Hello. Today, I will briefly talk about an English legend. Well,
according to the legend, he took from the rich and gave to the poor.
Who am I talking about? Yes, precisely, that is the legendary
character of Robin Hood. in English folklore, Robin Hood is portrayed
as a noble young guy, great archer and swordsman. He is thought to
have lived in Sherwood forest with his band of merry men. He is
thought to be a major opponent to lord sheriff of Nottingham Castle.
Therefore, modern Nottinghamshire people consider him an affinity to
their county. I only watched an Arabic cartoon of the legend when I
was a child. In this edition, he was portrayed a noble knight who
stood firm with oppressed members of Hengton family. Lord sheriff of
Nottingham Castle despised and persecuded them. Consequently, Robin
fought for their perfect emancipation. The depiction of Robin Hood in
the version I followed signified the nobility of knighthood in
medieval England. In the Arabic cartoon that I watched, there was a
paladin named Gilbert. He was a constant challenger to Robin, and
often featured engaging with him in one to one primitive battles. In
one of these sceens, Gilbert handed Robin a sword and said to him,
take this to engage with me. I do not assault those who are
susceptible. I liked how this concept was beautifully emphasized in a
show that was made particularly for children. Nobility in combat
mission is one of the greatest fundementals of Jihad. Therefore, I
sternly remonstrate and condemn those who unethically target innocent
civilians in the name of Islam. Emphatically, Islamic resistance
movement is licit to fend for our heritage and identity. However, it
is not religiously tolerable to delude diplomats. If Donald Trump came
as a visitor to my country, I am not by any manner consented to
assassinate him. Assassination is allowed in Islam in only one
situation. It is when someone has been noticed to explicitly conspire
to militarily assault Muslim land. This is a definite consensus in
Islamic jural sentiments. I am not ashamed at all to admit the
obligation of combative Jihad in Islam. If the States justifies its
deploy of military forces to fight Da'ish, they couldn’t then condemn
Jihad against transgressive assailants. If Hamas devoted its military
act to defy Israel’s military occupation of Palestine, why is it
considered a terrorist organisation? Who on earth has given Americans
the exclusive privilege to judge who is a terrorist and who is a
legitimate withstander? Muslims won’t ever retain their depleted pride
unless they fathom, what has been taken by force won’t ever be
regained but by force. Peace talks won’t ever be implemented unless
all sides are treated equally. It couldn’t be slanted. There is no
tolerance for transgressors and there is no place in this world for
fainthearted individuals. I urge Americans not to listen to their
current chief who is plainly an arrogant warmonger. Aggression begets
defiance. It will then be a relentless conflict. Sensible people from
either camp won’t ever be pleased with this. It is not sufficient to
just advocate for peace. There will never be genuine peace process
until all sides are brought in equal level playing field. Otherwise,
there will be hope for peace but not actual peace. Peacemakers are the
ones who would never tolerate a particular side to be superior to its
rival. Why the west failed in establishing a recognisable peace
between Jews and Palestinians? Because in all peace attempts, they
intrinsically favoured the Jewish side in some form or another. That
is the problem. The west talks about racial equality but, it is barely
noticed in their acts. Bob