Religion
See other Religion Articles
Title: Exposed! Ground Zero Imam Calls for Return to Most Radical Form of Islam in History
Source:
IronicSurrealiam
URL Source: http://ironicsurrealism.blogivists.com/tag/imam-feisal-abdul-rauf/
Published: Aug 17, 2010
Author: na
Post Date: 2010-08-17 14:08:34 by Murron
Keywords: None
Views: 1772
Comments: 2
Exposed! Ground Zero Imam Calls for Return to Most Radical Form of Islam in History What so called “moderate” Muslims say to the western press and what they say to the Arabic press is often as opposite as night and day. Walid Shoebat Exposes 911 Mosque Imam Rauf GROUND ZERO IMAN CALLS FOR RETURN TO MOST RADICAL FORM OF ISLAM IN HISTORY! Proof: Feisal Abdul Rauf’s Arabic Language Interview Just who is ‘moderate’ Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf? He’s no moderate at all. He’s the funder of the controversial Ground Zero Mosque in New York and a financier of the Turkish Flotilla, along with the Turkish government that funded the terrorist group IHH which has ties to al Qaida and Hamas in Gaza What’s more, Iman Rauf is calling for a worldwide return to the most radical form of Islam in history, turning the hands of time back to an era when Muslims ruled much of the known world. See eye-opening article below that was translated by Walid. The following is a translation of an Arabic language interview conducted by Iman Rauf that should put shivers up your spine as to what the world will look like if he gets his way: Islamic world domination, death and enslavement to anyone who gets in his way. The interview was translated from Arabic to English by Walid Shoebat, a former Palestinian terrorist who converted to Christianity and became a U.S. citizen. Essentially Rauf wants to use peaceful means including lobbying governments and establishing charities to incrementally implement the principles of Sharia law worldwide so once the stranglehold is established, potentially enacting Sharia-ordered decapitation and stoning of ‘infidels’ (any non-Muslims) Separation of Religion From State Translated, From his interview on Hadielislam.com When the fountains of knowledge differ, minds pick up the pace to acquire this knowledge. These disagreements produce different views dedicated to employ us to face new realities to keep pace with current events and requirements. But do the scholars differ regardless of the different sources of knowledge and education in regards to religion? And is it possible to fulfill the basic pillars and foundations to fulfill individual needs and duties in order to apply religion [Islam] as a way of life to conduct our daily life and in order to extract the basic laws for us to resolve and govern with in order to solve grievances? Or do we separate religion form state? This is the subject of our dialogue and questions with imam Feisal Abdul Rauf. Question: What does it mean to separate religion from state in Islam? Abdul Rauf: The general understating in the west is that religious institutions have no influence in decision making in the state. In Europe religion is weak while in the United States the majority is religious and believe in God. With this, the understanding of the term “separation of religion from state” is also to separate the arm of the government from pressuring religious freedoms. So in a general sense they respect religious freedoms. In America the state does not interfere in religious regulations, their details, construction or how they are managed. What is happening in the Muslim world after the fall of the Ottoman Empire and the establishment of the secular state, that the traditional relationship between state and religious institutions were subject to a separation, which resulted in a reaction that generated Islamic movements wanting to erect an Islamic state in the Islamic world. So if we watch history that after Rashidun Caliphate (Rightly Guided Caliphate) there was a form of separation between government and religious institutions that was represented by [Muslim] jurisprudence and since the Muslims on a personal level are required to follow the prophet (peace be upon him) on all aspects of life and conduct as permissible through a societal level as well. For that, we collectively believe that the state that was erected by the prophet in Medina was the ideal model for an Islamic state. The challenge today in the Islamic world is how do we accomplish this in our current era. Question: Many of the political Jihadist Islamic movements are talking about an Islamic Caliphate based on the prophet’s approach. Can we accomplish this today? Abdul Rauf: The challenge I was referring to is this; how do we call for the principles and standards that the prophet (peace be upon him) used to build the Islamic state in Medina. The challenge we have today is how do we accomplish this while keeping the prophet’s methodology in our current changing times. This challenge was an issue that the scholars and Caliphs had to face throughout the Islamic history, which resulted in the creation of several Islamic schools of thought with multiple views that are viewed equally. So the question in our era throughout my discussions with contemporary Muslim theologians that an Islamic state can be established in more than just in a single form or mold; it can be established through a kingdom or a democracy. The important issue is to establish the general fundamentals of [Islamic] Shariah that are required to govern. It is known