PDA

View Full Version : from a few days ago in Egypt-- enjoy



Pages : [1] 2

جوري
08-13-2013, 03:28 AM
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
Insaanah
08-13-2013, 02:39 PM
Beautiful scenes and du'aa. :jz: for sharing.
Reply

Good brother
08-13-2013, 04:10 PM
Salam alaikum
The video seems to be recorded years ago.
The Qiyam prayers was cancelled for the first time in history in Al-Qaed Ibraheem mosque on 27 july after the massacre and the attack of the filthy criminals on the mosque. The mosque is closed (locked) till today.






Reply

glo
08-14-2013, 07:33 AM
Dua for peace in Egypt. imsad
May we soon seen pictures of people praying peacefully side by side again! Remember last year, when Muslims and Christians stood together?

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middle...017193693.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23691401
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
sister herb
08-14-2013, 08:13 AM
^^ Sad news from Cairo. May Allah put some sense to minds of Egyptians and teach them to looking for solution for their problems by peaceful ways, not by using guns against each others. imsad
Reply

جوري
08-14-2013, 09:48 PM
There are no peaceful ways after today when the Egyptian army and police force are doing Israel's bidding, btw many of the police force out killing Muslims today were christians, they're also burning their churches in asyoot like they did before in maspiro to escalte and hasten the killing of peaceful protestors. I have no sympathy for them left although there are a handful of them in gabhat ad'dameer like Mervat Malak who still has some sense in her, but the rest of them... may they get from God what they deserve, they've a history there from the days of the Romans to Napoleon to modern day, whenever they're weak they're not grateful and when they've power and leverage they kill- they're traitors to their country and would like what happened in Sudan to happen in Egypt with as much damage to muslims as possible!

best,
Reply

جوري
08-14-2013, 09:50 PM
Originally Posted by Good brother
Salam alaikum
The video seems to be recorded years ago.
The Qiyam prayers was cancelled for the first time in history in Al-Qaed Ibraheem mosque on 27 july after the massacre and the attack of the filthy criminals on the mosque. The mosque is closed (locked) till today.







They closed it but the people went out to pray anyway btw and in several other provinces where they are holding Imams as political prisoners.. Even under French occupations Mosques weren't closed.. it is a debacle and an all out war AGAINST ISLAM!
Reply

Jedi_Mindset
08-14-2013, 10:07 PM
I really hope egypt will not fall down like syria....you egyptians should watch out for this robert ford guy, he is already called master of fitnah in the arabic world. In iraq he was the one who created the sunni-shia conflict with death squads. But it seems like egypt's army (supposedly 'nationalistic') is doing a decent job by killing protestors and slaughtering. netanyahu must be laughing to see 3 countries (Egypt, syria and iraq) around his fake country falling down.

May Allah(SWT) save egypt from fitnah and fasaad and may HE accept the killed as martyrs. Ameen.
Reply

Abz2000
08-14-2013, 10:22 PM
This is America's foreign policy in action, i wonder does anyone still believe their lies about the war on Islam disguised as a war on "terror"?
And democracy - well we played their one sided game of dillusion in Bangladesh too and still were coming out successfully in the cursed impossible lie called "democracy", when they arrested the leaders of Jamaat Islam and are now attempting to ban the group in order to prevent people from voting for it. they have shown us that the only way forward is alliance with the believers and only mutual co-operation with anyone else.

Almost as if I hear the resounding call for khilafah - united Muslim state - ready to cut the head off any despot still willing to do America's bidding against its Muslim population under the guise of the non-never-existent falsehood called "democracy".

Verily the rule is for Allah, not the despots, not the white house, and not the "people" (as if they were ever allowed to decide anything anyway.

Let no American wonder and blame the Muslims for the repercussions caused by it's "elected" Government's foreign policy, their allies are fair game too.

Maybe it is a great move in Allah's plan to throw the accursed game of "democracy" on it's face despite Muslims coming out on top, it was never Allah's will for us to accept the votes and opinions of the enemies of Islam,

Haha the stupid bast@rds, now the youth too will throw away their "moderate" (humiliated) fiqh and raise the call for jihad (struggle) in the path of Allah.
The youth in BD are realising too, of course after being shot at and treated like animals.

Did they say Morsi was under arrest for "conspiring to kill protesters"???

May Allah curse that house slave Obama and his slaves of slaves of filth sitting on thrones in the lands of the Muslims.

Oh Allah, raise up the Ummah and make their plots the cause of our True Awakening and victory.


ما كانَ اللَّهُ لِيَذَرَ المُؤمِنينَ عَلىٰ ما أَنتُم عَلَيهِ حَتّىٰ يَميزَ الخَبيثَ مِنَ الطَّيِّبِ ۗ وَما كانَ اللَّهُ لِيُطلِعَكُم عَلَى الغَيبِ وَلٰكِنَّ اللَّهَ يَجتَبى مِن رُسُلِهِ مَن يَشاءُ ۖ فَـٔامِنوا بِاللَّهِ وَرُسُلِهِ ۚ وَإِن تُؤمِنوا وَتَتَّقوا فَلَكُم أَجرٌ عَظيمٌ


Allah will not leave the believers in the state in which ye are now, until He separates what is evil from what is good nor will He disclose to you the secrets of the Unseen.
But He chooses of His Messengers (For the purpose) whom He pleases.
So believe in Allah. And His messengers: And if ye believe and do right, ye have a reward without measure.

Quran 3:179



8. How (can there be such a league), seeing that if they get an advantage over you, they respect not in you the ties either of kinship or of covenant? With (fair words from) their mouths they entice you, but their hearts are averse from you; and most of them are rebellious and wicked.

9. The Signs of Allah have they sold for a miserable price, and (many) have they hindered from His way: evil indeed are the deeds they have done.

10. In a Believer they respect not the ties either of kinship or of covenant! It is they who have transgressed all bounds.

11. But (even so), if they repent, establish regular prayers, and practise regular charity,- they are your brethren in Faith: (thus) do We explain the Signs in detail, for those who understand.

12. But if they violate their oaths after their covenant, and taunt you for your Faith,- fight ye the chiefs of Unfaith: for their oaths are nothing to them: that thus they may be restrained.

13. Will ye not fight people who violated their oaths, plotted to expel the Messenger, and took the aggressive by being the first (to assault) you? Do ye fear them? Nay, it is Allah Whom ye should more justly fear, if ye believe!

14. Fight them, and Allah will punish them by your hands, cover them with shame, help you (to victory) over them, heal the breasts of Believers,

15. And still the indignation of their hearts. For Allah will turn (in mercy) to whom He will; and Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise.

16. Or think ye that ye shall be abandoned, as though Allah did not know those among you who strive with might and main, and take none for friends and protectors except Allah, His Messenger, and the (community of) Believers? But Allah is well- acquainted with (all) that ye do.

Quran - Chapter 9:8-16
Reply

جوري
08-14-2013, 10:49 PM


the one on the left and the right were both killed today, both daughters of prominenet Muslim brotherhood leaders the one in the middle was killed in the beginning of Ramadan a doctor.. of course thousands of others but because of the comments on how the Muslim brotherhood runs for cover, they've lost their most precious, so the liars have to stop their lies the moment of truth has come and there will be hell to pay oh enemies of God!
Reply

جوري
08-14-2013, 10:54 PM
Reply

Abz2000
08-15-2013, 12:00 AM
Ortiz made it past security cordons into a field hospital inside the cordoned-off area around the mosque, where he saw at least eight bodies of people killed from gunshot wounds to the head and chest. The youngest fatality seen by Ortiz appeared to be no more than 13 years of age.

Ortiz reported, however, that the field hospital building was five stories high, and there were dead and wounded on every floor which he could not see. The stairs and floors were covered with blood, and there was a steady stream of dead and wounded arriving at the site.
.....
Islam Tawfiq, a Brotherhood member at the Nasr City sit-in, said the camp's medical center was filled with dead and that the injured included children.
......
"Oh, Egyptian people, your brothers are in the square. ... Are you going to remain silent until the genocide is completed?" said el-Beltagy, who is wanted by authorities to answer allegations of inciting violence.
However CBS news was very quick to remove this statement from it's report (which I was able to retrieve from google's server cache, maybe some shortsighted reporter who accidentally implicated obama's allies).


Egypt forces move in to clear pro-Morsi protest camps in Cairo ...
http://www.islamicboard.com/general/...pt-forces-move...
15 hours ago - "By Allah, I have seen toddlers being killed in front of their mothers." There was no*...
Egypt forces launch bloody seige to clear pro-Morsi protest ...
http://www.islamicboard.com/general/...t-forces-launc...
13 hours ago - "By Allah, I have seen toddlers being killed in front of their mothers." Al-Biltagi was later*...

The U.S. has avoided declaring Morsi's ouster a coup, a move that would force the administration to suspend $1.3 billion in annual military aid

http://m.cbsnews.com/storysynopsis.r...catid=57598425
Reply

جوري
08-15-2013, 02:08 AM
here the sons of ********************************** planting their weapons to justify their raid... you can see them planting their own weapons how stupid do they think people are in this day and age?

someone from sky news also died but they deny everything, everything including the raid by Israel on Sinai with their help is because the Brother Hood.. Oh God I am so filled with rage =(
Reply

عابر سبيل
08-15-2013, 05:02 AM
Originally Posted by جوري
Whenever they're weak they're not grateful and when they've power and leverage they kill- they're traitors to their country and would like what happened in Sudan to happen in Egypt with as much damage to muslims as possible!
That is the nail, hit on the head.

May Allah grant victory to the Muslims of Egypt, the nile will be flowing with blood wallahu a`lam, but in the end the situation will always turn on them. It's igniting all over the Muslim world, and we will see the results soon.

Allah (swt) time and time again says the best outcome will be for the righteous, and it is clear who the criminals are, they will never have the best outcome.
Reply

sister herb
08-15-2013, 07:31 AM
May Allah sends peace to the all Egyptians and let this kind of unglued violence end as soon as possible. Preferably immediately.
Reply

جوري
08-16-2013, 02:01 AM
the Massacre in pictures the photographer himself is dead and they burned most of the dead and lying about the numbers and don't want to give their families their bodies unless they sign a release form saying it was suicide:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mosaabe...ith/9508552545
Reply

Abz2000
08-16-2013, 05:09 AM
The same kuffar did a similar thing here in bd, they loaded the bodies on trucks and they disappeared, the only ones given on official accounts were the bodies taken to Dhaka medical college hospital.
They also siezed media at diganto tv and islami tv who were there taking footage of the crime, both are still banned.
I seriously believe it is unsafe for the flock to be out and being targeted:
If people are being targeted for wearing traditional Islamic garb in a muslim country and pigs feel safe walking about in uniforms after horrendous crimes like that, then there's something badly wrong with the people of that country, Allah tells us to use a different tack in situations like these:



فَإِذَا انسَلَخَ الأَشهُرُ الحُرُمُ فَاقتُلُوا المُشرِكينَ حَيثُ وَجَدتُموهُم وَخُذوهُم وَاحصُروهُم وَاقعُدوا لَهُم كُلَّ مَرصَدٍ ۚ فَإِن تابوا وَأَقامُوا الصَّلوٰةَ وَءاتَوُا الزَّكوٰةَ فَخَلّوا سَبيلَهُم ۚ إِنَّ اللَّهَ غَفورٌ رَحيمٌ


But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, an seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.

Walking about in the open and protesting is something they seem to have considered as meriting indiscriminate slaughter, rather than removing weapons from the kuffar provocateurs.
Morsi would have done better to arm everybody to the hilt, he would have been safer. What was needed were telescopic lenses and high rise buildings.


There is an excellent example in the Prophet pbuh. When small in number or weak, he'd use guerilla tactics and preferred the method of ambush and fast retreat (it preserves the numbers of willing fighters), when strong and with large numbers of WILLING FIGHTERS, they'd go out in the open.

The protests are still useful however for countering the media deceptions and tilting the balance of opinion. Coz otherwise they come out with stupid statistics.
Reply

Periwinkle18
08-16-2013, 07:29 AM
:( there's so much gng on n ppl over here can't stop talking abt clothes n shoes n parties etc it make me smad wen I see all those pics of Egypt n Syria etc.

May Allah help our brothers n sisters , protect them n keep them safe from all kinds of evils ameen.

We should remember them in our duas...
Reply

Ramadan90
08-16-2013, 11:59 AM
Originally Posted by جوري
the Massacre in pictures the photographer himself is dead and they burned most of the dead and lying about the numbers and don't want to give their families their bodies unless they sign a release form saying it was suicide:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mosaabe...ith/9508552545
Heartbreaking. :cry:
Reply

glo
08-16-2013, 12:26 PM
Praying for a peaceful day in Egypt today - especially since it is Jummah.
Reply

glo
08-16-2013, 01:09 PM
I don't know how recent this is, but I am told that these are Muslims in Egypt, protecting a Christian church so their Christian friends and neighbours can attend mass. :)

Reply

glo
08-16-2013, 01:14 PM
On a more depressing note 52 churches have been badly attacked in Egypt in the last 24 hours. These are worrying times!
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/49...ohag-menya.htm
http://www.themuslimtimes.org/2013/0...ction-in-egypt

To those who might claim that these are Christians torching their own places of worship to 'blame Muslims', I must say that I find that idea ridiculous. Who would destroy their place of worship, where they serve and worship God and meet with their fellow believers? That's simply implausible!

My heart is breaking for the whole of Egypt. God, bring your peace! :cry:
Reply

sister herb
08-16-2013, 01:43 PM
When the society is in the chaos, any kind of vandalism will rise - everyone may attack against everyone - even if it wouldn´t change or help the whole situation or situation of some individuals or some group at all.

imsad
Reply

glo
08-16-2013, 02:06 PM
Originally Posted by sister herb
When the society is in the chaos, any kind of vandalism will rise - everyone may attack against everyone - even if it wouldn´t change or help the whole situation or situation of some individuals or some group at all.

imsad
Very true. And often it is the minority groups, which suffer the most.

imsad
Reply

~Zaria~
08-16-2013, 04:37 PM
:salam:

Egypt massacre eyewitness account

Azhar Vadi | Cii News, Pics: Scott Nelson – Al Jazeera | 15 August 2013


The numbers game starts a few moments after the first shots of an approaching massacre are fired. The protagonists, most often being government security services and those opposed to the government, hardly ever agree on the figures and quite often the truth appears somewhere in the middle.

In the case of Egypt, the last official figure quoted at 568 and some opposition claims of up to 10 000 casualties makes for grim reading even based on the median average calculation.

In the end it boils down to who you want to believe. The military propped, unelected Egyptian coup leaders or supporters of a legitimate government brought to power by a popular vote.

Perhaps, in the case of Wednesday’s vicious crackdown on peaceful protestors, you would opt for an eyewitness’s account, a narration from one who was actually there.

Professor Nidal Sakr, current chairperson at The March for Justice, a former Assistant General at the International Islamic Council for Da’wa and Relief and a member on the Advisory Board at the United States Commission on Civil Rights, was at the Rabaa sit-in in Cairo yesterday when all hell broke loose. He is also a regular analyst on Cii.

“At around 6am on the 14 August 2013, the administrators of the sit-in advised us not to leave until noon amid reports of an imminent crackdown,” he said. “Immediately thereafter we heard gunfire and teargas being fired. At the Rabaa sit-in there were many children and families.”

The protest until yesterday morning, in support of deposed president Muhammad Morsi, had taken on a carnival atmosphere over the last six weeks since his ousting. Eid celebrations were enjoyed there just last week. The leaders of the new interim government claim that negotiations had failed and a difficult decision was taken to remove the protestors.

“We tried as much as possible to evacuate the causalities after they were hit,” said Sakr. “We had casualties being transported at the rate of 20 cases per minute coming in, half of them dead with injuries to the head, neck and upper chest. Chaos erupted immediately. There was no warning. They just came in shooting.”

Numerous testimonies have borne witness to the use of high velocity bullets and not just bird shot as claimed by the security forces.

Professor Sakr narrated further: “Shortly afterwards sniper shots were fired at the Square from all directions and from three levels: from street level, from rooftops and from helicopters – one was military and one was police. For twelve continuous hours we just sat there in Rabaa Square and watched people all around being shot in the head with blood spilling out of them.

“The field hospitals got jammed from the first few minutes. It was announced by the hospital that more than 2200 people were killed. In my opinion it was much more. Eventually they started stacking the bodies up outside and in the Masjid and other areas. The police then set the field hospital on fire and bodies inside were charred and burnt. We also found entire families wiped out while being burnt in their tents.”

The Professor rubbished the claim that only bird shot was used to disperse the large crowds. “This was a specific kind of ammunition. It went right through the bodies. When it goes in, it comes out on the other side.”

The protestors yesterday were caught by surprise at the speed and ferocity of the crackdown on their peaceful demonstrations. “Killing for the sake of killing,” described Sakr. “It was driven by hate. We found that many of the soldiers and police officers had tattoos on their hands like the Christian Copts who have a cross on their right hand.”

Ambulances were also barred from entering the scene of the massacre on. Private cars and motorcycles that transported injured person were also fired upon and occupants of some of these vehicles were also amongst the dead, said Sakr. “We had medics who were targeted. Anybody who tried to attend to the women and children injured in the initial attack was also shot at.”

The world can make up its own mind on the numbers game. The truth may never be known but from the descriptions of this eyewitness, it’s easy to understand that the coup leader’s account may conveniently be much lower.


http://www.ciibroadcasting.com/2013/...tness-account/
(Highlights inserted.
Pics removed)





Our hearts are distressed for our brothers and sisters in Egypt (and across the world) :cry:
O Allah, forgive us and grant us honor and victory once again.
Ameen
Reply

Jedi_Mindset
08-16-2013, 06:37 PM
Robert ford, netanyahu and their stooge al-sisi must be hanged!

May Allah(SWT) protect egypt from the plots and plans of the mischief makers. Ameen
Reply

Signor
08-16-2013, 06:56 PM
http://www.islamicboard.com/general/...ml#post1593781

I am not sure whether this will be a healer or pain igniter but one thing I surely know its time to Astagfaarimsad.Some sources claiming 2000 while other 4000 have been killed,to whom they will seek revenge of their blood,who will provide them with justice...
Reply

Periwinkle18
08-16-2013, 08:48 PM
"With every fir'awn there comes a Musa" -imam anwar al awlaki (rahimullah)

InshaAllah soon...
Reply

CosmicPathos
08-17-2013, 04:50 AM
Not for the weak

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x13...news?start=394
Reply

Insaanah
08-17-2013, 02:02 PM
I wonder if those who protested against Muhammad Mursi, leading to his removal from power, are pleased with what their protests have achieved. Bloodshed, carnage, destruction and death of innocent people on an unprecedented scale (this was not seen under Mursi), and a brutal military dictatorship, who will not even respect places of worship. Nor will it tolerate opposition, instead considering making those that oppose it illegal. Nor will it leave reporters, and cameramen. Anybody and everybody is fair game to be shot by them, even if you just happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Nobody is safe.

Maybe this is the anti-Mursi protester's idea of a democracy. While it takes time for the first ever democratically elected leader of a country to formulate policies and bring about change, as there is much work being done behind the scenes to bring it all into effect, there was at least stability, no bloodshed, no dictatorship, no syphoning off of millions into personal Swiss bank accounts.

May Allah grant Egypt and Muslims a leader who obeys and fears Him alone, ameen.

Originally Posted by glo
On a more depressing note 52 churches have been badly attacked in Egypt in the last 24 hours. These are worrying times!
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/49...ohag-menya.htm
http://www.themuslimtimes.org/2013/0...ction-in-egypt

To those who might claim that these are Christians torching their own places of worship to 'blame Muslims', I must say that I find that idea ridiculous. Who would destroy their place of worship, where they serve and worship God and meet with their fellow believers? That's simply implausible!
The fact that any place of worship is being attacked, be that a mosque or church is wrong. I see the above articles are playing the blame game, blaming brotherhood supporters, on the basis of pro-Mursi slogans being heard from the mouth of some of the attackers, an a fake pro-Mursi looking website created condoning the attacks. Anyone can shout slogans or create a website. The Muslim Brotherhood has categorically denied involvement in, and support for, such attacks: http://www.ikhwanweb.com/article.php?id=31246 They have said they have not done it, but by the same token have not played the blame game, and haven't tried to lay the finger of blame at anyone without solid evidence.

The so-called Muslim Times, is an Ahmadi/Qadiyani news blog. Here's one article of proof, though there are loads, where they refer to their fifth caliph: http://www.themuslimtimes.org/2013/0...t-uk-centenary). The Ahmadis/Qadiyanis, while using the name Muslim, are categorically not Muslim. So we cannot use that as evidence to justify that Muslims themselves are admitting that Muslims are attacking churches. That article, is very tabloid and sensationalist in nature. On the contrary there are articles which mention that "arsonists" attacked churches, or that churches were attacked, mentioning the tensions there have been, without laying blame, as right now it is not possible to do so. One of those is here:http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2...-churches?lite . The fact is, that nobody knows who is attacking the churches, but whoever it is, should stop attacking churches, mosques, and the Egyptian populace at large.
Reply

Signor
08-17-2013, 02:47 PM
I endorsed to what stated above

Report after Arab Spring in 2012
http://www.thenational.ae/news/world...ctarian-deaths

One year later
http://english.alarabiya.net/en/spec...adan-meal.html
Reply

Independent
08-17-2013, 04:01 PM
Originally Posted by Insaanah
Maybe this is the anti-Mursi protester's idea of a democracy.
Whatever else this coup is, it is most definitely an attack on democracy. In fact it is hard to see how democracy can be attempted here again for many, many years to come. Why is democracy being blamed for an attack on democracy? Bizarre.

Originally Posted by Insaanah
The fact is, that nobody knows who is attacking the churches, but whoever it is, should stop attacking churches, mosques, and the Egyptian populace at large
Another certain victim of this chaos is the Coptic community. The notion that the Copts themselves are the ones who are burning churches and shooting their own 10 year old daughters in the head is as absurd as anything the Israelis have ever claimed about the Palestinians 'faking' incidents. The people carrying out these attacks must be Muslims, because there simply isn't anyone else around who could be doing it.

No one important in the world seems to care about the Copts and no one protects them. Their ancient civilisation will therefore experience the same fate as all the other Christian communities in the region over the last 100 years - death or exile. The ongoing elimination of Christian communities in the ME has been inexplicably ignored by all sides, even in the West.

Democracy is blamed for an attack on democracy, Christians for attacks on Christians. Strange world.
Reply

جوري
08-17-2013, 04:18 PM
The churches were burned from the inside, they have high security, there wasn't a single loss of life, so draw your own conclusion especially that the minute they're raiding the protesters the churches are being burned by the same protesters who were also raping each other inside committing suicide and then burning themselves.. that's the official story on Egyptian state media. The churches that were burned were never used in general and old, now Sissi wants to pay for them from the funds of the state which are being paid for by Muslims, they've also made sure that they freeze and take the funds of the brotherhood whom they've placed in jail and made into terrorists groups. So they've killed many birds with one stone in fact!
You're not from Egypt, don't have family there, don't have relatives trapped in a mosque, don't even know that mosques are being torched and your claim to fame is what you saw on the news
Reply

جوري
08-17-2013, 04:24 PM
Originally Posted by Signor
I endorsed to what stated above

Report after Arab Spring in 2012
http://www.thenational.ae/news/world...ctarian-deaths

One year later
http://english.alarabiya.net/en/spec...adan-meal.html
I advise you to forgo alarbiya or as we call it al3brya (the Hebrew) it is the zionist mouth piece in the Muslim world and caters to the hypocrites amongst arabs but it is up to you :)
Reply

عابر سبيل
08-17-2013, 04:31 PM
The copts from the beginning supported the coup, and many of the cops on the front lines firing at Muslims are copts. They wish to establish their own state, and they have been allies of all the oppressive regimes in Egypt in recent history.

Right now the coptic priest tawadros II has thanked the egyptian army before and after they started their massacre of thousands. Kuffar minorities in our countries have been trouble from day one. These nusairis in Syria, the christians and shi`ah in Lebanon, and the copts in Egypt. Allies of all these corrupt governments, we live in a time when the line between Muslims and munafiqeen and their kaafir masters has become ridiculously sharp and clear. Even the world's media is manipulating information in blatant ways, the only reason we know better is because the internet has made it easier to get direct access to information from the sources of conflict. They say "200 killed", in one picture you see 50 people dead in a room. So I happen to be staring at 1/4th the death toll right now? It's thousands killed.

Anyway, we will see what will be done to them by the end of this. Everyone should support their brethren in any way they can.
Reply

جوري
08-17-2013, 04:40 PM
copt means egyptian they use that term to showcase they are the true egyptians while the Muslims are invaders even though they're the remnants of the Romans who were spared after the conquest of Egypt, the people of Egypt embraced Islam almost in totality! and yes christians have a history of treason most notable during Napoleon's time but of course he took them with him so they could be spared a public hanging!
Reply

glo
08-17-2013, 04:52 PM
Originally Posted by Signor
I endorsed to what stated above

Report after Arab Spring in 2012
http://www.thenational.ae/news/world...ctarian-deaths

One year later
http://english.alarabiya.net/en/spec...adan-meal.html
That is so encouraging!
Thanks for sharing. :)
Reply

Signor
08-17-2013, 04:53 PM
Originally Posted by جوري
I advise you to forgo alarbiya or as we call it al3brya (the Hebrew) it is the zionist mouth piece in the Muslim world and caters to the hypocrites amongst arabs but it is up to you
:jz: for telling me.I will try to keep this in mind Insha Allah
Reply

Independent
08-17-2013, 05:02 PM
Originally Posted by عابر سبيل
Kuffar minorities in our countries have been trouble from day one.
What you are doing is to justify the total elimination of all non Muslims in the ME (which has been happening progressively for the last 100 years).

You regard them either as actual traitors, or potential traitors.

This is ethnic/religious cleansing.
Reply

Independent
08-17-2013, 05:26 PM
Originally Posted by جوري
copt means egyptian they use that term to showcase they are the true egyptians while the Muslims are invaders even though they're the remnants of the Romans who were spared after the conquest of Egypt, the people of Egypt embraced Islam almost in totality!
Egypt was once as solidly Christian as it is now mostly Muslim. Many Copts converted to Islam over the centuries, but a significant community still remains. Not for much longer, from the looks of things.
Reply

جوري
08-17-2013, 05:35 PM
Originally Posted by Independent
Egypt was once as solidly Christian as it is now mostly Muslim. Many Copts converted to Islam over the centuries, but a significant community still remains. Not for much longer, from the looks of things.
actually it wasn't solidly christian- Egyptians by their very nature are religious people and that has changed with every messenger.. what they were solidly were worshipers of amun ra and speakers of demotic after its evolution from three other languages- thus if they want to call themselves copt and deny that Muslims are equally 'coptic' they should go back to amun ra and speaking demotic would love to see how much their dogma stands up to that were it not for Arabic elevating it and still their doctrine isn't transcendent..
I have no desire for their elimination- they have lived with us homogeneously for centuries and many of them from Gabhat ad'dameer are in solidarity with the chosen elected president and the constitution a notable speaker from them is Neveen Malak..
best,
Reply

جوري
08-17-2013, 05:46 PM
Originally Posted by glo
Very true. And often it is the minority groups, which suffer the most.
surprisingly it is the Muslims and their freely elected president that are made into a minority now.. btw I am curious if you heard word that Rabia Al3idwya mosque was torched with alive people in it at all so they were all unrecognizable char grill and when their folks came to claim them they wouldn't release the bodies until they signed a release stating they committed suicide!
Reply

جوري
08-17-2013, 05:51 PM

coup sponsored by christian businessman Suwaris who is most famous and made his billions building spy towers in Iraq to spy for Israel & America!
come speak to me again about minorities!
Reply

Independent
08-17-2013, 05:56 PM
Originally Posted by جوري
surprisingly it is the Muslims and their freely elected president that are made into a minority now
Meaningless.

Some Muslims support Morsi, some don't. Some supported the army coup, some don't.
Reply

جوري
08-17-2013, 05:59 PM
Originally Posted by Independent
Meaningless.

Some Muslims support Morsi, some don't. Some supported the army coup, some don't.
If you subscribe to the much toted democracy then it is very meaningful since he, his party & the constitution won six consecutive elections by a landslide!
who defines the terms exactly? you?
Reply

Independent
08-17-2013, 06:09 PM
Originally Posted by جوري
If you subscribe to the much toted democracy then it is very meaningful since he, his party & the constitution won six consecutive elections by a landslide!
who defines the terms exactly? you?
Like I said, the coup was an attack on democracy. Right now it looks like there is no prospect of a meaningful election for years to come.
Reply

جوري
08-17-2013, 06:12 PM
What you say evolves as your knowledge of the situation or lack thereof is exposed to everyone!
Reply

glo
08-17-2013, 06:19 PM
Now is not the time for tit-for-tats of conspiracy theories and scapegoating.

That's exactly what is tearing Egypt apart and diving the nation!

And as always it's the ordinary people who suffer the most, the ones who simply want to live in peace, raise their children, practice their faith and be safe.

Now is the time for people to stand together and demand equal rights for all.
Now is the time to not allow the powers to be to let the nation be divided - whether between different faiths or within the same faith. People need to stand united!

Many countries have expressed their horror at the violence which the military has unleashed. Hopefully this will help in putting more pressure on the interim government to moderate its practices.

I am praying for peace in Egypt.
Reply

جوري
08-17-2013, 06:25 PM
everyone has to bless the thread with their pearls I guess when they've never even stepped foot inside Egypt or know its history!
Reply

Independent
08-17-2013, 06:28 PM
Originally Posted by جوري
What you say evolves as your knowledge of the situation or lack thereof is exposed to everyone!
No, I am repeating what i said in my first post: Whatever else this coup is, it is most definitely an attack on democracy. In fact it is hard to see how democracy can be attempted here again for many, many years to come.

The Muslim Brotherhood will survive this coup, democracy will not.
Reply

جوري
08-17-2013, 06:31 PM
I guess we should wipe clean all the other crap stuffing in between? Too bad I quoted it!
Reply

glo
08-17-2013, 08:06 PM
Originally Posted by Insaanah
The fact that any place of worship is being attacked, be that a mosque or church is wrong. I see the above articles are playing the blame game, blaming brotherhood supporters, on the basis of pro-Mursi slogans being heard from the mouth of some of the attackers, an a fake pro-Mursi looking website created condoning the attacks. Anyone can shout slogans or create a website. The Muslim Brotherhood has categorically denied involvement in, and support for, such attacks: http://www.ikhwanweb.com/article.php?id=31246 They have said they have not done it, but by the same token have not played the blame game, and haven't tried to lay the finger of blame at anyone without solid evidence.
The so-called Muslim Times, is an Ahmadi/Qadiyani news blog. Here's one article of proof, though there are loads, where they refer to their fifth caliph: http://www.themuslimtimes.org/2013/0...t-uk-centenary). The Ahmadis/Qadiyanis, while using the name Muslim, are categorically not Muslim. So we cannot use that as evidence to justify that Muslims themselves are admitting that Muslims are attacking churches. That article, is very tabloid and sensationalist in nature. On the contrary there are articles which mention that "arsonists" attacked churches, or that churches were attacked, mentioning the tensions there have been, without laying blame, as right now it is not possible to do so. One of those is here:http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2...-churches?lite . The fact is, that nobody knows who is attacking the churches, but whoever it is, should stop attacking churches, mosques, and the Egyptian populace at large.
Thank you for adding those articles, sister Insaanah.
I found another one which makes reference to the arsonists being thugs and imams calling to protect the local churches.
http://www.middleeastmonitor.com/new...t-the-churches
I can't understand the video footage. Perhaps somebody can explain what's being said.

Salaam :)
Reply

Insaanah
08-17-2013, 08:37 PM
Please do not make personal remarks about members, and stick to the topic at hand. That goes for everyone. Thank you.
Reply

جوري
08-17-2013, 10:34 PM
Originally Posted by tearose
Sister can you recommend any good arabic news stations as I have heard bad things about both alarabiya and aljazeera but I never hear of any other news channels that are available online. jazaaki Allahu khair
They don't like aljazeera because it exposes them on the air and yesterday they burned Ramses (a building) didn't put the fire out then ontv state TV owned by suwaris said there was fire extending to the mosque they released this news before it happened a sister named shaima who's now in custody and we know nothing about her sent live recordings from inside the mosque to aljazeera while the state ******* Channel was saying there were armed terrorists inside aljazeera exposed their lies and continues to which is why they keep kicking them out they spoil their plans foreign correspondents with cameras and one of them for sky news died - you can also try yarmuk and there are a few others when I go home in shaa Allah I will give them to you and thank you!
Reply

Abz2000
08-18-2013, 12:16 AM
@glo
Now is the time for people to stand together and demand equal rights for all.
Now is the time to not allow the powers to be to let the nation be divided - whether between different faiths or within the same faith. People need to stand united!
Now the illusion of "democracy" has been exposed as a falsehood by it's own pretenders.
Now is the time to cast aside the falsehoods like a good christian and rather than stand for the leadership of infudelity say:



Our Lord who art in heaven,
hallowed be your name.
Your Kingdom come,
your will be done,on earth
as it is in heaven

Give us today our daily bread.
Forgive us our sins,
as we forgive those who sin against us.
Lead us not into temptation,
but deliver us from evil.
For the kingdom,
the power and the glory are yours.
Now and for ever.

