Jump to content
Islamic Forum
mhussain

Creation Of An Islamic State

Recommended Posts

Sallam.

 

Thought I'd start a thread on creating an Islamic state. This would be a thread to post articles on the topic.

 

Here is one i wrote:

 

 

The Need For A Unifying Islamic State

 

In the Name of Allah, Most Compassionate, Most Merciful

 

 

The Need For A Unifying Islamic State

 

by M. Hussain m.hussain[at]grandestrategy(contact admin if its a beneficial link)

 

Islam is threatened. From Morocco to Philippines, From Chechnya to Somalia. We are facing internal divisions and external threats that seem beyond our ability to coup. We all know how things stand today. The vivid images of the mass murder in Gaza brings tears to all of our eyes. Yet we need to be strong at this time. Somehow we need to hold our emotions and think clearly to fight back and regain our faith, strength and unity. The perennial question is, what can a Muslim do? Should we live under oppression and endure and hope that Allah will save us somehow? That this is Allah's Will? Islam does not appear to be a passive religion:

 

And fight them on until there is no more Tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah. but if they cease, Let there be no hostility except to those who practise oppression.

( ÓæÑÉ ÇáÈÞÑÉ , Al-Baqara, Chapter #2, Verse #193)

 

A doctrine of passivity and fatalism does not seem to hold. If we take this principle of fighting oppression, and we see oppressors in powerful countries like the United States and israel, which we, as individuals cannot fight, we are faced with a moral quandary. Clearly, as individuals, we are quite helpless today. As individuals we can be locked up, tortured or simply eliminated. But as a people, united in faith to the idea of Islam, we can fight them. To do so, we need our collective strength. We need to be organized. We need to create a movement to establish a Muslim state that can project our collective will.

 

Yet, if we look at any map, we see a host of Muslim states. One may wonder, why establish one when there are so many that profess to be Muslim states? Is not Saudi Arabia or Iran Muslim states? But what is a Muslim state? The long and short of it is that, today, there is no state that comes towards the ideal of a Muslim state, as was established in Madina. In some ways, Sweden is closer to a Muslim state than most professedly Muslim states.

 

If we are going to create an Islamic Movement culminating in an Islamic State, where would we create this? As we see, there is no place on earth today were an Islamic state exists, as in the spirit of the state of Madina during the Prophet Muhammad's (PBUH) time. In my eyes at least, Iran does not seem to reflect the spirit of Madina. Nor is there any other country that does. Perhaps, Southern Lebanon does, but can the Muslims of the world congregate there? Thus, it appears we do not have an Islamic state ready-made for us. We would need to do the hard work, with our sweat and blood, to create this Islamic state and choose a place and country to do this in.

 

And such a state would need to be established while being besieged by our enemies, countries that today control the world and would do anything to stop us. While our enemies may be too strong, such that if we attempted to, with the Grace of Allah, create an Islamic state, they would do anything and everything to break such a state, then our choice would have to be careful indeed. Would we create an Islamic State only to have it bombed to oblivion on trumped up charges as in Somalia? Further, to fight oppression against Islam, this Islamic state would need to have the wherewithal of doing so. That is, the ability to project conventional military might. There are few countries in the world that have this, given the might of our enemies.

 

Choosing a location for any Islamic state also has to be understood in the context of the coming of the Mahdi. We don't all agree that this is the time that he will appear. But people generally believe that he will appear soon. Prophecy after prophecy is coming true, and while we cannot agree whether it is tomorrow or 200 years from now, there is clearly at least a possibility that it will be sometime soon. As a Muslim, we must guard against that possibility, particularly since so many of the signs are being rehearsed before us. If we are to locate this Islamic state at a most opportune point regarding the coming of the Mahdi, then our location has to be, in the direction of Khurasan.

 

Three potential states are found in this direction: Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan. We know of the struggle in Afghanistan. There is little practicality in attempting to create a viable Islamic state with global reach from Afghanistan. Most of us would not even be able to relocate there. Further, any battle that we fight to win, rather than to irritate, would need industrial strength and a viable state, rather than a guerrilla struggle. This leaves us Iran and Pakistan. If it was Iran from where the struggle was to begin, the Prophet (PBUH) would have stated Persia rather than from the direction of Khurasan. So we end up with Pakistan.

 

Even if we do not believe in a Muslim revival from the direction of Khurasan as a reliable prophecy, today, the Muslim country with the greatest prospect of being able to challenge Western and israeli military supremacy is Pakistan. There is no stronger Muslim state, and none that can match the training in air power, the budding industrial-military complex, and the vast potential for future military strength that Pakistan holds.

 

If we follow this line of reasoning, it brings us to the conclusion that we need to establish an Islamic Movement / State, and that the best location for this is Pakistan.

We already see Allah's blessing upon Pakistan, at least until 2001. A country that has had the same level of corrupt rulers as the rest of the Muslim world, today somehow appears to have nuclear weapons, the finest air force in the Muslim world, and one of the best trained Muslim armies. The most innovative and competent military-industrial complex in the Muslim world that can churn out tanks, cruise missiles, combat aircraft, all of which are globally competitive. Surely there is a miracle in this; A country that is perpetually on the verge of bankruptcy, has not in recent history had laid out long term plans has managed to do what far more resource-rich Muslim countries have failed at. Clearly there is the hand of Allah here in this. And in this is perhaps a sign, but Allah knows best.

 

There are many in Pakistan who want to establish Pakistan as an Islamic state. Yet, as with operationalizing any idea, there are is a minefield of problems with making Pakistan as THE Islamic state. The problem in establishing an Islamic state come to mind and are as follows:

 

1. Nobody can agree on what an Islamic state should be

 

2. That by and large, the people who rule Pakistan pay lip service to Islam while serving Western interests

 

3. That the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan and other outfits professing to fight the state in the name of Islam are impostors paid by foreign agencies

 

4. The average Pakistani Muslim's faith is weak and understanding of Islam is second-hand, dependent on what other people tell them it is

People who rule Pakistan pay lip service to Islam: while in their hearts they doubt in putting their well being in the hands of Allah. Instead, they profess a policy where they are actively supporting the United States, acting as the key logistics line, intelligence support and conducting joint military operations. If ever the blessing of Allah is lifted from them, it may be because of this transgression. In essence, putting their faith in the United States over and against what is clearly written in the Quran and Commanded by Allah. In public they will raise the slogan of Islam, to satisfy the masses. However, this is far from their position. Islam is a tool for them to energize the masses when needed (as against India), or a sedative as to show that there are no other options. Hypocrites and disbelievers, no better than any of the governments in the Middle East. So much potential lost in the tragedy they represent.

 

That the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan and other outfits professing to fight the state in the name of Islam are imposters: paid by foreign agencies to destabilize Pakistan. The real Taliban in Afghanistan has no connection to them, and in fact, have explicitly asked everyone not to attack the Pakistani state. Composed either of paid thugs or Muslims bought into their propaganda, they are being sustained with immense amounts of financing and arming. They appear to be better armed and funded than the equivalent Pakistani constabulary. The average TTP grunt makes twice the salary of a Pakistani policeman, and is significantly better armed. Clearly not a spontaneous or natural rebellion but a well orchestrated and artificial movement by foreign provocateurs. They are trashing and tainting Islam, and what Islam should mean.

 

That We Cannot Agree on What an Islamic State Should be

 

This represents our intellectual weakness. A mental handicap. To even begin to discuss an Islamic state, we need men of learning, not only of the affairs of today's world, but a deep understanding of Islam. I certainly am well short of the type of men we need. However, we can perhaps find a way around this. Perhaps we can define how we can get to a consensus of what an Islamic state should be. We can find true Muslims who meet a high standard of learning and ability, create a council from amongst them, and have them define what an Islamic state should look like. Here is my list of what such Momins would need to meet:

 

1. Extensive knowledge of Islam, the Quran and Sunnah at the deepest levels.

 

2. Strong and real Imaan - faith in Allah and not just scholarly knowledge of Islam.

 

3. Extensive understanding of modern worldly knowledge in areas of Economics, Industry and Technology

 

4. Active life experience of living and struggling with life

All four points are vital. For each decision maker has to have a internal balance of judgment. One may wonder at the fourth point. It is because we need the common sense that is only instilled when a man faces the real struggle of living. Rather than men living in ivory towers, we need men who have this well grounded common sense. This is clearly a tall order for anyone, for we need momins who has mastered all of these four aspects. Nevertheless, amongst the 1.5 Billion Muslims, we could Insha'Allah find such excellent examples of men.

 

Perhaps one place to look would be amongst Western converts to Islam. These are people who had the strength of mind, the faith, and the blessing of Allah to find Islam amongst all the misinformation and propaganda against Islam. Most such men and women go on to study Islam in such great depth that they make those of us (including myself) born into the faith embarrassed as to the lack of our knowledge. Their Imaan show in their faces, and the noor in their faces is testament to their belief. Many such men often have prior experience and expertise in modern worldly knowledge.

 

If we can find two dozen such men, searching every corner of the Islamic world, bringing together the finest Muslims we can find, we could build a council to decide what an Islamic state could be like today. Whether there would be elections. What aspects of Islam will be enforced by the state and what aspects left to the individual to choose to enforce. Whether Ijtehad should be opened since it was closed when Islam was fighting the Mongol hordes. The million other questions that vex us, can be raised. Just as the founders of the United States, a group of the greatest men amongst them established a superior state, we can look to such men to create excellence, in their example of an Islamic state.

