PDA

View Full Version : Morsi - What did he do?



Snel
08-20-2013, 08:17 PM
Hello, this thread is created inshallah to bring the facts to the table about Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood (Al-ikhwan Al-muslimin). What have they contributed to the muslims in Egypt and where have they gone wrong?

Do you have to be a disbeliever or a munafiq to disagree with the Muslim Brotherhood and their actions (whatever they may be)? Because many muslims have been labeled as kuffar and traitors because they disagree with the Muslim Brotherhood. Is it Islamic to call people disbelievers for not agreeing with a political party, which may by the way have made a negative impact on the muslim ummah.

We want to hear every muslim's side of the story.
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
WarriorforMarie
08-20-2013, 08:41 PM
Originally Posted by Snel
Hello, this thread is created inshallah to bring the facts to the table about Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood (Al-ikhwan Al-muslimin). What have they contributed to the muslims in Egypt and where have they gone wrong?

Do you have to be a disbeliever or a munafiq to disagree with the Muslim Brotherhood and their actions (whatever they may be)? Because many muslims have been labeled as kuffar and traitors because they disagree with the Muslim Brotherhood. Is it Islamic to call people disbelievers for not agreeing with a political party, which may by the way have made a negative impact on the muslim ummah.

We want to hear every muslim's side of the story.
First, I am a non-Muslim. If you want only Muslims to post on this thread I will remove myself.

I have seen opinions on other thread that Muslims who do not advocate politics based on Islam are apostates. If the Muslim Brotherhood did represent the ideal form of Islam in politics I suppose such a logic might be valid. However, there are a couple of other issues. I have seen several others express the opinion that democracy is not compatible with Islam. Does that mean that the participation of the Muslim Brotherhood in elections in Egypt was an un-Islamic act? Even if their participation in elections was permitted, what about the way they governed? Did they truly govern as Islam dictates or did they produce policies that were un-Islamic. If the Muslim Brotherhood functioned like a non-Islamic party, would they become kuffar or tratiors themselves.

I think it is sad that the Muslim Brotherhood was removed from power by the military. If they had been left in office many lives might have been saved.
Reply

sister herb
08-20-2013, 08:57 PM
I posted this article some days ago to other islamic forum (and there some of the members wanted to :hiding: me because of it). I might not agree all of it but partly yes. Let´s see what reaction it causes in this thread:

Morsi Is Not Arab World’s Mandela

By: Hani Sabra and Bassem


August 12, 2013

Tawakul Karman is a brave press-freedom advocate and a worthy Nobel Peace Prize winner. She was a powerful voice in the Yemeni people’s struggle against President Ali Abdullah Saleh’s 34-year autocracy and remains an important figure in Yemen’s march toward democracy. However, Karman’s recent comparison of deposed Egyptian leader Mohammed Morsi to Nelson Mandela, one of the most influential and inspirational figures of the latter half of the 20th century and whose name is synonymous with courage, struggle and wisdom, is astoundingly wrongheaded. Mandela remains a global moral authority. Morsi is not worthy of such praise — not even close. If the defining feature of Mandela’s presidency was the unification of his people, the defining feature of Morsi’s one-year presidency was the intensifying and perilous polarization of the Egyptian people.

This is not a personal attack on Karman (though there is, regrettably, a deluge of unproductive and troubling ad hominem bullying on social media), but a disagreement about a bold and false assertion. Karman is certainly free to defend the former president and criticize the wisdom of the military’s decision to oust him and express serious concerns about the current trajectory of democracy in Egypt. And there is indeed, most certainly, ample cause for concern.

However, equating Morsi with Mandela is myopic, cynical and betrays a deep misunderstanding of Morsi’s brief presidency and Mandela’s long struggle for freedom. Mandela is everything Morsi is not. Following a career as an anti-apartheid revolutionary and almost three decades of imprisonment before his election, then-President Mandela moved swiftly to heal the deep rifts that plagued South African society. He led a national unity government and oversaw the establishment of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission that, despite criticism, succeeded in turning the focus of the country toward the future. Mandela was not perfect, but he proved particularly adept at taking the long view, at understanding the symbolism and impact of each of his actions, and he consistently strived to build bridges and create consensus without losing sight of his principles.

Morsi, on the other hand, is a member of a group that has at best a questionable commitment to and a skewed understanding of democracy, and that — following a razor-thin electoral margin — moved quickly and aggressively to consolidate power. Mandela was a visionary, while Morsi was a short-term tactician who refused to see the benefits of building and reinforcing coalitions. A telling and ironic example was his approach to security-sector reform. Morsi could have begun to reform the feared security apparatus had he at least maintained the electoral coalition that ushered him to power, and would likely have succeeded if he had broadened it. Today, that apparatus, which he heaped praise upon when he believed he could eventually bring it under his control, is being used against him and his supporters. Additionally, Mandela was — and remains — a popular national leader, earning the respect and admiration of even his one-time critics and affectionately referred to as "Tata," meaning "father."

While Morsi still maintains a bloc of support, prior to his ouster this support base was shrinking as a result of his bullheaded approach to leadership and his insistence on maintaining an inept cabinet that even spokesmen in his own party rejected. In fact, by the end of his first year in office, his list of critics included the Nour Salafist Party, the media, the judiciary, civil-society activists, the police, the military, the leaderships of Al-Azhar and the Christian church and very likely a majority of the population. Essentially, Morsi’s very legitimacy was rapidly deteriorating.

None of this was foreordained. When Morsi was first elected, many Egyptians believed that he was cognizant that his narrow margin of victory was largely a result of the support of millions of non-Islamists that didn’t necessarily trust him, but who wanted a clean break from the era of deposed president Hosni Mubarak. These same people pinned their hopes on the belief that the broad January 2011 "revolutionary coalition" would remain intact and thus were willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. Even many others that didn’t vote for him also were willing to suspend their pessimism and hoped to be positively surprised.

However, to say that Morsi proved to be a disappointment would be an understatement. His government made little progress delivering the "bread, freedom and social justice" its slogans promised. And less than five months after his inauguration, Morsi squandered his political capital when he committed a disastrous strategic blunder that would permanently dissolve the coalition of supporters that brought him to power, severely damage his legitimacy and mark the beginning of his downfall. Morsi’s infamous November 2012 presidential decree, which established him as above the law and forcefully installed a political ally as prosecutor-general, was ultimately used to ram through a divisive constitution. The bloody clashes that followed and the sequence of events that ensued left Egypt dangerously polarized and the January 2011 revolution in tatters.

In her piece, Karman says that she originally supported the June 30 anti-Morsi protests (despite her allegiance to a Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated party in Yemen), because she wanted to see the end of "the rift within Egyptian society, and building a country led by partnership rather than narrow majority rule." Karman, whose sincerity we’re not questioning, therefore clearly recognized that Morsi did not take a Mandela-like approach to leadership. She made passionate references in social media supporting the June 30 protests, stating that the "Revolutionary legitimacy is in Tahrir, and is stronger and greater than any [other] legitimacy," pointedly criticizing the Brotherhood and calling on Morsi to resign. While committed to political inclusiveness, she even appeared not to be averse to the notion of the military ousting Morsi and creating a presidential council while suspending the constitution. All of this makes Karman’s sudden heaping of praise on Morsi incomprehensible and incompatible.

Remarkably, following her previous sharp criticism, Karman now presents a broadly positive and democratic image of Morsi’s tenure that contradicts her previous positions. She writes that during his year in power, for example, freedom of speech was guaranteed. This is demonstrably untrue. Numerous "insulting the presidency" cases were filed during Morsi’s year in power, including some by the president's office itself before it withdrew them under local and international pressure. Quite tellingly, the Brotherhood dominated the legislature and ignored the calls by pro-revolutionary forces for the repeal of these laws. And instead of liberating state-owned media from political influence, Morsi and the Brotherhood instead worked to increase their influence over it.

One need not be a Morsi supporter to be critical of much of what is taking place in Egypt. One is free to argue Morsi that was a dangerous leader who was taking Egypt down a dark path, or alternatively that he was an elected president that was unfairly ousted by a military seeking political power, or take a position somewhere in between. However, one thing is certain: Mohammed Morsi is not the Arab world’s Nelson Mandela.

Hani Sabra is a New York-based political analyst. The views represented here are his own. On Twitter: @hani sabra

Bassem Sabry is an Egyptian political writer and commentator. On Twitter: @Bass em_Sabry

Source: http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m100129&hd=&size=1&l=e
Reply

Snel
08-20-2013, 09:03 PM
Originally Posted by WarriorforMarie
First, I am a non-Muslim. If you want only Muslims to post on this thread I will remove myself.

I have seen opinions on other thread that Muslims who do not advocate politics based on Islam are apostates. If the Muslim Brotherhood did represent the ideal form of Islam in politics I suppose such a logic might be valid. However, there are a couple of other issues. I have seen several others express the opinion that democracy is not compatible with Islam. Does that mean that the participation of the Muslim Brotherhood in elections in Egypt was an un-Islamic act? Even if their participation in elections was permitted, what about the way they governed? Did they truly govern as Islam dictates or did they produce policies that were un-Islamic. If the Muslim Brotherhood functioned like a non-Islamic party, would they become kuffar or tratiors themselves.

I think it is sad that the Muslim Brotherhood was removed from power by the military. If they had been left in office many lives might have been saved.
I have personally seen people calling muslims munafiqs for being against the Muslim Brotherhood, even on this forum, but I'm not going to point any of them out.

The part that I've marked in bold is the issue that I wanted to discuss. They've ruled in about a year, what exactly did they accomplish and where have they gone wrong. And a subquestion: What led the military to take down the Muslim Brotherhood and risk having a revolution against the military like in Syria? What led them to make that compromise? Why did the military allow an election to happen in the first place if they knew that the Muslim Brotherhood could win?
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
Snel
08-20-2013, 09:43 PM
Originally Posted by sister herb
I posted this article some days ago to other islamic forum (and there some of the members wanted to me because of it). I might not agree all of it but partly yes. Let´s see what reaction it causes in this thread:
The only parts that I liked was: "Morsi’s infamous November 2012 presidential decree, which established him as above the law" and that she mentioned that the Muslim Brotherhood was not the real majority of the people. The rest is just secularist propaganda. She made the majority unknown so that she could give place to her imaginary non-existent secularist friends (which btw are in millions). We all know what the majority of the Egyptians are, it's not really a secret: They are muslims.
Reply

h-n
08-20-2013, 10:04 PM
Originally Posted by WarriorforMarie
First, I am a non-Muslim. If you want only Muslims to post on this thread I will remove myself.

I have seen opinions on other thread that Muslims who do not advocate politics based on Islam are apostates. If the Muslim Brotherhood did represent the ideal form of Islam in politics I suppose such a logic might be valid. However, there are a couple of other issues. I have seen several others express the opinion that democracy is not compatible with Islam. Does that mean that the participation of the Muslim Brotherhood in elections in Egypt was an un-Islamic act? Even if their participation in elections was permitted, what about the way they governed? Did they truly govern as Islam dictates or did they produce policies that were un-Islamic. If the Muslim Brotherhood functioned like a non-Islamic party, would they become kuffar or tratiors themselves.

I think it is sad that the Muslim Brotherhood was removed from power by the military. If they had been left in office many lives might have been saved.
I don't know why your going into so many threads asking similar questions, but it is best to create your own thread with your question and stick with it, as your turning everything about how Islam governs. If your still not sure here are a few points to start with, if not satisfied then open a new thread;-

1. There is no such thing as democracy in Islam, ie when Prophet Jesus peace be upon him comes back he is in charge (which is accepted by the Christians).

The Prophets are in charge, when they are not here, then the religious who follow Islam choose amongst themselves. As they follow Islam, this ensures that they run the areas well.

There is no such thing as democracy, the UK government for example has rejected a petition for the death penalty, did not have the public agreement to go to Afghanistan and Iraq, so its rather that vote for us to do anything. It reminds me of the advertisements for charity were they say if you care about this starving child then you would give etc, treating people as simpletons. Also don't tell me that the public actually all read up on the parties manifestos etc.

