Brussels mayor bans upcoming anti-Islam protest

[Uthman]

The mayor of Brussels, Freddy Thielemans, after discussions with the police and other services, decided to ban a demonstration against the “progression of the practices of Islam,” saying he feared the event would trigger incidents between the demonstrators and the foreign population of his city, media reports said.

“I decided to forbid the September 11 demonstration ‘against the Islamicisation of Europe,” he said. “Such incitement to discrimination and hatred, which we usually call racism and xenophobia, is forbidden by a considerable number of international treaties and is punished by our penal laws and by the European legislation. The European Court of Human Rights has repeatedly pronounced judgments condemning this type of acts,” he was quoted as saying.

“The intention is obviously to confound the terrorist activities of Muslim extremists on the one hand and Islam as a religion and all Muslims on the other hand,” Thielemans added. “With regard to the planned demonstration of September 11 ‘against the Islamicisation of Europe’ my mind is made up.

And my decision is final: it will not take place,” Thielemans concluded.
The organization known as SIOE, “Stop the Islamisation of Europe,” wanted to organize a rally in front of the European Parliament on September 11, exactly six years after the attacks on New York. The organisers insisted that they have no connection to the parties of the extreme-Right, but their desire is to stop the “invasion” of Islamic practices in Europe. Their anger is directed at Islamic law, which they say violates equality and democracy.

Udo Ulfkotte, one of the organizers of the anti-Sharia demonstration in Brussels, went to the European capital to confer with lawyers about legal steps to counter last week’s decision to ban the demonstration.

Ulfkotte gave interviews to some of the major Belgian newspapers. Ulfkotte expected that thousands of Europeans, from all of the 27 EU countries, would have come to Brussels on September 11 to support the
demonstration’s demand. When asked what the organisers would do if the Belgian authorities uphold the ban.

“In that case we still ask people to come to Brussels, where we will stage a ‘birthday party’ for Mr Thielemans and everyone else who happens to be born on 11 September,” he said.

Three organisations are behind the planned demonstration; the Danish anti-Islam party SAID, the British group No Sharia Here and the German organisation Pax Europa.

Source

[Amadeus85]

Im sure that this mayor would allow a gay parade there.

[IbnAbdulHakim]

takbeer bolo, takbeer :D



Allahu Akbar, Allah shobshe greatest :D

[Abdul Fattah]

Im sure that this mayor would allow a gay parade there.

Yes I think so to, that is because a gay parade is about people protesting for their own rights, as where this demonstration was supposed to be a rally against the rights of others! Big difference wouldn't you say :)

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

[Amadeus85]

Are in muslim countries banned anti- westernization marches?

[Abdul Fattah]

Are in muslim countries banned anti- westernization marches?

1. I don't know of actual bans, but I do think it's plausible to happen in countries like Tunisia or Turkey or the likes.
2. There's a difference between anti-westernisation in muslim countries and anti-muslim protests in the west. The muslim countries dealing with westernisation have to deal with anti-islamic rules. Like Turkey's hijab-ban. If a group would organise an antiwesterisation rally in muslim countries, it would be to gain back religious freedoms that have been lost trough the course of westernisation. Anti muslim rallys in the west is not about regaining lost rights, quite the contrary it's about restricting the freedom of muslims who live in the west!
3. Two wrongs don't make a right. Even if there would be some double standard where I would encourage anti-westernisation rallys and discourage anti-muslim rallys. We need to remember that one country cannot excuse it's actions by the actions of another country.

[Amadeus85]

And what if those people just wanted to fight for stopping muslim immigration to Europe to save the christian roots of this country?

[Abdul Fattah]

And what if those people just wanted to fight for stopping muslim immigration to Europe to save the christian roots of this country?

Well most UN countries, including Belgium have signed international treaty's and conventions regarding refugees and regarding racism and religion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interna...e_Organization
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...r_for_Refugees
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_..._the_Near_East
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convent...Discrimination
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_religion

I suggest you do a little reading.

