Stop America’s war which makes Muslims fight Muslims!

On 8 May, Pakistan’s Prime Minister, Yousuf Raza Gillani, announced a war in Swat in a telecast address to the nation, in these words, “For the sanctity of this pure land, for national dignity, to suppress the extremists, to ensure the protection of people, the army has been deployed.” However, the Prime Minister’s venture is neither for the restoration of national dignity and nor for the public protection, rather it is to restore the dignity of the cowardly American occupying forces and for ensuring America’s survival in Afghanistan, where she is immersed in a deep quagmire.

Keeping control of Afghanistan is not possible without crushing the Mujahideen, who are fighting against America in Afghanistan. But cowardly American and NATO forces, whilst possessing the latest weaponry, are afraid of confrontation with poorly equipped, small groups of Mujahideen. Moreover, the American economy is in continuous, unabated recession, despite all efforts, whilst politically, in the international arena, America has lost the support of her allies in her campaign of occupation and hegemony. Countries like China and Russia are openly citing their concerns about the American presence in the region. Hence, in this situation America is unable to revitalise her failing campaign in Afghanistan alone.

America depends upon the Pakistan Army to emerge from this deepening quagmire. America urgently desires that the Pakistan Army stands with her and fights wholeheartedly in support of the US war of occupation and hegemony. However, America knows very well that the Muslims of Pakistan harbour a deep hatred for America and absolutely reject the American presence in the region, and so are unwilling to launch their army for the sake of America’s war. Moreover, there is a negative opinion within the Pakistan Army itself about America’s war. All of which amounts to a great obstacle for America in getting essential military help from Pakistan. Thus it was necessary for America to create an atmosphere of chaos and fear to enable the start of military operations within Pakistan. These operations on the one hand ensure that the Mujahideen who are fighting in Afghanistan against the American occupation will now turn their guns away from the real enemy, America, and on to their Muslims brothers of the Pakistan Army; whilst on the other hand, these operations are an attempt to conceal the fact that the real cause of the chaos in the region is the illegal American occupation of Afghanistan, which the Pakistani government fully supports by providing supply lines for weaponry, food and ordinance to the occupying forces of America and NATO in Afghanistan, whilst deploying thousands of Muslim soldiers at the Pak-Afghan border to stop any attacks by Pakistani Muslims on the occupying forces.

This is the reality of the military operations which the Pakistani government began first in the tribal areas and then extended to the settled areas of NWFP. The result of these operations are hundreds of thousands of homeless, noble Muslim women spending their days and nights under the bare sky, elderly and young plunged into angst and despair, with countless families suffering. Houses, markets, schools and shops are being converted to rubble, whilst the blood of Muslims is shed without respite.

The Pakistan government has not only pitched the Muslim army against their own brothers, she simultaneously started a malicious, carefully orchestrated campaign in which she is presented a distorted picture to gain public opinion to her favour. Learning from the Lal Masjid experience, the government has taken carefully planned steps. Through an organized media campaign, the government tried to sway Pakistani public opinion in favour of the military operations. The attack on Minawan police training centre and the video of the flogging of a girl were used for the same purpose, to prepare the ground for military operations which were planned weeks in advance. To justify these military operations, Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani said that these people were challenging the writ of government and in such a case the government was left with no other option but to use force. We ask: wasn’t this writ challenged when America openly and flagrantly killed children, women and the elderly in Wazaristan and Banu through its drone attacks? Why did the Prime Minister not appear on the media then to announce military operations against these drone attacks? Were these drone attacks not challenging the “writ of government,” coming one after the other, despite continuous government protests? And is the American plan to grant India opportunities in the region not a challenge to the government’s “writ”? Though it is a grave threat, why is the Pakistani government helping the execution of this plan? Indeed, the government has signed the Pak-Afghan transit trade agreement, under the guardianship of US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, in Washington, although the political and economical fruits of this transit trade are only for the benefit of India. As for Prime Minister Gilani’s claim of guarding the honour of Swat’s women as a justification for his military operations, was the Prime Minister not worried about the honour of the Muslim daughter, Dr. Afia Siddique, who is imprisoned in America and whose children remain missing? So, why has his government taken care not to raise a word about Afia Siddique during its numerous meetings with the Americans?

O Muslims of Pakistan!

