The Quran and the 2nd Arab Spring - collaborative article?
-
No offense bro, I don't think that religion will ever help solve the conflict. What the Arabs must do is to admit that religion is the problem. The sad part about the Arab spring is that religion is being used to hjiack. Basically, as soon as a dictator gets overthrown, another will replace him and this time he will be more fundamentally crazier and more friendlier to the West. When I was in Egypt, people used to protest a lot and stuff, and the conflict is still going on. Because everytime the Egyptians choose a new leader, they end up at being brought back to square one again, and it's all because of those religious d!ckheads who are ruining it for people inside the country. First you had a conservative Egyptian leader (i.e Hosni Mubarak) who was kicked off from the president seat by the people of Egypt, and after that Morsi came along with his Muslim Brotherhood party/crew, and soon you'll have another guy who has the same thinking of the Islamists and he will end up dragging Egypt back to square one. But I'm sure that won't happen as the Egyptian army are arresting all Muslim brotherhood members/Islamists. The Egyptians seem to have tighten up their security a lot more now. They've allowed the army to take over as the police is too weak in protecting its citizens. Anyway, the Egyptian army stands with its people. When I was in Egypt, there were about 40-50 million(about half of the population) of Egypt protesting against Morsi were even the Egyptian army joined its people against Morsi. Had it been in the West, the police would shoot tear-gas and beat more people with batons while the media would try to denounce the protestors. The Egyptians are actually afraid of being pulled into a civil-war, that's why the Egyptian army are doing their best in taking down the Islamists so those Western imps won't run around causing trouble.
Israel and the West is also a problem IMO. The id?a that Israel is somehow an innocent tiny country in the Middle-East is a myth. I've always wondered why Egypt is suffering of Islamists? Why Syria, Lebanon and Iraq are suffering of Islamist, while Israel remains unharmed? That's because those religious d!ckheads in Saudi-Arabia are using more of their oil-money to kill more Arabs in the name of Israhell. It bothers me when I see pictures like these
http//i.imgur.com/Q6HJ85Z.jpg
Arab Nationalism needs to rise now and kick out the Europeans. They are causing trouble in the Arab world. Never forget that it was the Europeans who brought the dictators in the Arab world. The Wahabbis got to power with the help of the British. The Assad family got to power with the help of France. Most of all it bothers me when I see Europeans lecturing the Arab world about democracy. Having Europe lecturing the Arab world about democracy is like having a prostitute lecturing a virgin about virginity! But not all Europeans are bad. I like the Eastern-Europeans, and for me they are not really considered Europeans. I also love countries such as Spain - Really, that country should not be considered a EUropean country. It's too advanced to be considered as such.
I know that Europe is complete garbage(excluding Sweden). The UK is a complete garbage sending terrorists to other countries, the same applies to Denmark, the same to France, etc. Now I live in Scandinavia, and hear we read a lot about foreign fighters leaving from some Scandinavian countries. Denmark is the perfect example of this. I hope to see Denmark destroyed for good. F*cking Denmark barely produces anything of value. It only produces a bunch of jihadists-tards were it can send them off to other countries. Denmark is not even near democracy, and its history is even more f'cked up than Israels history. If Denmark can not take responsibility over its borders, then we as other countries should invade and destroy that garbage country. Now they are sending jihadists to beautiful countries like Syria, but they should know that Syria is a very strong country. In 270 A.D, Queen Zenobia ruled Syria, while the European countries were still backward and were led by chimps, specialy Denmark. But looking at nations like Denmark should be enough evidence of Darwins theory regarding human evolution lol. But anyway most of Syrias valuable history sites have been damaged. The West were probaly thinking that they could replace those with McDonalds. They're f'cking idiots. Never forget the amount of damage they have brought to Syria.
Now the UK(After more than 2 years) has begun to arrest jihadists who left to fight in Syria. Why couldn't they think of that BEFORE sending them?
Arabs should have their democracy, but they should realize that their democracy won't come as long as the West is still out there and as long as the King Saoud(Al-Kalb) is alive. The Arabs could support secular democratic parties like the Syrian Social Nationalist Party, Ba'athism or the Democratic Arab Socialist Union or whatever they like. They should most of all establish a unitary parliamentary representative democracy under a constitutional monarchy that grants rights to all of themselves while expelling the Europeans. They could mix both liberalism and socialism. It works good too. My country Sweden for example has done that and we are ranked as one of the most democratic countries in the world and with the best living standard. Now people will use this term "Westerner" while including Sweden in it because without Sweden, they are complete garbage. But we are not Westerners or Europeans.