 

Yet, let us come back to Earth for a minute. Before we can build any councils, we must understand that Pakistan has to be won over. We cannot strut into Pakistan tomorrow and inform them that we are creating an Islamic state. It has to be an initiative originating from Pakistan and Pakistanis, the most we can do is attempt to convince them. This has to be not only from the Pakistani public, but more vitally, from within the Pakistani ruling elite. As such, we would need to hope that one of the people I have so liberally labeled as hypocrites agrees with us. Ideally, such a group of renegades and reverts would need to be from the Pakistani military as that is the institution that truly rules Pakistan. Only the Pakistan army can effect such a change, peacefully and without destroying the state.

 

But if Allah's Will is to happen, if Palestine will in fact be liberated, if we can someday in fact stand up to the United States and israel conventionally, then the fight begins in Pakistan. Not a fight to overthrow Pakistan, but to win the hearts and minds of the military establishment there. That appears to be the only realistic way to reach our goals without spilling Muslim blood and weakening the only Islamic country that can fight and win conventional wars against modern Western armies.

 

Such a Pakistan, with an influx of highly educated and skilled Muslims from around the globe, will be a far stronger Pakistan than as Pakistan stands today. If it took 5,000 dedicated Jewish Bolsheviks to establish the Soviet Union, and if we could inject 5,000 true Muslims into Pakistan, the possibilities for dramatic changes are endless.

 

Benefits for Pakistan

 

The TTP and other parasites will have lost their argument, and as such would become ineffective against such a state. The extremists and misguided Muslims will see the straight path that Pakistan would offer and hopefully see the light. That Muslim politics would move from that which represents a Mekkan era to one that represents the era of Madina - a position of strength rather than being oppressed.

 

Economically, Pakistan would benefit as well. Pakistan would not face bankruptcy, as skilled Muslim merchant immigrants from around the world would provide that vital link that the Pakistani economy lacks - link to foreign markets and technology.

 

Clearly, there would be many benefits to Pakistan. But the biggest benefit would be to live in obedience of Allah, and to fear Him and Him alone, for He is our Maker, our Sustainer and there is nobody that can compare with Him. That as long as we fear the United States more, or even pursue a policy of Pakistan First, we are moving away from this fundamental principal of Islam and going towards kufr and shirk. There is nothing more important than to obey Allah, the Lord of the Worlds. And if you have faith, there is no one else you need fear.

 

146 How many of the prophets fought (in Allah.s way), and with them (fought) Large bands of godly men? but they never lost heart if they met with disaster in Allah.s way, nor did they weaken (in will) nor give in. And Allah Loves those who are firm and steadfast.

147 All that they said was: "Our Lord! Forgive us our sins and anything We may have done that transgressed our duty: Establish our feet firmly, and help us against those that resist Faith."

148 And Allah gave them a reward in this world, and the excellent reward of the Hereafter. For Allah Loveth those who do good.

149 O ye who believe! If ye obey the Unbelievers, they will drive you back on your heels, and ye will turn back (from Faith) to your own loss.

150 Nay, Allah is your protector, and He is the best of helpers.

 

AL Quran, The Family of Imran, versus 146-150

 

IF you read this article and agree with me, please join me in making this possible. There is nothing I would not do to help establish a Muslim State, within the boundaries of the laws of the state I live in. There is little I can think of which is more urgent and important to the Muslim world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PropellerAds

:sl:

 

Please understand that I am not against an Islamic State rather I want you to understand that such a state will not happen untill Imam Al Mahdi appears. That will be the next caliphate just as prophecised by the prophet pbuh.

 

To get straight to the point, I would like you to take a look at muslim villages first before lining up straight for the Islamic State. If you can understand politics, you would very well see that the Mumbai attacks were made in order to blame it on the Pakistanis indicating that the US are anticipating a war on Pakistan itself therefore your idea of an Islamic State will not be easy at all and just what you described -

 

'Would we create an Islamic State only to have it bombed to oblivion on trumped up charges'

 

Here is the website where there is the open discussion on Muslim Villages - (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_imranhosein(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/index.php?option=com_ccboard&view=postlist&forum=3&topic=8"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_imranhosein(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/index.php?option=co...m=3&topic=8[/url]

 

To learn more about what is the Muslim Village, I recommend you to spare some time and listen to this lecture on 'The Muslim Village' - (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetyoutube(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/watch?v=AakkeLkovwU&feature=PlayList&p=1D366D5284F96887&index=0"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetyoutube(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/watch?v=AakkeLkovwU...887&index=0[/url]

 

I am very happy there are some brothers and sisters concerned on unity and bringing the muslims together in order to prepare for the final hour. It is of great importance that we understand the time we are living in and how severe it is to begin seperating from these evil systems surrounding us today.

 

May Allah guide us all. Ameen.

 

:sl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sallam. I took the time to read the links you mentioned. Please do not feel antagonized, I mean to be frank here as its vital that we share our opinions freely. The material you've put up, in my honest opinion neither has reasoning going for it, nor evidence. We seem to live in fantastic theories. I despair at the level of scholarship. I despair at the fatalistic and defeatist attitudes and the lack of reasoning. What is worse, is that the majority of Muslims do not seek reasoning. They are happy in their fatalism and blind following of one fellow or another. These are harsh words and I hope you can forgive me for them.

 

Here is what I am trying to do and what you could do as one possible option to sitting back and leaving it for the Mahdi:

 

you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetgrandestrategy(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/2009/03/open...usha-evans.html

 

 

Open Letter to Yusha Evans

 

In the Name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful

 

Dear Yusha Evans,

 

Assalam-alaikum. I am a Muslim who is striving to work in the way of Allah, in whatever way I can, and can think of. I am writing to you because I believe that you may be interested in what I am attempting to achieve. In fact, when I first saw one of your videos, I instinctively knew that you were the right person, a belief that was confirmed when I attended your lecture in Silver Spring, Maryland on the February the 3rd.

 

I believe that there is no need to be an apologist and that Islam is not merely a passive religion that we keep in our personal lives. That for every Muslim, there is a political component and where appropriate, even a military component in the way of Islam. This is particularly true when we see oppression against Muslims. In such circumstances, a true Muslim is not only a passive preacher but has to have a more holistic approach to life. And this is reflected in the life of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and his companions.

 

As a Muslim, it is my primary purpose to worship Allah and Him alone. This very letter that I am writing to you is, for me at least, is one of the ways I am worshiping Him. In my heart I believe that it is vitally important, and while I may or may not convince you (as only Allah can guide you, I can only bring something to you attention), I will attempt my best to explain.

 

Today, Islam is being attacked, Muslims are being persecuted, and it is vital as Muslims for us to defend Islam. But most Muslims feel helpless because they see themselves in a Mekkan era; that is, where we are in effect, powerless. Those that want to act often feel terrorism is the way, which is wrong and takes them beyond the pale of Islam. So it is either hopelessness or the desperation of terrorism.

 

But surely, there is a right way, we need to neither be passive, nor go into the evil of terrorism. There is a straight path in this. In one of your lectures, you gave me three beautiful verses from the Quran on what we can do, at Silver Spring, MD. Shall I give you a way, a beautiful way that we can begin to save the Islamic world? One, where with one move we could possibly change this Mekkan era to a Medina era? For such a feat, while it may seem as if a mountain impassable, may have hidden paths that can be taken. So as that what may seem impossible at first, Allah may help us get an effective way across.

 

While it is true that little actions from a billion and half people can have enormous impact, little actions must build up to bigger actions. If we look back to the generation of the Prophet (Peace be upon him), we see that they went from little actions to bigger actions, from struggle to greater struggle, and perhaps the greatest of those struggles was soon after when the Prophet (peace be upon him), seemed to have been at his lowest point, and reached Taif. And soon after, the great struggle to move the Muslim community to Yathrib (Medina) from whence the struggle was on its way up to a positive. The Prophet (peace be upon him) strove and increasingly moved up the tempo until we Muslims moved from an era of oppression in Mekkah to an era of strength in Medina. And if we can reach such a point, it would make all else that we do, such as dawah, charity and protecting Muslims across the globe, a whole lot easier.

 

The crux of my argument is, that this move to a Medina era is possible and there is a somewhat simple way to bring this about.

 

Imagine, imagine if we had an Islamic state that was not Wahhabi, not secular, nor controlled by the US, how much more would we be able to achieve? While it is vital to preach to non-Muslims, if we can find a possible way to create an Islamic state, that struggle should theoretically be of highest priority. I say this because, such a state would enable a far greater scale of dawah, charity and jihad. A nation state would galvanize us, synergize our efforts, and unite us in our will and resolve.

 

So what is the problem? There are so many Muslims, and so many professedly Muslim countries, why isn't there an Islamic state? Or is that merely my presupposition? I say that there is no Islamic state because I do not see any country today that reflects the Islamic state in the spirit of Medina. Or remotely so. Do not get me wrong, I am not asking for an ideal, but a state merely that even approximately can be considered as a Muslim state in the lineage of Medina. That is, a state that practices one of the four accepted Madhabs, a state that's government is not oppressive, and a state that not only provides lip service to Islam but also practices it in its laws and policies. A state that is not a client state of the United States.

