[سيف الله]

Salaam

Well at least hes being honest.

 

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

The whole "weapons of mass destruction" lie was always just an excuse to "take the oil". From all the countries in the world, America is probably the greediest, and they will invent any lie - no matter how ridiculous - to justify their greed and pillaging done under the pretext of "protecting other nations from terrorist organisations". When they entered all of these countries such as Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, and everywhere else, it had always only been to serve the interests of the American government; it was never about protecting any country. That is a ridiculous joke which even most of the common American people no longer believe, other than the brain-dead Trump supporters which consists primarily of washouts too dumb to speak coherently and who have to marry their sisters because they can't find any other woman willing to marry them.

Trump and all of the presidents before him are exactly the same, the only difference is that they would excrete into a plate and then paint that excreta green. They'd give it a shiny green coat of paint and then present it to people. Trump, on the other hand, wants to save on paint for economic reasons, so he just excretes into the plate and then hands it out. He doesn't worry to be "diplomatic" about things.

America has messed things up for itself as well as for the other nations, on a colossal scale. Now they're worried about "ISIS"? By their very own hands they have caused such problems for themselves which will they not be able to solve. Trump's solution is to try and wipe out Islaam, but neither he nor anyone else will ever succeed, because, as Shaykh `Abdul Hameed Kishk used to say:

"Islaam has a Lord that protects it: His Name is Allaah."

والسلام​

 

[Serinity]

I wonder why America never attacked or invaded North Korea. Because North Korea (NK) is the most vilest of places, and the kafir leader Kim Jong-un has committed crimes, yet they haven't.

North Korea has some Nuclear bombs, that is why they aren't invading, so they say. But hey, according to them, Iraq or another country (cant remember completely what country) also had "weapons of mass destruction" and the excuse they used to invade was that very reason..

Yet no invasion on North Korea. Russia is supporting North Korea, while USA is supporting South Korea.

Allahu alam.

 

[ardianto]

I wonder why America never attacked or invaded North Korea.

:wasalam:

There is People's Republic of China behind North Korea. If America invade North Korea, then China would involve in war like they did in Korean War.

 

[سيف الله]

Salaam

Yes China doesnt want the US on its land borders.

The US would like to attack and overthrow the regime, but North Korea can defend itself, unlike Iraq.

 

[سيف الله]

Salaam

WOW this Trump fellow giving some more truth.

U$A Not So Innocent... We've got a lot of killers. Trump Tells Bill O'Reilly

 

[Simple_Person]

The whole "weapons of mass destruction" lie was always just an excuse to "take the oil"

Well later on i heard that it was NOT about taking the oil, rather Saddam Hussein was planning to stop the whole petro-dollar scheme. A barrel is ONLY sold using dollars, while logically speaking if you for example would have sold a barrel oil for British pound, you would gained more from it. As exchanging dollars to your own currency, you lose money. You also could have used your own currency to sell barrels of oil. If somebody buys your currency to buy barrels of oil FROM you, you will not lose any money by exchanging currencies and also your currency gains more value.

Also with Muammar Gaddafi was the same story. He was also planning to stop using dollars for exchange of barrels of oil.

In the end people using dollars to use as a currency used for everything, is like highway everybody needs to use..which means a necessity, which means a dependents. If a country is out of line, you just cut them the ability to buy US dollars.

Looking from this point of view, everything made sense. However, those countries were weak countries compared to Russia and China. As they are planning to stop using the petro-dollar for buying stuff from each other. Instead they are planning to use each others currency to buy each others resources. Which in the end is win-win for both of them.

if one sheep leaps over the ditch the rest will follow, as many of the smaller countries know this all along, but if they do that, there is a big chance US will "bring democracy" to those countries as they have done with many other countries that did not listened to them. However Russia and China with involvement of India, South Africa and Brazil (BRICS), is slowly creating a alternative side for countries to join and leaving western created systems.

Although this sounds very good in theory, however we know from human behavior when you have tasted good food, you cannot suddenly go back to bad food. That will be or it will look like its gonna be with US. They had all the power over the world, so now to share with other countries is very hard indeed. That is why they are pressuring Russia with NATO settlements near Russian border. They know the longer they wait, the stronger Russia gets.

 

[Serinity]

:wasalam:

There is People's Republic of China behind North Korea. If America invade North Korea, then China would involve in war like they did in Korean War.

Bismillah,

It seems like both Russia and China are huge bullies. Supporting the corrupters. etc. They all operate within their interests. For their interests.

I also wonder why our muslim brothers in Middle east cant establish Shariah without killing eachother.

