Hizb Al-Tahrir Rally at Al-Aqsa Mosque Calls on Pakistan Army to Liberate

[punit]

What a stupid reply.

its reality .. even if u wont like it. There is hardly any difference b/w airstrikes done by PAF or IAF.

you feeling sorry for the terrorists being killed? Is India against the Pakistan army operation in KPK against Taliban? Just asking for your point of view sir.

no i am just concerned about collateral damage. If drone strikes kill innocents so does PAF strikes or for that matter Israeli Air Force Strikes .

 

[FaujHistorian]

Let's consider the reality.

HT: Political party calling for Khilafah and for Muslims to become major world players.

Pak Gov't: Nawaz. Zardari. Corrupion. Nepotism. Debt.

Let's proportion our vitriol appropriately.

HT calling for stone age Khilafa is far worse crime as it involves corruption of our religion, disrespect of our prophet pbuh and against the teachings of Allah swt.

If you steal few pennies, you committed a crime for sure.

But if you pushed millions into jahiliyyah in the name of God and prophet? that's crime against humanity.

Hope you now understand the concept of "proportionality".


peace

 

[airmarshal]

Isn't Hizbu Tahrir an organization heavily infiltrated by British intel?

Indians are having a great troll thread. Please close it to get rid of these roaches.

 

[EagleEyes]

I hope you folks would not complain when the others do it to you then.

As Mushy would say keep them coming.

Like India we must do double policy, unless its much stronger than ours or phatto.

 

[waz]

Let's just concentrate on our own region.

 

[Quwa]

HT calling for stone age Khilafa is far worse crime as it involves corruption of our religion, disrespect of our prophet pbuh and against the teachings of Allah swt.

If you steal few pennies, you committed a crime for sure.

But if you pushed millions into jahiliyyah in the name of God and prophet? that's crime against humanity.

Hope you now understand the concept of "proportionality".


peace

A couple of things.

1. Khilafah is a fard (i.e. obligation) on Muslims. Allah (swt) clearly commanded us in the Qur'an to rule by His (swt)'s commands. The Prophet (saw) lived to demonstrate how Allah (swt)'s commands ought to be implemented, and he (saw) clearly stipulated the need for Khilafah. Not only did he (saw) establish one with the help of Ansar and Muhajireen in Madina, but mandated its continued use and growth to the Sahaba (RA).

2. At the end of the day, whatever HT espouses are merely thoughts and ideas. If you're going to equate ideas -- which you're entitled to engage and refute intellectually, btw -- with real life policies that actually put people in harm's way and affect their wellbeing, then I advise you get your priorities in order. However bad you view HT's thoughts, their thoughts at this time are no where near as relevant as the GOP's bad policymaking to the actual lives and wellbeing of Pakistanis.

 

[FaujHistorian]

FYI the implementation of Khilafah is a fard (i.e. obligation) on the Muslim Ummah.

Oh bro

Please no talk like a madrassah student here.

There is no fard.

And Ummah as per Quran includes Christians, and Jews and Muslims and even sabieen.

So please quit this narrow minded shenanigans.

Thank you and with respect.

 

[Quwa]

Oh bro

Please no talk like a madrassah student here.

There is no fard.

And Ummah as per Quran includes Christians, and Jews and Muslims and even sabieen.

So please quit this narrow minded shenanigans.

Thank you and with respect.

Let's start with the ayat/verses outlining Allah (swt)'s commands on us:

"And rule between them by that which Allah revealed to you, and do not follow their vain desires away from the truth which came to you." (Qur'an 5:48)

And rule between them by that which Allah revealed to you and do not follow their whims, and beware (be on the alert) that they may deviate you away from even some part of what Allah revealed to you." (Qur'an 5:49)​

Then onto a few ahadith of Rasul'Allah (saw) on the subject:

"The Prophets ruled over the children of Israel, whenever a Prophet died another Prophet succeeded him, but there will be no Prophet after me. There will be Khulafaa' and they will number many.' They asked: ‘What then do you order us?' He said: ‘Fulfil the Bay'ah to them one after the other and give them their due. Surely Allah will ask them about what He entrusted them with.'" (Muslim)