 

Now, if we attempted to create such a state at a random location in the Muslim worlds, and let us suppose, by the Grace of Allah, that we succeeded: it is more likely than not that the United States or israel or whoever else, would find some pretext to label us terrorists, without evidence or by fabrication. We have seen this in Somalia recently as well as many times elsewhere. Like ants we would labor away, toiling away at a colony, only to see it destroyed. Clearly, even if such a state can attain massive economies of scale and scope with respect to dawah, aid and a host of other things, creating such a state seems impossible and hopeless.

 

But if you bear with my long letter, I promise you that I have a thought that may be worth your time. Or at least an idea that indicates a possibility. Maybe, only one shot, but a shot nevertheless. A shot that could change the world for 1.7 billion Muslims. In my eyes, it is our best chance.

 

Please suffer with m to take a step back and look at the historical context. When did Islam start falling behind the West militarily? Amongst other things, with the advent of industrialization that enabled weapons in scale and quality that could not be built previously. Technologies coupled with production enmass that enabled Western armies to overwhelm Muslim ones. The last "Muslim" power that could match the West conventionally was the Ottoman Empire. After this ended, no Muslim country has been able to build or produce weapons that can qualitatively and quantitatively match Western weapons. The arsenals today, whether you look at Saudi Arabia, Eqypt or Syria or any other country are largely from non-Muslim sources. Iran today is somewhat of an exception, as they received massive technologies during the Shah's era but thereafter have been able to merely stay at that technological standard. That is, there weapons are built on (broadly) 1960s-1970s technology and outdated by 21st Century standards.

 

So, unless we can find a Muslim country that has the industrial capability to withstand the West, even if we somehow, with all our effort and toil, created a Muslim state, it would either be overwhelmed and destroyed based on one pretext or other, or like Cuba, would become an island of isolation that would have little impact on the world.

 

There has been no country worldwide where Muslims are the majority where weapons such as tanks, aircraft, ships, etc have been built that could even approximately rival Western weapons. Industrialization has been minimal or virtually non-existent. Or is there such a country? Is there in fact, such a country? Let us pause for a minute.

 

One Muslim country, without oil and petro-dollars, without a clear plan or even political stability, has somehow, almost miraculously achieved this feat: Pakistan. Today, Pakistan can build everything from nuclear warheads to combat aircraft to tanks to cruise missiles and a whole host of other items some of which has not yet been revealed. These are not crude weapons that are "monkey versions" of other weapons, as is the case with Iran. Pakistani nuclear weapons are significantly sophisticated and built on research and investment in-country. Pakistan's Heavy Industries Taxila, can build tanks that incorporate local technologies derived originally from France, Ukraine and China. Pakistan has recently opened a production facility for combat aircraft that rival US F-16s. Pakistan is one of 5 powers in the world that produces its own cruise missiles. It is in the process of launching communication satellites that would enable true netcentric warfare. It has ballistic missiles that has a CEP of less than 50m, that, in simpler words are extremely accurate.

 

Beyond weapons, tactics and training play a key role. Pakistan has one of the world's best trained air forces. While Arab air forces where devastated by israel, small numbers of Pakistani pilots have held a 4-0 score against israel on deputation to Jordan, Iraq and Syria . Here is an excerpt of how the US values Pakistani pilots (US Commander during Gulf War I):

 

On one or two occasions, I had the opportunity to talk with Pakistani instructor pilots, who had served in Iraq. These discussions, didn’t give me great cause to worry. The Russian domination of training prevented the Pakistanis from having any real influence on the Iraqi aircrew training program.

 

Still, there had to be a few Iraqi pilots, who had observed and listened to their mentors from France and Pakistan and not the useless guidance of their inept leaders. It was those few, I was concerned about - the ones with great situational awareness and good eyesight, who had figured out how to effectively use their aircraft and its weapons to defend their nation.â€

 

 

 

(General Chuck Horner (retd) and Tom Clancey. General Chuck commanded the US and allied air assets during Desert shield and desert storm, and was responsible for the design and execution of one of the most devastating air campaigns in the history. He also served as Commander 9th Air Force, Commander US Central Command Air Forces, and Commander in chief, SpaceCom. Book: Every Man A Tiger).

 

 

 

In fact, when on training in the United States, PAF pilots have been assessed to be a shade better than israeli Air Force pilots they trained with by their USAF IPs (instructor pilots). And israeli pilots are widely considered "the best in the world". Pakistani armed forces, along with the military-industrial complex and, the incredibly well trained air force today, unlike Arab armies of today or yester-years, can actually match Western military might conventionally. The significance of this can be understood in the context that this has not happened since Ottoman times. Let me reiterate this, this capability has not existed since Ottoman times. How this has come about, is truly miraculous. If you have any insight on Pakistan's political history, there has been little long-term planning and resource allocation. Further, Pakistan is an impoverished country that has far less resources than many other Muslim countries. Yet, incredibly, it has come to be.

 

 

So we see in the broader picture, a first Muslim state from which a veritable "stand" can be made, possibly since the end of the Ottoman Empire. We see a seemingly resource-less country achieve technological feats far beyond what the massive spending by Arab countries have failed to achieve. We see a military that is trained beyond the pale of a Third World army. I do see a miracle in this.

 

For, as you have said in your lectures, Allah has promised us victory if we strive in His Way. And, I do not know if you believe in the Mahdi prophecies, but, if you do, it is says that an army is to come from the direction of Khurasan. It would seem, world events are matching Iraq and Afghanistan closely to what has been prophesied, and even if one takes them with a bit of salt, clearly, the possibility exists that this is a critical juncture, and as Muslims we can strive for that possibility. Even if these prophecies are false, their mere existence means that we need to guard against the possibility of them being true. Are we as Muslims, doing this?

 

You may be wondering what we can do. The Pakistan Army, the organization that actually runs the show even now, can broadly be seen to be split between two groups of people. People who are inclined to stop cooperating with the Americans and go towards an Islamic state, and people who are secular in their outlook and, essentially, weak in their faith. That is, Islam is more of a cultural aspect to them, and their belief in Islam is highly hypocritical. Secularism and pro-Western views are dominant in the Pakistan army, in my view, because of the weakness of faith amongst its officers. They gaze at the might of America and their eyes are stoned with awe. On the other hand, they look at the Al-Qaeda and Taliban and are revolted at the twisted interpretations of our faith. Being stuck between the devil and the deep blue sea, they feel there is no way for them but to accept servitude.

 

Yet, if in some way, these officers were to have a stronger belief in Allah, that they could see the glory of Islam. If they could see that they need not fear anyone but Him. And the weakness in their hearts was strengthened. Then, we'd be in business. The entire political landscape of Pakistan could change. In one move, we could out-maneouvre both the United States and the external enemies of Islam on the one hand, and Al-Qaeda, and all other internal enemies of Islam on the other; exploit the gap between the two perfectly through the middle.

 

These all sound great on paper. But how do we operationalize these thoughts? Here is my plan on what we can do given the resource constraints we have: Send 3-4 prominent Muslims that are true believers of Islam and practiced in Dawah. We would make an itenerary for one week to gain an audience throughout all the major military centers in the country.

 

The Pakistan Army would be happy to have such an audience. Targeting 4 cities that hold their major headquarters, if we can convert even a handful of them to belief, the possibility of an Islamic state suddenly becomes from remote to a significant proposal. I understand the Pakistan Army intricately and I can tell you that officers would be most open to have some prominent Muslim converts come and talk to them about Islam. So, getting an opening would not appear to be a problem. There is our chance to give them the message, and that is our work. If it does not sink in to their hearts, then that is a matter between Allah and them. But we'd have given one good shot at virtually changing the political landscape of Islam from the last hundred years.

 

So, you may be wondering why you are so important in this mission. When I first saw a video of you, my first thought was how much the way you sat and general manner seemed to me of a military person, even a marine. How clearly you gave the message of Islam. How strong your belief is and how much the "noor" in your face shines out. You have a gift of dawah, and you have reverted many people to Islam. Your qualities make you ideal for this work: You are a very good example of a Muslim, you know how to do dawah, and curiously, you seem to have a military demeanor to you. When I attended one of your lectures in my curiosity, you seemed to confirm my first impression. You are clearly a very great Muslim and blessed for some great purpose. I have done my best to outline the purpose that I see as most vital. I leave it up to you if you pursue it or not. I believe that I have done my part in the way of Allah in conveying you this message, for I neither have the ability, the talent or the resources to get this done myself.

 

You have said that we must not hold back from asking and giving help. From your lectures, I can glean that you want more than just being a speaker or doing dawah. I may be wrong, but I feel that you are seeking to organize Muslims under more stronger and more coherent lines. You clearly have the talent to do this and it is my duty to help you in any way I can. Whether you take up the task i have outlined above or not, I am truly at your service. I clearly see in you the potential to be a leader of Muslims and I strongly believe that we need to organize better. I share your enthusiasm for action rather than mere words. I exhort you to practice what you preach.

 

I am willing to do anything, within the boundaries of the law, to help you or work directly for you. This is of vital importance, for our lack of preparation and organization can be directly blamed for every time genocide against us takes place, whether in Bosnia, Palestine, Kashmir, Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia or wherever. By our inaction we let organizations like Al-Qaeda hijack our platform for purposes that are contrary to Islam. Most vitally, we have one chance now, to get back our glory. This chance will not last, for if events are to run their course, Pakistan may not exist 10 years from now. Between the conspiring Americans, israelis and Indians, and the Al-Qaeda, TTP and other outfits, unless drastic changes took place in Pakistan, she will not see the light of day but will perish before our eyes.