USA wants democracy in Middle east, Russia wants their communism (correct me if I am wrong on this one) but as Muslims we want Shariah, not democracy, not communism.

USA wants to have their hands in everything. They think of themselves as "The Police of the world".

If:

A. We could stop killing eachother.
B. Bring Shariah, but obviously, we cant have it the Shia's way, cause that isn't Islamic.

we should establish Shariah according and based on the Quran and the Sunnah 100%. So by that, every statement or arguement in explaining Shariah, etc. Should be backed up by Quran and Sunnah. Not misconcieved and ill-interpreted views of the Quraan.

This whole sect-thing is dangerous, and I can't see how Shariah will be established when people are engaged in this whole sect non-sense (NOT talking about the Hanbali, etc. They are not sects.).

It seems be like this: Either countries take USA's side or Russia/China's side. We don't want either systems.

Going back to the Korea subject. It seems like China likes to support North Korea. That is just soo wrong. Not different from supporting a terrorist.
Allahu alam.

 

[Simple_Person]

Bismillah,

It seems like both Russia and China are huge bullies. Supporting the corrupters. etc. They all operate within their interests. For their interests.

I also wonder why our muslim brothers in Middle east cant establish Shariah without killing eachother.

USA wants democracy in Middle east, Russia wants their communism (correct me if I am wrong on this one) but as Muslims we want Shariah, not democracy, not communism.

USA wants to have their hands in everything. They think of themselves as "The Police of the world".

If:

A. We could stop killing eachother.
B. Bring Shariah, but obviously, we cant have it the Shia's way, cause that isn't Islamic.

we should establish Shariah according and based on the Quran and the Sunnah 100%. So by that, every statement or arguement in explaining Shariah, etc. Should be backed up by Quran and Sunnah. Not misconcieved and ill-interpreted views of the Quraan.

This whole sect-thing is dangerous, and I can't see how Shariah will be established when people are engaged in this whole sect non-sense (NOT talking about the Hanbali, etc. They are not sects.).

It seems be like this: Either countries take USA's side or Russia/China's side. We don't want either systems.

Going back to the Korea subject. It seems like China likes to support North Korea. That is just soo wrong. Not different from supporting a terrorist.
Allahu alam.

Well bullies? Nobody is a bully it is just like you said..their political interests. For example why Russia is defending Assad is because of their harbor in Latakia, Syria. It is a strategic place to have a harbor there. Because that harbor is a harbor facing Mediterranean sea. If war might break lose between east and west, in Mediterranean sea you have Greece, Italy, Spain, France Balkan region..and thus also able to go through strait of Gibraltar (Morocco<-->Spain) and reach Portugal very easily. Also, you can reach other north-African countries. Russia and Egypt for example are closing ties with each other..thus also able for Russia to reach Red Sea as Russia also is trying to have good ties with Saudi Arabia and also reach the Gulf of Aden--> ..and further Arabic Sea (under Oman) to go further to rest of Africa.

If we look at US for example..they have "brought democracy" to every country in the Middle East in the last 50 years..since the creation of CIA. As in the Middle East there are full of dictators . (Mission achieved for US)

USSR doesn't exist anymore since 1991 as that was the year USSR fell. With in, the communist mentality and ideology that was for the larger part being practiced in the government. In the modern day Russia is having a Orthodox Christianity approach.

Muslim Brothers as many of other people who say "Islam..Islam..Islam"..it is all just talk. They like many before them have used religion to gain power in Egypt. As they were agreeing for example with the Zionist state to leave the Sinai desert as it is.

In Islamic Law there are two things. Shari'a law (From Allah) (example...not eating pork meat..praying..) and you have human law (This part is based on interpretation). I have heard that for example during the Ottoman Empire, Hanafi-mathab was used as law as how we see it now a days, while Hanafi-mathab is just a interpretation like the other mathabs and cannot be used in the same sense as law from Allah(swt). As in all the mathabs there are agreements without a doubt and what differs is what makes them a different mathab, although you cannot say this one is right and the other one is wrong. (Somebody do correct me please if i have said something wrong)

US, doesn't want to police the world whatsoever, they want to have control. Control and policing the world are two different things. When you are behaving like police, you ONLY think of the benefits of the ones you are helping. That is NOT the case with US. They think also of their political interests. That is for example why you see them trying to do coup's through out the world through CIA. I would advice you a documentary called "War on Democracy (2007) - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1029172/ ) It is a eye opener to many things .

