لماذا لا يصارح المسلمون انفسهم بأن معظمهم ارهابيون محتملون؟

نعم السؤال صحيح تماماً . مؤلم لي كمسلم متدين، اعرف أنه مؤلم لكثيرين غيري من المسلمين. لكنها الحقيقة التي يجب أن نصارح انفسنا بها. فداعش والقاعدة وغيرها من التنظيمات المتطرفة والإرهابية هم ابناء شرعيين، وليس نشاذ كما يدعي كثير من المسلمين. داعش تستند الى آيات في القرآن الكريم وفي الأحاديث والسيرة النبوية والتاريخ الإسلامي. استناد داعش وغيرها لا يعتمد على تأويل خاطئ، ولكن على نصوص مباشرة صريحة ووقائع واحداث واضحة وصريحة للنبي محمد عليه الصلاة والسلام وللصحابة وللتاريخ الإسلامي. إنها الثقافة الدينية التقليدية لدى المسلمين، السنة على وجه الخصوص، والتي تجعل كثيراً منهم ارهابيون محتملون، تجعلهم ابناء لداعش . واذا لم يحدث أن صار المسلم متطرف أو ارهابي، فهذا معناه أنه تجاهل هذه الثقافة ، أو أنه استقر على أن يتصالح مع نفسه باعتباره “مسلم غير ملتزم”.

الأمر هنا لا يتعلق بمنطقة الشرق الأوسط فقط، رغم أنها المنطقة التي ظهرت فيها معظم الأفكار المتطرفة والإرهابية وصدرته الى كل مكان في العالم. فهذه الثقافة ستجدها بعد ثورة الإتصالات والإنترنت في كل مكان ، في الشرق وفي الغرب، في كندا والمانيا واستراليا ونيجيريا والفلبين وغيرها وغيرها. لقد سمعت تجليات هذه الثقافة في مساجد بكندا، مثلما سمعتها في مساجد مصر، مثلما يمكن أن تسمعها على اليويتويب لمشايخ وائمة في كل بلاد الله. لذلك ليس غريباً أن تنتج هذه الثقافة ارهابيين من جنسيات مختلفة ومن كل مكان في العالم.

هذه الثقافة الدينية التقليدية السنية تحول المسلم العادي الى قنبلة موقوتة يمكن أن تنفجر في أي لحظة، في أي مكان.اذا سنحت الظروف والبيئة الحاضنة لها. تزيد أو تقل حسب طبيعة وظروف كل بلد. لكنها حتماً موجودة. فهي الأرضية الصلبة التي انتجت تنظيمات مثل الإخوان المسلمين والتي منها خرجت القاعدة والجهاد وداعش وغيرها. فالأساس الفكري الديني لكل ذلك مشترك. لا فارق في الجوهر، الإختلاف في الدرجة وليس النوع. داعش تؤسس دولة الخلافة بقسوة ودموية. الإخوان المسلمون يريدونها ديكتاورية دينية بطلاء ديمقراطي لطيف لا يختلف كثيراً عن نظام الملالي في ايران.

صحيح أن هناك رؤي اسلامية متسامحة، وصحيح أن هناك اجتهادات عظيمة تصالح بين المسلم وبين العالم ، لكن الصحيح الذي نحتاج الى الإعتراف به كمسلمين، وأنا أولهم ، هو أن هذه ليست الثقافة الدينية السائدة في اوساط عموم المسلمين السنة. ولابد أن نصارح انفسنا كمسلمين بأن الخطاب الديني السائد في اوساط المسلمين السنة في أي مكان في العالم، هو خطاب في معظمه عدائي عنصري دموي، قابل للإنفجار عندما تسنح الفرصة. لذلك لم يعد الإرهابيون فقط هم القادمون من الشرق الأوسط، بل القادمون من كل مكان في العالم، بسبب انتشار ثورة الإتصالات التي سهلت التعاطي مع هذا الخطاب الديني الإرهابي.

من اين تأتي هذه الثقافة الدينية الإرهابي؟

من النص القرآني ذاته. فالحقيقة هي أن القرآن الكريم مليئ بالعديد والعديد من آيات التسامح وحرية التدين واحترام الإختلاف .. الى اخر القيم الإنسانية العظيمة. لكنه ايضاً مليئ بآيات تحرض على القتل والكراهية . لذلك من الطبيعي ان تجد الكثير والكثير من المسلمين والكثير والكثير من الأئمة والمشايخ يقولون لك وهم صادقين أن ما تفعله داعش ليس هو الإسلام. السبب أنهم يستندون الى آيات كثيرة تدعو للتسامح والمحبة وغيرها من القيم الإنسانية الرفيعة ، لكنهم لا ينفون الآيات المعاكسة، التي تدعو للكراهية والقتل ، وهي التي تستند اليها داعش.

ذات الأمر ستجده في الأحاديث والسيرة النبوية التي نُقلت عن النبي العظيم محمد صلي الله عليه وسلم. فهناك احاديث غاية في الإنسانية وهناك غيرها يحرض على القتل والتنكيل بالخصوم من الكفار واليهود والمسيحيين وغيرهم. فالنبي لم يكن مجرد رسول ولكنه في ذات الوقت ولأسباب متعلقة بطبيعة المجتمع البدوي الذي ظهرت فيه رسالة الإسلام، كان مضطراً لخوض المعارك المسلحة بكافة اشكالها ضد الخصوم، وهم الكفار واليهود وغيرهم. فمن أين نأخد عنه، هل الرسول صاحب الرسالة السامية أم الرسول المحارب والمقاتل.