Amen.

Because the Muslims calling for Caliphate live and die by that motto.
There is no personal revenge, the infidel forces repent and denounce their riddah, and they Must be forgiven.
*
Reply

جوري
08-18-2013, 12:45 AM
You tell em ABZ and also anyone who's as sick if the bull as I am- they've used 'damdam' bullets israeli made on peaceful protesters that explode once inside the victims and killed thousands then you always find someone wanting to milk it for they could potentially be the victims of something untoward! Ugh
Reply

sister herb
08-18-2013, 08:14 AM
Originally Posted by Abz2000
@glo

Now the illusion of "democracy" has been exposed as a falsehood by it's own pretenders.
I can see that democracy has been illusion in the country where during its the recent history hasn´t had any kind of democratic rulers, just only dictators. Getting workable, western-like democracy (if they even want that one) might takes decades and many generations - a lot of more time and work than one elections.
Reply

sister herb
08-18-2013, 08:23 AM
Originally Posted by tearose
I think those Muslims who are making du3a for peace should also make du3a for success for those who seemed to be striving for Islamic rule in Egypt... they were chosen by the people, they have the right to defend themselves against this unprovoked attack. We as Muslims should support the people who would work to put into place an Islamic system in Egypt and I hope we will see it in sha Allah
Salam alaykum

Isn´t peace and islamic rule quite same matter? I make dua for peace to all people in Egypt, no for more massacres of innocents.

Who are now the people whose try to put islamic rules to Egypt?
Reply

faithandpeace
08-18-2013, 08:51 AM
May Allah (swt) bring justice to the Egyptian people and rid the land of oppressers be they kaffirs or munafiqeen. May Allah (swt) bring peace to the righteous in Egypt be they Muslims or Ahl Al-Kitaab. May Allah (swt) help us all to expose the truth to the world of what is going on and bring hope and faith to those who are righteous and bring shame and fear to the wrongdoers until they change their evil ways. Ameen.
Reply

faithandpeace
08-18-2013, 09:19 AM
I may still be new to Islam but my understanding is that there is no separation of church and state in Islam, none whatsoever. Therefore, those calling themselves Muslims and advocating against a Sharia state in Egypt preferring instead a secular state are instead demonstrating apostasy from Islam and therefore become munafiqueen. There is no "liberal, progressive, or secular" Islam. There is Islam or non-Islam. The Western states such as the U.S. that routinely demonstrate support for munafiq Muslim groups and regimes that oppose Sharia do so in the false guise of defending human rights. The truth is they do it for the purpose of installing, maintaining, or expanding finance capital in the area. This is incompatible with Sharia banking and therefore feared and fought against. It is indeed a War on Islam because Islam is a threat to the capitalist banking system everywhere where Muslims choose to favor an Islamic system as opposed to their system. A united ummah and restored kalifate that doesn't need their profit system is what they don't want but that is just what we need insha'Allah. And Allah(swt) knows best.
Reply

Independent
08-18-2013, 10:00 AM
Originally Posted by faithandpeace
Therefore, those calling themselves Muslims and advocating against a Sharia state in Egypt preferring instead a secular state are instead demonstrating apostasy from Islam and therefore become munafiqueen.
Logically, that means that the total number of Muslims in the world (ie those you would accept as worthy of the name) is very much less than the figures usually quoted.
Reply

faithandpeace
08-18-2013, 10:31 AM
Am I supposed to care what you think? I know what your agenda is here. I am not fooled.
Reply

glo
08-18-2013, 12:26 PM
Originally Posted by sister herb
I can see that democracy has been illusion in the country where during its the recent history hasn´t had any kind of democratic rulers, just only dictators. Getting workable, western-like democracy (if they even want that one) might takes decades and many generations - a lot of more time and work than one elections.
I agree.

People look to democracy and think it is going to offer a perfect world. That they can elect whichever government and life they want and will be forever happy!
The problem is that everybody else is voting too ... and people have different ideas and opinions on what they want.
That's the nature of democracy - working out your differences in opinion and (hopefully) finding a workable compromise.

Perhaps we forget that many of our European democracies are many generations old and have matured over the decades (and perhaps even become complacent). In the early days our democracies also went through rocky times and conflict too. Democracy needs to be worked on and worked out.
It's not a magic wand!
Reply

Jedi_Mindset
08-18-2013, 12:30 PM
Until you realize that we are not living under 'democracy' at all ;)
Reply

glo
08-18-2013, 01:04 PM
Originally Posted by Insaanah
The fact that any place of worship is being attacked, be that a mosque or church is wrong. I see the above articles are playing the blame game, blaming brotherhood supporters, on the basis of pro-Mursi slogans being heard from the mouth of some of the attackers, an a fake pro-Mursi looking website created condoning the attacks. Anyone can shout slogans or create a website. The Muslim Brotherhood has categorically denied involvement in, and support for, such attacks: http://www.ikhwanweb.com/article.php?id=31246 They have said they have not done it, but by the same token have not played the blame game, and haven't tried to lay the finger of blame at anyone without solid evidence.
Bishop Angaelos, General Bishop of The Coptic Orthodox Church in the United Kingdom, spoke about the attacks on churches in Egypt. He also directed no blame at any particular group, but spoke of the effect the conflict is having on all of Egypt.

What we have witnessed on the streets of Egypt over the past weeks, and particularly earlier this week, is nothing short of devastating. To see so many lives lost whether of victims or perpetrators is not only a loss to families and communities, but a loss to the nation and to humanity as a whole. At this point and without reservation or exception we offer our prayers for all those who mourn; those who have lost loved ones, who have been injured, or who feel more powerless than they did.

[...]

Over the past year we have seen an increased marginalisation of Christians and minority groups in Egypt followed by what some see, in these attacks on churches, as intentional instigation of anger attempting to prompt a retaliation that would lead to a spiralling pattern of violence. If this indeed is a ploy, it will of course fail, as it has been proven over centuries that the nature of Christians in Egypt is not to retaliate but rather to continue striving as loyal and law-abiding citizens of their indigenous homeland. While Christians in Egypt have been accused of being Western sympathisers and seeking Western intervention for decades, in actual fact what we have witnessed in our contemporary history and in particular over the past few weeks, is quite the opposite.

[...]

We continue to pray for Egypt, comprised of her ninety million Egyptians of various religions, beliefs, and outlooks, praying that a much needed peace and wisdom descends upon all. We further pray that Egypt returns to being a nation for all, and not one governed by some, to the exclusion of others.
http://www.christianmuslimforum.org/...ation-in-egypt
Reply

Independent
08-18-2013, 01:43 PM
Originally Posted by Jedi_Mindset
Until you realize that we are not living under 'democracy' at all ;)
The military coup is by definition an attack ON democracy, not an attack BY democracy. No matter how incompetent the Morsi government was, the best way to get rid of it was to vote it out in the next election, as would surely have happened. Whereas the coup ensures that there will be no election worthy of the name.

The greatest advantage of democracy is not the governments it brings in, but the ones it gets rid of PEACEFULLY. All governments go bad eventually.
Reply

glo
08-18-2013, 04:39 PM
Not sure how authentic people will find this article by Ibrahim Negm, the senior advisor to the Grand Mufti of Egypt.

The Egypt that witnessed scenes of joy and jubilation at images of dead bodies yesterday is not an Egypt to which we should aspire, or with which we should be content. We must be better than this – as we are. Now is not the time to revive old grudges without due regard for the basic value of life. Now is the time to band together to save our country from further deterioration – whether political, economic or moral. God affirms in the Holy Koran that though humans are capable of all sorts of bloodshed, they are also capable of heights of moral excellence and rectitude.

Among Egypt’s provinces, we also witnessed a disturbing rise in sectarian sentiment. Churches were vandalized and attacked. It is unacceptable that in such trying moments, our minority populations should have to bear a disproportionate amount of the burden. Egyptians are all in this together, as the nation belongs to all of us, not to members of one religion, sect, party or organization to the exclusion of all others. We all participate in a social contract, a vow before God to put peace and harmony first. In no circumstances, can we allow trying circumstances to transform us into partisan thugs.

These attack by extremist elements on churches as well as the subsequent clashes between Muslims and Copts cannot be the work of anyone who truly cares for religion or nation, and genuinely seeks to abide by their principles. Rather, this is the handiwork of those who put their interests and ideologies above all else.

[...]

It is now upon us to take up this example seriously and refrain from unnecessary division for the sake of our country. Any attempt to sow discord among Egyptian people must be opposed in the strongest terms possible. I have no doubt that forces that seek to divide Egyptians or make them to plunge in civil war will ultimately fail, for Egypt has been a symbol of coexistence for centuries and will continue to be by the grace of God.

http://www.ali-gomaa.com/?page=schol...efFRI.facebook
Reply

Abz2000
08-18-2013, 05:00 PM
democracy is a lie. worse still, america seems to believe that democracy means the vote of the cfr, not the majority in the country that votes.
democracy and republic are totally different forms of government.

Reply

Jedi_Mindset
08-18-2013, 06:17 PM
Originally Posted by Abz2000
democracy is a lie. worse still, america seems to believe that democracy means the vote of the cfr, not the majority in the country that votes.
democracy and republic are totally different forms of government.

Thats what i meant bro, but people here thought that i was talking about the coup *big facepalm*. The very idea of 'democracy' here in the west is a dillusion, people need to realize that. There are alot of reasons why.
Reply

Independent
08-18-2013, 07:34 PM
Originally Posted by Jedi_Mindset
Thats what i meant bro, but people here thought that i was talking about the coup *big facepalm*.
Well, the thread is about Egypt, not democracy in general.
Reply

Jedi_Mindset
08-18-2013, 07:36 PM
Originally Posted by Independent
Well, the thread is about Egypt, not democracy in general.
Being offtopic sometimes is healthy, As long as you end with the subject the topic is about. ;) You can't continously talk about the same subject, it would make a debate/discussion boring.
Reply

Independent
08-18-2013, 07:39 PM
Originally Posted by Jedi_Mindset
Being offtopic sometimes is healthy, As long as you end with the subject the topic is about. ;) You can't continously talk about the same subject, it would make a debate/discussion boring.
Sadly, all these years after leaving school, it would seem I'm still afraid of being told off....
Reply

Signor
08-19-2013, 08:21 AM
:sl:
Originally Posted by faithandpeace
he Western states such as the U.S. that routinely demonstrate support for munafiq Muslim groups and regimes that oppose Sharia do so in the false guise of defending human rights.
Its prudent and higly advised not to use words like "Munafiq" as some times this is not the case.
Reply

Jedi_Mindset
08-19-2013, 10:59 AM
ignorance is a better word to use.
Reply

Junon
08-19-2013, 12:44 PM
Salaam

News just in, seems credible

Mubarak could be freed

Mubarak, 85, was arrested after a popular uprising overthrew him on 11 February 2011 as unrest spread across the Arab world.

In scenes that mesmerised Arabs, the ex-strongman appeared in a court-room cage during his trial on charges that ranged from corruption to complicity in the murder of protesters.

More than a year on, the only legal grounds for Mubarak's continued detention rest on another corruption case which his lawyer, Fareed el-Deeb, said would be settled swiftly. He told Reuters:

All we have left is a simple administrative procedure that should take no more than 48 hours. He should be freed by the end of the week
Without confirming that Mubarak would be freed, a judicial source said the former leader would spend another two weeks behind bars before judicial authorities made a final decision in the outstanding case against him.

Mubarak, along with his interior minister, was convicted and sentenced to life in prison last year for failing to stop the killing of protesters in the revolt that swept him from power.

He still faces a retrial in that case after appeals from the prosecution and defence, but this would not necessarily require him to stay in jail.

Mubarak did not appear at a hearing in the case on Saturday. He was also absent from Monday's proceedings.

He is being held at Tora prison on the southern outskirts of Cairo, the same facility where senior Brotherhood members have been detained in a clampdown that followed Mursi's overthrow.

Mubarak's eventual release could stir more political tension in Egypt, where at least 850 people, including 70 policemen and soldiers, have been killed since the army-backed government forcibly dispersed Brotherhood sit-ins in Cairo on Wednesday.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/19/egypt-hosni-mubarak-could-be-freed-sinai-police-deaths-live
Reply

sister herb
08-19-2013, 12:57 PM
Keeping ex-leaders in prison or releasing them depending who keeps the power tells even that the judicial system in Egypt is far from the independent level.
Reply

جوري
08-19-2013, 07:55 PM
Originally Posted by faithandpeace
May Allah (swt) bring justice to the Egyptian people and rid the land of oppressers be they kaffirs or munafiqeen. May Allah (swt) bring peace to the righteous in Egypt be they Muslims or Ahl Al-Kitaab. May Allah (swt) help us all to expose the truth to the world of what is going on and bring hope and faith to those who are righteous and bring shame and fear to the wrongdoers until they change their evil ways. Ameen.
Hypoctrites are indeed in the bottomest lowest pits of hell- you've no idea about the mass killing that's going on in Egypt like now, it parrallels what happened in Algeria in 1992, which by the way Algerian cops admitted to dressing in civilian clothes to ruin the reputation of Islamists so they'd never rise to power again. YES make no mistake we're under massive oppressive crusades even in our alleged homelands. They control us completely and if you've a moment please read about the Sykes picot agreement which was exposed by the bolshevcs in their revolution-- there is an all out war on Muslims and our armies, well they're not our armies anymore, in fact they're Israel's armies- they call peaceful protesters terrorists and Islam a terrorist religion - yes right there in the heart of Islam!
Did you know Dr. Tareq Suwidan just lost his job, Walid Ibn Talal fired him, that big zionist masonist also owns al3rbya and sky news and fox.. so know that we've horrible hypocrites Zionists working in our midst owning it all while pretending to be Muslims. They've looted the wealth of Muslims and spend it on Dajjal media!
I no longer wonder why it is that no one will recognize Dajjal when he comes when I have encountered that much stupidity..
you want to know what else is ticking me off, the other day I take my little niece she's 8 to see the smurfs and right there in the commercial before it started they're advocating homosexuality by force you can't even watch little children programming that should be free of all profanity and sexual innuendos without encountering this brain wash, except it is just so in your face now.. Even if you watch nothing on TV but cooking and home and garden still there they push their vile agenda..
there's basically no room for you in this brave new world if you have some morals or principles to adhere to, No, those are all pathetic and backwards and they're so peaceful loving and progressive. Even when they kill thousands and torch the rest of them alive without batting an eyelash or saying more than well they shouldn't have been there and two minutes later they make commercials about cats and dogs suffering for your monthly donation of $18. No value to Muslim life even akin to that of dogs and cats!
Reply

جوري
08-19-2013, 08:01 PM
Originally Posted by Independent
The greatest advantage of democracy is not the governments it brings in, but the ones it gets rid of PEACEFULLY. All governments go bad eventually.
That's a load of crock. Democracy is completely and utterly meaningless to a system that's tightly put in place so that it doesn't matter which face you bring in, it will always be the same vile agenda with some degree of variation. Also you know jack about the failure or lack thereof of Mursi's govt. And I am not really interested in the crap you quote as if facts!The U.S loves Mubarak's regime and wants it at any cost, it doesn't matter by whom, Umar Suliman, Sissy, Mubarak's kid or whatever just so long as the system is the same, whether brought by democracy or monarchy or totalitarianism it doesn't matter.. all they want is for their image to not be tarnished in the media while they support the coup with 11 billion beneath the table and call for early elections.. Well like I said they already voted five times and all their votes were cast in the garbage until they bring the candidates that America approves of for israel' sake and then call it an excellent democracy that's all inclusive. you're welcome to sell your crap of course, but we've the option to not buy it!
Reply

Jedi_Mindset
08-19-2013, 09:05 PM
Problem is, you can say all these things to some people but if they are relucant to study these things and brush these things off by saying 'Oh thats nonsense' 'Oh thats a conspiracy theory!' then they are a waste of time to discuss with.

We are certainly not living in a democracy, democracy is supposedly when a leader gets chosen by the people while this leader is not seeking for the position himself. This is how caliphs should be chosen (looking at Abu bakr As-Siddiq(Ra), Umar ibn Khattab(Ra), Uthman ibn Affan(Ra) and Ali Ibn Abu talib(Ra).

Today, you have leaders who promise everything, showing a big fake smile while their intentions are evil and not honest, and the best liar and hypocrite gets chosen, this defeats the whole purpose of 'democracy'.

Shariah law itself has a form of democracy, as the righteous leader gets chosen by the people (truthfully elected and not selected) while the leader is not seeking for this position. Such men will always be helped by Allah(Swt).

There are countless other reasons why the west has not even a democracy at all.
Reply

Independent
08-19-2013, 09:51 PM
Originally Posted by Jedi_Mindset
democracy is supposedly when a leader gets chosen by the people while this leader is not seeking for the position himself.
This simply is not a definition of democracy. it's also incredibly hard to pull off in real life. If you have read Shakespeare's 'Julius Caesar', you can see how possible it is to manipulate this method as much as any other.
Reply

Jedi_Mindset
08-19-2013, 10:11 PM
Originally Posted by Independent
This simply is not a definition of democracy. it's also incredibly hard to pull off in real life. If you have read Shakespeare's 'Julius Caesar', you can see how possible it is to manipulate this method as much as any other.
The person doesnt get chosen by force rather its his own will if he wants to lead a country or not, when you decide to you know that you will have alot on your shoulders. The person must resemble the majority of the people.
Reply

Independent
08-19-2013, 10:22 PM
Originally Posted by Jedi_Mindset
The person doesnt get chosen by force rather its his own will if he wants to lead a country or not, when you decide to you know that you will have alot on your shoulders. The person must resemble the majority of the people.
I know the theory, I just think it's almost impossible in practice. If you had it as a system over time then politicians simply learn to become skilful in appearing to be reluctant leaders.

Also, it begs the question of who is a member of the body that elects the leader (the shura or otherwise). We're past the point of having natural tribal leaders.
Reply

جوري
08-19-2013, 10:49 PM
Originally Posted by Jedi_Mindset
Oh thats a conspiracy theory!' then they are a waste of time to discuss with
exactly what is conspiracy about the coup that happened? oh our pal glo and indy were upset with the content and couldn't steer it to the direction where christians or Jews would come out as victims and thus branded it 'conspiracy'?
Reply

Independent
08-19-2013, 11:02 PM
Originally Posted by جوري
exactly what is conspiracy about the coup that happened?
i didn't say it was a conspiracy. You did. Surprise, surprise - you think it's all America's fault!

Originally Posted by جوري
The U.S loves Mubarak's regime and wants it at any cost
Reply

WarriorforMarie
08-19-2013, 11:49 PM
Originally Posted by faithandpeace
I may still be new to Islam but my understanding is that there is no separation of church and state in Islam, none whatsoever. Therefore, those calling themselves Muslims and advocating against a Sharia state in Egypt preferring instead a secular state are instead demonstrating apostasy from Islam and therefore become munafiqueen. There is no "liberal, progressive, or secular" Islam. There is Islam or non-Islam.
The problem with this though is that if you tie one's ability to be a Muslim with how much they think political order should be based on religion it leaves the potential for large numbers of Muslims to be labeled as apostates if the political culture shifts towards secular politics. That are large structural factors (economic and otherwise) that influence countries towards secular or a democracy. How else to explain the wide variations of attitudes amongst Muslims concerning the application of religious law?
Reply

جوري
08-20-2013, 12:33 AM
Originally Posted by Independent
i didn't say it was a conspiracy. You did. Surprise, surprise - you think it's all America's fault!
And I didn't reply to you surprise surprise, I was addressing Jedi of why the lot of you choose to label something a conspiracy or not per your whimsey!
It is more than America's fault, it is the fault of the cockroach state as well the morons inside who love to kowtow and get billions in aid to be an army for Israel instead of an army for Egypt to eradicate Muslims while using western terminology like 'Terrorism'. Not that I need to explain anything to you!

best,
Reply

جوري
08-20-2013, 12:36 AM
Originally Posted by WarriorforMarie
The problem with this though is that if you tie one's ability to be a Muslim with how much they think political order should be based on religion it leaves the potential for large numbers of Muslims to be labeled as apostates if the political culture shifts towards secular politics. That are large structural factors (economic and otherwise) that influence countries towards secular or a democracy. How else to explain the wide variations of attitudes amongst Muslims concerning the application of religious law?
secularists are a minority a very small minority and they know their weight in the voting booth hence they had to come through a coup on the back of a tank to bulldoze people, literally torch them alive, they closed 17 Islamic channels, and they have specifically targeted the children of the brotherhood to ruin their morale and break apart their leadership. Yes people who are secularists are apostates.. why do you see that as a problem?
Reply

faithandpeace
08-20-2013, 05:14 AM
Astaghfirullah if I have used the word "munafiq" inappropriately. I did avoid calling out any specific individuals, groups, entitites, governments, etc. to avoid the risk of incorrect accusations. On a general note, I do believe, however, that individuals, entities, governments, etc. claiming to be Muslim(s) and representing Islamic values and practices while intentionally, knowingly, and deliberately are promoting things that are against Islam or opposing things that are Islamic would fall into the definition of munafiqueen. Please correct me if I'm wrong. I do believe it is true that in much of politics and media there are "token Muslims" who use the label "Muslim" when in reality try to steer the Muslim and non-Muslim public away from Islam by deliberately attempting to modify Islam. Government and media all too often like to place Islam into two camps: "moderate Islam" and "radical Islam." Yet in reality much of what they say in what they call "moderate Islam" is not Islam at all and much of what they deem "radical Islam" is actually correct Islam. I see it time and time again where "moderate Islam" refers to Muslims who don't pray or fast, women who wear Western clothes with cleavage showing and no hijab, Imams who conduct same-sex marriage, promotion of gender-mixing, opposition of Sharia states and Sharia as a political/economic system in general, etc. Then Muslims who dress Islamically, pray and fast as prescribed, and believe in the Qur'an and Sunnah, and attempt to follow Islam as the Prophet (saw) taught it are now deemed "radical Muslims." If they are then physically attacked or severely oppressed and they try to defend themselves, then they are labeled "terrorists." This is the agenda I see that is going on.
Reply

جوري
08-20-2013, 06:01 AM
when the army labels unarmed civilians 'terrorists' and bulldozes them and burns the rest alive, makes political prisoners everyone that opposes it (which is the voting majority) freezes bank accounts, takes hold of people's properties (Mubarak with vengeance basically) and kills callously even its own soldiers using thugs see this video which you can clearly see that :Allah::swt: showed their poison this time, when it burns mosques and makes no sanctuary of it, allows churches to have weapons and allows them to burn them from the inside and say 'brotherhood' did it when they're the most educated and most docile so they can have brand new buildings at the tax payers money, when people like the sick ******* George Ishaq comes out and says there's no more Islam after today and the orthodox church starts wearing white instead of black and trying pathetically to convert Muslims. Know that you no longer live in an Islamic country. Know that your leadership has apostatized and know that when they use the media to brain wash the sheeple who unfortunately have always loved and stood by the army and believed it to be 'The best Army of Allah' akin to the Zionist believing they are god's chosen and repeating the nonsense slogans of one hand and those are terrorists and they're the other, when your sisters are assaulted coming out of a mosque and man handled
when Islamic channels are closed down but media *****s are speaking of you as a non entity deserving death, when they harness body parts from children a la mode of Israel in Haiti, then know that it is Israel running your country and running your army..
there's no such thing as liberal Muslim or conservative Muslims - you are either a practicing Muslim or you are not in varying degrees Islam, Iman, Ihsan, Ikhlas, terrorist or extremist doesn't figure in that formula and it is very worrying that the creed of the army has switched over the last 40 years.. I hate to admit this but I feel Egypt is headed toward a Syria!
Reply

جوري
08-20-2013, 06:28 AM
oh by the way if you are able to read Arabic- here they're deranging the verses of the Quran openly.. this is what secularism has brought us btw complete and total disrespect for religion (I am not going to begin to touch on the basic human rights violations, from torching to genocide to political prisoners to organ harvests)

Reply

WarriorforMarie
08-20-2013, 07:42 AM
Originally Posted by جوري
secularists are a minority a very small minority and they know their weight in the voting booth hence they had to come through a coup on the back of a tank to bulldoze people, literally torch them alive, they closed 17 Islamic channels, and they have specifically targeted the children of the brotherhood to ruin their morale and break apart their leadership. Yes people who are secularists are apostates.. why do you see that as a problem?


Originally Posted by faithandpeace
Astaghfirullah if I have used the word "munafiq" inappropriately. I did avoid calling out any specific individuals, groups, entitites, governments, etc. to avoid the risk of incorrect accusations. On a general note, I do believe, however, that individuals, entities, governments, etc. claiming to be Muslim(s) and representing Islamic values and practices while intentionally, knowingly, and deliberately are promoting things that are against Islam or opposing things that are Islamic would fall into the definition of munafiqueen. Please correct me if I'm wrong. I do believe it is true that in much of politics and media there are "token Muslims" who use the label "Muslim" when in reality try to steer the Muslim and non-Muslim public away from Islam by deliberately attempting to modify Islam. Government and media all too often like to place Islam into two camps: "moderate Islam" and "radical Islam." Yet in reality much of what they say in what they call "moderate Islam" is not Islam at all and much of what they deem "radical Islam" is actually correct Islam. I see it time and time again where "moderate Islam" refers to Muslims who don't pray or fast, women who wear Western clothes with cleavage showing and no hijab, Imams who conduct same-sex marriage, promotion of gender-mixing, opposition of Sharia states and Sharia as a political/economic system in general, etc. Then Muslims who dress Islamically, pray and fast as prescribed, and believe in the Qur'an and Sunnah, and attempt to follow Islam as the Prophet (saw) taught it are now deemed "radical Muslims." If they are then physically attacked or severely oppressed and they try to defend themselves, then they are labeled "terrorists." This is the agenda I see that is going on.

My apologies, I do not believe I fully explained myself. In my earlier post I made reference to structural factors but did not properly elaborate. The problem is that there are broad historical and economic factors that will gradually shape societies into particular directions. These structures function in that they create incentives for certain actions and other the course of time the institutions of a state (or society or system) will be transformed. For instance, the West has gradually become secularized over the past century or so. In Europe this has often meant a complete collapse in religious belief whereas in the United States it is more that religion is a part of a person's private life rather than being a part of the political realm (all though there is a politically active Christian movement in the United States, but their over reliance on their religious principles and their faith in God has undermined their ability to be politically successful). Social scientists have produced different theories for why this happened. The process mostly seems to be the result of broad economic and historical trends that gradually eroded religious belief.

The question is, will such a process eventually happen in the Islamic world? There is some scholarship that is of the opinion that Islam is particularly unadaptable to secularism. I am not so sure, There seems to be research and polling data that indicates that Muslim attitudes towards things like Sharia vary by country to country. If there is variation in attitudes there has to be something affecting it, right? This is of course a separate issue from what you have mentioned which is that anyone who does not practice political Islam is a non-Muslim. This may or may not be the case. I do not know. But if it is the case, and if historical trends eventually lead to a secularization of the political space in the Islamic world (not people stop practicing the five pillars of Islam or such, just keeping religion out of public policy matters) will that not imply that they will cease to be Muslims? What if someday the vast majority of Muslims were to fall into this category?

Of course such a day is still a long ways off (consider that it seemed to take a century for something similar to happen in the West). I think the process was actually set back by the topping of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. If they had been allowed to continue to govern the country it might have been possible for political order to be consolidated. Once that had happened and political participation had been expanded and institutionalized it might have been possible for Egypt to progress forward. The pressures of an ever competitive world economy would have forced the Brotherhood to modernize the country in ways that would make Egypt competitive. Such reforms would fuel the growth of a middle class and begin fueling the secularization of the country. Unfortunately all of this fighting in bloodshed it only going to delay political development.
Reply

glo
08-20-2013, 07:48 AM
Originally Posted by جوري
oh our pal glo and indy were upset with the content and couldn't steer it to the direction where christians or Jews would come out as victims and thus branded it 'conspiracy'?
Huh?

I remember mentioning that amongst the many mosques 52 churches were also attacked in Egypt in recent days. But I don't remember mentioning Jews ... (Unless I have forgotten. Your memory is usually better than mine. :))

The point I was making is that ALL Egyptian people are suffering, Muslims, Copts and all others.
The population needs to stand together and not allow these destructive theories to tear them apart.

United we stand, divided we fall. Simple! All governments know that!!
Reply

جوري
08-20-2013, 07:55 AM
Originally Posted by WarriorforMarie
The question is, will such a process eventually happen in the Islamic world? There is some scholarship that is of the opinion that Islam is particularly unadaptable to secularism. I am not so sure, There seems to be research and polling data that indicates that Muslim attitudes towards things like Sharia vary by country to country. If there is variation in attitudes there has to be something affecting it, right? This is of course a separate issue from what you have mentioned which is that anyone who does not practice political Islam is a non-Muslim. This may or may not be the case. I do not know. But if it is the case, and if historical trends eventually lead to a secularization of the political space in the Islamic world (not people stop practicing the five pillars of Islam or such, just keeping religion out of public policy matters) will that not imply that they will cease to be Muslims? What if someday the vast majority of Muslims were to fall into this category?
The situation is unique in the Muslim world- It has been secular since the dissolution of the Ottomans and the sykes picot agreement. But even with mass killings Muslims want to bring back Islam and sharia and they've been dying for that for a good hundred years now! I also want to comment that it is the uneducated in Egypt who are secularists as they're ignorant of the religion and only see what they tell them on TV. 90% of the brotherhood are doctors, engineers, college professors (you should do research on them) and there's a vested interest in keeping them in prison and keeping the morons masters over the masses.. Whatever situation you've in the west we have the opposite of it. West thrived under secularism and did very poorly i.e the darkest (middle ages) under christianity whereas Islam had its zenith and age of enlightnment under Islam. Christians of the west seem to be oafish tea party trailer trash, in the Muslim world Islamists are the highest educated individuals.
Reply

WarriorforMarie
08-20-2013, 08:01 AM
Originally Posted by جوري
The situation is unique in the Muslim world- It has been secular since the dissolution of the Ottomans and the sykes picot agreement. But even with mass killings Muslims want to bring back Islam and sharia and they've been dying for that for a good hundred years now! I also want to comment that it is the uneducated in Egypt who are secularists as they're ignorant of the religion and only see what they tell them on TV. 90% of the brotherhood are doctors, engineers, college professors (you should do research on them) and there's a vested interest in keeping them in prison and keeping the morons masters over the masses.. Whatever situation you've in the west we have the opposite of it. West thrived under secularism and did very poorly i.e the darkest (middle ages) under christianity whereas Islam had its zenith and age of enlightnment under Islam. Christians of the west seem to be oafish tea party trailer trash, in the Muslim world Islamists are the highest educated individuals.

The regimes in the post Ottoman era may have been varying forms of secular, but the people were still pious Muslims were they not? When I'm talking about secularization I don't refer to the government, I refer to the civil society.
Reply

جوري
08-20-2013, 08:07 AM
Originally Posted by WarriorforMarie
The regimes in the post Ottoman era may have been varying forms of secular, but the people were still pious Muslims were they not? When I'm talking about secularization I don't refer to the government, I refer to the civil society.
pious Muslims is an individual thing I can't comment on that I can only comment on the state and that it was secular and especially abusive to Muslims, thousands were killed then as they are now but without any media attention. Do you have any idea how many thousands died in Algeria in 1992? which wasn't that far off. If people are practicing their islam as they're in the west as in under fear or threat or abuse and frank imprisonment then it is hard to practice it correctly especially that they were killing scholars and closing down islamic schooling and in the African north west they took away their Arabic language almost completely so they wouldn't even learn basics. In a nutshell secularization and any system under it is the most abusive form of governance and represents no one if you subscribe to current world stats on who follows what religion then atheists are marginal and I don't know whether or not christians prefer to live under christianity or not I imagine they don't since they are very allowing with their religion and it changes to adapt to modern trend rather than basic fundamentals to which most adhere. Jews of course have their Jewish state even though a majority of them are atheists and have extreme right wingers like that bouncer liberman and netyn in office with no one minding their racist policies!
Reply

faithandpeace
08-20-2013, 08:28 AM
I am not a moderator here, just a member, but I object to the way in which non-Muslims are relatively free on an Islamic discussion board to meddle in our political and economic affairs. Since this forum is about Islam and its expected audience is primarily Muslims, I don't really understand why we as Muslims are constantly having to be subjected to arguing our own political affairs with non-Muslims on our board. If a non-Muslim wants to come here to sincerely learn about Islam either for their own education purposes or because they are considering conversion or because their spouse or friend has converted and they want to learn about Islam to be supportive I am fine with that.