Within the Muslim world there are the Muslims and there are the rulers. When the rulers control the Muslims, killing will not stop. A Muslim cannot be brought to his senses as he or she is most of the times is ignorant of important facts and uneducated of the controlling of the governments. Even if you ARE one of the educated Muslims, telling them what is going on, many times they just brush you off..as what you are saying is dumb..or you sound very intellectual and they want to also sound very knowledgeable and are rather trying to compete with you in the sense of intellect rather to listen and learn from what you are saying. =_=!. As many of our cultures have only thought us the laws of the jungle..wife in the kitchen..brag about how much money you have and how big of a house or how expensive your car is.

I have pondered about Islamic way of live many times, but you can't bring something beneficial if somebody does not want to have it. What i mean by that is, you cannot introduce Islamic Law to a country or group of people if they themselves do not want it, as their desires in their hearts are longing for dunya instead of akhira and having fear of Allah(swt). What CAN be achieved is beginning small. A village with all Muslims wanting to have such a law or a town (looking back to Media for example). When you begin small, people can finally look at places WITHOUT Islamic Law and your place where you do have Islamic Law. THEN more people can slowly come to your village or also apply that to their village if everybody in the village wants that too.

Sects if for bigger part because human beings (not even referring to Muslims) have become emotional in our actions and talk. We follow what our hearts desire and not what our mind says. People have become sheep. One person can rise and promise you what your hearts desires and BAM.. you have a new cult as this is a modern day issue in the world for example. The same in the Muslim world. You cannot wake people up until they criticize things. That is the moment when things start to change. I THINK this starts with bringing down dictators as they control the flow of information and intellectuals. People are being murdered if they become to smart many times in autocratic countries.

In the current day and age, you have to choose..who would you choose to side with? I would say it is better to have Russian side instead of US side. US aka lapdog of the Zionist state, will do whatever it takes to take you down as Muslims. Russia however has no interest to take you down, as long as their political interests are met. But having you taken down by the Zionists state is to be able to expand their control around them.

I myself do not use the word "terrorist", but if we talk about that word, every country fits that picture of a terrorist state .

I recommend you to also watch another documentary called "Propaganda (2012)" - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2279306/

Interesting point of view, do know it is NOT made by North Korea, but by a Australian documentary maker to let us see through the eyes of the so called North Koreans as how the western world has become . Don't take every literally but it is funny to see the point of view.

Forgive me for this long comment .

 

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

As in the Middle East there are full of dictators . (Mission achieved for US)

"Benevolent Strong Men", they used to be known as.

---------------

I have pondered about Islamic way of live many times, but you can't bring something beneficial if somebody does not want to have it. What i mean by that is, you cannot introduce Islamic Law to a country or group of people if they themselves do not want it, as their desires in their hearts are longing for dunya instead of akhira and having fear of Allah(swt). What CAN be achieved is beginning small. A village with all Muslims wanting to have such a law or a town (looking back to Media for example). When you begin small, people can finally look at places WITHOUT Islamic Law and your place where you do have Islamic Law. THEN more people can slowly come to your village or also apply that to their village if everybody in the village wants that too.

You see, there will never be a time in the world when every single person will want the Sharee`ah. In fact, as we go further and further away from the Khayr-ul-Quroon (The Golden Age of Islaam), the people will only become worse and worse. Thus, if 100 years ago, out of every 100 people, 10 wanted Sharee`ah rule, then in today's time, 2017, out of every 1,000 people, only two or three wants Sharee`ah rule. If even that many. So the thing is, to halt the implementation of Sharee`ah rule until such a time as every single person is in agreement and is accepting of Sharee`ah rule, is to put it on halt forever, because such a time will not come. Even during the time of Sahaabah, the Golden Age of Islaam, they used to fight in Jihaad, offensive Jihaad, and they would conquer lands and they would establish Sharee`ah in those lands whether the inhabitants of that land liked it or not, and the reason behind this is that rule by Sharee`ah is not a "choice"; it's not something you can choose to accept or not accept. Every land belongs only to Allaah Ta`aalaa, and thus may only be ruled according to the Laws of Allaah Ta`aalaa, and never ever by man-made laws.

Also, even if, hypothetically, a small village of people were to come together and decide to implement rule by Sharee`ah in their little village, the Kuffaar world as a whole would not accept it. America would carry out drone strikes there, because there is nothing they hate more than Sharee`ah. They hate everything about it. So the idea that there can exist a Muslim village ruled by Sharee`ah, and that they can live in peace, without fighting and without interference from anybody, is a pipe-dream, because Shaytaan and his worshippers (the Kuffaar) will never allow that to happen. If the Muslims want Sharee`ah, they would have to fight for it: fight to implement it and fight to keep it as the rule after it has been implemented. That is the only way it would ever exist in any village, town or country.