Religion might have good intentions, but the truth is that it's being used as a tool. Religion has been misunderstood, but it's to late to do something about it now. The only solution is to remove it. That way religion won't be used as a tool anymore. Religion probaly opposes dictatorship, but it's not like religion can do anything about it. The Saudi-regime think they have the right to control other Arabs in Egypt, Syria, Iraq, etc. becuase they're somehow Arabs.
The Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies (ACRPS) recently published the Arab Opinion Index report for 2011. The Arab Opinion Index project is currently the largest of its kind. It covers 12 countries, representing 85 percent of the population of the Arab world. The Index compiles the findings of 16,173 face-to-face interviews with subjects who were drawn from a random, representative sampling of the populations of their countries of origin. An estimated 35,000 human work-hours were spent completing the surveys which will contribute to the final, detailed statistical report.
Answers show that a clear majority of Arabs support a democratic form of government, believing in the importance of a transfer of power.
71 percent of respondents expressed faith in their countries? armies; 47 percent trust their governments (the executive arms of), and 36 percent showed trust in their countries? legislative bodies before the revolutions.
Only 19 percent of respondents believe that their countries? legal systems treat all citizens equitably.
73 percent of respondents believe that Israel and the US are the two countries presenting the largest threat to the security of the Arab world, with 51 percent believing that Israel is the most threatening, 22 percent believe the US is the most threatening, and 5 percent reporting a belief that Iran is the single country most threatening to the security of their countries. The results on this question vary from one Arab country to another.
84 percent believe the Palestinian cause to be a cause for all Arabs, and not solely a Palestinian issue.
67 percent of respondents believe that present levels of intra-Arab cooperation are not satisfactory.
Roughly three-quarters support lifting travel and trade restrictions between Arab countries, the establishment of joint Arab military forces, and a unified monetary system. This highlights the similar belief, uncovered by this survey and shared by a clear majority of the respondents, which holds that citizens of all Arab states belong to a unitary Arab nation.
Most respondents supported the Egyptian and the Tunisian revolutions.
Most respondents attributed the revolutions to corruption, dictatorship and the lack of justice and equality.84 percent of respondents are opposed to their countries? diplomatic recognition of Israel, with only 21 percent of respondents expressing support for the peace agreements signed with the Israelis by Jordan, Egypt, and Palestine.
Most respondents describe themselves as religious too, while rejecting clerical influence in politics.
Source http//english.dohainstitute.org/release/5083cf8e-38f8-4e4a-8bc5-fc91660608b0
I think most Arabs are becoming secular. Many Arabs today will recognize themselves traditionally Muslims, but whether they pray, and read the Qur'an is not something many do I think. They do see themselves traditionally as Muslims since that is what they were born as, but they are not religious. Here were I live there are a lot of levant-Arabs(Specialy Lebanese), and they are really not religious but they do consider themselves traditionally Muslims as they were born Muslims. It's a part of their traditions. In my eyes, the Arabs are becoming like their Jewish cousins; A very secular people who consider themselves Muslims by name, but at the same time they don't really give an F about their religion. Anyway, I like religion as long as it stays out of politics. Religion and politics should never mix. Religion is suppose to be something personal that one could practise, and not something political.
-
First you had a conservative Egyptian leader (i.e Hosni Mubarak) who was kicked off from the president seat by the people of Egypt, and after that Morsi came along with his Muslim Brotherhood party/crew, and soon you'll have another guy who has the same thinking of the Islamists and he will end up dragging Egypt back to square one. But I'm sure that won't happen as the Egyptian army are arresting all Muslim brotherhood members/Islamists. The Egyptians seem to have tighten up their security a lot more now. They've allowed the army to take over as the police is too weak in protecting its citizens. Anyway, the Egyptian army stands with its people.
In egypt, it's evil vs evil vs evil, conn artist vs conn artist vs conn artist.
Their differences is only the 'genre'.
One uses religion the other one uses weapon and nationalism, but it's all about their greed of power and wealth.One of the main problem in Egyptian Military is their 'Dark / Mafia business'.
