Tarik Ramadan on the protests and the 'anti-islam film'

[Jaamac1975]

Tarik Ramadan is not Muslim, if you read his philosophy you will glean out that he is just "muslim" by culture not by creed , he just sees Islam as just a religion no different then the Voodo-sim og Gabon.

[Leftist]

TeAmo,

You're feisty, must be the hawiye in you (waa iska kaftan, don't go off)

Seriously tho, iga raali ahow, I coulda been more diplomatic, but when I saw: "demonstrations are haram" followed by "kafir ideology", I was all:

teh , it burns.

Let's reason this out, shall we:

Thanks to leftist/socialism(what you refer to as kafir ideology), your dad, as a working man, has the following rights and protections:

- Unemployment: If he's ever fired or laid off(think you guys call it redundancy), he gets paid
- Workman's compensation: If he's ever injured on the job, he gets paid. I know one guy who sprained his thumb, and got 50k out of it.
- Safe working environment, 8 hour work day, and more.

Do you think those rights materialized overnight? People marched for it in massive street protests. Thanks to all those that marched, protested, demonstrated, and went to jail, your dad, presumably an immigrant, enjoys those rights and many others that allow him to have one of the highest standards of living in the world.

Let's see how the land of your scholars measures up: There is a institutionalized system of semi-slavery known as the Kafaala. You can't move, marry, or even go for Umrah/Hajj without the OK of your owner er, i mean, you're sponsor. If you're injured, you're ass out. If you're fired, you're ass out. If your employer stops paying you, you're ass out. Ass out means: You're done for.

So you tell me, which system provides for a dignified existence?

Protests and demonstrations are not haram. There is a rich history of street protests throughout Islamic history. The scholars who are saying street protests are haram are simply protecting the regimes that pay their salaries. I know this must sound like heresy to you, but guess what, in Islam, you're actually allowed to disagree with scholars or the rulers. This, of course, depends on you using your caqli, but if you outsource your thinking to men sequestered in the Najdi desert, well, that's on you.

I'm sure if you ask Ameer Husni Mubarak, he'll also tell you that protests are haram.

[Alphanumeric]

Tarik Ramadan is not Muslim, if you read his philosophy you will glean out that he is just "muslim" by culture not by creed , he just sees Islam as just a religion no different then the Voodo-sim og Gabon.

@ 0:10

Put the volume up, nice and high, so you can hear how incredibly stupid you sound in this post.

[Leftist]

He may not have that much influence now, but with time, as the bankruptcy of literalism becomes more and more apparent, he will.

What do you mean by "bankruptcy of literalism"? Make yourself clear.

bankruptcy = failure. The failure of talafism/literalism to uplift the Muslims from ignorance, takhaluf, and jahl. When literalist scholars are spending the vast majority of their time engaged in refutations of innovators (read: defamatory insult sessions against other muslims), and tazkiya(read: follow me and mine, everybody else is on falsehood), you know their bankrupt and have nothing to offer.

[TeAmo]

Leftist

Stop talking out of your ass scholars never said it is haram. They said it is disliked I accidently interpreted it as being haram but I made the correction in my reply to you saying that it is disliked and disencouraged.

The first scholars who came up with this ruling were actually not ruled by any regime. The first scholars who came up with this were actually the ones who were alive at the time of the Khalifa scholars after them just studied the issue and agreed with their fatwa. So go and bad mouth and lie about our religious leaders elsewhere.

The scholars of Saudi Arabia do not follow any regime and speak out against their government if necessary, which they have done plenty of times in the past. They advocate for the deen not advocate for the Saudi government

[Arabmann]

bankruptcy = failure. The failure of talafism/literalism to uplift the Muslims from ignorance, takhaluf, and jahl. When literalist scholars are spending the vast majority of their time engaged in refutations of innovators (read: defamatory insult sessions against other muslims), and tazkiya(read: follow me and mine, everybody else is on falsehood), you know their bankrupt and have nothing to offer.

Do you have an example (or two) literalist scholar who 80-90% (vast majority) of his time engages only in refutations? I googled for "talafism", and there are only 7 results (2 from Somalinet). Are we supposed to understand you like that? Make yourself clearly understood.

[Jaamac1975]

.

Kid,Alphanumeric

I don't watch videos on youtube to find someone's real deep believe i read their books and as iam writing this i have it right beside me and i have read it three times "The quest for meaning": Developing a philosophy of Pluralism by Tariq Ramadan" meaning you need more then Islam the understand the meaning of life , and he argues that most religion are inherently deep inside the same. Throughout the book he is arguing as a "pluralist" meaning a man who doesn't just take Islam as the truth but only as a part of greater truth.

[Alphanumeric]

I'm sick of arguing against takfiir. Enjoy yourself.

[grandpakhalif]

I'm sick of arguing against takfiir. Enjoy yourself.

