site-wide search

SomaliNet Forums: Archives

This section is online for reference only. No new content will be added. no deletion either...

Go to Current Forums ...with millions of posts

The Iconoclasts of Afghanistan

SomaliNet Forum (Archive): Islam (Religion): Archive (Before Mar. 13, 2001): The Iconoclasts of Afghanistan
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  

A-Hakim

Monday, March 12, 2001 - 11:03 pm
The Iconoclasts of Afghanistan

By Imad-ad-Dean Ahmad,

A cold shudder is passing through the Muslim world as we look on in frustration while the Taliban show their contempt for fourteen centuries of Muslim tolerance and civility and undermine the recent gains Muslims have made in refuting the stereotype of Islam as barbarism by their willful destruction of the Buddhas of Bamiyan.

Muslims from America to Iran to Malaysia are responding appropriately to the situation, both by condemning the barbarity of the Taliban and by noting the hypocrisy of Western commentators who are more concerned about stone statues than about the welfare of Afghani children who will now be victimized by United Nations' sanctions as the children of Iraq have been since the Gulf War.

It was ironic that I was attending a forums on Islam and Civil Society when the news broke about Mullah Mohamad Omar's decision to destroy the giant Buddhist statues that have stood in Bamiyan for over 1,500 years. The forums consisted of a discussion of readings by both defenders and critics of Islam, including Samuel Huntington's (in)famous piece in Foreign Affairs on the Clash of Civilizations.

"What could have possibly triggered such an act?" asked one of the participants. That was an easy question to answer: the U.N. sanctions on Afghanistan, provoked by the United States over Afghanistan's refusal to extradite Osama Bin Laden. The Taliban have repeatedly insisted that, if the U.S. has evidence proving Bin Laden's guilt, they themselves will prosecute him.

Instead of offering evidence, however, the United States has successfully pressed the Security Council to sanction Afghanistan. China has a veto over Security Council actions, but elected not to use it. So much for Huntington's theory of a Sino-Islamic alliance!

The reasons that Afghanistan would want to lash out are understandable, but the manner in which they did so is unacceptable. The attempt to cloak their actions with the command to defy shirk is harmful to the ummah.

Alas, there have been a few Islamists who have tried to defend the vandalism by citing alleged precedents from the Sunnah of Ibrahim and Muhammad (peace be upon them both). There is no doubt that Prophet Muhammad (SAW) smashed the idols of the Ka`ba. But the Ka`ba was a Muslim shrine built by Ibrahim and Isma'il (AS) as a house of worship for Allah; therefore, the Prophet was cleansing a Muslim place of worship, not despoiling a shrine built by and for the people of another religion.

It is also important to note that the Prophet did not destroy a depiction of Mary and Jesus (AS) in the Ka`ba, but ordered them to be moved elsewhere. This concession was both because Mary and Jesus are respectfully mentioned in the Qur'an, and because Christianity does not teach the worship of statues even if some Christians engage in it.

Similarly, Buddhism does not teach the worship of statues even if some Buddhists engage in it. And although Buddha is not mentioned by name in the Qur'an, there is no doubt that Allah sent messengers to every people and, if Buddha was one of them, the fact that his original message has been corrupted can no more justify destroying the statues that Buddhists have made to him than the corruption of Christian scriptures can justify the destruction of statues Christians have made to Jesus.

Nor can Ibrahim's destruction of the idols of his people be made a precedent. Similar to Muhammad, Ibrahim was dealing with idolatry, but perhaps more to the point, his acts were done before his call to prophethood; they were the impetuous acts of a young man as yet unguided by divine revelation. Even the most simple-minded literalist could not use Ibrahim's act as a precedent since, contrary to the Taliban, Ibrahim left the biggest idol standing.

The destruction of these statues after one Muslim regime after another has left them standing for over a thousand years confuses the historical record. It is this history of Muslim forbearance that makes the Hindu charge that the Babri mosque that they destroyed in Ayodhiya was originally a shrine to Rama so incredible. However, the acts of the Taliban make the charge seem less absurd in the mind of onlookers. It distances them from the historical record.

For example, when the Muslims took over the Hagia Sophia church in Turkey, they did not plunder, loot, or destroy the Christian icons (as the Roman Catholics did when they conquered the city), but merely covered them up. In a civilized way, they brought the former church up to Islamic standards.

The Taliban's abandonment of Islamic practices, including Afghani practices, forms a horrendous precedent. Are they suggesting that American Muslims should demolish Mt. Rushmore?

This is a precedent that will be, and already is being, used against us. Earlier this week, Hindus burned the Qur'an (Washington Post, March 2001). Tomorrow, the Israelis may demolish al-Aqsa. In Islamic history, the Muslims who have failed to heed the Qur'an's advice, "Revile not ye those whom they call upon besides God, lest they out of spite revile God in their ignorance," (6:108) have been rare indeed. It is a shame that the Taliban, apparently unaware of the significance of this verse, seek to be among the rare exceptions.

Mohamad Omar's decision is, at best, an ignorant application of a very conservative interpretation of Shari`a. In reality, it is something far worse. Why didn't Mohamad Omar's order the statues destroyed before now?

The fact is that Mohamad Omar himself promised, during the siege of central Afghanistan, that if the Taliban prevailed, they would protect the historical monuments in question (Khan, 1998). What kind of Muslim goes back on his word? Certainly not an Islamic scholar.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  

Idea

Monday, March 12, 2001 - 11:36 pm
Isn't Budha a social reformer like Ibn Khaldoun?
Isn't it right for muslims to demolish objects that being worshiped as Gods?


"what kind of a muslim goes back on his word?"
Isn't a muslim a humble human being and thus subjected to error?

Are the afghanis the only one who are persecuted for hiding Bin Laden, what about the Sudan? what about Abdi-Gassim(somali business man)?

God Bless Bin Laden :-)

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  

Anonymous

Tuesday, March 13, 2001 - 12:12 am
Outcry as Buddhas are destroyed

3/12/2001 (BBC) :: India and Pakistan have led global condemnation of the Taleban''s destruction of two ancient statues of the Buddha in Afghanistan, which was confirmed on Monday.

Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee described the demolition of the Buddhas in central Bamiyan province as "an act of barbarism".

Pakistan''s Foreign Minister Abdul Sattar, who has accused the international community of doing too little, said it was "a tragic disaster".

In Bangladesh, a rally was held in the capital, Dhaka, to protest against the destruction, as Muslim nations from Malaysia to the Middle East queued up to stress the attacks on the statues had nothing to do with Islam.

Earlier Unesco Director-general Koichiro Matsuura said in a statement that the demolition of the relics was complete.

"I was distressed to learn from my special envoy, Pierre LaFrance, that the destruction of the Bamiyan Buddhas has been confirmed," he said.

Mr LaFrance has visited Afghanistan twice in an attempt to save the artefacts, but to no avail.

The Taleban Foreign Minister Wakil Ahmad Mutawakil, in Islamabad to meet with UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan, confirmed that the two giant statues had indeed been destroyed, along with all moveable artefacts.

"We do admit all these statues were the cultural heritage of Afghanistan, but we will not leave the part which is contrary to our belief." Mr Mutawakil said.

Explosives

Even a delegation of senior Muslim scholars from the 55-nation Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC) had been unable to dent the Taleban''s resolve to annihilate the country''s pre-Islamic heritage.

Journalists are barred from the region, but international aid workers have confirmed that the militia used explosives to bring down the soaring statues.

"The destruction work is not as easy as people would think," Taleban Information Minister Qudratullah Jamal told Reuters.

The statues are now said to lie in ruins at the foot of the cliff where they have stood since the second and fifth century.

Intolerance

Standing at 51 and 36 metres high, the statues were once a symbol of the religious tolerance that pervaded the region but today Bamiyan is a war zone.

Islamic leaders around the world have stressed that the Taleban''s iconoclasm has no justification in Islam.

Only Sudan and Saudi Arabia, one of only three countries to recognise the Taleban as the legitimate government of Afghanistan, have remained quiet.

Kofi Annan, in Pakistan on a tour of the region, described the Taleban''s acts as a "disservice" to themselves and to Islam.

Some analysts believe the demolition of the statues may have come in retaliation for UN sanctions imposed for the Taleban''s refusal to hand over Saudi dissident Osama bin Laden.

Bamiyan statues being destroyed, Taliban tells Annan

Reported by: Kyodo

ISLAMABAD, 3/12/2001 :: Taliban Foreign Minister Wakeel Ahmad Mutwakkal has said that all moveable statues in Afghanistan have been destroyed and the destruction of two giant statues of the Buddha has begun, U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan told reporters Sunday. Speaking at a press conference in Pakistan, Annan said he told Mutwakkal that ''''you have to respect what is sacred to others,'''' and the destruction was a lamentable act and a disservice to the Taliban itself and to Islam.

Asked if the destruction of the statues would affect the response by donors to his appeal for more funds for humanitarian assistance in Afghanistan, Annan said it would not help.

But no country has so far said it will not provide such funds if the statues are destroyed, he said.

Annan said such funds are meant for people who have nothing to do with the destruction of the statues.

''''I think a hungry child is a hungry child and we should do everything to help him,'''' he remarked.

After his meeting with Annan, Mutwakkal told a press conference that work had started on the destruction of the two Buddha statues in Bamiyan, northwest of Kabul, but he did not know the current status of the work.

''''I do not think they have been completely destroyed because they are tough ones,'''' he said, pointing out that in the days of former Afghan King Zahir Shah, cement and iron had been used to strengthen them.

Mutwakkal said there was no possibility of moving the statues abroad or selling them. ''''Surely we will destroy them completely,'''' he said.


World Cares More for Buddhist Statues than Human Life

Anyone who has been closely following the media reports coming out of Afghanistan this week can only come to one conclusion: that the world community cares more about ancient relics than it does human lives.

This week, shortly after Taliban leaders announced their decision to destroy two Buddhist statues carved into a sandstone cliff in the central Bamiyan province, the international community lashed out with strong condemnation.

Unsurprisingly, the United States was among the first to criticize Afghanistan''s ruling regime. Relations between the Taliban and the Americans deteriorated even further after the U.S. initiated latest round of sanctions on the war-torn nation. During a State Department briefing this week, US State Department spokesman Philip Reeker said the edict against the statues "directly contradicts one of Islam''s basic tenets -- tolerance for other religions".

