Quantcast

Ground Zero Imam Calls for Return to Most Radical Form of Islam in History

maggiemay 2010/08/17 21:36:54

GROUND ZERO IMAN CALLS FOR RETURN TO MOST RADICAL FORM OF ISLAM IN HISTORY!
Proof: Feisal Abdul Rauf’s Arabic Language Interview

Just
who is ‘moderate’ Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf? He’s no moderate at all. He’s
the funder of the controversial Ground Zero Mosque in New York and a
financier of the Turkish Flotilla, along with the Turkish government
that funded the terrorist group IHH which has ties to al Qaida and Hamas
in Gaza

What’s more, Iman Rauf is calling for a worldwide return
to the most radical form of Islam in history, turning the hands of time
back to an era when Muslims ruled much of the known world. See
eye-opening article below that was translated by Walid.

The
following is a translation of an Arabic language interview conducted by
Iman Rauf that should put shivers up your spine as to what the world
will look like if he gets his way: Islamic world domination, death and
enslavement to anyone who gets in his way.


The interview was translated from Arabic to English by Walid
Shoebat, a former Palestinian terrorist who converted to Christianity
and became a U.S. citizen. Essentially Rauf wants to use peaceful means
including lobbying governments and establishing charities to
incrementally implement the principles of Sharia law worldwide so once
the stranglehold is established, potentially enacting Sharia-ordered
decapitation and stoning of ‘infidels’ (any non-Muslims)


Separation of Religion From State

(Translated verbatim, From his interview on Hadielislam.com)

http://www.hadielislam.com/arabic/index.php?pg=articles/artic...


When the fountains of knowledge differ, minds pick up the pace to
acquire this knowledge. These disagreements produce different views
dedicated to employ us to face new realities to keep pace with current
events and requirements.

But do the scholars differ regardless of
the different sources of knowledge and education in regards to religion?
And is it possible to fulfill the basic pillars and foundations to
fulfill individual needs and duties in order to apply religion [Islam]
as a way of life to conduct our daily life and in order to extract the
basic laws for us to resolve and govern with in order to solve
grievances? Or do we separate religion form state? This is the subject
of our dialogue and questions with imam Feisal Abdul Rauf.

Question: What does it mean to separate religion from state in Islam?


Abdul Rauf: The general understating in the
west is that religious institutions have no influence in decision making
in the state. In Europe religion is weak while in the United States the
majority is religious and believe in God. With this, the understanding
of the term “separation of religion from state” is also to separate the
arm of the government from pressuring religious freedoms. So in a
general sense they respect religious freedoms. In America the state does not interfere in religious regulations, their details, construction or how they are managed.

What
is happening in the Muslim world after the fall of the Ottoman Empire
and the establishment of the secular state, that the traditional
relationship between state and religious institutions were subject to a
separation, which resulted in a reaction that generated Islamic
movements wanting to erect an Islamic state in the Islamic world. So if
we watch history that after Rashidun Caliphate (Rightly Guided
Caliphate) there was a form of separation between government and
religious institutions that was represented by [Muslim] jurisprudence
and since the Muslims on a personal level are required to follow the prophet (peace be upon him) on all aspects of life and conduct as permissible through a societal level as well.
For that, we collectively believe that the state that was erected by
the prophet in Medina was the ideal model for an Islamic state. The
challenge today in the Islamic world is how do we accomplish this in our
current era.

Question: Many of the political
Jihadist Islamic movements are talking about an Islamic Caliphate based
on the prophet’s approach. Can we accomplish this today?


Abdul Rauf: The challenge I was referring to
is this; how do we call for the principles and standards that the
prophet (peace be upon him) used to build the Islamic state in Medina.
The challenge we have today is how do we accomplish this while keeping
the prophet’s methodology in our current changing times. This challenge
was an issue that the scholars and Caliphs had to face throughout the
Islamic history, which resulted in the creation of several Islamic
schools of thought with multiple views that are viewed equally.

So
the question in our era throughout my discussions with contemporary
Muslim theologians that an Islamic state can be established in more than
just in a single form or mold; it can be established through a kingdom or a democracy. The important issue is to establish the general fundamentals of [Islamic] Shariah that are required to govern.
It is known that there are sets of standards that are accepted by
[Muslim] scholars to organize the relationships between government and
the governed.

