Join the British Army and become a martyr, say Muslims
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-2496507.html
ABUL TAHER
A GOVERNMENT-BACKED Islamic organisation is teaching young Muslims that dying while fighting for the British armed forces is an act of martyrdom.
The British Muslim Forum (BMF) explains to young people that even if a Muslim soldier dies in combat while fighting in an Islamic country such as Afghanistan, he will still be regarded as a martyr and a hero for this country.
The BMF is holding talks across Britain to persuade young people not to follow the teachings of Muslim extremists who instruct their followers that joining the British military is a “traitorous act”.
Its aim is to counter radicals’ misuse of the term “martyr”, which has become associated with terrorist suicide operations. The BMF was a leading member in a taskforce set up by Tony Blair after the July 7 bombings to combat extremism among Muslims.
In its forums its case workers and imams cite Lance-Corporal Jabron Hashmi, 24, a British Pakistani from Birmingham who was killed in combat in July in Afghanistan.
Islamic extremists have called him a “salaried traitor” as he died fighting Taliban Muslims at the command of non-Muslim generals. They argue he should not have received an Islamic burial as he died an “infidel”.
However, BMF case workers counter that he died a martyr. “We are calling him a martyr because he died fighting for his country. Islam teaches us to be loyal and abide by the laws of the land. We believe fighting for Britain is not being a traitor. And young people are getting the message,” said Khurshid Ahmed, the BMF’s chairman.
The BMF, a body representing 600 mosques, is one of Britain’s largest Muslim organisations. It is the government’s main working partner in the Muslim community.
Comment:
How nice to see that this organisation will not have their funding cut by the Government due to promoting the integrationist agenda. Re-defining the Islamic term martyr and giving it a completely different meaning will eventually lead to re-writing the Quran and the changing of Islam to fit in with society today.
Christianity in the past and today is going through such a phase where things forbidden in the bible are now acceptable such as homosexuality, same sex marriages and women priests.
Will we see such things in Islam? Nawuzubillah, I hear u say, but if organisations like BMF (Blair’s Muslim Followers) have their way don’t be surprised that martyr is the only Islamic term they re-define to please their masters in Downing street.
mar·tyr /ˈmɑrtər/ Pronunciation Key - Pronunciation[mahr-ter]
–noun
1. a person who willingly suffers death rather than renounce his or her religion.
2. a person who is put to death or endures great suffering on behalf of any belief, principle, or cause: a martyr to the cause of social justice.
3. a person who undergoes severe or constant suffering: a martyr to severe headaches.
4. a person who seeks sympathy or attention by feigning or exaggerating pain, deprivation, etc.
–verb (used with object)
5. to make a martyr of, esp. by putting to death.
6. to torment or torture.
Bear in mind Khurshid Ahmed was probably giving an answer to a direct question put to him about Jabron Hashmi. The Times is no doubt taking this one answer to one question and giving it a greater significance.
SO are the BMF Scholars for Dollars? Blair's Poodles? SOLD OUT? or are they in fact the Voice of British Muslims? Do they represent you? who are they?
...
i have a very deep hanging over my heart reading this...
almost i cant bear and cant believe what i am hearing...
I would never fight for this country unless it was invaded, even if it was invaded by Muslims who have in view chop of the head of every non Muslim out of hate i would fight these Muslims, but no way , no way , no way will i help ...
If this article is true then any connection i have with BMF and its members are broken.
I will also consult other scholars about this article here to see if its true
Ed no. No. No. No.
Don't go there.
Don't let MPAC's tabloid approach to this let you think things like that.
This would be like taking your particular views on the veil and saying "SO are the Revival Scholars for Dollars? Blair's Poodles? SOLD OUT? or are they in fact the Voice of Muslim Youth? Do they represent you? who are they?"
Khurshid Ahmed does not claim to be a scholar - and that's not for reasons of modesty. He is a community leader in a purely political sense.
This is a dodgy story in a dodgy newspaper. In other cases MPACUK would gladly label the Murdoch press (Times and Sun) as Zionists and Islamophobes.