The United Nations sent a special envoy to meet with the Taliban foreign minister, warning their destruction would cause "international outrage".

The European Union, along with several other industrialized nations urged the Taliban to reverse the decision. Shortly thereafter, a long list of countries joined the international uproar over the relics, including Malaysia, Germany, Russia, India, and Japan.

Even Egypt''s spiritual leader, mufti Sheikh Nasr Farid Wassel, expressed "astonishment" at the Taliban''s decision, saying they had no negative impact on Muslims.

Sri Lanka and India even offered to move and protect the statues if the Afghani government would agree.

And without hesitation, the international media dutifully reported the outpouring of grief and anger over the threatened Buddhas, as one headline read, "Worldwide horror as Afghan Taliban begin smashing ancient statues".

But there was no "worldwide horror" or "international outrage" when UN officials announced Friday that more than 260 people have died in displacement camps in northern Afghanistan where an additional 117,000 people are living in miserable conditions.

There was no outpouring of grief for those refugees who mostly died of hunger and exposure to cold weather. Sadly, no one seemed to care that most of the deceased were children under the age of five, elderly men, and women who did not survive childbirth.

And there were no invitations to house these refugees as conditions in these camps are expected to deteriorate.

Perhaps the only consolation in all of this, is that these refugees may never know how much the world cared for two statues and how little it cared for them.

Chechen rebels see world "hypocrisy"

Support for the Taleban campaign to destroy the Buddhist statues has come from a senior figure in the Chechen rebel movement - Yusuf Ibrahim, an influential editor at the Kavkaz-Tsentr news agency.
The following are excerpts from his Kavkaz-Tsentr article on Saturday 3 March:

The heathen world is upset.

The so-called world community, which is personified by the Judeo-Christian heathen alliance, has kicked up a real fuss over the decision by the leadership of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan to destroy stone idols in its country.


The world hypocritically laments for the stone idols and blesses the Kremlin crusade against the Muslims of Chechnya


Yusuf Ibrahim
Numerous international organisations and entire states have launched an unprecedented hullabaloo in the news and are accusing the Afghans of vandalism...

So, the heathen alliance considers the actions of Muslims who are carrying out an elementary prescription of the shari'ah as "hostility towards values common to all mankind".

The Prophet Muhammad (Peace be Upon Him), whose first action was to destroy idols and idolatry, is also a "vandal" and an "enemy" in the eyes of the heathens...

Without shame or remorse over its own shamelesness, the world community is hypocritically lamenting the stone idols and simultaneously giving its blessing to the Kremlin gangs' crusade against the Muslims of the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria...

Human rights

Neither hundreds of corpses nor concentration camps nor the Satanic mayhem of the Russian occupiers have had any impact on the "opinion" of the so-called human rights commissioner of the Council of Europe, Alvaro Gil-Robles who, after his ignoble and cowardly statements, can be taken for nothing other than an enemy.

The international outcry over the fate of the stone statues and the joyous silence over the mass killings of Muslims in Chechnya, Palestine, Kashmir, the Philippines and other countries once again demonstrate the true essence of Kufr (lack of faith).

Those Muslims who are still being deceived regarding the so-called world community must finally understand that there will be no peace, security and justice, while violence and true obscurantism prevail on the face of the Earth, as long as our entire religion and law fail to belong to our Creator, the Lord of the Worlds, the Great God (the Most High) who is the only One who sets laws and the only One worthy of worship.

Taliban: The World Needs the Iconoclasts

Reported by: Khalid Baig, Current Affairs

3/5/2001 :: As expected, the Taliban decision to destroy statues from the Islamic State has created a big international uproar. The entire "civilized world", with the UN at its head, has been jumping up and down to condemn this "great crime against humanity." The world leaders have been shaking with anger. The Taliban have been warned by the UN of a "devastating reaction" if they harm the sacred stones. One pundit even suggested sending an army to rescue the beleaguered Buddhas.

It is fascinating to see all these political and cultural champions get all worked up with "moral indignation." Through their pious pronouncements they try to persuade us that theirs is a principled stand.

The only problem is that it is difficult to discern what that principle is.

"No poor country has ever been sanctioned the way Afghanistan has." (UN Report)

Is it their concern for humanity? Well, it is the same UN that has started the project of torturing and killing the people by the millions in the war-devastated Afghanistan by imposing sanctions against it. The scheme they are using --- depriving the little children of milk, the hungry of food and the sick of medicine --- has been perfected in Iraq where it has killed half a million people according to the estimates of the UN itself.

The UN Security Council first imposed sanctions on Afghanistan in October 1999. They were tightened even more in December 2000, under strong pressure from the United States and Russia. According to a Global Policy Forum report, the new sanctions were imposed despite an August 2000 report from the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), which highlighted the "tangible negative effect" on Afghanistan''s populace of the existing sanctions. Another draft OCHA report has said that "no poor country has ever been sanctioned the way Afghanistan has." So much for their concern for humanity.

Is it their concern for religious freedom? It is important to remember that the Taliban are not destroying any place of worship or anything belonging to a place of worship. And although it is not apparent from the heated condemnations, the Taliban are not doing anything illegal either. The stone artifacts belong to their country; no body else holds title to them. If one buys a home and it comes with some statues, he has a right to keep them, sell them, destroy them or throw them away. Similarly, whether or not others like it or agree with it, the Afghans have a right to do what they want with the mountains, stones, and statues in their country, as long as they do not cause a danger to anybody else.

Things become more interesting if we begin to check the credentials of the anti-Taliban campaign itself on the issue of religious freedom. Consider India, a leader in the current crusade, where the same people are ruling today who had led frenzied mobs to destroy the historical Babri Mosque just eight years ago and had killed 2000 people in the ensuing protests. It is amazing that the butchers have been prompt to display righteous anger over this "medieval barbarism."

Given that the record of our beloved "International Community" on humanity and religious freedom is rather appalling, let us look at something more plausible, like a concern for universal cultural heritage. The results are no better here. For one must ask where were our guardians of cultural heritage when mosques, libraries, schools, historic buildings, and museums ---many of them great historic monuments ---- were being destroyed in the Balkans. More than 1200 mosques were destroyed in Bosnia by the European fanatics known as Serbs. More than 200 were destroyed in Kosova. Of course, unlike the Taliban they also killed the Imams and the rest of the population with the historic monuments they were destroying. Of course they committed other crimes so grisly that their cultural vandalism appeared to be a non-issue in comparison. And of course, the guardians of cultural heritage, of religious freedom, and of humanity were happily strolling through their art galleries when the butchery was going on.

So if there is a principle behind their "principled stand," we are unable to find it. In a rare case the Washington Post tried to find an answer to the question as to why Afghans must keep and preserve the statues: "These old buildings are Afghanistan''s identity. And when you lose your identity, you''ve lost your soul." The problem is these artifacts are NOT Afghanistan''s identity. And the assertion is nothing but unvarnished cultural imperialism. Afghanistan''s identity derives from the life and example of the Prophets.

Prophet Ibrahim, alayhi-salam, destroyed the idols, even though his own father was the idol maker. He was threatened with the wrath of gods. (Today, his followers are being threatened with the wrath of the "International Community," which is the same thing). He did not care. And in the process he exposed the weakness of the idols and the wickedness of the idol-worshippers. Later on, in Makkah he said the prayer: "O my Lord! Make this city one of peace and security and preserve me and my sons from worshipping idols. O my Lord! They [the idols] have indeed led astray many among mankind." [Ibrahim 14:35-36]

When the pagans later on filled the Ka''ba he had rebuilt with idols, Allah sent Prophet Muhammad, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam. Again he destroyed all of the idols there, forever. He did not preserve them as cultural heritage. Rather, with every stroke of the hammer, he declared, "Truth has come and falsehood has vanished."

Those who have hearts of stone are naturally showing their love for stones.

This is the Islamic heritage. You clean your own life and your own house of the idols. You do not preserve them as your cultural heritage or as a cherished work of art. And in doing so you will liberate the world.

So is there a principle behind the "International Community''s" stand? May be there is an underlying principle, but it is a sinister one. One "expert" summed up the mood of this commotion while talking to the Los Angeles Times. "I would send in the army, I really would," Pratapaditya Pal, a visiting curator to the US, said. "It is of course very difficult to compare [a statue] with a human life, but don''t forget that we [humans] can reproduce. These Buddhas . . . are destroyed forever."

There it is. We are living in a world in which animals are more valuable than humans (In India, for example, men have been slaughtered over the issue of cow slaughter). And now even the stones are more valuable than the humans. And to top it off, those who have developed such inverted values are the self-declared champions of human dignity. And why not? Those who have hearts of stone are naturally showing their love for stones.

This is a cruel, self-conceited, arrogant, wicked and ignorant world. It has incessantly talked about its love of art but the only art at work here is the art of propaganda. It needs someone who can expose that. It needs the iconoclasts who would refuse to continue the business as usual; who would challenge its hegemony and tyranny; and who would rid it of its cruelty, self-conceit, arrogance, and ignorance.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  

A-Hakim

Tuesday, March 13, 2001 - 12:44 am
Well, you made a point of how human can make an error but Is this a politically motifated action or it is just one man's action?

Would you please clerify us more what is going on in sudan? you sound you know little bit more than average peole´.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  

fg.

Tuesday, March 13, 2001 - 03:08 am
If anything came out of this destruction of the idols, it is the so called islamic muftis and islamic governments despicable hypocricies towards the teachings of islam.


Let us face it people! Did the prophet pbuh let the Idols Arabs were worshipping hundreds of years left standing for the excuse of respecting that other people worshipped them?.


Taliban did what is islamic. They didn't go to someone else's backyard and destroyed what belongs to them. They should have done this long time ago. May Allah be pleased with them. Those who claim to be muslims and value stones and the false gods should repent and seek the forgiveness of Allah.


Volume 3, Book 43, Number 658(Bukhari)

Narrated 'Abdullah bin Masud:

The Prophet entered Mecca and (at that time) there were three hundred-and-sixty idols around the Ka'ba. He started stabbing the idols with a stick he had in his hand and reciting: "Truth (Islam) has come and Falsehood (disbelief) has vanished."


A-HAKIM.