These rulers are liars and traitors against Islam and Muslims. They are only sincere to their own survival by fulfilling the interests of colonist Kuffar. These rulers are turning Muslims against Muslims to protect America, even though Allah سبحانه وتعالى said in the Noble Qur’an,

وَمَن يَقْتُلْ مُؤْمِناً مُّتَعَمِّداً فَجَزَآؤُهُ جَهَنَّمُ خَالِداً فِيهَا وَغَضِبَ اللّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَلَعَنَهُ وَأَعَدَّ لَهُ عَذَاباً عَظِيماً

“And whoever kills a believer intentionally, his recompense is Hell to abide therein, and the Wrath and the Curse of Allâh are upon him, and a great punishment is prepared for him.” [Surah An-Nisa’a 4:93]
RasulAllah سلم و عليه الله صلى said,

سباب المسلم فسق وقتاله كفر

“Abusing the Muslim is an aggression and fighting him is disbelief.” [Al-Bukhari, Muslim]
And RasulAllah سلم و عليه الله صلى said,

إذا التقى المسلمان بسيفيهما فالقاتل والمقتول في النار , قلنا يا رسول الله هذا القاتل فما بال المقتول قال انه كان حريصا على قتل صاحبه

“When two Muslims face each other in fighting and one kills the other, then both the killer and the killed are in the hell-fire.” The Companions asked, “O Messenger of Allah, this is the killer – what about the poor person who has been killed?” The Prophet, سلم و عليه الله صلى, said “He had the intention to kill his companion.”

The evil of these rulers is so extensive they even seek to incite sectarian conflict between Muslims to serve America. Previously America used the same tactic in Iraq, where she sought to strengthen her self by inflaming a Sunni-Shia conflict. May Allah سبحانه وتعالى punish these rulers, who descend to any depths to please the Kuffar. Indeed, the reality of these rulers is described by RasulAllah سلم و عليه الله صلى when he said,

«إِنَّهُ سَتَكُونُ بَعْدِي أُمَرَاءُ مَنْ صَدَّقَهُمْ بِكَذِبِهِمْ وَأَعَانَهُمْ عَلَى ظُلْمِهِمْ فَلَيْسَ مِنِّي وَلَسْتُ مِنْهُ وَلَيْسَ بِوَارِدٍ عَلَيَّ الْحَوْضَ وَمَنْ لَمْ يُصَدِّقْهُمْ بِكَذِبِهِمْ وَلَمْ يُعِنْهُمْ عَلَى ظُلْمِهِمْ فَهُوَ مِنِّي وَأَنَا مِنْهُ وَهُوَ وَارِدٌ عَلَيَّ الْحَوْضَ»

“There will be rulers after me, whoever testifies to their falsehood and lies and helped them in their treachery, he is not from me, and I am not from him (i.e. I have nothing to do with him). He shall not come near me at the cistern (Hawdh Kauthar). And whoever does not testify to their falsehood and does not help him in his treachery, he is from me and I am from him and he shall meet me at the Hawdh.” [Reported in Sunan an-Nisai on the authority of Ka’ab ibn ‘Ujrah (r.a.)]

These rulers do not even feel abhorrence when they meet with the so-called “civilized” American officials, who have punished the Muslims in Guantanamo Bay and Abu Gharaib with such brutal torture that even the Firaun would have shied from. In American torture cells Muslim men and women were piled over each other, Qur’an was defiled, the faces of prisoners were washed in toilets and Muslims were electrocuted. Yet, despite all this, in the eyes of these rulers, the American nation represents the peak of civilization. The rulers are consumed with honour and pride at any opportunity to meet them, whilst harbouring contempt and disgust for Islam, its rules and its punishments.

O Muslims of Pakistan!

How can you remain silent whilst your sons in the armed forces are being ordered to bomb and attack their own Muslim brothers? Do you not shed tears of blood when you see that your rulers are using your own army to plunge all the Muslims of the region under the dominance of their worst enemy, the America?
O Ulema of Pakistan!

You adopted a half-hearted stance at the time of the Lal Masjid massacre and Musharraf succeeded in spilling blood of Muslim women and children in a mosque and madrassa in the very capital Pakistan. The pain of that operation is still present in the hearts of the Muslims of Pakistan. Today, these “democratic” rulers are seeking to turn the whole of Swat into a Lal Musjid for the sake of their masters, America. So, will you not rise now and stop these rulers from this wasteful campaign? Arise and mobilize all your students in madrassas and march towards the palaces of these rulers, before America eradicates all mosques and madrassas from Afghanistan and the Tribal Areas.

O Political Parties of Pakistan!