[Md Mashud]

I hope Aaron, you don't think banning this was banning free speech and that this banning is in any way wrong. You see, marches like this only cause problems, have no real mean and are fueled by false information. In UK, you think you can give opinions of extremism and not get arrested? Rightly not, its not breaking free speech rights - but you know - Extremist Islamists are very misguided in the understanding of alot of teachings and thus should be banned from spreading it. Similarly here, if anyone had any reason to go against Islam, it truly means they don't have a clue about it...

[Intisar]

Im sure that this mayor would allow a gay parade there.

How could you compare the two? A gay parade is for gays advocating for the rights of gays, or celebrating being gay. This is an anti-Islam protest. It's called discrimination. Do you not have an understanding of the English language (no offence) because honestly, if you did you wouldn't compare a gay parade to an anti-Islam protest.

Are in muslim countries banned anti- westernization marches?

Lmao, again? OK, This is an anti-Islam protest meaning they want to halt the immigration of Muslims into their soil. The West is a whole chunk of land. There are protests organized by oppressed people ex. Iraq against the 'US liberation' *sigh*. Why would they ban that? You're being extremely silly. I'm not even going to bother dissecting the rest of your rubbish. :mmokay:

[Sami Zaatari]

Brother please lets set a good example :) - We are not in competition. We should help eachother understand eachother. Careful what pride can do to one! Ofcourse ignorance too is a dangerous trait. Our prophet :saw: would not encourage us insulting others, even if those provoked (not stating if you was provoked or not in this instance). Remember, the character of a human being is huge dawah itself.

true that..... i agree with you, but you know aaron is a devil in disguise, always acting so nice in one thread, then shows his true face in another, and i cant stand people like him, but you are still right...........

[aamirsaab]

:sl:
Here's a little message from our sponsors:

Don't fall for the bait
Don't join in the hate

[Uthman]

Oh, you guys. :rolleyes:

[Amadeus85]

I really dont understand why this is ok

And anti-islamization demos are not ok. :?

This demonstration wasn't anti-islam, it was anti-islamization. This is difference. This demonstration was, as i believe, to defend belgium traditional fundaments. It was against the process of civilization' change that is hapenning in Europe.

[beespreeteam]

And what if those people just wanted to fight for stopping muslim immigration to Europe to save the christian roots of this country?

lol.

[IbnAbdulHakim]

I really dont understand why this is ok

And anti-islamization demos are not ok. :?

lol, muslims believe that islam will indeed one day conquer rome as well as the whole world when jesus's second coming arrives, we also believe that jesus is the slave of Allah. i hope you werent offended :)

[Keltoi]

There is obviously a double standard, but the decision was probably the right one. A demonstration like that, while completely in the realm of free speech, could lead to things that go way beyond speech. You could have people chanting anti-immigrant slogans at people as they go to work or the grocery store. The point is to make immigrants a part of you, not to isolate them further.

[Amadeus85]

I think that ban of this demonstration just helped it, because npw many people talk about it. If this demo hapenned, probably no one would remember about it now.

[aamirsaab]

:sl:

I think that ban of this demonstration just helped it, because npw many people talk about it. If this demo hapenned, probably no one would remember about it now.

If this demo happened, you'd have riots.

From my perspective this action by the mayor prevented a lot of violence since it was going to spread hate and racism.

[Amadeus85]

[QUOTE=aamirsaab;817967]:sl:

If this demo happened, you'd have riots.

So now we cant even mention islamization, because angry muslims in Europe will make riots? Your words rather proved that this demo had sense :confused:

From my perspective this action by the mayor prevented a lot of violence since it was going to spread hate and racism.

Again, are muslims who protest against christianization and westernization in muslim world, racists ? :confused:

[KAding]

This was a really bad move. It was an anti-democratic ruling by the mayor and hopefully the courts will allow the protest.

[Cognescenti]

The move will only anger further those who hold these views. What is the deal? Xenophobes don't get free speech?