2. I myself stay away from joining in conflicts created by governments, it is best to wait for the arrival of the Mahdi and the Prophet Jesus peace be upon him, for someone like me who is not participating, not trusting why people who prefer Islam but happy to wear the suits and ties of the west is strange. Remember that Saudi Arabia's Royal family governs with Islam, but they are distrusted with the pro-western ties (as anyone who is willing to stand idly by whilst other Muslims are attacked are not trusted). So if we're not going to trust them, what makes others assume that we would trust the Muslim Brotherhood??

To the Muslims if you can't even sort out the "little things", then people shouldn't be quick to aim to build a nation, I am not comfortable with supporting anyone who does fgm (don't see anything that Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him arranged for his daughters to go through that). Lowering the age of consent for marriage (especially today when people are growing up learning about Islam less, I don't agree). There have been complaints about treatments of Christians -and that they are not treated equally in terms of living in the life of this world-this should be resolved. Regardless of media bias ie Pakistan even has part of their flag marked for non-Muslims.

3. In Islam, Prophets did not come and say we need to build a nation first and then get people to become Muslims, with Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him the focus was the spreading of the message, and with that led to the areas being governed under Islam law with agreement to the Muslims. Even though people use the word Islam and Muslims, not many people care about Islam, even at the last time they were rioting in Egypt-it wasn't for Islamic law, but for jobs etc. You can't force someone to help you find work. You don't say that someone should die because they won't give you money or a job. If they were so upset over Hosni Mubarak not being religious enough then they wouldn't have waited that long to complain.

I think it was yourself that questioned why the military threw them out, well after the US agreeing with what Muslims have been telling them that they were involved with the coup in Iran, your actually asking that question?? Even the military in Turkey is not caring about Islam, and there is a clash of even women wearing headscarves.

The western governments support governments around the world to be pro-western, the people carry on living without much contact from the governments, ie no welfare state etc. Its so bad that even in many countries they desire to make their countries look good for the western world rather then for their own people.

I rather remember Allah and the Day of Judgement much, I cannot say that so and so is not a Muslim, but I don't have to support them if I don't want to, as I am responsible for following the right people and for me that is now only the Mahdi and the Prophet Jesus peace be upon him.
Reply

WarriorforMarie
08-21-2013, 12:00 AM
The following is from the July 6th, 2013 issue of the Economist. Obviously recent events have negated some of the hopes about the military relinquishing power.



WHEN Muhammad Morsi was elected president of Egypt a year ago, this newspaper was wary. As fervent supporters of liberal democracy, we are uncomfortable with the belief of the Muslim Brotherhood, Mr Morsi’s party, that politics are subsidiary to religion, and are downright hostile to the attitudes towards women and minorities that pervade the Islamist movement. We would have preferred the secularists who led Egypt’s revolution to have won. Yet we recognised that Mr Morsi’s 52% of the vote—a stronger endorsement than Barack Obama got five months later—gave him the right to rule. And, most of all, we were delighted that after 30 years of dictatorship, Egypt was on its way to becoming a democracy.

That is why we regard the events of the past few days with trepidation. Mr Morsi’s ouster by a combination of street power and soldiers sets a dreadful precedent for the region. The army, which is in part responsible for the situation, must start Egypt on the path towards new elections as swiftly as possible, or the prospects for the country will be bleak.
Mr Morsi’s rule started unravelling when crowds massed in the streets of Egypt’s cities on June 30th, the first anniversary of his time in power. The protests turned violent; the Brotherhood’s headquarters were burned; 48 people have died. On July 1st, the army gave Mr Morsi 48 hours to resolve his dispute with his opponents. Mr Morsi responded by defending his legitimacy and refusing to step down. On July 3rd, the chief of army staff, General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, announced that the constitution had been suspended. Mr Morsi was taken into military custody.
Most of the blame for the disaster that has befallen Egyptian democracy lies with Mr Morsi. The very size of the protests—some estimates claim that as many as 14m took to the streets—shows that his opponents were not a small bunch of discontents. Most of the country seems to have turned against him. One reason for that is his incompetence. He did nothing to rescue the economy from looming collapse. The Egyptian pound and foreign exchange reserves have both dwindled, inflation is rising and unemployment among those under 24 is more than 40%. The IMF has despaired of agreeing on a big loan that would have opened the way to others. In the broiling summer heat, electricity cuts have become maddeningly frequent. Queues for petrol have lengthened. Farmers are often not being paid for their wheat. Crime has soared—the murder rate has tripled since the revolution.
The Brothers’ failure to include a wide range of views in its first government was even more foolish. Egypt, at the best of times, is hard to govern because society is polarised. Secular-minded and better-educated Egyptians generally want the country to be dragged into a modern, pluralistic and outward-looking world. A more conservative and religious stratum looks to political Islam rather than socialism or capitalism as the answer to centuries of injustice, inequality and corruption. In addition, Egypt has a large and nervous minority of Christians, perhaps a tenth of the populace of 84m, along with a much smaller minority of Shia Muslims, both of whom have been rattled by an Islamist government.
Instead of trying to build up the independent institutions—the courts, the media, a neutral civil service, army and police—that check the power of government in mature democracies, Mr Morsi did his best to undermine them. He legislated through a senate that was elected by only 10% of the voters. He made false, inept or cowardly choices at every turn, finagling constitutional issues, pushing fellow Brothers into key appointments and feeding the secularists’ fears that his brethren were determined, by hook or by crook, to Islamise every aspect of society. He stayed silent when bigots and thugs threatened and attacked religious minorities. He allowed foreigners working for advocacy groups promoting human rights and democracy to be hounded, prosecuted and convicted (most of them in absentia) on patently false charges.
That so many Egyptians should wish to get rid of Mr Morsi is therefore entirely understandable. That they have succeeded in doing so could well turn out to be a disaster, and not just for Egypt.
The precedent that Mr Morsi’s ouster sets for other shaky democracies is a terrible one. It will encourage the disaffected to try to eject governments not by voting them out but by disrupting their rule. It will create an incentive for oppositions all over the Arab world to pursue their agendas on the streets, not in parliaments. It thus will reduce the chance of peace and prosperity across the region.
It also sends a dreadful message to Islamists everywhere. The conclusion they will draw from events in Egypt is that, if they win power in elections, their opponents will use non-democratic means to oust them. So if they are allowed to come to office, they will very likely do their ****edest to cement their power by fair means or foul. Crush your opponents could well be their motto.
How to make it less bad
That damage is done, and cannot be undone. But there are better, and worse, ways for the story to unfold. If the army holds on to power, then Egypt will be back where it was before Hosni Mubarak was ousted—but without the hope that prevails before revolution has been tried and has failed. If the army announces a timetable for elections and sticks to it, then Egypt has a chance. The soldiers will need to make credible promises to the Islamists that if they win (which, given their performance over the past year, the Brothers are unlikely to) they will be allowed to take power. Persuading them of that will be hard: holding an election quickly would help.
Egypt’s army played a pivotal role in the revolution, standing by while people power pushed Mr Mubarak out. It still has the trust of many Egyptians, who are still inclined to turn towards it in times of crisis. If the generals are to repay that trust, they must get the country back on the path towards democracy as swiftly as possible.
Reply

جوري
08-21-2013, 02:10 AM
Originally Posted by WarriorforMarie
that politics are subsidiary to religion, and are downright hostile to the attitudes towards women and minorities that pervade the Islamist movement.
That's funny, these aren't Islamic attitudes in fact they're secular ones -- I am sick of outsider threads who pretend to know what's going on when they haven't the slightest clue, they just have an agenda at any cost, thousands of lives and across the decades that is!
The rest of the article can be binned. 6th of October and tamarud and other moron groups don't speak for the masses that voted five consecutive elections for the president, his party and the constitution which begs the Q as to who these types of articles address exactly, and the one before this one is even more absurd .. but I guess any idiot can write anything and get away with it.. why not it is a free market and mockery of Islam sells.
Reply

WarriorforMarie
08-21-2013, 04:51 AM
Originally Posted by جوري
That's funny, these aren't Islamic attitudes in fact they're secular ones -- I am sick of outsider threads who pretend to know what's going on when they haven't the slightest clue,
I don't think the writer meant that those attitudes were inherent in Islam. Just that the move using Islam in Egypt had traits along those lines. And attitudes like that can be found amongst both secular groups and religious groups.
Reply

جوري
08-21-2013, 05:33 AM
Originally Posted by WarriorforMarie
I don't think the writer meant that those attitudes were inherent in Islam. Just that the move using Islam in Egypt had traits along those lines. And attitudes like that can be found amongst both secular groups and religious groups.
Well the brotherhood doesn't have traits along those lines in fact if you look at most of its members, they're the top 10% elitest education wise.. those aren't morons hanging in the mountains to acquiesce to that pathetic western view of them and I don't think any Muslim woman in Egypt wants someone to tell her what her attitutde should be toward the party she voted for. Secularists in Egypt are utterly are underdevloped and can't sell their merchandise unfortunately save for smear campaigns and through unadulterated violence and genocide while the entire world watches and does nothing.. quick though to either sweep it under the rug or condemn the other parties with traits inherent to only them!
Reply

WarriorforMarie
08-21-2013, 06:26 AM
There is no denying that the Muslim Brotherhood has a substantial number of college educated individuals in its leadership. However, it is possible for someone to be college educated and yet still harbor horrifying attitudes. I've know several Christians like this, they could speak fluent Greek, Latin, and Herbrew but you talk with about women or gays it would seem that their knuckles scrape the ground. Looking on the Muslim Brotherhood's official English site I found this lovely statement. While there are some items that are relatively unobjectionable (abortion is still a controversial issue in my country, and feelings of tenderness towards the unborn are valid to have) that are things in this statement that chill my blood.


The 57th session of the UN Commission on the Status of Women (CSW), taking place from March 4 to 15 at UN headquarters, seeks to ratify a declaration euphemistically entitled ‘End Violence against Women’.


That title, however, is misleading and deceptive. The document includes articles that contradict established principles of Islam, undermine Islamic ethics and destroy the family, the basic building block of society, according to the Egyptian Constitution.


This declaration, if ratified, would lead to complete disintegration of society, and would certainly be the final step in the intellectual and cultural invasion of Muslim countries, eliminating the moral specificity that helps preserve cohesion of Islamic societies.


A closer look at these articles reveals what decadence awaits our world, if we sign this document:


1. Granting girls full sexual freedom, as well as the freedom to decide their own gender and the gender of their partners (ie, choose to have normal or homo- sexual relationships), while raising the age of marriage.


2. Providing contraceptives for adolescent girls and training them to use those, while legalizing abortion to get rid of unwanted pregnancies, in the name of sexual and reproductive rights.


3. Granting equal rights to adulterous wives and illegitimate sons resulting from adulterous relationships.


4. Granting equal rights to homosexuals, and providing protection and respect for prostitutes.


5. Giving wives full rights to file legal complaints against husbands accusing them of rape or sexual harassment, obliging competent authorities to deal husbands punishments similar to those prescribed for raping or sexually harassing a stranger.
6. Equal inheritance (between men and women).


7. Replacing guardianship with partnership, and full sharing of roles within the family between men and women such as: spending, child care and home chores.


8. Full equality in marriage legislation such as: allowing Muslim women to marry non-Muslim men, and abolition of polygamy, dowry, men taking charge of family spending, etc.


9. Removing the authority of divorce from husbands and placing it in the hands of judges, and sharing all property after divorce.
10. Cancelling the need for a husband’s consent in matters like: travel, work, or use of contraception.


These are destructive tools meant to undermine the family as an important institution; they would subvert the entire society, and drag it to pre-Islamic ignorance.


The Muslim Brotherhood urges the leaders of Muslim countries and their UN representatives to reject and condemn this document, and to call upon this organization to rise to the high morals and principles of family relations prescribed by Islam.


The Muslim Brotherhood also calls on Al-Azhar (the highest seat of learning for Muslims) to take the lead, condemn this declaration, and state clearly the Islamic viewpoint with regard to all details of this document.


Further, we urge all Islamic groups and associations to take a decisive stand on this document and similar declarations.
In conclusion, we call on women's organizations to commit to their religion and morals of their communities and the foundations of good social life and not be deceived with misleading calls to decadent modernization and paths of subversive immorality.