And the reason of their 'coup' is not about "Freedom and welfare of the Egyptian people" but it's all about "How to protect their own economical interest".Egypt's army in control of vast business empire
http//www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18548659The $$$ from their (high ranking official) business empire do not goes to the state it goes straight to their own pocket.
It cannot be audited and they will 'silence' anyone who dare to speak about it.
The word silence here is a verb which can be translated to kidnap, torture and murder.This is similar pattern observable in Russia (after the collapse of Soviet Union), Phillipines (Marcos regime) and Indonesia (Suharto regime) back in the 90s. After the dictator / oppressive system being brought down, the military faction is still not willing to give up their lucrative income from "military's businesses".
Arab Nationalism needs to rise now and kick out the Europeans. They are causing trouble in the Arab world.
I don't think another "arroganism" such as "Arab Nationalism" (or other type of Nationalism or Religionism) is the solution.
And Europeans is not the problem.The problems is within thus the solution is within..
"Critical Thinking" ability of the people need to be boosted.
Thus it will be harder for the elite to launch their propaganda for their own interest, either using nationalism or religionism.
The attitude of "X is TRUE because the General/Clerics said so" must be changed.The first step for that is by guaranteeing the freedom of speech.
Let people expose the dark side of the military's business and religious dogma by themselves..Proven to be among critical pillar based on Philippine, Indonesia and Russia's case.
Salam / Peace
-
Peace Brothers and Sisters.
There was once a civilization that was the greatest in the world. It was able to create a continental super-state that stretched from ocean to ocean, and from northern climes to tropics and deserts. Within its dominion lived hundreds of millions of people, of different creeds and ethnic origins. One of its languages became the universal language of much of the world, the bridge between the peoples of a hundred lands. Its armies were made up of people of many nationalities, and its military protection allowed a degree of peace and prosperity that had never been known.
And this civilization was driven more than anything, by invention. Its architects designed buildings that defied gravity. Its mathematicians created the algebra and algorithms that would enable the building of computers, and the creation of encryption. Its doctors examined the human body, and found new cures for disease. Its astronomers looked into the heavens, named the stars, and paved the way for space travel and exploration. Its writers created thousands of stories. Stories of courage, romance and magic.
When other nations were afraid of ideas, this civilization thrived on them, and kept them alive. When censors threatened to wipe out knowledge from past civilizations, this civilization kept the knowledge alive, and passed it on to others. While modern Western civilization shares many of these traits, the civilization I'm talking about was the Islamic world from the year 800 to 1600, which included the Ottoman Empire and the courts of Baghdad, Damascus and Cairo, and enlightened rulers like Suleiman the Magnificent.
Although we are often unaware of our indebtedness to this other civilization, its gifts are very much a part of our heritage. The technology industry would not exist without the contributions of Arab mathematicians. Leaders like Suleiman contributed to our notions of tolerance and civic leadership. And perhaps we can learn a lesson from his example It was leadership based on meritocracy, not inheritance. It was leadership that harnessed the full capabilities of a very diverse population that included Christianity, Islamic, and Jewish traditions. This kind of enlightened leadership - leadership that nurtured culture, sustainability, diversity and courage - led to 800 years of invention and prosperity."
All these happened at a time when the Islamic Evangelists did not gain the momentum to establish mastery over the Koranic verses and portraying the Koran as having been endowed with hidden miracles and not the simple message as it reads. Regrettably, the decline of Islamic glory crept in when the Ulemas declared that none but they were the ones to give its true interpretations.
In his intriguing book - 'What Went Wrong', Bernard Lewis, an eminent scholar of the Princeton University, examines the legacy of Islam and writes "For many centuries, the world of Islam was in the forefront of human achievement - the foremost military and economic power in the world, the leader in the arts and sciences of civilization..... And then everything changed..... "Who did this to us?' is of course a common human response when things are going badly, and there have been indeed many in the Middle East, past and present, who have asked this question".
In a subtle way, Bernard Lewis hinted on the theology of Islam that prevailed towards the end of Abbasid dynasty. Perhaps he is slightly right - but it is not the theology but the misinterpretation of Islamic theology propounded by the impoverished and ill educated Mullahs and their and ill conceived doctrines of Islam.
