Clerics denounce burning alive of pilot as un-Islamic

[Coventina]

Source: Reuters

(Reuters) - Muslim clerics widely denounced Islamist militants in Syria over the burning to death of a Jordanian pilot, saying such a form of killing was considered an abomination under Islam, no matter the justification.

Islamic State militants released a video on Tuesday appearing to show captured pilot Mouath al-Kasaesbeh being burnt alive in a cage. Jordan, which has participated in a U.S.-led military campaign to bomb Islamic State positions, responded overnight by executing two al Qaeda convicts on death row.

Egypt's top Muslim authority, the 1,000 year old Al-Azhar university revered by Sunni Muslims around the world, issued a statement expressing "deep anger over the lowly terrorist act" by what it called a "Satanic, terrorist" group.

The Grand Sheikh of Al-Azhar, Ahmed al-Tayeb, said the killers themselves deserved to be "killed, crucified or to have their limbs amputated."

Read more: http://in.reuters.com/article/2015/02/04/mideast-crisis-jordan-clerics-idINKBN0L814Q20150204

---

Ummmmm, that's all well and good but, how about denouncing it as un-human?

I mean, apparently crucifixion is fine and dandy according to Islam???

[Fred Sanders]

1. What are you talking about? Folks demand Muslims condemn killings and when they do..not good enough?

Went TOO far? Really? You want a Goldilocks zone sound bite, condemnation by Muslim religious leaders, make it vicious, but not too vicious?

Slap yourself in the head with an emoticon....

(Edited)

Same article:

"In Qatar, the International Association of Muslim Scholars, headed by prominent cleric Youssef al-Qaradawi and linked to the Muslim Brotherhood that has influence across the region, called the burning of Kasaesbeh a criminal act.

"The Association asserts that this extremist organisation does not represent Islam in any way and its actions always harm Islam," it said."

Does that meet the proper test for condemnation of ISIS by Muslims....in your opinion?

[Coventina]

2. I'm pointing out the irony of the burning as being deemed "un-Islamic" while calling for the

crucifixion of the perpetrators.

See the last paragraph quoted from the article.

[Fred Sanders]

4. Not even a good try.

[Coventina]

6. I'm not trying anything. The irony speaks for itself.

If you don't see it, then don't concern yourself.

[Fred Sanders]

8. So, now it is irony? Try again?

[Coventina]

10. Denouncing one horrific torture by advocating another?

Irony: a state of affairs or an event that seems deliberately contrary to what one expects and is often amusing as a result.

Maybe your irony detector is on the blink?

[CTyankee]

28. I agree with you, Coventina. What they said appears to be a "tell" of something...

not sure what but at the very least it is an unfortunate choice of words...

[Coventina]

33. Thank you. I found the article deeply disturbing, if it is supposed to be the "official response"

of the religion.

[Reter]

27. It's not irony

The Isis killers deserve to die. They are not human.

[Coventina]

32. Torture is wrong, no matter the form, no matter the crime.

Crucifixion is wrong.

So is burning someone to death.

[leftynyc]

3. This

http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Muslim-clerics-demand-crucifixion-of-ISIS-terrorists-who-burned-Jordanian-pilot-to-death-389959

http://news.yahoo.com/top-muslim-body-calls-killing-crucifixion-terrorists-100659379.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/03/28/syria-crucifixion-video_n_5049835.html


Gave plenty of links so you couldn't whine about sourcing.

[Fred Sanders]

5. It is not the source being disputed, it is the opined xenophobic conclusion using a hacked out of context quoting.

Got a link to that?

Not unlike hacking done by some folks who use single or two words as headlines.

[leftynyc]

7. Deny the truth all you want

Deny, deflect, change the subject - all your games are well known around here.

[Fred Sanders]

9. I do want to be anywhere near the " here " you are. Which place apparently likes using partial sentences.

[leftynyc]

14. Thanks for kicking

this very important thread.