صحابة النبي والخلفاء الراشدين في السير المنقولة عنهم الكثير من التسامح، ولكن هناك ايضاً الكثير من الدم، والكثير من نشر الإسلام بقوة السلاح وباحتلال بلاد اخرى، وما يتبع ذلك من جرائم حرب وجرائم ضد الإنسانية. بل وخلفاء النبي صلي الله عليه وسلم خاضوا حروباً دموية ضد بعضهم البعض في صراع محموم على الحكم . وثلاثة منهم قتلوا بالسلاح ( عمر بن الخطاب وعلي بن ابي طالب وعثمان بن عفان).

عموم التاريخ الإسلامي فيه جانب دموي، مثلما هو مليئ بالقيم العظيمة ومليئ بالحضارة التي ساهمت في التقدم الإنساني.

دعني اقول لك إن الإسلام ليس استثناءً في هذا التاريخ الدموي. فهكذا كل الديانات، بما فيها المسيحية. ورجال الدين الإسلامي ليسوا استثناء، فالقتل والدم تم باسم الله بواسطة كل الأديان. ثم أن الإمبرطوريات القديمة شرقية وغربية ارتكبت في توسعاتها الإستعمارية الجرائم البشعة. والإمبراطورية الإسلامية ليست استثناءً في ذلك. ولابد أن نتذكر أن الإستعمار الغربي للعالم في العصر الحديث كان مقروناً بالدماء، وكان في كثير من الأحيان يفعل ذلك تحت راية الصليب.

لكن هذه الأديان ومنها اليهودية والمسيحية تطورت لأسباب كثيرة وتنازلت عن الجانب الدموي فيها. وتصالحت مع العالم ومع الحياة. اظن أن هذا ما يحتاج اليه المسلمين. فللأسف هم يقدسون الجانب الدموي في ثقافتهم الدينية السائدة، وحان الوقت للتخلص نهائياً من النصوص الدموية. والتبرؤ من الجرائم الدموية في تاريخهم. فقد كان كل ذلك مرتبط بزمانه وظروفه و لسنا مضطرين للإقتداء به. اعتقد أننا نحتاج الى التخلي عن الإقتداء بالأداء السياسي للرسول محمد صلي الله عليه وسلم. فقد خاض معارك في زمانه كان مضطراً لها لحماية الدعوة الوليدة، واظن أننا لسنا مضطرين لذلك. لقد خاض مثلاً صراعاً دموياً مع بعض اليهود في زمنه ، فهذا لا يعني اننا في صراع مع اليهودية أو اليهود في كل زمان ومكان. نقتدي بأدء النبي العظيم كرسول للقيم الإنسانية العظيمة. كما نحتاج لأن نتخلى عن كل ما هو ضد الإنسانية في الفقه الإسلامي وفي التاريخ الإسلامي . نبقي على القيم العظيمة في هذا التاريخ، هذه القيم التي تحمي انسانيتنا ، ونتبرأ كما فعل غيرنا من الغزوات والعنف والدم. ننتقل من خانة العداء للإنسانية الى خانة أننا جزءً منها، جزء من تقدمها ، نحن بشر مثل الآخرين.

Why do Muslims “frankly” tell themselves that many of them are potential terrorists? 

Yes that question was absolutely correct. It’s painful for me as a religious Muslim, as I know that it is painful for a lot of other Muslims. But that’s the truth that we should face:

ISIS and Al-Qaeda and other extremist and terrorist organizations are legitimate sons, not illegitimate as many Muslims claim.

ISIS actions are based on verses from Holy Quran, Hadith (Sayings of Prophet Muhammad), Sirah (Biography of Prophet Muhammad) and Islamic history. They are not based on wrongful interpretations, but on direct and explicit texts, facts and events of Prophet Muhammad, Sahabah (prophet Muhammad companions) and Islamic history. It’s the traditional religious culture of Muslims – especially Sunni – that makes many of them potential terrorists, potential sons of ISIS. And if it doesn’t happen for a Muslim to turn to be an extremist r terrorist, that means that he chose to ignore this culture, or he settled on reconcile with himself as an” uncommitted Muslim”.

It’s not only the matter of Middle East region, although it’s the region where all these extreme and terroristic thoughts came to light and then exported to the rest of the world. But after the communication and internet revolution you can find that culture everywhere, east and west, in Canada, Germany, Australia, Nigeria, Philippines, etc.

I’ve even heard this culture’s manifestations in a mosque in Canada, as I heard it in mosques in Egypt, as you can hear it on Youtube by Sheikhs and Imams from all around the world. So it’s not weird for this culture to produce terrorists of different nationalities and from all over the world.

This traditional religious Sunni culture has the ability to transform the normal Muslim into a time bomb that may explode at any moment, anywhere, just if the circumstances and incubator environment allowed that, chances of that may increase or decrease depending on each country’s nature and circumstances, but it’s definitely exist. This is the solid base that produced an organization such as Muslim Brotherhood which in turn produced Al-Qaeda, Jehad, ISIS and others. The religious intellectual basis of all that organizations is the same; there are no differences in core, only in degree and class but not in kind and type. As while ISIS establishs the Caliphate State in a cruelly and bloody way, the Muslim Brotherhood want a religious dictatorship with a nice democratic appearance which would not be that much different than the Mullahs regime in Iran.

