This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

← Muslim 'scholars': Sea burial breaks sharia law

Muslim 'scholars': Sea burial breaks sharia law - Comments

anonymous.shyster's Avatar Comment 1 by anonymous.shyster

Perhaps his virgins get to stay just that, virgins.

Tue, 03 May 2011 08:22:58 UTC | #622369

foundationist's Avatar Comment 2 by foundationist

I think the official reason for the sea burial was to prevent creating a pilgrimage site for fundamentalist Muslims,and they stressed the point that they did the burial according to Islamic custom precisely in order to prevent this kind ofreaction. Worked wonderful, didn´t it? What about the Muslims burried underneath the debrisof the World Trade Center? Was that in accordance with Shariah law?

That being said, I think the USA wasted a very good opportunity in this affair. Of course I don´t know the details of the operation,but if it would have been possible to capture Bin Laden alive, I would have greatly preferred this. Just imagine:an orderly arrest and a fair and open trial in accordance with international standards, perferably not in a US court but in The Hague, all his crimesbrought to light and all his deeds properly accounted for. No execution but prison,as befits a criminal. This would have been a signal to the world that I would thoroughly enjoy. Instead we got more murder in the dark.

Tue, 03 May 2011 08:25:14 UTC | #622370

Steve Hanson's Avatar Comment 3 by Steve Hanson

Yeah, well, they can suck my American Army veteran Taliban fighting cock. All I care is that he's dead, and I'm sorry I wasn't the one to have killed him.

Tue, 03 May 2011 08:25:17 UTC | #622371

AlexP's Avatar Comment 4 by AlexP

As the moderates constantly kept reminding us, Osama Bin Laden wasn't a "true"® muslim, anyway, so why all the fuss?

Tue, 03 May 2011 08:34:10 UTC | #622374

Bumpy's Avatar Comment 5 by Bumpy

Whilst I respect people's right to be religious and to have a religious burial, I don't extend that respect to those who murder thousands of people. They could have fired him from the main turret for all the respect he commanded from me.

Tue, 03 May 2011 08:39:00 UTC | #622376

Vorlund's Avatar Comment 6 by Vorlund

Oh dear, there was actually enough of him in one piece to warrant a burial.

The fact that there wasn't much to bury of a good many of the non-muslim victims of his lunacy and the fact that every culture besides muslim cultures also has taboos about the handling and mishandling of corpses is probably entirely lost on these 'scholars'. Justified in their minds as doing Allah's bidding.

I sometimes wonder whether muslims also think they 'get a new body' like some Xtians. Some bombers have been apprehended before blowing themselves up and have been found to have 'protected' their genitals with towels no doubt to be ready for the virgins. This seems odd to me since they aren't going to do much copulating after turning themselves into flying mince.

Does Allah renew bodies but doesn't renew genitalia?

Tue, 03 May 2011 08:50:38 UTC | #622380

Barty77's Avatar Comment 7 by Barty77

Sharia law? Honestly...are we supposed to care?

Tue, 03 May 2011 09:13:45 UTC | #622385

MarkOnTheRiver's Avatar Comment 8 by MarkOnTheRiver

Comment 2 by foundationist : Just imagine:an orderly arrest and a fair and open trial in accordance with international standards, perferably not in a US court but in The Hague,

I take it you don't actually live in The Hague. Only, I imagine with the prospect of protracted islamic hysteria, threatened beheadings and suicide bombings that a trial of this kind would attract, the majority of its citizens are breathing a huge sigh of relief that that eventuality won't come to pass.

And I for one don't blame them.

Tue, 03 May 2011 09:14:18 UTC | #622386

Krasny's Avatar Comment 9 by Krasny

Being tossed out of a helicopter doesn't constitute a burial of any kind.

It's the sort of thing one might do to a dog you didn't like that much.

Tue, 03 May 2011 09:18:40 UTC | #622387

Cook@Tahiti's Avatar Comment 10 by Cook@Tahiti

Alternative: Wrapped in pig skin and cremated on a pyre of flaming Korans, recorded in 3D HD Imax.

Tue, 03 May 2011 09:20:11 UTC | #622389

Cook@Tahiti's Avatar Comment 11 by Cook@Tahiti

Forget about the Guardian's reporting... what about this!?!

Tue, 03 May 2011 09:21:44 UTC | #622391

Jay G's Avatar Comment 12 by Jay G

I listened to the briefing given by the White House press secretary yesterday. I was offended by how many times he went out of his way to assure everybody that bin Laden was buried in accordance with Muslim law. It seems to me that our government is going too far in appeasing so-called "moderate" Muslims.

