Decency of the "brotherhood"

[Bang_Ali]

This thread is about the “muslim brothers” (incl. Pakis)

Everytime I point out crimes committed by “muslims” on other muslims, who use Islam as propaganda, I’m accused of being anti-Islamic or attacking Islam itself. Why do these people think so? Why do they think that I am ignorant of Islam?

My cousin is a qualified muftee and a maulana. He is currently studying to become a hafiz, so is my younger brother. I also used to be an Islamic student myself (before the hormones came along!) So I do know what I talk about. Why do people like desi_sunny think they all have some sortof divine connection we don’t?

People like that are very stupid and never answer a straight question with a straight reply, just wishy-washy rhetoric and mumbo-jumbo.

They scream loudly for “Islamic” rule in BD, but fail to see that there is no decent “Islamic” ruler anywhere in the world right now.

Rather than looking at a persons manifesto and their personal ability to do the job, they look at the size of his beard.

I’d like a govmnt in BD that would be free from corruption, if they happen to be good muslims, then that’s fine, I’d be happy. But its not the be all and end all.

They want people like Jammat-E-Islam (BD section) to be in power. Do they not realise that the previous leader of J-E-I was golam azam. He did not even have a BD passport as he refused to accept the existence of BD. He went to pk after BD independence and campaigned against BD. The racist pakis in pk love him for that. The current leader of J-E-I is also another razakar and war criminal.

Do people like sunny not see that having parties like the J-E-I in power in BD would be like Hitler and the nazis gaining control in israel?

And in my thread “racism or ignorance” (from jinnah)
http://www.bangladesh.com/forums/sho...threadid=15490 whats the
best reply I had? Someone (muftee) said that my writing style was poor. Well I’m not entering a creative writing contest so who gives a ****?

And another idiot called fug could only say that the mukthi bahini were terrorists. And he probably thinks he’s really clever for saying that too!

Who are terrorists? Arent they those that go around attacking innocent civilians? How can the mukthi bahini be called terrorists when they didn’t attack civilians, the mukthis fought the wrong doers yet the thick pakis cant understand the concept of freedom fighters.

Then you’ll get those that dent wrong doing by the paki army. When you show
them the evidence (o ye who do not believe),
( http://www.bangladesh.com/forums/sho...threadid=15506 ) they
stay silent.

They say that “in Islam, to kill an innocent is like killing humanity” yet they seem to think its ok to kill 3 million Bengalis.

Do they condem such actions? No. But when a non muslim commits an act of oppression on muslims we hear them all screaming on the streets for revenge. Why do they fear the truth about what their “brothers“ have done?

And the pakis like ali_gohar, pakipowerrr, muftee and janaam seem to make excuses for their army. When these pathetic excuses don’t stand up to scrutiny, they quibble over the very exact figures involved in the genocide.

Do they not have the decency to say “whether it was one life or 3 million isn’t the issue. If only one innocent was murdered then it was one too many”.

Do people like sunny and his paki boyfriends not think that the “islamic brotherhood” should be there for everyone equally and not just for some to use when it suits them?

Till writing this post how many pakis and their self-hating boyfriends have said anything that sounded like what they should really have said that “If only one innocent was murdered then it was one too many”?

[Khilari]

dude

isnt the point that 1971 was evidence of what happens when Islamic brotherhood is ignored?



I can't imagine a single Muslim (ie one who practices Islam) condones the actions of the Pakistani Army in 1971.



But what annoys me is how pathetically racist some Bangalis are: they make racist anti-Pakistani comments based on events over 30yrs ago, over which hardly any Pakistani people in existence today had much influence over.



I agree that one should never forget the crimes perpetrated against Bangladeshis - but surely the people responsible should be the ones held accountable???


NOT AN ENTIRE NATION/RACE OF PEOPLE...!


It is sad that you feel no brotherhood to Pakistanis, but that's your problem. I have no problem loving Muslims regardless of their nationality.

[muftee]