We should be worried about people dying of hunger and adversity and not about Idols. No matter how you try to please a disbeliever by doing or refraining from certain islamic acts, they won't have positive feelings for you. That was made clear in the Quran time and time again. Destroying an Idol is part of islam period. I am glad Taliban pissed off the Idol worshippers next door who destroyed A MOSQUE dating back several hundred years on the pretext that IT WAS STANDING ON A HINDU GOD'S PLACE. Now didn't draw any cries like we have here and we haven't seen the so called muftis crying foul over that.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  

MAD MAC

Wednesday, March 14, 2001 - 04:32 am
Formerguest
Just out of curiousity, I guess that, based on your assessment that the destruction of the statues was OK because it is, in your opinion, supported by Islamic teaching, You also condone the destruction of the Mosque which was standing on a Hindu Gods place that you mentioned. Furthermore, if a group of Bhudists get together and decide to conduct a book burning of all the Qur'ans in their countries, that's OK too, because the Qur'an preaches something that is contrary to their beliefs and is therefore sacriligeous. And since it's in their country..... Based on your rationale you would have to say it is perfectly OK for them to do so.

This action by the Taliban wasn't executed because of their Islamic beliefs. Anyone with any intelligence whatsoever can see right through that. This was their way of saying "•••• you" to the non-Islamic world. You see they're pissed off at everyone because everyone treats them like the backward assholes they are. They're just flipping everyone the bird. If they were sincere, they would have said nothing to the international media (it's not like Bumiyan is a world cultural and media center) until after it was a done deal. But they wanted to hold it up and say "see, we're doing this and there ain't jack you can do about it."

As for the issue at hand, it seems that the majority of Islamic scholars believe this was un-Islamic, based on:

a. No one was actively worshipping these statues. They were simply relics from the past and irreplaceable ones at that.

b. If we can assume that, from an Islamic perspective, Bhudda was a prophet who's message has been corrupted, then they are destroying images of a prophet - in short a •••• you at one of God's prophets. Probably also un-Islamic.

Idea
Bin Laden is scum - I can't believe you can't see that. I suppose you support everyone who kills innocent people (including Muslims like those killed when he blew up the embassy) and claims he's a Muslim.

Now, all this having been said, do I think we all over-reacted? Sure. We can always build new statues. Do I think we should get excited about Afghanistans great humanitarian problem. Nope. They've made their own bed, and while I pity the children, beyond basic aid deliveries I wouldn't bother with it. They're just a bunch of ingrates anyway. Why bother? You think the fuckers will ever say thanks or show any appreciation? All you'll hear is litanys about how it's all the "wests" fault anyway, blah, blah, blah. I'm sick of them. They want to be an independent and free Islamic society, let 'em reap the rewards. I certainly would never bother going over there for any purpose. Forget about them and they'll just go away.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  

Idea

Thursday, March 15, 2001 - 12:10 am
Mad,

The embassy bombing, i thought you guys or the big dogs of the FBI caught those who bombed it, right? I even heard that you guys accused that the blind shiekh Abdirahman did it!

Mac, if Bin Laden is a scum, how do you categorize those who genocided the innocent natives of this continent? I will tell their rank, go and watch the movie called "my best friend's wedding" see how Julia Roberts describes herself towards the end of the movie, then you will be having huge headlines of your side of the world <smile>

By the way, the bombing of Sudan in 1997, what was it for? Did the FBI thought that Bin Laden was hiding in the chemical factory or did Mr Hanson gave you guys wrong info, i wonder! What about the recent bombing of Iraq! Man, now that was a joke, right!

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  

Ice-Man

Thursday, March 15, 2001 - 03:47 am
Mad Cow I knew you were Hypocrite, but I am surprised To know That you have The one eye.it's Appalling To see The world crying over something That doesn't even concern Them, The destruction of The statues are an internal issue for The Afghans. Serbs destroyed 90% of The Historic buildings and killed many innocent civilians in Bosnia in the 90's There wasn't real outcry for That, was There, Mad Cow?
In Spain Christian destroyed many Mosque, some of The Mosque, They made a Whore House To film a porno movies just To belittle Islamic Societies and defame our faith was There, outcry Mad cow?
When a preacher in Congo Burned The Holly Quran live on TV and millions saw it was There, outcry?
Most of All, when Salman Rushdie(Your Hero) wrote The Satanic verses to belittle The Muslim Image and The Words of Allah,Non of The Christians societies and your leadership showed condemnation, Instead a lot of Them embraced Him To Mention few Bill Clinton, Tony Blair, John major and other Hypocrites like your self, Mad Cow you're Nothing but a victim of So-called Democracy.

Later

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  

fg.

Thursday, March 15, 2001 - 06:03 pm
MAD MAC.

I am glad you are this pissed over the statues. We had few in Mogadisho and were taken care of by the ever notorious Mooryaan to sell them in the middle east countries. A job well done. You said the budha could be a prophet. He could be. However, in islam, even the a statue of prophet Mohammed peace be upon him is not acceptable and would be destroyed. There is no place for statues in islam. All these statues of jesus filled in the churches are mistakenly there as well. Earlier christians never had and respected statues. The world has changed though hasn't it. I like Taliban for showing the world what they are. A bunch of idol caring maniacs who wouldn't heed murdering and imposing genocidal sanctions on little kids, women and the old but whiners over useless statues. I can't help but feel victorious over this issue. You don't enjoy a victory like this one if you are a muslim in this hypocrite filled world not to mention the new world order who even rule islamic countries from the white house.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  

MAD MAC

Thursday, March 15, 2001 - 11:22 pm
First let me address Idea. Bombing of Sudan was the same as bombing of Libya. Maybe they were building a chemical weapons factory, maybe they weren't. Fact is, they have supported international terrorists ad nauseum. Just like the Libyans. You play with matches you're gonna get burned. They want to keep poking the US in the eye, that's up to them. But every time they do, there is going to be a response. And sometimes we're going to make a mistake and poke them when they didn't actually do anything - I think it's called guilt by association. They don't get my sympathy vote.

As for Uraq, as I have stated in other areas of this forums, I think we should:

a. End the no-fly zones.
b. Arabize the Iraqi problem.
c. Remind the world of the Carter doctrine - we will not allow oil supplies to be cut and will intervene militarily to prevent such.

I think we should move all of our bases to Bahrain (we have on there now) and UAE or Oman. they're less obvious in those areas, but geographically close enough to allow rapid intervention along the Gulf coast should that be required.

As for Israel (you didn't mention, but I know you're thinking about it) I also think we should cut all economic aid to b oth Israel and the Palestinian Authority and leave them to their fates. In fact, I would say we should encourage our Arab friends in the region to do the same. •••• 'em. They're not worth the political capital they cost - not to mention the money.

Ice Man
Interesting how you only see what you want to see. Clearly you must have forgotten the HUGE outcry during the Bosnian war. And which countries housed almost all of the Muslim refugess from that war??? Lousy Kufaar countries was it?? And which country lost hundreds of soldiers trying to do the right thing there??? Lousy kufaar countries, wasn't it? Where the •••• were all you Muslims then??? Where are you now?? Who's keeping the peace there now?? Who's spending over a billion dollars a year there now??? Sadui Arabia?? UAE??? Oman???? nooooooo, it's us motherfucker, that's who. I've spent 9 months of my life working peace keeping in Bosnia, and I didn't see you there. To top it off, which country do the Bosnian Muslims have the best international relations with and which soldiers do the Bosnian Muslims (by survey) appreciate most??? You guessed it - the biggest damn kufaar state of them all, the Great Satan himself, the US of A. Talk about hypocracy. why is it that the local Kufaar here on Islam net is the only one who ever puts his nuts on the line in these places you love to bitch about? You guys are lots of talk, but when it comes to doing something about these problems, it's all hot air!!!

Formerguest
I don't give a flying •••• about the statues. I was never in Bumiyan and it was never on the list of places I wanted to see. But what I do find annoying is your self-righteous attitude. Must be tough being one of the few saints running around in this sinner, hypocrit filled world huh??? You are just like an American liberal, it's your way or the highway. Only you and your ilk know what's right and wrong - everyone else is just a Godless heathen. Fortunately people with your mind-set never amount to anything. And neither will the Taliban - we'll kill them all long before they make any real trouble - should it come to that. As for Somalia, since you apprently don't have the cajones to go back and put your money where your mouth is, well, I guess it's fate will be left in the hands of folks like me, since that is where I am returning to most kosh.

You know, I have nothing against Islam, just like I have nothing against Christiainity, but you Muslim versions of the moral majority, Pat Reobertsons in black skin thumping a Qur'an instead of a Bible, I think you guys are the greatest Kufaars of all.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  

fg.

Thursday, March 15, 2001 - 11:39 pm
looooool MAD, You are funny now. Must have touched a raw nerve to get this re-action of yours. I was worried a little about myself burning up due to SHC(Spontaneous Human Combustion) and go to smeatherins. I will go to Mogaddisho god willing. My lovely town and my place on earth. My father and mother live there. I called them yesterday at 11:00pm east african time and Mom sounded sleepy so I let her sleep. Mad, take it easy Soldier boy, I don't like what you stand for and despise your profession but I guess I can teach you a little more manners if you are willing to listen. I am not liberal fanatic who approves of everything. Only that which is good. I have standards. Who doesn't??. Anyway, good to see you out of breath. You have a big mouth that puts you into trouble.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  

fg.

Thursday, March 15, 2001 - 11:47 pm
I guess I have to be more self-righteous to get the better of you all the time. This made my day. I can go finish some work now. Talk to you tonight when I come back inshallah for work.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  

MAD MAC

Friday, March 16, 2001 - 08:18 am
It was all of the righteous brothers that were getting on my nerves. The Harvard do-gooder (not themselves of course) types usually do it to me and now you guys are starting to have the same effect. Sorry if I sound a little hot-headed. You don't like my line of work, fine. You don't like what I stand for fine. But remember who here on the net is a doer, and remember who all of the talkers are. In June, 2004 I am heading for Somalia, to a place where numerous people want to blow my head off. How many of you guys want to come with me?? I mean I'm willing to compromise on all sorts of issues as long as we can agree that on some basics about improving local infrastructure. And everyone on here who's my biggest critic isn't willing to do anything, isn't willing to risk anything. I mean, who is Hamer wants to blow your brains out?? Are the Sa'ad waiting to drop you when you get off the plane? How about the Ayr??? So yeah, it torques me off just like it torqued me off when Clinton pulled the plug in October 93. You despise what I stand for, well I despise what you stand for too - close minded attitude who regards everyone who doesn't think like you do as someone who's opinion has no value. Just like those liberal dorks who regard everyone who doesn't agree with them as their intellectual inferiors.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  

Galool

Friday, March 16, 2001 - 10:49 am
FG

How did I miss when you managed to show your classless ignorance. Pity the Yanks who are presumably paying for your University education and saved you from the Mogadishu's mongol hordes!

