British soldier killed on street in London

Post Reply New Topic

Islam considers anyone who helps to fund a foreign, kufr army as fair game. See Quran 5:33.

Hence, a terrorist attack on any UK civilians/taxpayers is completely fair game to Islam.

But, there is also justification to kill kufr (non-Muslims) wherever and wherever they are found in the Quran and Hadith if "at war" (and, under a literal level, Muslims are always at war with non-Muslims, for they prevent a worldwide caliphate being enacted), so it's pretty much a done deal.

Yes but Britain funds the army using VAT money. By even living here & buying food, you're funding the armed forces.

I'm sure that could be over looked.

I heard that they're arresting people that make anti-Islam posts on Facebook and Twitter as this killing, is that true? I don't think you can be considered a free country if it is.

Armies have to be payed for. Armies run on taxes.

ruveyn

But aren't all taxes evil and Satanic?

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

It's a necessary evil but one that should be done in moderation.

But what is moderation? And often, as in the case of America just after the Revolution, taxes had to skyrocket just to keep the country afloat.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

That's not what happened in this case, as far as I can tell. This was primarily a political act, not a religious one. The word "Muslim" is only relevant here as a label for a group of people which the culprits felt solidarity with.

To put it simply, this was not a case of "I will kill you because I am a Muslim and Muslims are supposed to kill non-Muslims". It was a case of "I will kill you because I am a Muslim and you are part of an institution which kills Muslims (my people)".

Agreed:
If and when someone living in a country which has sent troops to his original country wants this war to stop, he needs to go to THAT country, join their army, and fight uniformed, armed soldiers in the war zone.

Hacking at a young man in a shopping district may seem like 'warfare' to the attackers and those who taught/encouraged them, but it is assault and murder and fanaticism nonetheless.

Sylkat

Last edited by Sylkat on 27 May 2013, 3:21 am, edited 2 times in total.

Says who? Invading a country is already a violation of the rules of pleasant human interaction. It's not exactly surprising that it might lead to more breaches of etiquette. If anything, it's already quite "polite" that the victim was indeed a soldier who fought in the relevant war.

So says the Geneva Convention.

This was a murder, not an act of war:

Public street.

Shopping district.

Victim:
No uniform, no weapon.

No formal declaration of war.

Back to the IRA, I am under the impression that they DID make a declaration of war against Britain. I am NOT justifying anything that they did. I am differentiating their reasons and actions from what is happening now.


Sylkat

Some of the people have been arrested for making some pretty threatening and racist comments. A lot of those arrested have just been arrested for being insulting, which is a massive shame.

One actually wonders whether it would be better to check out the threatening ones to see where the real danger is. There's a difference between some drunk dickhead saying some extremely stupid and racist stuff and feeling horrible the next morning, and someone issuing serious threats on Twitter.

Oh: and I hope that white people are not the only ones investigated for racism and threats of violence.

That said, I didn't agree with Azhar Ahmed being prosecuted either for his comments about British soldiers last year.

And debts have to be paid, Britain only finished paying it's second world war loan back to America in 2006.

Is that 51% political and 49% religious or something else?