God Almighty says: "God wants to forgive you, but those who follow whims and desires want you to deviate far away from the Path). {Quran 4 : 27}
The Muslim Brotherhood
Cairo: March 13, 2013
Reply

جوري
08-21-2013, 06:35 AM
It doesn't matter who declares what, all of them have been caught on camera lying and have been called out on their lies by westerners out of all people and lying in an official manner which is what goes on these funny meaningless documents

here is one of their *****s lying now:



not sure who elected her to speak out on behalf of women before, or the protesters after.. but I think sane involved people can see through the transparency of this charade and others for the sake of their projects or superficial education or to satisfy some sickness in their own psyche and/or foster some foreign country's agenda will stick to this crap.. that is the crap that goes on documents!

best,
Reply

sister herb
08-21-2013, 09:03 AM
Originally Posted by faithandpeace
That's right and I love our "7th century" Islam as well. I don't think a united ummah who lives according to Qu'ran and Sunnah needs the U.N. to tell us what we need.
Salam alaykum

We muslims are still waiting that this United Ummah would even exist. Where it is now? It is defending Al-Aqsa against daily insults against zionist inviders? Is it saying that it is against islam to shoot muslim school girl to head (who just wanted to study)? Is it in China or in yemen helping people against oppressers?

Truly to say; our Islamic Ummah is missing. And it is not fault of The West or the zionists - it is fault of us all. It is always so easy to find enimies outside, even the time when we should just look the mirror and find the biggest enemy from there.
Reply

جوري
08-21-2013, 09:22 AM
Yes it's greatly their fault read the game if nation how a little cockroach state managed to set shop in our midst is them and the puppets they've placed as leaders to keep it running that way by force in spite of the will of the people!
Reply

sister herb
08-21-2013, 09:30 AM
^^ And there is no mistakes what Morsi/MB did during they time they were in rule? ^o)

What are the basics of the economy of the Egypt? Tourism? Pyramids? Before some islamists gave the idea that all those idols of the older worships should destroy as they are un-islamic statues. Is there oil or natural gas in Egypt? Any other natural resources? What are the basics of the economy in Egypt?

Please, hopely we could stop some personal attacks here - here is no team herb at all. Could we try to discuss here without too high tensions?
Reply

tearose
08-21-2013, 09:35 AM
Just wanted to point out that Nelson Mandela is not a 'global moral authority' as mentioned in one post. I can respect how he fought against apartheid - it doesn't go any further than that. I don't know why some people think they can speak for the whole world.

In sha Allah I will respond to some other points made in this thread later.
Reply

sister herb
08-21-2013, 09:40 AM
Originally Posted by tearose
I don't know why some people think they can speak for the whole world.
Salam alaykum

This is just what every people should remember and try to avoid.
Reply

Snel
08-21-2013, 03:19 PM
So what did the Muslim Brotherhood accomplish to the muslim ummah? The so called "best muslims" with their "high education" did get 1 year to prove themselves, what did they accomplish?
Reply

sister herb
08-21-2013, 03:51 PM
Originally Posted by Snel
So what did the Muslim Brotherhood accomplish to the muslim ummah? The so called "best muslims" with their "high education" did get 1 year to prove themselves, what did they accomplish?
Of my mind they showed great lack of understanding of realism of the political economy.
Reply

WarriorforMarie
08-21-2013, 05:09 PM
Originally Posted by Snel
So what did the Muslim Brotherhood accomplish to the muslim ummah? The so called "best muslims" with their "high education" did get 1 year to prove themselves, what did they accomplish?
Well...Morsi named Abdul Fatah al-Sisi as the Minister of Defense. Obviously that didn't work out so well...

In international affairs I know that he was a strong supporter of the Syrian rebels. Whether this was to the benefit of the Egyptian people or the Islamic community is of course a matter of interpretation.
Reply

WarriorforMarie
08-21-2013, 05:26 PM
Originally Posted by sister herb
Of my mind they showed great lack of understanding of realism of the political economy.
I think the main problem for Morsi is that because of the size of the Brotherhood's victory he became tone-deaf to the concerns of the opposition. A more cunning political operator might have been able to placate the opposition and prevent the protests from even manifesting. The sad thing is, I think that if the Brotherhood had been allowed to continue its term in office it is entirely possible it would have learned how to effectively govern. I don't think it is impossible for Islamists to successfully participate in a democracy. The Justice and Development Party (AKP) in Turkey is an example, though there was heavy handedness towards protests there and their is a hostile environment for journalists I mainly think that is because of the personality flaws of Prime Minister Erdogan. In general the AKP has done a good job in consolidating Turkey's democracy and building its economy. I think that once Erdogan is gone Abdullah Gul becomes president things will improve even more.
Reply

جوري
08-21-2013, 05:33 PM
Originally Posted by sister herb
^^ And there is no mistakes what Morsi/MB did during they time they were in rule?
List to me his mistakes and we will discuss them if you dare truly!


Originally Posted by sister herb
What are the basics of the economy of the Egypt?
They gave him Egypt with funds of 16 billion when with Mubarak it was 63 billion, he was already starting from an impossible place, they didn't want him to succeed and still he went to Sudan to plant wheat there, he went to China, he went to Qatar and started fantastic new projects which were surprisingly successful in spite of the gross pressures on him and the fact that he and his family were very much prisoners since the day he stepped into office. And everyone knows who truly held the card with the crisis Israel started and of course they couldn't have that, they couldn't have Israel exposed before the world's eyes. If you proclaim to love the Palis and their cause then know that along with the MB they're too labeled terrorists and Rafah has been closed stopping any type of aid going on to a people already under siege- the Egyptian leadership that likes nude beaches considers Israel a friend and Muslims an enemy, they also enabled Israeli raids in Sinai last week which is in breech of the peace agreement but hey they were 'terrorists' so drink up because Mursi was so awful!
Originally Posted by sister herb
Tourism? Pyramids? Before some islamists gave the idea that all those idols of the older worships should destroy as they are un-islamic statues
Please bring me relevant articles that said the MB wanted to do any of those things.. If you're talking of hizb inoor, everyone knows they're amn idawla in beards. They just set them to confuse some of the ignorant and do enough damage on state media before the world's eyes.. isn't it amazing that no one has heard anything from those people when they were a complete separate party since the coup? What is your explanation to that I wonder? hmm?


Originally Posted by sister herb
Please, hopely we could stop some personal attacks here - here is no team herb at all. Could we try to discuss here without too high tensions?
I am not attacking you, I am asking you to validate what you write, don't accuse and start with a tirade against people you know nothing about, nothing of the politics and doing your part in keeping others in the fog, made up fog and for that you'll be responsible before God. So think before you write is all!
Reply

جوري
08-21-2013, 05:56 PM
Originally Posted by sister herb
I wrote in my post that some islamists wanted to destroy the pyramids. Did I mention MB at all?
Yes you did
here:


Originally Posted by sister herb
Originally Posted by sister herb
^^ And there is no mistakes what Morsi/MB did during they time they were in rule?
I don't know what keep funny with my MB means!
Reply

جوري
08-21-2013, 06:59 PM
I am sad to learn of your decision and I am sure I'll lose sleep over it :D

As for what did Mursi do during his year in office -- well here are some of Mursi's monumental achievements even with the extreme duress he was under:

الصحيفة أكدت أن قوة مرسي أمكن ملاحظتها في عدة أحداث مرت بمصر، وأوضحت أنه في ظل المظاهرات الشديدة التي كانت في عهد الدكتور مرسي والتي ضربت مصر من شمالها لجنوبها بقيادة أجهزه المخابرات العامة والحربية، إلا أن الصمود المذهل للرئيس مرسي في وجه الدولة العميقة أذهل خصومه المعارضين أنفسهم، بحسب "لموزيه نيوز" الفرنسية.

وأضافت بقولها: وتجد أنه في ظل التوترات الشديدة هذه قامت حكومة هشام قنديل بتدشين مشروعات عملاقة مثل مشروع تطوير خط الملاحة الدولى بقناة السويس الذي كان سيجلب لمصر 100 مليار دولار سنويا، والبدء في مشروع بناء 35 صومعة قمح على مستوى الجمهورية، مما كان سيحول مصر إلى اكتفاء ذاتي في القمح خلال ثلاث سنوات.

كما ألقت الصحيفة الفرنسية بالضوء على مشروع استصلاح أراضٍ زراعية للمصريين في السودان، وكذلك مشروع ربط مصر بالسودان ومشروع صناعة أول طائرة حربية مصرية مشتركة مع البرازيل وتركيا، ومشروع طائرة إسعاف على الطرق السريعة لنقل مصابي الحوادث، ومشروع تنمية سيناء، ومشروع مد خط مياه إلى مدينة مطروح وغيرها من المشاريع العملاقة.

stick it in google translate and read before you write!

justification and undertone of biting sarcasm- Hollande's approval ratings were 29% percent at some point, I didn't see the same crowd who'd justify, gloat or brush aside the death of thousands demand he be removed through a coup. Even if I subscribe to the notion that he did absolutely nothing in his stay in office, it is as if someone signed up for a four hour exam and then the proctor decided you'll fail anyway and takes away the exam papers after one hour.

you're nothing if not amusing!
Reply

Jedi_Mindset
08-21-2013, 07:03 PM
Originally Posted by sister herb
oops sorry then. Anyways; I put you to my ignore list - just that I don´t write here something non-islamic comments to you soon.

Have a nice day, my sister in islam.

:statisfie
Sorry, I dont agree with all points the sister mentioned but this is escapist at its best. She only wanted you to list some mistakes the MB did, not that its anything wrong with that. The sister doesnt lable you as a munafiq or kafir when you have disagreements with the MB.
Reply

جوري
08-21-2013, 07:19 PM
There are certainly three types of people in this situation. Kaffirs and we know their position. Munafiqs which are the worse of the lot because of them people die in massacres and they never seem to have enough blood or carnage and the ignorant and that's simply unforgivable- they speak when they've no business speaking and they spread falsehood through ignorance and then their pride gets in the way so they don't even modify their comments after learning but go on spreading their ideas of what things are or how they ought to be without evincing it- just a waste of effort of the person who spent their time trying to illuminate the situation for them!
Reply

Abz2000
08-21-2013, 10:25 PM
Lol I've been posting a lot of definitions recently due to the gross diversions and blatant misconstruction of terms,This one fit the bill well on pages one and two of this thread, and nearly all the other threads because they always seem veer off on a tangent with references and stereotypes that really make the blood boil and disrupt any possibility of on topic harmony.
In Internet slang, a troll (/ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people,by posting inflammatory,extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a forum, chat room, or blog), either accidentally or with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.
I mean why on earth would anyone revert to attacks with mentions of "7th century" and "marital rape" which will obviously stir emotions and provoke a reaction taking the thread off topic. I have a brother who used to do that with me after starting silly debates for the sole purpose of getting a reaction.Anyways, back to Morsi,I personally feel there is a difference between ruling and being oppressed and blackmailed,And a lot of the non-Islamic things Morsi (obviously not out of his own full discretion) agreed to were due to external pressure and a will to do his best given the situation. The military itself was a patsy of the U.S and probably accounted for more than 90% of the practical vote in decision making (the theoretical vote being that of the population). Aside from that there were the mischief makers controlling the media watching and waiting to portray his every move in a negative light. That is NOT rule, and just like we can't blame Yusuf (as) for not implementing shariah in Egypt, I personally do not believe that we can lay the blame for unislamic or not fully islamic rulings squarely on the shoulders of Morsi, But ultimately it becomes clear that (as it always has been) that this is not the ideal form of governance and in this critical stage, the creator of the heavens and earth willed it that people would take many lessons from it and know the truthful from the liars, and that it would light a passion in the hearts of millions who would otherwise have been neither here, nor there.I believe his biggest mistake was trying to pretend he was in full control when he wasn't.it's unlawful in Islam to pay bribes, but when a bent cop stops my motorbike and I know he wants a bit, can you blame me for digging into my pockets and shaking his hand out of fear of running around from office to office to get my papers released?I'd put it down to fear of more oppression and claim that I didn't do it willingly.Whereas in this country, we have "sheikh" hasina who feigns to be Muslim yet the whole country knows she is an enemy of Islam. I don't believe they are the same.Anyway, what is clear is that this form of governance is not ideal and the truthful have become quite clear from the liars, and that only happens in times of distress, that's when the deceivers rear their ugly heads.أَم حَسِبتُم أَن تُترَكوا وَلَمّا يَعلَمِ اللَّهُ الَّذينَ جٰهَدوا مِنكُم وَلَم يَتَّخِذوا مِن دونِ اللَّهِ وَلا رَسولِهِ وَلَا المُؤمِنينَ وَليجَةً ۚ وَاللَّهُ خَبيرٌ بِما تَعمَلونَOr 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.
Reply

جوري
08-22-2013, 01:13 AM
Mursi said three little words in his state address that sealed his fate, especially that he worked actively to achieve them.
Self-sufficiency in food (and he he had a joint venture with Sudan which has many fertile lands) which the U.S prevents it from planting -Yes they do look it up
2- Make our own weapons and he didn't look to Russia or the U.S for that he wanted to be freed of their grip and started with projects with North Korea and Brazil, make our own medicine.. and pay the debt through his expansion of the Suez Canal project which Emirates wanted for itself and they've already paid a couple of billions to take it out of Egyptian hands when it could have made it debt free in a matter of a decade...