والله تعالى أعلم

والسلام​

 

[Simple_Person]

You see, there will never be a time in the world when every single person will want the Sharee`ah. In fact, as we go further and further away from the Khayr-ul-Quroon (The Golden Age of Islaam), the people will only become worse and worse. Thus, if 100 years ago, out of every 100 people, 10 wanted Sharee`ah rule, then in today's time, 2017, out of every 1,000 people, only two or three wants Sharee`ah rule. If even that many. So the thing is, to halt the implementation of Sharee`ah rule until such a time as every single person is in agreement and is accepting of Sharee`ah rule, is to put it on halt forever, because such a time will not come. Even during the time of Sahaabah, the Golden Age of Islaam, they used to fight in Jihaad, offensive Jihaad, and they would conquer lands and they would establish Sharee`ah in those lands whether the inhabitants of that land liked it or not, and the reason behind this is that rule by Sharee`ah is not a "choice"; it's not something you can choose to accept or not accept. Every land belongs only to Allaah Ta`aalaa, and thus may only be ruled according to the Laws of Allaah Ta`aalaa, and never ever by man-made laws.

The problem with this is, you cannot force sharee'ah law on people who do not want it firstly. When we look in Medina back then, that the Muslims had their law, like the Jews and Christians had their law. The biggest issue of today is like you already somehow referred to it, even the Muslims don't want it..as many by mouth are Muslim, but never understand really the wisdom of Islam to begin with. If they would have understood the wisdom of Islam and the law of it, many would have embraced it.

Also, even if, hypothetically, a small village of people were to come together and decide to implement rule by Sharee`ah in their little village, the Kuffaar world as a whole would not accept it. America would carry out drone strikes there, because there is nothing they hate more than Sharee`ah. They hate everything about it. So the idea that there can exist a Muslim village ruled by Sharee`ah, and that they can live in peace, without fighting and without interference from anybody, is a pipe-dream, because Shaytaan and his worshippers (the Kuffaar) will never allow that to happen. If the Muslims want Sharee`ah, they would have to fight for it: fight to implement it and fight to keep it as the rule after it has been implemented. That is the only way it would ever exist in any village, town or country.

I can somehow agree with you on this. They KNOW that if it begins somewhere, people will see and will compare it with their law. When they see the justice in it by wisdom and mercy, they would also want to embrace it. This is something that indeed many who oppose Islam not because they don't know what Islam is about, they KNOW what Islam is about, that is why they are preventing the world to embrace it. Like the Jews back in Medina KNEW Rasullah(saws) was the LAST rasul that their scripture had told them about it and they have been waiting for, but rejecting it because he did not met with their standards of what they wanted the last rasul to be.

There is sadly no unity among the Muslims to begin with as the are treacherous towards each other. We Muslims have become like the hadith of Rasullah(saws) referring to the Muslims as becoming many but like the foam of the sea.

 

[Serinity]

In Islamic Law there are two things. Shari'a law (From Allah) (example...not eating pork meat..praying..) and you have human law (This part is based on interpretation). I have heard that for example during the Ottoman Empire, Hanafi-mathab was used as law as how we see it now a days, while Hanafi-mathab is just a interpretation like the other mathabs and cannot be used in the same sense as law from Allah(swt). As in all the mathabs there are agreements without a doubt and what differs is what makes them a different mathab, although you cannot say this one is right and the other one is wrong. (Somebody do correct me please if i have said something wrong)

Correct me if I am wrong, but, yes, Shariah is the Law of Allah :swt: , but how can you say that interpretting the Quraan is treatedd as "human laws" because that is not true.

Intrepretting Shariah Law is not something anyone can do. The interpretation of The Quraan should be done by pious people. What I am saying is -

Pls be careful on calling Shariah Law when interpretted as "human law". It is kufr to call Shariah law, human law.

Idk much on how Shariah Law is to be implemented.

Allahu alam.

 

[Simple_Person]

Correct me if I am wrong, but, yes, Shariah is the Law of Allah :swt: , but how can you say that interpretting the Quraan is treatedd as "human laws" because that is not true.

Intrepretting Shariah Law is not something anyone can do. The interpretation of The Quraan should be done by pious people. What I am saying is -

Pls be careful on calling Shariah Law when interpretted as "human law". It is kufr to call Shariah law, human law.