It’s true that there are tolerant Islamic views, and it’s true that there are great efforts to achieve reconciliation between Muslims and world, but the other fact that we “as Muslims” have to admit: is that this tolerant culture isn’t prevalent between Sunni Muslims in general.

We also have to admit that the most prevailing religious discourse between Sunni Muslims all around the world is mostly hostile, racist and bloody; can explode when the opportunity arises. So terrorists now aren’t only coming from the Middle East, but coming from everywhere in the world, because of the spread of communications revolution that facilitated dealing with this terroristic religious discourse.

From where does this terroristic religious culture come?

It came from the Quran itself. The truth is that the Holy Quran is full of lots and lots of tolerance, freedom of faith, respect of difference and many other great humanitarian values. But it’s also full of verses that incite for killing and hatred. So it’s normal to find many Muslims and lots and lots of Imams and sheikhs telling you that ISIS actions don’t represent the real Islam. The reason is that they are relying on verses that call for tolerance, peace, love and many other great humanitarian values, while they don’t deny that there’re contrary verses, which call for hatred and killing, those verses that have been taken by ISIS as main reference.

The same thing in Hadith and Prophet Muhammad’s (pbuh) Sirah. As there are very humanitarian Hadith, there are many others that incite for killing and abusing antagonists like infidels, Jews, Christians and others. Prophet Muhammad was not only God’s messenger, but also – For reasons related to the nature of the Bedouin community in which the message of Islam arose – he had to fight all forms of armed battles against antagonists. So which one we should take from, the messenger of peace or the fighter and warrior?

The biographies of Sahaba and Caliphs tell us about a lot of tolerance, and also about a lot of bloodshed, spreading Islam by force and occupation of other countries, and the subsequent war crimes and crimes against humanity. They even fought themselves in “the struggle for the throne” bloody wars, and three of them were murdered (Omar bin al-Khattab – Othman bin Affan – Ali bin Abi Talib).

There is a bloody side in the Islamic history, as there’re many great values and great civilization that contributed to humanity progress.

Let me tell you that Islam isn’t an exception in this bloody history; it includes all religions, including Christianity. Also Islam clerics aren’t exception, killing and bloodshed in the name of God occurred by all religions. Also eastern and western ancient empires committed a lot of heinous crimes during their colonial expansions, and Islamic empire isn’t an exception. We also must remember that the western colonization in modern era was coupled with blood, and that happened in many events under the cross flag.

But all those religions including Judaism and Christianity have been developed for many reasons and waived their bloody side, reconciled with world and life. And I think that this is exactly what Muslims need. Unfortunately they revere the bloody side of their prevailing religious culture, but that’s the time to get rid of all of those bloody texts, and to disown all those bloody crimes in their history. All of that was related to its time and circumstances and we don’t have to follow it. We need to stop following the political performance of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). He had to fight these battles in his time to protect the new message of Islam, and I think that we don’t have to do the same. As an example: he fought a bloody conflict with some of the Jews in his time, this does not mean that we are in conflict with Judaism or Jews in every time and place. We have to follow Prophet Muhammad as a messenger of great humanitarian values, while we have to waive everything else against humanity in Islamic jurisprudence “Fiqh” and Islamic history. Keeping the great values in this history, that values that protect our humanity, and disown – like others – the invasions, violence and blood. Move from being enemies of humanity to become part of it, effective part of its progress, we are humans just like others.

Saied Shoaaib

Egyptian Writer

saiedshoaaib@gmail.com

http://tsecnetwork.ca/2015/09/28/isis-is-the-legitimate-son-of-islam/

What is a Killer Imam Doing in Public Libraries in Canada?

by Saied Shoaaib
February 21, 2017 at 4:00 am

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/9974/ottawa-public-library-islam

Share137

Comment

• How is it possible that books that advocate violence and extremism meet the "selection criteria" of the Ottawa Public Library, but those that speak out against violence and extremism do not?
• The presence of these Islamic books, and these books alone, in Canada's public libraries, without any others to contradict them, gives them legitimacy. They are seen to represent a certain form of Islam that the government of Canada and the City of Ottawa recognize.
• This indicates that there is official support for the extremist and terrorist version of Islam, and at the same time no support for a humanist interpretation of Islam.
• This surah [4:74] also indicates that if you are a Muslim living in a non-Muslim country, then you are in a state of war against your host country. If you are a Muslim living in a non-Muslim country, then you are living with the enemy.
• If we are to reject this danger, it is important that libraries and other institutions have books that reject these Islamist views and confront their hatred, extremism and violence.

The Muslim Brotherhood classifies as one of their great intellectual leaders Imam Mohammed al-Ghazali (1917-1996). He famously decreed that the assassination of the Egyptian Muslim thinker, Farag Foda, was acceptable. In the views of al-Ghazali, Farag Foda was an apostate for defending secular values and human rights. Moreover, al-Ghazali went into an Egyptian court and defended the assassins: "Anyone who openly resisted the full imposition of Islamic law," he said, "was an apostate who should be killed either by the government or by devout individuals." He added: "There is no penalty in Islam to kill the apostate by yourself when the government fails to do so."
In public libraries across Canada (and elsewhere), the books of Imam al-Ghazali are available, along with others that incite hatred, violence and terror, by authors such as Yusuf al-Qaradawi and Imam Nawawi. There is not a single Arabic language book in a library that I have visited in Ottawa that attacks or criticizes terrorism and violence and hatred.

A copy of One Hundred Questions in Islam by Dr. Muhammad al-Ghazali, found in the Ottawa Public Library. The image at right shows the inside cover of the book, with the Ottawa Public Library Stamp.