[Snow Leopard]

13. they aren't condemning the killing

they are condemning the method of killing

[Mosby]

20. The very first paragraph

(Reuters) - Muslim clerics widely denounced Islamist militants in Syria over the burning to death of a Jordanian pilot, saying such a form of killing was considered an abomination under Islam, no matter the justification.

[Fred Sanders]

23. There are more paragraphs paraphrasing the translated comments.

[Mosby]

25. Like these?

"...senior clerics across the Islamic world argued that inflicting death by fire was always banned under Islam."

"The Prophet, peace be upon him, advised against burning people with fire..."

"Burning is an abominable crime rejected by Islamic law regardless of its causes."

The Grand Sheikh of Al-Azhar, Ahmed al-Tayeb, said the killers themselves deserved to be "killed, crucified or to have their limbs amputated."

So these Islamic scholars only objection is that the Jordanian was murdered using fire, instead of traditional beheading or dismembering.

[Fred Sanders]

26. Yeah, sure, that is what they meant to say. You go with putting words in their mouths. Hilarious.

Is your argument the clerics condemnation went too far, maybe if they said lethal injection by untested combo of drugs leaving the prisoner in agony for hours, like in America?

What combination of words will convince you folks they mean what they say about condemning ISIS as not being Islam?

Obviously....nothing.

[guillaumeb]

30. nice response

Like the lethal injection analogy. Great response.

As to killing, does the killing of innocent Pakistanis, men, women and children, blown up and sometimes burned alive by American drones count as senseless, barbaric acts?

Is it ironic that a Nobel Peace Prize winning President orders the extrajudicial killings of people he determines to be "America's enemies" ?

[Fred Sanders]

31. Is a strawman an argument or an analogy or a fallicy?

Thanks for the compliments on my last comment.

[Dr. Strange]

36. What?

How does QUOTING amount to putting words in their mouths?

Is your argument the clerics condemnation went too far, maybe if they said lethal injection by untested combo of drugs leaving the prisoner in agony for hours, like in America?

No, I think the argument was and is: Why is burning someone un-Islamic, while beheading and/or crucifying them isn't?

[Coventina]

37. That poster can't reply to you. He's had a hide in this thread.

Too bad.
I would have liked to see his reply to your spot-on post.

[samsingh]

11. it didn't stop isis

[valerief]

12. Why not just waterboard them to death like the US does? nt

[Snow Leopard]

15. seriously?

who has been waterboarded to death? Do you even know what waterboarding is?

[valerief]

21. Sorry, Mr. Cheney. Didn't know you were on DU. nt

[Fred Sanders]

24. He is advocating for drowning, I guess. But the clerics are the ones that went too far??? Hilarious.

[msongs]

16. yeah don't be cruel, whack off their heads or stone them to death instead nt

[samsingh]

17. they might also want to denounce

stoning people to death
beheading of minorities
killing people for alleged blasphemy
suppressing other religions
destroying history (like Buddha statues in afghanistan)

[Fred Sanders]

19. Why are you saying that about all of Christianity and painting with one brush! It is not fair and

reveals a lot of misunderstanding of a religion.

[yallerdawg]

22. Crucifixion is the basis and symbol...

of the largest religion on the planet.

Maybe the Muslims don't want to offend?

[immoderate]

29. They are right. Burning people is more a Christian tradition.

--imm

[DeSwiss]

34. ''....deep anger over the lowly terrorist act" by what it called a "Satanic, terrorist" group.''

- And here's who to thank for Shaitan's involvement:

[center]
Zacarias Moussaoui calls them: The Patrons of Al Qaeda[/center]

K&R

[Rhinodawg]

35. They just dont get it....

when you find excuses for SOME terror, then don't be surprised if it comes back to you.

[Trillo]

38. It is a paradox.

Every animal reserves the natural right of self-defense. When confronted with vicious killers who do not value life unless you're one of them, then do you wait until they come for you personally, or do you go hunting for them(?) and by so doing renounce your own beliefs about valuing life.