In the beginning, Islam flourished because of its emphasis on "good in this world" (Koran-2201). But the Mullah's came up with the sermon that no worldly improvement has God's blessings. This world is merely a temporary shelter for us for our onward journey to hereafter. All Muslims were encouraged to devote most of their times in madrasahs and mosques for continuous prayer for pleasing God. Within a few generations, these self-defeating teachings in the name of Islam got deeply rooted in the Muslims' minds. While the Koranic verses describe God as "beneficent and merciful", the Mullahs perceived and portrayed God as an intolerant ruler even for slightest deviation in praising Him. A deep belief engulfed them that nothing could be achieved without the blessings of God. They overemphasised the need for God's blessings in accomplishing things and de-emphasised the need for doing the things themselves. Gradually, a lethargic community grew up. The virgin 'hooris' were perceived as the thrill in the Heaven than the thrill in invention for the good of all people.
History tells us that the period of Harun ar-Rashid marks one of the great periods of Islam. Ironically, until the death of Harun ar-Rashid in 809 CE, there was nothing like 'Fatwa' or 'Sharia Laws' in the Muslim domain. Even when appointing Harthama as the governor of Khorasan, Harun ar-Rashid gave him a copy of the Koran and not a book of Sharia laws.
To prevent an Arab revolt, al-Ma'mun, one of the sons of Harun ar-Rashid, recruited a huge number of mercenary, Judges and administrators from Turkey. Unlike the Arabs, the Turks had little or no idea of the message of Islam. These circumstances allowed those Turks to justify Caliphs' actions as adherent to Islamic legislation under the pretext of Prophet Muhammad's precedents, known as the 'Hadith'. Over the years, various Caliphs' imprints of ruling crept into Islamic laws, ethics and customs despite the fact that a large number of the Hadith had severe contradictions with the Koran
The Hadith got eventually more prominence than the Koran itself. Fatwa and Sharia Laws took over general consensus. In about a century, the Islamic domain was made to appear as what existed in Christian Europe before the fifteenth century. Islamic lands were seen as an outer darkness of barbarism and unbelief from which there was nothing to learn or to fear. In effect, the table was turned around and the Muslims dearly paid for their open heart and generous teaching to the West that brought their Renaissance.
The deathblow occurred in the Islamic glory with the advent of two technologies. While these technologies enriched the rest of the world and helped Christianity to reshape, but opened a door for the Mullahs to amass unprecedented influence in the affairs of Muslim countries. Unlike today, access to the Koran or the Hadith was limited to a few people in the early days of Islam because of the absence of paper and printing press. The limited religious books on parchment, written in expensive calligraphy, rested in limited hands as emblems of prestige and nobility. Paper, though an ancient commodity in China, came to the Arab's hand and subsequently to the West during the tenth century. The mass production of the Koran and Hadith was not feasible until Johann Gutenberg's invention of printing press in the fifteenth century.
With the entry of paper and printing press, those myopic Mullahs got easy and less-costly access to the printed Hadith. Consequently, it gave them a bonanza in earning their livelihood based on religious interpretation and leadership. They borrowed ideas of religious suppression from Christendom and corrupted Islam.
As the educated and enlightened Muslims never bothered to take the leadership in the religion, the Mullahs faced no rival in challenging their interpretation, marinated with their own recipe and shaped Islam to fit their personal needs just as the Popes did in Christendom. Over the years, their unchallenged interpretations got ingrained in the religious belief and kept passing from generations to generations.
Misrepresented by the ill-educated and self-centred Mullahs, misinterpreting the message of the Koran, the Muslims are perceived as backward peoples today with nothing to offer to the rest of the world.
Source by courtesy & ? 2004 Mesbah Uddin
Basically GOD does not change /enforce things on people unless they decide to change themselves. For better or for worse. It is down to us?.
Peace to all.
-
Peace Brothers and Sisters.
Its armies were made up of people of many nationalities, and its military protection allowed a degree of peace and prosperity that had never been known.
And this civilization was driven more than anything, by invention. Its architects designed buildings that defied gravity. Its mathematicians created the algebra and algorithms that would enable the building of computers, and the creation of encryption. Its doctors examined the human body, and found new cures for disease. Its astronomers looked into the heavens, named the stars, and paved the way for space travel and exploration. Its writers created thousands of stories. Stories of courage, romance and magic.