The Significance

The Ottawa Public Library apparently prefers Arabic-language books of this extremist nature and rejects those that advocate resistance to extremism or advocates in favour of a modernist Islam.
As an experiment, I donated two books to the Ottawa Public Library. One book was titled The Demise of the State of Brotherhood, released in Egypt in January 2013. At that time, the Muslim Brotherhood was the ruling party (FJP) in Egypt. This book addresses the seriousness of the political and religious project of the Muslim Brotherhood and how it worked to establish a religious and theocratic authoritarian state. This government in Egypt was, for the Muslim Brotherhood, a part of the larger effort to restore the Islamic caliphate project around the world.
The second book was entitled, The Sins of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. It was released in 2010 and documented a dialogue conducted by the author with the former Muslim Brotherhood General Guide Mohammed Mahdi Akef (2006). It was in this dialogue that General Guide Akef made his famous statement "I don't give a damn about Egypt and these people in Egypt." Akef made it clear that his views on the Muslim Brotherhood and its project of recreating a caliphate took precedence over the needs and views of the people of Egypt. The book was threatened with legal action.
Several months after donating the two books to the Ottawa Public Library, there was no response. After inquiring further, they then told me that the books were not acceptable as they did not meet their "selection criteria." The exact statement from library employee was:

"I have contacted my colleagues at the acquisitions department about the books you donated to the library in the past. They no longer have them, which means that when they received them they didn't pass our selection criteria."

How is it possible that books that advocate violence and extremism meet the selection criteria of the Ottawa Public Library, but those that speak out against violence and extremism do not? Those who donated the other books appear to have been Islamists: they donated books that advocate the terrorist discourse. Yet the library selection committee approves of them.

Can Such Books Create Extremism and Terrorism?

The answer in the Islamist case is: Yes. Many books are available in bookstores and libraries which incite violence, such as Mein Kampf by Adolf Hitler, or books that promote the colonial period of the West. There are also non-Islamic religious books that incite hatred, but these no longer seem to lead others to kill.
Many governments and individuals have apologized for these past crimes. Germany, for example has apologized for the crimes of the Holocaust against the Jews (but not Austria, Hitler's birthplace); the Spanish government has apologized for the expulsion of Muslims from Andalusia, even though they are the descendants of the invading Arabs. (N.B. The Ottawa Public Library does have copies of Mein Kampf available, but it also has books on the Holocaust and a variety of history books on Word War Two.)
With modern extremist Islam, the situation is different. Its past, along with its ideas and bloody history, remain active today and act as an engine to drive reality. The prevailing Islamist culture has not gotten beyond its past: it does not spread a humanist interpretation of Islam or of the texts that are often used to spread hatred, extremism and terrorism. Today's Islamist Muslims have not apologized for the crimes their ancestors, committed when they invaded much of the rest of the world and formed colonial empires. The opposite is true: they seem very proud of this colonial era and frequently refer to the high-water marks of the empires as the "Golden Age of Islam."
ISIS, for example, wants directly to apply what is in the ancient texts and religious history: to restore the face of Islamist colonial empire. They literally apply the texts that incite violence, directly, without any modern re-interpretation. ISIS is the daughter of the traditional Islamic culture that is now found across the Sunni world.
The presence of these Islamic books, and these books alone, in Canada's public libraries, without any others to contradict them, gives them legitimacy. They are seen to represent a certain form of Islam that the government of Canada and the City of Ottawa recognize.
This indicates that there is official support for the extremist and terrorist version of Islam, and at the same time no support for a humanist interpretation of Islam.
Unfortunately, it seems that Canada and the West fight "terrorism" everywhere, but they do not close the factories of extremism and terrorism in their own countries. This view seems to exist not only in public libraries but also in the libraries of many of the mosques, the speeches of many imams, many Islamic schools and in other institutions controlled by the Islamists.[1]

Do the Ghazali Books Support Terrorism?

The Ottawa Public Library has, as noted above, many books by Muhammad al-Ghazali. His ideas are close to those of the Muslim Brotherhood and a lesson in how Muslim extremist and terrorist beliefs are created. Ghazaii, for instance, argues that a place can be considered a "home of peace" [Dar al Islam] when it is ruled by Muslims and the law of Allah and his messenger are applied to all. A place can be considered a "home of war" [Dar al Harb] if the place is inhabited by unbelievers of Islam or those who object to it.[2]
Ghazali also cites the Qur'an specifically saying:

"Let those fight in the cause of God who sell the life of this world for the hereafter. To him who fights in the cause of God, whether he is slain or victorious, soon we shall give him a great reward." -- Surah 4:74

This surah means that those who kill infidels, whether victorious or not, will get a great reward in Jana (paradise). This surah also indicates that if you are a Muslim living in a non-Muslim country, then you are in a state of war against your host country. If you are a Muslim living in a non-Muslim country, then you are living with the enemy.

Hatred of Canada and the West

Ghazali -- apparently forgetting that the Muslims invaded Persia, the Christian Byzantine Empire in Turkey, all of North Africa and the Middle East, Greece, Spain and most of eastern Europe -- claims that global colonization (by the West) is rooted on an ongoing deep hatred of Islam, and an enormous desire to destroy it. After weakening the Ottoman Turkish caliphate and having carved up its territory, the West gave it a fatal blow in the wake of the First World War, and wiped out the official presence of Islam in the international field. Ghazali writes on page 221 of One Hundred Questions About Islam that the laws that came out of Western colonialism were created to dominate the Islamic nation militarily and defeat it politically. He characterizes these laws as distorting the face of Islam, and having the goal of destroying the foundations of Islam.
So, a Muslim living in Canada who is exposed to these teachings is led to believe that he or she should hate their new home country. They are led to believe that they belong to another entity (an Islamist caliphate) and that it is their duty to build this caliphate on the ruins of Western civilization.
Most of the Arabic-language books on Islam in the West incite extremism and terrorism. If we are to reject this danger, it is important that libraries and other institutions have books that reject these Islamist views and confront their hatred, extremism and violence.