"Whosoever takes off his hand from allegiance to Allah (swt) will meet Him (swt) on the Day of Resurrection without having any proof for him, and whoso dies whilst there was no Bay'ah (allegiance) on his neck (to a Khaleefah), he dies a death of Jahiliyyah (ignorance).'" (Muslim)​

Then the views of the classical fuqahah (scholars):

“They (scholars of ahl al-sunnah) said regarding the khilafah and imamah that the Imamah is an obligation obligated on the ummah to the end of establishing the imam who would appoint for them judges and ministers, secure their frontiers, mobilise their armies, divide the fay’, and give justice to the oppressed from the oppressors; and they said that the way of contracting the imamah for the ummah is by their choice through exertion of effort.” - Abd al-Qahir al Baghdadi (died in 1037 CE) in al-Farq bayn al-Firaq, page 340.

“All of ahl ul-sunnah agreed, as did all the murji’a, all the shi’a, and all the khawarij upon the obligation of the Imamah, and that it is obligatory on the ummah to submit to a just imam, who establishes upon them the ahkam of Allah, and manages their affairs by the ahkam of the shari’a with which the Messenger of Allah (saw) came; except only the najadat from the khawarij who said: the people are not obliged with the imamah, rather what is upon them is to mutually practice the what is correct between them.” ibn Hazm (died 1064) in al-Fasl fi Milal wa 'l-Ahwaa' wa 'l-Nihal' 4:87

“The Imams (of the four madhabs: Abu Hanifa, Malik, Shaf’i, Ahmad) - may Allah have mercy on them – all consented that the Imamah is an obligation, and that the Muslims must appoint an imam who would implement the rites of the deen, and give the oppressed justice against the oppressors, and they agreed that it is not permitted that there be over the Muslims, at any one time, two imams, in agreement or discord, and that the imams are from Quraysh and that is permitted for the imam to choose a successor.” Imam al-Juzayri (died in 1360) in al-Fiqh ‘ala al-Mathahib al-Arba’a, 5:416​

Secondly, as for the definition of "ummah."

The linguistic definition of "ummah" is 'nation' or 'community.' The term is referring to a set of people, irrespective of usage. In the Qur'an and Sunnah, we've seen specific mentions made to the 'ummah' of Muhammad (saw). In broad terms this could include everyone who came during and after the time of the Prophet (saw) (Muslims and non-Muslims), but in other contexts, it is referring to the people who accepted Muhammad (saw) as the seal of prophets and messengers, i.e. Muslims.

In the Qur'an Allah (swt) says to the Muslims:

"You are the best ummah produced [as an example] for mankind. You enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong and believe in Allah." (Qur'an: 3:110)​

 

[FaujHistorian]

Let's start with the ayat/verses outlining Allah (swt)'s commands on us:

"And rule between them by that which Allah revealed to you, and do not follow their vain desires away from the truth which came to you." (Qur'an 5:48)

And rule between them by that which Allah revealed to you and do not follow their whims, and beware (be on the alert) that they may deviate you away from even some part of what Allah revealed to you." (Qur'an 5:49)​

Then onto a few ahadith of Rasul'Allah (saw) on the subject:

"The Prophets ruled over the children of Israel, whenever a Prophet died another Prophet succeeded him, but there will be no Prophet after me. There will be Khulafaa' and they will number many.' They asked: ‘What then do you order us?' He said: ‘Fulfil the Bay'ah to them one after the other and give them their due. Surely Allah will ask them about what He entrusted them with.'" (Muslim)

"Whosoever takes off his hand from allegiance to Allah (swt) will meet Him (swt) on the Day of Resurrection without having any proof for him, and whoso dies whilst there was no Bay'ah (allegiance) on his neck (to a Khaleefah), he dies a death of Jahiliyyah (ignorance).'" (Muslim)​

Then the views of the classical fuqahah (scholars):

“They (scholars of ahl al-sunnah) said regarding the khilafah and imamah that the Imamah is an obligation obligated on the ummah to the end of establishing the imam who would appoint for them judges and ministers, secure their frontiers, mobilise their armies, divide the fay’, and give justice to the oppressed from the oppressors; and they said that the way of contracting the imamah for the ummah is by their choice through exertion of effort.” - Abd al-Qahir al Baghdadi (died in 1037 CE) in al-Farq bayn al-Firaq, page 340.