When other nations were afraid of ideas, this civilization thrived on them, and kept them alive. When censors threatened to wipe out knowledge from past civilizations, this civilization kept the knowledge alive, and passed it on to others. While modern Western civilization shares many of these traits, the civilization I'm talking about was the Islamic world from the year 800 to 1600, which included the Ottoman Empire and the courts of Baghdad, Damascus and Cairo, and enlightened rulers like Suleiman the Magnificent.
Although we are often unaware of our indebtedness to this other civilization, its gifts are very much a part of our heritage. The technology industry would not exist without the contributions of Arab mathematicians. Leaders like Suleiman contributed to our notions of tolerance and civic leadership. And perhaps we can learn a lesson from his example It was leadership based on meritocracy, not inheritance. It was leadership that harnessed the full capabilities of a very diverse population that included Christianity, Islamic, and Jewish traditions. This kind of enlightened leadership - leadership that nurtured culture, sustainability, diversity and courage - led to 800 years of invention and prosperity."
The name of the empire/kingdom/country can be varied, but the "traits" or "characteristics" of advancing civilization is pretty much the same.
From Cyrus Persian Kingdom, Middle Ages Caliph, Post-Renaissance Europe and 19th-20th century USA.These are the traits
- Open Mindedness
Example The basic of algebra was not invented by Arabs or other mideastern folks, it was initially invented in the region which is now named as India. The Arabs translated thousands of Sanskrit based manuscript to Arabic and share it with others, including the more backwards european.
The population of "Islamic Caliph" back then doesn't have the attitude of It must be false because it's originated from foreign culture and not in my / our tradition / holy book. - Critical Thinking, Creative Thinking with Freedom of Thought and Expression
This is clear, the motto of "If it's not broken keep looking for something better". - Secularism, Tolerance and Egalitarianism
Cognate well with the previous point, Cyrus never enforced Zoroastrianism to the Jews, infact he helped the Jews to build the largest temple to their God, YHVH. - Meritocracy and Justice for All
Clear, no oppression based on his/her background, the system shall judge people based on his/her deed and his/her deed alone, either for punishment or reward. The criteria of good and bad behavior must be based on agreement of the people and not based on subjective interpretation of some elite without public discourse. - Check and Balance on Political Power
Initially invented by the Greeks, applied for limited time by the Roman (Republic Era), and gained widespread popularity in post-renaissance europe. Power tends to corrupt and one crazy dictator can easily corrupt and destroyed all of the point above, if not properly checked.
- Open Mindedness
-
peace all,
In case I was not clear, I am looking for Quran verses to provide a framework for this subject.
I intentionally called it the 2nd Arab Spring as the first, it could be argued, was the one that occurred alongside the revelation of The Quran. It led to a monumental transformation of the region and beyond. I believe it can happen again, using the very same source that ignited the first.
Many in the middle east regard The Quran highly (albeit they may not study it), thus if a basic framework can be made clear from it, then I think there is a reasonable chance this message will thrive in the region, hence this thread.
-
Wakas I think this is a good effort.
In the past I've had the same political inclinations as brother
I've been involved with socialism and far left ideology quite a bit, and am still a pan-arabist.
So I agree with about the need for further integration and unification, and would ideally like to see a federation of Arab states. I do not accept Sykes-Picot, and I do not accept the Balfour Declaration. I don't think any Arabs who actually know about these accept them either.I'm just not sure about secularism.
I think your argument that another spring can arise from the Quran alone is a very interesting one, and that the Quranic system must be political by its nature. I just don't see this happening within our lifetimes to be honest and so politically I follow socialist groups and pan-arabist ones.
Lastly - Jafar -
For the hundredth time - it is written a'raabu. Not arabu. Learn to read you simpleton
It's amazing that you so stubbornly and ignorantly choose to ignore two different words. There are 2 extra letters in one. Or does that not matter to you? I suppose you can't tell the difference between such similar sounding words as "moron" "maroon" or "loose" "lose" or "choose" "chose". Hey they're kind of similar right?? That's good enough. A'raabu and arabu are kinda sorta close and you happen to be a racist so what the hell. Go with that
-
Feel free to discuss and add verses which you think would be relevant to this important subject.