Would you read the Guardian story about Asghar and David Irving and think "is Asghar a Nazi? Is he Hitler's poodle? Who is he really?"
This is what I've submitted to the MPACUK page on this:
People, people, people...
Don't let them do this to you. Reading stories about Muslims in any newspaper these days you should not ask "is this story true?" You should ask "Why is this story a load of rubbish?"
Khurshid Ahmed's comment has no doubt been taken out of conext. He does not go around telling people to sign up to the army. He does not go aroung promoting dying for the army as martyrdom. He was answering 1 question about 1 case - Jibran Hashmi.
Even then Khurshid Ahmed's views are not representative of the views of the whole of BMF. Just as Ed's views are not the views of the whole of the Revival.
Khurshid Ahmed is not a scholar nor is every person in BMF a scholar.
Beast you're becoming very defensive
how do you know kurshid ahmad did not say this? were you there? have you spoke to him?
i havent read or heard anyone from BMF denying the claim made in article? Their website is silent on the matter.
i dont take tabloid approach....
the BMF are a responsible body consisting of several hundred ulema and mosques...so this claim they have made is irresponsible...
no excuses Beast...
if they are taken out of context then they need to state that.
i dont have anything personal against any group...
Look at the source of the story. The story needs to be analysed not taken as Gospel.
Khurshid Ahmed is quoted in the article as saying Jibran Hashmi died a martyr and he was not a traitor.
Let me ask you. Was Jabran Hashmi a martyr or a traitor? Don't sit on the fence, pick one or the other.
The BMF website is not updated daily. If this contrived controversy manages to take hold then no doubt they will respond.
If they really were "Blair's poodles" then they would have happily put the Times story word-for-wrod on their website and would have made a big deal about how Muslims should join the army. But they haven't.
The only quote in the article is from Khurshid Ahmed. He is not a scholar. But that hasn't stopped you from asking "are the BMF Scholars for Dollars?" If I took your views on the veil and said "are the Revival Scholars for Dollars?" that would be a tabloid approach.
"They" did not make this claim. There are many people involved in BMF and they all have their own views - just like the Revival. I remember the Observer quoting our Irfan Khan as saying it was a good idea Blair wanted to ban HT. Was this an irresponsible claim by the Revival? Does this mean the Revival sold out? No and no. Same in this case.
What about making 70 excuses?
What about giving Muslims the benefit of the doubt rather than taking a newspaper at its word?
Maybe you could contact them and ask [i]nicely[/i] if they could clarify the story.
But you're willing to cast doubt on groups based on newspaper stories.
---------
Think about this...
Imagine Jack Straw hadn't made the comments he made. Say a newspaper interviewd you about the Revival. During the interview the interviewer happened to ask about the veil. You tell them that you don't think the veil is necessary in the UK. The newspaper then prints a story saying "Youth magazine tells Muslim women: Take off the veil". MPACUK then asks its readers the question "are Revival scholars for dollars? Have they sold out?" This is kinda like the situation BMF is now in.
i understand what you are trying to say and where you are coming from
BMF might be quoted out of context
all i did was questioned it and asked the obvious questions...
we all have a right to speak our mind, whether one agrees or disagrees
you have just blown it out of proportion...which is a bit disappointing
i am raising the issue which is currently being discussed nationwide...
The Revival is not Mpac, having said that i agree and support their views and methodology on most occasions...
if The Revival was accused of being quoted out of context, i can assure you we will make a statement on our website asap, get out media spokesman to do his 'thing'... not remain silent.
You keep referring to my niqab views... which are that one has a right to wear it, i feel it is not necessary and rather defeats the object in the UK... this is not wrong as it is supported by prominent scholars like hamza yusuf, nuh keller etc... so if anyone was to say revival have sold out, scholars for dollars are entitled to their views... it wouldnt bother me. i would answer them comprehensively and not remain silent. where as kurshid ahmads view is unislamic. full stop.no scholar will back it....and sadly BMF have remained silent and not bothered to clear the issue and set the record straight.