Now I knew you were tunnel-vision Funda but I am truly disappointed by your total lack of class and grace. Unlike MM, I DO care about the destruction of the Budhas in Afghanistan. Afterall they have been there for almost a thousand years before YOUR faith was even invented! These structures form part of Human heritage, and therefore in small part belonged to me as much as to any Afghan. The Taliban and those who lick their filthy boots are the new mongol hordes and are harbingers of barbarity and savagery.

But as I said you need class to appreciate Art and value history. You just proved to be bereft of both. What a disappointment.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  

fisa

Friday, March 16, 2001 - 11:02 am
I am not sure here who is Somali, who Muslim etc. I found the names quite confusing and I do not have alot of time to read all your commonts. Can you guys ( those muslims edintify your names abit more clearer, |Thanks)


Faaisa

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  

Galool

Friday, March 16, 2001 - 01:46 pm
Faisa

Does it matter luv? People are just that - people, no matter their Race or faith. Look at the opinions posted here and express your own. Simple really isn't it? So long.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  

Ice-Man

Friday, March 16, 2001 - 02:35 pm
Mad cow,

You're ill-informed about Bosnia, Muslim countries don't brag about Helping Their fellow Muslims, They just do it in quite,we do get reward from Allah not International audience, unlike you people who brag about Helping one single person and broadcast on CNN all over The World to see.
Turkey, Iran,Pakistan,Jordan,Hosted Bosnian Refugees so don't say it where was The Muslim
as far as Muslim countries didn't send any Troops, sure They were ready and anxious To send 25.000 Iranian commandos were waiting The green line but USA Threaten to withdraw her Troops if Iranian got The go head from The United nation to remind you, USA uses The United Nation as a Tool To advance her foreign policy That is how They rejected Muslim countries to send their Troops, its not like we watched and let our people die,
About The "Billion" This is laughable, You know what some of your congress said Quote. "We made a profit of This war in Bosnia", They generated donor countries mainly Muslim countries To send money, Mad cow you're not Patriotic, you are not An Ambassador for Humanity as you mention you were in Bosnia for 9 months, Simply you were There for the pay-check, you are a Soldier and you go wherever They send you, So don't brag about Helping Muslims.

Later

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  

fg.

Friday, March 16, 2001 - 03:01 pm
faisa.

Sis, I am somali, Galool is somali, Mad Mac is an Irish American with lots of different blood in him(typical American). I hope that answers your question about identities.

Galool.

Pole sana Muze. I know I am classless and graceless and whatever name you can think of. The yankees don't pay my tuition. I pay for it. That is why I work the grave yard shift to pay my school fees. With the econimic down-turn, I am hoping to get laid off from the company so that I can become a fulltime student and get some free federal funds for my college education otherwise I will be stuck with work and school alternating semesters. God knows how long it will take me to finish for the degree.

As far as the Budhas are concerned, I don't envision that you will understand the issue from an islamic point of view. Yes they were there before islam, but how many Idols were there around the Arabian peninsula before Islam?. Too many of them. I would be a hypocrite if I tell you I care about the Budhas. I have no feelings albeit one of joy over the destruction of the monostrous and mountain sized idols. You are not the only one crying over them. There are some muslims doing the same. I guess they have an explanation may be for their grief over the destruction which I don't. I sympathisize with the Afghanis more and their plight. The world is looking while people are dying of hunger and adversity over there. Talk about humanity teachings in western colleges and Universities. We live in a hypocritic world simple and plain. If Taliban excersized their authority and took steps which they have a legal support from islam, I don't think anyone can have a say in that. I am glad the world was powerless to stop them. What a Joy!!. When you ostrasize someone for the simple reason that he wants a life of his own choosing and slap him on the face with all despicable and inhumane treatments, what do you expect when you want that person to listen to you?. It is all fair Galool. Let them destroy what they can and show the world they don't care either. This my view and Taliban has a different explanation so don't get mixed over the emmotions of mine with the Taliban justification.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  

Galool

Friday, March 16, 2001 - 03:43 pm
FG

There is some dark stuff oozing from your heart - stuff I never suspected will be there. Let us get some FACTS here.

The world IS helping Afghanistan. The Taliban are offered unlimited supplies of food and medicine without any preconditions, except to promise not to leave their women and little girls hungry! This is no idle insult. They have been known to divert food earmarked for starving civilians to their Militias fighting in the North of the country. They have taken to selling food-aid and buying ammunition with the proceeds. They are also fond of the Toyota pick-up trucks used by the UN and other NGOs which they confiscate almost at will. The Taliban are proven drug dealers. The country is the world's largest producer of opium (and has always been) and the Taliban have no problems with that! How Islamic.

The Sanctions imposed on them by the West does not include food and Medicine which is what you seem to believe. In fact those Afghanis who are alive today are fed and clothed with money donated by the "evil West" and by Saudi Arabia. This money is channeled through the UN and NGOs.

The destruction of Idols in Mecca and Medina was "justified" within its historical context as Muhammad was trying to avoid Idols being worshipped again by people he just managed to convert to his new faith. I suspect Muhammed also realized that these puny figures of `Uzzatt and Hubal are no artistic masterpieces and their destruction was no great loss. Just check the way he preserved the Ka'aba which was afterall a Pagan temple. He realized its intrinsic value and he kept it.

There is no threat whatsoever of the ancient Budhist figures forming a centre of attraction for Devoutly Muslim Afghanis. As I said they have been there for two thousand years and do not seem to have converted many locals to Budhism.

Surprisngly perhaps, there is a long tradition of Muslims happily accepting the building of "Idols" and temples in Islamic ruled countries. The Moguls(ironically, it was they that Islamized the Afghans)are very good example of this. Thousands of Hindu and Budhist structures were erected, sometimes funded by the Muslim-run state, during the Mogul Rule of India. We all know the results today. Arts, Architecture, Science and literature
flourished in India as never before or since in the sub-continent.

No risk of that happening in Afghanistan now is there? So how do you justify your stance FG?

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  

fg.

Friday, March 16, 2001 - 05:07 pm
Galool.

First thing first, You said: "I suspect Muhammed also realized that these puny figures of `Uzzatt and Hubal are no artistic masterpieces and their destruction was no great loss."


Galool, this is when I think you are either trying to fool us into your world of deceite or you are totally ignorant about Islam in totality. Islam doesn't care about the artistry of an Idol worshipped by people. Whether it is ugly looking or good looking it needs to come down and be removed from their place. It was part of the proccess of correcting the towhid of the people to destroy those Idols. Those Idols were set up to mislead people from the path of Allah.

"14.30 And they set up (idols) as equal to Allah, to mislead (men) from His Path".

They used to sacrifice animals for those Idols, pray to them for their needs, seek refuge and help from them. Islam came to correct all that twisted beliefs and deeds indeed.

"6.162 Say: "Truly, my prayer and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death, are (all) for Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds:"

163. No partner has He: this am I commanded, and I am the first of those who submit to His will.

164. Say: "Shall I seek for (my) Lord other than Allah, when He is the Cherisher of all things (that exist)? Every soul draws the meed of its acts on none but itself..."


The true reason of the destruction of the Idols had to do with the correction of the belief of the people and not about the ugliness or the prettiness of an Idol. Your judgement reminds me "Faqutila keyfa qaddar, thuma Qutila keyfa qaddar".

Anyway, this is what I have time for currently. I sneaked this message in when I got the chance for a few minutes. I will continue about the rest of the issues you talked about. Like the KA'BA which you lied about it too. I will bring inshallah the history of it and far it is from your sugestion that it was a pagan house.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  

fg.

Friday, March 16, 2001 - 05:28 pm
Question:

A patron at our library has asked for the architecture and history of the Great Mosque in Mecca known as Masjid Al Haram.

Answer:

Praise be to Allaah.

Al-Masjid al-Haraam (the Sacred Mosque) is situated in Makkah, a city in the Arabian Peninsula 330 meters above sea-level. The history of the mosque goes back to its founding at the time of Ibraaheem (Abraham) and his son Ismaa’eel (Ishmael), peace be upon them both. Makkah is the
place where the Prophet of Islam, Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) was born and where the Revelation began, and from which the light of Islam spread. Al-Masjid al-Haraam is located here. This is the first mosque that was built for people on earth, as Allaah says in the Qur’aan (interpretation of the meaning):

“Verily, the first House (of worship) appointed for mankind was that at Bakkah (Makkah), full of blessing, and a guidance for al-‘aalameen (mankind and jinns).” [Aal ‘Imraan 3:96].

It was reported in Saheeh Muslim that Abu Dharr said: “I asked the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) about the first mosque to be built for people on earth. He said, ‘Al-Masjid al-Haraam.’ I asked, ‘Then which?’ He said, ‘Al-Masjid al-Aqsaa [The Furthest Mosque, in Jerusalem].’ I asked, ‘How long between them?’ He said, ‘Forty years.’”

The Ka’bah – which is the direction of prayer for all Muslims throughout the world – is situated
roughly in the middle of al-Masjid al-Haraam. It is a 15-meter high stone structure more or less in
the shape of a cube. It was built by Ibraaheem (peace be upon him) on the command of Allaah.

Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And (remember) when We showed Ibraaheem the site of the (Sacred) House (the Ka’bah at Makkah) (saying): ‘Associate not anything (in worship) with Me, and sanctify My House for those who circumambulate it, and those who bow and make prostration.” [al-Hajj 22:26]

The word “bawwa’naa” [translated here as “We showed”] means “He guided him and gave him
permission to build it.” (Tafseer Ibn Katheer).