Saied Shoaaib is a Muslim scholar based in Canada. He can be reached at: saiedshoaaib@gmail.com

---

[1] Lovers of Death, Islamist Extremism is our Mosques, Schools and Libraries.
[2] One Hundred question in Islam, Dr. Muhammad al-Ghazali, Page 349.

• Follow Saied Shoaaib on Twitter
• https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/9974/ottawa-public-library-islam

Why Does Canada Accept the Existence of a Secret International Organization on its Soil?

What would your reaction be if you found out that a Canadian citizen who works for the police or a political party was a member of a secret international organization? How would you feel is this individual’s first loyalty was to a non-Canadian group and they were receiving commands to implement the plans of this secret organization? I think you would be very worried and you would be looking for ways to protect Canada from this secret organization.

One such secret organization in Canada is the Muslim Brotherhood. It is important to recognize that this group is the well spring from which most of the Islamacist terrorist organizations have grown. We will have more on this in the next article.

The long term goal of this largely secret organization is to create an Islamacist Caliphate which will enforce their version of an extremist and politicized Islam.

Of course, the control of Canada by the Muslim Brotherhood or any Islamacist organization is impossible in the short term. However, it should be remembered that several tens or hundreds of Islamacist terrorists can spread terror and damage economies. The Paris attacks of 13 November 2015 are only the most recent example of this.

As can be expected, some of the Muslim Brotherhood deny the existence of such a secret aspect of their organization, as was noted by Dr Hassan Prince. Dr Prince is the leader of the Freedom and Justice Party in Egypt and he told Radio Sawa in Egypt that such a position helps relieve them of some of the risk associated with have meetings and conversations between the members from 85 countries around the world.

The existence of the group has also been confirmed by former and current members of the group, including Al Jazeera broadcaster Ahmed Masnour. On his Facebook page, he called upon the secret wing of the organization to reform itself. Also, the Kingdom of Jordan has been involved in a crackdown on the Muslim Brotherhood while at the same time, the Muslim Brotherhood has been resisting efforts of the state to impose a new organizational president on them. The result has been a split in the Muslim Brotherhood there.

Tharwat Kherbawi, a former leadership figure of the Muslim Brotherhood says it is likely that the number of Canadians in this international secret organization ranges from 700 to 1000. They follow the direction of the Head of the Shoura Council of the Muslim Brotherhood in the United States of America. A large number of Muslim Brotherhood members have emigrated to Canada in the wake of the revolution that toppled them from power in Egypt in 2013.

Mr. Kherabawi has stated that the goal of the Muslim Brotherhood is to covert other states into Islamic States gradually. Canada’s secular democracy is a target and it is at long term risk of devolving and allowing Muslim Brotherhood ideology to shape policy in Canada.

When was the International Organization of the Muslim Brotherhood Founded?

The founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, Hassan al-Banna created the Muslim Brotherhood in 1928. In 1933, he created the department of external communication for its operations in various countries around the world. Its very first international outreach was to Djbouti and now that outreach involves some 85 countries.

Hassan al-Banna said, “the geographical and political divisions created by a political border does not separate our souls and will not interfere with the meaning of the Arab and Islamic unity, which the hearts gathered in the hope of one and one goal, and made the place all of these countries are one nation.” This was confirmed again by Dr. Mohamed Badie in the wake of the group’s take over of Egypt.

Hassan al-Banna further added that one of the founders of the external communications department, Dr. Mohamed Mahmoud Sawaf, established within this section:

The Committee on the Near East, including Arab and Muslim countries and peoples in Africa.

Commission the Far East, including the countries of East Asia and Central.

The Committee on Islam in Europe.

In the 1980s, a former member of the Muslim Brotherhood, Mahdi Akef, was chosen to lead the Munich Mosque/Centre. This centre has contributed to the rise of the growth of Islamacist organizations in Europe. Mahmoud Abu Halima, convicted for his role in the 1993 World Trade Centre bombing, was part of this effort.

How Does this Secret International Organization Work?

Tharwat Kherbawi was previously a leadership figure in the Muslim Brotherhood. He had specific responsibility for arranging the travel documents of any Muslim Brotherhood member to travelling to any Arab country. As a part of their organizational structure, he realized that it was important to modify the regulations of the organization to assist in expansion. One such change was a document which would allow a Muslim Brotherhood member to be recognized by other Muslim Brotherhood members anywhere in the world.

Other changes were made in the oath of allegiance included words to say that loyalty to the group is forever. The work of the group depends on the Qur’an as the book of God, they work to His profit and for the Victory of Islam.

Funding

The Muslim Brotherhood has a variety of economic activities in Egypt and abroad. According to the Masrawy website, it had a controlling interest in many companies in Egypt as well as a number of companies in the city of Dubai, Qatar and in other Gulf countries. They also invested in Japan where they bought shares in a major company specializing in the automotive and electrical appliances.