“All of ahl ul-sunnah agreed, as did all the murji’a, all the shi’a, and all the khawarij upon the obligation of the Imamah, and that it is obligatory on the ummah to submit to a just imam, who establishes upon them the ahkam of Allah, and manages their affairs by the ahkam of the shari’a with which the Messenger of Allah (saw) came; except only the najadat from the khawarij who said: the people are not obliged with the imamah, rather what is upon them is to mutually practice the what is correct between them.” ibn Hazm (died 1064) in al-Fasl fi Milal wa 'l-Ahwaa' wa 'l-Nihal' 4:87

“The Imams (of the four madhabs: Abu Hanifa, Malik, Shaf’i, Ahmad) - may Allah have mercy on them – all consented that the Imamah is an obligation, and that the Muslims must appoint an imam who would implement the rites of the deen, and give the oppressed justice against the oppressors, and they agreed that it is not permitted that there be over the Muslims, at any one time, two imams, in agreement or discord, and that the imams are from Quraysh and that is permitted for the imam to choose a successor.” Imam al-Juzayri (died in 1360) in al-Fiqh ‘ala al-Mathahib al-Arba’a, 5:416​

Secondly, as for the definition of "ummah."

The linguistic definition of "ummah" is 'nation' or 'community.' The term is referring to a set of people, irrespective of usage. In the Qur'an and Sunnah, we've seen specific mentions made to the 'ummah' of Muhammad (saw). In broad terms this could include everyone who came during and after the time of the Prophet (saw) (Muslims and non-Muslims), but in other contexts, it is referring to the people who accepted Muhammad (saw) as the seal of prophets and messengers, i.e. Muslims.

In the Qur'an Allah (swt) says to the Muslims:

"You are the best ummah produced [as an example] for mankind. You enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong and believe in Allah." (Qur'an: 3:110)​

please do not quote Quran in bits and pieces.

Hypocrites used to do this, and still do.

Quote the chapter, rokuu, so the context could be understood.

thank you

 

[Quwa]

please do not quote Quran in bits and pieces.

Hypocrites used to do this, and still do.

Quote the chapter, rokuu, so the context could be understood.

thank you

The ayat came from Surah Ma'idah, which is known as one of the surat (alongside Bakarah and Nisaa') outlining specific commands for the Muslims. This surah covers matters such as food, consumable items, murder, etc. As with Bakarah and Nisaa', Ma'idah reaffirms the obligation of obeying Allah (swt) in all matters.

For further elaboration, you can take a look at a tafsir (scholarly exegesis of Qur'an), and in the case of the above verse, Tafsir al-Jalalayn states:

"And judge between them according to what God has revealed, and do not follow their whims, and beware of them lest they seduce you, [lest] they lead you astray, from part of what God has revealed to you. But if they turn away, from the judgement revealed, and desire some other, then know that God desires to smite them, with punishment in this world, for some of their sins, [those] which they have committed, among them, their turning away, and [that He desires] to requite them for all of their sins in the Hereafter; surely, many of mankind are wicked."​

http://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp...No=49&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2

 

[FaujHistorian]

The ayat came from Surah Ma'idah, which is known as one of the surat (alongside Bakarah and Nisaa') outlining specific commands for the Muslims. This surah covers matters such as food, consumable items, murder, etc. As with Bakarah and Nisaa', Ma'idah reaffirms the obligation of obeying Allah (swt) in all matters.

For further elaboration, you can take a look at a tafsir (scholarly exegesis of Qur'an), and in the case of the above verse, Tafsir al-Jalalayn states:

"And judge between them according to what God has revealed, and do not follow their whims, and beware of them lest they seduce you, [lest] they lead you astray, from part of what God has revealed to you. But if they turn away, from the judgement revealed, and desire some other, then know that God desires to smite them, with punishment in this world, for some of their sins, [those] which they have committed, among them, their turning away, and [that He desires] to requite them for all of their sins in the Hereafter; surely, many of mankind are wicked."​

http://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp...No=49&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2

Brother I know from where it came from.

I was suggesting you not to quote one aya here and one aya there.

That type of quotation removes the context and thus can be misinterpreted.

Always quote the chapter, or rokuu, or the whole story. never just one sentence.

