Prince Charles : follow Islamic principles

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Mr.Fitnah, Jun 10, 2010.

  1. Mr.Fitnah

    Mr.Fitnah Dreamcrusher

    Jul 14, 2009
    Thanks Received:
    Trophy Points:
    Prince Charles yesterday urged the world to follow Islamic 'spiritual principles' in order to protect the environment.
    In an hour-long speech, the heir to the throne argued that man's destruction of the world was contrary to the scriptures of all religions - but particularly those of Islam.
    He said the current 'division' between man and nature had been caused not just by industrialisation, but also by our attitude to the environment - which goes against the grain of 'sacred traditions'.

    Read more: 'Follow the Islamic way to save the world,' Charles urges environmentalists | Mail Online

    Well we will have to look at history to know what Islam has "said and done" in the past.

    'Abdullah bin 'Umar, may Allah be pleased with them, narrated:
    The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) ordered the date-palms of Banu Al-Nadir to be burnt and cut. These palms were at Buwairah. Qutaibah and Ibn Rumh in their versions of the tradition have added: So Allah, the Glorious and Exalted, revealed the verse: What you (O Muslims) cut down of the palm-trees (of the enemy), or you left them standing on their stems, it was by Leave of Allâh, and in order that He might disgrace the Fâsiqûn (rebellious, disobedient to Allâh)
    Hadith number in Sahih Muslim [Arabic only]: 3284

    Here is a quote from the pioneering Sufi mystic Al-Ghazali:

    [O]ne must go on jihad (i.e., warlike razzias or raids) at least once a may use a catapult against them [non-Muslims] when they are in a fortress, even if among them are women and children. One may set fire to them and/or drown them...If a person of the Ahl al-Kitab [People of The Book – primarily Jews and Christians] is enslaved, his marriage is [automatically] revoked…One may cut down their trees...One must destroy their useless books. Jihadists may take as booty whatever they decide...they may steal as much food as they need...

    'Umdat al-Salik states on page 604 state is is permissable to cut down treee and destroy the buildings.


    Gil further elaborates on the initial wave of jihad conquests, and details the lasting destruction they wrought:

    …at the time of the conquest, Palestine was inhabited by Jews and Christians….The Arab tribes were to be found in the border areas, in keeping with arrangements made with the Byzantine rulers….

    one can assume that the local population suffered immensely during the course of the war [i.e., jihad conquests] and it is very likely that many villages were destroyed and uprooted in the frontier regions, and that the lot of these local populations was very bitter indeed.

    It appears that the period of the conquest was also that of the destruction of the synagogues and churches of the Byzantine era, remnants of which have been unearthed in our own time and are still being discovered.

    The assumption is based both on what is said in a few Christian sources…and on Muslim sources describing ‘Umar’s [Umar b. al-Khattab] visits to al-Sham. There is no doubt that one of the main purposes of these visits was to establish order and put an end to the devastation and slaughter of the local population…Towns in the western strip and the central strip (the region of the red sand hills and the swamps) in the Sharon, decreased from fifty-eight to seventeen !

    It is estimated that the erosion of the soil from the western slopes of the Judaean mountains reached – as a result of the agricultural uprooting during the Muslim period – the gigantic extent of 2,000 to 4,000 cubic meters….

    We find direct evidence of the destruction of agriculture and the desertion of the villages in the fact that the papyri of Nessana are completely discontinued after the year 700. One can assume that at the time the inhabitants abandoned the place, evidently because of the inter-tribal warfare among the Arabs which completely undermined the internal security of the area. 42
    FrontPage Magazine - The Legacy of Jihad in Palestine
    FrontPage Magazine - The Legacy of Jihad in Palestine (Continued)


    The magnitude of Muslim attrocities in India is so great that I grossly understimate their scope simply by attempting to describe them. By the sword of Islam, an entire civilization was destroyed and the number of dead easily number in the millions over several decades. The value of the booty--'jewels and unbored pearls and rubies, shining like sparks or like wine congealed with ice, and emeralds like fresh sprigs of myrtle, and diamonds in size and weight like pomegranates' [Smith Oxford History of India p207]--can never be measured. As a result of [this] fanaticism, thousands of temples which had represented the art of India through a millennium were laid in ruins. We can never know, from looking at India today, what grandeur and beauty she once possessed. [Will Durant] This rich cultural heritage, like the foundations and materials of Hindu temples used to erect Muslim mosques, were highjacked by Islam. Indian mathemeticians conceived algebra and the number zero, which were translated to the Muslim world through its conquests, and then brought to the West through conquest; Islamic civilization now mistakenly recieves credit for these innovations. India before Islam was one of the most advanced civilizations of all time.
    According to Prof. K.S. Lal, the author of the Growth of Muslim population in India, the Hindu population decreased by about 80 million between 1000 AD, the year Mahmud Ghazni invaded India and 1525 AD, a year before the battle of Panipat.

    One can safely add another 20 million Hindus to this list to account for the number that were killed during the Mughal rule or the rule of the Muslim rulers in the Deccan plateau. By all known accounts of world history, as pointed out by Koenard Elst in his book the Negationism in India, destruction of about 100 million hindus is perhaps the biggest holocaust in the whole world history.
  2. blastoff

    blastoff Undocumented Reg. User

    Nov 12, 2009
    Thanks Received:
    Trophy Points:
    In a galaxy far far away...
    That wacky Chuck. See what that Brit inbreeding leads to.
  3. Quantum Windbag

    Quantum Windbag Gold Member

    May 9, 2010
    Thanks Received:
    Trophy Points:
    The world gets crazier every day, and Charles is leading the charge. No wonder his mother is reportedly considering abdicating in favor of one of his sons rather than him.
  4. Shai

    Shai Member

    Jun 4, 2010
    Thanks Received:
    Trophy Points:
    Prince Charles raise this kid:
    Harry's Nazi Gaffe Stirs More Outrage - Prince Harry :

    No friend to Israel
    Sunday, 18th November 2007

    Clearly, either the Israel embassy in London or the Times has a sense of black humour. In its report of today’s Jewish Chronicle story about how the initial enthusiasm by Prince Charles’s private secretary Sir Michael Peat to accept an offer to visit Israel was slapped down by others in the Prince’s household for fear that HRH might be used to help Israel burnish its international image (heaven forbid), the Times volunteered that the invitation by the Israel embassy had been issued

    in the hope of building on the traditionally strong relations between Israel and the British Royal Family.
    Such relations have of course been traditionally not just not strong but invisible. As the story makes clear, there has never been an official visit by the Royal Family in the six decades of Israel’s existence. Yet Prince Charles, whose affinities with the Islamic world are well documented, thinks nothing of visiting Saudi Arabia (and formally receiving its King when he visited the UK last month). He bestows royal favour upon one of the most repressive and dictatorial regimes on earth, and which is the wellspring of the war of conquest being waged against his own country, but refuses to visit the one democracy and true ally of this country in the Middle East in case he might ‘burnish its international image’.
    Obviously, Sir Michael’s own decent and entirely rational reaction was slapped down by the innate prejudice of the Royal household at Clarence House. Despite the humiliating attempts by forelock-tugging British Jewish leaders to smooth this incident over on the grounds that
    'Prince Charles is a great friend of the Jewish community,’
    he is certainly no friend of Israel nor Jewish peoplehood.

    No friend to Israel | The Spectator

Share This Page