To Mo on CIA and some other nasties
Submitted by Plato (India), Feb 5, 2007 at 12:43
"...I hope one day you visit Bangladesh and experience first hand how the Christians, Hindus and Muslims are living side by side..."Have you had a look at the demographic changes in the religious makeup of your country over the years. I don't have to spell it out. Check it for yourself. It will not be any different from practically all other Islamic majority countries. In Pakistan from more than 20 per cent Hindus at the time of independence the number has plummetted to single digits. I can bet you several takas that the story has been repeated in Bangladesh. Now look at that infidel country India, the Muslim population has gone up instead of down. Does it tell you something, Mo. Those living side by side with Muslims in Bangladesh are an endangered species
"The unclean here is not in the physical sense, but in the religious sense, their practice in not pure therefore it in impure. Idol worshipers during the time of revelation used to perform the Tawaf (circling of the ka'baa) naked.."That tells us kaffirs almost all we want to know of Islam. Unless we convert we will never be considered pure. And we are naturally targets for purification. It is worse than calling us physically unclean. To be called spiritually unclean reeks of the worst kind of prejudice. And what is the big deal about running naked. We are born naked. There is nothing to be ashamed of it. The thickest clothes cannot hide your nakedness from Allah
"58:22 is reaffirming that true love is within faith; this verse was revealed during the times when the companions were fighting against an army who consisted their blood brothers, uncles and fathers. The faithful here were being told of their true allegiance, it is to Islam."Context to the rescue again. So I presume this verse is now superfluous? What relevance does it have except as a matter of history and the Koran is not a book of history. Contrast this with your Hindu neighbours scripture the Gita. One of the protagonists agonises endlessly and page after page before reluctantly agreeing to draw his bow and against relatives who had done considerably more than the relatives of the Muslims had done to them. Which brings up the fact that the Muslims, who numbered just a few hundreds despite thirteen years of preaching, were hardly molested in any real sense. The persecution, if you can call it that, began only when the Prophet started persecuting the Queresh by denouncing and reviling their idols. Now if a Muslim woman is asked to identify herself by lifting up her niqab it is considered persecution and fit to start a riot. The Meccans held their peace for thirteen years.
And that brings up another little matter.In the verse Allah says that for hating their blood relative he will have ' ..strengthened them with a spirit from Himself. And He will admit them to Gardens beneath which Rivers flow, to dwell therein (for ever). Allah will be well pleased with them...' Encouragement to take the sword to their relatives. And that is what used to happen. Raid upon unprovoked raid on Meccan caravans and finally upon Mecca. Mo read the story of the gazwas your Prophet indulged in all 70 or so of them. An intersting piece of information for you. The large majority of Meccans who had refused to convert after 13 years of peaceful preaching almost overnight became Muslims after the conquest of the city. Guess why. Let me help, read: 110:1-2 'When comes the Help of Allah, and Victory, And thou dost see the people enter Allah's Religion in crowds.'
You see Allah is not equivocating about how military victory brings in the converts to Islam."I will be honest, I don't know what I'd do, I would seek council from the scholars if such a scenario was to take place, however I will defend England if it is my obligation to."You are honest. It tells me you have no idea where your loyalty lies. Considering that Allah tells those Muslims to kill their fathers and sons for their religion, I can easily predict the result of your pow-wow with your scholars. Pity England.That is the migratory attack Noah and Susan are going on about. If and when the time comes you will show your true colours and sell the country on whose salt you live down the Thames.
"Please do not be so ignorant. People have been aware of the Prophet through the constant mention of his name on the news and elsewhere, people genuinely wanted to find out who he was. That is what I meant; expand upon a subject without looking at the obvious it is quite unbelievable. For a Muslims to get closer to the Prophet (p) they must adhere to the Sunnah, try and imitate the Prophet (p) in as many ways as possible, that is the way to get closer to him, not kill themselves in an outburst of anger. We were told by our scholars across the world about this, but you have those people who allow their emotions get the better of them."As the saying goes ignorance is bliss. People were blasted out of their bliss by 9/11, London, Madrid. Korans flew off the shelves. People wanted to know all about the Prophet. Take a look at what I have underlined of your statement. The Muslims were certainly imitating the Prophet when they went into a frenzy demanding the heads of those cartoonists. That is exactly what he did to those who caricatured him in verse or otherwise. Abu Afak. Kaf Bin Ashraf. Asma Bint Marwa to name just a few. It is the Sunnah, the way of the Prophet
"Islam has united the majority of Muslims in the religious sense, that is why in the mosques all races and class come together and pray, exchange hugs and kisses etc. But not so politically; there still exist lines between nations. Islam will provide security when Islam is taken up on the political level by the ruling party."You can't believe that hugging and kissing stuff, Mo. They blow each other up in mosques in countries like Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq. And everyone saw the security provided in Afghanistan when Islam was taken up at the political level and we see it now in Iran. Are all those countries which call themselves Islamic republics fake Islamics? Do we have to take counsel of Islamic scholars to decide the level of purity of those Islamic states?
"Certainly, I would advise you to look into the history of the CIA ..."
Why CIA, the US government is doing it openly in Iraq, and did in Panama, Vietnam. That is hardly the issue. You seem to think that America is in some kind of permanent crusader mode looking to harm Muslim interests by propping up dictators in Muslim countries (many Muslims despise democracy because it comes from the West), consumes its god-given oil wealth and props up infidel countries. Have you considered why Japan is one of the most prosperous countries despite being nuked and devastated by the US and very pro-American to boot. So also Germany. And now Vietnam. Food for thought
"The corrupt politicians of Bangladesh have stolen from the public funds hundreds" What, do you not believe this statement? Does that require substantiation?"
No it does not. I was asking you about the Jamat e Islami a pure Islamic party founded by Maulana Maududi. I bet you a taka that the pure Islamists were also on the take. Are you waiting for me to raise the stake to take it up? Ten taka it is... .
Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".
Reader comments (2100) on this item
Comment on this item
Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum. Daniel J. Pipes