Yet there are people here who demonstrate no intention to learn anything about Islam as they never ask any religious questions about Islam and never post in any threads about Islam. Instead, they show up solely on political and current event threads to argue with Muslims about our Islamic views on events and situations that are affecting us. Whether non-Muslims enter our mosques or go online to an Islamic board I feel their welcome should be extended to cover their own education on Islam and an inclusion in the Islamic community as a non-Muslim only if they demonstrate respect towards Islam and Muslims. I don't feel that non-Muslims should be welcome in mosques or on online Islamic discussion boards to dictate and control our politics, laws, and religious matters. It is like being invited to someone else's house for dinner and then telling them how to run their own household.
Reply

WarriorforMarie
08-20-2013, 08:28 AM
Originally Posted by جوري
pious Muslims is an individual thing I can't comment on that I can only comment on the state and that it was secular and especially abusive to Muslims, thousands were killed then as they are now but without any media attention. Do you have any idea how many thousands died in Algeria in 1992? which wasn't that far off. If people are practicing their islam as they're in the west as in under fear or threat or abuse and frank imprisonment then it is hard to practice it correctly especially that they were killing scholars and closing down islamic schooling and in the African north west they took away their Arabic language almost completely so they wouldn't even learn basics. In a nutshell secularization and any system under it is the most abusive form of governance and represents no one if you subscribe to current world stats on who follows what religion then atheists are marginal and I don't know whether or not christians prefer to live under christianity or not I imagine they don't since they are very allowing with their religion and it changes to adapt to modern trend rather than basic fundamentals to which most adhere. Jews of course have their Jewish state even though a majority of them are atheists and have extreme right wingers like that bouncer liberman and netyn in office with no one minding their racist policies!
So I take it that if broad historical and economic trends do eventually result in a secularization of the Islamic world, you would consider any Muslim who accepts a non-religious government to be a non-Muslim? What if they follow the five pillars of Islam?
Reply

sister herb
08-20-2013, 08:37 AM
Originally Posted by glo

Huh?

I remember mentioning that amongst the many mosques 52 churches were also attacked in Egypt in recent days.
Something about those churches...

http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m100202&hd=&size=1&l=e

(Yes yes, article might be quite political by its some parts.)
Reply

جوري
08-20-2013, 08:40 AM
Originally Posted by WarriorforMarie
So I take it that if broad historical and economic trends do eventually result in a secularization of the Islamic world, you would consider any Muslim who accepts a non-religious government to be a non-Muslim? What if they follow the five pillars of Islam?
Not sure how you arrived to that conclusion from what I'd written? did you google sykes picot and read about it? secularization was imposed by force and it is still imposed by force. Five pillars are just that pillars upon which Islam stands.. can you have a building made of just pillars? like holding a mug with nothing inside... there's no point to that and it isn't my consideration .. as I stated before I only deal with what I see and :Allah::swt: deals with what the hearts hide!
Reply

glo
08-20-2013, 08:43 AM
Originally Posted by faithandpeace
If a non-Muslim wants to come here to sincerely learn about Islam either for their own education purposes or because they are considering conversion or because their spouse or friend has converted and they want to learn about Islam to be supportive I am fine with that.
I'm afraid learning about a religion can also mean asking some tough questions, challenging concepts and voicing disagreements.

I have learned much by reading (and sometimes participating) in those discussions. I have learned about Islam from the responses of my Muslim friends, but I have also learned about how other non-Muslims may view things.

Both are very valuable for living with each other in the real world.

You don't have to agree with what non-Muslims ask or say ... but if you are willing you can use those things to learn about your non-Muslim friends; how they think, what makes them tick (and perhaps how Islam may be of help to them). Insh'Allah :statisfie
Reply

WarriorforMarie
08-20-2013, 08:44 AM
Originally Posted by faithandpeace
I am not a moderator here, just a member, but I object to the way in which non-Muslims are relatively free on an Islamic discussion board to meddle in our political and economic affairs. Since this forum is about Islam and its expected audience is primarily Muslims, I don't really understand why we as Muslims are constantly having to be subjected to arguing our own political affairs with non-Muslims on our board. If a non-Muslim wants to come here to sincerely learn about Islam either for their own education purposes or because they are considering conversion or because their spouse or friend has converted and they want to learn about Islam to be supportive I am fine with that.

Yet there are people here who demonstrate no intention to learn anything about Islam as they never ask any religious questions about Islam and never post in any threads about Islam. Instead, they show up solely on political and current event threads to argue with Muslims about our Islamic views on events and situations that are affecting us. Whether non-Muslims enter our mosques or go online to an Islamic board I feel their welcome should be extended to cover their own education on Islam and an inclusion in the Islamic community as a non-Muslim only if they demonstrate respect towards Islam and Muslims. I don't feel that non-Muslims should be welcome in mosques or on online Islamic discussion boards to dictate and control our politics, laws, and religious matters. It is like being invited to someone else's house for dinner and then telling them how to run their own household.

Originally Posted by faithandpeace
I am not a moderator here, just a member, but I object to the way in which non-Muslims are relatively free on an Islamic discussion board to meddle in our political and economic affairs. Since this forum is about Islam and its expected audience is primarily Muslims, I don't really understand why we as Muslims are constantly having to be subjected to arguing our own political affairs with non-Muslims on our board. If a non-Muslim wants to come here to sincerely learn about Islam either for their own education purposes or because they are considering conversion or because their spouse or friend has converted and they want to learn about Islam to be supportive I am fine with that.

Yet there are people here who demonstrate no intention to learn anything about Islam as they never ask any religious questions about Islam and never post in any threads about Islam. Instead, they show up solely on political and current event threads to argue with Muslims about our Islamic views on events and situations that are affecting us. Whether non-Muslims enter our mosques or go online to an Islamic board I feel their welcome should be extended to cover their own education on Islam and an inclusion in the Islamic community as a non-Muslim only if they demonstrate respect towards Islam and Muslims. I don't feel that non-Muslims should be welcome in mosques or on online Islamic discussion boards to dictate and control our politics, laws, and religious matters. It is like being invited to someone else's house for dinner and then telling them how to run their own household.
Isn't it possible that having a variety of opinions is a good thing though? Isn't it important to consider all perspectives? All points of view? There are non-Muslims who can contribute quite a bit. I myself am a political scientist with a specialization in comparative politics. If you ever want an opinion about plurality voting systems versus proportional representation I am always available! :shade:
Reply

faithandpeace
08-20-2013, 08:49 AM
There is no separation of church and state in Islam. The tenets of Islam are not formulated based on "democracy." Just because some "Muslims" believe in non-Islamic things and then call that "Islam" does not mean that by majority rule Islam is now modernized, changed, or adapted in any way. Islam is based on the Qur'an and the Sunnah and while it can be applied different ways in different societies and different circumstances, Islam itself is not changed. Even if 90% of Muslims push secular government and try to change Islamic principles, values, tenets, etc. that does not change Islam. It means that what they are doing is haram at best and apostasy from Islam at worse. Quantity of Muslims may be important but quality is more important. Just because a bunch of "Muslims" call their brand of Islam "progressive Islam" and support same-sex marriage, secular government, and gender mixing does not make what they do Islam. The Western governments and regimes in the Islamic world can oppose Sharia as much as they want but that is not Islam. Muslims want Sharia. Got it?
Reply

WarriorforMarie
08-20-2013, 08:52 AM
Originally Posted by جوري
Not sure how you arrived to that conclusion from what I'd written? did you google sykes picot and read about it? secularization was imposed by force and it is still imposed by force. Five pillars are just that pillars upon which Islam stands.. can you have a building made of just pillars? like holding a mug with nothing inside... there's no point to that and it isn't my consideration .. as I stated before I only deal with what I see and deals with what the hearts hide!
I was just trying to return to the substance of my original commentary. You seem to be having trouble following precisely what I'm talking about. If you are interested in learning more about some of the concepts I'm talking about I can recommend some books and articles that deal with the subject matter. I think the modernization and political development literature would be a good foundation.
Reply

جوري
08-20-2013, 08:59 AM
Originally Posted by WarriorforMarie
I was just trying to return to the substance of my original commentary. You seem to be having trouble following precisely what I'm talking about. If you are interested in learning more about some of the concepts I'm talking about I can recommend some books and articles that deal with the subject matter. I think the modernization and political development literature would be a good foundation.
I am not interested in your concepts. You posed questions and I answered them and that is all there is to it!
Reply

WarriorforMarie
08-20-2013, 08:59 AM
Originally Posted by faithandpeace
There is no separation of church and state in Islam. The tenets of Islam are not formulated based on "democracy." Just because some "Muslims" believe in non-Islamic things and then call that "Islam" does not mean that by majority rule Islam is now modernized, changed, or adapted in any way. Islam is based on the Qur'an and the Sunnah and while it can be applied different ways in different societies and different circumstances, Islam itself is not changed. Even if 90% of Muslims push secular government and try to change Islamic principles, values, tenets, etc. that does not change Islam. It means that what they are doing is haram at best and apostasy from Islam at worse. Quantity of Muslims may be important but quality is more important. Just because a bunch of "Muslims" call their brand of Islam "progressive Islam" and support same-sex marriage, secular government, and gender mixing does not make what they do Islam. The Western governments and regimes in the Islamic world can oppose Sharia as much as they want but that is not Islam. Muslims want Sharia. Got it?
Well, what sort of political order does Islam propose?
Reply

جوري
08-20-2013, 09:00 AM
Originally Posted by WarriorforMarie
Well, what sort of political order does Islam propose?
This is a judicial matter that needs schooling and you want it distilled in a paragraph? How is that sane?
Reply

faithandpeace
08-20-2013, 09:01 AM
Islamic environments as far as I'm concerned are not about "neutrality." We don't have to be neutral on anything. Non-Muslims do not get to come into our mosques and tell us how to dress, what to eat, how to pray, or what our laws are. That is a good way to find yourself unwelcome. Frankly, I wish the same would apply here. If you want to ask questions about our political, economic, legal, or other views on current events that is fine. Coming here for the sole purpose of preaching your non-Muslim politics to us (Muslims) is what I object to. I don't want to be preached at by non-Muslims on a Muslim board.

I don't care about anyone's political science degree. American and European political thought does not dictate what Islamic thought is. Many Muslims do not live in Europe or Canada or the United States and do not want these political models shoved at them in opposition to an Islamic model of law and policy.

Futhermore, Muslims are not required to listen to "all points of view." We aren't required to be "neutral" on anything. Opinions in many cases are actually irrelevant. It doesn't matter what our opinions are on Islam, the Qur'an, and the Sunnah other than the fact that we have submitted to its message and accept it and insha'Allah try to follow it the best we can. Even if there is something in Islam that I am having trouble understanding or that I find difficult, it really doesn't matter what my opinion on it is. I accept it is commanded by Allah (swt) and I shall seek insha'Allah any needed clarification on it so that I can try to implement it in the best way possible regardless how difficult that may be. Islam is not a democratic system based on the equality of opinions.
Reply

sister herb
08-20-2013, 09:03 AM
Salam alaykum

Dear sister faithandpeace; I don´t see anything strange if non-muslims take part discussions in here. How even this situation in Egypt for example would be only affair of muslims, when all Egyptians are not muslims (minority of coptics is about 10% of the population). Similarly; we as muslims have to deal with non-muslims in our every-day life (unless if you live in Mecca - most of us don´t live there) as our neighbors, friends, family members, co-workers at jobs, students in the school etc. If we can´t discuss peacefully with them even in the discussion forum (islamic or non-islamic ones), how we could do it in the real life? If you feel they try to dictate discussions here, you can tell it as your opinion to them and explain why you feel so. I have seen that most of non-muslim members behave very respected ways in here.
Reply

WarriorforMarie
08-20-2013, 09:05 AM
Originally Posted by جوري
I am not interested in your concepts. You posed questions and I answered them and that is all there is to it!
I apologize if my questions have tried your patience. I am sorry, but I am vessel that is needing to be filled with information. If you are not interested in political science concepts I will not bore you with them, I am sorry. It is just that I thought that if you understood better the question I was posing you could help me out by giving a more comprehensive answer.

You see, I am interested in whether structures matter more in state and society change or if agents are more important. The answer to this no easily answerable question could give us insight into what the future is for Egypt and perhaps for the Muslim Middle East in general.
Reply

WarriorforMarie
08-20-2013, 09:10 AM
Originally Posted by جوري
This is a judicial matter that needs schooling and you want it distilled in a paragraph? How is that sane?
Please, do not feel obligated to limit any answer to one paragraph. The more information and detail the more helpful it would be for me to understand.
Reply

جوري
08-20-2013, 09:15 AM
Originally Posted by WarriorforMarie
but I am vessel that is needing to be filled with information
That is something learned from books and through schooling..not on forums-- if you're interested in Islamic law and politics and jurisprudence then you'll have to be properly schooled for that. This isn't even my area of expertise to feign that the paragraph I give if I should sum it up would be the most accurate response. If you've specific questions you're welcome to ask them and I'll do my best to answer. You're not welcome however to presume what I am thinking or understanding. I don't like verbiage- as for the future of the ME, then my views are from a religious point of view if you're interested in eschatology which I don't think is relevant to the politics you're studying or interested in studying.
Reply

faithandpeace
08-20-2013, 09:17 AM
I see it as an issue of intent. While I don't have the ability to see inside people's hearts, I find it suspicious when someone comes to an Islamic board as a non-Muslim, asks no questions about Islam with a sincere intent to learn, and instead only shows up on threads involving current events for the purpose of preaching their political ideas at us.

The same applies to what is happening in the Middle East. U.S. and other soldiers come to Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere in the Middle East/S. Asia and decide to dictate to Muslims living there what kind of freedom they need, what kind of culture they need and don't need. Afghan women are told to take off their burqas, niqabs, and even hijabs! People are told they need democracy instead of a Sharia system. Outsiders (non-Muslims) coming to Muslim lands telling Muslims how to think and how to live. Then of course people are arrested and killed when they resist.

I came to this board because I had studied Islam and was considering conversion. I converted rather soon after arriving here and now I am here to learn and grow in Islam with the help of Muslims. I am also here to discuss current events and issues that affect Muslims as I am now a Muslim and part of the ummah. I have not prioritized da'wah to non-Muslims because I am too new to Islam to be able to have sufficient education to sufficiently teach non-Muslims about Islam. Current events particularly events that involve war and violence are very sensitive issues as innocents (Muslim and non-Muslim) are being injured and killed. I can understand non-Muslims wanting to hear from an Islamic perspective on these issues especially as non-Muslims as we have seen in the Egypt conflict are also the victims of violence. That doesn't mean I want to be preached at by non-Muslims. I do not want to be told by a non-Muslim what I need to think, feel, and believe about Islam on an Islamic forum unless it is on a da'wa thread!
Reply

faithandpeace
08-20-2013, 09:22 AM
Originally Posted by WarriorforMarie
Please, do not feel obligated to limit any answer to one paragraph. The more information and detail the more helpful it would be for me to understand.
First, why don't you tell us about your background, what you do know about Islam, and what specifically you want to learn. You haven't provided any information whatsoever with what has even brought you to an Islamic forum. Since you are a non-Muslim, it makes sense for you to learn the basics of Islam first, then the intermediate stuff, then advanced. But you haven't told us what you know already and what you want to learn. You show up here and then dictate to us what to think about political affairs that involve our brothers, sisters, and children being killed. How do you think that makes some of us feel?
Reply

WarriorforMarie
08-20-2013, 09:26 AM
Originally Posted by faithandpeace
Islamic environments as far as I'm concerned are not about "neutrality." We don't have to be neutral on anything. Non-Muslims do not get to come into our mosques and tell us how to dress, what to eat, how to pray, or what our laws are. That is a good way to find yourself unwelcome. Frankly, I wish the same would apply here. If you want to ask questions about our political, economic, legal, or other views on current events that is fine. Coming here for the sole purpose of preaching your non-Muslim politics to us (Muslims) is what I object to. I don't want to be preached at by non-Muslims on a Muslim board.

I don't care about anyone's political science degree. American and European political thought does not dictate what Islamic thought is. Many Muslims do not live in Europe or Canada or the United States and do not want these political models shoved at them in opposition to an Islamic model of law and policy.

Futhermore, Muslims are not required to listen to "all points of view." We aren't required to be "neutral" on anything. Opinions in many cases are actually irrelevant. It doesn't matter what our opinions are on Islam, the Qur'an, and the Sunnah other than the fact that we have submitted to its message and accept it and insha'Allah try to follow it the best we can. Even if there is something in Islam that I am having trouble understanding or that I find difficult, it really doesn't matter what my opinion on it is. I accept it is commanded by Allah (swt) and I shall seek insha'Allah any needed clarification on it so that I can try to implement it in the best way possible regardless how difficult that may be. Islam is not a democratic system based on the equality of opinions.
Please, I am sorry. I am not attempting to preach non-Muslim politics to Muslims. I am trying to understand things better, both by exploring case studies for my research, but also by getting a better understanding of Islamic thought in regards to politics. It is very different for me you see, the idea that someone's politics and religion are interrelated. I come from a background in which one's religion may influence their politics, but it does not determine policy. I do not know what any of the prophets would advocate in terms solar subsidies or trade policy. So please understand that it seems strange to me that someone's politics would negate their religious affiliation. I wish to understand what concepts of Islam these are from.

I am not proposing American political models for the Islamic world. There is even a body of literature that would propose that the Islamic world is not ready for complex versions of democracy. I am not sure I believe this, honestly I do not have a strong opinion one way or another.

Also, please I apologize if I caused offense. I was not suggesting that Muslims are required to listen to "all points of view." I just think it is important to try to keep an open mind because others might have perspectives that can enhance our understanding.

I am just trying to understand. You see, I have heard that Islam is not democracy or other things. What is political Islam, exactly?
Reply

WarriorforMarie
08-20-2013, 09:29 AM
Originally Posted by جوري
That is something learned from books and through schooling..not on forums-- if you're interested in Islamic law and politics and jurisprudence then you'll have to be properly schooled for that. This isn't even my area of expertise to feign that the paragraph I give if I should sum it up would be the most accurate response. If you've specific questions you're welcome to ask them and I'll do my best to answer. You're not welcome however to presume what I am thinking or understanding. I don't like verbiage- as for the future of the ME, then my views are from a religious point of view if you're interested in eschatology which I don't think is relevant to the politics you're studying or interested in studying.
Can you recommend any good books on Islamic politics?
Reply

جوري
08-20-2013, 09:34 AM
I can yes but br. Amirssab who is also a mod here I believe is very studied in the matter he can recommend better books:









Shari'a: Theory, Practice, Transformations

by Wael B. Hallaq
4.36 of 5 stars 4.36 · rating details · 11 ratings · 4 reviews
In recent years, Islamic law, or Shari'a, has been appropriated as a tool of modernity in the Muslim world and in the West and has become highly politicised in consequence. Wael Hallaq's magisterial overview of Shari'a sets the record straight by examining the doctrines and practices of Islamic law within the context of its history, and by showing how it functioned within...more
Reply

جوري
08-20-2013, 09:37 AM
by the way I deliberately chose a non Muslim writer for you so you'd get as unbiased a view of it as possible!
Reply

جوري
08-20-2013, 09:41 AM
if you want books from an Islamic perspective then I'd recommend the entire series by m.m. al-azami .. as it is all intertwined and will cover more than the politics but the texts themselves and give historical backgrounds as well comparative study with other religions.. it is up to you though and I think as a westerner you'd probably prefer to stick with a Non-Islamic interpretation to Islamic law and politics..
Reply

WarriorforMarie
08-20-2013, 09:42 AM
Originally Posted by faithandpeace
You show up here and then dictate to us what to think about political affairs that involve our brothers, sisters, and children being killed.
I am sorry that you feel that I was dictating to you what to think. What was the thing I said that sounded this way so that I could avoid saying it in the future?
Reply

WarriorforMarie
08-20-2013, 09:43 AM
Originally Posted by جوري
if you want books from an Islamic perspective then I'd recommend the entire series by m.m. al-azami .. as it is all intertwined and will cover more than the politics but the texts themselves and give historical backgrounds as well comparative study with other religions.. it is up to you though and I think as a westerner you'd probably prefer to stick with a Non-Islamic interpretation to Islamic law and politics..
Thank you for your recommendations.
Reply

sister herb
08-20-2013, 10:59 AM
Salam alaykum

I have critical opinions about every parties, whose take part to political life, in general. And yes, I pray end of violence and put my hope to people whose want and can solve they problems by non-violentic ways, like by negotiation. That´s why I pray that Allah would put some sense to the minds of the leaders (and that those leaders could keep they supporters avoiding more violence against those whose support something else leader/party).

To me yes it is same what party will rules Egypt - if it is what Egyptians want, not what some people outside want - muslims or non-muslims. Without will of ordinary Egyptians, the situation goes only to one direction - to chaos where the first victims are those like usually in kind of situation: innocent civilians whose haven´t nothing do with kind of political mess.

:heated:
Reply

sister herb
08-20-2013, 11:26 AM
Originally Posted by tearose
So I think that as Muslims we must support the Muslim Brotherhood and any other Islamic groups in Egypt that are working towards these aims.
Salam alaykum

I think that we us muslims (or we as humans in general) should at the first hand support peace. After that we are free to choose groups we support.
Reply

glo
08-20-2013, 12:36 PM
Originally Posted by faithandpeace
Futhermore, Muslims are not required to listen to "all points of view."
You don't have to read everything that's written. Do you?
You can also put people on ignore (although I've forgotten how to do that)

And you can always reports posts, if you feel they go against forum rules.

Salaam
Reply

faithandpeace
08-20-2013, 01:02 PM
Glo that is true. I'm not going to name names but my concerns aren't really about your posts. To my knowledge, you've always been nice, respectful, and supportive.
Reply

faithandpeace
08-20-2013, 01:14 PM
I do take offense to others here who reduce the real-life suffering and death of others to "political science." When people at my masjid tell me of relatives who have died in Syria, when someone on this forum talks about being attacked in Lebanon in real-time and you never hear from them again, it hits much closer to home.

It isn't about theories anymore. Further, talking over and over about how Egypt, Syria, etc. needs "peace" is a distraction from the real issue. Justice is what is needed. When there is oppression, there is no peace. Violence is justified and even encouraged in certain circumstances such as in self-defense or defense of others. It would be ridiculous if an intruder entered my home and tried to take my things and tried to hurt me and when I fight back the neighbors tell us both to "make peace." That is ridiculous. Peace happens when oppression is stopped and wrongdoers are punished.
Reply

glo
08-20-2013, 01:14 PM
I appreciate your kind comment, faithandpeace. Thank you. :)

Some people get my goat too. I guess it's the nature of Internet forums that people can show their true colours and get away with things, they might never get away with in real life.

Honestly, use the report button.
Or stay clear of certain topics. I know that there are some threads I never even look at - because the title alone tells me that I won't like what I will see ...
Reply

sister herb
08-20-2013, 01:25 PM
Salam alaykum

Sorry I didn´t mention justice because to me "making peace"- solution, justice between different kind of people and groups in the society is a natural and integral part of the peace.

And, wanting peace isn´t ridiculous choice of my mind but... everyone has of course right to they own opinions here.
Reply

Abz2000
08-20-2013, 03:25 PM
Originally Posted by sister herb
I think that we us muslims (or we as humans in general) should at the first hand support peace. After that we are free to choose groups we support.

unfortunately you will see no peace without a struggle, whatdo you think, they're going to hand you the keys to parliament?

and i don't know what you mean by this or how you hope to achieve it:

We have suffered too much for too long. We will not accept apartheid masked as peace. We will settle for no less than our freedom.
Reply

Independent
08-20-2013, 03:57 PM
Originally Posted by faithandpeace
I object to the way in which non-Muslims are relatively free on an Islamic discussion board to meddle in our political and economic affairs.
Strangely enough I've always thought those are the sections it would be seen as ok to talk in. Oh well.

Personally I think a forum like this is a great place for people to exchange different views and understand more about each other in a safe environment. I've always believed that was part of the inspiration behind the site as it is today. In fact, participation in the mixed threads tend to be among the highest.

I joined this site after watching a series of interviews with Muslim spokespeople on tv. It became apparent not just that they had different views from me, but that there seemed to be some sort of organised or consistent alternative narrative which I didn't know about (and neither did the interviewers).

Since then, as a member, I have learned that there is indeed a drastically alternative view of world events, history and morality that is far more alien to my experience than i ever expected. I ask questions to challenge statements to see what is behind them, because that is the way to learn. However, I do not agree that making a political observation (for example, suggesting that the US did not engineer the military coup in Egypt) is tantamount to being 'Islamophobic' in any way, shape or form.

Ironically, while the western news is dominated by the actions of people who are termed 'extremists', it's the so-called 'moderate' Muslims who dominate media appearances in the UK and Ireland, when they are asked onto panel programmes to discuss events. I joined expecting to see that this 'moderate' view was the real majority in the Muslim world. Instead, I find that many members regard these 'moderates' to be scarcely Muslim at all. I don't know who is the real majority but it seems that there is the most enormous battle for ownership going on within Islam.

I have learned a massive amount about all kinds of subjects here for which i am very grateful. I have even learned that Sharia Law has its plus side (although not in the hands of the Taliban). However, it needs to be for Muslims, no one else.

I have also now read the Quran and many other Muslim-related books. But although stranger things have happened, it's fair to say that I am not likely to convert.
Reply

Signor
08-20-2013, 04:20 PM
Originally Posted by Independent
But although stranger things have happened, it's fair to say that I am not likely to convert.
Would you like tell us what are those "strange" things?Maybe we can help if its is Allah's will
Reply

Independent
08-20-2013, 04:37 PM
Originally Posted by Signor
Would you like tell us what are those "strange" things?Maybe we can help if its is Allah's will
I meant simply that sometimes people have converted in very unexpected ways, such as the controversial Dutch film-maker (Van Doorn). I think this is not likely in my case as I am not drawn, but thank you for your offer of help.
Reply

Signor
08-20-2013, 04:49 PM
Originally Posted by Independent
I meant simply that sometimes people have converted in very unexpected ways, such as the controversial Dutch film-maker (Van Doorn). I think this is not likely in my case as I am not drawn, but thank you for your offer of help.
You are welcome anytime.However,I need to tell you something which you find "Unexpected".

"Surely you cannot guide whom you love, but Allah guides whom He pleases, and He knows best the followers of the right way." [28:56]

Mentioned in Al Ar'af,verse 149

Say, "With Allah is the far-reaching argument. If He had willed, He would have guided you all."

Peace
Reply

glo
08-20-2013, 05:07 PM
Originally Posted by faithandpeace
I do take offense to others here who reduce the real-life suffering and death of others to "political science." When people at my masjid tell me of relatives who have died in Syria, when someone on this forum talks about being attacked in Lebanon in real-time and you never hear from them again, it hits much closer to home.
It isn't about theories anymore.
I understand what you are saying.

When people suffer and die, especially people we relate to ourselves or know personally, then our only response can be one of deep emotion - anger, hurt, pain, sadness, despair ...

And it can seem heartless when outsiders analyse the situation and give their opinion. And perhaps those people should hear what you are saying and be sensitive in their response.
Or perhaps there should be a period when NOTHING is said and people are just left to grieve.

However, I also think you are perhaps a bit unfair on people like Warrior. Exactly because he is an outsider and has an understanding of political situations, it may actually make him a good person to look at the situation and give his thoughts.

What might just look like interference and irritation at the moment, may actually be words of wisdom. It just might not be the right time for people who are affected by all this to hear.


My thoughts and prayers are with your friends in your masjid and with their families back in Syria.
Reply

sister herb
08-20-2013, 05:28 PM
Originally Posted by Abz2000
unfortunately you will see no peace without a struggle, whatdo you think, they're going to hand you the keys to parliament?

and i don't know what you mean by this or how you hope to achieve it:
Salam alaykum

Thanks about reminding about struggle - but struggle has to be some clear goal and to me it is end the conflict and reach the peace (plus justice of course).

By my signature text I refer to a situation in the Palestine; for me it is quite personal matter as I have lost friends and some family members during that conflict - but still I haven´t lost my hope for peace (and justice of course) with Palestine matter too.

"Make peace not war."
Reply

Jedi_Mindset
08-20-2013, 05:43 PM
Originally Posted by faithandpeace
I do take offense to others here who reduce the real-life suffering and death of others to "political science." When people at my masjid tell me of relatives who have died in Syria, when someone on this forum talks about being attacked in Lebanon in real-time and you never hear from them again, it hits much closer to home.
I remember the topic as well, never heard from the brother again indeed, it caught me a bit off guarrd that day but later on i accepted that it is the state of the ummah today.
Reply

جوري
08-20-2013, 07:27 PM
Originally Posted by tearose
As-salamu 3laikum,I only heard some people say that aljazeera had so much integrity when they started out, that when they got bought over they lost some of it. They do also have some unislamic elements in their broadcasting like music etc. However, if they continue to broadcast the truth and are better than alarabiya then I will continue to watch their broadcasts in sha Allah.
You heard what they wanted in fact Al Jazeera started around the America invasion if Iraq to showcase how great and heroic the Americans are to an Arabic audience and that's why they gained popularity until a few reporters died not just from Aljazeera but even Spanish reporters whose families tried to sue the US to no avail and their govt. isn't doing much to help and the US turned in Aljazeera shortly after in fact every regime has turned on them because of their live recordings and expose especially in Arabic - al3rabya or as we call it al3brya is owned by that turd waleed IBN talal who just fired Dr. Suwaidan he also owns fox along with Murdoch and they are the vilest against Muslims with no credibility whatsoever I mean their lies are hilarious the other day they said the brotherhood they don't even want to admit that internationally people are supporting mursi without anything to do with the brotherhood are placing that yellow avatar with four sign to promote multiple wives lol I mean need I say more?
Reply

WarriorforMarie
08-20-2013, 08:19 PM
Originally Posted by faithandpeace
I do take offense to others here who reduce the real-life suffering and death of others to "political science." When people at my masjid tell me of relatives who have died in Syria, when someone on this forum talks about being attacked in Lebanon in real-time and you never hear from them again, it hits much closer to home.

It isn't about theories anymore. Further, talking over and over about how Egypt, Syria, etc. needs "peace" is a distraction from the real issue. Justice is what is needed. When there is oppression, there is no peace. Violence is justified and even encouraged in certain circumstances such as in self-defense or defense of others. It would be ridiculous if an intruder entered my home and tried to take my things and tried to hurt me and when I fight back the neighbors tell us both to "make peace." That is ridiculous. Peace happens when oppression is stopped and wrongdoers are punished.
I think you are having misunderstandings. When I first posted in this thread it was in response to your mentioning that Muslims who do not accept Islam as a political system might be apostates. What I was trying to discuss was what the consequences of this be if broad structural trends, both historic and economic, might lead to a secularization of the political space in the Muslim World and wanted to know what the implications of that mean. I was met with an assertion that any Muslim who practices secular or progressive politics is an apostate. I did not dispute this, merely inquire about its details. The responses I received often focused on Egypt and any mention I made of it was only in reference to these comments. I also have yet to see any providing example of how I was "preaching" or trying to force people to accept Western political systems. My writings were oriented towards attempting to gain information about the understanding that a Muslim's politics and beliefe in God are one in the same. So far no one has been able to provide a satisfactorye explanation of the details. Of course, if someone does not have that understanding there is nothing wrong with that, and a simple statement that the particular details are unknown would have been sufficient.

I also take issue that anything is "reduced" by applying political science to it. Political scientist study political phenomena. The systematic study of politics allows one to describe, explain and in certain matters make some limited predictions on issues. Anyone who wishes to understand how the political world needs to conduct formal study, otherwise self taught ideas will leave them unable to comprehend the things that are happening in the world.

I will however cease posting in this forum. In the numerous diatribes that have been posted, there were two at least partially valid points made.
-One is that this is a forum about the events of Egypt. Comments about political Islam risk driving it off topic.
-There are people on this thread with loved ones in danger.

Perhaps if there had been an open and honest answering of my questions in the first place (rather than the issuing of unfound accusations that I was trying to force Western political systems on people) the excess comments could have been avoided. I will instead create a separate thread about Political Islam, probably about a week from now as my school semester is starting and I have to prepare my notes this week.
Reply

sister herb
08-20-2013, 08:36 PM
Originally Posted by WarriorforMarie
When I first posted in this thread it was in response to your mentioning that Muslims who do not accept Islam as a political system might be apostates. ... I was met with an assertion that any Muslim who practices secular or progressive politics is an apostate.
Discussions like this kind of comments are (unfortunately) quite common. Claiming that is not good or islamic behavior at all (as only Allah knows kind of things) but some times some people see some conflicts so personal matters that they might accuse others... When talking about some current conflicts, some may see things just only like black and white- situation.