 

And what if we lose Pakistan to a balkanized group of states? If we lose Pakistan, let there be no doubt that we Muslims, throughout the world, for generations to come, will be condemned to live in persecution, in injustice and as the lowest class of people in the global village. If Pakistan is destroyed, we may not get another opportunity for at least another 100 years.

 

Thank you so much for reading this lengthy letter. I hope you consider what I am saying and again, even if you don't, I am still at your service to help you in any way I can.

 

 

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

M. Hussain

m.hussain[at]grandestrategy(contact admin if its a beneficial link)

 

Agree with me? What can you do?

 

Here are the people I believe we need to convince to this cause to make it work:

 

Contact Yusha Evans to convince him.

Contact Yusuf Estes to convince him (sheikyusuf"at"aol(contact admin if its a beneficial link))

Contact Shiekh Nuh Ha Mim Keller to convince him (admin"at"shadhiliteachings(contact admin if its a beneficial link))

Contact Yusuf Islam to convince him (office"at"yusufislam(contact admin if its a beneficial link))

 

Email me your thoughts on who else we can approach

Email me your ideas (m.hussain[at]grandestrategy(contact admin if its a beneficial link))

Do something, anything

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Concept of Islamic State

Mohd. Nasran Mohamad, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia

Posted From ######arts.ualberta.ca/cms/mohamad.pdf

 

Introduction

 

The term Islamic State is composed of two words: “Islam†and†State.†The Muslim Ummah has come to realise that the solution to their problems resides in creating the Islamic State, but much confusion remains in defining its parameters. Does a majority Muslim population establish an Islamic State, regardless of the laws, systems, and constitution imposed upon it? Does the partial implementation of some aspects of Islam or having the name Allah on the state flag suffice to consider a state as Islamic? Does the existence of Islamic movements in positions of authority constitute an Islamic State? Even if a state possesses all of these elements, it would not be considered the Islamic State. Because Islam is the Quran and the Sunnah, the Islamic state revolves around the Quran and the Sunnah and not around Muslims. The presence of a large Muslim population or Islamic movements does not produce the Islamic State.

 

The Formation of Islamic State

 

Because Islam is composed of the Aqidah (doctrine) and a collection of laws emanating from it, the Islamic State must derive its entire constitution from the Islamic Aqidah. All of the systems, laws, and regulations must emanate solely from the Islamic Aqidah and the sources of Shariah, and must be substantiated by evidence to verify such a law or article as derived from Islam, for a state to be considered Islamic.

 

Any contradiction that exists between any law or article in the constitution and Islam will exclude such a state from the circle of Islam. Islam is a complete way of life that necessitates the existence of the State to implement the Shariah comprehensively, both at an individual and societal level. Individuals can abide by some rules of Islam related to the prayer, fasting, and Hajj. The other rules of Islam that organise the various political, social, economic, and international relationships require the existence of the State with the authority to organise the myriad of relationships that characterise the society and the resources to mobilise the Ummah towards propagating Islam (Qadri 270).

 

Islam has to be the basis for the foreign policy between the Islamic State and other states. Consequently, Islam outlines the objective of the foreign policy of the State. The questioning of the ruler/state by the Ummah, individuals, or the political parties, has to be based upon Islam. Islam has to be the criterion for the State and the Ummah to measure the Islamicity of the State. Islam cannot be implemented by the State alone, Islam must be implement by both the Ummah and the State. The State implements Islam while the Ummah keeps a check and balance on the State. In addition, even the process of check and balance has to be based on Islam.

 

The Islamic State would not allow any concept or idea emanating from a source other than Islam, even if it had a similarity to Islam, to take root or establish itself within the social fabric. The Islamic State is not a desire that one aims to satisfy, but an obligation that Allah has decreed on Muslims and commanded them to execute; He warned of the punishment awaiting those who neglect this duty. How are they to please their Lord if the Glory and Dignity are not to Allah, nor to His Messenger, nor to the believers? How are they to be safe from His punishment if they do not establish a state that would prepare the army for battle, defend the territory, implement Allah’s penal code and rule by what Allah has revealed? Therefore, Muslims must establish the Islamic State, for Islam would not have an influential presence without it, and their country would not become an Islamic homeland unless it is ruled by the Islamic State (Qadri 270).

 

The Concept of Islamic State in the Qur’an and Hadith

 

First of all we should know whether there is any concept of Islamic state in the Qur’an or Hadith literature. A thorough examination of the scripture and Hadith literature shows that there is no such concept of Islamic state. In fact, after the death of the Holy Prophet the Muslims were not agreed even on the issue of his successor.

 

The Muslims split on the question—a section maintaining that the Prophet (PBUH) never appointed any successor and another section maintaining that he did. As far as the Qur’an is concerned there is, at best, a concept of a society rather than a state. The Qur’an lays emphasis on ‘adl and ihsan, i.e. justice and benevolence. A Qur’anic society must be based on these values. Also, the Qur’an strongly opposes zulm and ‘udwan, i.e. oppression and injustice. No society thus based on zulm and ‘udwan can qualify as an Islamic society. The Qur’anic values are most fundamental. It is thus debatable whether a state, declaring itself to be an Islamic state, can be legitimately accepted as such without basing the civil society on these values. We will throw more light on this later.

 

Historical Background

 

Pre Islamic Arab

 

First of all it is important to note that the pre-Islamic Arab society had not known any state structure. It was a predominantly a tribal society which did not know any distinction between a state and a civil society. There was no written law, much less a constitution. There was no governing authority either hereditary or elected. There was a senate called mala.’ It consisted of tribal chiefs of the tribes in the area. Any decision taken had to be unanimous and the tribal chiefs enforced the decision in their respective tribes. If a tribal chief dissented, the decision could not be implemented (Mahmassani 15).

 

There was no taxation system or any police or army. There was no concept of territorial governance or defence or policing. Each tribe followed its own customs and traditions. There were of course inter-tribal wars and all adult tribals took part in defending their tribal interests. The only law prevalent was that of qisas, i.e. retaliation. The Qur’an put it succinctly as “And there is life for you in retaliation, O men of understanding†(al. Baqarah, 2:179). The whole tribal law and ethic in pre-Islamic Arabia was based on the law of retaliation.

 

Islamic State of Madina

 

The Islamic movement in Mecca inherited this situation. When the Prophet and his companions faced severe persecution in Mecca they migrated to Madina, also known as Yathrib. Madina was also basically a tribal city governed by tribal laws. Like Mecca in Madina, too, there was no state, and only tribal customs and traditions prevailed. In fact Madina was worse in a way than Mecca. In Mecca inter-tribal wars were not much in evidence as it was turning into a commercial society and inter-tribal corporations for trade were coming into existence. However, Madina, being an oasis, was a semi- agricultural society and various tribes were at daggers drawn. It was to get rid of the inter-tribal warfare that the people of Madina invited the Holy Prophet as an arbitrator (al-Dhahabi 23).

 

The Prophet, a great spiritual and religious personality, commanded great respect and set out to establish a just society in Madina. First of all he drew up a pact between various tribal and religious groups known as Mithaq-i-Madina (i.e. the Medinese treaty), which guaranteed full autonomy to all tribes and religious groups like the Jews, the Muslims, and other pagan tribes.

 

Thus, all religious groups were free to follow their own law and tradition and there was no coercion in such matters. The Holy Qur’an also declared that “there is no compulsion in the matter of religion†(2:256). The Mithaq-i-Madina was a sort of preliminary constitution of the `state’ of Madina that went beyond a tribal structure and transcended the tribal boundaries in matters of common governance. It also laid down that if Madina is attacked by an outside force all will defend it together. Thus for the first time a concept of common territory, so necessary for a state to operate, evolved. Before this, as pointed out earlier, there was concept of tribal but not of territorial boundaries (al-Dhahabi 24).

 

The Prophet, in a way, took a revolutionary step in dissolving tribal bonds and laying more emphasis on ideological boundaries on one hand, and territorial boundaries, on the other. However, the Prophet’s aim was not to build a political community but to build a religious community instead. If Muslims evolved into a political community it was accidental rather than essential. Hence the Qur’an lays more emphasis on values, ethics, and morality than on any political doctrines. It is Din which matters more than governance. Allah says in the Qur’an that al-yauma akmaltu lakum dinakum, i.e. I have perfected your Din today (al-Ma’idah 5:3). Thus what the Qur’an gives us is a perfect Din, not a perfect political system. The political system had to evolve over a period of time and in keeping with the needs and requirements.

 

The Basic Task of Ummah

 

One of the basic duties of the Muslims is “enforcing what is good and combatting what is evil.†This clearly gives a moral and spiritual direction to an Islamic society. The later emphasis on integral association between religion and politics is, to the best of my knowledge, totally absent in the Holy Qur’an. The Prophet was an enforcer of good par excellence and he devoted his life to eradicating evil from society. But he never aspired for political power. He was one of the great spiritual persons born on this earth. He strove to inculcate spiritual power among his companions. The following verse of the Qur’an enunciates the basic philosophy of the Muslim community: “You are the best ummah (nation, community) raised up for people: you enjoin good and forbid evil and you believe in Allah†(Ali Imran 3:109).

 

Thus it will be seen that the basic task of the Muslim ummah is to build a moral society based on good and negation of evil. The unity of Muslims is possible only if they remain basically a religious community engaged in building a just society that has no elements of zulm (oppression and injustice), though there may be different ways of approaching the truth. The Holy Prophet is reported to have said that a society can persist with kufr (unbelief) but not with zulm (injustice) (Qadri 274). The Qur’an also describes Allah as Ahkam al-Hakimin, i.e. best of the Judges. (al-Tin 95:8). These are all value-giving injunctions and hence give a direction to the society.

