DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**attlawqa** · 06-06-2012, 12:14 PM

its true but that need not be an obstacle. Arabs can have an arab leader, pakistanis can have a pakistani leader, banglis4bangalis, indonesians4indonesians etc and have a level of cooperation amongst them whilst also having development plans for each individual nation. some muslim nations are coming leaps and bounds in technologies and economics. Indonesian GDP is nearly a $trillion mashAllah, saudi has made serious moves in terms of science and engineering, turkey is working on the f-35, the muslim lands are becoming more islamic which means more unity inshAllah as a lot of our disunity came from people like ghaddafi and assad who are currently being removedf inshAllah. I doubt ikhwan al muslimeen et al will want friction with muslim nations

Brother, you raised some serious and highly important questions. And you made some true observations.

However, what you described above is not a solution, nor is it the Islamic solution.
What you described is like a bank robber robbinonly one bank a month, rather than 10, or a prostitute seeing only two clients a week, rather than 20. that 'gradualism' continues to leave the perpetrator in sin, and the 'gradual' transition of Muslim countries continues to keep our Ummah in sin, in defiance of Allah, and those performing the gradualization are empowered beyond what the Prophet

was granted. Even with the course which you described, there will still need to be the 'shock' or revolt or coup which springs the people free of their corrupt regime.

1), the Muslim regimes are NOT representative of Islam. They fail to meet the minimal standards set by the Shariah. And because of their constitutions and legal bodies, they are kufr regimes even if their leaders and many officials in the regimes are Muslim. The phenomenon of constitutions and political systems which exist and persist outside of the ruler was addressed by shaykh Ibn Taymiyah (rh) who recognized the Mongol ruler may be a Muslim, as was the case at one particular time, but the regime which he implemented and enforced consisted of kufr- Mongol kufr laws mixed with various other laws along with a few laws from Shariah- and therefore should be removed.

2), the Muslim Ummah is too backwards to simply implement an Islamic state. Rather, it is in need of a spiritual, political, ideological movement or movements which uplift it's "iman" and awareness. So a mere military coup would not suffice.

3), the model of the Prophet

applies here as the solution: he

demonstrated how a spiritual, political, ideological movement should emerge from the people, how it should reject capitulation to kufr and shirk, how it should reject partial and gradual rule, and how it should confront the wrong ideas of the public until nusra- structural support emerges for the foundation of a truly liberated, independent Islamic state.

4) the Sunnat of all the prophets of Allah (as) was NEVER to compromise with Taghut and kufr just for earthly gain. they were always idealistic and ideological- meaning that they held a definitive doctrine and adhered to it and struggled to implement it regardless of the earthly and physicial obsticals and temptations.

One can look at the Turkish military. Yes, it may have advanced weaponry, but it is utterly impotent when it comes to Syria just as it was useless and lifeless when it came to Bosnia. The Bosnian crisis lasted for nearly 4 years and Turkey did nothing except obeyed the West by remaining impotent. I distinctly recall that the Muslims inside Turkey deeply resented that the military and its secular govt did nothing such that they elected Erbakan.

Turkey can't even end its PKK threat. The Turkish military is a piece of worthless high crafted metal when it comes to Islam. Being a Nato member positions the Turkish military to be infiltrated by Western operatives who have supported and will continue to support generals who will do their bidding. It's like having the opposing team's coaches coaching and advising your players- its utterly unconscionable for a Muslim people.

And the 'gradualism' approach to Islam will prolong this lifelessness as well as set up gradualists as accountable to Allah, just as Ghanoushi will be accountable for publicly opposing Islam in society and NOT advocating Islam in Tunisia.

06-06-2012, 12:14 PM	#13
attlawqa Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 377 Senior Member	its true but that need not be an obstacle. Arabs can have an arab leader, pakistanis can have a pakistani leader, banglis4bangalis, indonesians4indonesians etc and have a level of cooperation amongst them whilst also having development plans for each individual nation. some muslim nations are coming leaps and bounds in technologies and economics. Indonesian GDP is nearly a $trillion mashAllah, saudi has made serious moves in terms of science and engineering, turkey is working on the f-35, the muslim lands are becoming more islamic which means more unity inshAllah as a lot of our disunity came from people like ghaddafi and assad who are currently being removedf inshAllah. I doubt ikhwan al muslimeen et al will want friction with muslim nations Brother, you raised some serious and highly important questions. And you made some true observations. However, what you described above is not a solution, nor is it the Islamic solution. What you described is like a bank robber robbinonly one bank a month, rather than 10, or a prostitute seeing only two clients a week, rather than 20. that 'gradualism' continues to leave the perpetrator in sin, and the 'gradual' transition of Muslim countries continues to keep our Ummah in sin, in defiance of Allah, and those performing the gradualization are empowered beyond what the Prophet was granted. Even with the course which you described, there will still need to be the 'shock' or revolt or coup which springs the people free of their corrupt regime. 1), the Muslim regimes are NOT representative of Islam. They fail to meet the minimal standards set by the Shariah. And because of their constitutions and legal bodies, they are kufr regimes even if their leaders and many officials in the regimes are Muslim. The phenomenon of constitutions and political systems which exist and persist outside of the ruler was addressed by shaykh Ibn Taymiyah (rh) who recognized the Mongol ruler may be a Muslim, as was the case at one particular time, but the regime which he implemented and enforced consisted of kufr- Mongol kufr laws mixed with various other laws along with a few laws from Shariah- and therefore should be removed. 2), the Muslim Ummah is too backwards to simply implement an Islamic state. Rather, it is in need of a spiritual, political, ideological movement or movements which uplift it's "iman" and awareness. So a mere military coup would not suffice. 3), the model of the Prophet applies here as the solution: he demonstrated how a spiritual, political, ideological movement should emerge from the people, how it should reject capitulation to kufr and shirk, how it should reject partial and gradual rule, and how it should confront the wrong ideas of the public until nusra- structural support emerges for the foundation of a truly liberated, independent Islamic state. 4) the Sunnat of all the prophets of Allah (as) was NEVER to compromise with Taghut and kufr just for earthly gain. they were always idealistic and ideological- meaning that they held a definitive doctrine and adhered to it and struggled to implement it regardless of the earthly and physicial obsticals and temptations. One can look at the Turkish military. Yes, it may have advanced weaponry, but it is utterly impotent when it comes to Syria just as it was useless and lifeless when it came to Bosnia. The Bosnian crisis lasted for nearly 4 years and Turkey did nothing except obeyed the West by remaining impotent. I distinctly recall that the Muslims inside Turkey deeply resented that the military and its secular govt did nothing such that they elected Erbakan. Turkey can't even end its PKK threat. The Turkish military is a piece of worthless high crafted metal when it comes to Islam. Being a Nato member positions the Turkish military to be infiltrated by Western operatives who have supported and will continue to support generals who will do their bidding. It's like having the opposing team's coaches coaching and advising your players- its utterly unconscionable for a Muslim people. And the 'gradualism' approach to Islam will prolong this lifelessness as well as set up gradualists as accountable to Allah, just as Ghanoushi will be accountable for publicly opposing Islam in society and NOT advocating Islam in Tunisia.
	Quote