So you know you know, army generals get 1.3 billion yearly from the U.S in aid and their doctrine is that of the U.S 'war on terrorism. type crap. israel just droned in Sinai last week and that was applauded and the Egyptian media is a *****, they're either rude to outside reports pls see video I've posted or they cut their coverage and throw them in prison as is the case of Al Jazeera crew even though they've a license there.. and no one is spared their venom even Abu trekka number 22 from the Egyptian team for providing generators to the slain protestors of Rabia and Nahda..

but you're right, let's play candy land with pink cobras and discuss marital rape and 7 c Islam and other people's pet peeves :)

best,
Reply

جوري
08-22-2013, 01:56 AM
http://www.islam21c.com/islamic-thou...t-to-lose-hope
Reply

sister herb
08-23-2013, 06:28 AM
Originally Posted by Jedi_Mindset
Sorry, I dont agree with all points the sister mentioned but this is escapist at its best. She only wanted you to list some mistakes the MB did, not that its anything wrong with that. The sister doesnt lable you as a munafiq or kafir when you have disagreements with the MB.
Salam alaykum

I understood that but sometimes it is better to put some ice to the hat (chilling discussion) to avoid too personal comments (mods dislike kind of situations in general). I like to discuss here about matter, not personal opinions or persons whose have kind of (opposite) opinions.

:phew

As WarriorforMarie mentioned, the worst mistake was forget the opposition. Also forget the political reality they live - that in Egypt has been and still has very strong army what takes part to daily politics. Other mistake was socio-economic situation: from where this huge population get its money (what kind of industry in Egypt has?), where people get they jobs, money for living, do they possible needs loans from outside... and what is price to get them? Political price?
Reply

جوري
08-23-2013, 06:53 AM
Egypt is the world's producer of the best cotton, under mursi's term he started an Egyptian made iPad and various joint ventures with Sudan, brazil and North Korea - the suez canal project would have been sufficient to pay the debts and in fact a portion of it was being paid - they simply don't want Egypt to be self sufficient- resident trolls don't know more about Egypt than Egyptians and should take a hike or go and do an actual report instead if hiding behind the screens and speaking as if authority figures!
Reply

جوري
08-23-2013, 06:55 AM
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lm3J1f3Q2Gs here's an Egyptian scientist up for Nobel not that I think much of that prize helping Japan in its nuclear crisis surprise surprise there are decent countries in the world outside of the US and Europe which love brilliant minds without political gains!
Reply

sister herb
08-23-2013, 07:02 AM
Originally Posted by tearose
As you know it is not allowed in Islam to earn money through haraam means, and there are many haraam elements involved in the tourist industry, such as alcohol, free mixing, inappropriate dress etc. not to mention people going to visit the remains of the ancient Egyptian civilisation with the wrong attitude. If any Islamists wanted the country to move away from that industry I would support them.
Salam alaykum

That is all true what you wrote. As muslim I have to admit it. But. From where all those workers of the tourist services could get halal jobs? The government - any kind of government in Egypt would fall when millions unemployeds will go to the streets to demend the bread! What they should ask from tourists? Use niqab when you go to swim to the Red Sea or to the Mediterranean Sea? Different seashores to men and women (when families comes there to have holiday together)? Mecca Cola? Destroy pyramids and give free Qurans to the tourists whose come there looking for sun and ancient Egypt?

Morsi or Sisi - just same when man can´t earn living to his family.
Reply

faithandpeace
08-23-2013, 08:13 AM
Originally Posted by sister herb
Salam alaykum

That is all true what you wrote. As muslim I have to admit it. But. From where all those workers of the tourist services could get halal jobs? The government - any kind of government in Egypt would fall when millions unemployeds will go to the streets to demend the bread! What they should ask from tourists? Use niqab when you go to swim to the Red Sea or to the Mediterranean Sea? Different seashores to men and women (when families comes there to have holiday together)? Mecca Cola? Destroy pyramids and give free Qurans to the tourists whose come there looking for sun and ancient Egypt?

Morsi or Sisi - just same when man can´t earn living to his family.
A functional economy is a self-sufficient one in which the majority of goods are produced locally (within the state's borders) and whatever cannot be feasibly produced locally can be traded with other nations. Part of the recipe for ultimate failure in any economy in my opinion is a reliance on too much of the service industry. Look at the U.S. and ask yourself what is actually produced here? Nothing. It is all restaurants and office buildings essentially. Having a country such as Egypt based primarily on just people visiting the place to see things doesn't make sense either. In both examples the U.S. and Egypt will have to rely on foreign lands to sustain their own economies.

In any case, haram is haram. I don't see why Western tourism cannot be a part of the economy but it should not be resulting in an erosion of Islamic values and policies just to cater to the dollar bill.
Reply

sister herb
08-23-2013, 08:17 AM
Salam alaykum

Sure functional economy is self-sufficient but is economy of Egypt functional? ^o)
Reply

جوري
08-23-2013, 09:07 AM
Faith and peace I don't wish to descend to the game play practiced by middle aged teenagers on this board but this merits s reply based on what you wrote and the reply to it I can tell most of it just flew over head!
Reply

sister herb
08-23-2013, 09:16 AM
http://www.mapsofworld.com/egypt/natural-resources/

Can 84 million people population lives by this without any (political-base) foreign help? If yes, why IBM and USA gives loans and help to them?
Reply

جوري
08-23-2013, 09:31 AM
They give 1.3 billion out of 1.5 to the military so they can coup against the elected president drone Sinai ( not two weeks ago) and keep the debacle of a peace treaty to keep Israel safe and close rafah capice? Now that you do hopefully you can understand why 'peace and love' don't work the enemy expects it from you but don't adhere to it themselves - this isn't candy land it's real life!
Reply

sister herb
08-23-2013, 09:47 AM
Salam alaykum

Whose are those attack against Egyptians in Sinai? The Western media claims sometimes they comes from Gaza and represent "Al-Qaeda" but Gaza is under control of Hamas who doesn´t accept Al-Qaeda at all. Also Hamas has no interest to attack against Egyptian groups over border (that would be very stupid at all).
Reply

Ali_008
08-23-2013, 10:31 AM
:sl:

I read almost all the posts of this thread, and I still have no clear clue whether Morsi was good or bad. More than half of the posts are irrelevant, and way away from the actual topic. Please, keep it civil and relevant. There are lots of us who need proper information, and if an Islamic forum as well starts behaving like the media then I think we have to accept the suffering as our fate.
Reply

جوري
08-23-2013, 02:23 PM
Indeed it's what happens when the unlearned speak about that which they don't know, they quote you articles merely to support their views not because they've yaqeen that's what the absolute truth is- they write about places they've never tread, know nothing of its culture or people
Mursi is but a man and men make mistakes I think his fault here is trusting and openly opposing amero Israeli policies
Yes suffering is our fate when we let go of kitaab and sunnah and follow the desires of kaffirs because they're 'our friends' peace and love
Oh btw here's Israel itself telling you they've crossed Egyptian sovereign skies and killed five

http://www.haaretz.com/mobile/.premium-1.540699

Maybe Israel = alqaeda in some minds eyes and zionists = Muslims and let them kill us so we can get along
أعوذ بالله من هذه أشباه الرجال وأشباه المسلمين
Reply

WarriorforMarie
08-26-2013, 09:51 PM
Originally Posted by faithandpeace
A functional economy is a self-sufficient one in which the majority of goods are produced locally (within the state's borders) and whatever cannot be feasibly produced locally can be traded with other nations. Part of the recipe for ultimate failure in any economy in my opinion is a reliance on too much of the service industry. Look at the U.S. and ask yourself what is actually produced here? Nothing. It is all restaurants and office buildings essentially. Having a country such as Egypt based primarily on just people visiting the place to see things doesn't make sense either. In both examples the U.S. and Egypt will have to rely on foreign lands to sustain their own economies.

In any case, haram is haram. I don't see why Western tourism cannot be a part of the economy but it should not be resulting in an erosion of Islamic values and policies just to cater to the dollar bill.


Uh, I'm not an economist but I can tell you that this is not accurate. First off all your comment "what is actually produced here? Nothing. It is all restaurants and office buildings essentially" is simply incorrect. Manufacturing represents less of a percentage of the United States economy that it once did but is still a significant share (I think both durable and non-durable goods represent roughly 12% of the US economy).


As to whether it is desirable from a country to have an economy based of the service industry it is still a matter debated by economists. So I can not say you are wrong about this. But one thing you are absolutely wrong about is "A functional economy is a self-sufficient one in which the majority of goods are produced locally" If I am understanding you correctly you are saying that a country should try to produce all of its owns goods. This violates the law of comparative advantage. What you are suggesting is called autarky. It is feasible for a state to take this course of action, but this usually results in considerable economic inefficiencies. It is better that a country instead focus on the industries in which it has a comparative advantage.
Reply

جوري
08-26-2013, 11:53 PM
Now in Egypt with the liberals amending the constitution1- the head of the army can remove the president
2- you can't remove the head of azhar and he's appointed by the govt. same for the pope
3- you can't form political parties if you've religious inclinations
4- they've the right to detain you anytime they want for any reason they concoct
5- media is fully controlled by the govt.
6- they've implemented martial law
And much more too numerous to count

By the way mursi as stated started many projects including expansion of Suez Canal he also wanted to do business with large Muslim countries like Malaysia, weapons from North Korea and brazil but thanks to this new 'free liberal democratic' govt. Egypt will forever be a slave to the amero/ Zionist agenda
Congratulations to those who support the coup and of course too dumb to understand what it all entails!
Dumb by agenda or dumb by choice!
Reply

sister herb
08-27-2013, 09:15 AM
Originally Posted by Ali_008
:sl:

I read almost all the posts of this thread, and I still have no clear clue whether Morsi was good or bad. More than half of the posts are irrelevant, .
Salam alaykum

I afraid that we too often hot up when matter is too close to us.

:phew

Humans usually do it.
Reply

Jedi_Mindset
08-30-2013, 07:21 PM
This guy is a idiot but what he said here clearly explains why Morsi couldnt achieve everything he wanted, he talks openly about a deep state controlling egypts government officials, and the shocking thing he stated is that the deep state is controlled by israel, the US and some other arab countries (Mainly saudi arabia)

Confessions of ElBaradei


A democratic "nobel peace prize laureate" and former head of the UN-affiliated international atomic energy agency ElBaradei gave his first interview after his resignation from the post of the acting junta's vice president of Egypt, in which he said "Mubarak's regime still retains power in the country".

"The ousted president Muhammad Mursi fell into a trap that was set up by conspirators, and Muslim Brotherhood helped them by making their own mistakes", the democrat claimed.

ElBaradei became an interim junta's vice president on July 3 after the military coup in Egypt. But later, after mass shooting of peaceful demonstrators in Cairo, which killed more than 1,500 people (according to other sources up to 4,500), and mild criticism of the junta from the west, he abandoned his post and left the country.

In a statement on recent events in Egypt that has been widely disseminated by the large number of democratic Arab newspapers, El-Baradei made some admissions.

Some groups in Egypt were quick to interpret the resignation of ElBaradei as an escape, to which "the former vice president" retorted:

"Egyptians do not know something. Namely, the fact that two years after the 2011 revolution, the Mubarak regime did not cease to reign in Egypt. And I found that the truth was on the side of Muhammad Mursi. After all, those who lured him into the trap, those who arranged artificial crises in the country, power outages, etc., cannot be called in other words but conspirators from the state within a state.