that there are sets of standards that are accepted by [Muslim] scholars to organize the relationships between government and the governed. Question: So we understand that separation of religion from state, that is, it depends on the Muslim governors that so long they were spreading Islam and justice… but when the rulers are ruling under traditional laws contrary to Islamic laws, what then should the Islamic institutions do? Abdul Rauf: A time after the prophet (peace be upon him) arose certain new conditions that required the governors to institute new laws so long they do not conflict with the Quran and the Sunna that were Shariah compliant as such followed in traditional customs. So in our modern era, governments that want to ensure the new laws as to not contradict Shariah rules—so they create institutions to ensure Islamic law and remove any that contradict with Shariah. So we advise that when there is a problem in the relationship between state and religious institutions in the form of the question you just asked, that people need to use peaceful means to advise the governors and government institutions and use peaceful means that are available to send their message out to the masses. And we also suggest to the governors and political institutions to consult [Muslim] religious institutions and [Muslim] personalities in the field as to assure their decision making to reflect the spirit of Shariah. Question: No doubt that there are disastrous results if the Islamic world kept going under the principles that are used with religious issues and state, but what do we do on a personal level while in the midst of this low class system that is established in our Muslim states? Abdul Rauf: First and foremost, we need to understand what Shariah requires from us. Second, we need to be a part of a larger group that is capable to give advise [to the government] as is done by lobbies in the West. Thirdly: We become an institutional group to provide benevolent needs in the society.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Murron (#0)
Liberals are 100% pro Nations run by religion. As long as its the one that beheads girls for listening to Ipods.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Concerning Islam’s intimidation tactics reducing freedom of speech in Western nations, to the Washington Post, Rauf rationalized: Imam Rauf: “Western culture makes freedom of expression nearly a religious value. It protects the right to say anything, no matter how insensitive or scandalous. Everyone and everything can be insulted.” Concerning the forcing of Sharia law on a society, Rauf pronounced in the Post: Iman Rauf: “Where there is a conflict, it is not with Sharia law itself but more often with the way the penal code is sometimes applied. Some aspects of this penal code and its laws pertaining to women flow out of the cultural context. The religious imperative is about justice and fairness. If you strive for justice and fairness in the penal code, then you are in keeping with moral imperative of the Sharia." Imam Rauf: “In America, we have a Constitution that created a three- branch form of government -- legislative, executive and judiciary. The role of the judiciary is to ensure that the other two branches comply with the Constitution. What Muslims want is a judiciary that ensures that the laws are not in conflict with the Qur'an and the Hadith. Just as the Constitution has gone through interpretations, so does Sharia law.” Rauf’s speeches and writings indicate that, rather than a moderate, peace- loving, assimilated immigrant, he is really an Islamic ideologue and propagandist with an anti-American political agenda. Until the 1990s, such aliens might have been barred from entering the United States or else face removal for advocating policies at odds with America’s national interest -- and certainly that jeopardized our nation’s survival. This wasn’t a curb on freedom of speech. Rather, it properly distinguished who has a legitimate voice in the American marketplace of political ideas: Americans themselves, not outsiders. Under policies firmed up during the Cold War, exclusion and deportation were to occur to foreign extremists for cause. One ground blocked aliens participating in activities that would be prejudicial to the public interest or public safety. Also, aliens were excluded from the United States if they belonged to subversive groups or for teaching or advocating radical ideology. We also barred those aliens expected to engage in subversive activities. These included spying, sabotage, public disorder or activity putting national security at risk, or using force or violence to overthrow the U.S. government. Certainly, it’s more prudent for America to be safe than sorry when it comes to keeping alien advocates of anti-American Islam out of the country. The United States has already been the target of jihadists. Middle Easterners who would like to see this nation’s demise come here, legally and illegally, every day. We are long overdue to revive ideological exclusion policies and the vigorous exercise of this common-sense practice of national self-preservation. Imam Rauf represents the kind of subversive alien who should be scrutinized for ideological exclusion. by James R. Edwards, Jr., coauthor of The Congressional Politics of Immigration Reform
Toss: ADL,CAIR and the Vatican into the pit they belong in.
#2. To: All (#0)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]