If someone has made kind of claiming in this thread in purpose and really meant it... may Allah forgives him.
Reply

WarriorforMarie
08-20-2013, 08:49 PM
Originally Posted by sister herb
Discussions like this kind of comments are (unfortunately) quite common. Claiming that is not good or islamic behavior at all (as only Allah knows kind of things) but some times some people see some conflicts so personal matters that they might accuse others... When talking about some current conflicts, some may see things just only like black and white- situation.

If someone has made kind of claiming in this thread in purpose and really meant it... may Allah forgives him.
You are right to mention that importance of personal matters. As had been revealed some in this threads have ones they care for who are in danger. It is understandable that they would have problems if they saw someone they thought was making light of that situation. I apologize to anyone if they thought I was making light of the peril of those they care about.
Reply

Abz2000
08-20-2013, 09:05 PM
@ confused warriorMarie
I was met with an assertion that any Muslim who practices secular or progressive politics is an apostate. I did not dispute this, merely inquire about its details. The responses I received often focused on Egypt and any mention I made of it was only in reference to these comments. I also have yet to see any providing example of how I was "preaching" or trying to force people to accept Western political systems. My writings were oriented towards attempting to gain information about the understanding that a Muslim's politics and beliefe in God are one in the same. So far no one has been able to provide a satisfactorye explanation of the details.
The answer to your simple question is in the Quran if u actually cared to read it:إِنّا أَنزَلنَا التَّورىٰةَ فيها هُدًى وَنورٌ ۚ يَحكُمُ بِهَا النَّبِيّونَ الَّذينَ أَسلَموا لِلَّذينَ هادوا وَالرَّبّٰنِيّونَ وَالأَحبارُ بِمَا استُحفِظوا مِن كِتٰبِ اللَّهِ وَكانوا عَلَيهِ شُهَداءَ ۚ فَلا تَخشَوُا النّاسَ وَاخشَونِ وَلا تَشتَروا بِـٔايٰتى ثَمَنًا قَليلًا ۚ وَمَن لَم يَحكُم بِما أَنزَلَ اللَّهُ فَأُولٰئِكَ هُمُ الكٰفِرونَIt was We who revealed the law (to Moses): therein was guidance and light. By its standard have been judged the Jews, by the prophets who bowed (as in Islam) to Allah\'s will, by the rabbis and the doctors of law: for to them was entrusted the protection of Allah\'s book, and they were witnesses thereto: therefore fear not men, but fear me, and sell not my signs for a miserable price. If any do fail to judge/legislate by what Allah hath revealed, they are Disbelievers.Quran 5:44Sent using alQuran. http://iphone.almubin.com/alQuran
Reply

sister herb
08-20-2013, 09:11 PM
^^ Hopely that now doesn´t mean to someones that if muslims don´t support MB as ruling of Egypt, they are disbelievers?

:phew
Reply

WarriorforMarie
08-20-2013, 09:16 PM
Originally Posted by Abz2000
The answer to your simple question is in the Quran if u actually cared to read it:إِنّا أَنزَلنَا التَّورىٰةَ فيها هُدًى وَنورٌ ۚ يَحكُمُ بِهَا النَّبِيّونَ الَّذينَ أَسلَموا لِلَّذينَ هادوا وَالرَّبّٰنِيّونَ وَالأَحبارُ بِمَا استُحفِظوا مِن كِتٰبِ اللَّهِ وَكانوا عَلَيهِ شُهَداءَ ۚ فَلا تَخشَوُا النّاسَ وَاخشَونِ وَلا تَشتَروا بِـٔايٰتى ثَمَنًا قَليلًا ۚ وَمَن لَم يَحكُم بِما أَنزَلَ اللَّهُ فَأُولٰئِكَ هُمُ الكٰفِرونَIt was We who revealed the law (to Moses): therein was guidance and light. By its standard have been judged the Jews, by the prophets who bowed (as in Islam) to Allah\'s will, by the rabbis and the doctors of law: for to them was entrusted the protection of Allah\'s book, and they were witnesses thereto: therefore fear not men, but fear me, and sell not my signs for a miserable price. If any do fail to judge/legislate by what Allah hath revealed, they are Disbelievers.Quran 5:44Sent using alQuran.
Abz2000. I was informed that this thread is inappropriate for this topic. Could we discuss this in a separate thread or private message?
Reply

جوري
08-20-2013, 10:00 PM


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23762970

our good friends are behind it everything from the beginning! They condemn on TV and foster the carnage under the table!
Reply

جوري
08-20-2013, 10:09 PM
Originally Posted by sister herb
^^ Hopely that now doesn´t mean to someones that if muslims don´t support MB as ruling of Egypt, they are disbelievers?:phew
Worst than disbelievers are those aiding and abetting the killing of their brothers and sisters even with a word or through gloating. IBN taymiha as he was being whipped by his jailer supplicanted against the oppressors and their aid to which the jailer replied forgive me shiekh I am but a servant who obeys am I the helper of the oppressor to which IBN taimyah replied No, you're the oppressor the helpers are those who cook your food and mend your clothes Something to ponder furthermore even if you were of those who support a pure Islamic governance and unhappy with the democratic route then you're still to support Muslims over kafirs and I remind you of suret ar'rum where the Muslims rejoiced when the Romans won the second time over the Persians even though technically they're both kafirs but at the time the Romans were still considered people of the book thus closer to us than Zoroastrians- Something to ponder over!Best,
Reply

Jedi_Mindset
08-20-2013, 10:10 PM



^^
Makes me sick to see all those hypocrites, wallahi sometimes you can even see the evil on their faces, with those fake smirks.
Reply

جوري
08-20-2013, 10:14 PM
Btw none of the pages open properly why don't you guys fix the problem I either have to use my phone or some third party browser some pages open in Firefox and some on aol this is nonsense I can only see page 8 on desktop! Anyone else with this problem? Uses to think it was my laptop but I got this one only three weeks ago the problem is definitely from your end!
Reply

sister herb
08-21-2013, 05:35 AM
If you don´t support MB 100%, you gives your support to Romans and Zoroastrians? It is useful to know background of some political happenings but I am not sure if we need to go so far like to time of Romans in this thread (when many people don´t even remember happenings from few decades back).

I afraid that those some whose dare to pray for peace are much worst than disbelievers too... (including justice).
Reply

جوري
08-21-2013, 05:39 AM
I don't understand what you wrote there and I suspect you yourself didn't understand what I wrote hence this very strange reply!
Reply

sister herb
08-21-2013, 05:48 AM
^^ Thats very possible - thats why I modified my post a little.

Best...
Reply

جوري
08-21-2013, 05:55 AM
It doesn't make it any better I am afraid, it is a cosmetic band aid to something very serious and deadly.. You're free to your beliefs but I'd ask that if you don't know what is going on in Egypt currently to not comment about it!
Reply

sister herb
08-21-2013, 08:17 AM
^^ All I know about Egypt is what I have read from they political history and about those current happenings is... propaganda from the every sides.

Whose propaganda I should believe is the truth and the only truth (if there even is kind of matter)?
Reply

Independent
08-21-2013, 08:30 AM
Originally Posted by جوري
You're free to your beliefs but I'd ask that if you don't know what is going on in Egypt currently to not comment about it!
You love to tell everyone how ignorant they are. Yet it was you, just a few months ago, who made what is undoubtedly the worst prediction by anyone in relation to Egypt. You told us that the Egyptian army (a conscript army) is an army of the people, which would never turn its guns on the people:

Also the Egyptian army which is conscript of the people isn't going to do what was done in Algeria with the Islamists even if the kaffirs may detest it

Just how wrong can you get???
Reply

جوري
08-21-2013, 08:47 AM
the Egyptian army is conscript of the people and the murders going on right now in the army are because they refuse to follow orders they take em out and shoot them 38 at a time and proclaim brotherhood did it- furthermore he has placed high ranking army generals under house arrests as he's afraid if betrayals and his last state address he was afraid of an assassination he hand picked those present. Those who shot at Muslims are the generals with deep pockets and are Christian but we don't have many of them in the army he himself sissy is a son of a Jewish Moroccan who moved to Egypt in the fifties and Abdul Nasser loved showing to the west how non prejudice and UN Islamic he is by hiring Christians and Jews in strategic places.Sissy suckled at Americas chest for a very long time and this coup was two yrs in the making but will blow in his face soon.Here's a tweet from a defector who's speaking of the large split inside the army amongst high ranking officials https://mobile.twitter.com/samyalhasanI almost feel sorry for you - it doesn't matter how hard you try you can never keep up or draw accurate conclusion!Best,
Reply

sister herb
08-21-2013, 08:55 AM
Salam alaykum

Only Christians shoot MB? Or Jew Egyptians? Isn´t there any muslims in the Egyptian army? Is this the reason why some "supporters" burnt churches in Egypt? Revence is sweetest when you revence to the people who too are the most innocent to the political mess?

Oh my world! imsad
Reply

Independent
08-21-2013, 08:59 AM
Originally Posted by جوري
Those who shot at Muslims are the generals with deep pockets and are Christian
The Egyptian army is the 11th largest in the world and overwhelmingly Muslim. The notion that a few generals could make the best part of a million men act entirely against their will is one of the daftest suggestions you have yet made. (And that's saying something.) I also note that once again you are lining up the Christian minority for their fate.

Either way, those same generals were in position when you made your assertion a couple of months ago. How could you get it so spectacularly wrong? Because you always fit events to your views, not the other way round.
Reply

جوري
08-21-2013, 09:03 AM
Churches were burnt from the inside I've already covered that with no casualties as opposed to mosques which were torched with people inside - there's also strong evidence of black water mercenaries some of the dead were missing kidneys which is rather an odd choice for autopsies - you want Muslims who were shot in cold blood to take the rap for crimes the others did just to stand in equal footing with their evil?
Thanks but no thanks he who hides or is silent about the truth is a devil as the Hadith goes!

I am going to bed it's after fajr and the dialogue here is boring me!
All we've to do is wait and see العاقبة للمتقين

Best,
Reply

sister herb
08-21-2013, 09:10 AM
^^ I don´t think that christians by themselves burn they own holy places. Now we go back to the conspiracy theory section again. I see that chaos of the society cause a lot of vandalism - I don´t blame MB burning them but some of people whose believe to support them and let they rage to do what they wish.

As I know some Egyptian muslims have been safe the churches too - with christians.

Situation is not hopeless yet - if people can meet others as they common humans.

Praying the peace is also praying against chaos. And chaos helps noboby - except your real enemy.
Reply

Independent
08-21-2013, 09:11 AM
Originally Posted by جوري
Churches were burnt from the inside I've already covered that
Then why are you repeating it? Even if it were true, it has nothing to do with the Egyptian army's willingness to overthrow Morsi.

It would seem your inside knowledge is not as reliable as you tell us.
Reply

جوري
08-21-2013, 09:15 AM
Inde- I am not sure what's difficult for you to grasp or understand? the ruling bodies aren't a majority in any country they just have to be strategically placed- they exercise their might behind their tanks if you follow what's going you'd have learn that entire brigades are forced to submit their weapons and they're killing in the thousands - it's a political game and war is psychological not just physical - I am not setting a minority for anything they've not set themselves up for even Neven melek who's sick of the bull of her church and the governing bodies has just resigned from gabhat a dameer with fears of excommunication stating that the pressures to be human and true to self and cause have been exceedingly difficult!
Lining up words and using them as if an authority figure isn't making much of a case for you if there's going to be an army split and I am hoping they'll just take care of sissy and his goats it would be best - it will not be like Syria on the account that in Egypt they don't put folks in the airforce based on being alawite but based on physical criteria and that's the only advantage Bashar has his air raids - we've to wait and watch but you can sit there defending 'minority rights' when we all know you don't give a fig about anyone's death as I am yet to hear a word of condemnation to what went down but you never make yourself scarce from a phoney high ground from which you're far removed!
Reply

جوري
08-21-2013, 09:19 AM
Originally Posted by Independent
Then why are you repeating it? Even if it were true, it has nothing to do with the Egyptian army's willingness to overthrow Morsi. It would seem your inside knowledge is not as reliable as you tell us.
I repeated it because you repeated a statement I've already corrected which tells me that you're interested in your own truth or didn't bother read!There are four corrupt branches in the Egyptian scene none of them were cleaned from the time of Mubarak they only removed the figurehead thus the church has everything to do with the coup tamarud and black bloc are nothing but church thugs and hizb alwatan!Hopefully you got it this time :)Best,
Reply

جوري
08-21-2013, 09:29 AM
Herb mursi invited them repeatedly to the table and they refused - the coup was paid for by the US, emirates and Saudi and if the US wants to play good cop bad cop to save its public image given it's the tax payers funding a civil war they'll simply order Saudi to pay for it as it did before in Nicaragua - were the lot of you born yesterday or honestly that naive?
Reply

جوري
08-21-2013, 09:34 AM
Originally Posted by tearose
She is talking about a historical event that is mentioned in the Qur'an, in surat ar-rum, not something we would read to get the background on a situation. We have to apply the lessons from the Qur'an and sunnah to our understanding of situations in all times and places.
Jazaki Allah khyran I haven't failed if I have reached just one person even if some guest who doesn't comment!With some it's a sort of tournament of one up Manship as if to say to hell with a the dead let's have peace and no one to be held responsible for the crimes and Muslims come in for the kill too it's good to show them how we are not 'terrorists' they use the term so much forcing people to become guilty of something they didn't commit. Reminds me of how querysh conspired to kill the prophet by wanting to divide the blood so not one would be held responsible for what they conspired - amazing thing is even Abu jahl had some honour and said don't do it in the night I don't want the Arabs to say I frightened Muhammad's womenfolk!
Reply

sister herb
08-21-2013, 09:35 AM
Saudis payed civil war in Nigaragua? Any proves about it or just that I am ignorant? Or did I undesrtood you wrong again? Tax payers of Saudi or the USA? I am a little confused now.

Maybe because you dont use dots in your text - difficult to read where sentences ends and starts.
Reply

Independent
08-21-2013, 09:46 AM
Originally Posted by جوري
I repeated it because you repeated a statement I've already corrected
I didn't mention the Christians - you did.

Originally Posted by جوري
entire brigades are forced to submit their weapons and they're killing in the thousands
It has happened in many other countries that the army is asked to fire on civilians. If the army isn't sufficiently supportive of the leadership, they mutiny. This is especially true of conscript armies (which is why you were confident they would never fire on civilians in the first place.)

The Egyptian army has shown no sign of mutiny. This has to be because most of them, for the moment at least, agree that Morsi had to go. It never occurs that a few generals who aren't even on the scene at key flashpoints can force a whole army to act so strongly against its will.

Originally Posted by جوري
I am yet to hear a word of condemnation to what went down
I condemned the coup many times already. The violence that's now occurring is a direct result of the coup. They should have waited for the next election.
Reply

sister herb
08-21-2013, 10:11 AM
Originally Posted by Independent
I condemned the coup many times already.
Peace to you all

I afraid that condemning in this situation is bad as well praying for peace (with justice). I have no idea what these MB supporters expect people to do. As the conscience forbid to support 100% some political movement as MB as haven´t full understanding about its political (or religion) aims.

I just can pray that people in Egypt will find stability in they society and will live in peace (what I think most of people there just hopes).
Reply

glo
08-21-2013, 11:36 AM
Originally Posted by sister herb
I just can pray that people in Egypt will find stability in they society and will live in peace (what I think most of people there just hopes).
Amen to that.
I know that many, many people (Muslims and non-Muslims) pray for that every day.

May God's mercy and peace shine in Egypt and other places.
Reply

sister herb
08-21-2013, 11:45 AM
Originally Posted by tearose
wa 3laikum as-salaam,

and what I am wondering is how far the situation would have to go before you would change that point of view. Presumably that wouldn't still be the case if it was a straightforward struggle between Muslims and kuffar?
Salam alaykum

There is no limits as I base my opinions for the life experience of some other similar crisis. Kuffars killed my husband, my fiancee and several of my friends and I still believe peace with them. Because peace is only level we can live together in the same world. If you others think differently - it is your choice, not mine.

Should I lose my life for hate? No thanks. Heritage of my lost is looking for peace.
Reply

glo
08-21-2013, 11:50 AM
You are a great example in how to practice forgiveness, sister herb. Not many would be able to live up to such an example. I'm not sure I could!

You are right, peace IS the only way!
Reply

Jedi_Mindset
08-21-2013, 12:44 PM
Originally Posted by sister herb
Salam alaykum

There is no limits as I base my opinions for the life experience of some other similar crisis. Kuffars killed my husband, my fiancee and several of my friends and I still believe peace with them. Because peace is only level we can live together in the same world. If you others think differently - it is your choice, not mine.

Should I lose my life for hate? No thanks. Heritage of my lost is looking for peace.
They didnt got 'killed' if you know what i mean :)
Peace in palestine is the only way, but unfortunately the zionist enemy wants war and doesnt want to solve everything with peace.
The recent peace talks are a sham.
Reply

sister herb
08-21-2013, 01:09 PM
Salam alaykum

Yes I know what you mean. And peace talks with leaders are just as s joke - by both sides. Peace can make and have to make ordinary people, not leaders.

Leaders just sign the peace.
Reply

glo
08-21-2013, 01:38 PM
Peace in Egypt?
This is a good start!
:statisfie

Reply

sister herb
08-21-2013, 01:53 PM
^^ This is the way we should live together - even this.

Why so simple is so many times too difficult?
Reply

جوري
08-21-2013, 05:11 PM
Originally Posted by Independent
I didn't mention the Christians - you did.
I mentioned their involvement yes, your point being?
Originally Posted by Independent
It has happened in many other countries that the army is asked to fire on civilians. If the army isn't sufficiently supportive of the leadership, they mutiny. This is especially true of conscript armies (which is why you were confident they would never fire on civilians in the first place.)
Quote me saying they'd never fire toward civilians in the first place!


Originally Posted by Independent
I condemned the coup many times already. The violence that's now occurring is a direct result of the coup. They should have waited for the next election.
I am sure you're heartbroken yes.. your sincerity is lighting up the room!
Reply

جوري
08-21-2013, 05:12 PM
Originally Posted by glo
Peace in Egypt?
This is a good start!
:statisfie
Mubarak was released today.. yes I am sure we will all live in peace!
Reply

جوري
08-21-2013, 05:15 PM
Originally Posted by sister herb
Saudis payed civil war in Nigaragua? Any proves about it or just that I am ignorant? Or did I undesrtood you wrong again? Tax payers of Saudi or the USA? I am a little confused now.

Maybe because you dont use dots in your text - difficult to read where sentences ends and starts.
it isn't my job to teach you world politics or history or how it is all tied in.. if you're interested in what occurred then here's a summary of the events:
http://www.brown.edu/Research/Unders...meline-n-i.php
Reply

Ramadan90
08-21-2013, 05:16 PM
Originally Posted by جوري

Mubarak was released today.. yes I am sure we will all live in peace!
:sl:

I read this today. We live in a sick world. He will eventually taste his own medicin. Allah is the most just.
Reply

sister herb
08-21-2013, 05:17 PM
^^ It is ok to me dear sister. Maybe it is job of some other then.

Have a nice day to you. :statisfie
Reply

sister herb
08-21-2013, 05:25 PM
Originally Posted by جوري

Mubarak was released today.. yes I am sure we will all live in peace!
I have wrote before; judiciary shouldn´t make they decision by political reasons. Judiciary and political elite should be separate - but countries where justice goes with policy of the rulers this might be quite impossible.

Situations like this, democracy is very very far; political elite command both army and judiciary.
Reply

جوري
08-21-2013, 05:25 PM
Originally Posted by Allah<3
:sl:

I read this today. We live in a sick world. He will eventually taste his own medicin. Allah is the most just.
He was released, his entire machine judicial, media, police force and generals are holding all the joints and Bashar used chemical weapons on children yesterday causing a horrific scene, Muslims are being labeled 'terrorists' to justify any mass killing against them.. the whole world watches and funds the killing but show up on TV like your pal indy here with such sincerity with words of condemnation.. Which don't matter on the long or short term of it, what matters to me is Muslims wake up already and do whatever they can, even if it be flooding their countries state departments with comments and videos of what is going on.. we all know the policy makers don't give a fig but your own country's citizens have a right to know their hard earned money is taken in the form of tax dollars to sponsor genocides...

all other trolling on the forum is completely irrelevant if you knew the dire conditions that are currently going on!

:w:
Reply

Ramadan90
08-21-2013, 05:48 PM
Originally Posted by جوري
He was released, his entire machine judicial, media, police force and generals are holding all the joints and Bashar used chemical weapons on children yesterday causing a horrific scene, Muslims are being labeled 'terrorists' to justify any mass killing against them.. the whole world watches and funds the killing but show up on TV like your pal indy here with such sincerity with words of condemnation.. Which don't matter on the long or short term of it, what matters to me is Muslims wake up already and do whatever they can, even if it be flooding their countries state departments with comments and videos of what is going on.. we all know the policy makers don't give a fig but your own country's citizens have a right to know their hard earned money is taken in the form of tax dollars to sponsor genocides...

all other trolling on the forum is completely irrelevant if you knew the dire conditions that are currently going on!

:w:
This is a good summary of what is happening today. We muslims are targets and have always been. We need to be more aware of what is really happening to our ummah. Awereness comes first and from there we can actually do something. We muslims need to wake up.
Reply

Independent
08-22-2013, 11:29 AM
Originally Posted by tearose
As I understand it, that means establishing peace through treaties and negotiations where necessary, and fighting fi sabilillah where necessary. That is something we all have to think about when examining modern conflicts involving the ummah.
Unfortunately, for some Muslims this has led to the view that war against the West is not merely justified but actually necessary. Many Muslims (perhaps yourself included) think the West has in fact declared war on Islam. They link together every single event involving Muslims - Bosnia, Iraq, Afghanistan etc - and regard them as part of a single, unified plan. This is very surprising and difficult to understand for Westerners, whose plan it is supposed to be.

Unlike some religions, Muslims are widely scattered round the world and therefore come into contact with every other religion and culture. There are many lines of tension in these areas (often based on historical wars of expansion) that remain volatile to this day. Only Christians are as widely distributed.

However, unlike Christians, Muslims are brought up to see any event, involving any Muslim, anywhere in the world, as personal (ie all part of the umma). Christians simply don't draw up lists of international conflicts in the same way. There is no equivalent 'single world view' in Christian culture - or in any other culture.

Not only are Muslims encouraged to see any attacks on any Muslims as personal, they also see any act by any Western country as linked. So whilst I, for example, see acts by France as having nothing whatsoever to do with me, some Muslims treat this as all part of the evidence against me and my culture.

In effect, many Muslims think that I personally (along with all other Westerners) are at war with them. Therefore they believe they are allowed to be at war with me. This came as a shock to me when I first joined this forum. Whereas almost all Westerners like myself, certainly do not feel we have declared war on you - so any action taken against western targets feels like Muslims have declared war on us.

In other words, we have a war situation where both sides feels the other started it, and that they are only acting in self defence. Not only is this terrifically sad in itself, it's also hard to see how anyone can declare peace, even if they want to. If I don't know I'm at war in the first place, how can I stop?

At first it's only a limited number of zealots who take actual physical action. But if it scales up, then in the end no one can stay out of it. A westerner becomes a target simply because he is a westerner, and a Muslim because he is a Muslim. No matter what an individual feels, you will be forced to choose sides. There will be a huge number of people caught impossibly in the middle. For instance, westerners who have converted to Islam. Or Muslims who are 'not Muslim enough'.

Each side will respond tit-for-tat, each will blame the other for being the first to sink to the worst kind of violence.
Reply

جوري
08-22-2013, 03:00 PM
This is a war on Islam!
individual beliefs here are irrelevant as this is simply evidence based-- what business have they being in the middle east or so called Islamic countries to begin with? tourism?

here's where it all started:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sykes%E...icot_Agreement
Reply

Abz2000
08-22-2013, 04:27 PM
Originally Posted by Independent
Many Muslims (perhaps yourself included) think the West has in fact declared war on Islam. They link together every single event involving Muslims - Bosnia, Iraq, Afghanistan etc - and regard them as part of a single, unified plan.
of course they have - and they have made that clear for anyone who cares to scavenge down in the memory hole, of course, if you're an inner party or outer party member, you'd get your information from the ministry of truth and searching the memory hole would be tantamount to treason:

DICK CHENEY: The business of our alliance goes forward and it begins with the fundamental duty to protect our people from danger. Having stood together in every major conflict of the last 100 years, the US and Australia now stand together in the decisive struggle against terrorism.

And it is they, the terrorist, who have ambitions of empire. Their goal in the broader Middle East is to seize control of a country so they have a base from which they can launch attacks against governments that refuse to meet their demands.Their ultimate aim, and one they boldly proclaim, is to establish a caliphate covering a region from Spain, across North Africa, through the Middle East and South Asia, all the way around to Indonesia. And it wouldn't stop there.

LOUISE YAXLEY: Dick Cheney's enthusiastic push for keeping up the war on terror begins with Baghdad.

DICK CHENEY: In Iraq our goal remains a democratic nation, that upholds the rule of law, respects the rights of its people. Provides them with security and is an ally in the war on terror.

But for this to happen, Baghdad must be secure. So we're pursuing a new strategy that brings in reinforcements to help Iraqi forces secure the capital so that nation can move forward and the political process can turn towards reconciliation.
hmmmmmm

wondering if it's a one off statement by a loon....................

munafiqs eat this!!!!

[QUOTE]

Sir Campbell Bannerman,
[Prime Minister of Britain (1905-08)]
“ There are people who control spacious territories teeming with manifest and hidden resources. They dominate the intersections of world routes. Their lands were the cradles of human civilizations and religions. These people have one faith, one language, one history and the same aspirations. No natural barriers can isolate these people from one another ... if, per chance, this nation were to be unified into one state, it would then take the fate of the world into its hands and would separate Europe from the rest of the world. Taking these considerations seriously, a foreign body should be planted in the heart of this nation to prevent the convergence of its wings in such a way that it could exhaust its powers in never-ending wars. It could also serve as a springboard for the West to gain its coveted objects.” - 1902

(not long after followed the occupation of the holy land and handing over of it to isntrael)

During the First World War, General Edmund Allenby the British Empire commander of the Egyptian Expeditionary Force remained responsible for the territories, occupied during the Sinai and Palestine Campaign.[2] After the war ended a military administration, named Occupied Enemy Territory Administration, was established in the captured territory of the former Ottoman Syria. The British sought to set up legitimacy for their continued control of the region and this was achieved by obtaining a mandate from the League of Nations in June 1922. The formal objective of the League of Nations Mandate system was to administer parts of the defunct Ottoman Empire, which had been in control of the Middle East since the 16th century, "until such time as they are able to stand alone.
The Zionist Commission was formed in March 1918 and was active in promoting Zionist objectives in Palestine. On 19 April 1920, elections were held for the Assembly of Representatives of the Palestinian Jewish community.[6] The Zionist Commission received official recognition in 1922 as representative of the Palestinian Jewish community)

Lord Curzon,
After the termination of Khilafat, the secretary expressed his views when he announced to the House of Commons the following words:

"The situation now is that Turkey is dead and will never rise again, because we have destroyed its moral strength, the Caliphate and Islam".

"We must put an end to anything which brings about any Islamic unity between the sons of the Muslims. As we have already succeeded in finishing off the Caliphate, so we must ensure that there will never arise again unity for the Muslims, whether it be intellectual or cultural unity"


Tony Blair,
In a speech at Labour Party National Conference, stated:
“What we are confronting here is an evil ideology......They demand the elimination of Israel; the withdrawal of all Westerners from Muslim countries, irrespective of the wishes of people and government; the establishment of effectively Taliban states and Shariah law in the Arab world en route to one caliphate of all Muslim nations.”


Charles Clarke
,
In a speech on Counter Terrorism at The Heritage Foundation (a neoconservative think tank, Washington DC) stated:
“What drives these people on is ideas. And unlike the liberation movements of the post World War II era in many parts of the world, these are not in pursuit of political ideas like national independence from colonial rule, or equality for all citizens without regard for race or creed, or freedom of expression without totalitarian repression. Such ambitions are, at least in principle, negotiable and in many cases have actually been negotiated. However there can be no negotiation about the re-creation of the Caliphate; there can be no negotiation about the imposition of Shariah law; there can be no negotiation about the suppression of equality between the sexes; there can be no negotiation about the ending of free speech. These values are fundamental to our civilization and are simply not up for negotiation.”



Lord Zetland [March 24, 1940, British Secretary of State for the colonial India]
“[T]he call of Islam is one which transcends the bounds of country. It may have lost some force as a result of the abolition of Caliphate by Mustafa Kamal Pasha, but it still has a very considerable appeal as witness for example Jinnah’s insistence on our giving undertaking that Indian troops should never be employed against any Muslim state, and the solicitude which he has constantly expressed for the Arabs of Palestine.”


President Bush
“The militants believe that controlling one country will rally the Muslim masses, enabling them to overthrow all moderate governments in the region, and establish a radical Islamic empire that spans from Spain to Indonesia"
“The murderous ideology of the Islamic radicals is the great challenge of our new century. Yet, in many ways, this fight resembles the struggle against communism in the last century."


**** Cheney [Vice President, Speech in Sydney, Australia February 2007]

" ...And it is they, the terrorists, who have ambitions of empire. Their goal in the broader Middle East is to seize control of a country, so they have a base from which they can launch attacks against governments that refuse to meet their demands. Their ultimate aim -- and one they boldly proclaim -- is to establish a caliphate covering a region from Spain, across North Africa, through the Middle East and South Asia, all the way to Indonesia. And it wouldn't stop there.
...The war on terror is more than a contest of arms, and more than a test of will. It is a battle of ideas...."


Donald Rumsfeld [US Secretary of Defense, December 5 2005]
In a speech at the Paul Nitze School of Advanced Studies at Johns Hopkins:

"...Iraq would serve as the base of a new Islamic caliphate to extend throughout the Middle East and which would threaten the legitimate governments in Europe, Africa, and Asia. This is their plan. They have said so. We make a terrible mistake if we fail to listen and learn...."


Eric Edelman [Undersecretary of Defense for Policy]

December 1, 2005, Council on Foreign Relations, Washington, DC

"...So I think we need to be very clear. Iraq's future will either embolden terrorists and expand their reach and ability to establish a — reestablish a caliphate, or it will deal them a crippling blow. For us, failure in Iraq is just not an option..."

General John Abizaid, [Chief of US Central Command, 29th Sept. 2005]
In a speech to US law makers said:
"Al Qaeda terrorists hope to drive American influence from the Middle East and install a global Muslim leader in Saudi Arabia.....If al Qaeda terrorists manage to take control of Saudi Arabia, they will try to create and expand their influence in the region and establish a caliphate."
Abizaid said al Qaeda would subsequently move on to apply a "very narrow, strict interpretation of Shariah, Islamic law, not believed in or practiced anywhere else in the world today.......The next goal would be to expand into non-Arab Islamic countries. This would include the middle of Africa, South Asia and Southeast Asia".
At another occasion,
Gen. John Abizaid said: “We are fighting the most despicable enemy ... who uses the 21st century-technology to spread their vision of a 7th-century paradise (and) try to re-create what they imagine was the pure and perfect Islamic government of the era of the prophet Muhammad.”


Gen. Richard Myers, [The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff]
While addressing a Pentagon news conference stressed:
“If the Zarqawis of the world were allowed to be successful in Iraq in their view, and that would be the start of the caliphate that they envision, the stakes would be huge for the region,"


Henry Kissinger, [Nov 2004]
Asked in an interview “What in your opinion are the principal threats of the age?” He answered - “First, is what we call terrorism in the United States, but which is really the uprising of radical Islam against the secular world, and against the democratic world, on behalf of re-establishing a sort of Caliphate. That is directed as much against moderate Islam, than it is against non-Islamic societies.”


Patrick J. Buchanan, [June 23, 2006. Founder of magazine ‘The American Conservative’. Has served three presidents in the White House]

“If Islamic rule is an idea taking hold among the Islamic masses, how does even the best army on earth stop it?
Do we not need a new policy?”



President Vladimir Putin
The Russian leader said at a European Union summit in Brussels that western civilisation faced a mortal threat from Muslim terrorists, and claimed that they had plans to create a "worldwide caliphate".
"…The creation of a caliphate on the territory of the Russian Federation is only part one of their plan. In fact, if you are following the situation, you surely know that the radicals are pursuing a larger goal: They are talking about the creation of a world caliphate…”

The Washington Post [January 14, 2006]
The Washington Post headed an article with the title " Reunified Islam: Unlikely but Not Entirely Radical, Restoration of Caliphate, Attacked by Bush, Resonates With Mainstream Muslims", arguing that such a call is not radical nor only resonant with Islamic guerrilla movements


Terrorism - From a War on Terror to a War of Ideas
by David Lazarus
"...The underlying belief of the jihadists appears to be that the re-establishment and enforcement of strict Islamic law in these territories will bring about an almost mystical rebirth of a just, pure and perfect society for all true Muslims. The appeal of such a vision is potent within the Middle East in particular and can be easily understood when one examines the general failure of modernity that prevails in most sectors of Arab society.
Any Islamist revolution throughout the entire Middle East has, however, been thwarted by authoritarian dictatorships within the region, such as those of Egypt and Saudi Arabia..."