The Brotherhood in their naivety helped the Mubarak regime to successfully implement their plans. Because, at the right time, they have not sent Mursi on the path of making right decisions", said ElBaradei.

"The first thing that Mursi had to do was to purify the court system. Because justice is the foundation of power. And for the transparency of the trial of the Mubarak regime, it was necessary to convene an extraordinary revolutionary court.

It was necessary to work with people in all areas and to eliminate elements of the old system. However, none of this was done.

The Mubarak regime (deep state within a state, consisting of the army, interior ministry, judiciary, press, America's economy , "Israel" and some Arab countries), predicted Mursi victory in the election, and let him come to power.

However, they developed plans to overthrow him, to sabotage, and artificial crises. That was all prepared long before June 30. The movement "Tamarrud" knows what I'm talking about".

ElBaradei continued: "I found out too late about their secret meetings in Madinat Al-Nasr (a district in Cairo), and the money that they received, and the forgery of signatures of the National Assembly - forgery and treachery, and so much more about it!

If the Brotherhood took necessary decisions in time, they would have been able to destroy all these plans of the conspirators".

ElBaradei lamented that when the popular elected president Mursi declared a state of emergency, interior and defence ministries did not comply with the decision of the president. "But today the defense ministry proclaimed a state of emergency, use sharp ammunition, and this decision is implemented now", said the democratic politician.

As for the money for the aid to Egypt from the Gulf, according to El-Baradei "there was no money from Arab countries, Mubarak just spent all the stolen money before".

Another error of Muslim Brotherhood, according to El-Baradei, "was that they attacked with criticism their political opponents and the Arab regimes and insulted them. Even I got my fair share of it...

Unfortunately, the people of Egypt and Muslim Brotherhood were cheated, they were used as a means to successfully implement plans of the Mubarak's regime. By this time, everyone has forgotten about the revolution of martyrs, killing of revolutionaries and their oppression.

After getting rid of the Brotherhood, according to the plan of the conspirators, all the murderers of revolutionaries during the January Revolution are now being acquitted".

In addition, ElBaradei suggested that starting with the Salafi party Nur, all other religious and political parties in Egypt will be abolished.

Recall, that on September 19, a court of the Egypt's military junta is to consider a lawsuit against ElBaradei, he is charged with "the breach of confidence, which resulted in his dismissal during the critical bloodshed.

http://www.kavkazcenter.com/eng/cont...29/18217.shtml
Reply

Independent
08-31-2013, 10:32 AM
Originally Posted by Ali_008
I read almost all the posts of this thread, and I still have no clear clue whether Morsi was good or bad
From an economic viewpoint, his rule was unsuccessful. To be fair to him, anyone taking charge of Egypt following the revolution was facing massive challenges. The economy was weakening under Mubarack and even more disrupted by the revolution. There are 3 key sectors that are revealing:

Foreign currency reserves - had fallen dramatically since the revolution and continued to fall to about 40% of Mubarack levels under Morsi. This would have covered just 3 months of Egypt's imports and threatened total collapse for the economy. Even getting close to these levels was damaging confidence.

Wheat - Egypt hasn't been self sufficient in food for years, not least because it now has twice the population to feed but with less farmland. Morsi promised on ideological grounds to end US wheat imports. In fact he did cut imports - but without raising domestic production. When he was deposed, Egypt's wheat stocks were at an historic low and were compelling the government to pay extra for emergency supplies. This part of his policy made no sense at any level.

Fuel - diesel fuel is essential to the Egyptian economy and as cooking fuel for poorer classes especially. The price has been subsidised for years. Maintaining the subsidy was a terrific strain on the government budget, but Morsi feared to cut the subsidy in case of revolution. In the end he did nothing to fix this long standing issue. The loans he received were simply wasted on current account subsidies, he did nothing to change the structural problem.

Economic schemes - Morsi promoted a grand scheme to develop the Suez Canal into a massive enterprise zone, offering services to the huge traffic of shipping that passes through the canal every year. This is a very good idea (although it dates back to the Mubarack era). The canal is undoubtedly Egypt's jewel in the crown which, alongside the tourist industry, generates most of Egypt's foreign currency earnings.

However, to develop the Zone he needed big investment from the IMF. But the Brotherhood are ideologically opposed to the IMF so, after negotiations, they withdrew from the deal. Instead he tried to get the money from Gulf States (who may have demanded partial ownership of the scheme in return - the details of the deal, which is fundamental to Egypt's future, are disgracefully secret.) In the end he wasted this money on subsidies and the scheme is no further advanced than before.

For Morsi, there was a fundamental conflict between the ideal of no borrowings, no debt, and his pledge to develop the Suez Canal Zone. Morsi's approach to this is contradictory and in the end went nowhere.
Reply

Abz2000
08-31-2013, 10:55 AM
Originally Posted by Independent
From an economic viewpoint, his rule was unsuccessful. To be fair to him, anyone taking charge of Egypt following the revolution was facing massive challenges. The economy was weakening under Mubarack and even more disrupted by the revolution. There are 3 key sectors that are revealing:....................


you conveniently scratch the service, a little akin to a whitewashed tomb with nothing but corruption and dead bones within.......


i managed to dig this out of the memory hole, amazing how short our memory spans become in the world of politics


Sudden Improvements in Egypt Suggest a Campaign to Undermine Morsi


Published: July 10, 2013





CAIRO — The streets seethe with protests and government ministers are on the run or in jail, but since the military ousted President Mohamed Morsi, life has somehow gotten better for many people across Egypt: Gas lines have disappeared, power cuts have stopped and the police have returned to the street.





Yusuf Sayman for The New York Times

As crime and traffic worsened under President Mohamed Morsi, the police refused to respond, hurting the quality of life and the economy. Since his ouster last week, officers have returned to patrols.


The apparently miraculous end to the crippling energy shortages, and the re-emergence of the police, seems to show that the legions of personnel left in place after former President Hosni Mubarak was ousted in 2011 played a significant role — intentionally or not — in undermining the overall quality of life under the Islamist administration of Mr. Morsi.
And as the interim government struggles to unite a divided nation, the Muslim Brotherhood and Mr. Morsi’s supporters say the sudden turnaround proves that their opponents conspired to make Mr. Morsi fail. Not only did police officers seem to disappear, but the state agencies responsible for providing electricity and ensuring gas supplies failed so fundamentally that gas lines and rolling blackouts fed widespread anger and frustration.
“This was preparing for the coup,” said Naser el-Farash, who served as the spokesman for the Ministry of Supply and Internal Trade under Mr. Morsi. “Different circles in the state, from the storage facilities to the cars that transport petrol products to the gas stations, all participated in creating the crisis.”

Working behind the scenes, members of the old establishment, some of them close to Mr. Mubarak and the country’s top generals, also helped finance, advise and organize those determined to topple the Islamist leadership, including Naguib Sawiris, a billionaire and an outspoken foe of the Brotherhood; Tahani el-Gebali, a former judge on the Supreme Constitutional Court who is close to the ruling generals; and Shawki al-Sayed, a legal adviser to Ahmed Shafik, Mr. Mubarak’s last prime minister, who lost the presidential race to Mr. Morsi.

But it is the police returning to the streets that offers the most blatant sign that the institutions once loyal to Mr. Mubarak held back while Mr. Morsi was in power. Throughout his one-year tenure, Mr. Morsi struggled to appease the police, even alienating his own supporters rather than trying to overhaul the Interior Ministry. But as crime increased and traffic clogged roads — undermining not only the quality of life, but the economy — the police refused to deploy fully.
Until now.
White-clad officers have returned to Cairo’s streets, and security forces — widely despised before and after the revolution — intervened with tear gas and shotguns against Islamists during widespread street clashes last week, leading anti-Morsi rioters to laud them as heroes. Posters have gone up around town showing a police officer surrounded by smiling children over the words “Your security is our mission, your safety our goal.”
You had officers and individuals who were working under a specific policy that was against Islamic extremists and Islamists in general,” said Ihab Youssef, a retired police officer who runs a professional association for the security forces. “Then all of a sudden the regime flips and there is an Islamic regime ruling. They could never psychologically accept that.”
When Mr. Mubarak was removed after nearly 30 years in office in 2011, the bureaucracy he built stayed largely in place. Many business leaders, also a pillar of the old government, retained their wealth and influence.
Despite coming to power through the freest elections in Egyptian history, Mr. Morsi was unable to extend his authority over the sprawling state apparatus, and his allies complained that what they called the “deep state” was undermining their efforts at governing.
While he failed to broaden his appeal and build any kind of national consensus, he also faced an active campaign by those hostile to his leadership, including some of the wealthiest and most powerful pillars of the Mubarak era.
Mr. Sawiris, one of Egypt’s richest men and a titan of the old establishment, said Wednesday that he had supported an upstart group called “tamarrod,” Arabic for “rebellion,” that led a petition drive seeking Mr. Morsi’s ouster. He donated use of the nationwide offices and infrastructure of the political party he built, the Free Egyptians. He provided publicity through a popular television network he founded and his major interest in Egypt’s largest private newspaper. He even commissioned the production of a popular music video that played heavily on the network.
“Tamarrod did not even know it was me!” he said. “I am not ashamed of it.”
He said he had publicly predicted that ousting Mr. Morsi would bolster Egypt’s sputtering economy because it would bring in billions of dollars in aid from oil-rich monarchies afraid that the Islamist movement might spread to their shores. By Wednesday, a total of $12 billion had flowed in from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait. “That will take us for 12 months with no problem,” Mr. Sawiris said.
Ms. Gebali, the former judge, said in a telephone interview on Wednesday that she and other legal experts helped tamarrod create its strategy to appeal directly to the military to oust Mr. Morsi and pass the interim presidency to the chief of the constitutional court.
“We saw that there was movement and popular creativity, so we wanted to see if it would have an effect and a constitutional basis,” Ms. Gebali said.
Mr. Farash, the trade ministry spokesman under Mr. Morsi, attributed the fuel shortages to black marketers linked to Mr. Mubarak, who diverted shipments of state-subsidized fuel to sell for a profit abroad.
Corrupt officials torpedoed Mr. Morsi’s introduction of a smart card system to track fuel shipments by refusing to use the devices, he said.
But not everyone agreed with that interpretation, as supporters of the interim government said the improvements in recent days were a reflection of Mr. Morsi’s incompetence, not a conspiracy. State news media said energy shortages occurred because consumers bought extra fuel out of fear, which appeared to evaporate after Mr. Morsi’s fall. On Wednesday, Al Ahram, the flagship newspaper, said the energy grid had had a surplus in the past week for the first time in months, thanks to “energy-saving measures by the public.”
“I feel like Egypt is back,” Ayman Abdel-Hakam, a criminal court judge from a Cairo suburb, said after waiting only a few minutes to fill up his car at a downtown gas station. He accused Mr. Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood of trying to seize all state power and accused them of creating the fuel crisis by exporting gasoline to Hamas, the militant Islamic group in the Gaza Strip.
“We had a disease, and we got rid of it,” Mr. Abdel-Hakam said.
Ahmed Nabawi, a gas station manager, said he had heard several reasons for the gas crisis: technical glitches at a storage facility, a shipment of low-quality gas from abroad and unnecessary stockpiling by the public. Still, he was amazed at how quickly the crisis disappeared.
“We went to sleep one night, woke up the next day, and the crisis was gone,” he said, casually sipping tea in his office with his colleagues.
Regardless of the reasons behind the crisis, he said, Mr. Morsi’s rule had not helped.
“No one wanted to cooperate with his people because they didn’t accept him,” he said. “Now that he is gone, they are working like they’re supposed to.”


..............................
Reply

جوري
09-01-2013, 12:34 PM
The economy has nothing to do with Mursi!
At any rate it's not worth while to argue with kaffirs about this their vision for the ME differs from ours and until we rid of them completely will they continue to dictate to us how to run out affairs!
I do fear that Egypt is headed toward a Syrian end but maybe that's just what's needed to rid of the cancer within and the infections from outside!
Reply

Junon
09-02-2013, 02:16 PM
Salaam

Another assessment of President Morsi. Agree, disagree?

The Middling Muslim Brothers

It’s a small detail of great consequence. On July 3, members of the presidential guard stepped away and let Dr. Mohamed Morsi and his aides be arrested by army commandos. If men with guns and tanks can simply arrest an elected president, then what’s to keep them from doing it again and again?