Allaah also says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And (remember) when Ibraaheem and (his son) Ismaa’eel were raising the foundations of the
House (the Ka’bah at Makkah)…” [al-Baqarah 2:127]

Wahb ibn Munbih said: “… It was built by Ibraaheem, then [rebuilt] by the Amalekites, then by Jurham, then by Qusayy ibn Kilaab. Its rebuilding by Quraysh is well known… They began to
rebuild it with the stones of the valley, which Quraysh carried on their shoulders, and they built it up, 20 cubits high… Between the rebuilding of the Ka’bah and the beginning of the Revelation there were five years, and between the rebuilding and the Hijrah there were fifteen years. ‘Abd
al-Razzaaq reported from Mu’ammar from ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Uthmaan from Abu’l-Tufayl, and from Mu’ammar from al-Zuhri: ‘They were building it and when they reached al-Rukn, Quraysh argued about which tribe should lift it up. Then they said, “Let us ask the first person who comes from this direction to judge between us.” They agreed on that, then the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) came to them, and he was a young man wearing a spotted sash. They asked him to judge between them, and he told them to place al-Rukn on a piece of cloth, then he told the chief of every tribe to hold the edge of the cloth, then he climbed up and they lifted al-Rukn up to him, and he himself (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) put it into its place.” (Taareekh Makkah by al-Azraqi, 1/161-164)

Muslim (2374) reported that ‘Aa’ishah said: “I asked the Messenger of Allaah (peace and
blessings of Allaah be upon him) about al-Jadr [the wall] and whether it was part of the House
[the Ka’bah]. He said, ‘Yes.’ I asked, ‘So why is it not incorporated into the House?’ He said,
‘Your people ran out of money.’ I asked, ‘What about the door? Why is it high up?’ He said, ‘Your people did that so they could let in whomever they wanted and keep out whomever they wanted. If it were not for the fact that your people are still new [in Islam] and too close to their Jaahiliyyah, and I am afraid that they would resent it, I would think of incorporating al-Jadr into the House and bringing the door down to ground level.’”

Before Islam (in the year in which the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) was born), the Ka’bah was subjected to an attack by the Ethiopian Abrahah, who had built al-Qulays, a church to which he wanted the Arabs to make their pilgrimage. He set out with his army, with whom was the elephant, and when they reached Makkah, Allaah sent flocks of birds against them; each bird was carrying three stones like chickpeas or lentils, one in its beak and two in its claws. Every man who was struck by a stone was killed, so the army was destroyed, by the command of Allaah.

Allaah has mentioned this incident in His Book, where He says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Have you not seen how your Lord dealt with the Owners of the Elephant? Did He not make their plot go astray? And sent against them birds, in flocks,
Striking them with stones of Sijjeel, And made them like an empty field of slaks (in which the corn has been eaten up by cattle).” [al-Feel 105:1-5]

(See al-Seerah al-Nabawiyyah by Ibn Hishaam, 1/44-58).

There was no fence or wall around the Ka’bah until it became necessary. Yaaqoot al-Hamawi said in Mu’jam al-Buldaan (5/146): “The first one to build a wall around the Ka’bah was ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab (may Allaah be pleased with him); there was no wall around it during the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) or Abu Bakr. [The wall was built] because people were building their houses too close to the Ka’bah and making the space around it too small for people. ‘Umar said: ‘The Ka’bah is the House of Allaah, and a house needs a courtyard. You have encroached on its space, it has not encroached on yours.’ So he bought those houses, demolished them and added that space to the space around the Ka’bah. He also
destroyed the houses of people in the vicinity of the Ka’bah who had refused to sell, and kept the
money aside for them until they came and took it later on. He built a wall around the mosque, lower than the height of a man, and lamps were placed on it. When ‘Uthmaan was khaleefah, he bought more houses that were more expensive… It was said that ‘Uthmaan was the first one to build porticos around it … When Ibn al-Zubayr was in power, he improved its appearance, although he did not increase its size, by adding marble pillars, extra doors and other improvements. When ‘Abd al-Malik ibn Marwaan was khaleefah, he added to the wall of the mosque, and brought columns from Egypt by sea to Jeddah, which were carried from Jeddah to Makkah on wheels. Al-Hajjaaj ibn Yoosuf commanded that the Ka’bah should be covered in drapes (al-kiswah) and when al-Waleed ibn ‘Abd al-Malik was khaleefah, he added to the adornment of the kiswah and spent money on improvements to the drainage spout and roof… When al-Mansoor and his son al-Mahdi were khaleefahs, they added more adornments to the mosque and improved its appearance.”

There are also other religious monuments in the Mosque, such as Maqaam Ibraaheem (the Station of Ibraaheem), which is the rock on which Ibraaheem (peace be upon him) stood whilst he was building the Ka’bah. There is also the Well of Zamzam, which is a spring of water brought forth by Allaah for Haajar and her child Ismaa’eel (peace be upon him) when he got thirsty. We should not forget either the Black Stone and al-Rukn al-Yamaani, which are two of the precious stones of Paradise. Al-Tirmidhi and Ahmad reported that ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Amr said: “I heard the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) saying that the Rukn and the Maqaam are two of the precious stones of Paradise, whose light has been extinguished by Allaah. If He had not extinguished their light, it would illuminate everything between the East and the West.” (Sunan al-Tirmidhi, 804).

Near the Mosque are the two hills of al-Safa and al-Marwah. One of the unique features of the Mosque is that it is the only mosque in the world to which people come on pilgrimage (Hajj). Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Verily! Al-Safa and al-Marwah are of the Symbols of Allaah. So it is not a sin on him who performs Hajj or ‘Umrah (pilgrimage) of the House to perform the going (tawaaf) between them. And whoever does good voluntarily, then verily, Allaah is All-Recognizer, All-Knower.” [al-Baqarah 2:158]

Another of its unique features is that Allaah has made it safe, and one prayer in it is equal to a
hundred thousand prayers elsewhere. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And (remember) when We made the House a place of resort for mankind and a place of safety. And take you (people) the Maqaam (place) of Ibraaheem as a place of prayer, and We commanded Ibraaheem and Ismaa’eel that they should purify My House for those who are circumabulating it, or staying (I’tikaaf), or bowing or prostrating themselves.” [al-Baqarah 2:125]

“In it are manifest signs (for example); the maqaam (place) of Ibraaheem; whoever enters it, he
attains security. And Hajj to the House is a duty that mankind owes to Allaah, those who can afford the expenses (for one’s conveyance, provision and residence); and whoever disbelieves [i.e., denies Hajj, then he is a disbeliever of Allaah], then Allaah stands not in need of any of the ‘aalameen (mankind and jinns).” [Aal ‘Imraan 3:97]

(See Akhbaar Makkah by al-Azraqi and Akhbaar Makkah by al-Faakihi).

And Allaah is the Source of Strength and the Guide to the Straight Path.


Islam Q&A (www.islam-qa.com)

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  

Galool

Saturday, March 17, 2001 - 12:51 am
FG

You may not care about the beauty of objects, but the prophet clearly did. All this drolsch about the Ka'aba being built by Ebrahim on "Allah's orders" is a load of you know what. The Ka'aba served as the focal point for Arab Pagan worship and housed most of their Gods(Idols) They came there to do sacrifices, seek blessings from their Wadaadas(Kahana). If Muhammed did not value what is precious he would have surely destroyed the place with its contents but he didn't. We can also speculate on his reasons, and no amount of Hadiths etc will change the facts.

I was amazed by how you missed the similarity btw what you guys do now and the practices of those whose faiths you despise. The Prayed to their Gods, did animal sacrifices and asked for their help" Ring any bells FG? Talk to you later.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  

A-Haki

Saturday, March 17, 2001 - 07:19 am
This is strange. An atheist is telling the Muslims that the Prophet(saw) of Islam valued the obscene idols and idol worship, while it is known that the Prophet(saw) hated the idols even in his youth and before he was a Prophet(saw). ALLAH(swt) forbid the Prophet(saw) to worship the idols the Pagans used to worship and ALLAH(swt) taught the Prophet(saw) how to establsih the salat. Idol worship is both indecency and dishoour(29:45) and idols neither hurt nor profit anybody. The harm of idol-worship is sure and patent. It has no advantage but only imaginary(22:12)

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  

Anonymous

Saturday, March 17, 2001 - 07:40 am
The life of the Prophet(saw)

As a boy, Mahammad (pbuh), disliked the prevailing custom of idol worship practiced by his people. While tending to his uncle's flocks, how many a night must he have paused to watch the stars and the endless plains and wondered about the real Creator of them all. He shunned the mischief of his fellow youth and soon developed a reputation for honesty, generosity and compassion.

.......This was the voice of Muhammad.........

The following pure words were imprinted on the minds of those who were endeavouring in the path of God for a better life, and were ready to support him (Muhammad) in his campaign against idol-worship and evil-doing, and were afraid lest their rights and good conduct might be wasted in the battle-field.

"Remember ! Don't be treacherous. Don't commit breach of trust. Don't kill either a child or a woman or an old man or a monk in a monastery. Don't burn a date-palm tree and don't cut any tree nor pull down a building".

The Coming Of The Most Noble Messenger

With eyes as bright as the shining sun, a reality on the lips more brilliant than the light of the sun, a heart more fresh than the flowers of the gardens of Yathrib and Taif, habits and morals more decent than the moon- lit nights of the Hijaz, a mind more brisk than the strong winds, a bewitching tongue, a heart with heavenly light, firm determination like a trenchant sword and heavenly words on the tongue - such was Muhammad son of Abdullah, the prophet of Arabia, the prophet who destroyed the idols which had separated brothers from brothers. He did not break only the idols of wood and stone but also broke the idols of wealth, indecent habits and party-spirit.

The only thing which the cowardly Quraysh desired was money should be transferred from the hands of the nomadic Arabs to their own pockets. The only value which they attached to life was that in order to earn profit they should travel through the desert on the back of the camels undergoing extreme hardships and then return to their hometown Mecca-the same Mecca which was the city of idol-worship, and where money was the only thing which counted.

Suddenly they heard a voice which shook their nerves. Their hopes were shattered. The world turned away its face from them saying "The value of man is not the same which you have assessed and the object of the creation of the nomadic Arabs is not the same which you think it to be".

........This was the voice of Muhammad.........