The Muslim Brotherhood also found that the investment in the automotive industry could achieve large profits and they bought shares in the company “Daewoo” in Korea before it collapsed. For years, the Muslim Brotherhood has stated they have funds in international banks such as Societe Generale and Barry Bahy France.

The problem of undeclared money is both inside and outside of Egypt. This is a secret activity on behalf of the members who are largely unknown or unrecognized and move from country to country to finance the activities of the Muslim Brotherhood. This is why such a risk exists. It is probable that some of this money supports terrorist organizations that came out of the Muslim Brotherhood and maintain a strategic alliance between them.

Saied Shoaaib

Egyptian writer and researcher

saiedshoaaib@gmail.com
http://tsecnetwork.ca/2015/12/10/why-does-canada-accept-the-existence-of-a-secret-international-organization-on-its-soil/

Next article:

The Muslim Brotherhood is against democracy, against freedom and against humanity. What the difference between them and ISIS ?

Why is the Muslim Brotherhood a Threat to Canada?

Why is the Muslim Brotherhood a Threat to Canada?

Many reasons exist, but the most important is that the Muslim Brotherhood are not a party or political trend. They are organizing with an aim to expanding their control over institutions in Canada. They aim to redefine a variety of these institutions in accordance with their interpretation of divine, not human, law.

As the group’s founder Hassan al-Banna said: Build a Muslim individual and later the Muslim community, then the Islamic state, and then the Islamic Caliphate, and finally control the world.

This political/religious belief has not changed yet. What they believe is in the motto of the group:

Allah is our objective.

The Prophet is our leader.

The Qur’an is our law.

Jihad is our way.

Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.

Allahu akbar!

There is no room to talk about the nation, democracy, human rights, women, minorities and other humanitarian concepts. These are all against the Muslim Brotherhood’s interpretation of Islam and against God, at least as they see it.

They will tell you that you cannot vary or even discuss the Muslim Brotherhood project, because it is sacred, it is divine, and they are agents of God on earth. How can you differ with God? So, in the project of Muslim Brotherhood, any of the people or peoples are just tools to carry out their divine will in the application of the law of God. If the people resist this, they have no rights of any kind and they must be killed, burned and exterminated.

This understanding does not belong to the Muslim Brotherhood alone, it includes all varieties of political Islam. The differences in the factions or groups is in the tools and timing. In that sense that there is no difference in doctrine, for example, between the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamic Jihad or Al-Qaeda or ISIS or the mullahs’ regime in Iran. The final goal is the same.

ISIS, for example, believes in moving into to power through the force of arms; the Muslim Brotherhood came to power in Egypt through elections, but both have one goal, which is to apply (their version) of the law of God. The goal is the Islamic caliphate and later to take over the world.

Some say that discussions about tolerance and freedom have been launched by the Muslim Brotherhood. These are just a tactic to gain power, or to possess the force or influence to capture power. At the end of all these discussions, they will return to their original goal. This is what happened in Egypt once they were elected in Egypt.

The current General Guide (head) of the Muslim Brotherhood is Dr. Mohamed Badie who posted a message on the Brotherhood’s website after the January Revolution:

We have identified the Imam (Hassan al-Banna, founder) to that Great Goal, starting with the reform of the individual and then build a family and then the establishment of the community then the Caliphate and global control.

He also said in the posting that:

The group has come close to achieving the purpose set by the view of its founder Imam Hassan al-Banna, which, by establishing the rule of a just rational system with all its institutions and its components includes the succeeding governments and then a station to control other countries and eventually the world.

Dr. Mohamed Badie also believe that the Muslim Brotherhood does not recognize differences of blood or of borders.

Following in this belief, the Canadian member of Muslim Brotherhood does not care about Canada. For them, it is a simply a station to reach for control of other countries and in the end control the world.

The former leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, Mohammed Mahdi Akef, said to me in a recorded interview that he agrees that Egypt could be governed by a Muslim from anywhere in the world and that it is no problem if a Muslim from Malaysia was to rule Egypt. However, he also said he would refuse to be ruled by any Egyptian in Egypt who was not a Muslim. He also made the (in)famous comment that “I don’t give a damn about Egypt and these people in Egypt.”

So the Muslim Brotherhood is a movement and part of an international secret organization that is extremely dangerous for any country. They have no loyalty to any country. No loyalty to any human values. The only loyalty is to apply what they call the law of God and to their own control of governments.

So the Canadian Muslim Brotherhood is a danger to Canada, because the project is based on the idea of a completely demolished and then rebuilt system according to their divine plan. They imagine that God hand-picked them to rule and not any others.

There are other reasons to explain the threat of the Muslim Brotherhood to Canada. They are also an international secret organization and they are anti-democratic, anti-women and especially against women from any minority, particularly Christians. And they have a close relationship with many terrorist organizations in the world which needs to be explained and will be in a later article.

Saied Shoaaib

Egyptian writer

saiedshoaaib@gmail.com

http://tsecnetwork.ca/2015/11/13/why-is-the-muslim-brotherhood-a-threat-to-canada/

Why Muslims “frankly” tell themselves that many of them are potential terrorists?