I can see restricting the route of the march to avoid provocation or supplying extra police protection, but this won't work. Do you think the potential marchers will decide they were wrong and open up an interfaith dialogue center?

[Zman]

:sl:

“I decided to forbid the September 11 demonstration ‘against the Islamicisation of Europe,” he said. “Such incitement to discrimination and hatred, which we usually call racism and xenophobia, is forbidden by a considerable number of international treaties and is punished by our penal laws and by the European legislation. The European Court of Human Rights has repeatedly pronounced judgments condemning this type of acts,” he was quoted as saying.

“The intention is obviously to confound the terrorist activities of Muslim extremists on the one hand and Islam as a religion and all Muslims on the other hand,” Thielemans added. “With regard to the planned demonstration of September 11 ‘against the Islamicisation of Europe’ my mind is made up.

Bravo. I salute that gentleman!

[aamirsaab]

:sl:

So now we cant even mention islamization, because angry muslims in Europe will make riots? Your words rather proved that this demo had sense :confused:

You can mention islamization. But, this particular demonstration was doing more than that. It would have led to needless violence and I think we all know what that means by now.

Again, are muslims who protest against christianization and westernization in muslim world, racists ? :confused:

Not unless the groups were attending the protests were racists which is pretty much the case for this demo.

This was a really bad move. It was an anti-democratic ruling by the mayor and hopefully the courts will allow the protest.

Not really since the laws of that country dictated that particular type of demo would be punishable.

The move will only anger further those who hold these views. What is the deal? Xenophobes don't get free speech?

By letting them have the demo will it change their anger? In anycase, that country's laws and treaties dictated that the demo couldn't take place.

I can see restricting the route of the march to avoid provocation or supplying extra police protection, but this won't work. Do you think the potential marchers will decide they were wrong and open up an interfaith dialogue center?

They will find other means of venting their anger such as the internet or a television show. Everyone else manages too...

[Muezzin]

Anti-Islamicisation Demonstrations deliberately held on September 11th? I predict a riot...

I think the mayor made the right decision.

[Amadeus85]

Anti-Islamicisation Demonstrations deliberately held on September 11th? I predict a riot...

I think the mayor made the right decision.

Its funny that Turks in Turkey can demonstrate against islamization, while citizens of Belgium can not. :?

[Muezzin]

Its funny that Turks in Turkey can demonstrate against islamization, while citizens of Belgium can not. :?

Are the Turks demonstrating on September 11th?

Anyone who allows that sort of demonstration, on that particular day... what do they think will happen? And so I'm glad the mayor of Brussels has not allowed this demonstration to take place.

[Amadeus85]

Anti-Islamicisation Demonstrations deliberately held on September 11th? I predict a riot...

I think the mayor made the right decision.

Your words reminded me what Segolene Royal said just before the presidential elections, that if Sarko wins, the youths in french suburbs will make riots. Well, Sarko won. No one likes to get such threatens. Dont protest against islamization, because young muslims in Belgium will burn cars and shops. So maybe we shall wait few years, when its too late. :skeleton:

Are the Turks demonstrating on September 11th?

Anyone who allows that sort of demonstration, on that particular day... what do they think will happen? And so I'm glad the mayor of Brussels has not allowed this demonstration to take place.

So if the demo took part in 12th September it will be ok for you.?

[Muezzin]

Your words reminded me what Segolene Royal said just before the presidential elections, that if Sarko wins, the youths in french suburbs will make riots. Well, Sarko won. No one likes to get such threatens. Dont protest against islamization, because young muslims in Belgium will burn cars and shops. So maybe we shall wait few years, when its too late. :skeleton:

Dunno why you quoted the other post, but you misunderstand. I'm not saying don't protest. I'm saying if people protest on September 11th of all days, they're asking for trouble.

EDIT: Yup, they could protest on another day and, though I might disagree vehemently with them, I wouldn't want to stop them as a matter of urgency or public safety. But that's just my opinion.