Peter Costello (Ex Australian Treasurer), 2006, Australian Christian Lobby:

“There are countries that claim to be theocratic Islamic States, for example, The Islamic Republic of Iran, The Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, The Islamic Republic of Mauritania. There are other countries that enforce religious or Sharia Law – the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. But for the radical Islamists even this is not enough. They have a vision of a Caliphate stretching across the Middle East toppling what they see as corrupt nation states and enforcing a more “pure” version of Islam. In our own region the ambitions of Jemaah Islamiyah is to create a Pan-Islamic State stretching down and encompassing the southern Philippines, Malaya and Indonesia.”

Alexander Downer, 2005, Centre for Muslim States and Societies (UWA):

Let's be crystal clear about what the terrorists are seeking. Let's strip away the rhetoric and focus on the type of world they want to create. Their goal is to create a new extremist Caliphate in the Muslim world - a Taliban style theocracy. In South-East Asia they want to drive out western influence and establish a fundamentalist regime across Indonesia, Malaysia, Southern Thailand and Southern Philippines. The same for the Middle-East - a Caliphate stretching from the Caucuses to North Africa. They want to get rid of democracy in these countries and replace it with a puritanical regime that denies individual freedoms. Nothing complicated about that ideology. A perverted interpretation of Islamic law, no tolerance of diversity.”

Fazza

03-10-08, 01:03 PM

ON LOSING THE KHILAFAH


Syed Ameer Ali, of the Aligarh Muslim University and Muslim League, in the Times newspaper on the 5th March 1924:

"It is difficult to anticipate the exact effect the 'abolition' of the Caliphate will have on the minds of the Muslims of India. But so much I can safely affirm - that it will prove a disaster to both Islam and civilisation. The suppression of the time honoured institution, which was throughout the Moslem world regarded as the symbol of Islamic Unity, will cause the disintegration of Islam as a moral force. It had knit together over 250 million of the followers of the faith belonging to the Sunni communion by one common ideal."

REPORTS & POLLS

US Think Tanks
In December 2004, A report by the National Intelligence Council (NIC) state a possible scenario that by 2020 a “New Caliphate" would have been established. This 123-page report titled "Mapping the Global Future" was aimed to prepare the next Bush administration for future challenges, and was presented to US President, members of Congress, cabinet members and key officials involved in policymaking.
According to CSIS (Center for Strategic and International Studies), Washington based think tank, this report was not a prediction, but a case exercise/study which involves observing the various events taking place in the world. These events are then connected in such a way that there might be a possibility of forming of a Caliphate state. Given that such a state may be established, then it is to be decided from today as to what needs to be done to prevent it, if it needs to be prevented. Moreover there are two organizations which did such a study, one is the CIA and the other is Shell Oil Company.


National Strategy for Combating Terrorism (NSCT)
“…Deny terrorists control of any nation they would use as a base and launching pad for terror. Our terrorist enemies are striving to claim a strategic country as a haven for terror. From this base, they could destabilize the Middle East and strike America and other free nations with ever-increasing violence. This we can never allow….”



[U]World Public Opinion Report [April 24th, 2007]
file:///C:/Users/faraz/AppData/Local/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_image002.jpg

“Large majorities in most countries support the goals of requiring a strict application of sharia, keeping out Western values, and even unifying all Islamic countries into a single Islamic state”


The Pew Global Attitudes Project [July 14, 2005]
file:///C:/Users/faraz/AppData/Local/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_image004.jpg
Large majorities in Pakistan (79%), Morocco (70%) and Jordan (63%) say they self-identify first as Muslims, rather than as Pakistanis, Moroccans or Jordanians. Even in Turkey, with its more secular traditions, a 43% plurality among Muslims identify primarily with their religion rather than their nationality. Indonesians are closely split with 39% self-identifying as Muslims first, 35% as Indonesians and 26% saying both equally. In Lebanon, however, just 30% of Muslims (this question was not asked of Christians) say they view themselves primarily in terms of their faith, rather than as Lebanese.


file:///C:/Users/faraz/AppData/Local/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_image006.jpg
Large majorities of Muslims in most predominantly Muslim countries surveyed think that it is very important that Islam play a more important and influential role in the world than that religion now does. In Morocco, 84% of Muslims subscribe to this view, as do 73% in Jordan, 70% in Pakistan and 64% in Indonesia. Even in Lebanon and Turkey, where fewer among the Muslim population place high importance on a larger global role for Islam, pluralities in both countries do so.


Policy Exchange
Major new survey finds younger Muslims much more likely to be inspired by political Islam. 37 percent of 16-24-year-old British Muslims would prefer to live under Islamic sharia law than under British law.

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ لاَ تَتَّخِذُواْ بِطَانَةً مِّن دُونِكُمْ لاَ يَأْلُونَكُمْ خَبَالاً وَدُّواْ مَا عَنِتُّمْ قَدْ بَدَتِ الْبَغْضَاء مِنْ أَفْوَاهِهِمْ وَمَا تُخْفِي صُدُورُهُمْ أَكْبَرُ قَدْ بَيَّنَّا لَكُمُ الآيَاتِ إِن كُنتُمْ تَعْقِلُونَ


O you who believe!
Take not as (your) Bitanah (advisors, consultants, protectors, helpers, friends, etc.) those outside your way of life since they will not fail to do their best to corrupt you.
They desire to harm you severely.
Hatred has already appeared from their mouths, but what their breasts conceal is far worse.
Indeed We have made plain to you the Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses) if you understand.

Quran 3:118



Reply

Ali_008
08-22-2013, 04:57 PM
Originally Posted by Independent
Unfortunately, for some Muslims this has led to the view that war against the West is not merely justified but actually necessary. Many Muslims (perhaps yourself included) think the West has in fact declared war on Islam. They link together every single event involving Muslims - Bosnia, Iraq, Afghanistan etc - and regard them as part of a single, unified plan. This is very surprising and difficult to understand for Westerners, whose plan it is supposed to be.

Unlike some religions, Muslims are widely scattered round the world and therefore come into contact with every other religion and culture. There are many lines of tension in these areas (often based on historical wars of expansion) that remain volatile to this day. Only Christians are as widely distributed.

However, unlike Christians, Muslims are brought up to see any event, involving any Muslim, anywhere in the world, as personal (ie all part of the umma). Christians simply don't draw up lists of international conflicts in the same way. There is no equivalent 'single world view' in Christian culture - or in any other culture.

Not only are Muslims encouraged to see any attacks on any Muslims as personal, they also see any act by any Western country as linked. So whilst I, for example, see acts by France as having nothing whatsoever to do with me, some Muslims treat this as all part of the evidence against me and my culture.

In effect, many Muslims think that I personally (along with all other Westerners) are at war with them. Therefore they believe they are allowed to be at war with me. This came as a shock to me when I first joined this forum. Whereas almost all Westerners like myself, certainly do not feel we have declared war on you - so any action taken against western targets feels like Muslims have declared war on us.

In other words, we have a war situation where both sides feels the other started it, and that they are only acting in self defence. Not only is this terrifically sad in itself, it's also hard to see how anyone can declare peace, even if they want to. If I don't know I'm at war in the first place, how can I stop?

At first it's only a limited number of zealots who take actual physical action. But if it scales up, then in the end no one can stay out of it. A westerner becomes a target simply because he is a westerner, and a Muslim because he is a Muslim. No matter what an individual feels, you will be forced to choose sides. There will be a huge number of people caught impossibly in the middle. For instance, westerners who have converted to Islam. Or Muslims who are 'not Muslim enough'.

Each side will respond tit-for-tat, each will blame the other for being the first to sink to the worst kind of violence.
Ignorance is a universal ailment, and not limited to a particular country or a particular religion. We do acknowledge that there are a lot of westerners who feel for the sufferings of the Muslims around the world, but at the same time there are other westerners as well who rejoice at the same suffering and openly declare their desire for annihilation of the entire Middle East - of course excluding Israel. Similarly, there are Muslims who acknowledge these sympathetic western brothers, but there are other Muslims as well who consider all westerners to be enemies of Islam. This bad habit of generalization is prevalent on both the sides.

What is needed to be understood is that it is perceived to be a war against Islam, because there is a similarity to all the targets of the west which inevitably leads to the belief that there is a pattern - a pattern of extermination of Muslims. This particular ideology may not be applicable to every westerner, but it is to every westerner leader, but again there are exceptions to leaders as well. You are surprised at Muslims believing the west to be at war with them, but you don't seem to have any such reservations about the westerners living with the belief of Muslims trying to take over the world and kill every Jew, every Christian, every non-Muslim they can get their hands on.

I don't believe that every American, or every Britisher or every Jew is against Muslims, but there are people in those groups that are working day and night to create a negative image of Islam, and justify the killing of its followers. So, you do the math, and relate why Muslims have beliefs such as the ones you claimed.

You also mentioned about Muslims being a scattered community. Bro, if my country is attacked; and if I'm living on, practically, the other side of the world, I'll still feel targeted. Its not about being a Muslim, its just a human emotion - comes when you have a sense of belonging.
Reply

sister herb
08-22-2013, 05:05 PM
The so-called west needs usually enemy. Before islam it was the reds (communist) during the Cold War. Unfortunately the East too needs enemy - in this case muslims.

They are infidels - kuffaar - to be an enemy. It is easy to blame someone else - even when problems have cause by incoherence by islamic ummah.

It is always easier to blame others than look to the mirror and find out that reason to problems finds from our own actions.
Reply

sister herb
08-22-2013, 05:11 PM
Originally Posted by glo
You are a great example in how to practice forgiveness, sister herb. Not many would be able to live up to such an example. I'm not sure I could!

You are right, peace IS the only way!
How we say... Allah gives hard life to those He loves the most and whose He knows can carry it.

:D Allah gave me life I didn´t expect at all and I thank Him about it.

Allah made me pacifist!
Reply

Independent
08-22-2013, 05:37 PM
Originally Posted by Ali_008
This bad habit of generalization is prevalent on both the sides
This is very important and we need to fight against it. The trouble is, once things go past a certain point, it doesn't matter what any individual thinks. We will all be forced to choose sides. For many people, this point has already been passed. i don't have any desire to fight anyone.

Originally Posted by Ali_008
there is a similarity to all the targets of the west which inevitably leads to the belief that there is a pattern - a pattern of extermination of Muslims.
In the reply above from Abz, there are references to so many events in so many countries. This makes it very hard to reply without writing a book. Fundamentally I don't believe this view is correct - but I wholly understand that many Muslims do.

I remember I was in Turkey many years ago. I caught a bit of a tv programme that covered 3 world events of the time - Bosnia, East Timor and somewhere else I forget. My first thought was: how could they possibly see these unrelated incidents as connected? I knew then it spelt trouble. If this message has been put across in Muslim media for decades, then no wonder that's the way people think now. HOWEVER - it's not the way Muslims used to think when Islamic states held the military edge. There was no talk of conspiracies prior to recent decades.

Looking at the list from Abz - he is focusing on Islamic references only. You could just as easily construct a story of West versus Communism, or Britain versus France, Catholic versus Protestant etc, depending on which period you look at. Does the evidence really support the idea that Islam is the West's main target, rather than all these other conflicts?

if you take the US, the biggest wars in their history are (chronologically) the War of Independence, the Civil War, WW1 and WW2, the Korean War and the Vietnam War. Not one of these has anything to do with Islamic issues. Many of them are against other western countries. In what way can it be credible that the west has been acting in a single, unified way against Islamic targets, when by far the larger part of their wars have been against each other or other non Muslim targets?

Of if you go back in history, when Islamic states were militarily superior and the Ottomans were still expanding in Europe - at various times Venice and France allied with the Ottomans against other Western states. They did this even though there was very serious danger than the west would be entirely over-run by the Ottomans. It just does not make sense to see this a consistently pressed war against Islam.

The west's main wars have been against other western powers. (And for that matter, not a few Muslim wars have been against other Muslim powers). Although at times people call upon ideologies, I see no consistent pattern. And given the western electoral system, whereby who gets into power is difficult to predict, it's impossible to see how any form of secret agenda could be continued across so many governments in so many generations.
Reply

Junon
08-22-2013, 06:02 PM
Salaam

A shallow and naive analysis. Western powers have always been strongly opposed the 'third world' taking an independent course of development that doesn't benefit their interests. So they'll be against any ideology that doesn't benefit them whether that be communism, socialism or other forms of government (eg Islamic).

And contrary to what you say, policy made by powerful western states (like the USA) have been remarkably consistent over the decades when it comes to international affairs.

To save you the trouble Independent, the operative principle is

'How will this benefit me'
Reply

Independent
08-22-2013, 06:06 PM
Originally Posted by Junon
'How will this benefit me'
How is this is different from any state, at any time in history - Islamic states just the same? When did a state or empire ever have altruism as its number one principle?
Reply

Ali_008
08-22-2013, 06:07 PM
^^^ I agree with you, but during most of those wars, there wasn't an obsession of oil, was there? The aim may not be the extermination of Muslims, but it definitely is oil. Muslims are just a roadblock to it, because it is their monopoly. The west wants oil - total control over it, and that will only happen when they make those areas their territory.

How do they do that? Kill the citizens.

How do you justify that? Make it appear that killing them cleansed the world of social poisons.

How do you do that? Find a similarity, and make it stink.

In the process, if others are found to be sharing that similarity then turn a deaf ear to their cries, and as long as people sharing this particular similarity are being killed, blame it on that stinking common factor - in this case, it is Islam. In the chase of oil, the leaders of the west made Islam their enemy.
Reply

sister herb
08-22-2013, 06:22 PM
Of course the west wants oil and other natural recources what ever it is - even the ivory. Arab/Islamic countries should now to learn to process their natural recources and sell them to the west.
Reply

Independent
08-22-2013, 06:24 PM
Originally Posted by Ali_008
The aim may not be the extermination of Muslims, but it definitely is oil. Muslims are just a roadblock to it, because it is their monopoly. The west wants oil - total control over it, and that will only happen when they make those areas their territory
There is no doubt that oil has given the region an importance it would not otherwise have had. However, it's not as important as you suggest for several reasons:

1. 'Monopoly on oil' is an exaggeration
2. Not all the wars are connected with oil
3. The strategic importance of ME oil is in decline - especially since the major development of shale oil which may make the US self sufficient in oil in the next decade.

In terms of access to oil, the most important war was Gulf War 1 (the liberation of Kuwait) which was supported by most Muslim states. None of the other ME wars have resulted in increased access to oil, by the west or anybody else.

Above all, it needs to be understood that the west is the primary customer of ME oil. This should be a mutually beneficial relationship.

Also, if the west's primary motivation is oil (and there is some truth to this) then this is not an ideological war - it's a resource war. And it is not west v islam, but individual western states pursuing their own interests.
Reply

Signor
08-22-2013, 06:35 PM
Originally Posted by Independent
Of if you go back in history, when Islamic states were militarily superior and the Ottomans were still expanding in Europe - at various times Venice and France allied with the Ottomans against other Western states. They did this even though there was very serious danger than the west would be entirely over-run by the Ottomans. It just does not make sense to see this a consistently pressed war against Islam.

The west's main wars have been against other western powers. (And for that matter, not a few Muslim wars have been against other Muslim powers). Although at times people call upon ideologies, I see no consistent pattern. And given the western electoral system, whereby who gets into power is difficult to predict, it's impossible to see how any form of secret agenda could be continued across so many governments in so many generations.
Greeting to you Independent

I want to correct you a little bit,something not only for you but may be difficult for my fellow Muslims to understand.Concept of "Islamic State" only compromises of period from Rule of Muhammad(SAAWS) in Medinah to Last pious caliph and companion of Prophet(SAAWS) Ali(R.A),if you want to have a look at Real "Islamic State",Read each and everything about this period only from friends and foes of Islam,from Muslim to Non Muslim with non prejudiced attitudeThe rest of Muslim empires no matter how advanced or how mighty they had been are only Muslim states not Islamic States.

Thankyou
Reply

Independent
08-22-2013, 06:49 PM
Originally Posted by Signor
The rest of Muslim empires no matter how advanced or how mighty they had been are only Muslim states not Islamic States.
Thank you for the correction - it's very difficult not to make mistakes or tread on toes with these terms - but you're right, I should say Muslim states. However - if there really is an all-out, consistent ideological war between the west and Islam (which I am disagreeing with) there is no distinction.

Perhaps I am wrong - perhaps I'm not seeing something - but it should be possible to at least ask the question.
Reply

Signor
08-22-2013, 07:01 PM
Originally Posted by Independent
However - if there really is an all-out, consistent ideological war between the west and Islam (which I am disagreeing with) there is no distinction.
Ever heard of term "Clash of Civilizations",predicted by Arnold Joseph Toynbee,endorsed By Samuel P. Huntington and later By Dr Bilal Philips,All three have written there books on same topic with nearly similar title.Reading them will open some new doors.
Reply

Independent
08-22-2013, 07:29 PM
Originally Posted by Signor
Ever heard of term "Clash of Civilizations",predicted by Arnold Joseph Toynbee,endorsed By Samuel P. Huntington and later By Dr Bilal Philips,All three have written there books on same topic with nearly similar title.Reading them will open some new doors.
In terms of overviews i prefer authors such as Paul Kennedy (Rise and Fall of the Great Powers) and Nial Ferguson ('The War of the Worlds'), but all views are interesting.

Fundamentally, I find that an Islamocentric view of Western policy over the centuries simply leaves out too much history. In fact, almost all the important parts - until you get back to the Ottoman wars and earlier Muslim invasions (which obviously also don't support a western obsession theme.)
Reply

Abz2000
08-22-2013, 07:38 PM
herb....


Of course the west wants oil and other natural recources what ever it is - even the ivory. Arab/Islamic countries should now to learn to process their natural recources and sell them to the west.
Then they can only accept dollars or something similar which the fascists print to their hearts content, any indication of "we're going to stop accepting dollars and trade for gold" is like a declaration of war.

It's quite clear they've seen the truth as a threat to their upside down orwellian world of control over the masses,
Just that we're lagging behind in understanding it, and while they're turning the see saw upside down on us, we're still trying to get near the middle of it to level it out, maybe out of fear of being seen as aggressors.
It's quite clear they don't care much about how many tog us they have to upset or kill to achieve their agenda, but to give them credit, they do try to keep the masses pacified and not over upset via careful calulations and propaganda in case what they perceive as their side of the see saw starts pulling the other way.
Reply

sister herb
08-22-2013, 07:48 PM
Salam alaykum

Unfortunately also islamic world lives same Orwelian world, in same cycle. The leaders control masses. They too kill each others. I don´t see much differencies between the western world.
Reply

Abz2000
08-22-2013, 08:29 PM
Only that the so called "Islamic world" is not being governed by Islam, and Muslims admit this,Whereas the western world bathes in its degenerate ideals and feels the need to export its "perfect" vesrsion to those trying to escape from it in the "Islamic world".أَلَم تَرَ إِلَى الَّذينَ أوتوا نَصيبًا مِنَ الكِتٰبِ يُؤمِنونَ بِالجِبتِ وَالطّٰغوتِ وَيَقولونَ لِلَّذينَ كَفَروا هٰؤُلاءِ أَهدىٰ مِنَ الَّذينَ ءامَنوا سَبيلًاHast thou not turned Thy vision to those who were given a portion of the Book? they believe in sorcery and Evil, and say to the Unbelievers that they are better guided in the (right) way Than the believers!Quran 4:51-------فَتَرَى الَّذينَ فى قُلوبِهِم مَرَضٌ يُسٰرِعونَ فيهِم يَقولونَ نَخشىٰ أَن تُصيبَنا دائِرَةٌ ۚ فَعَسَى اللَّهُ أَن يَأتِىَ بِالفَتحِ أَو أَمرٍ مِن عِندِهِ فَيُصبِحوا عَلىٰ ما أَسَرّوا فى أَنفُسِهِم نٰدِمينَThose in whose hearts is a disease - thou seest how eagerly they run about amongst them, saying: \"We do fear lest a change of fortune bring us disaster.\" Ah! perhaps Allah will give (thee) victory, or a decision according to His will. Then will they repent of the thoughts which they secretly harboured in their hearts. Quran 5:52.......Only, some of us just try to pretend our way and the way of shayateen are the same.Saudi Arabia is not Islam or khilafah - get it?... I still recall some of the comments about brother anwar, so no love yet.......بَشِّرِ المُنٰفِقينَ بِأَنَّ لَهُم عَذابًا أَليمًاTo the Hypocrites give the glad tidings that there is for them (but) a grievous penalty;-الَّذينَ يَتَّخِذونَ الكٰفِرينَ أَولِياءَ مِن دونِ المُؤمِنينَ ۚ أَيَبتَغونَ عِندَهُمُ العِزَّةَ فَإِنَّ العِزَّةَ لِلَّهِ جَميعًاYea, to those who take for friends unbelievers rather than believers: is it honour they seek among them? Nay,- all honour is with Allah.Quran 4:138-139--------Not my fault that "edit post" discards all syntax and merges the whole post into one hotchpotch of Indistinguishable words, a bit like some of the members here.
Reply

Ali_008
08-22-2013, 09:01 PM
Originally Posted by Independent
There is no doubt that oil has given the region an importance it would not otherwise have had. However, it's not as important as you suggest for several reasons:

1. 'Monopoly on oil' is an exaggeration
2. Not all the wars are connected with oil
3. The strategic importance of ME oil is in decline - especially since the major development of shale oil which may make the US self sufficient in oil in the next decade.

In terms of access to oil, the most important war was Gulf War 1 (the liberation of Kuwait) which was supported by most Muslim states. None of the other ME wars have resulted in increased access to oil, by the west or anybody else.

Above all, it needs to be understood that the west is the primary customer of ME oil. This should be a mutually beneficial relationship.

Also, if the west's primary motivation is oil (and there is some truth to this) then this is not an ideological war - it's a resource war. And it is not west v islam, but individual western states pursuing their own interests.
The advancements in oil industry have been going on since Henry Ford invented the motor car. I think every country in the world has its own share of oil in its ground, but what makes the Middle-Eastern oil so special is the affinity that automobiles have for it. Believe me, there is oil literally under every inch of earth, but somehow its the Arab sands that most make it suitable for our requirements. The shale oil is just one of those advancements. Until and unless, you actually see it being sold on the regular market, you can be sure that we'll be relying on ME for the supply.

Secondly, as I mentioned before oil made Islam and westerners enemies. It started with oil, but they wanted full control, and they had to get the Muslims out of the way. They target Muslims, and if you say they don't then why is the western media so consistent in portraying Islam in the bad light? When there is some court case on the news, the reporter easily communicates both the sides plight, but when it comes to something involving some terrorist attack by Muslims, we just hear that those terrorists said "AllahuAkbar" and blew up. How about letting the viewer know that these terrorists are not working according to, but rather against the commandments of Islam? I am yet to see a reporter utter words such as "it was another crime by hooligans who claim to be working for Islam, and are defaming this religion of peace." As a matter of fact, anything that has anything positive about Islam is rather opposed and suppressed. You see movies and books like Thousand Splendid Suns, Dictator, Hurt Locker, and such that encourage hatred towards Muslims gain widespread popularity, but a movie like "Body of Lies" - which has Leonardo DiCaprio clearly saying that the Qur'an doesn't contain any verse that encourages killing of innocent civilians - is eclipsed with other ridiculous movies. Body of Lies is an awesome action thriller movie, gets a lot less attention than it deserves, and if you ask me, that's because it has pro-Muslim statements coming from the mouth of one of the most popular actors on earth.

West is the primary customer of oil. Customer being the keyword here. Don't you ever wish you never had to pay for the things you love? Food for thought
Reply

Independent
08-22-2013, 09:26 PM
Originally Posted by Ali_008
They target Muslims, and if you say they don't then why is the western media so consistent in portraying Islam in the bad light?
I wouldn't disagree with you that Muslims are often portrayed in a bad light - but not exclusively, there are plenty of attempts to show otherwise. In the UK I can see many sincere attempts to redress the balance, even if the overall image remains negative.

But consider the image of the west in Muslim media? It's even worse. The views of Abz (above) are far from unusual.

i regret these extreme views on both sides and they are leading us into wars and division that don't need to happen.

Originally Posted by Ali_008
How about letting the viewer know that these terrorists are not working according to, but rather against the commandments of Islam?
It's very difficult for the west to understand when individuals keep saying they are doing these things in the name of Islam. I have seen any number of debates in this forum about who is a 'real' Muslim. But for the west, they are what they say they are. Also, you have guys like Abz quoting Quranic verses that appear to endorse enmity into eternity. I don't know what to make of this. it's exactly what we've been told Islam does not do.

Originally Posted by Ali_008
As a matter of fact, anything that has anything positive about Islam is rather opposed and suppressed.
You might like 'Kingdom of Heaven' too, which takes a pro Muslim view of Saladin's capture of Jerusalem.

Originally Posted by Ali_008
West is the primary customer of oil. Customer being the keyword here. Don't you ever wish you never had to pay for the things you love? Food for thought
The main thing the west wants is open, competitive markets and free trade. This is a much cheaper policy, and far more effective, than invasions which, apart from the wholly justified liberation of Kuwait, have never resulted in increased access to oil for the west.
Reply

Abz2000
08-22-2013, 09:57 PM
But consider the image of the west in Muslim media? It's even worse. The views of Abz (above) are far from unusual.
Then the views of abz must have been "unusual" when he was going around handing out dawah books and anti war leaflets in London, just that Abz must have been struck a few chords when he started speaking out against illegal wars while calling for non-violence and arrested a few times under stupid premises with totally fabricated accusations and even sent to trial and fined despite CCTV evidence to the contrary, grown up in the palace of pharaoh and seen his corruption with his own eyes to make him realise that things aren't as chummy as they appear on the surface, maybe he's even been pushed offers to shift kilos of drugs by those whom he's previously identified as agents of influence in order to try and ensnare him but has somehow managed to disentangle himself despite the peer pressure laid on him. Maybe Abz just feels an enemy presence for reasons only he himself understands.
Reply

faithandpeace
08-23-2013, 01:21 AM
Jazakallah khair to some very informative posts on this thread. A united people is a people that is harder to control than a divided people. The West should not fear a united Islamic Caliphate unless they know that they--the West--is doing something wrong. It really is up to us as Muslims to be the best Muslims we can be insha'Allah because that way we are leaders by example. Enemies can kill us but they cannot kill ideas. Soldiers who have gone over to Muslim lands to kill Muslims have ended up converting to Islam themselves and then upon their return from service call out the injustices done against Muslims. This does seem to be a real test of faith. The enemies want us to falter and fail if even in just small ways. I loved the lecture given at the Eid prayer I attended. Its message was a simple one: don't give up the Salaat. They want us divided but at the end of the day we are all insha'Allah facing Makkah five times per day and communicating with Allah (swt) and standing shoulder to shoulder with our fellow brothers and sisters. Insha'Allah the enemies will never be able to stop this.
Reply

Abz2000
08-23-2013, 06:08 AM
The sons of the devil even used abz' Quran in the video game, now he "hates" their actions even more!-------Independent may be thinking "They hate us for our freedoms" because he heard it on the ministry of truth.----This representative of theirs summed up their understanding of "things" well, not that it's not nonsense- simpleton.--------"See, we love—we love freedom. That's what they didn't understand. They hate things; we love things. G W Bush—Oklahoma City, Aug. 29, 2002
Reply

جوري
08-23-2013, 06:57 AM
Who the heck cares what kaffirs think? They insinuate themselves here then accuse and tell you how it's according to their understanding which there's not much of!
Reply

faithandpeace
08-23-2013, 07:41 AM
This is why I object for the most part to the non-Muslims' involvement in our politics on this discussion board. If they want to debate Islamic politics, then they need to become Muslims first. We as Muslims do not have a united ummah or caliphate of our own, yet how can we talk about successfully building one when we are endlessly explaining ourselves to those who have no intention of ever joining us? There is a difference between being a member of something and being a guest with acceptable levels of social decorum for each one accordingly. Since I have been here I feel like Muslims are spending more time arguing over tragic situations from the Boston, U.S. bombings to Egypt's and Syria's crises to those who are here as guests and have no say whatsoever in our politics. I'm happy to hear what Muslims think we as an Islamic community need accompanied with understandings based on Qur'an and Hadith. It is my opinion that non-Muslims here as guests can listen and ask clarifying questions but their opinions on what Muslims or Islamic society need have absolutely no relevancy.
Reply

sister herb
08-23-2013, 08:06 AM
Originally Posted by faithandpeace
This is why I object for the most part to the non-Muslims' involvement in our politics on this discussion board. If they want to debate Islamic politics, then they need to become Muslims first.
Salam alaykum

Following same logic we, us muslims, should then become Christians first before we can discuss about political matters about Christian-majority countries? Because we are muslims, we should avoid talk here about politics of USA, UK, France, Germany or... (we should become Jews?) about Israel?

:D Sometimes you muslims get very interesting ideas to your heads!
Reply

faithandpeace
08-23-2013, 08:14 AM
No sister Herb, this is an Islamic board. This is not a Christian, Jewish, etc. discussion board. Why is this so hard?
Reply

sister herb
08-23-2013, 08:22 AM
Originally Posted by faithandpeace
No sister Herb, this is an Islamic board. This is not a Christian, Jewish, etc. discussion board. Why is this so hard?
Salam alaykum

It is hard when some members feels it so hard to listen opinions from outside of your religion. Not even all muslims agree with those political matters. Why it is so hard to you try to discuss with some non-muslim. If your knowledge is better than them, why you couldn´t lost some minutes to help others and increase they knowledge?

If non-muslims here really stress you, you better contact to admins and ask them to change the rules.
Reply

جوري
08-23-2013, 08:30 AM
Here's the church in involvement in Egypt's coup in videos

منقووول

طبعا لان كتير من المصريين ركن دماغه على جنب واستخدم مكانه فردة جزمه مقاس 45 اسود برباط مهما نقول ومهما نتكلم بالادله والبراهين والاثبتات القاطعه عن دور الكنيسه في الاحداث الاخير مش بيصدقونا ويقولوا كدابين لانهم اتعودو على الكلام بدون تفكير

جمعنا ليكم الراوبط ده دليل واضح وقوى على دور الكنيسه

ياااارب اللى عايز يعرف الحقيقه يفوق بقي

بالفيديو مسلحون داخل الكنيسة بالعباسية يطلقون النار على الشرطة

http://nahdanm.blogspot.com/2013/08/blog-post_8943.html

بالفيديو شباب الكنيسة يعترف باستخدام السلاح لمواجهة الشرطة

http://nahdanm.blogspot.com/2013/08/blog-post_8264.html

بالفيديو الشرطة تعترف بوجود أسلحة داخل الكنيسة المصرية

http://nahdanm.blogspot.com/2013/08/blog-post_6259.html

بالفيديو سليم العوا يتهم الكنيسة بتخزين السلاح

http://nahdanm.blogspot.com/2013/08/blog-post_2588.html

بالفيديو عمر عفيفى يتهم الكنيسة المصرية بوجود أسلحة بداخلها

http://nahdanm.blogspot.com/2013/08/blog-post_7670.html

بالفيديو تصريح خطير للقمص عبدالمسيح يهدد باستعمال السلاح

http://nahdanm.blogspot.com/2013/08/blog-post_5337.html

بالصور : الأسلحة داخل الكنائس المصرية

http://nahdanm.blogspot.com/2013/08/blog-post_4201.html

تغريدات تويتر حول سلاح الكنيسة المصرية

http://nahdanm.blogspot.com/2013/08/blog-post_7271.html
Reply

Junon
08-23-2013, 03:05 PM
Salaam

An update on the situation

Amended draft Egyptian constitution seeks to ban parties based on Islam

The amended constitution will be discussed by a 50-member assembly representing Egyptian society

After a month of deliberations and revisions, a 10-member technical committee entrusted with amending Egypt’s 2012 constitution has finished its task.

On Tuesday, the committee handed an amended copy of the constitution to Adly Mansour, Egypt’s interim president. The copy will be discussed by a 50-member committee representing major stakeholders in Egyptian society.

As revealed by Ahram Online on Monday, the committee decided to retain Article 2, which states that Islam is the religion of the state, Arabic its official language and Islamic sharia the main source of legislation. The committee, however, decided that Article 219, which gives various interpretations of Islamic sharia, be revoked. This reportedly came upon the request of most political and public institutions.

The article, which was added by the Islamist-dominated constituent assembly in 2012 under the rule of the Muslim Brotherhood, states that: “the principles of Islamic sharia include its generally-accepted interpretations, its fundamental and jurisprudential rules and its widely considered sources as stated by the schools of Sunna and Gamaa.”