Banu Asad-and Banu Tamim were so foolish and ignorant that they buried their daughters alive without any cause. There was no justification for their doing so except that it was a custom which had survived amongst them. They were opposed to the divine will. They hated the beauty of nature. And then they heard a voice, which was expressive of deep love and sympathy for the people saying: "Don't bury your daughters alive. Daughters are as good a creation of God as the sons. No human being has a right to deprive others of life. It is only God who creates the people and makes them die".

.......This was the voice of Muhammad.........

The Arabs were always fighting. They fought and shed blood for years on account of very trivial things. They killed their own brothers and then rejoiced and glorified themselves on it. To sacrifice their lives for the sake of their own ignorance was something very ordinary for them. The children cried and screamed and grew up in conditions which were not conducive to the creation of love or sympathy for anyone in their minds.

In these circumstances they heard another voice which said "What are you doing ? You kill one another although you are all brothers because all of you have been created by God. Strife is something satanic. Peace and friendship are more beneficial for you. The blessing for which you fight can't be achieved except through peace".

......This, too, was the voice of Muhammad.........

The Arabs were the most proud and egoistic people. They considered the non-Arabs inferior to themselves. Not only this but they did not consider the non-Arabs even human beings. Muhammad disliked this attitude of the Arabs very much. Addressing these proud people he said: "No Arab is superior to a non-Arab unless he is more pious. Whether you like it or not all human beings are brothers of one another".

There were oppressed, homeless and helpless persons whose faces had been scorched by the hot winds. The society had discarded them and made their lives miserable. They were more humble in the eyes of the people than the particles of sand and their life had become extremely unenviable. And these were the true friends of the prophet of Islam, just as the indigent and outcasts of the society were the friends of Jesus Christ and other great men of the world. It was these very people for whose benefit the prophet of Islam endeavoured to prevent the establishment of dictatorship, disallowed slavery, freed man from the bondage of his fellow-men, and established the public treasury so that all might benefit from it without any discrimination. He directed the efforts of the people towards public welfare. He insisted on Quraysh, who were his kinsmen, at every step that they should improve their conduct, do good deeds, and keep their attention directed wholeheartedly to God, who has united the scattered creation into a single whole.

However, Quraysh instigated the ignorant persons as well as their own children to stone and ridicule him.

The helpless, oppressed and homeless slaves among whom one was Bilal, the Mu'azzin of the prophet, were overjoyed when they heard this: "All human beings are fed by God. He likes him most who is more helpful to his creatures".

.......This was the voice of Muhammad.........

Those who were his enemies and stoned and ridiculed him heard this animating voice: "If you (Muhammad) had been stern and hard-hearted they would all have deserted you a long time ago. Forgive them and ask God to forgive (their sins) and consult with them in certain matter. But when you reach a decision trust God. God loves tbose who trust aim ".

.......This was the voice of Muhammad.........

The following pure words were imprinted on the minds of those who were endeavouring in the path of God for a better life, and were ready to support him (Muhammad) in his campaign against idol-worship and evil-doing, and were afraid lest their rights and good conduct might be wasted in the battle-field.

"Remember ! Don't be treacherous. Don't commit breach of trust. Don't kill either a child or a woman or an old man or a monk in a monastery. Don't burn a date-palm tree and don't cut any tree nor pull down a building".

.......This voice was the voice of Muhammad........

The Arabs heard this heavenly voice from Muhammad and spread it in all the four corners of the world. They covered powerful rulers and kings with this voice, estab- lished brotherhood amongst human beings and strung them in one faith, and created relationship between man and God.

The shade of Muhammad spread so much that the entire Old World came under it and the land from the east upto the west began producing the fruits of goodness, knowledge, peace and friendship. The prophet of Islam stretched his hand and sowed the seeds of friendship and brotherhood throughout the world. That hand is still stretched and is busy sowing the seeds. Hence, there is no part of the world wherein the followers of Muhammad are not found. One of them may be in Pakistan and the other may be in Spain, but in spite of this both of them are treated to be under one and the same standard. The prophet provided honour and respect to the Orientals which is even now a shining crown on their heads.

This voice of the prophet, was a call for human brotherhood. It stopped the hands of the rulers from reaching the property of the subjects and gave equal rights to all human beings. In his religion there is no discrimina- tion between a common man, a ruler and a subject and an Arab and a non-Arab, because all human beings are the slaves of God and it is He who provides sustenance to all of them.

This voice emancipated women from the oppression of men, freed the labourers from the injustice of the capitalists and delivered the servants from the degradation of submission to their masters. As opposed to Plato and other philosophers, who deprive the workers of their social rights on account of their mean occupation and have divided the society into many grades, the prophet of Islam made all human beings participate in the affairs of govern- ment. He also disallowed usury and exploitation of one man by another.


When he was a young man he took employment in the merchant trade and soon distinguished himself for his excellent managerial skills, which resulted in an offer of marriage from his wealthy, widowed employer, the noble lady Khadija. He was 25 and she was 40 when they got married. Their marriage was based upon love friendship and trust

Though time and circumstances had changed as he grew older and wiser, Muhammad (pbuh) still remained restless for the truth and he began to retreat to the solitude which could only be found outside the city of Mecca. He often went to a mountain where he would sometimes spend days thinking and contemplating about God, reality and the Divine way of life. Then on one glorious day, the Almighty revealed words of inspiration to him through His angel, Gabriel. "Read!" the angel commanded him, "Read in the name of your Lord who created man from a clinging embryo..." This was Muhammad (pbuh), for all his truthfulness, patience, piety and spirit, commissioned as the last and final Prophet of God to humanity. Though many trials, tests and triumphs lay ahead of him, he always called people to the service of the One God, to shun myths and idols and to do unto others only what is good and right. He always lived a frugal life, and even after all of Arabia was liberated from the darkness of ignorance, he, as the ruler, still slept on a reed mat and mended his own clothes.

He taught a new standard to people and brought civilization to an area of the world where it had long ago passed by. His lips moved with the Revelation of God and his life put its precepts into practice. Though persecuted by the idol worshipers for thirteen years in Mecca and followed faithfully by the believing citizens of Medina for ten thereafter, he remained unto his death a devoted father, husband, leader and Prophet. He was given the title of "Mercy to the worlds" by God Himself in the Quran and anyone who has studied the details and adventures of his life must necessarily declare the same. This man Muhammad (pbuh) is truly the hero of his age as well as an inspiration to ours.

Before entering into Makkah, Muhammad (pbuh) did his utmost to ensure the safety of everyone in Makkah save those who explicitly refused it. Muhammad addressed the Muslims before they rode into Makkah saying: "He who enters into Abu-Sufyan's home shall be given sanctuary. And he who closes his door shall be given sanctuary. And he who enters the holy masjid shall be given sanctuary" Muhammad then severely cautioned all Muslims against raising their weapons against anyone who did not attack them first. He also severely cautioned them against taking their money, property, or homes, and to not lay their hands upon the citizens.

It is recorded that Muhammad (pbuh) entered Makkah on the Friday the 20th of Ramadan (ninth lunar month) in the eighth year after the emigration. Muhammad (pbuh) directed Al-Abbas to sit Abu-Sufyan somewhere in the city where he shall see the passing of the Muslim army. As the tribes of the Muslims would pass by holding their flags, Abu-Sufyan would ask Al-Abbas "Who is this group?," and Al-Abbas would tell him, until finally Muhammad (pbuh) passed by in the "green" brigade clad in their chain-mail coats and their armor, extending as far as the eye could see. Abu-Sufyan exclaimed "My Lord! who are these?" Al-Abbas replied: "This is the messenger of Allah with the Muhajereen and the Ansar." Abu-Sufyan said: "No force shall ever resist such as these! By Allah O Abbas, the dominion of your nephew (Muhammad) has become immense indeed on this day!" Al-Abbas replied: "It is the prophethood" Abu-Sufyan replied: "How admirable it is!"

As the Muslims entered into Makkah victorious, Muhammad bowed his head down low in humility to God who had bestowed upon him this bloodless triumph. So low did he lower his head in humility and submission that his beard nearly touched his camel's back. As he was in this state he recited the chapter of Al-Fath(48): "Verily, We have given you [O Muhammad] a manifest victory, that Allah may forgive you your sins of the past and the future, complete his favor upon you, and guide you on the straight path....." up to the end of the chapter.

As Muhammad and his army strode through the heart of Makkah, the capital of Arabia and its political and spiritual center, he did so in all peace, humbleness, and justice. A man spoke to him on the that day, trembling with fear. As he did so, Muhammad (pbuh) consoled him saying:"Calm yourself, for I am not a king. I am but the son of a woman from Quraish who eats 'jerked' meat."

As Saad ibn Obadah (one of the leaders of the Ansar) passed by Abu-Sufyan, he called unto him saying: "Today is the day of the great poems (immortalizing this day). Today that which is unlawful is made lawful. Today Allah has dishonored Quraish." When Muhammad (pbuh) passed by Abu-Sufyan he complained to him of what Saad had said to him. Muhammad disliked what he heard and responded: "Rather, today is the day of mercy. Today Allah shall honor Quraish, and shall honor the Kaaba!" Muhammad (pbuh) then commanded that the banner be taken from Saad and given to his son Kais.

Some small scuffles ensued as a few men from Quraish attempted to attack some of the Muslims and put up a token resistance, however, they were quickly quelled. It is recorded that only twelve people were injured in the opening of Makkah.

Muhammad (pbuh) entered into the holy masjid and circled around the Kaaba with his bow in hand. As he did so, he would poke the 360 idols which had been placed around it with his bow and recite: "And say: Truth has come and has crushed falsehood. Verily, falsehood [by its nature] was destined to perish." The noble Qur'an, Al-Israa(17):81

Muhammad (pbuh) then commanded that all idols and statues be removed from the Kaaba and destroyed.

Muhammad (pbuh) then stood in the door of the Kaaba. The people had collected below him and had filled the masjid, row upon row, waiting for him to issue his decree regarding their fate. Finally he spoke and said:

"There is no deity worthy of worship but Allah, no partners has He. He has fulfilled His promise, given victory to his servant, and defeated the confederates by His own Self. [I declare that] every glory, money, or blood has been placed under these, my two feet, except for the "sidanah" (custodianship of the Kaaba), and "siqaya" (watering of the pilgrims) … O people of Quraish, I relieve you of the false pride of the age of ignorance, and its pride in its ancestry. Mankind is from Adam, and Adam was from dust."