You claim that you look after the affairs of the Muslims of Pakistan. And you are witnessing that Muslims are being turned against Muslims for the sake of America. So is there any sincere person amongst you who will come forward and account these rulers in the manner that it deserves and seize their hands? If you will not do this then do you wish that Allah سبحانه وتعالى includes you in the ranks of these oppressive rulers on the Day of Judgement? RasulAllah صلى الله عليه وسلم said,

إِنَّ اللَّهَ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ لَا يُعَذِّبُ الْعَامَّةَ بِعَمَلِ الْخَاصَّةِ حَتَّى يَرَوْا الْمُنْكَرَ بَيْنَ ظَهْرَانَيْهِمْ وَهُمْ قَادِرُونَ عَلَى أَنْ يُنْكِرُوهُ فَلَا يُنْكِرُوهُ فَإِذَا فَعَلُوا ذَلِكَ عَذَّبَ اللَّهُ الْخَاصَّةَ وَالْعَامَّةَ

“Allah does not punish common people by the bad deeds of some specific people, unless they see munkar between them and are capable to refrain it but do not do so. If they do this then Allah will punish both of them”[Musnad Ahmad]

O Muslim sons of the Armed Forces!

Do you not desire that your pure blood is spilled in the way of Allah سبحانه وتعالى to raise the Deen of Allah سبحانه وتعالى as the highest, rather than to maintain the American Raj over the necks of your own people? For how long will these rulers keep using you as a fuel for America’s war?

Research Associate,
Database and Multimedia Lab,
Computer Science Dept.,
KAIST.

Read more...

Misconception Vs. True Face Of Islam

There is a face of Islam the world does not know.

By Amit Pyakurel

Fair distinction is needed between the concept of Islam and some of its unfair practices. The newly bred term “Islamophobia,” is feared to be infiltrating the mentality of the Western, European and other societies. It may be putting forth unnecessary prejudice and negative speculation against the Islam by the non-Muslims, so we need to ascertain how relevant the term is in itself. Is it about fearing all aspects of Islam, or fearing only some of its distorted or misinterpreted values, which are perceived to lead to radicalism, fundamentalism, discrimination or even terrorism?

There is one adage that the term “Islamophobia” is deceptive and the phobia (fear) is illogical. Perceivably, what is to be feared is the Political Islam, or some practices in it that sound ethically wrong.
The world media is saturated with the terms Islamic Fundamentalism, Islamic Radicalism and Islamic Terrorism, causing all the havoc or negative backlash against believers of the religion. We need to separate “Islamic” out of these generally unwelcome terms. Maybe the discontent is not with the Islam, but with the very bad aspects associated with the religion. Negative stereotypes abound because the majority of those perpetrating world terrorism, such as al Qaeda, are Muslims.

But does it mean that all the people in Islam have to bear the responsibility for the unruly characteristics of some of the people in the religion, who have nothing to do with the moderate lots? Certainly not! It may be only a coincidence that the majority of world terrorists are Muslims. It’s not ethical to associate Islam with the unruly characteristics followed by some of its less moderate believers.

It’s of course not reasonable for the West, and the rest of us, to fear Islam as a religion, its genuinely humanistic teachings or its deference to the lord, Allah. While criticizing bad practices of Islam, it’s extremely essential not to impose any hatred or contempt against ordinary and moderate Muslims. And it would be more genuine if, not only non-Muslims, but all the intellectual and moderate believers of Islam come forward to refute and discourage the wrong practices in Islam as well as to uphold the good practices in it and to highlight Islam as being an equally good religion as others.

Some call this distinguishing and questioning by non-Muslims “intruding” in Islamic norms. Though I am not a stern believer or blindly faithful, I happen to be a Hindu by religion. And I certainly don’t mind if anyone criticizes the unfair norms or distorted or misinterpreted practices of any doctrine in my religion. Criticisms could help provoke changes for good. Couldn’t it be viewed just from the humanist point of view rather than from any religious or cultural phenomenon? Arguably, we could.

We could be right to question the “unfair practices.” But what if the Muslims in their country and living abroad, especially in the Western or European countries, are misunderstood, annoyed, and intimidated, simply because they are from the religion? It’s definitely unethical and we can’t refrain to deem that such belief resembles inadequate knowledge about the religion.

The Vienna-based European Monitoring Center on Racism and Xenophobia, which tracks ethnic and religious bias across the 25-nation EU, has cautioned in a recent report that Muslims routinely suffer acts ranging from physical attacks to discrimination in the job and housing markets. Beate Winkler, the group’s director said that the key word is “respect.” “People need to feel respected and included. We need to highlight the common ground that we have.” Winkler said that since the September 11, 2001 attacks, many of Europe’s nearly 13 million Muslims feel “put under a general suspicion of terrorism.” The 117-page report underpins the increasing urgency of dealing with the religious tensions in Europe.

For instance, especially in Western or European nations, it’s certainly ironic and unfair that if a crime is committed by a Muslim, chances are high that it may be linked with “terrorism” or “Jihad.” This highly reflects a prejudiced notion and, as the scholars in Islam argues, that “Jihad” doesn’t encourages terrorism or nonsensical murders, here the accusers must need to rethink their claimings. Such crimes could have been solely committed by a criminal, and it may have nothing to do with Islam or Jihad. As there is no significance to criticize if the unfair practices or some cultural aspects in Islam are questioned, it’s equally refutable that many Muslims are subjected to prejudiced discrimination and intimidation simply due to their adherence or recognition with the religion.