Peace Wakas,
Many people are hardcore fans of Revolution. But I am a supporter of Reform. In most situations, I think Reform is better than Revolution when it comes to creating changes in a country. I see the value of Revolutions, but the fact is that Revolutions are not always pragmatic. They don't always lead to good results. And for me results are all that matters when it comes to creating changes in backward and/or oppressive country. Many groups of people that have started revolutions, have ended up creating worse conditions in their countries (e.g. Syria, Libya and Egypt). Many groups of people who started revolutions to create a more free and more just society, when getting in positions of power, ended up being dictators themselves. The fact is that it is often less risky and much easier to reform the existing system in a country than to destroy it totally, then create a whole new system. In my opinion gradual changes that slowly but surely show positive results and development in a country, are less risky and less dangerous than a change that is going to "happen overnight" in a country, without considering all the different variables that are related to a new political system and all the future consequences that happen as a result of such a huge and rapid change.
In my opinion, there is no point in starting a revolution in a country if the people in that country can achieve their aims through Reforms. To start a revolution in a country that has a system that works, is like sending a car that works to a breaker's yard. To create a reform in a country, is like fixing the car. What is best? Is it best to throw a car that works or is it best to fix it? That being said, in some countries it is almost impossible to create reforms. For example it will be almost impossible to create reforms in a country like North Korea. So in such a country it is pointless to try create Reforms. Because one's effort will be futile. Therefore it seems that only a revolution can lead to changes in countries with hardcore dictatorial systems. In my opinion a Revolution should always be the last resort. People should only start revolution if it is impossible to create changes through reform. As far as I am concerned, verse 839 in the Quran supports Revolution.
Quran 839 You should fight them all until there is no more oppression, and so that the entire system is God's. But if they cease, then God is seer of what they do.
Revolutions have a tendency to swing back and forth like a pendulum. In the first phase things go fast forward where the insurgency is carried forward on the popular wave that results in the fall of the old regime. Then comes a phase where the air is let out a little of the spontaneous popular will and a power vacuum has formed on top of the system. An attempt to fill this vacuum with revolutionary forces can result in the pendulum beginning to swing back again, the necessity of creating peace and order in the country coupled with the fear of counter-revolution, increases the risk that another brutal regime takes the place of the old. The examples are many, most notably the French Revolution of 1789.
- John H.
Aftermath of revolution
http//www.nytimes.com/2013/02/15/opinion/global/aftermath-of-revolution.html?_r=2&It seems that the concept of revolution is being glamorized and used a lot to promote changes in different countries. Some people claim that if people want to start a succesful revolution, they first have to start a revolution in their own minds. Because all man-made external changes are a result of inner changes in our minds. In other words, all change starts from within. I think a group of people can start reforms and achieve as good results as they would have achieved by starting revolutions. A quote I really like about revolution is a quote from a Professor at the University of Kabul. His quotes illustrate the importance of creating a psychological revolution in the mind before trying to start a revolution in a country.
..."Revolution is possible without violence. It's possible to have a revolution of the mind. If you change peoples ideas, then things will change with."
Quran 1311 Each person has Divine laws surrounding him. They record his actions according to the command of God. Most certainly, God does not change the condition of a nation until they first change themselves. And when God intends a nation to suffer punishment (as a consequence of their misdeeds), there is none who can repel it. For, they have no defender besides Him.
-
I intentionally called it the 2nd Arab Spring as the first, it could be argued, was the one that occurred alongside the revelation of The Quran. It led to a monumental transformation of the region and beyond. I believe it can happen again, using the very same source that ignited the first.
I deeply recommend reading these 3 articles
Color Revolutions. Getting Our Facts Straight on the "Arab Spring"
http//www.globalresearch.ca/color-revolutions-getting-our-facts-straight-on-the-arab-spring/5379479Media Disinformation and the "Arab Spring" Color Revolutions
http//www.globalresearch.ca/media-disinformation-and-the-arab-spring-color-revolutions/30320The Ngo raids in Egypt
http//www.globalresearch.ca/the-us-engineered-arab-spring-the-ngo-raids-in-egypt/28433Many in the middle east regard The Quran highly (albeit they may not study it), thus if a basic framework can be made clear from it, then I think there is a reasonable chance this message will thrive in the region, hence this thread.
I agree with your view. I think it's a good idea.
-
peace all,
I agree with some of what has been said.
I'm surprised that in Egypt for example, the divide seems to be against secularists and religionists but what they don't seem to realise is that The Quran can unite them both, as its basic framework for rights, principles etc is quite secular. Hence this thread idea.