The committee also opted to change Article 6 to impose an outright ban on the formation of political parties based on religion or on mixing religion with politics. The article in its amended form states that “it is forbidden to form political parties or perform any activities on the basis of religious foundations or on the basis of discrimination in terms of gender or sex.”

The new draft could lead to the dissolution of dozens of newly-formed political Islam parties – including the Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice party.

The committee’s changes will also alter Egypt’s electoral system, going back to an individual candidacy system which was in use in Egypt during most of the years of Hosni Mubarak’s presidency.

The committee also ruled in favour of eliminating the Shura Council, parliament’s upper house, and lifting a ban that prevented leading officials of Mubarak’s defunct ruling National Democratic Party from exercising political rights, including running in elections.

Committee member Magdi El-Agati commented that: “Stripping citizens of their political rights must be instituted through judicial order rather than by the national charter.”

El-Agati was the judge who ordered the dissolution of the NDP in 2011.

Egypt’s interim presidency also said it will announce the make-up of the 50-member committee, representing all layers of society “within days.”

Members of the committee will represent political parties, intellectuals, workers, farmers, syndicates, national councils, Al-Azhar, Egyptian Church, armed forces, and police, in addition to other public figures. Ten youth and women are expected to be among the members.

Most members will be chosen by their respective bodies. The Cabinet will choose the public figures of the committee. The 50-member group is assigned to come up with the final draft of the constitution within 60 days. The final draft is expected to be up for public debate within the same period.

The president is to later put the amended version of the constitution to a national referendum within 30 days from receiving the final draft. It will be effective upon public approval.

The 2012 constitution was suspended as part of the Egyptian armed forces’ roadmap for Egypt’s future following Islamist president Mohamed Morsi’s ouster on 3 July amid mass protests against him.

Egypt’s non-Islamist political forces have repeatedly argued that the suspended constitution was not representative of all layers of society and limiting many freedoms. They blame the majority of the Islamist members of the outgoing constituent assembly for ignoring their recommendations.

Al-Ahram

http://www.hizb.org.uk/news-watch/am...based-on-islam
Reply

Junon
08-23-2013, 03:12 PM
Salaam

Insightful commentary on whats happening in Egypt.

Egypt Massacre: Time to uproot the U.S. backed system

On the 14th August 2013 Egypt’s US-backed military regime started the process of bringing to an end the protests and sit-ins in support of Mohammad Morsi at various sites across the country. In doing so, a huge number of people were massacred.

There can be no doubt that the spilling of innocent Muslim blood as we have seen in the past few weeks is haram – a great sin in the eyes of Allah (swt).

Whilst many across the world have condemned these killings, the words of condemnation from Washington and London are mere hypocrisy. They approved the coup in which General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi removed Mohammad Morsi. America continues to give aid to the Egyptian military, merely cancelling some joint military exercises – wanting the army to bring the stability Morsi could not give, in order to secure American interests.

In the aftermath of these tragic deaths, we make the following points:

1. It is clear for all to see that the US-backed army leadership in Egypt never gave up power after the uprisings two and a half years ago – and has managed to preserve the same old system that served U.S. interests in the Mubarak era.

2. It should be clear to everyone that to assume political office under this US-backed system, without having any real power or authority means you will only ever be serving those with the real power in the state – which in the case of Egypt is the United States.

Moreover, it should be clear that trying to experiment by mixing Islam with a secular system only ever ends in disaster and humiliation.

3. Egypt now faces several choices and all but one of these choices would be a disaster in this world and in the akhira.

The first disastrous choice would be to legitimise the US-backed military-led system by endorsing the coup, as secular politicians have chosen to do.

The second disastrous choice would be by reinstating Morsi into the same Mubarak-era system he was in before. That would simply mean continuing the charade that pretends that the existing system somehow has Islamic legitimacy – as well as trying to hide the aspects of Islam that conflict with the existing system.

Both of these two paths would effectively legitimise a system that secures U.S. dominance over the people of Egypt – a secular system that is in place as an obstacle to the Islamic system and made to secure U.S. interest above all else.

The third disastrous choice would be to take up arms against the army and open an ‘Algerian-style’ fitna causing bloodshed and mayhem. This is not the Shari’ way to bring Islamic change but only a recipe for years of misery that would weaken the country in a way that could only please the enemies of Islam.

The only choice that could lead to salvation for this Ummah is to follow the Prophetic method of Islamic change working for a real Islamic society and state – the Khilafah.

This means to call for Islam comprehensively, distinctly from secular democracy, without hiding aspects of it, mixing Islam with secularism, or trying to implement Islam piecemeal.

Full article here

http://www.hizb.org.uk/current-affairs/egypt-massacre-time-to-uproot-the-u-s-backed-system
Reply

جوري
08-23-2013, 03:13 PM
They've already banned all Islamic articles which include
1- cursing of the prophets and condemnation of religion.(it is ok for you to do that now)
2- article 208 which impliments sharia according to Quran and Sunnah
3- making arabic the official language

a movie actress who has slept with everyone ilahm shaheen and the bango smoking druggie from Tamrud amended the articles that were drafted by judges and scholars..and the mufti from Al Azhar Ali Jumaa gave the OK to kill the protesters because he called them khwarij he denied that later but didn't give a statement otherwise whether he supported the killing or not, and one army general came forth saying the 80+ people he killed are well killing his conscience and wants Ali Jumaa to justify what he said to him.

if you are still not sure whether Mursi is the good guy or the bag guy then check your own conscience!

:w:
Reply

Junon
08-23-2013, 03:49 PM
Salaam

Secular liberals are in a bind.


Sherlock 363

claim: this is a coup.
Egyptian liberals: No, it is a revolution.

claim: it is a massacre.
Egyptian liberals: No, it is a fight against terrorists.

claim: Sisi is a dictator.
Egyptian liberals: No, he is a hero.

Fact: Mubarak is released, this is a counter revolution.
Egyptian liberals: Error 404 – Not Found !??!
Having said that this was one of the better responses from the secular liberal Guardian.


Military crackdown: Egypt's Tiananmen Square

The Egyptian military's bloody assault on its own people marks a point of no return for the government


Egypt's military-installed government crossed a Rubicon on Wednesday by sending in the security forces to clear the camps of demonstrators demanding the reinstatement of President Mohamed Morsi. Within hours, the contours of the landscape the country had entered became brutally clear: 235 confirmed deaths and the possibility of many more; running battles breaking out in cities around the country; a state of emergency; night-time curfews imposed on 10 provinces. The bloodshed caused by interior ministry troops opening fire with shotguns, machine guns and rooftop snipers on largely peaceful sit-ins took its first major political casualty on Wednesday evening. The leading liberal who had supported the military coup, Mohamed ElBaradei, resigned as acting vice-president. The streets around Rabaah al-Adawiya became Egypt's Tiananmen Square.

The Rubicon being crossed is clear: before Wednesday, there had been the possibility, however faint, that cooler counsel would prevail in the Egyptian military mind – that, with the release of Muslim Brotherhood leaders arrested on phoney charges, a way could be found to announce a national unity government pending fresh parliamentary and presidential elections. Formidable obstacles remained, not least the undoubted unpopularity of Mr Morsi's rule among a large section of the population and his non-negotiable demand to put the constitutional clock back to the eve of the coup that toppled him. The prospect of an early reconciliation between the two camps has now disappeared.

Spurred on by voices in the liberal and secular camp that the opportunity had finally arrived to deal the Muslim Brotherhood a mortal blow – the running banner on Egypt's private television coverage on the demonstrators was "War on Terrorists" – General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, the defence minister and head of the army, took the opposite course. Rejecting any hope of reintegrating Islamists into the political process, he has declared war on Egypt's largest political movement.

The government vowed last night that there would be no cabinet resignations, but with the departure of Mr ElBaradei, the liberal fig leaf has dropped off what has become full military rule. The day before these traumatic events, 19 of 25 provincial governors appointed were generals (17 from the military, two from the police). The idea even then that the military would take orders from a transitional civilian government appointed by them was far-fetched.

Today, military rule has been revealed for what it is, and anyone thinking that it will be temporary or last for just one month has got to be supremely optimistic. Calm and a national dialogue cannot be restored in that time. More likely are repression and further rounds of arrests – the Brotherhood leader Mohammed El-Beltagy, whose 17-year-old daughter was killed in the storming of the camps, was one of those detained last night – that will in turn provoke fresh protest. The defiance of the Brotherhood, and especially of those leaders who have lost family members, will be redoubled. There were already revenge attacks on Christian churches in upper Egypt by militants whom the Brotherhood do not and can not control.

The reaction of the international community failed lamentably to match the significance of these events. John Kerry, the US secretary of state, called last night for all sides to take a step back. He stated his strong opposition to emergency law, and repeated that the only solution will be a political one. These are all rhetorical statements, unless and until the US is prepared to cut its $1.3bn aid to Egypt's military. The state department said Wednesday evening that this was still under review. Mr Kerry's assertion that the political route was still open last night appeared to belie the basic facts on the ground – a military intent on crushing all expression of dissent, peaceful or not. International inaction in circumstances of the growing military crackdown in Egypt amounts to acquiescence. The bet the US is taking is that General Sisi will prevail. That is looking like a risky one.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/14/egypt-military-crackdown-muslim-brotherhood-protestors
Reply

Independent
08-25-2013, 12:55 PM
Originally Posted by tearose
I don't believe you are as naive as you are trying to come across, I hear Westerners talking about this issue all the time as well, it is all over TV in various European countries, how it can come as a surprise to you is beyond me.
Islam as an issue has shot up the agenda from the time of the 1981 Teheran Embassy hostage crisis onwards. But the Muslim media is at least as bad - if anything worse, because extreme anti western views are mainstream. Either way I hold my views from my own observations and no other agenda, whatever you think. I wish there was some oath I could take that you would believe me by when I say this.

You have to remember that there is another, perfectly logical narrative of key events. That Afghanistan really was invaded because of Bin Laden and 9/11, not in order to build some pipeline or other excuse. That WMD was an excuse for a war, but it was to finish off Gulf War 1, not the next epdisode in the Crusades. There is nothing strange or bizarre about this narrative. Everyone knew that the US would have to take action after 9/11.

In fact, if you look at the current situation, with US troops out of Iraq and on the way out of Afghanistan - potentially there will be no direct combat at all between Muslim and Western forces very soon. (Which is why I hope the west will not intervene in Syria, despite Assad's crimes.) The main wars Muslim wars are with other Muslims. As I have said elsewhere, the West's biggest wars by far have all been against non Muslim targets. This needs to be explained by anyone who sees a war against Islam as the main agenda.

Originally Posted by tearose
Muslims are one of only two groups who can be spoken of openly in hostile terms, the other one being travelling people
The Russians still get an unfavourable press, so do the Chinese at times, so do other immigrants groups who are seen as taking jobs etc. The situation is fluid and is the same in every country. For example in Egypt, it's not travellers who are the issue - Coptic Christians are. Prejudice varies from country to country, and from one age to the next. In the Uk, Muslims/Islam was not a serious issue 40 years ago. It's risen up the agenda because of actual events.

Originally Posted by tearose
people banning veils
I don't agree with France banning veils but you need to understand the context, and this is not just to do with Islam. France is far more proactively protective of its culture than some countries. For example, they have even tried to ban people using English words because it undermines French - also a ridiculous extreme in my view.

Originally Posted by tearose
this type of hostile attitude,
i don't agree with anti Muslim attitudes but you have to accept that anti western attitudes are at least as ubiquitous in Muslim media. Whereas in the west anti Muslim attacks tend to be by isolated individuals, we have been treated many times on tv to huge crowds burning effigies etc of western hate figures - and this goes back to 80s Iran (long before Afghanistan etc). It looks like the whole community is ready to come out and attack westerners at the drop of a hat. The only thing remotely similar in the UK are groups like the BNP but they are regarded as fringe extremists. When they put together a protest, they have to bus in people from all over the country.

I realise that these anti western events may be stage managed by politicians - however, the effect is cumulative. It doesn't matter whether you consider these people to be true Muslims - they say they are, and that's how the west is bound to regard them.
Reply

جوري
08-25-2013, 02:11 PM
Islam has been an issue for the church and the west since its inception. I don't usually read of this fellow more than the first line, as it is usually the summary for the fillers and meaningless words strung together to follow. History and politics are learned from books and the events that shaped it. This is an Islamic forum not a cesspool for much and trashy novels as dreamt up by those who are responsible for the trash and the muck in the world.
Reply

Independent
08-25-2013, 02:47 PM
Originally Posted by جوري
Islam has been an issue for the church and the west since its inception.
No - at the inception of Islam, the west didn't even exist as a concept. Also, Chuch and state are not the same thing.

In this post I'm talking about the last 50 years, not the last 1400. Obviously Islam was a much bigger issue when the Ottomans were hacking their way through central Europe - although this doesn't help your argument either. But since the disappearance of Muslim states as a military threat (the 18th century onwards), Islam has also slipped down the agenda as a topic of political importance.

Originally Posted by جوري
History and politics are learned from books and the events that shaped it.
You need to read some by people who aren't just echoing your own opinion.
Reply

جوري
08-25-2013, 03:11 PM
Originally Posted by Independent
No - at the inception of Islam, the west didn't even exist as a concept. Also, Chuch and state are not the same thing.
Hence I named them separately the church first then the west!
I can't be bothered with the rest of your drivel since you don't seem to understand the most basic of statements!

Originally Posted by Independent
You need to read some by people who aren't just echoing your own opinion.
It is because of people not like me that I have formed my opinion!

best,
Reply

sister herb
08-25-2013, 04:14 PM
I only can repeat this

May Allah sends peace to the all Egyptians and let this kind of unnecessary violence end as soon as possible. Preferably immediately.

Best,
Reply

Junon
08-28-2013, 02:23 AM
Salaam

Another comment piece

The Spreading Wings of Islamophobia in Egypt



The Orwellian features of the military takeover in Egypt have received attention, although the use of language to evade unwanted truth continues because incentives to do so persist. For this reason, Washington has remained unwilling to call what happened in Egypt on July 3rd as a coup, despite its unmistakable character. The nature of Egypt’s coup has daily become more and more evident. It is now clear that not only was the takeover properly described as coup, but it has turned out to be a particularly bloody coup that is now being reinforced by a total lockdown of opposition forces and democratic options, including even dissenting opinions.

It is true that the disgraced members of el-Sisi’s façade of civilian leadership, its so-called ‘interim government,’ continue to tell a compliant media in Cairo about intentions to restore democracy, revert to the rule of law, end the state of emergency, and carry forward the spirit of Tahrir Square in 2011. They even have the audacity to invoke their allegiance to the overthrow of Mubarak as ‘our glorious revolution,’ historicizing that memorable occasion when the whole world was inspired by this remarkable scene of Egyptian unity and fearlessness. They shamelessly make such a claim at the very moment when their own movement is extinguishing the earlier quest for a just society by this newly empowered and ruthless police and security establishment. The latest reports from Egypt suggest an atmosphere in which state terror prevails without accountability and with a writ so large as to reach even those anti-Morsi activists who were in the street on June 30th but now have the temerity to question the release from prison of Mubarak. Nothing more establishes the hypocrisy of the new Egyptian leadership than to insist on their continuity with the earlier democratic movement and their support for Mubarak’s release from prison and accountability.

Of all the Orwellian ironies is this double movement that deserves our contempt: public reassurances about fidelity to the January 25th Revolution of 2011 while arranging the official rehabilitation of Hosni Mubarak!

But less noticed, but at least as insidious, is resurgent Islamophobia on the part of the el-Sisa junta that runs the country with an unconcealed iron fist. Revealingly, Western media seems to avert their eyes when reporting on the suppression of the Muslim Brotherhood, and its supporters. Now according to the most recent reports the non-religious leaders of striking workers or independent journalists are being killed or criminalized if they offer even the mildest criticisms of the harsh oppressiveness that prevails in Egypt these days, and the justifications offered are that they are engaged in ‘Islamic’ politics. [See David D. Kirkpatrick, “Egypt Widens Its Crackdown and Meaning of ‘Islamist,’” New York Times, Aug. 25, 2013] In the security codes operative these days in Egypt, ‘Islamist’ is increasingly being used as a synonym for ‘terrorist,’ and neither is seen as entitled to the protection of law nor even treatment as a human being. It is hard to grasp this kind of extreme Islamophobia in a country that is itself overwhelmingly Muslim, and in which even its military leadership affirms its private adherence to Islam. Such an inner/outer confusion is more distressing even than the Orwellian manipulations of our feelings by Inversions of language: calling the peaceful demonstrator as ‘a terrorist’ and treating the terrorist acting on behalf of the state as a bastion of public order. Why? This inner/outer demonization of Islamists gives a sanctuary to the virus of genocide. We urgently need further insight into this disturbing discovery that the worst forms of Islamophobia seem currently emergent within the Muslim heartland.

There are other features of Egyptian developments that point in the same direction. None more illuminating than the failure of the Western media to observe that the new rulers of Egypt shockingly turned their back on the most elemental human entitlements of the Muslim Brotherhood, whose membership and sympathies extends to at least 25% of the country. Recall how strident and universally endorsed was the external Western criticism of Morsi for his failure to establish a more inclusive form of democratic governance during his time as president. Then compare with the deafening silence about the undisguised embrace of violent exclusiveness by the el-Sisi cabal. Somehow the repression of Muslims, even if taking the form of massacres, guilt by identity, and group criminalization, is reported upon critically as an overreaching by the government seeking in difficult circumstances to establish public order. The repressive policies and practices of the el-Sisi leadership are rarely identified, even tentatively, as a genocidal undertaking where affiliations with the most popular and democratically most legitimate political organization in the country is by fiat of the state declared an outlaw organization whose membership become fair game. Is inclusiveness only expected when the government is in the hands of an elected Muslim-oriented leadership? Is exclusiveness overlooked when the government moves against an alleged Islamist movement? What, we might ask, is the el-Sisi concept of inclusiveness? At present, the only plausible answer is ‘my way or the highway.’

http://www.zcommunications.org/the-spreading-wings-of-islamophobia-in-egypt-by-richard-falk.html
Reply

عابر سبيل
08-28-2013, 05:32 AM
They say that Islamists have brought the country back years, but now they have went right back to the oppressive state they were in prior. May Allah grant victory to the Muslims over these tyrants and their helpers who think that the masses are unaware of them. Their time is coming soon, Allah (swt) does not leave the oppressor for too long.
Reply

جوري
08-28-2013, 11:47 PM
The backwardness lewdness, moral degeneracy, economic and social decline has only ever been a result of secularists and their policies not 'Islamists' - what's astounding to me is the islamophobia they've managed to export to us so that now these mercenary govt. that are running the Muslim world have a large portion of their population subscribing to this whole 'war on terrorism' and parroting it- fourth generation war at its finest!
Reply

M.I.A.
08-28-2013, 11:53 PM
i dont understand, didnt you make a thread a while back about how great egypt was going to be after the upheaval of the old government.

i often skim read so i may be mistaken again...
Reply

جوري
08-29-2013, 12:00 AM
I don't understand what you want or what you're asking do you've a thread that's concerning to you? If you do then reply to it directly I am not open for personal grievances otherwise!

Best,
Reply

Junon
09-02-2013, 02:22 PM
Salaam

Another assessment on whats happened in Egypt.

Fashioning a Coup

I understand the outrage of honest citizens who went out to protest against Mohamed Morsi on June 30 only to have their efforts branded a coup. When you’re in the middle of a crowd of boisterous humanity that stretches farther than the eye can see, nothing exists outside of that overwhelming reality. The feeling of mutual recognition and collective empowerment erases all context and constraints. As well it should. You don’t go to a protest to think carefully or make necessary distinctions. But when you exit the protest and survey the big picture, you do have to face inconvenient facts.

One such fact is that the protests were unscrupulously appropriated and packaged for ends I’m pretty sure many protesters find abhorrent. A genuine popular protest and a military coup aren’t mutually exclusive. The massive protests of June 30 came in conjunction with a much larger scheme that began very soon after Morsi took office. This long term project by entrenched state elites seeks more than simply ejecting the Muslim Brothers from power, although that’s a highly prized outcome.

The overarching goal is to systematically reverse each halting step toward subjecting the state to popular control. As Leon Trotsky wrote long ago, in the aftermath of an uprising state managers will gradually push away the masses from participation in the leadership of the country. Popular depoliticization is the grand strategy.

The amazing breakthrough that was the mass mobilization of January-February 2011 shook the grip of the ruling caste on the Egyptian state and toppled its chief, Hosni Mubarak. But, alas, it did not smash that grip. The web of top military & police officers and their foreign patrons, the managers of the civil bureaucracy, cultural & media elites, and crony businessmen firmly believe that ruling over Egypt is their birthright, and its state is their possession.

The frightful specter conjured up by January 25 of power-rotation at the top had to be exorcised once and for all, principally by habituating Egyptians into thinking that regular political competition over the state is tantamount to civil war.

It’s soothing to believe that a popular uprising ejected an incompetent Islamist president. It’s not comforting to point out that a popular uprising was on the cusp of doing so, until the generals stepped in, aborted a vital political process, arrested the president, and proclaimed their own “roadmap” for how things will be from now on.

The constant equating of democracy with disorder and the positioning of the military as the stabilizer and guarantor, this is the stuff of the resurgent Egyptian counter-revolution.

Four Vignettes

In thinking through the trauma of Morsi’s ouster by military coup, I want to focus on four vignettes from the last year that complicate the too-neat story of a heroic popular uprising against an unpopular president. These are the August 24 anti-Morsi demonstrations; the broadening of the anti-Ikhwan coalition in October; the theatrical foray by General El-Sisi into the political arena in December; and the military’s Machiavellian appropriation of the June 30 protests to activate their coup d’état on July 3.

Together, the four snapshots show not a plot spun by a mastermind but an alignment of disparate interests to oust a common enemy: the first outsider president elected from below, not handpicked from above. The fact that this man belongs to the historically excluded counter-elite of Muslim Brothers was an excellent bonus. This made it easy for the ruling caste to draw on a deep reservoir of societal antipathy to the Ikhwan, gleefully casting Morsi as the crazy-theocrat-dictator-in-cahoots-with-the-Americans-and-Qatar-who-will-steal-your-secularism-and-ban-your-whisky.

Had it been Abdel Moneim Aboul Fotouh or Hamdeen Sabahy or any other outsider president, executing the ouster would’ve been a lot harder but the objective would’ve been the same. Outsider presidents with no loyalty to the ruling bureaucracy will fail. Insider presidents can stay, provided that they protect the purity of the ruling caste and secure its privileges.

August: Revanchism on the Fringes

At the time, these manufactured protests against Mohamed Morsi and fronted by Tawfiq Okasha and former MP Mohamed Abu Hamed were laughed off as the ravings of unhinged lunatics working for the security services. In hindsight, the event was the deep state’s first revenge thrust against Morsi for activating his presidential powers and wading into the farthest reaches of the deep state, firing intelligence chief Mourad Mowafi and other officials, and a few days later retiring the senior SCAF generals and fatefully promoting Gen. Abdel Fattah El-Sisi to Defense Minister.

The protests launched the campaign to depict Morsi and the Ikhwan as a sinister cult bent on “infiltrating the state.” This of course is an upgraded version of the Mubarak-era canard of the Ikhwan “takeover” of any institution where they won seats in fair-and-square elections, especially in professional unions. “Brotherhoodization of the State” also made its first appearance in August, quickly migrating to the center of political discourse and becoming a main battle cry of the June 30 mobilization.

Simply run your eyes down these 15 demands of the August protests mouthed by Abu Hamed to see the origins of the claims hurled against Morsi and the Ikhwan even now after his removal.

The protests ultimately drew a small turnout and were quickly forgotten, but they planted the seed that Mohamed Morsi was unpopular and not to be trusted with steering the Egyptian state.

October: Mainstreaming anti-Ikhwanism

Conventional wisdom has it that Morsi antagonized everyone with his Nov. 21 decrees that revealed dictatorial intentions. In fact, the anti-Morsi mobilization decrying his “monopoly on power” and “Islamization of the state” started a full month earlier in October. A large protest on October 12 dubbed “Accountability Friday” was organized in Tahrir to decry presidential performance after the first 100 days and demand a different constituent assembly. Panicked Ikhwan leaders bussed in their supporters for a counter-demonstration in the square. The sight of pro- and anti-Morsi protesters clashing violently that has become so routine now made its first shocking appearance on that Friday. Islamists tore down the Tahrir stage of Morsi critics, and the FJP headquarters in Mahalla were stormed and torched.

Once political conflict took on this street depth, the anti-Morsi coalition grew from a risible revanchist fringe to virtually the entire secular political class and its constituents. Hamdeen Sabahy, Mohamed ElBaradie, and Amr Moussa, who were left in the lurch after the presidential elections now found their footing as figureheads of facile opposition, indulging in reflexive criticism of Morsi rather than the hard work of scrutinizing his policies.

Another crucial player joined the bandwagon of the president’s adversaries in October: lots of judges. Morsi’s first attempt to remove Prosecutor-General Abdel Meguid Mahmoud (a constant revolutionary demand) threatened deeply entrenched Mubarakist judges and catapulted Ahmed al-Zend to loudly lead this faction. And the Supreme Constitutional Court as an institution objected to its place in the draft constitution, reprising its never-ending conflict with the Islamists since Mubarak’s ouster.

Media covered the political conflict in alarmist tones, and was a conduit for deep state messages. A major daily “leaked” a supposedly top-secret intelligence document reporting widespread discontent at worsening economic conditions “that threatens national security.” The language of “endangering national security” is a recurrent trope in all of Abdel Fattah al-Sisi’s speeches this year, including his 48-hour ultimatum of July 1. The October report warned that “citizens are eager for political participation, but fear single-party dominance of the political process.” Read: the Ikhwan are taking over.

December: The Military Speaks

Instead of containing the widening anti-Ikhwan coalition, Mohamed Morsi either underestimated or belittled the gathering opposition to his rule and chose to forge ahead. On November 21 he promulgated a decree that blocked the courts from dissolving the constituent assembly and the upper house of parliament. But rather than spend time persuading the public that he was confronting entrenched interests threatened by the set-up of new institutions, Morsi essentially dumped the decrees on us as you’d drop leaflets from an airplane on a bewildered civilian population. This left the arena wide open for his now diehard and empowered opponents to spin a narrative of a dangerous power grab by a dictatorial theocratic president.

The massive street demonstrations against Morsi in November & December crystallized the trends that surfaced in October and revealed a new element: serious friction in the police-president relationship. Police were ineffectual or absent when more FJP headquarters were attacked across the country. Morsi and Ikhwan powerbroker Khairat al-Shater suspected that police were making themselves scarce around the presidential palace to allow protesters to storm it. Feeling double crossed by Ahmed Gamaleddin, the Mubarakist Interior Minister that Morsi had appointed as a peace offering to the police fiefdom, Morsi and Shater panicked. In a disastrous decision, they sent their cadres to violently break up the protesters’ sit-in outside Ittehadeyya Palace on December 5.

At that moment, the deed was done. The security apparatus had the Ikhwan right where it wanted them: a sinister cabal that had hijacked the Egyptian state and sicced its ruthless private militia on anyone who dared protest.

In what has to be one of the more surreal scenes in the Egyptian revolutionary saga, leaders of the state’s coercive apparatus held a press conference in which General El-Sisi extended a formal invitation to all parties, including the president, to gather round the general’s magnanimous table for a healing national dialogue. Flanked by Gamaleddin, El-Sisi acted the sage monarch, calling his fractious flock to order.

The dialogue never took place because the presidency sputtered its objections, but the blunt message got through: the president was not in full control. Between December and June, El-Sisi struck out on his own, periodically issuing portentous warnings about the impending collapse of the state.

June: The Pageantry of a Coup

Another surreal scene was the military’s use of the June 30 protests to put on a grotesque display of military prowess. Fighter jets flew above Tahrir Square, not to intimidate the massed citizens into going home as in 2011 but to package their mobilization as an assent to military rule. The planes streaked colors of the Egyptian flag in the sky and drew giant high schoolish hearts (never underestimate the mawkishness of military PR). Helicopters dropped flags on the masses, lending a martial visual uniformity to an essentially diverse populace. Posters of General El-Sisi were held aloft. Police officers in their summer whites gleefully engaged in protest, some theatrically revealing Tamarrod T-shirts beneath their uniforms.

Aerial footage (only of the anti-Morsi crowds, of course) was sent to anti-Morsi television channels, which broadcast it to the tunes of triumphal cinematic music. Naturally, the protests of those icky other people didn’t exist. A military plane was put at the disposal of a film director who’s a fixture of the anti-Morsi cultural elite, presumably to make a movie about “Egypt’s second revolution,” as State TV swiftly christened the June 30 protests. The equally massive June 25 2012 protests against military rule are conveniently dropped from this emerging canonization.

The revolutionary invention of the Tahrir Square protest as an authentic political performance was recast as state-sanctioned spectacle.

The next act of the pageant was to control the message. Officials enlisted media personalities to banish the term “coup” and hound anyone who used it. A few hours before General El-Sisi’s declaration of the coup on July 3, Egyptian media luminaries were contacting foreign media outlets to insist that they not call his imminent announcement a coup. Military spokesmen and anti-Morsi activists repeatedly and defensively asserted that “15 million protesters” and “30 million protesters” had come out on June 30, not citing the source of their numbers. A former police chief called the numbers "unprecedented in Egyptian history." A giant message saying “It is not a coup” was reflected with green laser on the front of the Mugamma building in Tahrir on July 5.

It was quite the bizarre display of hysterical chauvinism. Government officials and establishment elites huffily insisted that the whole world acquiesce in their construction of reality. Foreign ministry officials rounded up ambassadors fromthe Americas to “explain” to them that it’s not a coup. Unnamed government officials were tasked with intensifying contact with US Congressmen in Washington for the same purpose. The Ministry of Defense in Cairo invited foreign journalists for more slideshows of the June 30 protests. And now youth activists are being sent on an official mission to London and Washington to “clarify for Western nations and the whole world that the June 30 revolution is an extension of the January 25, 2011 revolution.”

Rarely has a tenacious establishment been so keen to proclaim its own alleged overthrow. What that establishment wants, of course, is to turn the practice of the Egyptian revolution into a folkloric carnival of people filling Tahrir Square to wave flags and chant “Egypt! Egypt!”

Anti-Politics

With their July 3 coup, Egypt’s new military overlords and their staunch American backers are playing an age-old game, the game of turning the public against the ineluctable bickering, inefficiency, gridlock, and intense conflict that is part and parcel of a free political life, so that a disillusioned, fatigued people will pine for the stability and order that the military then swoops in to provide.

The acute but generative political conflict during Morsi’s blink-of-an-eye presidency was constantly amplified and then pathologized by the jealous custodians of the Egyptian state, with their repeated invocations of civil war and mass chaos to frighten people away from the vagaries of self-rule.

Like clockwork every few months, state agents facilitated the conditions for collective violence, dispatching provocateurs to demonstrations, removing police from the streets, standing back as communal violence broke out, resisting civilian oversight, and then ominously forecasting an impending breakdown of social order. The message is clear: left to your own devices, you will kill each other.

The ethos of collective self-confidence, cross-class cooperation, religious co-existence, and creative problem-solving on such magnificent display in the January 25 uprising spells the beginning of the end for the ruling military and civilian bureaucracy. So it had to be replaced with a manufactured mood of resignation and “realism,” the false realism that says: accept tutelage or face chaos.

As the recently self-designated “eminence grise” Mohamed ElBaradie summed it up, “Without Morsi’s removal from office, we would have been headed toward a fascist state, or there would have been a civil war.”

And that is the essence of the anti-political doctrine that worships order, fears political struggle, mistrusts popular striving, and kowtows to force majeure.

http://www.zcommunications.org/fashioning-a-coup-by-baheyya.html
Reply

Junon
09-05-2013, 12:00 PM
Salaam

An update

Fall-off in Egyptian protests as army stays silent on total killed or arrested

There is no agreement on figures for victims of the crackdown on the Muslim Brotherhood, but estimates of the detained range from 1,000 to 8,000


No one will say how many have died in Egypt. No one will reveal how many are in prison. There is no agreement on how many demonstrators turned out last Friday for the latest protest against last month's coup, in an atmosphere fraught with competing figures and misinformation.

A crackdown by the new military-backed government has decapitated the Muslim Brotherhood, the powerful Islamist organisation that ran this country for just over a year. As the police state is resurrected, authorities are walling off information on the number of deaths and detentions, and seeking to minimise what remains of the group's support.

Last Friday thousands took to the streetsacross the nation in thinning marches in support of the ousted president, Mohamed Morsi. The health ministry said six people were killed and more than a dozen injured when clashes erupted between protesters and civilian opponents in some areas, and marchers and police in others. Security forces directed teargas and sporadic gunfire at protesters in central Cairo.

But, in a sign of how state and private media have played down support for Morsi, Egyptian television networks mostly broadcast scenes of empty streets and quiet squares. The Muslim Brotherhood said one demonstrator was killed by police.