As for Jabran Hshmi, he is not traitor or martyr.
referring to irfan khans view on HT. that was his view. he had every right to express it. i dont think it was irresponsible. But again revival is not an organisations which represents over 200 mosques and ulema...a bit of a massive difference dont you think?
i am not casting doubt on BMF.... i am questioning them...we do have a right to accountability bro. i am having an open discussion giving people like you to answer my questions and put the record straight.
i am also speaking to members of BMF as we speak to get the full story and will let you know what they say on this issue.
good point!
thanks for the reminder
The Editor caught at it again!
49 verse 6
It's not that they "might" be quoted out of context. They [u]most probably[/u] are being quoted out of context. But you directed your "obvious" questions towards the BMF rather than the article and the Times. But inviting people to discuss the possibilty that an org is made up of scholars for dollars is irresponsible. It not only encourages disrespect towards ulema but it's based on an unreliable source. You're accepting what the article is saying. The questions you should be encouraging are not questions about BMF but questions about the Times and this particular reporter. I'm trying to get you back down to earth. The issue being discussed is framed in completely the wrong way. It accepts what the article is saying and uses that as its basis. Whereas what should be happening is people should be discussing why the Times decided to write this article, what is the evidence they are providing, etc?
OK. I know that. But I believe you first read the MPACUK homepage and then decided to post on this thread.
Why are you getting all defensive Ed?
So you're sitting on the fence? But did you write to the Observer clarfying your position?
The Times did not quote a BMF press release. We don't know the context in which the answer was given. Was it part of a larger interview? Was it a direct question about Jibran Hashmi? Did Khurshid Ahmed actually give the answer or was it his spokesperson? What else was said on the subject?
If this was a BMF press release then we could say this is BMF talking. But Khurshid Ahmed is a member of BMF - he's not even chairman anymore. (BTW there are two prominent Muslims in UK called Khurshid Ahmed [url=http://images.google.co.uk/images?q=tbn:df7hfLE0egBctM:http://www.senate... person[/url] and [url=http://images.google.co.uk/images?q=tbn:-N4hiSC0ie5zDM:http://www.cre.go... person[/url], I think it's the second person who is quoted in the story)
But your questions are based on a newspaper story who's veracity no-one seems to be questioning.BTW let me just say I don't mean to be disrespectful to you in any way. I'm just trying to get you to come over to my way of thinking - this is probably a bit arrogant of me. But I really think this "debate" is seriously flawed.
Great.
BTW I can't believe you posted this on the homepage...
you trying to rip me apart is a bid sad!
waste of time debating with you im afraid...
i aint got time and effort to answer to each and every one of ur 200 points
like 'My Eye' you think because "they're Muslims" you cant question them.... what rubbish!
i will always speak my mind whether you like it or not
editor caught out again: yep at not being afraid to hold Muslim groups/leaders accountable.
yep, editor caught at speaking out again and creating open, honest discussions amongst Muslims.
I'm not trying to rip you apart. Seriously. I'm not pitting myself against you in any way. I apologise if anything I say is coming across as disrespectful.
Let me summarise my position in as few words as possible.
The veracity of the Times story is what should be questioned. Once it has been deemed reliable [i]then[/i] we can move on to asking whether what Khurshid Ahmed said was right. However, by questioning Khurshid first rather than the Times, this debate is getting ahead of itself. Therefore it is flawed.
I don't know about this claim, but the story does contain other factual errors.
I have a question for everyone:
If a Muslim in the British armed forces was defending Muslims when killed, is he a martyr?
If you say no, give your reason.
If he was deployed in Bosnia/Kosovo? What if British troops are deployed in Sudan to stop the genocide?
I do not have a problem with Muslims joining the British Military.
however I would want (not expect, but want) them to be conscientious objectors if deployed to Iraq, Afghanistan or other war of aggression. Even then, there are questions over Afghanistan.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
I find myself in agreement with the point Admin is making.