The horrible precedent this sets is buried under the partisan fury for and against the Muslim Brothers. Haters of the MB apparently see nothing wrong with the military summarily detaining the first elected national leader in Egyptian history. Boosters of the MB are so caught up in their own injury that they’re not pausing to wonder why a great many people feel relief and even satisfaction at the demise of the Morsi presidency.

I don’t want to belabor here the polarization that so many others have written about. I want to reflect on what Dr. Morsi did to hasten his ignominious ouster. As a seasoned politician with long experience dealing with the Mubarak state, surely Mohamed Morsi and his inner circle realized the unbelievable obstacles they were up against.

Dangers lurked everywhere—resistance and intrigue from the mukhabarat state; corruption and obstruction from top to bottom of the bureaucracy; a rogue police force intent on facilitating rather than containing violence; fulul networks in every province ever-ready to block any change; a hostile media establishment hellbent on demonizing the MB; and considerable public mistrust of the Brothers well before Morsi set foot in the presidential palace.

Stubbornness, stupidity, incompetence, myopia, dictatorial intent – all have been breezily thrown about in an ugly carnival of Morsi-blame and schadenfreude that may emotionally satisfy some people. But it doesn’t begin to get at a real understanding of the perils of governance in a revolutionary situation. Dr. Morsi’s challenges and failings are sure to re-appear in future presidents. That’s assuming we’ll get future presidents who come to power through credible elections, not stage-managed pageants.

Here I want to flesh out a remark I made about Mohamed Morsi when he was first elected. I want to argue that Dr. Morsi’s core mistake is that he underestimated and neglected the very public that his enemies were cynically and ceaselessly courting. He and his advisers chose to govern behind closed doors, without first girding themselves in protective public support. When the problems piled up and the mukhabarat state tightened the noose, Morsi found no succor from anyone outside his trust network.

This isn’t an issue of the former president’s stubbornness or blindness or whatever. It’s his embodiment of a mode of leadership that’s common in the world of politics but very inadequate for the treacherous terrain of post-revolutionary politics. Dr. Morsi’s fatal weakness is that he’s a prototypical party oligarch, and this made him distinctly unsuited for the extraordinary responsibility he took on.

A Janus-Faced Movement

The Muslim Brothers have always been an essentially middling movement, not in the sense of ‘mediocre’ but in the sense of straddling two worlds. Their base is rooted in the middle and lower classes, with a real interest in transformative socio-economic change. But their leadership has always had its eye on joining,not destroying, the system.

Over the years, the MB leadership crystallized into a counter-elite of well-to-do, urban, upwardly-mobile professionals and businessmen eager to enter the exclusive ranks of the establishment. The Brothers are still second to none in their public outreach during elections, knowing how to woo rather than spurn ordinary citizens. But as with all large organizations, the leadership has developed interests of its own, principally self-preservation.

The leaders’ hold over the organization is reinforced by decades of state repression and the kind of insular decision-making that it breeds. Such an environment encourages a conception of politics as the art of machination and intrigue, of deal-making behind closed doors with both allies and adversaries.

The contrasting conception of politics as the painstaking, transparent, messy work of coalition-building between large, cacophonous groups has less purchase. Why invest time in cultivating horizontal ties with other groups when there are greater (and quicker) payoffs from bargaining with those at the top?

The MB’s now-notorious practitioner of politics-as-elite-intrigue is financier and strategist Khairat El-Shater, invariably referred to as the group’s “strongman.” Shater is emblematic of the rising Islamist counter-elite aspiring for a share of national power, only to be rebuffed every time by the Mubarakist entrenched elite.

After being blocked from an academic appointment in 1981, Shater turned to the family business and became a millionaire, in spite of the Mubarak regime’s repeated crackdown on his businesses, starting with the 1992 shutdown of his computer company (Salsabeel) that he co-owned with businessman Hasan Malek. Incidentally, the prosecutor on that case was none other than Abdel Meguid Mahmoud. Beginning in 2004, Shater’s star began to rise in the MB and was cemented with the January 2010 internal elections that put Mohamed Badie at the helm and re-arranged the politburo to push out Shater’s rivals, Abdel Moneim Aboul Fotouh and Mohamed Habib.

A Party Leader Becomes President

The first handicap that afflicted Morsi’s presidency is that he is a Shater loyalist, which is not the same as being the best man the MB could put forward for such a critical position. Morsi as stand-in for Shater may have been passable to the party faithful, but not to Egyptians at large. It left an undying impression among both the general public and Morsi’s opponents that he was the wrong man in the wrong place. And this is before he made a single executive decision.

Morsi’s personal attributes reinforced the image of an unconvincing president. The whip of the Ikhwan’s bloc in the 2000 parliament, he was the quintessential party manager. His manner was rote, risk-averse, a tad pallid. He didn’t do outreach, like MB leaders Mohamed El-Beltagui and Helmi al-Gazzar, both comfortable around and popular with non-Ikhwan politicians and the media. Morsi’s natural habitat is the executive committee meeting of the party, flanked by fellow party elders and deferential to the towering figure of Shater.

Typical of party leaders, the MB and Morsi did court non-MB voters, but purely for electoral purposes. They changed their campaign slogan for the second round of elections to the glib “Our Power is in Our Unity.” And the Morsi campaign courted a group of activist luminaries who pledged to support Morsi over Ahmed Shafiq at the famous “Fairmont Meeting.” In return, the group asked for an inclusive national unity government and presidential advisers from outside the Ikhwan. Morsi balked at the former and acceded to the latter, but after the November 21 decrees, all of his advisers resigned, refusing to serve as ornaments in an essentially Ikhwan presidential administration.

Rocky Beginnings

Morsi began his short-lived tenure in office with a lot of baggage. He didn’t ride into the presidency on a wave of popular enthusiasm, as one would expect of the first ever free presidential elections after a heroic popular uprising. Aside from the brief, celebratory day of June 29, 2012 when Morsi took his oath in Tahrir Square, the general mood was sober.

Shafiq had secured a stunning 48% of the vote, a clear sign that the forces of the old order succeeded in molding a sizeable public opinion against change. And the Muslim Brothers’ subpar performance in parliament and their hogging of the constituent assembly throughout the spring of 2012 left an indelible feeling that they wanted to “take over” the whole state.

Morsi’s enemies in the deep state started working on the public from day one. Ironically, they read the election returns better than the Brothers did, recognizing in major metropolitan centers a significant anti-Ikhwan sentiment that they worked to stoke. Within a week of Morsi taking office, they had their chance. On July 8, Morsi issued his first decree re-seating the parliament dissolved by SCAF based on a Supreme Court ruling. The civilian president looked like he was intent on using his executive powers, not merely being a figurehead.

Alarm bells went off in the military and intelligence apparatus. The ever-useful Mohamed Abu Hamed called on the military to act against the president. Thus began the campaign to cast Mohamed Morsi as the MB’s cat’s paw to take over the state. Significantly, the military’s propaganda video justifying its coup cites the July 8 decree as the beginning of Morsi’s supposedly irresponsible actions that precipitated his own downfall.

But let’s not be lulled into parroting the military’s storyline. The generals’ goal is to demonize any effort to create an independent power base within the Egyptian state, especially if that power inheres in an elected institution. So they use the discourse of failure, autocratic usurpation, and incompetence to smear Morsi and reinforce their exclusive hold on power. We have to come up with our own independent assessment of Morsi’s performance.

Hemmed In

Morsi’s performance oscillated between acting with resolve to push back against obstruction and going slow so as not to antagonize powerful entrenched fiefdoms. Morsi used the first strategy against the Mubarakist judiciary, thus transferring to the presidency the Muslim Brothers’ intensifying conflict with the courts that they had started while in parliament. The November 21 decrees are the case in point here. Morsi tried to protect the constituent assembly and Shura Council from judicial dissolution, but did so by touching a nerve with Egyptians: increasing presidential powers.

The second strategy of placation was used with the police. As an outsider president, Morsi’s dilemma was that if he moved to purge the police, he would face a mutiny that would bring down his rule. If he chose accommodation, he would be held accountable for the continuing torture and abuses of a rogue police force intent only on maintaining its untouchable status. Morsi repeatedly accommodated the police, only to get the worst of all worlds. Citizens were outraged by continued police impunity, while police strikes and passive resistance intensified the collective violence and chaos that destabilized Morsi’s rule.

In ordinary times and places, a dual strategy of confrontation and appeasement is the stuff of presidential politics. In the power struggle of post-revolutionary Egypt, presidential politics is an existential gamble. Morsi became trapped in a cycle where he was accused of dictatorship if he moved aggressively and accused of betrayal if he pursued accommodation.

The wider public tuned out this grand drama, seeing no stake in the epic battles playing out at the top. Morsi’s sense of besiegement and retreat into his Ikhwan trust network was a huge disincentive for the public to even try and sympathize with the embattled president.

Most Egyptians could be forgiven for feeling that the whole thing didn’t concern them, that it was just a new round of the perennial conflict between the Muslim Brothers and the state. It wasn’t a battle between the first elected president and the corrupt deep state, but a fight between the president of the Muslim Brothers and his group and everyone else.

The anti-Morsi media drove home this framing every day and night. If an alien had parachuted into Egypt in spring 2013 and turned on the television, the impression he’d get is that the state had been hijacked by a lunatic tribe that was running the country into the ground. The insular, preaching-to-the-converted media of the Muslim Brothers stood no chance against this juggernaut.

The best that can be said about the president’s attempts to reach out to the public at this juncture is that they were perfunctory. His speeches were bland status updates, boring balance sheets of what the government had achieved and still needed to do. As crises mounted, the underworld of deep conflict between the president and the security services began to bubble up, but in a way that made the president appear even weaker.

By April, Morsi seemed completely encircled. Repeatedly, he reasonably protested that he was protecting democratic legitimacy. But he seemed to be the only one invoking the rules of the democratic game. All other players had moved on. An EU delegation was pressuring Morsi to accept the demands of Morsi’s opponents in the National Salvation Front, in return for the IMF signing off on its $4.8 billion loan to Egypt. And on April 24, General El-Sisi had a long meeting in Cairo with US Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel. Afterwards, “Mr. Hagel told associates that he believed Gen. Sisi was someone Washington could—and should—work more closely with.”

Beyond the Muslim Brothers

Had Morsi pursued a different tack and built a robust popular front to help him take on the Mubarakist ruling caste, would he still be president today? I don’t know. My argument suggests that even if he wanted to, Morsi wouldn’t have been able to build firm bridges. He was too imprisoned by the MB leadership’s strategic decision to go it alone. For them, ‘real’ politics is the interaction between competing elites. The politics of coalition-building and public persuasion is small potatoes compared to the high politics of elite machination. Tragically, this age-old conception of power cost them a lot more than their short-lived exercise of power.

For me, there’s nothing to celebrate in the rout of the Muslim Brothers. Warts and all, they were the only civilian counterweight to absolute military supremacy, the only organization big enough to stand up to the self-preserving generals and their partners in the civilian bureaucracy. But their leaders’ strategies led to their undoing by the far more powerful, vicious ruling caste. The consequences of their defeat go far beyond simply injury to their organization.

The downfall of the Morsi presidency will also be cast as the futility of the hope that outsiders can govern. The Brothers proved to be excellent tools in the counter-revolution’s master operation of regaining exclusive control over the state. The Morsi episode is already being framed as a cautionary tale of the bad things that happen when unqualified outsiders dare to enter the hallowed precincts of state power.

Millions entrusted Dr. Morsi with making the state work for its people, of ending decades upon miserable decades of state theft, violence, and neglect. He did not, could not, fulfill the trust.

If the largest, best organized, and most politically experienced mass movement can be so handily slain by the forces of the old order, what hope is there for the weaker segments of the opposition, many of whom have already proved their willingness to pact with the dominant elite out of hatred for the Islamist counter-elite?

In my political dream world, this defeat will catalyze an internal revolution in the Muslim Brothers and the rise of a new leadership more committed to far-reaching change, and skilled in the politics of coalition-building. A historic entente will ensue between the new and improved MB and new and improved factions of the secular opposition, who will have learned their own hard lesson to never, ever trust the military, and to respect ordinary citizens more. This powerful alliance will contest and win parliamentary and presidential elections, firing up public enthusiasm for a decisive showdown with the old order and its foreign backers.