My Salaam to ALL! Mr. Bang is Banging again. I appreciate your love for Islam and your bothers I pray WILL be good for Islamic ummah. NO Sir, I don't say you do not know about Islam, but necessarily may happen it needs some corrections in your way of thinking. I tried to reply to your post at "racism or ignorance", but I could not open that. So I cover the both here.
I never said that your way of writing is incorrect or am I trying to teach you way of writing. I am self is NOT at ALL a good writer. But what I am seeing is you use LOT of unneccessary words and show aggression. You can convey what you say without using LOW words. WHY THIS AGGRESSION?
Ya! if peoplr NOT agree with you, WHY you should be ANGREE and curse on them. IF you HAVE Right to say things then others also have Right to Disagree with you. WHY YOU WANT THAT PEOPLE SHOULD AGREE WITH YOU?
I never said I am a good Muslim, BUT at least I am TRYING to be and aim is to be a GOOD humen being. I Never replied what I meant at that earliar topic. I believe that people should USE own minds also. For me it is NOT Enough to come with certain articles/ pictures and just BLINDLY believe on it. IN NO COURT all over the World can you prove things just by showing articles/ pictures. What you try to forward is some other one's reality! which even he/she might taken from someotherone. We live in a scientific world.
Probably you have not read my post, as I did condemn all misjustice and suppressions. I did condemn ALL KILLINGS NO matter WHO did it. WHY ONE PERSON KILLED? I DO accept that there was a supression, otherwise things should not happened. It was just because in us " Muslims" Islam is MISSING. Killings between two muslims happens only WHEN Islam is NOT there. That's WHY Importance of Islam is become more and more Important.
I never said your writing style is poor and I do NOT consider you anti-islamic.
Your problems rather lies not to accept different views. You go out and self claimed truth teller, BUT of course we ALL can have rights or wrong, what's the matter?
I understand your emotional attachment with your country, and that's not wrong either. It is there in all of us, BUT sometime this attachment sometime hinder us to discuss things more openly. 1971 was a civil war and in civil war it is Total lawlessness. Criminal gangs take advantage. And many things can happen without one can find anyone who do such things. I said that starting this discussion again and again leads to NOTHING. Let's GO AHEAD from here, as this discussion causes Retraumatization as startar of this discussion DO NOT lay this trauma to rest. They scrach the wound again and again and cause pain for themselves and for others too, without winning one single thing.
Lastly, I never tried to Attack anyone. If you felt been attacked by me I AM SORRY and please do let me know whenever you feel like that. It will be a BIG HELP for me to be a batter person.
Take care ALI!
Allah Hafiz
muftee

[Star]

i don't think this post is directed at me because i don't think our views have been absolute poles apart - sure i sometimes disagree with aspects of what you've said and sometimes agree - and maybe you'd say the same of me..

but when i personally have referred to "unislamic" behaviour - at those times it wasn't directed at you.. but specifically at those who attack the faith of Islam as a consequence of 1971 - i don't think that has been your objective.

ie.

to accuse the Prophet(sas) of being a rapist and a murderer - is Un-Islamic

to reject the Quran is the ultimate source of guidance for Muslims (whether we are able to follow it or not being another issue)

to say Allah is unjust - is Un-Islamic

to say that Islam is judged by the actions of its followers - and hence Islam is intrinsically linked to the fallout in 1971

to say that those committing attrocities were good muslims nay "pious" muslims is, well not un-islamic but just a mistruth... (any half-decent worthy scholar will tell you that piety isn't just about praying or just about having a beard, it's realm is way beyond that - including our behaviour, attitudes, personalities etc)


As for anger towards Pakistanis... i get angry when i think about what took place in 1971... but obviously when i see a pakistani in the UK today i don't think automatically..he raped/murdered in the 1970s - but then i'm sure you don't think that either... as for racial stereotyping - i think i can be guilty of that myself, although i recognise that individuals should not be judged purely according to the blood that flows through their veins... and i think even you probably feel that way - your anger at pakistanis in general being more a release for your (OUR even) anger at the events of 1971.


And Golam Azam - and the JI - from what i hear about them - i dislike them as much as the next guy - to be Islamic does not / should not mean that you have to plege alliegance to the jamatis - luckily in this country it is possible to be Islamically-interested and not be a member of the Hizb or Jamat - i think in Bangladesh it is less the case.



in 1971 - hypocritical / so-called / misguided / sinful -muslims (technically some i'm sure would be apostates because of their views) attacked muslims.


muslims stood aside and did nothing - non-muslims also stood aside and did nothing.. add to this the holocaust-deniers - but they're not only muslim or pakistani, how many european sources talk about the 3million dead bangladeshis? i've looked at some western statistics of crimes against humanity in the 20th century and many are ignorant of the fact.


arabs stood by and didn't respond (arabs who've fallen prey to colonial-brainwashing and who in the 20th century were more into arab-nationalism than anything else) - YES - but so did the almighty west.. AMERICA - AMERICA implicitly backed Pakistan - there is evidence to suggest the CIA supported (openly or covertly) the assasination of Mujib.


my point is that i don't think its right to pick and choose the appropriate bits of this picture and turn it into a means of critiquing the faith of Islam

but then as i've said i don't think that's what you yourself are doing.


i know i'm just rambling now... sorry

[Edited by Star on 27th February 2004 at 02:06]

[Amar-Sonar-Bangla]

I think the most dangerous aspect to the idea of an 'Islamic brotherhood' which allegedly overarches ethnic, social and national boundaries (though historical proof is rather lacking)is the fact that those who support this idea have to resort to gross and offensive distortions of history.