[Amadeus85]

I dont even live in western Europe, so i wont take part in such demos anyway :). My country is too poor, and to unknown to gather immigrants. But even in my country so many people are aware of whats going on in Western Europe. Few politics warned the society that if we dont encourage citizens to have more kids, we will have the same problems like France or Holland. And the reality is that you won't find more nationalistic people in world than Europeans.So i think that such problems like with this demo will be growing drasticly in next years, as Europe will probably wiill have to embrace 50 millions immigrants (mostly muslims) 'till 2050 if they want keep economic progress.

[KAding]

Not really since the laws of that country dictated that particular type of demo would be punishable.

That is not true IMHO. I don't see what law would forbid this demonstration:

From the organizers:

http://siad.wordpress.com/2007/07/11...the-march-911/
Aims of the demonstration:

1. To show the world that Europeans and others have had enough of Sharia by stealth and creeping Islamism.

2. To be the first in a long line of similar events. We are in this for the long haul and continual opposition to Sharia and Islamism will bring us success.

3. To build up a network of millions of people, both as individuals and as members of likeminded organisations, determined to reverse Islamism and restore freedom.

This network will then provide the necessary mutual support for further events.

Therefore, the SIOE Brussels 9/11 Demo only allows the following banners:
Stop islamisation of Europe.
No sharia here.
Democracy not theocracy.
Enough is enough.

If this would be illegal then, frankly, any demonstration against any political ideology would have to become illegal. How can it possibly be illegal to demonstrate against the Sharia or against Islamism ("Islamism holds that Islamic law (sharia) must be the basis for all statutory law of society")?

You can protest against communism, you can protest against secularism, you can protest against liberalism, you can protest against the EU constitution, you can protest against theocracy, heck you can even protest against the Church or the pope. Then why would you not be able to protest against the Sharia? To me it does not make sense. Why would political Islam have to be treated any differently from any other political ideology?

The two only arguments here would be:
1. to claim the organizers or some protesters have hidden motives, which would be in violation of the law. But can you ban a demonstration because you have a suspicion that some/many/all demonstrators are racists and inciting hatred?
2. There would be violence from the side of the demonstrators. If counter-demonstrations turn out to initiate the violence, it is the job of the police to make sure the two groups are separated. Giving in to threats of violence from other groups would be giving in to intimidation and is not acceptable.

[Uthman]

Belgian protesters to fight ban
By Alix Kroeger
BBC News, Brussels

The organisers of a march against Islam say they will appeal against a decision to refuse them a permit.

The mayor of Brussels refused permission for the 11 September march by Stop the Islamisation of Europe, saying it would disturb public order.

His decision has been upheld by a Belgian court, but now the marchers plan to appeal to the highest court in the land for an urgent decision.

And the Danish branch of the alliance says its members will march anyway.

The alliance wants to hold the demonstration on the sixth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks on the US.

Its slogans include No to Sharia Law and Democracy Not Theocracy.

Brussels has a substantial Muslim population.

The German organiser, Udo Ulfkotte, says the marchers' freedom of speech has been denied by the ban and rejects any suggestion of ties to extremist neo-Nazi groups.

He says a new political party in Germany will be formed as a result of the ban on the Brussels march.

It will act as a sponge, he says, for all those who are fed up with politicians and want equal rights for everybody.

Source

[Keltoi]

I'm not familiar with the Belgian system of law, but I would think if there is any significant freedom of speech protection in the books, then this demonstration was probably unlawfully rejected.

[Amadeus85]

I'm not familiar with the Belgian system of law, but I would think if there is any significant freedom of speech protection in the books, then this demonstration was probably unlawfully rejected.

The mayor said that this demo would bring only hate and racism. It was planned on 9/11, he saw it controversial so he banned it.

[KAding]

Well, actually the mayors main argument was that it might lead to violence. This is the legal foundation of his ruling on the demonstration; that it might be a threat to public safety. The mayor feared there might be scuffles between the demonstrators and local Muslims.