After weeks of protests against the coup, the government launched a full-fledged crackdown on 14 August, starting with raids on two pro-Morsi sit-ins that left hundreds of civilians dead. Security officials have arrested Muslim Brotherhood members every day since then, including the group's most prominent official still at liberty – Mohamed Beltagi – last Thursday. But the state has released only partial figures of arrests.

The health ministry stopped publishing a total casualty count from the crackdown on 17 August "because of the huge number of deaths", according to one ministry official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorised to speak to the media. At that point, more than 900 people had been killed in four days, according to the official tally.

When Egyptians are arrested, they typically face a hearing before a prosecutor within 48 hours to learn whether they will be detained pending possible trial, said Diana Eltahawy, an Egypt researcher for Amnesty International. Normally lawyers are allowed access to prosecutors' offices.

But since the coup the hearings for alleged Morsi supporters "are taking place inside the places of detention – police stations and prisons", as well as in riot police camps, Eltahawy said – and the numbers simply aren't getting out. Eltahawy said the number of detained has probably surpassed 1,000.

Another activist, Ahmed Mehrif, who directs a Switzerland-based Arab rights group, put the number closer to 2,000. And a western diplomat, who spoke on the usual condition of anonymity, said it could range from 3,000 to 8,000, most of them "rank and file" members of the Muslim Brotherhood, or Morsi supporters unaffiliated with the Islamist group.

In cities and towns across Egypt, police have burst into private homes in a dramatic effort to lock up Brotherhood officials. The scenes are reminiscent of the reign of the former autocrat Hosni Mubarak, when the Muslim Brotherhood was a banned opposition group. But the current crackdown on Egypt's Islamists is even harsher than in that era. Rights activists and lawyers say the detainees are also picked up at protest marches, or grabbed by vigilantes operating in neighbourhood "popular committees" who hand them to security forces.

One plainclothes police officer explained last week: "If we see someone suspicious, we look at their paperwork." He spoke as he patted down a pedestrian in downtown Cairo, before rifling through the man's wallet. If the "paperwork is normal", the people are allowed to continue on their way, he said. If not, they are taken into custody. "We make a judgment based on how he looks," the officer said of the men he stops.

General Hani Abdel Latif, the interior ministry spokesman, said last week that his forces had arrested 213 Brotherhood leaders since 14 August. That total did not include lower-ranking members. The government has also, in recent days, brought charges against some of Egypt's most prominent liberal activists for speaking out against police brutality and military rule.

Egypt's cabinet is now the only body authorised to issue comprehensive death and injury tolls, health officials said. But it has yet to do so. Cabinet spokespersons did not respond to multiple queries for updated figures.

At the health ministry, an adviser to the minister grew agitated last week when pressed for the number of people killed since security forces raided the pro-Morsi protest camps. "I do not have any numbers at all," said Mohamed Fathallah, after also saying that he had provided the cabinet with the latest figures last Saturday. "Stop pushing," he said. In another corner of the ministry, an official quietly voiced his opposition to the government's behaviour. "You won't find any co-operation at the health ministry," he mumbled, after struggling to dig up numbers. "A failure of a government."

London-based Amnesty International published a tally last month based on mortuary reports that put the death toll since 14 August at nearly 1,100 nationwide. The Brotherhood had said more than 2,000 people were killed on 14 August alone.

"The Muslim Brotherhood and supporters of the deposed president tend to inflate numbers quite a lot," said Eltahawy. And on the government side, "there is clearly a desire, especially since the dispersal of the protests, to show that the casualty toll was not that high," she added. "So in terms of getting accurate information, it is extremely difficult."

But the state is more forthcoming about certain figures. In his darkened office at the interior ministry, Abdel Latif, the spokesman, sat before a stack of papers that contained up-to-the-minute data on police casualties in clashes or revenge attacks. "Since 14 August, there have been 106 martyrs and 915 injured," he said, before breaking the numbers down by "officers", "conscripts" and "recruits". Local media reported that a police officer and a civilian were shot dead early last Friday in an attack on a Cairo police position, the second in three days.

On walls and street signs across Cairo's Nasr City district, former home to the sit-ins, signs of the anti-coup fervour have been swiftly and methodically covered up. Swatches of red and beige paint cover the phrases "Morsi is my president" and "Down with military rule".

Pockets of hundreds of protesters moved through Cairo last Friday, chanting "revolution, revolution", and holding the four-fingered symbol of their former sit-in outside the Rabaa al-Adawiya mosque. The pro-Morsi Anti-Coup Alliance has claimed that "tens of millions" of protesters have turned out across the nation, but there has been no evidence of such numbers.

Last Friday's crowds were small by the standards of Egypt's recent protests, and security forces had locked down the squares, thoroughfares and even mosques associated with unrest.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/03/egyptian-protests-muslim-brotherhood-military
Reply

Jedi_Mindset
09-13-2013, 07:40 PM
In the latest measure against pro-democracy supporters in Egypt, the coup authorities have banned 55,000 Imams from delivering the important Friday sermons.

The interim Minister of Religious Affairs, Mohamed Mokhtar Jomaa, said that the Imams do not have licences to deliver the sermons and that they are regarded as "terrorists who pose a threat to Egyptian security".

The move will, in effect, close 55,000 mosques as they have no alternative Imams available.

Commenting on this measure, Egyptian historian Mohamed al-Jawwadi said that this is the first time in Egyptian history that this number of mosques is being closed. "This man surpasses what Ataturk, who ended the Islamic Caliphate and founded secular Turkey, did when he fought against Islam at the beginning of the 20th century," he said.

As most Egyptian Muslims, either religious or secular, attend the Friday sermons, the coup government believes that Imams have the opportunity to affect the congregation's emotions. Most, the minister claimed, will then attend anti-government demonstrations.

Since the coup which ousted President Mohammed Morsi in July, Egyptian security forces have attacked several mosques and attempted to prevent the Friday prayers completely in order to undermine the efforts to begin anti-coup protests. Thousands of protesters have been killed by security forces and the thugs which support them.

http://www.middleeastmonitor.com/new...-55000-mosques
Reply

جوري
09-13-2013, 08:35 PM
Yup.. we've been occupied for sometime but now it is out in the open!
Reply

Junon
09-17-2013, 10:08 AM
Salaam

This is an excellent counter narrative to what happened in Egypt.

Reply

Abz2000
09-17-2013, 09:38 PM
Interesting how they (the American backed military) chose the date 3 july, the next day July 4 - rather than asking fundamental questions about their government's role in this internationally illegal act, Americans all over the land would be celebrating the overthrow of the British government and independence from it - and their minds would be subconsciously making a positive association with a coup their government controlled. Worse still, Obama could be out their praising the military heroes who removed the despots.

Maybe just a coincidence, though it's difficult to believe that politicians doesn't take sensitive dates into account before acting. And even more difficult to believe that the puppet military would even move forward without a positive green light from their masters at the pentagon - who always plan and counter plan before staging global events.

Anyways, they can go screw themselves - or hang themselves in rage, because Allah's plan includes theirs.
Reply

Junon
09-18-2013, 08:59 PM
Salaam

Another update


Egypt: Frenchman dies in police custody amid rising tide of xenophobia

Jailed Canadian pair on hunger strike while Syrian refugees bear brunt of anger towards foreigners in wake of Morsi ousting




A French national has died in police custody in Cairo and two Canadians have begun a hunger strike to protest at their month-long detention amid a rising tide of xenophobia and nationalist fervour in Egypt.

Elsewhere, two Syrian refugees were killed by Egyptian coastguards while trying to flee the country by boat, while a Swiss national has been arrested on suspicion of espionage after being caught in possession of a toy plane.

Frenchman Eric Lang, 49, a teacher, was beaten to death by fellow inmates in a Cairo police station last Friday. A longterm Cairo resident, Lang had been held by the police since 6 September after failing to produce valid residency papers. Initial reports suggested Lang was arrested for flouting Cairo's curfew, which has been in place since the brutal killing of up to a thousand supporters of the ousted president Mohamed Morsi on 14 August sparked a wave of unrest across Egypt, but his family's lawyer said that he was arrested during the day.

News of Lang's murder came as two Canadians announced a hunger strike to protest against their continued incarceration without charge in an Egyptian prison. John Greyson, a renowned Canadian documentary film-maker, and his companion Tarek Loubani, a doctor, were arrested during the unrest in Cairo on 15 August after asking at a police station for directions, according to friends.

Shortly afterwards, they called a colleague in Canada. "They said: we're being arrested," Greyson's sister Cecilia said. "And then the line went dead."

The pair were on their way to Gaza, where Loubani planned to teach local doctors in a training programme that Greyson had wanted to document on camera. Instead, they have spent 33 days in jail without charge, much of it in a cramped cell containing 36 other inmates, Cecilia Greyson said.

The pair's situation has become a cause célèbre overseas, and Alec Baldwin, Arundhati Roy, Ben Affleck, Charlize Theron and Michael Ondaatje are among 135,000 to have signed a petition calling for their release.

While the precise circumstances surrounding their and Lang's arrests are unknown, their treatment follows a spike in xenophobia and nationalism in Egypt that was provoked by the overthrow of Morsi in early July.

Suspicion of foreigners is by no means unprecedented in Egypt, but it has heightened this summer as Egypt's new government and its backers across state and private media began to demonise Morsi and his allies as anti-Egyptian terrorists backed by an unlikely range of foreigners, from Hamas to Barack Obama.

Prosecutors accuse Morsi of colluding with Hamas during Egypt's 2011 uprising, in charges that paint Morsi and his Muslim Brotherhood as foreign interlopers who act without Egypt's national interests at heart. In a similar vein, Egypt's flagship state newspaper, al-Ahram, has run front-page stories claiming that Morsi's Brotherhood were plotting with the US to divide up Egypt. One private newspaper even claimed that Obama was himself a member of the Brotherhood.

Some television chatshow hosts have fanned the flames on a nightly basis, vilifying western governments and journalists for failing to give wholesale approval to the army's removal of Morsi, which had widespread public approval within Egypt's borders.

"America and Britain have a plan to pay the Muslim Brotherhood so that the country will be divided – one piece to Palestine, another to Libya and another to the Christians, so that we'll have a war for 50 years," Salah Zeyada, a governor of a province in central Egypt, said last week, expressing a commonly held sentiment.

A British resident in Cairo for nearly three decades, Cathy Costain said she had never personally experienced xenophobia since arriving in 1986, now or in the past. But she said that anger towards foreigners from some television hosts is now "way beyond anything I've seen before", and added that the treatment of Lang, Greyson and Loubani was unusual.

"The teacher who's died, and the journalists who are in prison – it used to be that the authorities would try to make the problem go away as quickly as possible," said Costain, a charity worker. "But it seems like they are trying to make an example of them – which is quite scary."

There are also concerns about the effect such events will have on foreign investment and tourism, which has already fallen drastically since the 2011 uprising.

Angus Blair, an economic and political analyst at Cairo's Signet Institute, said that while Egypt remained an attractive investment opportunity for overseas businesses, such security incidents would prove off-putting to investors.

"It's one extra piece of information that makes Egypt less likely to be seen as a good investment – part of the drip-drip-drip of bad news," said Blair.

Syrian refugees have borne the brunt of the xenophobia. Tawfik Okasha, a reactionary television chatshow host, has called on Egyptians to arrest any Syrians they find in the street – mostly because Syrians have become unfairly associated with the now widely hated Brotherhood during the dying days of Morsi's presidency.

Warmly received before Morsi's ousting, some Syrians report an increase in xenophobic street harassment, others greater job insecurity. One man claimed his children were not allowed to register at a state-run school because of their Syrian nationality. Another was taken to a police station by a taxi driver after getting in his cab to go home. Many are now fleeing their second country in as many years.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/18/egypt-frenchman-dies-syria-morsi
Reply

جوري
09-19-2013, 12:22 PM
Originally Posted by Junon
was beaten to death by fellow inmates in a Cairo police station last Friday.
that's the police's story but we all know that he was killed by the police who along with the army have been raiding delga and kirdasah to round as many civilians as possible and raid and kill as much as possible for their anti coup stance!

Originally Posted by Junon
which had widespread public approval within Egypt's borders.
another lie.. they can makeup any numbers they want, google earth of the june 30th 6 hour govt. sponsored coup says otherwise of their number!
Reply

Junon
09-26-2013, 06:49 PM
Salaam

Another comment piece

Mourning Chile’s coup, ignoring Egypt’s

The fortieth anniversary of the slaying of Allende has exposed some double standards among human-rights groups.


Forty years ago today, on 11 September 1973, the newly re-elected president of Chile, Salvador Allende, was holed up at La Moneda Palace in Santiago. As the AK-47 in his hand indicated, he knew what lay ahead. Senior military figures, with Major General Javier Palacios to the fore, were coming to kill him.

At about four o’clock that afternoon, the 64-year-old Allende was busy fighting back, by all accounts, shooting Palacios in the hand; but the officers were soon to overwhelm him. Once they had killed Allende, they riddled his body with bullets and beat his face in with a rifle butt.

The Chilean coup d’etat, backed by the Commie-fearing US, which clearly didn’t want a socialist nation near its doorstep, had been brewing for some time. Originally, a military takeover had been planned in 1969 in the event of Allende, the leader of the socialist Popular Unity party, being elected to power in 1970. That Allende did win the election that September, and the generals did not respond, was due, in the main, to the balance of social forces. Simply put, the Chilean middle classes and bourgeoisie, who might have been expected to support a coup, were benefiting at the expense of foreign capital. And this, as it happened, was a result of the newly elected government’s decision effectively to repatriate and nationalise lucrative industries, especially copper. In such circumstances, a coup would have proved deeply unpopular.

But by the next election, in September 1973, the terrain had shifted. A long-term US-led blockade – payback for Chile’s expropriation of foreign capital – and internal agitation from the Christian Democrats and the right-wing National Party, had led Chile near enough to the brink of a civil war. Allende’s victory in the presidential elections on 4 September 1973, something which he was almost surprised by, pulled the trigger. The generals executed their long-standing plot. And a democratically elected leader was deposed.

Forty years on, there has been no shortage of melancholy commentaries to mark this dreadful anniversary. And no wonder. The reign of General Augusto Pinochet, Allende’s successor, represented the bloody, brutal continuation and consolidation of the coup. This involved purging Chilean society of Allende supporters, a practice that has left many in Chile with no idea of what happened to friends and family. On the eve of the fortieth anniversary, Amnesty International released a statement to remind people of this: ‘Thousands of torture survivors and relatives of those disappeared during General Augusto Pinochet’s brutal regime are still being denied truth, justice and reparation.’

For many in left-ish, liberal circles, the anniversary has also provided an opportunity to attack America. After all, America’s involvement in the Chilean coup is now largely accepted as fact: the CIA backed the generals financially, strategically and militarily. For the legion of critics of the US, the date of the coup is just too serendipitous too ignore. This coup, ‘the other 9/11’, indeed the first 9/11, exposes just how nefarious America’s own foreign policy has often been, they say. ‘Forty years on, we should not forget the bloody birth pangs of neoliberalism that serve to underline capitalism’s violent streak’, writes one radical. Another says: ‘As we approach 40 years since the devastating events in Chile, and a dozen since the horrific attacks of 2001, we must remember that to truly honour the memory of all those who lost their lives in the fight for democracy, we must uphold the principles of freedom and equality that democracy represents.’

Yet here’s the big fat fly in the righteous ointment - the principles of democracy are not only demeaned by Western leaders; they are demeaned by those in liberal circles, too. Because while it’s all very well drawing out an arbitrary, date-based analogy between the Chilean coup and 9/11 to expose the American state’s selective attitude to atrocity, a more pertinent parallel is to be drawn between the Chilean coup and one of rather more recent vintage: the Egyptian coup d’etat on 3 July of this year. And on this, too many who have been quick to recall the anti-democratic iniquity of the Chilean coup have remained ambivalent at best.

The double standards are striking. Like the coup in Chile, in Egypt an elected president, Mohammed Morsi, was deposed by the military (he wasn’t shot to death like Allende, but he is being detained in a ‘secret location’ awaiting trial on trumped-up charges). Like the coup in Chile, the military is now purging the upper echelons of Egyptian society of Morsi supporters, with many of his ministers now under house arrest. Also like the coup in Chile, the army has killed many hundreds of Morsi supporters in an effort to quell opposition.

And yet, from the left-ish and liberal media and campaign groups… not very much. Amnesty International, which has made great play of the fortieth anniversary of the Chilean coup, has proven itself reluctant to condemn outright the Egyptian coup and has even spent some time demonising the protesters against it as armed and dangerous. From others, at best there has been criticism of the excess of the Egyptian military, but very little on the usurpation of a democratically elected ruler.

Indeed, it is revealing that in all the worthy commemorations on the anniversary of the Chilean coup, few if any have drawn attention to the current situation in Egypt, absurdly described by US secretary of state John Kerry as an attempt to ‘restore democracy’. Genuine supporters of freedom and democracy ought to recall with anger what happened in Chile four decades ago. But we also need to recognise that those ideals are being debased in the present, too. Some coups are definitely not better than others. Remember Chile, yes, but let’s talk about Egypt as well.

http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/chile_and_egypt/14018
Reply

Junon
10-07-2013, 12:54 PM
Salaam

Another update


Egypt: dozens of protesters killed as rival factions tear Cairo apart

Opposing rallies to commemorate Egypt's participation in 1973 Yom Kippur war flare into day of violence across the country


At least 51 people died in clashes across Egypt as the country's two largest political factions gathered in rival commemorations of Egypt's participation in the 1973 war with Israel, a day of deep significance for many Egyptians.

Both opponents and supporters of the country's ousted president, Mohamed Morsi, rallied in their thousands – ostensibly to mark the 40th anniversary of the Yom Kippur war which is viewed in Cairo as an Egyptian victory, despite ending in a stalemate that favoured Israel.

But rather than emphasising Egypt's unity, the different messages conveyed by each faction's demonstrations underscored divides. Morsi's supporters, whose marches filled highways in west Cairo, used the day to protest against his ousting, while his opponents took to Tahrir Square to praise General Abdel Fattah el-Sisi's role in his overthrow. Deadly violence flared when tens of thousands of Morsi supporters tried to reach Tahrir Square. Soldiers, police and armed vigilantes blocked their path and started firing.

Arriving in west Cairo's Dokki suburb around 3pm, the marchers were met first by teargas, then rubber bullets and then live rounds, according to one witness who was at the front of the march.

"It was three groups of armed people – police, army, and residents – attacking helpless protesters, who didn't even do much to fight back," said Mosa'ab Elshamy, a photographer known for his pictures at Cairo clashes. "Today's march was made up largely of families, lots of women, lots of children. Sometimes marches take things into their own hands, start trouble, break something. But today's march was really remarkably peaceful until the police just shot at them without any kind of trigger."

Some reports suggested that a number of marchers carried firearms, but Elshamy said the protesters, who included hardcore football fans unaffiliated with Morsi's Muslim Brotherhood, simply held their ground for three hours – throwing stones and burning tires – before retreating.

He added: "As a couple of people were running away, they were gunned down, and they left quite a trail of blood."

Opponents of the Muslim Brotherhood argued the Islamists and others had sought a violent response in order to garner sympathy internationally, or to gain concessions during negotiations.

"They are trying to make trouble everywhere so that at some point, the deal will be: fine, stop the trouble, what do you want?" Alaa al-Aswany, one of Egypt's best-known authors and a fierce critic of the Brotherhood, argued in the buildup to the celebrations.

As the day wore on, Cairo became a tale of two Tahrirs – Tahrir Square in the east, where army helicopters flew over pro-military bands, and Tahrir Street in the west, where police and secular locals fired bullets and teargas on the pro-Morsi marches.

The juxtaposition highlighted Egypt's ideological divisions. "Today feels like a second victory," said Mohamed Abdel Aziz, a cleaner wearing a picture of Sisi around his neck. "We feel like we have won our country back from a gang that doesn't belong to Egypt."

Across town, protesters carrying yellow placards – in memory of those who died at several summer massacres of Morsi supporters – had a different idea about what the day meant. "Today is about saying no to the military coup, and bringing back liberty," said Saber Nafi, a pro-Morsi journalist.

What had been a festive afternoon quickly soured, with gangs of vigilantes and plain-clothed policemen in some streets attacking people suspected of being a foreigner, a journalist or a Muslim Brother.

Two liberal politicians – including Khaled Dawoud, a one-time spokesman for Egypt's main secular coalition – were attacked by Brotherhood supporters this weekend. Dawoud was spotted while driving through central Cairo, hauled from his car, and stabbed in his hand and twice in his chest. He is now recovering in hospital.

Clashes were reported in several other neighbourhoods in Cairo and across Egypt, though much of the country remained calm. Some Egyptians expressed frustration at their fellow citizens' overbearing nationalism, and at being pulled between what they feel to be two sides of the same authoritarian coin: the army and the Brotherhood.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/06/egypt-cairo-morsi-yom-kippur
Reply

Junon
10-09-2013, 08:27 PM
Salaam

More analysis. Quite long but well worth reading

The Return of Mubarak’s Children

The children of Mubarak have returned.

It would be foolish to believe that Mubarak spent 30 years of ruling without permeating every facet of Egyptian bureaucracy, media and economy with like minded people. Of course, the people are not devotees to the cult of Mubarak, but they are old guard Secular Nationalists from the post-colonial era of the 1950s in the Muslim world. These are known in Egypt as the ‘felool’.

They have made their nation their idol, and view religion and politics to be separate things, albeit with a few cultural values left to placate the Muslim masses. Mubarak was from that era, and was a product of it.

But after being forced to retire their former frontman Mubarak, due to popular protests, and grudgingly accepting elections that, despite their best efforts, saw the victory of Mohammed al Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood (MB), the Secular Nationalists have risen again.

But how did they return? Simple, they never left. The Army, the Interior ministry, the Judiciary and the media were all under safe ‘lock and key’ by thousands of Secular Nationalists.

Therefore, the aftermath of the election victory by Morsi was easily controlled by them. They limited his power and ensured that the main ministries (energy, oil, justice and the interior) were so hard to govern, the services were brought to a virtual standstill. This was of course, part of a simple (and not surprising) plan to make the Egyptian people regret their choice.

Energy deliveries went missing, mysterious armed gangs attacked supplies, felool managers neglected their work, workers were encouraged to go on strikes, or do work at a slow pace - and consequently the people experienced massive supply disruption.

Throughout 2012 to 2013, the media and ‘underground’ (but curiously very well funded and public) ‘rebellion’ groups incited near constant, and in many cases violent, anti-Morsi demonstrations. These had the effect of causing near constant disruption to the Egyptian economy and daily life. The Police were strangely nowhere to be seen for most of the time.

The Interior ministry (who controls the police), vacillated between being completely negligent, and on the odd occassion, brutal (though not as much as they could under Mubarak or SCAF). This had the effect drastically reducing security on the streets, causing a public perception of lawlessness, while at the same time allowing the occasional news story of police brutality to be seized upon to put Morsi in a bad light. The propaganda against him became so ridiculous, that if it were true, it would make Morsi the first man in history to create a police state, with no police!

The public Police presence was nothing like their presence before Morsi; they allowed MB offices to be burnt, and even the presidential palace to be attacked. It got so bad, the MB had to create their own civilian protection force just to protect their offices. Of course, the Felool/Liberal media were just waiting to use this as an example of Morsi becoming ‘tyrannical’ and attempting to ‘dominate egypt’ with his own ‘militia’.

The only people Morsi could trust were the MB members (and some allies), and so the only way for him to make any improvement against the constant disruption to services by the Mubarak old guard, was to appoint MB members and allies to positions of power within the Egyptian civil service. Again, this was seized upon by the Mubarak old guard and the Liberals as more ‘proof’ that Morsi was trying to take more power for himself. Of course, they could criticise him for the rapidly declining services if he did nothing.

The Judiciary consistantly challenged the MB and Islamic candidates, by disqualifying the top two, the MB election candidate Khairat al-Shater (a successful businessman, and relatively charismatic leader), and Hazem Abu Ismael, a strong Salafi and anti-american, but curiously they were happy to let through the uncharismatic, and politically inexperienced back-up MB candidate, Morsi, who they knew wouldn’t be as effective. The evidence for this can be seen when we consider that Shater was disqualified for falling foul of a law requiring an absence of being in jail 6 years prior to the election, but Morsi wasn’t – despite being sprung from jail in 2011, and hadn’t even finished his sentence!.

The Judiciary then ordered the dissolution of the fairly-elected (and MB/Nour Party majority) People’s Assembly, and continued to oppose Morsi at every turn. The Mubarak-era judiciary even (to no surprise) acquited their fellow felool in the police accused of attacking protestors in the 2011 ‘revolution’, but Morsi got the blame by the victims families and the media for not prosecuting the accused. Again, to get any work done, he had to take enough powers for himself to do so – which of course, meant getting depicted as an aspiring dictator by the Felool/Liberal media for his troubles. His later attempts to fire 3000 members of the Judiciary were also quashed by Felool/Liberal media incited ‘outrage’. There was no winning for Morsi here.

Of course, while the media attacks on Morsi were permitted, the judiciary didn’t tolerate any criticism of itself, and demanded the prosecution of some journalists and politicians for ‘insulting the judiciary’.

Despite the many compromises Morsi did with the Army, USA, the Secularists and the Christians, any hint of laws sympathetic to Islam was outright rejected and resisted. It was as if the MB and Salafi majority were only allowed to contribute laws which the small Secular minority approves of. When the Secularists didn’t get their way (which was 100% of their way), they walked out of the drafting of the constitution (yes, all 11 of them – out of 100 ELECTED members). Secularists claim that people may say that having a constitution based upon Islam would not represent the 10% Christian minority. But curiously, none of the Secularists in France argue that the French constitution does not have any representation for the 10% Muslim minority there!

Western Democracies do not allow their people to choose the ideology of the state, or even make major changes to the constitution – once Secular Liberalism gets into power, the people are only allowed to choose the leader. That, in of itself is not a problem, but Liberals demonstrate their hypocrisy when they accuse ‘Islamists’ for merely desiring the same. At least the ‘Islamists’ (i.e. the modern term for what was called a normal Muslim for the last 1,400 years) gave the people a choice by asking them to elect a committee to write the constitution – which is more than can be said for the current Secularist government of Egypt.

The Egyptian people elected the Egyptian People’s Assembly, which was meant to be their representation in a democracy. But Secularists and Liberals don’t believe in real democracy, and only call for democracy when it suits their interests (i.e. Nationalism and/or Liberalism). And when Democracy fails to give them the result they want, they are perfectly happy to scrap it, use violence and repress others – as the Egyptian coup now incontrovertibly demonstrates - again.

Of course, with regards to Egypt, there was no way Morsi or the MB could win – and this was of course, the point. Just like what the USA had done to popular Communist president Allende of Chile, Hamas of Gaza, and Prime Minister Mossadeq of Iran (who like Morsi, mistakenly believed the U.S. was a quiet supporter to his cause, all the way up until the day the CIA executed the coup!). It is a well known policy of Western Liberal regimes to bring a country that dares to elect leaders it disapproves of, economically and politically to its knees, then overthrow them – Hamas of course is still a work in progress.

The MB spokesman Gehad mentioned some of these problems that were faced by the MB in Egyptian politics here.

The Liberals (or the second-wave post-colonial Secularists, as I call them), only represent a very small minority in Egypt, reacted fanatically against even the slightest possibility of a return of Islam to holistic implementation. They came to the natural conclusion that they were ideologically closer to the Mubarak-era Secular Nationalist felool, then they were to Muslims who desire a regime that represents the requirements of their belief. And they acted accordingly, joining forces and media resources, to attack Morsi and the MB whenever possible, accusing him of being ‘fascist’ and desiring a totalitarian state like Iran – which is ironic coming from Egyptian secularists and liberals, considering Iran has a better democratic system than Egypt ever had!.

F(el)ooling the Egyptian People

Of course, the Army were still visible in the public eye until winter 2012, having managed to hold full control over their economic holdings in Egypt (estimated by some to be 40% of the Egyptian economy), and they retained control over all foreign policy matters, and the ARMY reformed SCAF into the National Defence Council (NDC), of which being in a deliberate military majority membership, Morsi was not the controller of.

They then used their resources to execute a simple plan. The head Tantawi had grown unpopular and outlived his usefulness, so they arranged with Morsi to retire him, and put in place a man that the army had groomed for the position, General Abdel-Fateh Sisi, known for his infamous implementation of ‘virginity tests’ on female protestors during SCAF rule. General Sisi had from day one tried to get Morsi’s trust, by claiming he was a ‘pious Muslim’, whose wife ‘wears a face veil’. Morsi was easily fooled and lured into a false sense of security, but whether he was fooled or not would make no different to the SCAF plan. Tantawi would be retired, and the Army would issue a statement that it was receding from politics – yet absolutely nothing would change, except that the Egyptian people (and Morsi) would naively believe that full power now resided in Morsi’s hands.

The fact that the Army always had full control over Egypt was clear when Morsi attempted to opening up diplomatic relations with Iran with the possibility of forging a mutual alliance, and when he promised to help the Muslims of gaza by opening up the Rafah border, but was clearly prevented from achieving anything except goodwill gestures. No sooner had he met with Hamas leaders in summer 2012 to discuss easing the Israeli embargo, then a mysterious attack on Egyptian soldiers occurred in the Sinai, leading the Army to shut down tunnels to Gaza, and the Rafah crossing completely, and launch the heaviest ground assaults against ‘militants in the sinai’ than even under Mubarak. In 2013, when Morsi tried again to open the border crossing, the Egyptian judiciary issued a court order for Morsi to enforce the Egyptian (Mubarak-era) agreement with Israel, and shut down ALL tunnels to Gaza. If Morsi tried to reject the judiciary’s decision, yes you guessed it, he would be accused of believing himself ‘above the law of the land’, by the Secular and Liberal media.

It is no surprise now that the Egyptian media is vilifying Hamas currently, using a series of ridiculous stories, conveniently provided by the Egyptian military. My personal favourite was how they explained the fuel shortages in Egypt under Morsi, by claiming he allegedly was supplying petrol to Gaza – despite the fact that petrol shortages in Gaza were worse than they ever had been after the Army had shut the tunnels! Of course, this false propaganda stories are designed to make the common Egyptian people accept the harsher policy of the current Egyptian regime against the people of Gaza. Surely, the U.S.A has got its money worth from the $1.5 billion it spends on the Egyptian army, a fact conveniently forgotten by the Egyptian people. Naturally Israel is overjoyed at the turn of events, because Mubarak never dared to appear too harsh on the Gazans, for fear of the Egyptian sentiment – but Morsi has proved the perfect scapegoat for the Egyptian military turn up the pressure on Hamas, and deliver even better value for money on the U.S. salary it receives. No wonder the U.S. does not want to call the coup, a coup!

All this the military could do, while at the same time blaming a powerless Morsi for it, since he is the one in the spotlight.

The trap was set for Morsi and the MB, and now all that needed to happen was the coup itself.

The political analyst, Yazid Sayigh impressively seemed to predict a coup as far back as December 2012, article here.

A Coup by Any Other Name

And so the coup did happen, and to demonstrate Egypt’s ‘liberation’ from the ‘tyranny’ of Morsi, they immediately shutdown all sympathetic TV stations to the MB, claiming they were ‘inciting violence’ (what? including Al Jazeera?!).

All the while, the Liberal and Felool controlled TV stations were allowed to broadcast, with them calling for ‘cleansing the streets’ of the Islamists.

Almost ‘magically’, the fuel shortage problem was resolved overnight, and the police (who had been mostly absent during Morsi’s rule) all reappeared – many were even seen dancing with the anti-morsi protesters in full uniform!

Despite leaders of the MB (that could be arrested) being rounded up by the military and police, and despite the Mubarak-era demands by the secularists and Secular Liberals to ban all political parties based upon religion from taking part in future elections (yes, Liberals – Liberalism is only tolerant of itself), General ‘Virginity Test’ Sisi has made the hilariously strange public ‘call’ to invite the MB to be part of an ‘inclusive’ new political process. Of course, what he means is to telling the counter-coup protestors to stop their demonstrations and acquiesce to the new regime – while of course appearing as a ‘reasonable man’ to the wider public.

Before the coup, Mubarak himself called for Morsi to step down. But after the coup happened, support came from strange, yet telling places. Saudi Arabia and UAE supported it, Israel’s Benyamin Netanyahu supported it, the USA were silent over it (but have made veiled comments of support), the EU was relatively permissive of the Egyptian military, and Bashar ul Assad (along with his fellow Secularists in Egypt and worldwide) expressed joy over it, claiming this was a defeat of ‘political Islam’, despite the fact that Morsi’s government didn’t implement a single Islamic law (Assad strangely forgets that Iran, who backs Syria, are also political ‘Islamists’ according to the West).