Idk much on how Shariah Law is to be implemented.

Allahu alam.

No you misunderstand me. Read it again. With Islamic Law there is shari'a law which is based on what Allah has told us ..which does not differ where ever you go in the Muslim world. These rulings for example are not eating pork..not drinking alcohol. Everybody agrees with this part and no body disagrees with it. If you disagrees with it ..then that is like you said kuffr.

Then you have the other part that is human effort of understanding. For example rulings that do not exist in the Qur'an or the Sunnah. As for this is a well fact that exist and has existed. Scholars can differ with each other on this but doesn't mean one of the interpretation is definitely the right interpretation. As it is interpretated.

Going against this interpretation doesn't mean you have gone against what Allah(swt) has said. You merely go against a human interpretation .

You understand me now on this?

 

[Serinity]

No you misunderstand me. Read it again. With Islamic Law there is shari'a law which is based on what Allah has told us ..which does not differ where ever you go in the Muslim world. These rulings for example are not eating pork..not drinking alcohol. Everybody agrees with this part and no body disagrees with it. If you disagrees with it ..then that is like you said kuffr.

Then you have the other part that is human effort of understanding. For example rulings that do not exist in the Qur'an or the Sunnah. As for this is a well fact that exist and has existed. Scholars can differ with each other on this but doesn't mean one of the interpretation is definitely the right interpretation. As it is interpretated.

Going against this interpretation doesn't mean you have gone against what Allah(swt) has said. You merely go against a human interpretation .

You understand me now on this?

I kind of understand. Only Allah knows the Quraan 100 %.

We all know Shariah Law is the Law of Allah.

Not anyone can interpret the Quraan. Disagreement in fiqh is, afaik, ok. Byt it is not in Aqeedah.

However, what if, by the mercy of Allah, Allah sends a very pious, who is guided and has taqwah. If that man's interpretation of a verse speaking of a ruling is correct. It is NOT human Law. To say that is kufr.

Only Allah knows the Quraan in its entirety. If Allah was to bless a pious Muslim with knowledge and understanding of the Quraan. That knowledge and understanding used to interpret Quraan can not be called "human law".

So I disagree with you. If Allah in a verse ordered "x" and a pious one interpretted and came to understand what is meant by the verse / Allah blessed him with the knowledge and understanding.

U cant call that "human law".

Allahu alam.

 

[Simple_Person]

I kind of understand. Only Allah knows the Quraan 100 %.

We all know Shariah Law is the Law of Allah.

Not anyone can interpret the Quraan. Disagreement in fiqh is, afaik, ok. Byt it is not in Aqeedah.

However, what if, by the mercy of Allah, Allah sends a very pious, who is guided and has taqwah. If that man's interpretation of a verse speaking of a ruling is correct. It is NOT human Law. To say that is kufr.

Only Allah knows the Quraan in its entirety. If Allah was to bless a pious Muslim with knowledge and understanding of the Quraan. That knowledge and understanding used to interpret Quraan can not be called "human law".

So I disagree with you. If Allah in a verse ordered "x" and a pious one interpretted and came to understand what is meant by the verse / Allah blessed him with the knowledge and understanding.

U cant call that "human law".

Allahu alam.

You seem to forget something. You refer to the unseen as if it is seen by the people. A pious person is ONLY known and seen by Allah(swt). Well human law is maybe the wrong wording i have used, but HUMAN understanding of it. So your argument still is contradictory saying that just because somebodies efforts give a very good ruling, is suddenly become shari'a law. It is STILL human interpretation. This pious person can indeed give the interpretation, but it doesn't make somebody do kuffr, because that certain individual chooses another interpretation to follow. While this is your argument, that you reject somebodies argument suddenly is kuffr. If we would follow your approach, then by default many mathabs are astray as they are in disagreement with each other by minor details of the deen. However if you ask people around, nobody will say mathab x is astray, rather all the mathabs have a different understanding, but doesn't make them wrong.

So do know that when we speak about human understanding, doesn't mean 1 thing if FOR sure is the correct way. In school we have come to learn that only 1 answer is the right answer, but a question can have multiple answers and those answers can differ from each other but all can be good answers. To give you an example.

Question: Do plants need the sun to grow? (Choose YES/NO)

Your answer and my answer to that question would automatically be, YES, plants need the sun to grow. HOWEVER both the answers are good. They need the sun, but they also don't need the sun to grow. I am not going to give you the answer why both answers are right. I'll let YOU explain to that to me, as the explanation is fairly easy if you think outside the box.