Would that the next round of the Egyptian revolution follow my playbook. For there will be a next round, but nobody knows whose playbook it’ll come from.

http://www.zcommunications.org/the-middling-muslim-brothers-by-baheyya.html
Reply

جوري
09-02-2013, 03:32 PM
They didn't want any form of Islamic government to succeed even one merely flavored Islamic and the take home lesson for Muslims here is you can't attain what's rightfully yours using a western model to attain what was lost by the sword or their equipments and tanks must be regained in the same fashion - Syrian rebels after two yrs and useless 'peaceful protests' got the right idea and now that they're closing in in their devil bashar the US and west are suddenly concerned of the use of chemical weapons well where was the concern with the hundreds of thousands dead? They did the same in Bosnia they come in when a proper genocide has taken place against Muslims they come in to make sure no Muslim rises to power no matter how westernized they seem and of course take the glory like a deus ex machina. Once people collectively understand how they play their dirty politics and propaganda mill will they be able to move forward and get what's rightfully ours back!
Reply

Jedi_Mindset
09-02-2013, 04:04 PM
US can very well meet russia on the battlefield when they try to attack syria and install a pro-zionist system. When US, israel attacks syria it wont matter if you are pro or anti-Assad, I know hamas is anti-Assad but the group made itself clear that if US attacks syria that it will carry out strikes into israel. So yes, this is going to get messy.

http://www.islamicinvitationturkey.c...ke-on-syria-2/
Reply

جوري
09-02-2013, 04:51 PM
The US and Russia may appear as enemies but they've a common enemy 'Muslims' even if the US appears anti Asad and Russia pro at the end they've to protect the cockroach Israel furthermore they can play good cop bad cop with the veto system.
I do believe we are headed toward a WWIII the Armageddon sort!
Reply

Jedi_Mindset
09-02-2013, 05:44 PM
Exactly, thats why i try to avoid geopolitics.
Reply

WarriorforMarie
09-03-2013, 01:48 AM
Originally Posted by جوري
The US and Russia may appear as enemies but they've a common enemy 'Muslims' even if the US appears anti Asad and Russia pro at the end they've to protect the cockroach Israel furthermore they can play good cop bad cop with the veto system.
I do believe we are headed toward a WWIII the Armageddon sort!
Which countries will be on what sides in this hypothetical WWIII you think we are headed for?
Reply

WarriorforMarie
09-03-2013, 02:24 AM
Originally Posted by Jedi_Mindset
US can very well meet russia on the battlefield when they try to attack syria and install a pro-zionist system. When US, israel attacks syria it wont matter if you are pro or anti-Assad, I know hamas is anti-Assad but the group made itself clear that if US attacks syria that it will carry out strikes into israel. So yes, this is going to get messy.
I think it is highly unlikely that the United States and Russian will actually fight each other. Is it possible? Well sure, just about anything is possible. But highly unlikely. As for Hamas carrying out strikes against Israel...well, in the past they have fired rockets into Israel that they can barely aim. Most of the time they seem to strike open landscape. I don't know for sure, but I suspect that I could count on both my hands the number of people they have managed to kill with their weak rockets. I do think it will be messy and bloody regardless of who wins. Maybe if the US had intervened at the very beginning they could have saved tens of thousands of lives and sped up Assad's downfall before relations between the different Muslim groups in the country became hardened. Unfortunately Isolationism is on the rise in the United States because of the Iraq fiasco.
Reply

sister herb
09-03-2013, 09:02 AM
Originally Posted by WarriorforMarie
As for Hamas carrying out strikes against Israel...well, in the past they have fired rockets into Israel that they can barely aim. Most of the time they seem to strike open landscape. I don't know for sure, but I suspect that I could count on both my hands the number of people they have managed to kill with their weak rockets.
Peace with you

Some years ago I asked this matter from Hamas (they military section al-Qassam Brigades). They told that they don´t want to kill innocent people - it is against islam.

They fire rockets, missiles to the place where isn´t inhabitants. Sometimes they missiles hit to houses. As they are homemades... they might go to everywhere. Sometimes even back to Gaza. Israel has now the Iron Dome- system. Sorry Americans, it is paid from your tax money.

:embarrass
Reply

جوري
09-03-2013, 09:59 AM
Israel is a colonial settler state and viewed as the enemy it also has no problems killing civilians and putting in prison children as young as three unfortunately Hamas isn't sophisticated enough to target their missiles where they need as most of their equipment are locally made but hopefully in due time!
Reply

WarriorforMarie
09-03-2013, 12:29 PM
I've just read up on the performance of Iron Dome. Very impressive capabilities. Even if Hamas does upgrade its rocket capabilities I don't know if it will make a difference.
Reply

جوري
09-03-2013, 01:14 PM
That's Israeli propagandist BS Hamas' rockets penetrated their so called iron wall and they'd to beg Egypt for a cease fire another reason mursi had to go because they didn't like the shift in power!
It reminds me if their five hundred million dollar impenetrable bar lev line which the Egyptian army back when they were still Muslims took it down with plain water!
Victory has always come from faith and from God not equipments and allies which us precisely why Afghanistan as meek and poor as it is, is labeled the graveyard of empires read all about it - written by your own greedy imperialist fools too not Muslim ones after a psychological warfare!
Israel will never be happy or at peace they know they're thieves and thieves never sleep!
As the great Muslim military leader who has never lost a battle Khalid IBn ilwaleed said: 'فلا نامت أعين الجبناء'
Reply

WarriorforMarie
09-03-2013, 02:17 PM
Originally Posted by جوري
That's Israeli propagandist BS Hamas' rockets penetrated their so called iron wall and they'd to beg Egypt for a cease fire another reason mursi had to go because they didn't like the shift in power!
From my understanding the system does not target rockets that are calculated not to hit anything. It seem most rockets that "penetrate" the system are permitted to do so.

Originally Posted by جوري
It reminds me if their five hundred million dollar impenetrable bar lev line which the Egyptian army back when they were still Muslims took it down with plain water!
The bar lev line is an illustrative example of why fixed defenses are of little value in an age of mobile warfare. Pretty strange that the Israelis would put effort into something that was not congruent with their military strengths.

Originally Posted by جوري
Victory has always come from faith and from God not equipments and allies which us precisely why Afghanistan as meek and poor as it is, is labeled the graveyard of empires read all about it - written by your own greedy imperialist fools too not Muslim ones after a psychological warfare!
Victory always comes from God and not equipment or allies? Then how do you account for Israel's victories in 1948, 1967, 1973? The issue with Afghanistan is that guerilla warfare always has the potential to outlast a large conventional arms opponent. It is a matter of speculation as to what the situation there would be like if the United States had not initially gone in with limited forces and not diverted attention away to an unecessary and stupid war in Iraq rather than finishing the job in Afghanistan. Vietnam can also make a pretty good claim to be a graveyard for empires and they have done so without God. Of course, faith in one's ideals can be pretty strong though. I will conceder that devout religious belief can be a source of strength, but it doesn't matter which God is the source of that faith. Heck, I imagine that for many Vietnamese, Communism and Nationalism was as inspiring as religion is for some Muslim fighters. If there is a God, it doesn't seem like he takes an active hand in military affairs (or anything else).

Originally Posted by جوري
Israel will never be happy or at peace they know they're thieves and thieves never sleep!
As the great Muslim military leader who has never lost a battle Khalid IBn ilwaleed said:
Ok.
Reply

جوري
09-03-2013, 02:36 PM
Hence I said when they practiced Islam Marie - 56 and 67 the communist gamal was passing out pictures of Egyptian and american *****s on the military to boost their morale American style and there's nothing Islamic about that!
The rest of your assessment is filler for me not sure if you've questions or comments to make I deal with the first and little to no interest in the latter!

Best,
Reply

WarriorforMarie
09-04-2013, 04:37 PM
Originally Posted by جوري
Hence I said when they practiced Islam Marie - 56 and 67 the communist gamal was passing out pictures of Egyptian and american *****s on the military to boost their morale American style and there's nothing Islamic about that!
So, are you saying that the Egyptian army cease to practice Islam around 56 to 67? Because you said "It reminds me if their five hundred million dollar impenetrable bar lev line which the Egyptian army back when they were still Muslims took it down with plain water!" which was afterwards. Did the army change back and forth during that time?
Reply

جوري
09-04-2013, 05:50 PM
Not sure which part was difficult for you to understand from what was written considering you can re read it!
Reply

WarriorforMarie
09-04-2013, 06:32 PM
Originally Posted by جوري
Not sure which part was difficult for you to understand from what was written considering you can re read it!
What I am trying to understand is this. You seemed to suggest that in 1973 the Egyptian Army "were still Muslims" and seemed to indicate that that was part of the reason for their initial success in that war (even though the campaign eventually unraveled). But then you bring up 56 and 67 and seem to suggest that since pictures were distributed that depicted...something, that this negated the Army's status as Muslims. Was I wrong in thinking that was the case? Was it that the Amry has gone back and forth from being Muslim or was the Army Muslim up to 1973?
Reply

جوري
09-04-2013, 06:36 PM
What I wrote is clear when they pledged their resistance to God they were successful in spite of modest means when they pledged it to Abdul Nasser and *****s they lost!
Reply

WarriorforMarie
09-04-2013, 06:42 PM
Originally Posted by جوري
What I wrote is clear when they pledged their resistance to God they were successful in spite of modest means when they pledged it to Abdul Nasser and *****s they lost!
So in 1973 they pledged their allegiance (I assume you meant 'allegiance' instead of resistance) to God? That was why they were able to overcome the bar lev line?
Reply

جوري
09-04-2013, 10:46 PM


Asmaa in her last moments.. the daughter of Dr. Beltagi, she was targeted specifically along with other brotherhood members with an Amero/Zionist plan carried out by traitors in Egypt.
feast your eyes on the killing of little girls- the best of Egypt sacrifices so the worst of it can live in the bosoms of their Zionist buddies!
Reply

faithandpeace
09-04-2013, 11:46 PM
I couldn't understand the Arabic. What happened to her? Was she shot? Bomb blast? This is very sad and horrific! :(
Reply

جوري
09-05-2013, 12:13 AM
They killed her in rabi3a sister along with 6000 other peaceful protesters against the coup.. I am surprised western news which btw partook in chemical warfare in Fallujah and allowed the use of phosphorus in Gaza and 14 other chemical attacks in Syria and are now suddenly concerned about Bashar.. Now you know sis, they're all in cahoots, and she well they labeled her a terrorist, they've also taken in her father and made up charges against him the same made up charges against anyone who opposes them 'terrorists'!
Reply

faithandpeace
09-05-2013, 01:57 AM
This sick behavior needs to stop and soon.
Reply

Independent
09-05-2013, 09:11 AM
Originally Posted by جوري
I am surprised western news which btw partook in chemical warfare in Fallujah and allowed the use of phosphorus in Gaza and 14 other chemical attacks in Syria and are now suddenly concerned about Bashar.. Now you know sis, they're all in cahoots, and she well they labeled her a terrorist, they've also taken in her father and made up charges against him the same made up charges against anyone who opposes them 'terrorists'
Depleted uranium and phosphorus are not chemical weapons (they are used in munitions) and are not illegal, so the use of these in Fallujah and Gaza is not relevant. You may feel they ought to be illegal - but that's not the case in international law right now.

As for chemical weapons....Syria is one of a handful of countries that have refused to sign the Chemical Weapons Convention which prohibits manufacture and use of chemical weapons. (Egypt is another.) Having denied they had such weapons for many years, Syria admitted they did in 2012.

There have been many suspected attacks during the civil war but absolute proof is difficult to obtain, and proof of who used them even harder. Nevertheless it is hard to believe that Assad is not the guilty party.

Unfortunately the Russians refuse to see it like that and they block all UN votes (along with China). The Russians are also guilty of helping Syria develop biological weapons (anthrax etc).

Why is everyone focusing on the Americans, when this is overwhelmingly the responsibility of the Russians and Assad? The Americans are, so far, a minor player in this conflict. It's the Russians who should be in the dock.

We should also focus attention on the countries that have refused to sign the treaty such as Egypt and North Korea, and those who have signed it but not ratified it, such as Israel.
Reply

جوري
09-05-2013, 02:30 PM
Originally Posted by Independent
and are not illegal
You shouldn't use the first article that comes out of google under guradian UK and copy it almost word for word as if an authority figure on the matter as for what is or isn't legal, well you tell that to the Iraqis when their kids are born dead or with birth defects:




This Iraqi baby has little chance in life thanks to the U.S. and Britain!



