It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Actually, Hamas and the Taliban are both from the extremely violent Wahhabi Muslim sect.
Usually specially trained child suicide bombers
According to the Coalition to Stop the Use of Child Soldiers "2004 Global Report on the Use of Child Soldiers", there were at least nine documented suicide attacks involving Palestinian minors between October 2000 and March 2004
sorry bro, moar starz
I be a stoopid one
Originally posted by Peruvianmonk
Hamas is not Wahhabi, it originated from the Muslim Brotherhood which itself is not Wahhabi.
Hamas in Israel represents pure Wahhabism. Forms of neo-Wahhabi or Wahhabized ideology have been powerful in Egypt (the Muslim Brotherhood) and in Pakistan — in both countries neo-Wahhabis lead attacks on other Muslims and other faiths.
National Review
Originally posted by Peruvianmonk
Let us also remember that the last suicide bombing carried out by any Palestinian faction was in 2005.
While he agreed with the Wahhabis on the need to purify religious practices of illegitimate innovations, he saw nothing wrong with visits to the tombs of holy men as long as one did not seek their intercession. As a youth, he had been active in a sufi order and although he would later criticize sufism’s ‘corrupt’ aspects, he maintained that its emphasis on asceticism and mindfulness of God made it an essential part of Islam. In fact, he exhorted Muslim Brothers to practice individual and group dhikr, a ritual ‘mentioning’ of God, to strengthen the believers’ mindfulness of God and the Prophet’s example. Dhikr is a hallmark of sufi practice and considered by the Wahhabis an illegitimate innovation. More generally, Banna’s keen desire for Muslim unity to ward off Western imperialism led him to espouse an inclusive definition of the community of believers. Thus, he would urge his followers, ‘Let us cooperate in those things on which we can agree and be lenient in those on which we cannot.’ Banna did not share the Wahhabi view that most Muslims were idolaters.
Wahhabi doctrine does not support constitutional rule. Whereas Banna denied the legitimacy of hereditary monarchy in Islam, Wahhabi ulama have supported the Saudi monarchy.
A salient element in Banna’s notion of Islam as a total way of life came from the idea (current since the mid-nineteenth century) that the Muslim world was backward, and the corollary (current since the early twentieth century) that the state was responsible for guaranteeing decent living conditions for its citizens. He argued that the government had the duty to minimize unemployment, guarantee a minimum wage and health care for workers, and ensure the fair distribution of wealth. Such notions are alien to Wahhabism.
Wahhabis and Muslim Brothers had a narrow base in religious doctrine, but a shared commitment to combat powerful secular forces seeping into Muslim societies.
The third stage in the reformist movement occurred in the twentieth century and is generally described as `Salafiyya’ . Unlike Wahhabism or Islamic Reformation, the new movement interpreted Islam as part of the national patriotic struggle for independence. Salafiyya was primarily concerned with the ethical and educational role of religion; it was a cultural and educational rather than a political endeavour. The adherents of Salafi ideology operated as welfare organisations and occupied themselves with education and providing assistance to the needy. In order to achieve their aims they first formed local groups that operated on the communal level.
Later, in an attempt to achieve some degree of coordination amongst different local groups, the first political Muslim parties emerged (for example the Muslim Brethren in Egypt). These early Muslim parties were political but not radical or extremist organisa - tions. For a number of years (at least between 1950 and 1956) the Muslim Brethren in Egypt, for example, put social activities above political ones.
I'm not defending the rocks being thrown, but the tying the child up as a human shield is a disgusting act that should be condemned, you don't seem very concerned. It must be nice to have lived a sheltered life.
Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
Israel has been caught using children as human shields various times but all I hear about is the "cowardly Islamic militants" using human shields, which is not the case. When you are trapped in an open prison and have no where else to go you are not hiding amongst civilians, you are living amongst your loved ones. Anyone who considers this hiding amongst civilians needs a reality check.
Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
I know this post will probably raise some eyebrows and will probably be considered as propaganda by the pro Israel crowd but there should be no justification for these actions no matter who you are or what you believe in.
Originally posted by spoor
Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
I know this post will probably raise some eyebrows and will probably be considered as propaganda by the pro Israel crowd but there should be no justification for these actions no matter who you are or what you believe in.
You really are getting desperate in your hatred of jews - you dig up a story over 8 years old.... ignoring all the times the Palestinian terrorists use their own people as human shields....
Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
Can you prove it is 8 years old?
Originally posted by spoor
Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
Can you prove it is 8 years old?
Good grief, just check the date on the newspaper page!
Copyright ©2008 FutureFastForward.com – All Rights Reserved
Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
Originally posted by spoor
Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
Can you prove it is 8 years old?
Good grief, just check the date on the newspaper page!
The disclaimer for copyright on the website as a whole is 2008
That's not the date of the article Einstein...go to any link on that page and it will have the same date.
Copyright ©2008 FutureFastForward.com – All Rights Reserved
Even if the above date was correct, it's not 8 years old, just saying...
The incident is 4 years old, your math is even lacking.
this isn't about religion.
Yes, I acknowledge that the boy was throwing rocks and should have been dealt with accordingly. Tying him up to their armored vehicle was NOT the proper way to discipline this child.
Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by DarknStormy
You are using arabic numerals every day, are you confused too?