Yamin Zakaria vs. Ali Sina
Part II Page 4
Back
< > Next
e)
You then go on to make a lot of allegations using terms like “evil”, “humanity”, “savagery”, “rape”, “innocent”,
“murder” etc without defining and elaborating them, and
the basis from which those are derived. You also say:
“Each
one of us is free to make any assumption that he pleases but he must
be able to prove that assumption or withdraw it. I think this
is fair.”
Charges
are normally brought against someone in a court of law where the
criteria of determining crime and punishment already exist and are
agreed upon. However
in a debate across different ideologies we need to agree on the
criteria and the definitions of the terms before we can determine
the respective allegations. Otherwise they are mere “assumptions”
or “accusations” herald from a premise not recognised by the
other and vice versa. Hence, by rational necessity this is a
prerequisite before you can establish the truth of your allegation.
To illustrate the point here are two examples which you yourself
touched upon.
|
You
say I have made a lot of allegations aganist Muhammad without elaborating
them. We
are just beginning this debate. I will withdraw any charge that I can’t
prove. But of course I can’t prove all of them at once in an
introductory message. That was just to let you know the kind of
accusations I am going to make against your prophet. We shall go through
them one by one and then I will present my proofs and you’ll have the
opportunity to refute them.
We consider those who engage in beheading en masse by the use
of Napalm, B52s and Cluster bombs etc are the real “subhumans”.
Those
US
soldiers in Abu-Ghraib, Fallujah and elsewhere “engaging in senseless acts of
terror” behaving like real “monsters,
beasts and vampires”. As for the Iraqis they are merely
the heroic resistance fighters defending their lands by whatever
means they have at their disposal. Let us not forget the
US
is in
Iraq
not the reverse. So you
see we are at odds as to what is meant by the term “subhuman”
and the other terms, and how they are applied. Similarly, we can
call someone a “murderer” but according to which laws he or she
has committed the crime?
|
In
your zest to accuse America, you
have confused and bungled up a lot of issues. Let us dissect and clarify
them. What happened in Abu Ghraib was a crime according to the
US
military law. The perpetrators broke the law. They were prosecuted
and found guilty and were put behind the bars. Some of them received
sentences as long as 15 years. We certainly can’t condemn
America
, its people or its government and not even its military if a few of its
individuals break the law. Criminals and law breakers exist in every
society. If they are prosecuted and punished the society can’t be
blamed.
Before
responding to the rest of the charges let me make a comparison to what
these prison guards (now convicts) did and what Muhammad did. The following
is an extract from the abbreviation of Sira
"Kinana,
the husband of Safiya, had been guardian of the tribe's treasures, and he
was brought before the apostle, who asked where they were hidden. But
Kinana refused to disclose the place. Then a Jew came who said, 'I have
seen Kinana walk around a certain ruin every morning.' The apostle asked
Kinana, 'Art thou prepared to die if we find thou knewest where the
treasure was?' And he replied, 'Yes.' So the apostle ordered the ruin to
be dug up, and some of the treasure was found. After that Kinana was asked
again about the remainder, but he still refused to tell. The apostle of
Allah handed him over to al‑Zubayr, saying, 'Torture him until he
tells what he knows', and al‑Zubayr kindled a fire on his chest so
that he almost expired; then the apostle gave him to Muhammad b. Maslama,
who struck off his head."
The
American guards who broke the law are prosecuted and are now serving their prison terms.
But they did not kill their prisoners and the torture was mere humiliation
and light compared to what Muhammad did to Kinana. However, you worship
Muhammad and think he was a perfect example to emulate. Can you explain this moral relativism?
Now
let us talk about the rest of your accusations. You accuse the Americans
and the British soldiers and their respective governments of criminal activity
for what they do in Iraq. Who are you to say that? 72% of the Iraqis defied all the
threats from your terrorist brothers and went to the polls to show they
want to take charge of their lives and they are not going to be
intimidated by the terrorists. The turn out would have been much more in
some cities where people stood by and did not dare to
vote fearing the terrorists would do good on their promise and would
behead them and their children. So obviously the Iraqis are happy with the
presence of the coalition forces in their country and they hate the
terrorists who routinely round up truck drivers, health care workers,
police officers
and ordinary people, shoot them or behead them and try to win through
creating fear among the people.
The
coalition forces, i.e. the kafirs, are trying to bring democracy and self
rule to the oppressed people of
Iraq
. Their Muslim “brothers” are trying to take away that freedom through
terror and planned killings.
The
coalition forces never have targeted innocent people. Innocent people have
sadly died despite the extra care in the crossfire. This is not act of
terrorism. This is unfortunate collateral causality.
A
doctor may operate on a patient and the patient may die in the process.
This is not murder. The intent matters. The intent has not been to murder
but to save life. Muslims murder their victims intentionally. They deliberately target
innocent civilians, bomb them and shoot to kill them. The victims of 9/11
in WTC, 3/11 in
Madrid
, the innocent children in Beslan,
the victims of
Bali
, Riadh, Synagogues in Turkey, Churches in Iraq, the Israelis killed by suicide bombers, are deliberately
targeted and blown up by a malicious design. There is a huge difference
between these two killings. Americans never target the civilians, never
kill non-combatants. If an American soldier shoots a wounded enemy, he is
charged and prosecuted. So your characterization of the Americans and the
coalition soldiers is false. They are not engaged in senseless acts of
terror and they are not monsters, beasts and vampires. They are soldiers
who are fighting a just war. They want to liberate an oppressed people who
are grateful for being liberated. I am an Iranian and I would welcome
these soldiers to invade my country and liberate my people. I can’t ask
that because it is unfair that these young men and women die to free my
people but if they do it I would be grateful to them for ever.
Back
< > Next
Back to Index
|