When I first came upon this forum, it was heavily Islamised (I'd urge posters to click back and take note of the huge numbers of Khilafist, Shia Iranian and other fundamentalist threads) to the point where Islamists were saying Bangladesh was better under Pakistani rule and that independance only meant the increase of Indian influence! (Incidently, Jamal Hasan makes a point of this phenomenon of rabid Anti-Hindu/India hatred among Bangla/Pak Islamists, in his article I've posted on Open forum). Several Islamist Bangali's also loudly asserted the fact that they did not recognise the authority of 'man-made' Bangladesh (they were ok enough with Islamic Iran)!

9/10 of Islamic history actually involves Muslim disunity, not Muslim unity. Political unity is a sentimental expression of the current Muslim powerlessness, and is not rooted in historical or political reality.

This word--->reality--is the worst enemy of the Islamist.

It was no suprise that Communist Russia (and the Eastern block) and Hindia India were instrumental in aiding Bangali's in realising their freedom from Islamist feudal Pakistani rule. After independance, not one Islamic country would recognise us of their own accord. It was only because of Indian and Russian pressure that countries like Iraq and those in Eastern Europe, recognised us before 1974. It was only after the Islamic Conference of 1974 (when Pakistan gave the go-ahead) that most Muslim countries deigned to recognise our newly independant nation. The price of this recognition? Bangladesh had to renounce claims to compensation and justice for the victims of Pakistani atrocities. Agreeing to restore normal relations. No Bangali should forget this perfidy.

For instance, Pakistani's on this board such as Muftee, Janaam, Dilkashahzada and Pakipowerrr (and their Bangali Islamist friends such as Khilari and Fug) make erroneous and quite frankly malicious statements such as 'Indians were responsible for the genocide of 1971,' or 'the criminal Awami League killed Bangali citizens' and 'Kashmir is the worst case of human rights abuse since World War II'. This is calculated to cause offense to any right-thinking Bangali who is familiar with even the rudiments of the events of the liberation war.

There is just soooo much academic evidence out there to disprove these idiotic statements. Which often use Islam as a cloak of legitimacy. These assertions are nothing more than Islamist/Pakistani politically motivated rhetoric.

Ultimately, those of an Islamist bent would have us forget/excuse the bitter Islamist yesteryear so that they can build their Islamist tomorrow.

The questioning of the liberation war and the establishment of Bangladesh, a country built on a solid cultural base, a country established so Bangali's can speak Bangla and live in peace and dignity, is nothing more or less than an attempt to legitimise political Islam.

However, politics is a divisive game. Whichever ideology is held forth, will be vigourously challenged by those who disagree and the cynics. Therefore, even Islamism comes under attack from many (in fact most) Muslims. Hence every time Bangali Islamists venture forth, those of a more liberal democratic bent will always remind them of the collaborationist Muslims of 1971.

The only weapon, and a potent one when used among uneducated ppl's used to identity politics, is to brand those who use historical/political truth and ration and logic of being 'UnIslamic'. Of saying 'they said this' and 'they said that'. And yet, it comes out they 'they' didn't say anything. Or it was within a certain context or that when challenged, the Islamist in question has to worm themselves out of the discussion. lol

Some Islamists believe if they repeat the same accusations and catchphrases again and again, the mud will stick. Unfortunately, they forget that they sell themselves and the ideals they represent, Islam, short by compromising themselves so blatantly. And Islam when propagated by the unworthy, almost always suffers from it.

As for Pakistani's, these selfish and politically manipulated fools actually expect Bangali's to support them in such 'worthy' Pakistani (oh, I meant 'Islamic') causes as their claims on Kashmir and confrontation with India!!! I say leave them to their own devices.

Have you noticed how Pakistani's are the first to extol the virtues of 'brotherhood' and in almost all UK Islamic political meetings/gatherings, they almost invariably grasp for the leadership role? Bangali's are not nearly as politically driven as the Pakistani's. Surely a lasting legacy of the betrayal by the believers, delivered in 1971?

Rest assured Bang_Ali, these Islamiblaggers would be booted out of any Bangali meeting or conference, if they dared to mouth even a 10th of the bigtalk and politically-motivated historical distortion they engage in. I've always appreciated your candor and forthright views on the subject of the 1971 conflict and I think you hold the views that reflect those of the Bangali on the street, rather than the 'cafe society' Islamist delitents that sometimes post here.

Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.

[hac]

Lemme guess:

Another thread on 1971.....? Just a wild stab in the dark...

[Amar-Sonar-Bangla]

Ah, what a refreshing change. Not a single Iranian or Shia missionary-related post in sight. Although it certainly looks as if that ‘oversight’ is soon to be remedied. What would a Bangladeshi forum do without it’s Shia’s?