Tariq Ramadan follows a very laxed version of Islam, some argue he is nothing but muslim by name. Reminds me of that Irshan manji character

[Gantaal05]

and here i was thinking Tarik ramadan is hypocritical because the west thinks so too

and accordinginly to the wahabis hes not muslim enough either

poor man

yaa allah have mercy on this ummah

[Arabmann]

and accordinginly to the wahabis hes not muslim enough either

Tarik is an unknown "scholar" to the vast majority of Muslims; only some diaspora Muslims are familiar with him. His works aren't taught in Muslim schools nor sold in bookshops of Muslim countries. He's where (status in Western countries) he's because the West is satisfied with him.

[Hyperactive]

who he is?

[Leftist]

^^ He is the grandson of Hasan Al-Banna and a prominent mufakir Islaami.

Arabman,

because the West is satisfied with him

Tariq Ramadan was:

- banned from entering the US

- is considered persona non grata in most arab countries for his criticism of the arab tyrants(in your view, Wulaat-ul-Umoor)

- was fired from a top dutch university for his islamist activism

And that's just from a quick google search. So the next time you want to discredit a brave mufakir because he doesn't subscribe to your literalist world-view, try harder.

Do you have an example (or two) literalist scholar who 80-90% (vast majority) of his time engages only in refutations?

Do you want one example.......or 10? How about Mudane Rabee Al-Madkhali and his 'students of knowledge'? To them, Salaahudeen Al-Ayoobi, Omar Mukhtar, and Sayyid Maxamed Abdulahi are all and I quote, "filthy Sufis". To them, Imaam Abu Xaniifa is a "rationalist innovator". Should I continue?

Maybe I should.

From the fruits of the teachings of Mudane Al-Madkhali and his cult:

Soon, it was not good enough to remain silent on these issues. They started to demand a “bayaan” from every individual – whether written or spoken and recorded – “clarifying their position”. In this “bayaan” one would affirm their rejection of the list of “deviants” the self appointed ecclesiastical tribunal came up with and affirm their loyalty to a list of scholars many had never heard of that they were calling “the Kibaar” (i.e., the biggest scholars on earth)

Many were forced into a corner to accept the position of the ecclesiastical tribunals. Everyone that wanted to maintain their standing in the community was forced to comply. It was a form of “thought reform”

@ ecclesiastical tribunal.

The penalty for not complying? … The dreaded boycott. This meant that no one would give you the salaam, nor speak to you, your wife or even your children. That being the case, this created a lot of problems inside homes as the wife would not appreciate being boycotted by her friends because her husband is not “taking the correct position” or vice versa. The obsession with “clarifying one’s salafiyyah” reached a fever pitch.

During my studies, I was also made privy to the kind of life-style these pre-salafis were leading. They were all, with the exception of one, married to black women and on the prowl for a second or third wife—preferably a white one. Their families lived on welfare because it was “haram to work for the kuffar”. The kuffar would not allow you to wear a turban and jalabayih to work, so you couldn’t work for them, as “Islamic” clothing for men was wajib. It was not haram however to take charity from the kuffar. So these families existed on full welfare, which back in those days—before Clinton’s welfare reform—was a bundle. You could very easily raise a family on cash allotments—which by the way increased with the birth of each new child, food stamps—again increased with each new birth, medical care, WIC and free housing or ridiculously low monthly payments via a section 8 housing allowance. Most of these brothers lived better than others who had jibs for a living. They weren’t getting all that help, and struggled to make ends meet.

It was suggested to me that I might like to become the wife of one of these fine brothers. I politely declined, not just because I was uninterested in living on welfare, but because I couldn’t get with the polygamy aspect, being that not only was it illegal, but I would have to lie and pretend I wasn’t married to my husband. This is how the welfare department in our city came to call the Muslim women on the welfare role “the Holy Whores” – because they were often dressed in all black and niqaab and having children (as far as the state was concerned) out of wedlock. The second and subsequent wives could not be legally married to their spouse, and the government didn’t give a damn about or recognize a so-called Islamic marriage. And so the “Holy Whores” were born and I wasn’t eager to join their ranks.

http://umarlee.wordpress.com/rise-and-f ... -complete/

Read the whole thing, like I said, complete bankruptcy. They've taken the noble word of al-salaf and subverted it with a perverse mix of Najdi desert culture, narrow-minded literalistic interpretation of the nusoos, and lacageey-lacag: petrodollars.

[Arabmann]

http://umarlee.wordpress.com/rise-and-f ... -complete/

Read the whole thing

That's a blog. You can do better.

[ZubeirAwal]

lool at the suufi shrines post - some people are really stupid.

fool I would be involved in the destruction of a shrine as it is an act of shirk, as for the salafi boogey man being mentioned everywhere

So would you destroy the shrine of the prophet, abu bakr, and umar all located in the masjid al nabawi in medina?

And would you pull them from their graves and dump them in the desert as the libyans did with sahaba zuhayr R.A and great 13th Islamic Scholar Ahmad Az-Zarruq R.A?

Fuckin' dickhead if i catched you on the street i'll curb-stomp you to death.

Salafi scum.