This is what depleted uranium does!




So what is exactly relevant for you? I am not sure why the mods continue to turn a blind eye to a hypocrite such as yourself but I guess if you insert enough honey in your poison and do it with skill they can't hold anything on you.

btw we have already established that countries at least as far as ME is concerned who refused to sign this or that don't represent their people. I don't know who elected them, they're pretty much in the govt. because they satisfy Amero/Israeli interests, which is precisely why folks are out on the streets in millions, so wait you for we too are in waiting for a shift in gears!

best,
Reply

faithandpeace
09-05-2013, 02:48 PM
May Allah (swt) grant Asmaa the highest realms of Jannah. May Allah (swt) alleviate the suffering of the righteous and innocent in Egypt, Syria, and throughout our ummah. May Allah (swt) help the evil wrongdoers see the truth and forgive those who sincerely repent and work to pay restitution for their crimes and for those who still do such evil and refuse to fix their hearts, may Allah (swt) give them the most severe punishment. May Allah (swt) grant victory to our ummah with the establishment of the khalifa and the restoration of justice through the implementation of sharia. May Allah (swt) help us to continue to have sabr and make du'as for justice and peace and to remain steadfast in the deen. Ameen.
Reply

Independent
09-05-2013, 10:04 PM
Originally Posted by جوري
You shouldn't use the first article that comes out of google under guradian UK and copy it almost word for word
No idea what you're on about.

Originally Posted by جوري
So what is exactly relevant for you?
Depleted uranium is not a chemical weapon, it's used in munitions because it is very dense. As far as we know it hasn't been used in Syria and isn't relevant to Syria. Nor was it illegal at the time of the Gulf War, so again it is not relevant to the issue of illegal weapons.

Originally Posted by جوري
btw we have already established that countries at least as far as ME is concerned who refused to sign this or that don't represent their people.
Whether or not you personally support these governments is irrelevant. No more relevant than whether i personally support the US or UK governments, neither of which I voted for. Also, Egypt was under MB rule for a year and they did not sign the treaty and renounce chemical weapons. The MB government is of course one you did support.

It remains the case that the use of chemical weapons in Syria is the responsibility of Assad and Russia, not the US. People worry about US intervention when Russia has been intervening like crazy since the first day of the war.
Reply

جوري
09-05-2013, 10:43 PM
Originally Posted by Independent
No idea what you're on about.
well of course not!


Originally Posted by Independent
Depleted uranium is not a chemical weapon, it's used in munitions because it is very dense. As far as we know it hasn't been used in Syria and isn't relevant to Syria. Nor was it illegal at the time of the Gulf War, so again it is not relevant to the issue of illegal weapons.
I think the pictures and the conditions in Fallujah speak for themselves!
if it has no relevance to Syria then Syria has no relevance in a Mursi thread!
'Illegality' as decided by war mongers is in fact what is irrelevant here!

now take a hike and find a new word to use to sugar coat your war mongering!
Reply

Independent
09-05-2013, 11:18 PM
Originally Posted by جوري
well of course not!
Post the link.

Originally Posted by جوري
if it has no relevance to Syria then Syria has no relevance in a Mursi thread!
You introduced it yourself. As usual, you are derailing the thread.

Originally Posted by جوري
now take a hike and find a new word to use to sugar coat your war mongering!
It's you who favours war, not me.
Reply

جوري
09-05-2013, 11:27 PM
Originally Posted by Independent
Post the link.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...ov/15/usa.iraq
Dishonesty is a kaffir's trait!

You introduced it yourself. As usual, you are derailing the thread.
and if I did it makes me a pioneer and you a sycophant!


It's you who favours war, not me.
you prefer to label it legal is all!
I don't subscribe to your definitions for what my eyes see and I certainly don't subscribe to your solutions if you ever offered any'
Reply

Independent
09-06-2013, 08:10 AM
Originally Posted by جوري
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2005/nov/15/usa.iraq!
This bears little resemblance to what i wrote in content or style, so I don't know why you think I copied it. Just another random insult I guess.

Originally Posted by جوري
Dishonesty is a kaffir's trait!
It's a human trait.

Originally Posted by جوري
and if I did it makes me a pioneer and you a sycophant!
It's a source of constant amazement to me how you ever passed any medical exams with such a gadfly mind. Are you for real? You make statements and accusations, then reverse them five seconds later, without the slightest concern. You don't seem to care to follow any argument, make no attempt to examine facts, and above all never admit you got something wrong even when it is factually incontrovertible. You simply slip on to the next anti western statement.

Originally Posted by جوري
you prefer to label it legal is all!
I don't subscribe to your definitions for what my eyes see and I certainly don't subscribe to your solutions if you ever offered any'
They are not 'my' definitions. It's not a question of my 'labelling' something illegal. It's a factual condition of international law.

Your personal opinion is of no consequence. It doesn't become 'illegal', simply because you think it ought to be. So when you continue to describe it as 'illegal' to others, you are - factually - indisputably - lying.
Reply

جوري
09-06-2013, 10:08 AM
Originally Posted by Independent
This bears little resemblance to what i wrote in content or style, so I don't know why you think I copied it. Just another random insult I guess.
Anymore obvious would make you a plagiarizer!


Originally Posted by Independent
It's a human trait
It is a sub human trait. Islam elevates us from mere animals!


Originally Posted by Independent
It's a source of constant amazement to me how you ever passed any medical exams with such a gadfly mind. Are you for real? You make statements and accusations, then reverse them five seconds later, without the slightest concern. You don't seem to care to follow any argument, make no attempt to examine facts, and above all never admit you got something wrong even when it is factually incontrovertible. You simply slip on to the next anti western statement.
What amuses you is irrelevant to me as is most of what you write- I have no better expectations nor would I consider a validation from your ilk any type of flattery. As for facts, Someone who is a paragraph short of plagiarizing is not an authority on the facts or how to sort through them!


Originally Posted by Independent
They are not 'my' definitions. It's not a question of my 'labeling' something illegal. It's a factual condition of international law.
No, they're for the brainless and those whose hearts and minds are blind. The definitions of someone who is a hypocrite at best for seeing similar results on a similar set of population in the same region only elicit a response in dollars and cents and depending on who is doing the attack and also the timing of it and oh of course depending on who defined its legality. You no more care who lives, who is tortured or suffers, who is displaced or eradicated than any of the govt. you defend. I have already stated folks see through the transparency of your charade.
The 'Law' itself international or otherwise seems to change based on the person's religion and ethnicity as I have demonstrated in my previous thread 'It isn't a war on Islam or anything'
So who the heck are you or those whose laws you so like to tote and uphold and defend? Take a hike, until we clean another thread from the stench of your BS.
Reply

Independent
09-06-2013, 10:23 AM
Originally Posted by جوري
So who the heck are you or those whose laws you so like to tote and uphold and defend?
I don't make the law, i don't necessarily like the law. But it is factually 'the law' and to say otherwise is simply a lie, which you are repeating.

International law is notoriously messy because everyone has to agree. The Geneva Convention is flouted daily in Syria and many other warzones. But it's still better to try than to do nothing. On another day you'll be talking about how Israel ignores international law. But today, you don't care about international law. There is nothing fixed in your mind except bigotry against the greater part of mankind.

Originally Posted by جوري
You no more care who lives, who is tortured or suffers
Yes i do, i don't want anyone to suffer like this. Whereas your issue is not the suffering itself, but the identity of who is suffering. If it was only kaffirs you wouldn't care, because in your worldview they deserve it = all of them - as you have made amply clear many times in the past.
Reply

جوري
09-06-2013, 10:31 AM
Originally Posted by Independent
On another day you'll be talking about how Israel ignores international law
lol are you for real? and even if I do mention 'the law' will the cockroach state or its poodles actually uphold it? are they actually upholding it now with the new colonies and homes they're destroying in spite of the 'law'- the same law which they concoct to invade sovereign counties at whim and break at whim? Get real & get a life!
you lose credibility with each post, it is a wonder at all you don't even make the slightest attempt to save face!


Originally Posted by Independent
i don't want anyone to suffer like this.
Yes you do!
Reply

جوري
09-08-2013, 09:40 PM
Originally Posted by WarriorforMarie
I apologize. It is just that you originally asserted that, "Victory has always come from faith and from God not equipments and allies
How many times do you need an assertion to understand?


Originally Posted by WarriorforMarie
I just wanted to be clear about what you meant. I really don't believe what you have said is true.
That's your prerogative!



Originally Posted by WarriorforMarie
While religious faith or dedication to some cause can be useful in a war.....weapons & equipment, aliies, and strategy and tactics are important factors in determining victory.
Victory is always from Allah.. you can build all you want and a tiny tsunami washes it all away!.. As Umar ibn Ilkhtaab said to the leader of the Muslim army:

to Sa’d bin Abee Waqqas, the commander of the Muslim armies during the campaign against the Persians,
"I command you and your soldiers to observe Taqwa which is the best preparation against the enemy and the strongest weapon of war.
I command you and your soldiers to be more on guard against sins than against the enemy, for the sins of [your] army should be feared more than their enemy.
Indeed, Muslims only triumph by the sinning of their enemy against Allah, for otherwise we would not have the strength and advantage over them.
Our numbers are not like their numbers, nor is our preparation like their preparation. If we equal them in sins, they will prevail over us through their physical strength.
If we cannot defeat them through our piety, we will not defeat them through our strength.”
Allah’s support for His servants and His assistance to them with the angels is conditional upon piety.

_______________

The Pharaoh was chasing Moses and his people from behind and the red sea was in front of them, indeed if they subscribed to your ideology they'd have been done for..
and countless other examples that I can't ignore to subscribe to your personal set of values or beliefs simply because you laid them out on the forum!




Originally Posted by WarriorforMarie
I really can not believe that God (if it exists) plays much of a role in determining victory.
Again, that's your privilege, what would you like me to do about your set of beliefs?


Originally Posted by WarriorforMarie
If I did, I would have to come to the conclusion that God favors the Israelis over the Arabs.
The Arabs are no better than the Israelis indeed (see the quote above again by Umar Ibn Ilkhtaab)- I can't gauge anyone's level of piety but they've let their ummah go and fight their Muslim leaders so why should their nations expect victory?

best,
Reply

Muhammad
09-11-2013, 06:30 PM
Greetings,

This thread is repeatedly becoming a war-zone, so I think it's time to put it to rest.

Just thought I'd comment on a post I saw:

Originally Posted by WarriorforMarie
It is just that you originally asserted that, "Victory has always come from faith and from God not equipments and allies..." I just wanted to be clear about what you meant. I really don't believe what you have said is true. While religious faith or dedication to some cause can be useful in a war.....weapons & equipment, aliies, and strategy and tactics are important factors in determining victory. I really can not believe that God (if it exists) plays much of a role in determining victory. If I did, I would have to come to the conclusion that God favors the Israelis over the Arabs.
If God can create the world and all that exists, could He not easily grant victory to whom He pleases? Try to learn about the Islamic concept of God, and you will realise He is the All-Powerful, Able to do all things. If you read the Qur'an, it is filled with so many attributes of God, and then you will appreciate How everything is in His control, even victory. Many times we are reminded in the Qur'an of how God supported those who believed in Him.


...So when he had crossed it (the river), he and those who believed with him, they said: "We have no power this day against Jalut (Goliath) and his hosts." But those who knew with certainty that they were going to meet Allah, said: "How often a small group overcame a mighty host by Allah's Leave?" And Allah is with As-Sabirun (the patient).

And when they advanced to meet Jalut (Goliath) and his forces, they invoked: "Our Lord! Pour forth on us patience, and set firm our feet and make us victorious over the disbelieving people."

So they routed them by Allah's Leave and Dawud (David) killed Jalut (Goliath), and Allah gave him [Dawud (David)] the kingdom [after the death of Talut (Saul) and Samuel] and Al-Hikmah (Prophethood), and taught him of that which He willed. And if Allah did not check one set of people by means of another, the earth would indeed be full of mischief. But Allah is full of bounty to the 'Alamin (mankind, jinn and all that exists).


[Qur'an 2: 249-251]
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!