 

Islam never required Muslims to evolve into a political community. Politics leads people basically to power-seeking projects and aspirations for power bring about division rather than unity. The Qur’an required Muslims to remain united and not entertain disputes weakening themselves. “And obey Allah and His Messenger,†the Qur’an says, “and dispute not one with another, lest you get weak-hearted and your power depart, and be steadfast. Surely Allah is with the steadfast†(al-Anfal 8:46).

 

 

Political Power

When someone aspires for political power they dispute with others and thus become weak, which is what Muslims have been warned against. And in the history of Islam the dispute between Muslims arose on the question of political power. Who should wield political power and who should rule was the main question after the death of the Holy prophet. Thus Muslims began to divide on the question of power.

 

Various disputes arose between different groups of Muslims even leading to bloodshed during the thirty years of what is known in Islamic history as Khulafa al-Rashidin (period of the rightly guided rule). This thirty year period is full of conflict and bloodshed. Three rightly-guided Caliphs out of four were assassinated. Why was the spirit of unity lost? Why did wars break out between different groups and parties? It was mainly on account of fights between different aspirants for power and pelf. The first signs of these aspirations appeared immediately after the death of the Holy Prophet (Majid 3).

 

The people of Mecca belonging to the tribe of Quraysh claimed their superiority over others and said that an Imam could only be from the tribe of Quraysh, as they first embraced Islam and were most cultured and cultivated, and had adequate experience. The supporters of the Prophet from Madina the Ansars claimed that they helped the Prophet when he was driven out of Mecca due to severe persecution by the people of Quraysh and hence they better deserved to succeed the Prophet. The Imam or Caliph, they claimed should be from amongst the Ansars.

 

The members of the family of the Prophet (PBUH) felt that “Ali, the son-in-law of the Prophet and leader of the Hashimites, was better qualified to succeed the prophet†(Qadri 274). Thus these fissures appeared as different groups aspired for leadership and consequently for power associated with the nascent Muslim state.

 

It is also necessary to stress here that a preliminary state structure came into existence because it was historical and not religious need.We would like to elaborate this a bit. As every Muslim knows, the religious duties of Muslims are to pray, fast, pay the poor due (zakat), perform Haj, and believe in tawhid (unity of Allah) and not associate aught with Him. This is necessary for spiritual control over oneself. A Muslim can perform these obligations wherever he/she lives.

 

There is no need for an Islamic state for this. A Muslim living in a non-Muslim society can perform these obligations without let or hindrance. And even when there is Muslim rule no ruler can forcibly enforce these obligations on Muslims. Matters of ‘ibadat (i.e. acts of worship and spiritual exercises) cannot be coercively enforced by any authority. It is a matter between human beings and Allah. However, it is different matter as far as mu’amalat (i.e. relations between human beings) are concerned. A state has to govern these mu’amalat and the ultimate aim of the state is to set up a society based on justice and benevolence (‘adl and ihsan in the Qur’anic terms). ‘Adl and ‘ihsan are most fundamental human values and any state worth its salt has to strive to establish a society based on these values. But for this no particular form of state is needed. Even an honest monarch can do it. It is for this reason that the holy Qur’an praises prophet-rulers like Da’ud and Sulayman, who were kings, but Allah’s Prophet’s too. Even Queen Bilquis is praised for her just governance in the Qur’an though she was not a prophet herself.

 

But the Qur’an is also aware that such just rulers are normally far and few in between. The governance has to be as democratic as possible so that all adults can participate in it. If governance is left to an individual, or a monarch, the power may corrupt him or her as everyone knows absolute power corrupts absolutely. It is for this reason that the Qur’an refers to democratic governance when it says: “And those who respond to their Lord and keep up prayer, and whose affairs are (decided) by mutual consultation, and who spend out of what We have given them†(al-Shura 42:38). Thus the mutual affairs (those pertaining to governance) should be conducted only by mutual consultation which in contemporary political parlance will be construed as democratic governance.

 

Since in those days there was no well defined practice of political democracy, the Qur’an refers to it as `amruhum shura’ baynahum, i.e. affairs to be conducted through mutual consultation, which is a very meaningful way of hinting at democracy. The Qur’an is thus against totalitarian or monarchical rule. Here a problem may arise as far as the Shi’ah sects are concerned. They believe in the theory of imamah, i.e. only an Imam from the progeny of the Prophet’s son-in-law and his daughter, Fatima, can inherit the Prophet (PBUH). The Shi’ahs, in other words, reject the concept of khilafah, i.e. succession to the Prophet through election by the people. The right to succession is confined only to the members of the Prophet’s family and it is available to no one else. It is no doubt the very basis of the Shi’ah tradition and faith (Qadri 275).

 

But this hardly changes the ethos of governance. The state in Iran is today a democratically elected one. The President of Iran and the Majlis (parliament) are elective in nature. In today’s world there is no question of a ruler coming from the Prophet’s family. It was a different matter when the controversy arose immediately after the death of the holy Prophet. A group of people then did feel that Ali, the son-in law of the Prophet, who was rigorously just, who had fought and won many an Islamic battle, who was one of the bravest and most honest people, should have succeeded the Prophet. He was qualified for good governance in more ways than one.

 

Apart from being just, honest, and brave, he was most learned as well. The holy Prophet had described him as gateway to the city of knowledge, Prophet being the city of knowledge himself. He was also greatly confident of his knowledge. He often used to say “saluni qabla tafquduni,†i.e. ask me before you loose me. Thus even an imam from the Prophet’s family cannot be absolutist and has to base his rule on democratic principles. Thus even the Shi’ah theory of imamah cannot lead to absolutist or purely personal rule. Also, an imam can be infallible in religious matters, in laying down religious rulings. But in all secular and worldly matters he will be bound by democratic structures of governance.

 

Composition of Muslim Society

 

Once Islam spread to vast areas of the world outside the confines of Arabia, new ethnic and racial groups were added to its fold. This proved to be both the strength and the weakness of the Islamic society. Its strength lay in its rich diversity, and its weakness resulted from complex problems and group conflicts. The group conflicts greatly intensified even within the limited period of Khulafa’ al-Rashidin, which lasted for slightly less than thirty years. During this period, a number of groups came into existence.

 

The most powerful group was the tribe of Quraysh, who were muhajirs (immigrants) who migrated to Madina along with, or after, the Prophet to avoid persecution in Mecca. They claimed to be the sabiqun al-awwalun, i.e. those who responded to the call of Islam earlier than others and also belonged to the tribe of the Prophet. After the death of the Prophet they also came out with the doctrine that the Khilafat be confined to the tribe of Quraysh.

 

However, the Quraysh were divided into several clans of which the clans of Hashim (to which the Prophet himself belonged) and of Banu Umayyah were at loggerheads. Among the Qurayshites, the Hashimites and the Umayyads fought against each other for the leadership of the nascent Muslim state. Ali and his sons (particularly Hasan and Husain), who were claimants to the leadership, all belonged to the clan of Banu Hashim (al-Dhahjabi 35).

 

Then there were Ansars—those who belonged to the tribes of Aws and Khazraj of Madina and who had helped the Prophet by swearing allegiance to him, by helping him migrate to Madina, and by supporting him vis-a-vis his powerful opponents (hence Ansars means ‘helpers’). The Ansars also claimed leadership of the state after the death of the Prophet on the basis that they had helped the Prophet and that without their help his mission would not have survived. But the Qurayshites strongly resisted their claim to the Khilafat. Then the leaders of the Ansars proposed a compromise to let one from the Quraysh and one from the Ansars share the leadership but this was also turned down by the Qurayshites, who felt that it would lead to more conflict and confusion.

 

The third group was of those Muslims who embraced Islam from amongst the conquered non-Arab peoples of Iraqi, Persian, Egyptian, or Syrian origins. The emphasis of Islam on justice and equality of all believers was a great attraction for these non-Arab peoples. In the course of a few years, a large number of non-Arabs, most of them belonging to weaker sections of society, converted to Islam and demanded equal treatment. But despite strong emphasis of Islam on equality of all believers irrespective of their social status, nationality, colour, or race, the ruling classes among Muslims were not prepared to accord equal treatment to them. Most of the Muslims were accepted Muslims only when they were made mawla (affiliate or associate) of a tribe. Kufa and Basra in Iraq, Egypt, Damascus etc. became centres of these non-Arab Muslims. Many of these non-Arab people were those captured in various wars.

 

As for the first group, the Qurayshites, they wielded power with the second group of Ansars as their co-partners. These groups were contented to a great extent though some sub-groups were not. The Hashimites, for example, were a discontented group among the Qurayshites as the non-Hashimites had captured power. Similarly among the Ansars who were initially the allies of the Quraysh, the younger generation among them felt neglected.

 

The fact that the second Caliph was assassinated by a discontented non-Arab slave on the dispute about wages to be paid to him, showed the beginning of the dissidence in early Islamic society. It reached its peak during the period of 3rd Caliph Usman when the non-Arab people from Egypt, Kufa and Basra surrounded his house and murdered him in the presence of his wife when he was reciting the Holy Qur’an. Dr. Taha Husain, in his book, Al-fitnah al-Kubra (The Great Insurrection), has dealt with this problem. This uprising against Usman was a result of deep discontent found among them as they felt completely neglected and found themselves discriminated against.