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  

Galool

Saturday, March 17, 2001 - 08:40 am
Xeroxman

Didn't read a word of what you said. I see your name and my spirits sink!

Al-haki

Why do Islamists give themeselves Arabic-sounding names and wear Arab garb? Why Al-haki when you are probably called Ulusow or Qowdan or something really Somali like that? Just a question Yaa abul-Haki binu-uttaibah ibn abi al hadaf al-`amberi! Do you think Allah prefers such a name to Dhicisow culusow boodda-cadde koboxoor?

Why do you think the prophet decided NOT to destroy the Ka'aba when it clearly was the holiest site of Pagan worship in the country at the time? And please don't say Allah told him not to, because He didn't!

FG

How fair of Allah to make praying near the Ka'aba as valuable as that! What about those Muslims who live in Indonesia and Senegal who can't reach the place except once in a life time perhaps? I mean this is a clear discrimination benefitting the locals isn't it? Never mind. The Ahlul-Fiil business must be one of the earliest and certainly most bizzare aerial bombardment of all time! I wonder what material were the peaks of these hellish birds' made of? Also why did Allah choose such a complicated battle-plan when he could've simply snuffed the life out of the Ethiopians? What are they teaching you at this Uni FG? Does it involve any rational thinking at all?

What is ironic about all of this is that the Ethiopians actually wanted to do EXACTLY what Prophet Muhammed did forty years later; ie to destroy pagan idols and convert the locals to Christianity. They never reached anywhere near Mecca, as their mainly Elephant-borne forces were hampered by desert sandstorms and then fell to the ravages of small-pox epidemic. Their provisions ran out and the Elephants died. The Pagan Arabs who knew of the Ethiopian Army's intentions celebrated and thought of this as a sure sign that THEIR gods were indeed all-powerful.

Muhammed's later hostility to the Ethiopian attack smacks of pure nationalism, since Allah would've surely preferred the Christian Ethiopians to succeed in their quest? whaddya think FG?

Are you saying that Allah actually chose Pagans over Christians who set-out to do `God's work'?

More than that he actually sent some Sci-fi creatures with Platinum Peaks in order to stop believers from destroying pagan idols and Icons?

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  

Al-haki

Saturday, March 17, 2001 - 11:44 am
Galool,

Again, it is strange that an atheist is telling the Muslims that the Prophet(saw) didn't destroy the idols in Kaba!

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  

MAD MAC

Saturday, March 17, 2001 - 01:17 pm
Ice-Man
So how much money did you personally contribute to Bosnians?? How much came out of your pocket? How many months did you spend working there to keep the peace??? Did the time you spent in Bosnia cost you a relationship with a woman??? Where did the most Bosnian Muslim refugees go??? Germany you idiot!!!! Why do you think so many Bosniacs speak German. They pick it up in Iran??? I guess my Bosniac friends in Sarajevo must have been lying to me when they told me that most Bosniacs thought America was Bosnias best ally. And I guess Slatko Lagumdjia was also blowing smoke when he told me that the Bosnians valued their American and European alliaces as critical to their future economic and social growth. When did you become a fucking expert on Bosnia.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  

Ice-Man

Saturday, March 17, 2001 - 04:32 pm
Mad Cow,

Your Questions don't deserve an answer, its pure nonsense.

Later

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  

fg.

Saturday, March 17, 2001 - 06:44 pm
Galool.

I can sense always a short lived jubilation in your writings when you think you have a point against Allah. You never learn though that at the end of the day, you are the looser.

"How fair of Allah to make praying near the Ka'aba as valuable as that! "

Of course how fair. Let me ask you this Old crank, If you have no one who can dispute with you over a property of yours, can you do with it with whatever you want and choose any location from that property for any reason you wish?. Walillaahil mathalul aclaa. See, Galool, you are always blinded when you write something. It is funny how in your unreasonable world, you think you have a point as well and pat yourself on the shoulder like you scored big time. It is the common flu you guys atheists and Agnostics suffer from.

"The Ahlul-Fiil business must be one of the earliest and certainly most bizzare aerial bombardment of all time!"

One of the convincing examples of What Allah can do on his own choosing to whomever he wills.


" Also why did Allah choose such a complicated battle-plan when he could've simply snuffed the life out of the Ethiopians? What are they teaching you at this Uni FG?"


First, Allah is unquestionable for what he does, He does the Questioning since the world belongs to him including your poor soul. Make sure it doesn't leave your body at the time of death.

"021.023 He cannot be questioned concerning what He does and they shall be questioned."

Second, The method Allah used to punish those who wanted to destroy his house was purely Allah's choosing Almighty. He destoryed others using many other methods when they didn't want to live up to their promises. What is the difference here about the method?. Or does it matter:

"54.51 And certainly We have already destroyed the likes of you, but is there anyone who will mind?


The lessons in it for me and for those who believe in Allah Almighty is obvious. That is why you are worried and angry with yourself isn't it Galool?. You are not sure you are right in your beliefs and circle around islam which you admire sometimes. Can't do without it can you?.


"The Pagan Arabs who knew of the Ethiopian Army's intentions celebrated and thought of this as a sure sign that THEIR gods were indeed all-powerful. "


Galool, I appreaciate the new brand of your story. Gotta appreciate the diversity rings a bell here. Thanks but no thanks, because I know from the authentic islamic history that the leader of the ethiopian army talked to the leader of the arabs in the city before he started his final phase of the campaing. Guess what he was told "THE KA'BA HAS GOD" simple and plain. The ARABS couldn't defend the Ka'ba BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT A MATCH FOR THE ETHIOPIAN ARMY so they let the LORD of the HOUSE who ordered it's foundation be built defend it from those who wanted to destroy it.


"Are you saying that Allah actually chose Pagans over Christians who set-out to do `God's work'"

The Arabs were Pagans right. But the christians who were believers were messing with the wrong house thinking it BELONGED to the ARABS and they found out the price for their ill faited plan. See, you can't teach me islamic history. Oh well, there is whitegirl and MAD to FOOL.

Guess I have to get back to work. Talk to you later.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  

MAD MAC

Sunday, March 18, 2001 - 06:48 am
Idea
Pound for pound dude!!! I lay out the facts, you lay out the BS. Obviously youhaven't spent a day in Bosnia. You haven't done any work in Bosnia. Youhaven't contributed any money to Bosnians. You haven't talked with any local Bosnian politicians. When you start learning the facts of what went down there, why and how, you can start talking smack. But right now it's obvious you don't know squat about Bosnia!!!!

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  

Idea

Sunday, March 18, 2001 - 07:54 am
waryaa Mad u need glasses. I am not Ice-man.
the user of the nick Idea is a female. While i believe ice-man is a guy! This is the second time you are doing this! You better watch your language when you talk to me or else

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  

MAD MAC

Sunday, March 18, 2001 - 11:37 am
Sorry
Ice Man, Idea, I keep getting them mixed up. I'll make a concerted effort to avoid repetition in the future Abai. Fadlan

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  

Idea

Sunday, March 18, 2001 - 10:29 pm
Ice-man,

good job brother. I can see that you are giving him nightmares.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  

MAD MAC

Sunday, March 18, 2001 - 10:54 pm
Idea
Now I'm not sorry. You got to be kidding. The only thing that's giving me nightmares is knowing that there are morons out there who believe his "facts." Jesus Christ, what was it Hitler said "keep telling a big enough lie over and over and people will believe it." Look, I've worked the Bosnian problem up close and personnel. This is what I do for a living. The Islamic States haven't done •••• to help Bosnia. Before you dumbasses start popping off about something you know nothing about why don't you go there and check it out - don't take my word for it. I've been there, I lived there, I worked the problem every day I was there. There is no way you're going to convince me I don't have my facts straight. Not on this one baby. You want to argue about the Taliban fine, I ain't never been to Afghanistan. But don't start telling me what I know and don't know about Bosnia, I know the facts.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  

Anonymous

Monday, March 19, 2001 - 11:00 am
MUHAMMAD, No. 1 from the 100, a Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History, by Michael H. Hart


My choice of Muhammad to lead the list of the world's most influential persons may surprise some readers and may be questioned by others, but he was the only man in history who was supremely successful on both the religious and secular levels. Of humble origins, Muhammad founded and promulgated one of the world's great religions, and became an immensely effective political leader.

Today, thirteen centuries after his death, his influence is still powerful and pervasive. The majority of the persons in this book had the advantage of being born and raised in centers of civilization, highly cultured or politically pivotal nations. Muhammad, however, was born in the year 570, in the city of Mecca, in southern Arabia, at that time a backward area of the world, far from the centers of trade, art, and learning. Orphaned at age six, he was reared in modest surroundings. Islamic tradition tells us that he was illiterate. His economic position improved when, at age twenty-five, he married a wealthy widow. Nevertheless, as he approached forty, there was little outward indication that he was a remarkable person. Most Arabs at that time were pagans, who believed in many gods. There were, however, in Mecca, a small number of Jews and Christians; it was from them no doubt that Muhammad first learned of a single, omnipotent God who ruled the entire universe.

When he was forty years old, Muhammad became convinced that this one true God (Allah) was speaking to him, and had chosen him to spread the true faith. For three years, Muhammad preached only to close friends and associates. Then, about 613, he began preaching in public. As he slowly gained converts, the Meccan authorities came to consider him a dangerous nuisance. In 622, fearing for his safety, Muhammad fled to Medina (a city some 200 miles north of Mecca), where he had been offered a position of considerable political power. This flight, called the Hegira, was the turning point of the Prophet's life. In Mecca, he had had few followers. In Medina, he had many more, and he soon acquired an influence that made him a virtual dictator.

During the next few years, while Muhammad s following grew rapidly, a series of battles were fought between Medina and Mecca. This was ended in 630 with Muhammad's triumphant return to Mecca as conqueror. The remaining two and one-half years of his life witnessed the rapid conversion of the Arab tribes to the new religion. When Muhammad died, in 632, he was the effective ruler of all of southern Arabia. The Bedouin tribesmen of Arabia had a reputation as fierce warriors. But their number was small; and plagued by disunity and internecine warfare, they had been no match for the larger armies of the kingdoms in the settled agricultural areas to the north. However, unified by Muhammad for the first time in history, and inspired by their fervent belief in the one true God, these small Arab armies now embarked upon one of the most astonishing series of conquests in human history. To the northeast of Arabia lay the large Neo-Persian Empire of the Sassanids; to the northwest lay the Byzantine, or Eastern Roman Empire, centered in Constantinople. Numerically, the Arabs were no match for their opponents.