The issue of martrydom in the British army is complex. And just because someone positioins themselves on one side of the argument or the other it shouldn't invite name-calling and appocalyptic prophecies.
BTW Ed when you posted this story on the homepage you copied and pasted Showkat's entire post, including his comments. Did you mean to put Showkat's comments on the homepage? If so then it appears to be the Revival talking rather than someone posting on the message board.
Just deleted that article.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
:shock:
I didn't do it Ed.
It was Admin.
I had nothing to do with it.
Honest.
I should have put the word 'I' in my post.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal (rahimullah) was once asked about the correct meaning of the following hadith:
"When you hear something from or about your brother, ascribe to it the best interpretation until you can no longer do so"
To this, he replied: "Find an excuse for him by saying, 'Maybe he said this, or maybe he meant such and such”.
May Allah shine sweet faith upon you this day and times beyond. May your heart be enriched with peace, and may your home be blessed always. Ameen.
Heres something else to add to the mix:
[size=18][b]Muslim war veterans tell children of sacrifice [/b][/size]
The story of five Asian Second World War veterans from a West Yorkshire town has been recorded on to DVD to teach children in schools about the sacrifices made by the British Indian Army.
The idea for the project came from Ghulam Rabani, the manager of Sangat community centre in Keighley, where the five war veterans meet each week.
Mr Rabani said: "A lot of the first generation of immigrants who came to this country were soldiers who had fought in the British Indian Army in World War II. We wanted to make sure that the new generations understood this, so that the British Asian children can take pride in what their families have done and children from the host communities understand that immigrants from India and Pakistan also made sacrifices during this war."
The DVD features first-hand accounts from the five soldiers about the war against Japan in south-east Asia. The men: Fazal Ahmed, Noor Dad, Niaz Ali, Sahib Dad and Abdul Rehman, were all born in Jammu and Kashmir, which was then part of British-controlled India, but disputed territory since independence in 1947, part of it administered by India and part having its own government with strong ties to Pakistan.
The DVD is titled "Two leaves of a Shahtoot", which was taken from lyrics of a song the Indian soldiers would sing on the front line.
The Sangat Centre is now aiming to market it to schools after piloting it at Greenhead High School in Keighley.
[url=http://www.themuslimweekly.com/fullstoryview.aspx?NewsID=E76AB77CF69EB5A... Muslim Weekly[/url]
also,
[size=18][b]Muslim war veterans tell children of sacrifice[/b][/size]
Five Yorkshiremen born in Kashmir put their memories of fighting for Britain on DVD for schools
John Roberts
FOR three years soldier Noor Dad was held in a Japanese prisoner of war camp with no contact with his family or friends.
He was captured while fighting in a foreign land and for a country to which he had never been.
Mr Dad was born in Kashmir and volunteered to join the British Indian Army when he was just 17 in 1939, months before the outbreak of the Second World War.
Three years later he was captured during a battle in Singapore along with 96,000 other troops from India, Brit-ain, Canada and Australia who were fighting side-by-side against the Japanese.
Mr Dad is now 88, and a great-grandfather living in Keighley. His story and that of four other Asian Second World War veterans from the West Yorkshire town has been recorded on to DVD to teach children in schools about the sacrifices made by the British Indian Army.
The idea for the project came from Ghulam Rabani, the manager of Sangat community centre in Keighley, where the five war veterans meet each week.
Mr Rabani said: "A lot of the first generation of immigrants who came to this country were soldiers who had fought in the British Indian Army in World War II. We wanted to make sure that the new generations understood this, so that the British Asian children can take pride in what their families have done and children from the host communities understand that immigrants from India and Pakistan also made sacrifices during this war."
The DVD features first-hand accounts from the five soldiers about the war against Japan in south-east Asia. The men: Fazal Ahmed, Noor Dad, Niaz Ali, Sahib Dad and Abdul Rehman, were all born in Jammu and Kashmir, which was then part of British-controlled India, but disputed territory since independence in 1947, part of it administered by India and part having its own government with strong ties to Pakistan.