He might well be right, but thats hardly a reason to ban the demonstration. He also noted that the organizers were Islamophobe, but Islamophobia is not a crime.

[Amadeus85]

Well, actually the mayors main argument was that it might lead to violence. This is the legal foundation of his ruling on the demonstration; that it might be a threat to public safety. The mayor feared there might be scuffles between the demonstrators and local Muslims.

He might well be right, but thats hardly a reason to ban the demonstration. He also noted that the organizers were Islamophobe, but Islamophobia is not a crime.

Suddenly this reminded me a situation from my country. Two years ago, president of Warsaw (now president of Poland) banned gay parade in our capital. He said that it might have led to violence and agression between gays and football hooligans. And you know what, this decision was completely condemned by europeans, also by EU parliament.Our country was named as homophobic, untolerant etc etc. And now where is their reaction? :confused:

[north_malaysian]

Are in muslim countries banned anti- westernization marches?

On 4.04.1997, 200 Muslims were detained for participating in Anti-Israeli Cricket Team demonstration in Malayan University.

[KAding]

Suddenly this reminded me a situation from my country. Two years ago, president of Warsaw (now president of Poland) banned gay parade in our capital. He said that it might have led to violence and agression between gays and football hooligans. And you know what, this decision was completely condemned by europeans, also by EU parliament.Our country was named as homophobic, untolerant etc etc. And now where is their reaction? :confused:

Thats different :D :thankyou:.

[InToTheRain]

Yes I think so to, that is because a gay parade is about people protesting for their own rights, as where this demonstration was supposed to be a rally against the rights of others! Big difference wouldn't you say :)

Good point :thumbs_up

Got to respect the mayor for the decision he made :statisfie
Allow such things to happen and they are only adding fuel to the fire regardless of whether it's an Islamic nation such as Turkey or a western one such as Brussels.

And what if those people just wanted to fight for stopping muslim immigration to Europe to save the christian roots of this country?

And then the Neo Nazis will make protest against the coloured people within their saying they want to preserve the White race within their nation. :ooh:

[Malaikah]

:sl:

The banners don't even make sense, who is trying to implement islamic law in Europe?

I have to agree that this demonstration appears to be inciting hate and discrimination against a minority.

Does their right of freedom of speech out way our right of freedom of religion?

And what if those people just wanted to fight for stopping muslim immigration to Europe to save the christian roots of this country?

Well the country is secular so I don't see why they should be able to do that.

[Amadeus85]

[QUOTE=Malaikah;822906]:sl:

The banners don't even make sense, who is trying to implement islamic law in Europe

?

There are some organizations, maybe not many but influential, for example Muslim Brotherhood in Europe and others. I dont say that average muslim citizen living in Europe thinks only how to conquer Europe. But there are groups and organizations who plan this and organize.

[Sami Zaatari]

Suddenly this reminded me a situation from my country. Two years ago, president of Warsaw (now president of Poland) banned gay parade in our capital. He said that it might have led to violence and agression between gays and football hooligans. And you know what, this decision was completely condemned by europeans, also by EU parliament.Our country was named as homophobic, untolerant etc etc. And now where is their reaction? :confused:

i wouldnt condemn your president! he did a very good thing, good man, good job, more presidents should be like him and should ban these disgusting gay lezbian parades.

but also the reason why leaders may have not condemned this incident is because its very different, for instance the mayor banned NEO-NAZI RIGHT WINGERS! most politicians and people dont like them anyway, and know they are simple racist thugs. you cant compare these people with gay men in leather jackets!

[KAding]

:sl:

The banners don't even make sense, who is trying to implement islamic law in Europe?

I agree. Although there are some attempts here and there to implement some Islamic law, such as in family law. And of course, occasionally there some vigilante justice trying to enforce bans on alcohol. But all this is so marginal. These guys are paranoid.

I have to agree that this demonstration appears to be inciting hate and discrimination against a minority.