 

Islam had tried to usher in a just society based on compassion, sensitivity towards other fellow human beings, equality, and human dignity. However, the well entrenched vested interests, though they pay lip service to these values, in practice sabotage them in various ways and continue to impose their own hegemony. The weaker sections and the downtrodden attracted by the revolutionary thrust of Islam and its sensitivity towards them, felt disillusioned and they revolted. This revolt brought about near anarchy in society and resulted in a civil war in which thousands were killed.

 

There was yet another group of Bedouins who lived in the desert and resented the hegemony of the urban elite. They considered the Khilafat an urban rule imposed on them. They were not accustomed to submission to any authority. Thus in the Battle of Camel fought between the fourth Caliph Ali and Amir Mu’awiyah, the Bedouins seceded from the army of Ali and raised the slogan alhukmulillah (Rule of Allah). They adopted extreme postures and caused much bloodshed in the early history of Islam.

 

Ultimately the Umayyads captured power and Khilafah was converted into monarchy. Maulana Abul A’ala Maududi has thrown detailed light on it in his book, Khilafat aur Mulukiyyat. Thus we see that the Islamic society went through great deal of turmoil and bloodshed and could not evolve a universally acceptable form of state. When the Abbasids overthrew Umayyads in the first half of the second century of Islam, there again was a great deal of bloodshed. When the Abbasids captured power, some Umayyads fled to Spain and established their own rule there. Now there were two Caliphs simultaneously in the Islamic world.

 

Earlier, the theory was that there could be only one Caliph or Imam at a time. Now that theory had to be revised in view of the empirical reality and two Caliphs at a time were accepted. But still later, at the end of 2nd century of Islam, the Fatimid Imams established their rule in Egypt and now there were several rulers at a time in the Islamic world. The Abbasid Caliphs were also reduced to nominal heads of the state as the Buwayhids and Saljuqs captured power and wielded real authority. They came to be known as Sultans, the real power behind the Abbasid caliphs. The Islamic political theory had to undergo change again. Now, by and large, non-Quraysh were wielding power and hence the theory of Quraysh alone becoming caliph had to be abandoned. Earlier, the Khawarij (Seceders), who were mainly Bedouins and hence non-Qurayshites, had rejected the theory that only a Quraysh could become the caliph.

 

Conclusion

 

Thus we see that the political theory of Islam had to undergo frequent changes to accommodate the empirical reality. It is, therefore, not possible to talk of an ‘Islamic State’ with a sense of finality. It is an extremely difficult task to evolve any ijma’ (consensus of Muslims) on the issue. Today also, there are several Muslim countries with varied forms of state, from monarchical to dictatorial and from semi-dictatorial to democratic. There are examples of each of these states, however, that call themselves ‘Islamic States.’ The forms and structures of state are bound to vary from place to place and time to time. It would be very difficult, for example, to create a democratic state in a feudal society.

 

Thus the Qur’an does not give much importance to the form of state but greatly emphasises the nature of society. While the state is contingent, the society based on values like justice, equality, compassion, and human dignity is a necessity in Islam. And needless to say, in our time it is only a democratic state with the widest possible power-sharing arrangement that can guarantee such a society. Also, as per the Qur’anic teachings, the Islamic state should guarantee equal rights to all ethnic, racial, cultural, tribal, and religious groups. The Qur’an considers racial, national, tribal, and linguistic differences signs of Allah and indicative of identity (see 30:22). It also accepts the right of other religious communities to follow their own religion and it also accords equal status to men and women (see 33:35 and al-Baqarah al-Ahzab 2:228). The Qur’an accepts plurality in society as the will of Allah (al-Ma’idah 5:48).

 

Thus, in view of all this, an Islamic state should have following characteristics:

 

1)It should be absolutely non-discriminatory on the basis of race, colour, language and nationality;

2)Guarantee gender equality;

3)Guarantee equal rights to all religious groups and accept plurality of religion as legitimate and;

4)It should be democratic in nature and its basic premise will be human dignity (al-Isra’ 17:70).

 

 

Works Cited

Al-Qur’an al-Karim

Al-Dhahabi. Tarikh al-Islam. Beirut: n.p. n.d.

Mahmassani Subhi. Falsafah al-Tashri’ fi al-Islam. Trans. Shah Alam. Hizbi, n.p., 1986.

Majid Ali Khan. The Pious Caliph. Kuwait: Islamic Book Publishers, 1982.

Muhammad Hamidullah. The Muslim Conduct of State. Karachi: Ashraf, 1986.

Al-Qadri, Anwar Ahmad. Islamic Jurisprudence in the Modern World. Karachi: n.p., 1973.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

salam

 

I think that the Islamic State is already on its way. Allah knows best. The Khilaafa will come, but are we from those who participate or are we those who wait until it it there?

Edited by Yusha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:sl:

 

I'm not sure what Yusha Evans has to do with any of this; could you please explain why you have sent him this letter? What exactly do you want him to do? If you could summarize the point you are trying to make, so less intelligent people like myself could understand, I'd appreciate it because to be honest I'm lost.

 

In your first post you seem to be inclined towards the creation of an Islamic state, then in your last post the conclusion states:

 

Thus we see that the political theory of Islam had to undergo frequent changes to accommodate the empirical reality. It is, therefore, not possible to talk of an ‘Islamic State’ with a sense of finality. It is an extremely difficult task to evolve any ijma’ (consensus of Muslims) on the issue. Today also, there are several Muslim countries with varied forms of state, from monarchical to dictatorial and from semi-dictatorial to democratic. There are examples of each of these states, however, that call themselves ‘Islamic States.’ The forms and structures of state are bound to vary from place to place and time to time. It would be very difficult, for example, to create a democratic state in a feudal society.

 

Thus the Qur’an does not give much importance to the form of state but greatly emphasises the nature of society. While the state is contingent, the society based on values like justice, equality, compassion, and human dignity is a necessity in Islam. And needless to say, in our time it is only a democratic state with the widest possible power-sharing arrangement that can guarantee such a society. Also, as per the Qur’anic teachings, the Islamic state should guarantee equal rights to all ethnic, racial, cultural, tribal, and religious groups. The Qur’an considers racial, national, tribal, and linguistic differences signs of Allah and indicative of identity (see 30:22). It also accepts the right of other religious communities to follow their own religion and it also accords equal status to men and women (see 33:35 and al-Baqarah al-Ahzab 2:228). The Qur’an accepts plurality in society as the will of Allah (al-Ma’idah 5:48).

 

Thus, in view of all this, an Islamic state should have following characteristics:

 

1)It should be absolutely non-discriminatory on the basis of race, colour, language and nationality;

2)Guarantee gender equality;

3)Guarantee equal rights to all religious groups and accept plurality of religion as legitimate and;

4)It should be democratic in nature and its basic premise will be human dignity (al-Isra’ 17:70).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The real Taliban in Afghanistan has no connection to them, and in fact, have explicitly asked everyone not to attack the Pakistani state.

 

This was fake news spread by the enemies of Islam. Prove to me that the letter "allegedly" written by Mullah Umar was authentic. Please prove it or keep quiet and stop spreading false news.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
salam

 

I think that the Islamic State is already on its way. Allah knows best. The Khilaafa will come, but are we from those who participate or are we those who wait until it it there?

 

salam

 

 

Allah knows best. I think that we all need to read and research and make up our minds.

 

The establishment of “The†Khilaafa and the establishment of an Islamic State are not necessarily one and the same. Muslim states were justice reigned, and that were able to defend themselves against non-Muslim powers have existed before. Perhaps famously for instance, during Salahdin's reign. It is not contingent upon even believing in the Mahdi prophecies to want to work towards an Islamic state. The reason I state this is because what is best here is convergence, rather than divergence. There are Muslims who do not consider the Mahdi prophecies as even valid. They may still agree with me in the importance of having an Islamic state.

 

For those of us who believe in the Mahdi prophecies (and this includes me), there is a wide spectrum of opinion as to

 

1)What hadith can be considered relevant

2)How they can be interpreted

 

These range from the fantastic to the cautious. From those that attempt to find supporting evidence to ones that would have you rely on the theorist's reputation.

 

Amongst the many theories and interpretations, some for instance, believe that the Mahdi will be part of an army that will come from the direction of Khurasan, that will retake Iraq and march all the way to Palestine. That there would be great turmoil in Arabia and calls for a Khalifa. At a point, were the Mahdi (still undeclared) would be on pilgrimage to the Kaaba, a group of people will attempt to convince him that he, in fact, is the prophesied Mahdi. That he will not be convinced of it but will eventually be convinced. That at some point, either while the army is retaking Iraq or marching to Palestine, or afterwards, when he is declared the Khalifa and accepts that he is the Mahdi, Allah will strengthen him.

 

The internet has a million places with a million interpretations. The relevant Hadith are also readily available in case you want to make up your mind yourself.

 

For me, as to my personal beliefs on the subject, I tend to believe that whatever the different theories are, the army that will march from the direction of Khurasan to Iraq and Palestine, and from which the Khalifa will emerge, has some connection to the Pakistan Armed Forces. This is because any student of military affairs will tell you that a military force that has to take and hold territory (as opposed to hit and run) against a modern (Western) force, would need to have, at the bare minimum, the basic wherewithal of doing so.