Mr Rehman sadly died at Airedale Hospital at Steeton, Keighley, aged 87, after the DVD was produced. The project has been dedicated to his memory.
The DVD is titled Two leaves of a Shahtoot, which was taken from lyrics of a song the Indian soldiers would sing on the front line. The Sangat Centre is now aiming to market it to schools after piloting it at Greenhead High School in Keighley.
It opens with footage from a Remembrance Day service in Keighley which the five veterans have attended every year.
Mr Dad said: "Every time I attend this Remembrance Day service I remember all those who died back then. I lost many friends in the war but I am happy that our story is being told to schools."
The DVD is divided into separate sections with personal accounts from each of the soldiers and chapters on the climate and conditions they faced, the machinery of war, life as a prisoner of war and the battles at Imphal and Kohima in India which are seen as the turning point in the war against Japan.
On the DVD Mr Rehman gives an account of the
jungle warfare fighting against the Japanese whose uniforms and equipment were camouflaged.
He said: "They would use booby traps, they would cut bamboo to a sharp point and then hide it in the ground.
"Our troops sometimes had to crawl in the ditches and the bamboo would stab, cut or injure them. And a few Japanese soldiers could cause a lot of trouble for a whole unit."
The five men were all Muslims but fought alongside soldiers from other faiths.
In the DVD Mr Dad says: "The British Army contained Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, Christians, Jews and Buddhists but there were never major problems then.
"Among the battalions one each was for Muslims, Sikhs, Hindu and British. Only our food was separate from the others and apart from that we used to work together, fight together and parade together."
Although the soldiers from different faiths and countries fought side by side they were separated by the Japanese when they became prisoners of war after the fall of Singapore in 1942.
Mr Dad said conditions were worse for soldiers from Britain, who were tortured.
Sangat Centre worker Alan Watkinson, who helped co-ordinate the project, said: "I think what we hope this will show pupils in schools is whatever differences we have as different faiths and countries we have an awful lot more in common."
[url=http://www.yorkshireposttoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=55&Artic... Yorkshire Post[/url]
May Allah shine sweet faith upon you this day and times beyond. May your heart be enriched with peace, and may your home be blessed always. Ameen.
why? and replaced with a pointless boring tree article...marvellous
these are not questions for the layman
these are issues ONLY ulema can answer
we will just give personal opinion
ulema will base it on quran, sunnah, ijma, qiyas, fiqh, ijtihad etc....
kurshid ahmad was not a scholar but a layman
thats why we have this mess...
Shaykh Mohammed ul Qadri has been very popular here in the past. Does he have a ruling on this?
[size=10]The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.[/size]
[size=9]Bertrand Russell (1872 - 1970)[/size]
Because you just posted a forum post of a member making it sound like an official Revival verdict or something.
The forums are for forum posts.
If you are putting something on the site, either put the article, or an official post on behalf of the revival - or even yourself since you are 'Ed, but NOT just another post from the forums giving the opinion of some random poster.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
listen mate, i didnt realise i added the few lines of the poster aswell... i thought it was just the article...all you had to do was delete the comments not the article...
gee!
Ed, the papers print stories about Muslims like this every other day. We don't put them all up on the homepage.
Certain newspapers are not good sources for articles on British muslim issues. The Times is one of them. Telegraph, Mail, Express, Sun, Star, and Mirror are others. Even the Observer is not always reliable (eg Asghar "Nazi sympathiser").
Beast, I suppose that the BMF lady was quoted out of context obviously!
Again no protest from BMF on their website
I don't know if you're being sarcastic, but nevertheless:
What exactly is Zareen Ahmed being quoted as saying? "If security is at stake, then yes, the veil should be removed."
What are the implications of this? e.g. a woman cannot walk through an airport without ever removing her veil - at some point the veil has to be removed.
Is Zareen suggesting anything new? Or is it that the rest of the story gives her quote a peculiar meaning?
Pages