More hateful than, say, an anti-zionism demonstration? They are held quite frequently as well, despite the fact that noone is trying to implement zionism in Europe either ;).

Or is it 'inciting hatred' mainly because Muslims are a minority here? Because essentially the same protest was held in Turkey earlier this year. Should that march, which close to a million people joined, also have been banned?

This is always so confusing. Islam is a culture. Islam is a religion. Islam is a political ideology. Islam is a system of law. Which parts can you demonstrate against? None? Thats unfair as well, no? Other political ideologies and systems of laws can be demonstrated against. Is it prohibited to protest the Sharia, but allowed to protest against the, say, capitalist system?

[wilberhum]

................
Other political ideologies and systems of laws can be demonstrated against. Is it prohibited to protest the Sharia, but allowed to protest against the, say, capitalist system?

But Sharia is from god. :skeleton:

[Malaikah]

This is always so confusing. Islam is a culture. Islam is a religion. Islam is a political ideology. Islam is a system of law. Which parts can you demonstrate against? None? Thats unfair as well, no? Other political ideologies and systems of laws can be demonstrated against. Is it prohibited to protest the Sharia, but allowed to protest against the, say, capitalist system?

Well, when you put it that way... just goes to show how protected we are from all directions! :D

[Md Mashud]

condemned by europeans, also by EU parliament

Big deal, EU parliament sucks, I can say this since I live in Europe :)!

[Md Mashud]

But Sharia is from god. :skeleton:

Ameen. How can someone give any other human analogy any credit? Infact I'll show you somthing.

One of the things that nullify ones Islam:

4. Anyone who believes any guidance to be more perfect, or a decision other than the Prophets decision to be better, is an unbeliever. This applies to those who prefer the rule of Evil (Taghout) to the Prophets rule.

Some examples of this are:

(a) To believe that systems and laws made by human beings are better than the Shariah of Islaam; for example,
That the Islaamic system is not suitable for the twentieth century.
That Islaam is the cause of the backwardness of the Muslims.
Or that al-Islaam is a relationship beween Allaah and the Muslim. It should not interfere in other aspects of life.

(b)To say that enforcing the punishments prescibed Allaah, such as cutting off the hand of the theif or the stoning of an adulterer, is not suitable for this day and age.

(c) To believe that it is permissible to give a rule from that which Allaah did not reveal in Islamic transactions or matters of law, punishments or other affairs. Although one may not believe such things to be superior to the Shari'ah he in effect affirms such a stand by declaring a thing which Allaah has totally prohibited, such as adultery, drinking alcohol or usury, to be permissible. According to the consensus of the Muslims, one who declares
such things to be permissible is an unbeliever (Kafir)

This makes sense, as, how can you say a human has the same capability? :).

Just because not everyone believes doesnt discredit it. To this day no one can contradict the Quran or hadith as wrong, care to explain why we should belittle them to a mere ideology or political notion? Or do we label it according to what you believe, lets be serious now!

[Amadeus85]

The problem is that majority of europeans dont want to live under sharia law.Otherwise they would convert to islam already. And muslims always try to impose sharia wherever they live, in Europe too. And here you have the conflict.

[Md Mashud]

Whats your point? Who are we forcing?

[justahumane]

The problem is that majority of europeans dont want to live under sharia law.Otherwise they would convert to islam already. And muslims always try to impose sharia wherever they live, in Europe too. And here you have the conflict.

Well put. Muslims want shariyah laws when they are in minority in any country. But they abandon shariyah in their own countries. :D . Grand show of hypocricy as I always feel.

[Sami Zaatari]

Well put. Muslims want shariyah laws when they are in minority in any country. But they abandon shariyah in their own countries. :D . Grand show of hypocricy as I always feel.

actually you --- no muslims in the west are trying to force sharia, secondly there is a difference between the muslims in the west and the muslim world. the ones in the west are mainly reverts hence they have more zeal for their faith so they say they want sharia law because they are better muslims than the ones in the muslim world who accept secular ways rather than sharia.

hence it is not hypocracy as you narrow-mindedly say, it is two groups of muslims who have a different way of seeing things.

thirdly you said it yourself, in the west these muslims are a MINORITY hence when they make a statement or something they get much more attention, however so in the muslim world no one takes much attention when ppl call for sharia since it is the muslim world so no one takes much attention.