 

That for the first time since the collapse of the Ottoman Empire are we at a point where this has happened. That coincidentally, such a state is next door to Khurasan. That simultaneously Palestine and Iraq and Afghanistan are occupied. And a long list of other signs are flashing before us. I need not elaborate as we have all heard of them.

 

If, at this point, we choose to interpret the scripture such that we wait for the Mahdi and an army to miraculously appear, while we sit and watch the show on tv, and after all is well and done for, we go and pat the Mahdi in the back for a job well done, then that is our choice.

 

My thought on fate is that the intricacies of fate, makes fate a tricky subject to handle. Concept of fate and what is foretold, does not call us to inaction. It presupposes our actions, not necessarily because we believe in the prophecies, but because, as good Muslims, witnessing now and openly before us, Palestine, Bosnia, Chechnya, Iraq, Somalia, Afghanistan, Kashmir, Philipines, Thailand and many more places, we need to act. That most of the governments in Muslim countries are client regimes of our avowed enemies. With or without the prophecies it is our duty to build a platform from whence we could solve our problems.

 

Now, I am not making a case for anyone to make great sacrifices, to give their all, to put all their eggs in this proverbial basket. What I am proposing is in no way an ambitious plan. All the plan calls for is one week of time from a handful of Muslims to share their strong faith with an audience of military officers. Not necessarily to preach to them about theories of Khilaafa or about building an Islamic state, but to preach to them about Islam.

 

The attached pdf shows the impact this would have.

 

Alas, it wouldn't let me attach. Let me see if a link works.

 

you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetdocstoc(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/docs/5144501/Impact-of-Preaching

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:sl:

 

I'm not sure what Yusha Evans has to do with any of this; could you please explain why you have sent him this letter? What exactly do you want him to do? If you could summarize the point you are trying to make, so less intelligent people like myself could understand, I'd appreciate it because to be honest I'm lost.

 

In your first post you seem to be inclined towards the creation of an Islamic state, then in your last post the conclusion states:

 

 

Sallam. Thanks for your response. I hope my last post to this post (see above) makes it simpler to understand. I do not wish to burden you with my platitudes.

 

The post you quote is not written by me but merely posted by me. It does not negate an Islamic state but illustrates how difficult it would be to agree on what an Islamic state would actually be in implementation. My approach has been to avoid splitting hairs. If you see my first article, it illustrates a methodology on how we can resolve the conflict of who and how we will determine what an Islamic state is.

 

SaracenSoldier, I have never convinced anyone by arguing with them. If you think this is false propaganda, I respect your right to believe so. However, informed observers of the situation would confirm my claims as it is a widely known fact that the TTP is a different force from the Afghan Taliban and that they are funded by foreign powers bent on harming the Pakistani state. If you want to discuss this further, please feel free to go to Pakdef, defence.pk, pakistanidefence and other similar forums and there are more than enough people who will set you right on your assumptions of the innocence of the TTP. Or better yet, go to Pakistan and walk into any tea shop and they will more likely than not, tell you the same. I have spent over a decade in Pakistan including in Peshawar, I know what I am talking about, but I respect your right to believe whatever you want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SaracenSoldier, I have never convinced anyone by arguing with them. If you think this is false propaganda, I respect your right to believe so. However, informed observers of the situation would confirm my claims as it is a widely known fact that the TTP is a different force from the Afghan Taliban and that they are funded by foreign powers bent on harming the Pakistani state. If you want to discuss this further, please feel free to go to Pakdef, defence.pk, pakistanidefence and other similar forums and there are more than enough people who will set you right on your assumptions of the innocence of the TTP. Or better yet, go to Pakistan and walk into any tea shop and they will more likely than not, tell you the same. I have spent over a decade in Pakistan including in Peshawar, I know what I am talking about, but I respect your right to believe whatever you want.

 

Assalamualikum

 

I know that TTP is not within the Taliban of Afghanistan (even though they have pledged allegiance to Mullah Umar). But I was talking about how you said about the Mullah Umar's letter to TTP not to attack Paistani forces. This is a lie because every single Taliban releases are through their official media and spokesperson. Then where did you get that news from? It wasn't released by the official Taliban media. Wheer did you get it from? The Pakistani media? Ofcourse they will lie. And you obviously can not prove that this was from the Afghan Taliban. And how follish would that be coming from Afg Taliban. Because Afg Taliban be harmed heavily if it wasn't for the TTP. Their supplies and their alleged "bases" in Pak would be crushed. And it was the Pakistani state who betrayed the Taliban in 2001. How then can you say that Taliban don't want to attack the Pakistani State. This does not make sense!

 

You say that the TTP are funded by forieng states to harm Pakistan. Firstly, the Pak govt. websites obviously are going to lie against their enemies and make themselves look innocent. And obviously the average Pakistani is going to fall for this propaganda through their media. So I can't take that as proof that TTP are funded by foreigners. Secondly, It was the Pakistan who started this war. Do you think the TTP would even be formed or they would even attack Pakistan if Pakistan did not attack them first? Or did you already forget that it was the Pakistani State who attacked them to please America? How can you now, when ur beloved Pak army has been humiliated and defeated, accuse TTP and blame them when it was Pakistan who started it.

 

And one more point. I ageree with you that the TTP are harming Pakistani govt. but they are NOT funded by some foreigners. And what is wrong with attacking the Pakistani state? It is ruling with kufr (democracy). It does not rule with Shariah. It's leaders are accupying Pakistan by proxy on behalf of the West. It hasnt freed kashmir in 50 years. Now TTP come adn want to implement Shariah and establish a state and free KAshmir, you accuse opppose them? Yet you want to see an Islamic State?

 

The fact is that you can not prove your allegations. What some other people say on forums or what the Pak govt. says is not proof. I am an open minded person. Bring me proof and i will listen to it. But you have no proof and you are accusing Muslims of being agents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let us not get diverted and agree to disagree. Let me reiterate what I am looking to do - creating greater faith amongst the Pakistani military officers and demonstrating to them by example what good Muslims are.

 

The wider topic for this thread is related to thoughts, views and analysis available on the topic of Islamic state.

 

Here is a wonderful book I found at hizb ut tehrir:

 

you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yethizb-ut-tahrir(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/PDF/EN/en_bo...slamicState.pdf

 

 

you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yethizb-ut-tahrirDOTorg/PDF/EN/en_books_pdf/IslamicState.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your scenario for this war to create an Islamic state is soooo unrealistic. First of all, the Mahdi ? He's the guy that's going to crawl out of the well he's been hiding in for the last 800 years, correct ? O.K.... Pakistan, while possibly able to manufacture weapons that 'work' in the third world, would be no match for any semi-modern army, let alone someone like israel, Britain , France or the U.S. Their Air Force and Navy would be gone in a day. And then you say a large army would MARCH from Pakistan to Palestine ? Really ? How 'Arabian Nights'. Do you really think an Army can do stuff like that in this day ? Do you REALLY think a million man army would be able to MARCH with no air cover ? During the first Gulf War there was a thing called 'The Road Of Death'. Remember ? A very good object lesson on why your half-baked little plan could never work. There are hundreds of reasons, but these come readily to mind. Keep your dreams, though. And keep posting, too It's amusing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Your scenario for this war to create an Islamic state is soooo unrealistic. First of all, the Mahdi ? He's the guy that's going to crawl out of the well he's been hiding in for the last 800 years, correct ? O.K.... Pakistan, while possibly able to manufacture weapons that 'work' in the third world, would be no match for any semi-modern army, let alone someone like israel, Britain , France or the U.S. Their Air Force and Navy would be gone in a day. And then you say a large army would MARCH from Pakistan to Palestine ? Really ? How 'Arabian Nights'. Do you really think an Army can do stuff like that in this day ? Do you REALLY think a million man army would be able to MARCH with no air cover ? During the first Gulf War there was a thing called 'The Road Of Death'. Remember ? A very good object lesson on why your half-baked little plan could never work. There are hundreds of reasons, but these come readily to mind. Keep your dreams, though. And keep posting, too It's amusing.

 

 

The last item I posted is not mine. It's what Hizb ut Tahrir have. Concerning The Mahdi "crawling" out of a cave after 800 years that is a Shiite belief. Concerning your mention of whose airforce will be whipped out or so forth, I beg to differ on the sweeping conclusions made. My point is actually on the same basic premise - that we cannot achieve any deterrence unless we have conventional might of arms, and that Pakistan affords us this chance. Don't mind me asking, are you a Muslim?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

by the way, I am asking for no war to create such a state. On the contrary, I'm asking for a peaceful means of creating an Islamic state that can defend itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Let us not get diverted and agree to disagree.

 

But if you can not prove to anyone that TTP is funded and are agents of some foreign power then why accuse them of that in your article? Anyone who reads it might believe those lies.

 

Let me reiterate what I am looking to do - creating greater faith amongst the Pakistani military officers and demonstrating to them by example what good Muslims are.

 

You want the Pak officers to create an Islamic State? Those that sold themselves to America and they kill Muslims for the sake of the Kuffar? Again it was these officers who started the war. And you know they did it at the request of America. Instead of calling them agents of the west you put this accusation on innocent Muslims who take up arms to defend themselves and their families and so they could live under Islamic law? Where is the Justice?

 

The wider topic for this thread is related to thoughts, views and analysis available on the topic of Islamic state.

 

Thoughts, views and analysis should be made using FACTS and not lies. You have used lies against the TTP yet your only proof is that people in cafe's in Pakistan believe so. And that because the murtad rulers of Pakistan told you through their government website.