Yes that Question was absolutely correct. It’s painful for me as a religious Muslim, as I know that it’s painful for a lot of other Muslims. But that’s the truth that we should face: ISIS and Al-Qaeda and other extremist and terrorist organizations are legitimate sons, not illegitimate as many Muslims claim. ISIS actions based on verses from Holy Quran, Hadith (Sayings of prophet Muhammad), Sirah (Biography of prophet Muhammad) and Islamic history, not on wrong interpretation, but on direct and explicit texts, facts and events of prophet Muhammad, Sahabah (prophet Muhammad companions) and Islamic history. It’s the traditional religious culture of Muslims – especially Sunni – that makes many of them potential terrorists, potential sons of ISIS. And if it doesn’t happen for a Muslim to turn to be an extremist r terrorist, that means that he chose to ignore this culture, or he settled on reconcile with himself as an” uncommitted Muslim”.

It’s not only the matter of Middle East region, although it’s the region where all these extreme and terroristic thoughts came to light and then exported to the rest of the world. But after the communication and internet revolution you can find that culture everywhere, east and west, in Canada, Germany, Australia, Nigeria, Philippines, etc... I’ve even heard this culture’s manifestations in a mosque in Canada, as I heard it in mosques in Egypt, as you can hear it on Youtube by Sheikhs and Imams from all around the world. So it’s not weird for this culture to produce terrorists of different nationalities and from all over the world.

This traditional religious Sunni culture has the ability to transform the normal Muslim into a time bomb that may explode at any moment, anywhere, just if the circumstances and incubator environment allowed that, chances of that may increase or decrease depending on each country’s nature and circumstances, but it’s definitely exist. This is the solid base that produced an organization such as Muslim Brotherhood which in turn produced Al-Qaeda, Jehad, ISIS and others. The religious intellectual basis of all that organizations is the same; there are no differences in core, only in degree and class but not in kind and type. As while ISIS establish the Caliphate State in a cruelly and bloody way, the Muslim Brotherhood want a religious dictatorship with a nice democratic appearance not much different than the Mullahs regime in Iran.

It’s true that there are tolerant Islamic views, and it’s true that there are great efforts to achieve reconciliation between Muslims and world, but the other fact that we “as Muslims” have to admit: is that this tolerant culture isn’t prevalent between Sunni Muslims in general. We also have to admit that the most prevailing religious discourse between Sunni Muslims all around the world is mostly hostile, racist and bloody; can explode when the opportunity arises. So terrorists now aren’t only coming from the Middle East, but coming from everywhere in the world, because of the spread of communications revolution that facilitated dealing with this terroristic religious discourse.

From where does this terroristic religious culture come?

It came from the Quran itself. The truth is that the Holy Quran is full of lots and lots of tolerance, freedom of faith, respect of difference and many other great humanitarian values. But it’s also full of verses that incite for killing and hatred. So it’s normal to find many Muslims and lots and lots of Imams and sheikhs telling you that ISIS actions don't represent the real Islam. The reason is that they are relying on verses that call for tolerance, peace, love and many other great humanitarian values, while they don’t deny that there’re contrary verses, which call for hatred and killing, those verses that have been taken by ISIS as main reference.

The same thing in Hadith and Prophet Muhammad's (pbuh) Sirah. As there are very humanitarian Hadith, there are many others that incite for killing and abusing antagonists like infidels, Jews, Christians and others. Prophet Muhammad was not only God’s messenger, but also - For reasons related to the nature of the Bedouin community in which the message of Islam arose - he had to fight all forms of armed battles against antagonists. So which one we should take from, the messenger of peace or the fighter and warrior?

The biographies of Sahaba and Caliphs tell us about a lot of tolerance, and also about a lot of bloodshed, spreading Islam by force and occupation of other countries, and the subsequent war crimes and crimes against humanity. They even fought themselves in “the struggle for the throne” bloody wars, and three of them were murdered (Omar bin al-Khattab - Othman bin Affan - Ali bin Abi Talib).

There is a bloody side in the Islamic history, as there’re many great values and great civilization that contributed to humanity progress.

Let me tell you that Islam isn’t an exception in this bloody history; this is how all religions, including Christianity. Also Islam clerics aren’t exception, killing and bloodshed in the name of God occurred by all religions. Also eastern and western ancient empires committed a lot of heinous crimes during their colonial expansions, and Islamic empire isn’t an exception. We also must remember that the western colonization in modern era was coupled with blood, and that happened in many events under the cross flag.

But all those religions including Judaism and Christianity have been developed for many reasons and waived their bloody side, reconciled with world and life. And I think that this is exactly what Muslims need. Unfortunately they revere the bloody side of their prevailing religious culture, but that’s the time to get rid of all of those bloody texts, and to disown all those bloody crimes in their history. All of that was related to its time and circumstances and we don’t have to follow it. We need to stop following the political performance of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). He had to fight these battles in his time to protect the new message of Islam, and I think that we don’t have to do the same.

As an example: he fought a bloody conflict with some of the Jews in his time, this does not mean that we are in conflict with Judaism or Jews in every time and place. We have to follow Prophet Muhammad as a messenger of great humanitarian values, while we have to waive everything else against humanity in Islamic jurisprudence “Fiqh” and Islamic history. Keeping the great values in this history, that values that protect our humanity, and disown – like others – the invasions, violence and blood. Move from being enemies of humanity to become part of it, effective part of its progress, we are humans just like others.

Saied Shoaaib

Egyptian Writer

saiedshoaaib@gmail.com

لماذا الإرهابيون مسلمون؟

لم يكن غريباً أن تنقل "شيلبي ماري دياجل"، النقاش الجاد للبحث عن حلول، إلى مهاجمة الانتهاكات النادرة- التي تعد على أصابع الأيدي- ضد بعض المسلمين، ولم يكن غريباً أن تُبدي الكثير والكثير من التخوَّفات من زيادة العداء أو ما يسمونه هنا في كندا الكراهية ضد المسلمين في أعقاب الهجومين الإرهابيين، وأوديا بحياة جنديين كنديين. 