----

[NoName55]

actually ---no Muslims in the west are trying to force sharia, secondly there is a difference between the Muslims in the west and the Muslim world. the ones in the west are mainly reverts hence they have more zeal for their faith so they say they want (ONLY THEMSELVES TO LIVE BY) sharia law because they are better Muslims than the ones in the Muslim world who accept secular ways rather than sharia.

hence it is not hypocrisy as you narrow-mindedly say, it is two groups of Muslims who have a different way of seeing things.

thirdly you said it yourself, in the west these Muslims are a MINORITY hence when they make a statement or something they get much more attention, however so in the Muslim world no one takes much attention when people call for sharia since it is the Muslim world so no one pays much attention.

:thumbs_up
:w:

[justahumane]

[QUOTE=Sami Zaatari;823613]actually ---no muslims in the west are trying to force sharia, secondly there is a difference between the muslims in the west and the muslim world. the ones in the west are mainly reverts hence they have more zeal for their faith so they say they want sharia law because they are better muslims than the ones in the muslim world who accept secular ways rather than sharia.

hence it is not hypocracy as you narrow-mindedly say, it is two groups of muslims who have a different way of seeing things.

thirdly you said it yourself, in the west these muslims are a MINORITY hence when they make a statement or something they get much more attention, however so in the muslim world no one takes much attention when ppl call for sharia since it is the muslim world so no one takes much attention.

---QUOTE]

First of all my dear brother, thanks a ton for ur decent language. Actually I would have been pleased to reciprocate, but unfortunately my religion doesnt allows me to speak such decent words, unlike urs.

Secondly brother, plz check ur facts again when U say that muslims in the west are mainly converts. For instance are the number of muslims converts in UK is greater than muslims migrants?

Thirdly brother, every misdeed, every sin has its own justification. I have been hearing lots and lots of justifications from so called muslims for not living under shariyah in any country of the world.

And finally brother, I again put my point that muslims are the biggest bunch of hypocrites in terms of religion. A negligible few want to live under shariyah. It is very much evident by seeing no muslim nation adopting shariyah as the laws of its land.

Once again thanks for ur decent language, I hope U will repeat it and feel blessed.

Peace.

[Md Mashud]

I have been hearing lots and lots of justifications from so called muslims for not living under shariyah in any country of the world.

They are wrong.

I'll repeat:

4. Anyone who believes any guidance to be more perfect, or a decision other than the Prophets decision to be better, is an unbeliever. This applies to those who prefer the rule of Evil (Taghout) to the Prophets rule.

Some examples of this are:

(a) To believe that systems and laws made by human beings are better than the Shariah of Islaam; for example,
That the Islaamic system is not suitable for the twentieth century.
That Islaam is the cause of the backwardness of the Muslims.
Or that al-Islaam is a relationship beween Allaah and the Muslim. It should not interfere in other aspects of life.

(b)To say that enforcing the punishments prescibed Allaah, such as cutting off the hand of the theif or the stoning of an adulterer, is not suitable for this day and age.

(c) To believe that it is permissible to give a rule from that which Allaah did not reveal in Islamic transactions or matters of law, punishments or other affairs. Although one may not believe such things to be superior to the Shari'ah he in effect affirms such a stand by declaring a thing which Allaah has totally prohibited, such as adultery, drinking alcohol or usury, to be permissible. According to the consensus of the Muslims, one who declares
such things to be permissible is an unbeliever (Kafir)

Under things which makes one come out of Islam

No one said this world has perfect Muslims, infact far from it.

[aamirsaab]

:sl:
This thread is past its sell by date.