I think ideally, with a basic framework, wherein it doesn't really matter who gets into power as no group can invalidate such. A federation of Arab states could then form around this basic framework.
In some ways similar to the USA.
-
Wakas,
?What formidable courage! May God male reality your wishes and aims.I become so despondent in this whole situation, it being still an unknown what Israel might do with its atomic weapons and submarines, and the moral sapping that the Egyptian population has undergone, I am glad you are so optimistic and confident. I do hope your wishes come true.
Salaam
-
Peace Wakas, all,
I completely agree with what you wrote in your last post. I would like to add that one of the keys to peace, prosperity, justice, equality and freedom in a country, is its constitution. If the arab states adopt a constution that is based on the Quran but at the same time has a similar structure as the constitution of the United states, France or Japan, I think this will lead to peace, prosperity, justice, equality and freeedom in these countries. By the way I consider the constitution of the United states and the constitution of France as two of best constitutions in the world. For example Norway is a country that has copied the constitution of the United states and France. This is confirmed by historical works. Many people claim that the success of Norway is because of its great constitution. Many people claim that if Norway didn't have the constitution it has, then Norway would not have had the rights and opportunities which it has today. When it comes to women's rights and opportunities Norway, Finland and Sweden are ranked among the best in the world. Another great country that I like is Japan. A political analysts (don't remember his name) claimed that the secret of success in Japan is its constitution. In my opinion, Japan has the best constitution in the Asian continent. As far as I know, Japan is the only country in Asia with a constitution that don't allows an offensive war. The constitution of Japan only allows war in self-defence. This is similar to the Quranic law which states that war only is allowed for a country, if it wants to defend itself (see verse 2239, 913. Thus, the constitution of Japans seems to be in agreement of the above mentioned Quranic principles. Even though the Quran only allows war in self-defence, there seems to be an exception to this rule in two verses of the Quran. The Quran seems to support peacekeeping missions, similar to the ones the UN have had in the past (see verse 474 and 499).
By the way, I would like to share some information about Article 9 of the Japanese constitution, with you and other members in this forum.
From an article
The Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution (9 Nihonkokukenp dai 9-j?) is a clause in the National Constitution of Japan outlawing war as a means to settle international disputes involving the state. The Constitution came into effect on May 3, 1947, following World War II. In its text, the state formally renounces the sovereign right of belligerency and aims at an international peace based on justice and order. The article also states that, to accomplish these aims, armed forces with war potential will not be maintained, although Japan maintains de facto armed forces, referred to as the Japan Self-Defense Forces which may have originally been thought of as something akin to what Mahatma Gandhi called the Shanti Sena (soldiers of peace) or a collective security police (peace keeping) force operating under the United Nations.
Source
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_9_of_the_Japanese_Constitution
-
Peace everyone
..."Revolution is possible without violence. It's possible to have a revolution of the mind. If you change peoples ideas, then things will change with."
Let me correct an error in the quote above
..."Revolution is possible without violence. It's possible to have a revolution of the mind. If you change peoples ideas, then things will change with it."
I forgot to write the word "it" in the Quote of my post. But now it is fixed.
-
The Arab Spring is utter nonsense, in fact, it is the cause of destruction for the Arabs.
Look at our beautiful Saudi Arabia which has been saved by Allah from the current crises and corruption that has swept most of the Arab world. That is because there was no "Arab Spring" in Saudi Arabia, Alhamdulillah for that!
The Arab spring has effected the following countries 1. Tunisia 2. Egypt 3. Libya 4. Yemen 5. Bahrain 6. Syria
All six of these countries are experiencing the worst turmoil. Syria in particular is in the midst of an appalling civil war.
Monarchy is in fact the best form of government (and the only viable form of government mentioned in the Qur'an BTW)
Democracy is destroying the Arab world and even a lot of the non-Arab Muslim countries. Pakistan is a perfect example.
On the other hand, countries like Saudi, Oman, Emirates, Qatar, and Kuwait are the most secure and peaceful places in the entire Muslim world. This is the blessing of Monarchy and Kingdom.
The Qur'an commands us to obey Allah, obey His Messenger (which is why we follow Sunnah and Hadith), and those who are in a position of authority. That primarily means the government. Obedience to the government is like an article of faith from the Islamic perspective.
Uprising, revolutions, and the like are doomed to failure and invoke the Anger of Allah (Blessed and Most High)