Tue, 03 May 2011 09:23:38 UTC | #622392

TheRationalizer's Avatar Comment 13 by TheRationalizer

The important thing to note here isn't that the US may have offended Muslims by not giving Osama a religious burial (I'd imagine anyone who cares should be far more upset that they killed him than they are by how his corpse was disposed of) but the fact that the US claim to have disposed of his body within 24 hours as per religious requirements is completely laughable.

I'm sorry to sound like a conspiracy hypothesiser here, but here are my suspicions anyway

  1. Bin Laden was killed a long time ago
  2. Making people believe he was still alive meant the US could prolong their "war on terror" for as long as they wished, being made easier for American's to stomach by presenting Osama as the "evil" one that must be destroyed.
  3. A faked audio tape now and again to reinforce the idea he is still alive and still making threats.
  4. Timed release of old video footage, none of which indicated a date by presenting a newspaper or mentioning current events.

Then all of a sudden Osama's death is announced, resulting in the complete burying of news around the world relating to a failed illegal attempt at assassinating Gaddafi as part of an illegal regime change operation. The body (read "proof") is allegedly dumped at sea on the pretense that the US wanted to conform to Shariah burial laws - something anyone with even a basic understanding of Islam would know is utter rubbish.

At least I don't care if it is true or not and am perfectly willing to change my opinion upon receiving new evidence, but I do feel compelled to state that I think it smells somewhat, and that the timing is more than just a little convenient.

Tue, 03 May 2011 09:28:51 UTC | #622397

skeelo's Avatar Comment 14 by skeelo

I think they should've nailed his remains into a wooden crate, and shoved it into a massive warehouse full of thousands of identical wooden crates. When people asked where the body was, and if it had been buried according to Sharia, the reply should have simply been that 'Top People handled it'. When pressed for details on who these people were, the final, unalterable reply, repeated whenever the question came up, should simply have been 'TOP PEOPLE'.

Tue, 03 May 2011 09:29:49 UTC | #622398

Jumped Up Chimpanzee's Avatar Comment 15 by Jumped Up Chimpanzee

Sea burials are permissible for Muslims in extraordinary circumstances. This is not one of them.

This is not an extraordinary circumstance?!?!?!

Exactly how many genocidal Muslims are buried on a regular basis? How many are refused a burial in their home country? And what exactly is the normal burial process in this most ordinary of circumstances?

Tue, 03 May 2011 09:31:39 UTC | #622400

Jos Gibbons's Avatar Comment 16 by Jos Gibbons

burial of bin Laden breaks sharia law

Why should the non–Muslims performing the burial care?

decision to dispose of body in the sea prevents grave site becoming a shrine but clerics warn it may lead to reprisals

It seems extremists always find ways to come up with an excuse for doing something bad.

scholars warned that it may provoke calls for revenge attacks against US targets.

One individual Muslim gets buried in a way Muslims, but not the non–Muslims who bury him, allegedly object to (I bet they don’t all). This is no reason for arbitrary individuals of the same nationality as those who conducted the funeral to become “targets” for “revenge attacks”, which presumably means some form of violence. Anyone who thinks otherwise lacks perspective.

his body was disposed of in accordance with Islamic tradition, which involves ritual washing, shrouding and burial within 24 hours.

If anything this was too much appeasement of the wacko’s faith, particularly since

The 24-hour rule has not always been applied. For example, Uday and Qusay Hussein were held for 11 days after they were killed. Their bodies were later shown to media, provoking some angry responses.

Hm – more angry responses.

dispelling any doubts he is dead is likely to be a major impetus – particularly when conspiracy theories can be powerfully manipulated on the web.

One more conspiracy about the US government lying won’t hurt the government, and nor will providing evidence it’s definitely wrong prevent such conspiracy theories. Obama is still thought by many to have not been born in Hawaii years after his birth certificate entered the public domain, the Moon landings are doubted despite our ability to reflect lasers with a mirror once left on its surface, and I correctly predicted before it happened that, when Michael Jackson died, there’d be a conspiracy theory about it just because he’s famous. This form of irrationality occurs on an automatic basis.

there's going to be a set of people who are never going to be convinced. People filter the information they receive through their current attitudes, their current perspectives.

The inaccuracy and immorality of Islam springs to mind as an unmentioned example.

"I'm not ready to buy Bin Laden was here," said Haris Rasheed, 22, who works in a fast food restaurant. "How come no one knew he was here and why did they bury him so quickly? This is all fake, a drama, and a crude one." Kamal Khan, 25, who is unemployed, said the official story "looks fishy".

These are just the sort of people whose opinions on the subject outweigh those who perform autopsies, right?