"شيلبي" رئيسة تحرير موقع «مسلم لينك»، مثلها مثل أغلبية المنظمات الإسلامية، ومثل الكثير من الذين شاركوا في المؤتمر المصغر الذي عقدته جامعة أوتاوا حول "المسلمين في كندا". لا يريدون الإجابة عن سؤال: لماذا كل الإرهابيين أو معظمهم مسلمين؟

فكلهم تقريباً استخدموا ذات الدفاعات، في البداية أن الذين قاموا بالاعتداءات الإرهابية مضطربين نفسيًا، ومن بيئات اجتماعية مفككة وأصحاب سوابق ومدمني مخدرات. أي أن الدافع للعمليات الإجرامية التي ارتكبوها ليس دينياً ولا عقائدياً، ولكنه راجع لأسباب أخرى.

فحتى لو كانت هذه الحجج صحيحة، فالدافع عقائدي. أي أن المجرم هنا استند إلى نصوص دينية. مثل الحافز الذي جعل عشرات الشباب الكنديين من أسر عادية يذهبون إلى بلدان أخرى وينضمون لتنظيمات إرهابية ويقتلون أناساً لا يعرفونهم في بلد لا يعرفونها.  

الدفاع الثاني الحار" ليس كل المسلمين إرهابيين". وهذا صحيح طبعاً. فأغلبية المسلمين هنا في كندا يعيشون بشكل طبيعي جداً، ولا يمارسون أي أعمال عنف ضد غيرهم ويتمتعون بحريتهم. 

الدفاع الثالث هو المبالغة في تصدير الخوف والرعب مما يسمى بـ "الإسلامو فوبيا". أي أن تؤدي الاعتداءات الإرهابية إلى اضطهاد للمسلمين. وهذا غير صحيح بهذا الشكل. لكن على كل الأحوال كانت هناك مطالبات كثيرة بالعديد من الإجراءات التي على الحكومة أن تتخذها.

والحقيقة أن الحكومة كانت قد اتخذت الكثير والكثير من الإجراءات بهدف رئيسي وهو أن توصل رسالة إلى الجالية المسلمة، وعددها يصل إلى 2% من عدد السكان، وهي أننا نعرف أن الذين ارتكبوا هذه الجرائم، وأن الذين سافروا وأصبحوا جنودا في داعش وغيرها، لا يمثلون كل المسلمين. وأن الحكومة لن تسمح بأي انتهاك ضد أي مسلم وضد أي كندي مخالف للقانون وعلى أرضية دينية.

هذا لم يمنع بالطبع عددًا من التصرفات التي قال لي نائب رئيس الجمعية الإسلامية بالعاصمة الكندية أوتاوا أنيس شمس الدين، إنها نادرة وفردية، وأنه عندما يتم الإبلاغ عنها، فإن "البوليس" يتحرك على وجه السرعة وينفذ القانون بحسم وصرامة.

هذه الدفاعات الحارة، ودوافعها مفهومة، إذا جنبنا المبالغة، ولكنها لا تقترب من السؤال الأهم" لماذا الإرهابيون أو على الأقل معظمهم مسلمون؟

هذا السؤال وهذه المناطق الشجاعة في التفكير، يتم تجنبها، وكأن هناك تواطئا جماعيا، بألا يواجه المسلمون أنفسهم بها. مع إنها هي الأخطر وهي التي ستمكنهم من محاولة تصحيح الصورة السيئة عن الإسلام والمسلمين.

لقد نشر أحد أصدقائي على "فيس بوك" صورة لميادين خالية، ووضع تحتها سؤلاً: لماذا لم ينتفض المسلمون ضد جرائم داعش وأخواتها؟".

السؤال صحيح تماماً، فالمسلمون في أغلبهم يتظاهرون ويثيرون الدنيا لأي مساس بالدين من جانب أي شخص غير مسلم في أي مكان في العالم. وهذا صحيح لأنهم يخافون على صورة دينهم. لكنهم لم يثوروا ولم ينتفضوا ضد التنظيمات الإرهابية التي من المؤكد أنها دمرت صورة الإسلام وليس مجرد إساءة.

هذا ما فعله أنصار الإسلام السياسي أكثر من عموم المسلمين، فعندما تواجههم بضرورة اتخاذ موقف حاسم ضد الإرهاب، وأن الإرهابيين يستندون إلى نصوص دينية وإلى تاريخ فقهي وإسلامي، يجرك جراً إلى  عموميات، مثل الظلم الواقع على المسلمين والاستبداد وليس بعيداً أن يجرجرك ايضاً الى المؤامرة الكونية المعروفة ضد الإسلام والمسلمين.

لذلك من الصعب ويكاد يكون من المستحيل القضاء على الإرهاب في كندا أو في مصر. لأننا بصراحة وحتى الآن نفتقد شجاعة أن نقف أمام المرآة ونواجه أنفسنا: لماذا كلهم أو على الأقل معظمهم مسلمين؟ وأن نعترف بأن لدينا مشكلة حقيقية في النصوص والتاريخ. وأننا إذا أردنا التصالح مع أنفسنا ومع الحياة ومع العالم، فعلينا أن نبدأ من أن المشكلة أولاً عندنا وليس عند غيرنا.

نقلاً عن موقع دوت مصر
لماذا الإرهابيون مسلمون؟