In January of 2006, one of Shia Islam's highest ranking marja clerics, Ayatollah al-Udhma Yousof al-Sanei also decreed a fatwa against suicide bombing, declaring it as a "terrorist act"."
I was talking about Salafis, not Shia. Salafis are Sunni and think the Shia are all heretics. That's like finding a Papal Bull as evidence on the opinions of Protestant Ulster.
Rather it will probably just make the enemy more determined, and this action will provoke malice and bitterness in his heart to such an extent that he may seek to wreak havoc upon the Muslims.
This is what is found from the practice of the Jews with the people of Palestine so when one of the Palestinian blows himself up and kills six or seven people, then in retaliation they take sixty or more. So this does not produce any benefit for the Muslims, and does not benefit those amongst whose ranks explosives are detonated."
Not a whiff about it being WRONG to blow up Jews. Right as rain, criticizable only as non-productive, increasing the malice in their already vicious hearts.
This is supposed to be an example of NOT supporting suicide bombing?
This whole ME conflict is about LAND, no matter how much you try and kid yourself. Religion is a convenient subplot just as it was in Northern Ireland.
No it's not. Border conflicts get settled eventually. Nobody mortgages their future for 50 years over a few hectares of borderland.
How many new countries have been formed in last 100 years? How many wars? dozens, hundreds? Why is this one case supposed to be so damn special? Answer: Religion.
Religion was NOT just a subplot back in 1690, was it? It was a real moving impulse for both sides in Ireland back then. I think even you will agree to that much.
Well, it's 1690 in the Middle East RIGHT NOW.
Until you can get that much through your head you will never comprehend events. |