What was done by the Americans is forbidden by Islam and might provoke some Muslims. It is not acceptable and it is almost a crime to throw the body of a Muslim man into the sea.

“Almost” a crime makes no sense. Bin Laden committed plenty of “crimes” (understatement of the year). Why only for a Muslim man? Frankly, why does what Americans – largely a non–Muslim people and certainly not citizens of an Islamic theocracy – do have Islamic implications?

The Americans want to humiliate Muslims through this burial, and I don't think this is in the interest of the US administration.

Not everything that annoys a few Muslims with a voice was done in order to humiliate or anger over a billion people. Some decisions are based on simple pragmatism.

Tue, 03 May 2011 09:49:58 UTC | #622410

mmurray's Avatar Comment 17 by mmurray

Comment 9 by Krasny :

Being tossed out of a helicopter doesn't constitute a burial of any kind.

It's the sort of thing one might do to a dog you didn't like that much.

They didn't shove him out of a helicopter. Have a look here.

Bin Laden's body was flown to the USS Carl Vinson in the North Arabian sea, a senior defense official said. There, aboard a U.S. warship, officials conducted a traditional Islamic burial ritual. Bin Laden's body was washed and placed in a white sheet. He was placed in a weighted bag that, after religious remarks by a military officer, was slipped into the sea about 2 a.m. EDT Monday.

Michael

Tue, 03 May 2011 09:52:10 UTC | #622411

Vaal's Avatar Comment 18 by Vaal

Personally and irrationally, I would have liked to have cut his head off, stuck it on a pole, and erected it at ground zero. However, that would have made us as odious as this psychopath, so even though the man would have been happy to murder all “unbelievers” (nearly 6 billion other human beings who are not Muslim), and would not lift an eyebrow at the beheading of you and your children, it behoves us to show some civility at his funeral, or what is the difference between us?

However, as Richard remarks, the brown-nosing to Muslim scholars and attributing respect to their heinous Sharia laws is contemptible, especially with respect to a mass-murderer and coward.

One wonders why there was not such outrage that Hitler was not buried in accordance to his Catholic church, or is this another one of Ratzinger’s foot-in-mouth comments to come?

Tue, 03 May 2011 10:11:23 UTC | #622415

danconquer's Avatar Comment 19 by danconquer

Comment 8 by MarkOnTheRiver :

I take it you don't actually live in The Hague.

I don't know about Foundationist, but as some RDF users will know from my previous contributions, I do live in The Hague. And I have no hesitation in saying that I would have liked to see him put on trial here. I took your message as implying that when lunatics become sufficiently noisy and threatening, it is 'OK' to abandon the Rule Of Law. Well it isn't.

In the event that holding the trial here was deemed to be too risky for the citizens, then arrangements can be made for the trials to be conducted in another territory (there is legal precedent for this; see the Lockerbie trial) where security can be easily managed.

People keep saying that "justice" has been done. I think you have to hold supernatural views on the afterlife to believe that. I believe that justice involves an element of punishment and retribution; well instant, quick death can only constitute a punishment if Bin Laden will now "burn in hell forever". Well he wont.

Tue, 03 May 2011 10:35:10 UTC | #622426

InYourFaceNewYorker's Avatar Comment 20 by InYourFaceNewYorker

When Osama Bin Ladin was killed, I read that those handling his body made sure to do it by Islamic custom. Why? The man is a fucking murderer. And besides, after we killed him, why would we care about handling it with "respect?" Oh, wait. To not give them one more reason to blow us up.

Julie

Tue, 03 May 2011 10:57:07 UTC | #622432

Vogon42's Avatar Comment 21 by Vogon42

If he had always ensured his victims were buried according to their rituals I might agree that he is entitled to a quid pro quo. Well - actually, he is entitled to a quid pro quo and tying an anchor to his corpse and chucking it into the Arabian Sea from 1,000ft up is it (oh... just seen that they put him on a ship and wrapped him in a sheet ... what a pity!)

Unfortunately, I heard an Arab child yesterday openly proclaim that now America has killed bin Laden, all Muslims have the right to kill any Westerner they like "because it is forbidden to kill Muslims". Of course, he didn't think this up for himself, I guess it came via the mosque/family/school.

I suppose that since Obama and the US military hierarchy all tout their allegiance to a death cult it is not surprising that they are obsessing over corpse disposal but I certainly don't like their willingness to proclaim their acts of submission to and reverence for Sharia law. They should be ashamed of themselves.

Tue, 03 May 2011 11:10:36 UTC | #622440

jardino's Avatar Comment 22 by jardino

Has anyone seen a authenticated photograph of the corpse yet? Just curious...