On the field of battle, though, the inspired Arabs rapidly conquered all of Mesopotamia, Syria, and Palestine. By 642, Egypt had been wrested from the Byzantine Empire, while the Persian armies had been crushed at the key battles of Qadisiya in 637, and Nehavend in 642. But even these enormous conquests-which were made under the leadership of Muhammad's close friends and immediate successors, Abu Bakr and 'Umar ibn al-Khattab -did not mark the end of the Arab advance. By 711, the Arab armies had swept completely across North Africa to the Atlantic Ocean. There they turned north and, crossing the Strait of Gibraltar, overwhelmed the Visigothic kingdom in Spain. For a while, it must have seemed that the Moslems would overwhelm all of Christian Europe. However, in 732, at the famous Battle of Tours, a Moslem army, which had advanced into the center of France, was at last defeated by the Franks. Nevertheless, in a scant century of fighting, these Bedouin tribesmen, inspired by the word of the Prophet, had carved out an empire stretching from the borders of India to the Atlantic Ocean-the largest empire that the world had yet seen. And everywhere that the armies conquered, large-scale conversion to the new faith eventually followed.

Now, not all of these conquests proved permanent. The Persians, though they have remained faithful to the religion of the Prophet, have since regained their independence from the Arabs. And in Spain, more than seven centuries of warfare 5 finally resulted in the Christians reconquering the entire peninsula. However, Mesopotamia and Egypt, the two cradles of ancient civilization, have remained Arab, as has the entire coast of North Africa. The new religion, of course, continued to spread, in the intervening centuries, far beyond the borders of the original Moslem conquests. Currently it has tens of millions of adherents in Africa and Central Asia and even more in Pakistan and northern India, and in Indonesia. In Indonesia, the new faith has been a unifying factor. In the Indian subcontinent, however, the conflict between Moslems and Hindus is still a major obstacle to unity. How, then, is one to assess the overall impact of Muhammad on human history? Like all religions, Islam exerts an enormous influence upon the lives of its followers. It is for this reason that the founders of the world's great religions all figure prominently in this book .

Since there are roughly twice as many Christians as Moslems in the world, it may initially seem strange that Muhammad has been ranked higher than Jesus. There are two principal reasons for that decision. First, Muhammad played a far more important role in the development of Islam than Jesus did in the development of Christianity. Although Jesus was responsible for the main ethical and moral precepts of Christianity (insofar as these differed from Judaism), St. Paul was the main developer of Christian theology, its principal proselytizer, and the author of a large portion of the New Testament. Muhammad, however, was responsible for both the theology of Islam and its main ethical and moral principles. In addition, he played the key role in proselytizing the new faith, and in establishing the religious practices of Islam. Moreover, he is the author of the Moslem holy scriptures, the Koran, a collection of certain of Muhammad's insights that he believed had been directly revealed to him by Allah. Most of these utterances were copied more or less faithfully during Muhammad's lifetime and were collected together in authoritative form not long after his death. The Koran therefore, closely represents Muhammad's ideas and teachings and to a considerable extent his exact words. No such detailed compilation of the teachings of Christ has survived. Since the Koran is at least as important to Moslems as the Bible is to Christians, the influence of Muhammad through the medium of the Koran has been enormous It is probable that the relative influence of Muhammad on Islam has been larger than the combined influence of Jesus Christ and St. Paul on Christianity. On the purely religious level, then, it seems likely that Muhammad has been as influential in human history as Jesus. Furthermore, Muhammad (unlike Jesus) was a secular as well as a religious leader. In fact, as the driving force behind the Arab conquests, he may well rank as the most influential political leader of all time.

Of many important historical events, one might say that they were inevitable and would have occurred even without the particular political leader who guided them. For example, the South American colonies would probably have won their independence from Spain even if Simon Bolivar had never lived. But this cannot be said of the Arab conquests. Nothing similar had occurred before Muhammad, and there is no reason to believe that the conquests would have been achieved without him. The only comparable conquests in human history are those of the Mongols in the thirteenth century, which were primarily due to the influence of Genghis Khan. These conquests, however, though more extensive than those of the Arabs, did not prove permanent, and today the only areas occupied by the Mongols are those that they held prior to the time of Genghis Khan. It is far different with the conquests of the Arabs. From Iraq to Morocco, there extends a whole chain of Arab nations united not merely by their faith in Islam, but also by their Arabic language, history, and culture.

The centrality of the Koran in the Moslem religion and the fact that it is written in Arabic have probably prevented the Arab language from breaking up into mutually unintelligible dialects, which might otherwise have occurred in the intervening thirteen centuries. Differences and divisions between these Arab states exist, of course, and they are considerable, but the partial disunity should not blind us to the important elements of unity that have continued to exist. For instance, neither Iran nor Indonesia, both oil-producing states and both Islamic in religion, joined in the oil embargo of the winter of 1973-74. It is no coincidence that all of the Arab states, and only the Arab states, participated in the embargo. We see, then, that the Arab conquests of the seventh century have continued to play an important role in human history, down to the present day. It is this unparalleled combination of secular and religious influence which I feel entitles Muhammad to be considered the most influential single figure in human history.


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

Though I don't agree with how Mr.Hart has misinterpreted Islam and Islam's beginings by saying that Islam is all Muhammed(pbuh)'s idea and much more wrong things he stated about Islam that is wrong; I however agree with his reasons for choosing Muhammed(pbuh) in terms of him being a good leader with vast influence after his death.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  

Ice-Man

Tuesday, March 20, 2001 - 02:18 pm
Idea,
walaal Thanks For your kind words. :)

Mad cow,
You lack such a basic understanding of politics, it's amazing That you claim To be Guru of Bosnia and The meantime don't know anything about it.Since The Serbian inherited The Former Yugoslav Air force virtually the entirety of The arms of its army,Bosnian had relatively few arms and Thus were practically defenseless against Serb attacks. consequently, by supporting The arms embargo during Bosnian conflict, The USA made it difficult for The Bosnian To defend Themselves and contributed To The genocide of The Bosnians,

Most American and soldier like you"Mad Cow" have no knowledge of this, but many people in The Muslim countries are acutely aware That the USA played an active role in preventing The Bosnians from attaining The arms That would have allowed Them to defend Themselves against Their slaughter and rape at The hands of The Serbian Gangs,
I am sure you are very aware what happened in Zepa and Srebrenica The so-called "safe haven" since you're bragging you were in Bosnia, That massacre(8 to 10 Thousand men and boys) was carried out after The commander Of The UN in Bosnia refused to carry out UN mandate to defend the "safe haven" and handed it over To Serbian army well-known Criminal General.Ratko Mladij and rutless gang called Arkan,

Mad cow, safe your boastful statement, you are obviously responsible disarming Those men in Zepa and Srebrenica and you couldn't protected Them from being killed,

by the way who cares if you are not sorry Mad cow, Tell That your patsy, you know who he/she is LOL The one who gives you Always a moral support with your nonsense here all the Time.

Later

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  

MAD MAC

Tuesday, March 20, 2001 - 10:01 pm
Ice Man
I can't believe you don't know more about the situation than this. What a dip-••••.

The US DID NOT support the arms embargo. It tolerated it. We argued many times with our Europeans allies that the embargo against the Bosniacs should be lifted for the very reasons you stated. However, the Europeans were the ones with troops getting killed on the ground there, so ultimately they got the deciding vote. All that having been said, the Bosniacs did slowly arm themselves, and by 1995, due to their advantange in numbers, the alliance with the Croats, and their critical advantage in interior lines of communication the Bosniacs went on a major offensive capturing a significant amount of territory from the Serbs. Without a doubt the Serbs inherited most of the arms from the VJ that was in Bosnia. And without a doubt they committed most (not all) of the excesses during the war. But let's keep this in context shall we.

Now, let's talk about the massacre at Srebrenica. Have you been there? I have. I wasn't very welcome either, we're not real popular there. The Dutch Commander (I worked with his XO in Bosnia) did not have a mandate to use force to "defend" the safe havens. You see the US was stupid and foolishly believed that the Dutch presence would thwart the Serb attack - a sort of moral shield. In fact, the heaviest weapon system the Dutch possessed was 50 calibre machine guns mounted on lightly armored APCs. They had one battalion of troops there (about 500 men). When the Serbs attacked they overan one of the Dutch outposts and captured about 30 men. When the Dutch commander threatened airstrikes Gen Ratko Mladic (remember him) threatened to kill the captured soldiers. Even with the air strikes, the Dutch could not have held out. They were simply not equipped for a serious fight.

Now, that leadss us to why the Serbs attacked Srebrenica. There was a Muslim leader there (I have unfortunately forgotten his name but can dig it up if you want) who was leading raiding parties out of the safe area into the Serb rear area. You know raping and murdering civilians; the usual kind of stuff that goes on in Bosnia. Well, the Serbs didn't like it so they decided that Srebrenica and it's men folkd had to go. FYI the actual number of dead is about 5,000, but why quibble on that point.

Who is now doing the train and euip of the Bosniacs at US expense??? The US (former Army officers are working for MPRI, the firm that is training and euipping the Bosnian Muslim Army) that's who. Now do I think that the the entire UNPROFOR mission and its associated embargo was a mistake?? Yep, I sure do. I think we should have let them fight it out and eventually they would have killed themselves enough they would have gotten tired of it. As a matter of fact, we could have made a profit out of it by selling weapons to all of the combatants. A good opportunity blown there. What can I tell you, I wasn't one of the decision makers.

So before you babble on about Bosnia, please let's be up front with all of the facts. The Muslims always look at things from this warped perspective - it never ceases to amaze me. Except the Muslims in Bosnia, they are far more Western oriented, in their clothes, style, culture, food, dress, everything. Most of the time you can't tell a Muslim from a non-Muslim in Bosnia.

Feel like posting? Pleaase click here for the list of current forums.