 

[Quwa]

Brother I know from where it came from.

I was suggesting you not to quote one aya here and one aya there.

That type of quotation removes the context and thus can be misinterpreted.

Always quote the chapter, or rokuu, or the whole story. never just one sentence.

Fair enough.

 

[Arsalan]

its reality .. even if u wont like it. There is hardly any difference b/w airstrikes done by PAF or IAF.



no i am just concerned about collateral damage. If drone strikes kill innocents so does PAF strikes or for that matter Israeli Air Force Strikes .

oky i got it now, i was just curious as i could not remember your concern of collateral damage when we were discussing drone strikes, anyway.

Yes there is collateral damage, that is why authorities tried to clear all areas of civilians BEFORE the operation began. You can search out about IDP's in Bannu - Pakistan to know about the internally displaced people of waziristan that were moved to temporary camps to minimize the collateral damage of the operation. This, will however do just that, MINIMIZE the collateral damage.

 

[tarrar]

This is the reason why PA is kept busy, so that no one can question Israel. All the Arab countries know PA is strong & the best, this strikes fear in the hearts of Israel. So they have found cheap tactics to keep Pakistan busy & they have done it with success. Their first & most important success is to have massively corrupt & incompetent politicians in Pakistan. Second is to use India against Pakistan, which they are doing it from Afghanistan & we know what all Indian consulates are doing in Afghanistan which are stationed along the border.

GOD help Pakistan & I pray we defeat corrupt & incompetent politicians, this will be a success for Pakistan & defeat to the enemies of Pakistan, May GOD help us to achieve success, AMEEN.

 

[Quwa]

Generally speaking the U.S does not want Pakistan turning into a serious regional power.

The U.S needs a strong and uninterrupted India. With its renewed focus on Asia Pacific and its desire to contain China, the U.S. is looking to build around China a series of strong buffers, i.e. India, Japan and ROK. For that to happen, India cannot be bogged down by Pakistan, much less actually put under serious threat by Pakistan. The U.S. wants the margin of difference between India and Pakistan to be significant, with India at the top, of course.

Just consider the following realities:

• It is India that's receiving favours in regards to its nuclear programs, Pakistan's can't even get fuel from the NSG.
  
  
• It is India that's getting the best military equipment. Sure, it's buying, but if money were a problem for Pakistan the U.S. could simply give aid (akin to Israel and Egypt), not happening (for buying arms).
  
  
• Speaking of money, it's Pakistan that's being pushed to spend/lose tens of billions dollars fighting within its own territory. Yes, there's a terrorism problem that needs to solved, but the U.S wants Pakistan to focus on fighting the very groups the U.S is having trouble with in Afghanistan.
  
  
• As a result of this war, our economy isn't functioning or producing wealth to its true potential (corruption notwithstanding). Consequently, we cannot as easily fund critical arms acquisitions, e.g. we dropped the U-214, we stalled MILGEM, we're scratching over T-129 even though we need it now, etc.

With all this in mind, it's clear Pakistan isn't the party that's benefiting from America's presence within our region, but Pakistan is the one sacrificing the most. It is the Pak Army's efforts in Waziristan today that is helping the U.S cement a permanent presence in Afghanistan (via the Bilateral Security Agreement and the desire to weaken the Taliban).

Now given what we've seen of America's presence in the region thus far, i.e. drone strikes, OBL raid, shameless support for India, etc, how exactly is Pakistan working for its own interests?

This is the key point, because if Pakistan were a serious regional power, it'd be working for its interests, and its interests DO NOT see the U.S. holding a position in Afghanistan, nor does it see India becoming the sole power of South Asia, nor does it see China being contained, nor does it see India building a presence in Afghanistan, Arabian Sea or even the Gulf Arab countries, nor does it see Iran becoming very powerful, etc, etc.

Pakistanis want to be the leading powerbrokers, but our rulers prefer subordinating Pakistan's policymaking to the likes of the U.S, and in some cases, to India (see our MFN or Indus Water Treaty). This problem needs to be addressed, the individuals selling Pakistan out need to be kicked out, otherwise, we won't be able to solve our internal and external problems in the appropriate manner. On the note of Waziristan, our Army can't even buy the helicopters it needs to fight properly.