Tue, 03 May 2011 11:22:43 UTC | #622442

CuriousCat82's Avatar Comment 23 by CuriousCat82

I don't undersstand why they didn't keep the body! Surely the world needs to see for sure that this man is dead? Dumping it at sea seems very "Un-American" and a waste of the last 10 years of war?! Are we just supposed to accept that he was killed and is now dead? It's like the idea of them chucking an actual alien body out to sea! It doesn't make sense....

Tue, 03 May 2011 11:22:51 UTC | #622443

CuriousCat82's Avatar Comment 24 by CuriousCat82

As the moderates constantly kept reminding us, Osama Bin Laden wasn't a "true"® muslim, anyway, so why all the fuss?

But surely, if you "think" you're a Muslim, and you "say" you're a Muslim, you are a Muslim?

Tue, 03 May 2011 11:26:47 UTC | #622446

VDubster's Avatar Comment 25 by VDubster

Is there anything about this story that WON'T cause outrage and reprisals?

Tue, 03 May 2011 11:31:45 UTC | #622447

Vogon42's Avatar Comment 26 by Vogon42

Comment 23 by CuriousCat82 :

I don't undersstand why they didn't keep the body! Surely the world needs to see for sure that this man is dead? Dumping it at sea seems very "Un-American" and a waste of the last 10 years of war?! Are we just supposed to accept that he was killed and is now dead? It's like the idea of them chucking an actual alien body out to sea! It doesn't make sense....

I suspect the body is an inconvenience, they say no country wanted to take it, it could become an object of pilgrimage and those who won't believe he's dead until they see the photo also won't believe that the photo wasn't faked. My opinion is that Obama would not risk looking like a complete fool by proclaiming the death if there was a chance of him popping up in a new video next week.

Do we need to keep trophy corpses?

Tue, 03 May 2011 11:45:40 UTC | #622452

MadEd's Avatar Comment 27 by MadEd

Remember Brecht's words of caution (from The Resistable Rise of Arturo Ui) ; Do not rejoice in his defeat, you men. For though the world has stood up and stopped the bastard, the bitch that bore him is in heat again.

Seems somehow relevant.

Tue, 03 May 2011 11:51:11 UTC | #622454

schalkerforever's Avatar Comment 28 by schalkerforever

Comment 9 by Krasny :

Being tossed out of a helicopter doesn't constitute a burial of any kind.

It's the sort of thing one might do to a dog you didn't like that much.

Excuse me ???

Tue, 03 May 2011 11:55:47 UTC | #622456

Stevehill's Avatar Comment 29 by Stevehill

Why would he deserve any greater respect in death than he enjoyed in life?

There's quite an old Christian tradition (equally irrational, obviously) that people executed for murder may not be buried in consecrated ground.

Tue, 03 May 2011 12:15:21 UTC | #622460

MarkOnTheRiver's Avatar Comment 30 by MarkOnTheRiver

Comment 19 by danconquer

Comment 8 by MarkOnTheRiver :

I take it you don't actually live in The Hague.

I don't know about Foundationist, but as some RDF users will know from my previous contributions, I do live in The Hague. And I have no hesitation in saying that I would have liked to see him put on trial here.

Why aren’t I surprised? That’s why I said the majority of The Hague’s citizens.

I took your message as implying that when lunatics become sufficiently noisy and threatening, it is 'OK' to abandon the Rule Of Law. Well it isn't.

Indeed not, and that is not what I said. The Rule Of Law (I hope that was correctly capitalised for you), wasn’t abandoned. A self confessed terrorist, when challenged to surrender, preferred to die in a blaze of glory. His choice.

In the event that holding the trial here was deemed to be too risky for the citizens, then arrangements can be made for the trials to be conducted in another territory

It certainly can. Let them (whoever “they” may be) deal with the inconvenience of islamic rioting. After all bloodshed and the mutilated bodies of the local citizenry is a small price to pay. Actually, I believe Guantanamo Bay is a good choice for that kind of thing.

(there is legal precedent for this; see the Lockerbie trial) where security can be easily managed.

You don’t get out much, do you Dan?

People keep saying that "justice" has been done. I think you have to hold supernatural views on the afterlife to believe that.

I make no claims about justice, but I believe that a rabid dog has been put down, his body safely disposed of and the world is a now better place for his non existence.

Is that justice? Frankly, I don’t give a damn. He’s dead and good fucking riddance.

I believe that justice involves an element of punishment and retribution; well instant, quick death can only constitute a punishment if Bin Laden will now "burn in hell forever". Well he wont.

Of course not, so what?

Tue, 03 May 2011 12:39:05 UTC | #622470