But the MB refused to go down without protest, and immediately began peaceful demonstrations and protests to demand the return of Morsi, and the rule of law, and due process. However, they have been met with violent crackdowns, shootings, and masked assailants and Bashar/Ghaddafi-esque massacres of civilians on the streets. Shockingly, this brutal treatment of the MB dissidents is occurring with both the Liberals and the Secularists cheerfully waving it on as ‘necessary in the national/Liberal interest’, or claiming that the Army and Police acted in ‘self-defence’. Of course, what goes forgotten by most of the media and Egyptian public, is that the Army and Police have been using this level of violence before Morsi came to power, under the SCAF interim rule. And with public support, they are now free to do what they wanted to do for a long time, effectively wipe out the Islamists under the guise of fighting ‘terrorism’. At the moment, only few Egyptians that were against Morsi have woken up to the fact that the regime has returned to being more predisposed to use violence, arbitrary arrest, and summary sentences now, than under Morsi – yet the Liberals and felool ironically accuse Morsi and the MB of being the ‘fascists’.

Now the MB are deposed, ‘quelle surprise’, they are pushing for Mubarak to be relieved of his sentence due to compassion for his health (aww, poor thing…).

The children of Mubarak have indeed returned back in the open to control Egypt again under their Secularist regime, and now the Egyptians will suffer the oh so familiar taste of its rancid fruit.

But before we mistakenly believe that the Egyptian people have all turned Secularist, this is not the case. Muslim Egyptians love Islam, and want Islamic law, but they do not know what it looks like. No one has done a concerted campaign to educate the masses on the political solutions that Islam offers. Nor have they explained how the enlightened system of Caliphate actually works, and how it brings about open intellectual inquiry, justice, progress and unity. The Egyptian people have only ever been taught that Islam is Tawheed (monotheism) and ibadaah (ritual spiritual worships). It is the failure of Muslim dawah carriers (proselytisers) to undo this lingering legacy from the colonial-era’s secularisation of the Muslim mind, that causes this obstacle for the return of the comprehensive way of life that is Islam. Consequently, the ignorance of the Egyptians is such, that even the most pious Egyptians may be amongst the crowd of pro-General Sisi supporters, believing in all innocence, that the MB are a non-Islamic party!

This is not to mention the media campaign against the MB, which has generated a terrible fanaticism of hatred against them. Most people outside Egypt wouldn’t understand this, since they are reading the news reports with a general emotional detachment that comes with being not being involved with the situation - outside observers see more of the facts than many Egyptians who are emotionally compromised, or personally involved. But this doesn’t mean that the people outside Egypt do not understand what is happening, or are unable to make a clear judgement – just look at the U.S. State Department, and the UK’s Foreign Office who’ve been doing this successfully for decades.

The Egyptian people have seen a general degradation of their living standards since well before Mubarak, and saw it fall sharply during the SCAF rule, and even more sharply during Morsi’s rule. They’ve been continuously fed stories by the Liberal and Secularist media (who Morsi DIDN’T suppress under his rule) undermining him and depicting him as a fascist, all the while preparing the Egyptian public for the return of fascism. For what else is fascism but the ideology of the Nation? Fascists are nothing but Secular Nationalists, who make the nation the source of morality under the euphemism, the ‘National Interest’, which serves as the ultimate criteria of the halal (right) and haram (wrong).

Fascists tend to focus on a particular enemy in their society that should be ‘cleansed’ from their midst. Does not the alarming Secularist and Liberal discourses on what should be done to ‘Islamists’ not fit that description? Morsi, far from calling people to attack Christians during his rule, actually called for their defence. Under Morsi’s tenure, a Muslim cleric was arrested and prosecuted for burning a Bible and insulting the Christian community (something that never happened under Mubarak’s rule!). Yet, the MB are vilified.

Of course, Morsi didn’t have control over some of the pro-MB, or pro-salafi youth which engaged in violent clashes with other groups, but then again neither did anyone else control their youth. In fact, it is probably because of the MB not being fascist, that they were unable to discipline and control some of their supporters amongst the youth.

However, the fact remains, that instead of the 2012 ‘revolution’ being the liberation of Egypt from a course heading towards fascism, the Egyptians have instead been ‘liberated’ from liberation itself.

Morsi made mistakes, made compromises with Secularists and the Army in pursuit of a gradualist approach attempting to replicate the successful AKP of Turkey, but he turned out to be a weak leader in a heavily controlled Mubarak-era government. But despite this he, like Allende and Mosadeq, wanted true independence for his county, a ethical and moral foreign policy, and an end to the kind of tyranny that sees arbitrary arrests, torture, civilians killed and fear return to the streets.

Cui Bono? (Who Benefits?)

To truly see who has won and benefited from – and may of been behind – the coup, let us look at the facts of the coup’s results, and ‘score’ who wins and who loses:

Gazan palestinians crippled now more than ever, during the Mubarak era ,
Egyptian Army now more dependant on U.S.A for international legitimacy,
Possible Egyptian alliance with U.S. arch-enemy Iran, successfully torpedoed,
and the further delaying of a feared Islamic revival and united Muslim world.

USA: Win
Israel: Win


Possible alliance successfully torpedoed between Saudi Arabia’s arch-enemy, Iran, and its Mubarak-era ally, Egypt,
U.S. diplomatic pressure appeased,
and a genuine call for Islamic aspirations in the middle east against autocratic rule, suppressed.

Saudi Arabia: Win

The small minority Liberals are finally getting a chance – by undemocratic means – to have power despite, their low support from a relatively religious Egyptian public,
Islamic inspired gradualist movements demoralised and have been prevented from rising in a key Muslim country in the middle east, and more importantly, the suppression of Islam from politics.

Egyptian Secular Liberals: WIn

Arch-enemies Muslim Brotherhood deposed,
Return to the open for Mubarak-era cronies ,
Increased power for Army,
Continuing U.S. pay for the loyalty of the Egyptian Army ,
and a ‘get out of jail free’ card for Mubarak.

Egyptian Secular Nationalists: Win
Mubarak: Win
Egyptian Army (also Secular Nationalists): Win Win

Iran loses an opportunity to find an ally in the region that could have co-operated with it to resist American Interests in the region.

Iran: Lose

Gazan palestinians crippled now more than during the Mubarak era, Hamas, the arch-enemy of Israel (and the USA), now without any allies.

Gazan Palestinians: Lose

Hamas: lose

Secularist minorities in Muslim world now inspired to public disobedience as a successful methology to impose their will, when democracy fails to delivery what they want (i.e. their way).

Peaceful Muslim groups in the Middle East: Lose

Return of (open) Police state to Egypt
Return of unfettered U.S.A influence and control upon Egyyt’s foriegn policy
Return of suppression of political dissent upon Egyptian citizens
No change in economic system in Egypt

Egyptian People: Lose Lose

The question we have to ask ourselves is, does this score-card look good to you? Is this the score-card we would accept for a truly independent and liberated Egypt?

I didn’t think so either.

Painful Lessons

The Muslim Brotherhood is not completely devoid of blame in this turn of events. Their gradualist methodology for re-establishing Islam after colonialism has ended up with the public perception against them at an all time low, and pushed back the cause for the return of a holistic Islam, by decades – unless some new (peaceful) stratagem can be enacted.

By entering into the Secular Democratic process, Morsi was always destined to fail. In fact, even if the MB presidential candidate was a combination of Malcom X, Nelson Mandela, Haroun al Rashid and Salahudeen Ayubi would it have not made a difference; the felool administration and army would have made it impossible to succeed regardless.

What the MB should have done, is to have started a public and open campaign for the re-establishment of the Islamic state in Egypt, as soon as Mubarak was deposed (or preferably a long time before!). This could have been achieved by a public education initiative through their outlets, followed through by calls for a national debate on the nature of the country and an awareness campaign on the superior political solutions that Islam offers. The MB should also have drawn up a clear and detailed plan of what new institutions they needed to create to implement Islamic laws, policy and progressive solutions to modern problems (like the interest based finance system that has led to the levels of poverty we see in Egypt). If they were clear, open and resolute on this method, demanding power for Islam, not for pragmatic politics, the people would have seen their clear and open stance, and would have realised the need for it.

It could be argued that if they held this stance, they wouldn’t have been able to be elected, and would have lost the opportunity for power. But how is that different to now? In fact, it is now many times more worse for them. Had a Secularist obtained power after Mubarak, and failed, people would turn more and more to a clear alternative. Now the people believe they have tried the Islamic alternative (again, despite not a single new Islamic law being implemented) and believe it has failed. The general masses in the Muslim world do not fully realise just how imprisoned they are still under the old guard of Egypt. So if they see their lives become worse under a leader, they will blame him, without realising that his is just a puppet, figurehead, and frontman, pushed into the spotlight from behind which, the real power brokers rule quietly behind the scenes.

The Khilafah (Caliphate) still remains the only untried alternative in the 21st century, and when the Secular nations collapse, either as a result of the natural problems inherent in secularism (e.g. economic, social etc), or due to the work of successful Islamic groups rising to power in Muslim countries, we the Ummah have to be ready to set ourselves on the true course for real liberation – the re-establishment of Islam.

As for the current situation in Egypt, and the claim that the coup saved Egypt from fascism, consider this: Hitler was a Secular Nationalist, an ex-military officer who made the State the ultimate idol for Germans, and justified everything he did as being ‘necessary in the national interest’, he never won an election on a slim margin, or was known to make compromises, or be a weak leader, or quietly tolerate minorities. Does his example really fit Morsi? Or does it fit the Secular Nationalist military leader emerging now, who under calls to ‘cleanse the streets’, is killing civilians belonging to dissident groups? The end of democracy in germany, came about not due to grudging election victories by a controversial group, but to rousing applause, celebrations and the popular belief in hope of a better future, under a new ‘saviour’.

The children of Mubarak have indeed come home, and someone, somewhere in Torah prison outside Cairo, is looking at the news and smiling…

http://abdullahalandalusi.com/2013/0...raks-children/
Reply

جوري
10-18-2013, 02:39 PM
This is what Arab liberalism, 'nationalism' has reared in Egypt you can thank sissy whose mother is a Jew for helping his cousins get the highest positions in Egypt to murder Egyptians, aid the Zionists in Gaza not just through the tunnels they destroy but rafah which they closed not even allowing them for humanitarian reasons and of course handing refugees back to Bashar



there should be NO doubt in your minds now as to who is running the middle east, and why they want so badly to keep that debacle of a peace treaty!
hopefully those who are still asleep thinking all is well with the world, ''this is just about armed terrorists'' (my mother included) will now wake up :ia:
Reply

Jedi_Mindset
10-19-2013, 10:25 PM
Thats very sad to see imsad Its not about 'terrorists' shame on the ones who still believe that.
Reply

faithandpeace
10-21-2013, 04:07 AM
Let us all make du'as to bring justice to Egypt. May Allah (swt) help restore peace for the righteous and purge the anti-Muslim filth from the land. Ameen.
Reply

WarriorforMarie
10-24-2013, 02:29 PM
Who appointed El-Sisi as Minister of Defense?
Reply

جوري
10-24-2013, 02:50 PM
Mursi was given three choices this cretin, Anan who is no better and one last person whose name escapes me- not much of a choice when you've a pig or a sac of manure or a scatologist from which to choose!
I am impressed though that you parrot the crap the coup sponsors spew - I almost thought you were capable of a free thought :)

Best,
Reply

WarriorforMarie
10-24-2013, 08:13 PM
Originally Posted by جوري
Mursi was given three choices this cretin, Anan who is no better and one last person whose name escapes me- not much of a choice when you've a pig or a sac of manure or a scatologist from which to choose!
I am impressed though that you parrot the crap the coup sponsors spew - I almost thought you were capable of a free thought :)

Best,
Perhaps he should have chosen the scatologist instead! I don't believe the coup sponsors, but rather was just asking a question. I've noticed that you are not pleased about what is happening in Egyptian and I agree that the events of the last few months have not be good. But you should try to look on the bright side. At least with Mursi gone Egypt is do supporting the Syrian rebels like it might have been otherwise. Maybe Allah wanted the coup to happen in order to save Bashar Assad's regime in Syria? Who knows?
Reply

جوري
10-24-2013, 09:05 PM
Originally Posted by WarriorforMarie
Perhaps he should have chosen the scatologist instead!
The outcome would have been the same given that they're hand picked and reared by the U.S to carry U.S/Israeli interests!


Originally Posted by WarriorforMarie
I don't believe the coup sponsors, but rather was just asking a question.
It is a common question asked in rhetoric and propagated for a particular agenda which isn't lost on anyone with minimum political education.


Originally Posted by WarriorforMarie
At least with Mursi gone Egypt is do supporting the Syrian rebels like it might have been otherwise
I don't understand what this means.. and generally your thoughts on the matter are irrelevant to me..
of course in the beginning and the end What :Allah: :swt: wants is what will happen and I quote the verse:


Al-Imran [3:179]
مَّا كَانَ اللّهُ لِيَذَرَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ عَلَى مَآ أَنتُمْ عَلَيْهِ حَتَّىَ يَمِيزَ الْخَبِيثَ مِنَ الطَّيِّبِ وَمَا كَانَ اللّهُ لِيُطْلِعَكُمْ عَلَى الْغَيْبِ وَلَكِنَّ اللّهَ يَجْتَبِي مِن رُّسُلِهِ مَن يَشَاء فَآمِنُواْ بِاللّهِ وَرُسُلِهِ وَإِن تُؤْمِنُواْ وَتَتَّقُواْ فَلَكُمْ أَجْرٌ عَظِيمٌ

Ma kana Allahu liyathara almumineena AAala ma antum AAalayhi hatta yameeza alkhabeetha mina alttayyibi wama kana Allahu liyutliAAakum AAala alghaybi walakinna Allaha yajtabee min rusulihi man yashao faaminoo biAllahi warusulihi wain tuminoo watattaqoo falakum ajrun AAatheemun
3:179 Allah will not leave the believers in the state in which ye are now, until He separates what is evil from what is good nor will He disclose to you the secrets of the Unseen. But He chooses of His Messenger. (For the purpose) whom He pleases. So believe in Allah. And His apostles: And if ye believe and do right, ye have a reward without measure.

_____________________________________________

In order for an Arrow to go full speed ahead it has to be pulled back with maximum effort!
Reply

WarriorforMarie
10-25-2013, 06:43 PM
Originally Posted by جوري
The outcome would have been the same given that they're hand picked and reared by the U.S to carry U.S/Israeli interests!
Why does Allah allow the United States to continue to dominate the Sunni part of the Middle East?
Reply

faithandpeace
10-25-2013, 07:54 PM
Allah (swt) knows best what is His will. It is our duty as Muslims to follow the path He has given us. Your question is rather irrelevant and pointless.
Reply

جوري
10-25-2013, 09:21 PM
Originally Posted by WarriorforMarie
Why does Allah allow the United States to continue to dominate the Sunni part of the Middle East?

An-Nisa [4:79]
مَّا أَصَابَكَ مِنْ حَسَنَةٍ فَمِنَ اللّهِ وَمَا أَصَابَكَ مِن سَيِّئَةٍ فَمِن نَّفْسِكَ وَأَرْسَلْنَاكَ لِلنَّاسِ رَسُولاً وَكَفَى بِاللّهِ شَهِيدًا

Ma asabaka min hasanatin famina Allahi wama asabaka min sayyiatin famin nafsika waarsalnaka lilnnasi rasoolan wakafa biAllahi shaheedan
4:79 Whatever good, (O man!) happens to thee, is from Allah. but whatever evil happens to thee, is from thy (own) soul

so that's the simple answer.. those who abandon :Allah::swt: :Allah::swt: abandons them but not to worry - nothing is forever and we are indeed told that our umma tamarad wala tamoot. i.e our ummah may get sick but will never die!

best,
Reply

جوري
10-25-2013, 09:23 PM
Originally Posted by faithandpeace
Your question is rather irrelevant and pointless
You can tell he puts much of his seething cynicism in it but always comes up short.. nonetheless it is our job (on the forum) to enlighten the ignorant! :shade:

:w:
Reply

faithandpeace
10-25-2013, 10:22 PM
We must strengthen our ummah and starting with ourselves. We shouldn't waste time with the kaffirs unless it is a worthwhile da'wah opportunity and that is it.
Reply

جوري
10-25-2013, 10:42 PM
I agree but I hardly write with any kaffir in mind - They're not the only ones frequenting the forum and even his queries banal and borrowed as they're are the ones found on the net so we need to provide the accurate response in case someone genuinely confused about the events. I have people in my extended family who believe in that media drivel.. it is both surprising to me and disappointing...
Here's what I've learned about most people from the noble Quran:

Most people aren't grateful, they're not knowledgeable, they're not faithful and even if you try your earnest will not believe.. so don't lose sleep over those you can't convince but do offer them an answer the best of your knowledge!

:w:
أَلَمْ تَرَ إِلَى الَّذِينَ خَرَجُواْ مِن دِيَارِهِمْ وَهُمْ أُلُوفٌ حَذَرَ الْمَوْتِ فَقَالَ لَهُمُ اللّهُ مُوتُواْ ثُمَّ أَحْيَاهُمْ إِنَّ اللّهَ لَذُو فَضْلٍ عَلَى النَّاسِ وَلَـكِنَّ أَكْثَرَ النَّاسِ لاَ يَشْكُرُونَ
Alam tara ila allatheena kharajoo min diyarihim wahum oloofun hathara almawti faqala lahumu Allahu mootoo thumma ahyahum inna Allaha lathoo fadlin AAala alnnasi walakinna akthara alnnasi la yashkuroona
2:243 Didst thou not Turn by vision to those who abandoned their homes, though they were thousands (In number), for fear of death? Allah said to them: "Die": Then He restored them to life. For Allah is full of bounty to mankind, but Most of them are ungrateful.

Al-A'raf [7:187]
يَسْأَلُونَكَ عَنِ السَّاعَةِ أَيَّانَ مُرْسَاهَا قُلْ إِنَّمَا عِلْمُهَا عِندَ رَبِّي لاَ يُجَلِّيهَا لِوَقْتِهَا إِلاَّ هُوَ ثَقُلَتْ فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالأَرْضِ لاَ تَأْتِيكُمْ إِلاَّ بَغْتَةً يَسْأَلُونَكَ كَأَنَّكَ حَفِيٌّ عَنْهَا قُلْ إِنَّمَا عِلْمُهَا عِندَ اللّهِ وَلَـكِنَّ أَكْثَرَ النَّاسِ لاَ يَعْلَمُونَ

Yasaloonaka AAani alssaAAati ayyana mursaha qul innama AAilmuha AAinda rabbee la yujalleeha liwaqtiha illa huwa thaqulat fee alssamawati waalardi la tateekum illa baghtatan yasaloonaka kaannaka hafiyyun AAanha qul innama AAilmuha AAinda Allahi walakinna akthara alnnasi la yaAAlamoona
7:187 They ask thee about the (final) Hour - when will be its appointed time? Say: "The knowledge thereof is with my Lord (alone): None but He can reveal as to when it will occur. Heavy were its burden through the heavens and the earth. Only, all of a sudden will it come to you." They ask thee as if thou Wert eager in search thereof: Say: "The knowledge thereof is with Allah (alone), but most men know not."

Hud [11:17]
أَفَمَن كَانَ عَلَى بَيِّنَةٍ مِّن رَّبِّهِ وَيَتْلُوهُ شَاهِدٌ مِّنْهُ وَمِن قَبْلِهِ كِتَابُ مُوسَى إَمَامًا وَرَحْمَةً أُوْلَـئِكَ يُؤْمِنُونَ بِهِ وَمَن يَكْفُرْ بِهِ مِنَ الأَحْزَابِ فَالنَّارُ مَوْعِدُهُ فَلاَ تَكُ فِي مِرْيَةٍ مِّنْهُ إِنَّهُ الْحَقُّ مِن رَّبِّكَ وَلَـكِنَّ أَكْثَرَ النَّاسِ لاَ يُؤْمِنُونَ

Afaman kana AAala bayyinatin min rabbihi wayatloohu shahidun minhu wamin qablihi kitabu moosa imaman warahmatan olaika yuminoona bihi waman yakfur bihi mina alahzabi faalnnaru mawAAiduhu fala taku fee miryatin minhu innahu alhaqqu min rabbika walakinna akthara alnnasi la yuminoona
11:17 Can they be (like) those who accept a Clear (Sign) from their Lord, and whom a witness from Himself doth teach, as did the Book of Moses before it,- a guide and a mercy? They believe therein; but those of the Sects that reject it,- the Fire will be their promised meeting-place. Be not then in doubt thereon: for it is the truth from thy Lord: yet many among men do not believe!

Yusuf [12:38]
وَاتَّبَعْتُ مِلَّةَ آبَآئِـي إِبْرَاهِيمَ وَإِسْحَقَ وَيَعْقُوبَ مَا كَانَ لَنَا أَن نُّشْرِكَ بِاللّهِ مِن شَيْءٍ ذَلِكَ مِن فَضْلِ اللّهِ عَلَيْنَا وَعَلَى النَّاسِ وَلَـكِنَّ أَكْثَرَ النَّاسِ لاَ يَشْكُرُونَ

WaittabaAAtu millata abaee ibraheema waishaqa wayaAAqooba ma kana lana an nushrika biAllahi min shayin thalika min fadli Allahi AAalayna waAAala alnnasi walakinna akthara alnnasi la yashkuroona
12:38 "And I follow the ways of my fathers,- Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; and never could we attribute any partners whatever to Allah. that (comes) of the grace of Allah to us and to mankind: yet most men are not grateful.

Yusuf [12:40]
مَا تَعْبُدُونَ مِن دُونِهِ إِلاَّ أَسْمَاء سَمَّيْتُمُوهَا أَنتُمْ وَآبَآؤُكُم مَّا أَنزَلَ اللّهُ بِهَا مِن سُلْطَانٍ إِنِ الْحُكْمُ إِلاَّ لِلّهِ أَمَرَ أَلاَّ تَعْبُدُواْ إِلاَّ إِيَّاهُ ذَلِكَ الدِّينُ الْقَيِّمُ وَلَـكِنَّ أَكْثَرَ النَّاسِ لاَ يَعْلَمُونَ

Ma taAAbudoona min doonihi illa asmaan sammaytumooha antum waabaokum ma anzala Allahu biha min sultanin ini alhukmu illa lillahi amara alla taAAbudoo illa iyyahu thalika alddeenu alqayyimu walakinna akthara alnnasi la yaAAlamoona
12:40 "If not Him, ye worship nothing but names which ye have named,- ye and your fathers,- for which Allah hath sent down no authority: the command is for none but Allah. He hath commanded that ye worship none but Him: that is the right religion, but most men understand not...

Yusuf [12:21]
وَقَالَ الَّذِي اشْتَرَاهُ مِن مِّصْرَ لاِمْرَأَتِهِ أَكْرِمِي مَثْوَاهُ عَسَى أَن يَنفَعَنَا أَوْ نَتَّخِذَهُ وَلَدًا وَكَذَلِكَ مَكَّنِّا لِيُوسُفَ فِي الأَرْضِ وَلِنُعَلِّمَهُ مِن تَأْوِيلِ الأَحَادِيثِ وَاللّهُ غَالِبٌ عَلَى أَمْرِهِ وَلَـكِنَّ أَكْثَرَ النَّاسِ لاَ يَعْلَمُونَ

Waqala allathee ishtarahu min misra liimraatihi akrimee mathwahu AAasa an yanfaAAana aw nattakhithahu waladan wakathalika makkanna liyoosufa fee alardi walinuAAallimahu min taweeli alahadeethi waAllahu ghalibun AAala amrihi walakinna akthara alnnasi la yaAAlamoona
12:21 The man in Egypt who bought him, said to his wife: "Make his stay (among us) honourable: may be he will bring us much good, or we shall adopt him as a son." Thus did We establish Joseph in the land, that We might teach him the interpretation of stories (and events). And Allah hath full power and control over His affairs; but most among mankind know it not.

Yusuf [12:68]
وَلَمَّا دَخَلُواْ مِنْ حَيْثُ أَمَرَهُمْ أَبُوهُم مَّا كَانَ يُغْنِي عَنْهُم مِّنَ اللّهِ مِن شَيْءٍ إِلاَّ حَاجَةً فِي نَفْسِ يَعْقُوبَ قَضَاهَا وَإِنَّهُ لَذُو عِلْمٍ لِّمَا عَلَّمْنَاهُ وَلَـكِنَّ أَكْثَرَ النَّاسِ لاَ يَعْلَمُونَ

Walamma dakhaloo min haythu amarahum aboohum ma kana yughnee AAanhum mina Allahi min shayin illa hajatan fee nafsi yaAAqooba qadaha wainnahu lathoo AAilmin lima AAallamnahu walakinna akthara alnnasi la yaAAlamoona
12:68 And when they entered in the manner their father had enjoined, it did not profit them in the least against (the plan of) Allah. It was but a necessity of Jacob's soul, which he discharged. For he was, by our instruction, full of knowledge (and experience): but most men know not.

Yusuf [12:103]
وَمَا أَكْثَرُ النَّاسِ وَلَوْ حَرَصْتَ بِمُؤْمِنِينَ

Wama aktharu alnnasi walaw harasta bimumineena
12:103 Yet no faith will the greater part of mankind have, however ardently thou dost desire it.

Ar-Ra'd [13:1]
المر تِلْكَ آيَاتُ الْكِتَابِ وَالَّذِيَ أُنزِلَ إِلَيْكَ مِن رَّبِّكَ الْحَقُّ وَلَـكِنَّ أَكْثَرَ النَّاسِ لاَ يُؤْمِنُونَ

Aliflammeemra tilka ayatu alkitabi waallathee onzila ilayka min rabbika alhaqqu walakinna akthara alnnasi la yuminoona
13:1 A.L.M.R. These are the signs (or verses) of the Book: that which hath been revealed unto thee from thy Lord is the Truth; but most men believe not.

An-Nahl [16:38]
وَأَقْسَمُواْ بِاللّهِ جَهْدَ أَيْمَانِهِمْ لاَ يَبْعَثُ اللّهُ مَن يَمُوتُ بَلَى وَعْدًا عَلَيْهِ حَقًّا وَلـكِنَّ أَكْثَرَ النَّاسِ لاَ يَعْلَمُونَ

Waaqsamoo biAllahi jahda aymanihim la yabAAathu Allahu man yamootu bala waAAdan AAalayhi haqqan walakinna akthara alnnasi la yaAAlamoona
16:38 They swear their strongest oaths by Allah, that Allah will not raise up those who die: Nay, but it is a promise (binding) on Him in truth: but most among mankind realise it not.

Al-Isra [17:89]
وَلَقَدْ صَرَّفْنَا لِلنَّاسِ فِي هَـذَا الْقُرْآنِ مِن كُلِّ مَثَلٍ فَأَبَى أَكْثَرُ النَّاسِ إِلاَّ كُفُورًا

Walaqad sarrafna lilnnasi fee hatha alqurani min kulli mathalin faaba aktharu alnnasi illa kufooran
17:89 And We have explained to man, in this Qur'an, every kind of similitude: yet the greater part of men refuse (to receive it) except with ingratitude!

Al-Furqan [25:50]
وَلَقَدْ صَرَّفْنَاهُ بَيْنَهُمْ لِيَذَّكَّرُوا فَأَبَى أَكْثَرُ النَّاسِ إِلَّا كُفُورًا

Walaqad sarrafnahu baynahum liyaththakkaroo faaba aktharu alnnasi illa kufooran
25:50 And We have distributed the (water) amongst them, in order that they may celebrate (our) praises, but most men are averse (to aught) but (rank) ingratitude.

Ar-Rum [30:6]
وَعْدَ اللَّهِ لَا يُخْلِفُ اللَّهُ وَعْدَهُ وَلَكِنَّ أَكْثَرَ النَّاسِ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ

WaAAda Allahi la yukhlifu Allahu waAAdahu walakinna akthara alnnasi la yaAAlamoona
30:6 (It is) the promise of Allah. Never does Allah depart from His promise: but most men understand not.

Ar-Rum [30:30]
فَأَقِمْ وَجْهَكَ لِلدِّينِ حَنِيفًا فِطْرَةَ اللَّهِ الَّتِي فَطَرَ النَّاسَ عَلَيْهَا لَا تَبْدِيلَ لِخَلْقِ اللَّهِ ذَلِكَ الدِّينُ الْقَيِّمُ وَلَكِنَّ أَكْثَرَ النَّاسِ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ

Faaqim wajhaka lilddeeni haneefan fitrata Allahi allatee fatara alnnasa AAalayha la tabdeela likhalqi Allahi thalika alddeenu alqayyimu walakinna akthara alnnasi la yaAAlamoona
30:30 So set thou thy face steadily and truly to the Faith: (establish) Allah's handiwork according to the pattern on which He has made mankind: no change (let there be) in the work (wrought) by Allah; that is the standard Religion, but most among mankind understand not.

Saba' [34:28]
وَمَا أَرْسَلْنَاكَ إِلَّا كَافَّةً لِّلنَّاسِ بَشِيرًا وَنَذِيرًا وَلَكِنَّ أَكْثَرَ النَّاسِ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ

Wama arsalnaka illa kaffatan lilnnasi basheeran wanatheeran walakinna akthara alnnasi la yaAAlamoona
34:28 We have not sent thee but as a universal (Messenger) to men, giving them glad tidings, and warning them (against sin), but most men understand not.

Saba' [34:36]
قُلْ إِنَّ رَبِّي يَبْسُطُ الرِّزْقَ لِمَن يَشَاء وَيَقْدِرُ وَلَكِنَّ أَكْثَرَ النَّاسِ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ

Qul inna rabbee yabsutu alrrizqa liman yashao wayaqdiru walakinna akthara alnnasi la yaAAlamoona
34:36 Say: "Verily my Lord enlarges and restricts the Provision to whom He pleases, but most men understand not."

Ghafir [40:59]
إِنَّ السَّاعَةَ لَآتِيَةٌ لَّا رَيْبَ فِيهَا وَلَكِنَّ أَكْثَرَ النَّاسِ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ

Inna alssaAAata laatiyatun la rayba feeha walakinna akthara alnnasi la yuminoona
40:59 The Hour will certainly come: Therein is no doubt: Yet most men believe not.

Ghafir [40:61]
اللَّهُ الَّذِي جَعَلَ لَكُمُ اللَّيْلَ لِتَسْكُنُوا فِيهِ وَالنَّهَارَ مُبْصِرًا إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَذُو فَضْلٍ عَلَى النَّاسِ وَلَكِنَّ أَكْثَرَ النَّاسِ لَا يَشْكُرُونَ

Allahu allathee jaAAala lakumu allayla litaskunoo feehi waalnnahara mubsiran inna Allaha lathoo fadlin AAala alnnasi walakinna akthara alnnasi la yashkuroona
40:61 It is Allah Who has made the Night for you, that ye may rest therein, and the days as that which helps (you) to see. Verily Allah is full of Grace and Bounty to men: yet most men give no thanks.

Ghafir [40:57]
لَخَلْقُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ أَكْبَرُ مِنْ خَلْقِ النَّاسِ وَلَكِنَّ أَكْثَرَ النَّاسِ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ

Lakhalqu alssamawati waalardi akbaru min khalqi alnnasi walakinna akthara alnnasi la yaAAlamoona
40:57 Assuredly the creation of the heavens and the earth is a greater (matter) than the creation of men: Yet most men understand not.

Al-Jathiya [45:26]
قُلِ اللَّهُ يُحْيِيكُمْ ثُمَّ يُمِيتُكُمْ ثُمَّ يَجْمَعُكُمْ إِلَى يَوْمِ الْقِيَامَةِ لَا رَيبَ فِيهِ وَلَكِنَّ أَكَثَرَ النَّاسِ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ

Quli Allahu yuhyeekum thumma yumeetukum thumma yajmaAAukum ila yawmi alqiyamati la rayba feehi walakinna akthara alnnasi la yaAAlamoona
45:26 Say: "It is Allah Who gives you life, then gives you death; then He will gather you together for the Day of Judgment about which there is no doubt": But most men do not understand.


Reply

WarriorforMarie
10-26-2013, 12:31 AM
Originally Posted by جوري
so that's the simple answer.. those who abandon abandons them but not to worry - nothing is forever and we are indeed told that our umma tamarad wala tamoot. i.e our ummah may get sick but will never die!

best,
Please correct me if I am wrong (I'm sure you would anyway) but does this mean that Allah has allowed the United States to control the Sunni countries because they abandoned Allah?
Reply

Signor
10-26-2013, 07:51 AM
Greetings WarriorforMarie

Originally Posted by WarriorforMarie
Allah has allowed the United States to control the Sunni countries because they abandoned Allah?
Allah's knows whats the wisdom behind HIS works,However,Even concept of reward and punishment(for nations) according to Islam would be explained,it will not going to make any sense to you,since one needs to believe in Allah before understanding HIS laws.

I would encourage you to read the following thread for more

http://www.islamicboard.com/general/...ml#post1598965
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!