 

You want an Islamic State? The mujahideen around the world are working for just that. In Somalia, Afg/Pak, Iraq, The Caucasus and many more places. So be careful and do NOT spread propaganda and lies spread by the enemies. You support nationalistic Pak forces who defend democracy and attack TTP who spread shariah? What Islamic State do you want to see? A Democratic one?

 

I am not attacking you, rather i just can not stay quiet when lies are being spread about Muslims.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My point is actually on the same basic premise - that we cannot achieve any deterrence unless we have conventional might of arms, and that Pakistan affords us this chance. Don't mind me asking, are you a Muslim?

 

Akhi me and you both know that America is losing the War right? And we know that the Mujahideen kicked out ethiopia recently from Somalia. It was the Commander Al-Khattab who defeated conventional Russian armies twice in Chechnya. The Mujahdieen can defeat the Superpowers of the world and they can also, by the help of Allah defend an Islamic State. It was not the Pak Army who defeated the ethiopians or the Russians. It is not the Pak army who is defeating America in Afg.

 

Remember we do not need "conventional might of arms".. all we need is Allah. The Sahaba(ra) defeated the superpowers, The Persians and the Romans not through strength of numbers nor through better military capabilities. They had the help of Allah and iman.

 

9. At-Taubah: 25. Truly Allah has given you victory on many battle fields, and on the Day of Hunain (battle) when you rejoiced at your great number but it availed you naught and the earth, vast as it is, was straitened for you, then you turned back in flight.

 

26. Then Allah did send down His Sakinah (calmness, tranquillity and reassurance, etc.) on the Messenger (Muhammad ), and on the believers, and sent down forces (angels) which you saw not, and punished the disbelievers. Such is the recompense of disbelievers.

 

So it is not the Pak army that will give us a chnace for an Islamic State. The Pak army is standing against it. It is Allah whom we must rely on.

 

 

It has also been narrated on the authority of Ibn `Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wassallam) said: “If you deal in usury and hang unto the tails of cows, being satisfied with cultivation and ceasing to take part in Jihad, Allah will inflict a humiliation upon you which will not be removed until you return to your religion.” (Reported by Ahmad and Abu Dawud and graded as authentic by Al-Qattān, and Al-Hafiz states in Al-Bulugh that the chain of narrators are trustworthy and reliable.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Keep your dreams, though. And keep posting, too It's amusing.

 

You relied on your numbers and technology in Afghanistan and it did you no good. The west is being crushed in Afghanistan. Where are your planes? Where are you modern armies? Why can't you defeat the Taliban? Who are seen as less capable than the Pak army..

Edited by SaracenSoldier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
First of all, the Mahdi ? He's the guy that's going to crawl out of the well he's been hiding in for the last 800 years, correct ?

 

Lol, what?

 

He's a human being who'll be born and who will die, not an immortal sewer monster.

 

Secondly, don't make the mistake of thinking that things will remain the way they are in the future. A hundred or two hundred years from now, the tides will turn. In our favor? Against us? Allah knows best, but looking at history, one thing that never changes is change itself.

 

Salam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You relied on your numbers and technology in Afghanistan and it did you no good. The west is being crushed in Afghanistan. Where are your planes? Where are you modern armies? Why can't you defeat the Taliban? Who are seen as less capable than the Pak army..

 

 

The U.S. flew half way around the world to CRUSH the worlds 4th largest army. TWICE ! Then they took Afghanistan. No modern army has done what the U.S. has and sustained so little casualties. Six years of fighting TWO wars with the loss of a little over 4000 soldiers is unheard of. While the loss of even one Allied soldier is regrettable, the lopsided numbers are staggering. The U.S. could make short work of the Taliban by carpet bombing the tribal areas of Pakistan. They know were they are. But they prefer to 'Predator' them instead so as to appease the 'Muslim street'. Still, when the Talibs hear the whine of the Predator engine overhead the next day is a big laundry day from all the soiled pants. :sl:

 

 

And are you sure, R, that the Mahdi isn't the guy hiding in the well that Ahmadinejad is talking about all the time ? I think he is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sallam ALL,

 

I am afraid my thread has been hijacked by on the one hand, people who sympathize with blowing up schools and on the other by an American who wants us to believe we are incompetent and our religion is a bunch of fairy tales.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sallam ALL,

 

I am afraid my thread has been hijacked by on the one hand, people who sympathize with blowing up schools and on the other by an American who wants us to believe we are incompetent and our religion is a bunch of fairy tales.

 

 

 

 

Hijacked ? (I could crack a few jokes, but I'll resist) Welcome to Gawaher. Incompetent ? No. 'Over ambitious', yes. To think Pak technology could stand against western, especially air power is hoping for much. And as for the guy in the well for 800 years... I'm 'skeptical'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sallam ALL,

 

I am afraid my thread has been hijacked by on the one hand, people who sympathize with blowing up schools and on the other by an American who wants us to believe we are incompetent and our religion is a bunch of fairy tales.

 

Akhi.. please I am not here to argue with you nor sound as if I am against you. We both are on the same team. The points I have raised are valid. You should not use false news and accusations to get across your point. All I am asking is for you to prove your allegations against TTP. If you are truthful then prove that what you say is correct.

 

And I am telling you now. Prove to me that and prove to me that TTP are against Islam. If you can prove it I will back down and accept. We should not be stubborn when we find the truth. I believe one thing to be the truth. Prove to me otherwise.

 

As for Schools. And I'm sure Zardari and Musharraf also did not tell you that these are used by Pakistani army as bases? Also another reason why Schools are closed is because they teach secularism. You wanting Shariah and an Islamic State should know better than to use this ridiculous point as an attack rather than dicussing the issues I have raised.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...As for Schools. And I'm sure Zardari and Musharraf also did not tell you that these are used by Pakistani army as bases?...

 

 

 

 

BALONY !!! :sl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sallam ALL,

 

this may be of interest, Zaid Hamid's Banned Program

 

you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetgrandestrategy(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/2009/04/zaid...-situation.html

 

Zaid Hamid's Banned Program on Situation in Pakistan

 

Brass Tacks

Rough translation

 

Zaid Hamid

 

Few months ago we did a CIA threat part 1 and later part 2. We discuss here all the issues faced by Pakistan.

 

Current strategic analysis today.

 

This is an extremely sensitive issue and we will discuss this carefully. To understand what Pakistan is going through, we need to look at Yugoslavia during Tito's era. The Americans decided that Yugoslavia would be broken up. CIA wants to implement the same strategy in Pakistan.

 

After Tito died, a weak and incompetent government was brought into power. The government was bought out by the CIA. The first thing that they did was to stop funds for law and order in the various provinces. This creates chaos and militancy. Secondly, they started creating talk of provincial autonomy. When the central government is weak and there is no funds for law and order and there is talk of autonomy, the country would automatically start to break.

 

Another aspect was that the economy was broken, creating economic problems. As a result, another issue combined, the militias of each of the separate province. This created a war against each province. As a result, a proxy war started with Russia supporting the Serbians, the USA supporting Croatians and Bosnians.

 

The CIA is implementing this textbook tactic against Pakistan. Now there is maximum threat on the country with India threatening from the East, US forces are on the Western front, and now they are planning to put their troops inside Pakistan. And there are two carrier groups that are there to capture Gwadar and attempt to connect with their forces in Helmand in case their supply lines are threatened.

 

In this situation, when there is an incompetent government that has done nothing to counter these movies, the government is looking to create provincial autonomy. While provincial autonomy is a good thing when the center is not weak and the country is not under threat. However, in this situation, implementing provincial autonomy is being implemented for other purposes.

 

Further, on multiple axis, militancies are being supported in NWFP, Baluchistan and Sindh. This is exactly similar to what was done to Yugoslavia. Just as Yugoslavia stopped law and order funds to the provinces, funding for police and paramilitary funds have been stopped. This is for the first time that frontier forces are having to be funded by the Pakistan Army. This is again exactly like what was done in Yugoslavia.

 

The problem is Swat is also being worked upon. It is being said that Swat is not in our control but this is a lie, the city and valley are under our control and the problem is of law and order. Again, if funds are not available, if there is no paramilitary, if there is no force to fight there then how can the situation improve? Why isn't there an order by the government to deal with this?

 

There is no reason to fear, we just have to deal with this challenge and situation. However, we have little time. India is waiting for the US to attack Pakistan. India is waiting to attack at the opportune time. This is a delicate time for Pakistan. We warn our enemies that we can deal with them.

 

The government must wake up. This warning is not going to come again and again.

 

On Prophecies

 

The Prophet (PBUH) said that a force would capture Hindustan and that this army will return back and attack israel. There are many hadith. And this is in the future. That those who will fall in these battles will be equal to those in Badr. And this is for our army to achieve. This is our fate. But if we don't fix ourselves, Allah is not dependent on us, He will destroy us and raise another nation that would do what is fated. But this is our fate. If we can do this and not falter.

 

This time is near, we will capture Dehli. This time is near, it can be a day a week or a few years. Now India is supporting insurgency. We tell India clearly that we will deal with them.

 

There is nothing to fear, that in trial our mettle will be found. There will be casualties and we will be tried just like Iraq and Afghanistan. But Allah will not leave us.

 

There are three types of people. Firstly there will be those who will fall, and those that will live to see victory and those that will be damned and will die that death of a dog. Pray to Allah that we are in the first two and not the third.

 

-B. Khan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anybody other than gerber and SaracenSoldier has any comments, criticisms, questions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×