All religions and customs are made by humans, and we can’t deny that there could be some flaws in them. This is relevant in speaking about Islam, Hinduism, Christianity and so on. Any cultural idea or practice deserves to be analyzed and examined. Our nationalism, culture and religion are our dignity. We should be ready to prevent and uphold our identity, but this doesn’t mean we are exempt from having moral criticisms against our practices, no matter which religion or culture we belong to.

Article taken Froem: Orato.com

Read more...

UK’s first official sharia courts

ISLAMIC law has been officially adopted in Britain, with sharia courts given powers to rule on Muslim civil cases.

The government has quietly sanctioned the powers for sharia judges to rule on cases ranging from divorce and financial disputes to those involving domestic violence.

Rulings issued by a network of five sharia courts are enforceable with the full power of the judicial system, through the county courts or High Court.

Previously, the rulings of sharia courts in Britain could not be enforced, and depended on voluntary compliance among Muslims.


It has now emerged that sharia courts with these powers have been set up in London, Birmingham, Bradford and Manchester with the network’s headquarters in Nuneaton, Warwickshire. Two more courts are being planned for Glasgow and Edinburgh.

Sheikh Faiz-ul-Aqtab Siddiqi, whose Muslim Arbitration Tribunal runs the courts, said he had taken advantage of a clause in the Arbitration Act 1996.

Under the act, the sharia courts are classified as arbitration tribunals. The rulings of arbitration tribunals are binding in law, provided that both parties in the dispute agree to give it the power to rule on their case.

Siddiqi said: “We realised that under the Arbitration Act we can make rulings which can be enforced by county and high courts. The act allows disputes to be resolved using alternatives like tribunals. This method is called alternative dispute resolution, which for Muslims is what the sharia courts are.”

The disclosure that Muslim courts have legal powers in Britain comes seven months after Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, was pilloried for suggesting that the establishment of sharia in the future “seems unavoidable” in Britain.

In July, the head of the judiciary, the lord chief justice, Lord Phillips, further stoked controversy when he said that sharia could be used to settle marital and financial disputes.

In fact, Muslim tribunal courts started passing sharia judgments in August 2007. They have dealt with more than 100 cases that range from Muslim divorce and inheritance to nuisance neighbours.

It has also emerged that tribunal courts have settled six cases of domestic violence between married couples, working in tandem with the police investigations.

Siddiqi said he expected the courts to handle a greater number of “smaller” criminal cases in coming years as more Muslim clients approach them. “All we are doing is regulating community affairs in these cases,” said Siddiqi, chairman of the governing council of the tribunal.

Jewish Beth Din courts operate under the same provision in the Arbitration Act and resolve civil cases, ranging from divorce to business disputes. They have existed in Britain for more than 100 years, and previously operated under a precursor to the act.

Politicians and church leaders expressed concerns that this could mark the beginnings of a “parallel legal system” based on sharia for some British Muslims.

Dominic Grieve, the shadow home secretary, said: “If it is true that these tribunals are passing binding decisions in the areas of family and criminal law, I would like to know which courts are enforcing them because I would consider such action unlawful. British law is absolute and must remain so.”

Douglas Murray, the director of the Centre for Social Cohesion, said: “I think it’s appalling. I don’t think arbitration that is done by sharia should ever be endorsed or enforced by the British state.”

There are concerns that women who agree to go to tribunal courts are getting worse deals because Islamic law favours men.

Siddiqi said that in a recent inheritance dispute handled by the court in Nuneaton, the estate of a Midlands man was divided between three daughters and two sons.

The judges on the panel gave the sons twice as much as the daughters, in accordance with sharia. Had the family gone to a normal British court, the daughters would have got equal amounts.

In the six cases of domestic violence, Siddiqi said the judges ordered the husbands to take anger management classes and mentoring from community elders. There was no further punishment.

In each case, the women subsequently withdrew the complaints they had lodged with the police and the police stopped their investigations.

Siddiqi said that in the domestic violence cases, the advantage was that marriages were saved and couples given a second chance.

Inayat Bunglawala, assistant secretary-general of the Muslim Council of Britain, said: “The MCB supports these tribunals. If the Jewish courts are allowed to flourish, so must the sharia ones.”

Article Taken From Times Online...

Read more...

Scores dead after US strike in Afghanistan - 06 May 09

What if these killed were European, Americans or Jews????

Read more...

Auraat ki Azadi (An Artical by Mufti Abu Hurara)‏

Read more...