Question: So we understand that
separation of religion from state, that is, it depends on the Muslim
governors that so long they were spreading Islam and justice… but when
the rulers are ruling under traditional laws contrary to Islamic laws,
what then should the Islamic institutions do?

Abdul Rauf: A time after the prophet (peace be upon him) arose certain new conditions that required the governors to institute new laws so long they do not conflict with the Quran and the Sunna that were Shariah compliant as such followed in traditional customs. So in
our modern era, governments that want to ensure the new laws as to not
contradict Shariah rules—so they create institutions to ensure Islamic
law and remove any that contradict with Shariah
.


So we advise that when there is a problem in the relationship
between state and religious institutions in the form of the question you
just asked, that people need to use peaceful means to advise the
governors and government institutions and use peaceful means that are
available to send their message out to the masses.

And we also suggest
to the governors and political institutions to consult [Muslim]
religious institutions and [Muslim] personalities in the field as to
assure their decision making to reflect the spirit of Shariah
.

Question:
No doubt that there are disastrous results if the Islamic world kept
going under the principles that are used with religious issues and
state, but what do we do on a personal level while in the midst of this
low class system that is established in our Muslim states?

Abdul Rauf:
First and foremost, we need to understand what Shariah requires from
us. Second, we need to be a part of a larger group that is capable to
give advise [to the government] as is done by lobbies in the West.
Thirdly: We become an institutional group to provide benevolent needs in
the society.

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf is the chief executive of the
American Society for Muslim Advancement. Sunday, December 9th, 2007,
10:08 A.M.


Moderate? Not on your life.


No juxtapose the above with this tweet from the official Ground Zero Mosque twitter account “Park51″:


@AndrewShimmin @parkerbriden Also “Law” in Muslim countries is a mix of Fiqh (jurisprudence), Shariah (law) and Wali (local law)


Not if Imam Feisal and others like him have their way.

And this one:


@AndrewShimmin @parkerbriden ah no that was in response to another tweet on FGM. We don’t have a position on Shariah


You know what boils my blood more than anything? Being lied to and treated as if I am ignorant.


BTW:


Walid will be speaking this Sunday August 15 at Bethany Evangelical
Free Church in Lacrosse WI, contact the church for full details at

http://bethanyefc.org/


Update:

Imam Feisal’s “Shariah Index Project” measuring a nations “Islamicity”


The project has been in the works since 2006, with researchers
quietly holding behind-the-scenes meetings with scholars, activists and
government officials.

“We have been soliciting the opinion of
scholars throughout the Muslim world, asking them what defines an
Islamic state, from the point of view of Islamic law,” he said.
……

So far the project has produced a book of scholarly essays on
the concept of measuring a nation’s “Islamicity”, providing a
theoretical foundation for the index.

By the end of this year, it
expects to release the results of an unprecedented poll, conducted with
the Gallup Organisation, that asked people in 44 majority-Muslim nations
how well they felt their country complied with Islamic principles.

“It will create an annual rating, a score to rate countries on how compliant they are,” said Imam Feisal.


For not having a “position on Sharia”, Imam Feisal sure is up to his eyeballs in it. I wonder what he has planned for an encore…

H/T Anne Bayefsky – “An Iranian Connection to the Cordoba House Ground Zero Mosque?


In July of last year, Cordoba chief Rauf was interviewed by a reporter for Abu Dhabi Media about the Shariah Index Project. He told The National,
“Determining Islamic principles had been the easy part.” Easy, but not
available for examination to the residents of New York City or to the
loved ones of 9/11 victims. Despite multiple references to the
Initiative’s publication more than a year ago of a book “on the concept
of measuring a nation’s ‘Islamicity,’” a request for a copy of the book
made directly to the New York-based Cordoba Initiative resulted in a
denial of the book’s existence.


The unanswered questions keep mounting.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2572364/posts
You!
Add Photos & Videos

Top Opinion

  • PartysOver 2010/08/17 23:04:58
    PartysOver
    +7
    It's about remembering alright, it's a shrine to stand in defiance and remind Americans that they hate us and intend to hurt us.

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • ALPEAUX 2010/08/19 15:41:17
    ALPEAUX
    +1
    We ain't SEEN NUTHIN' YET...Alpeaux
  • maggiemay ALPEAUX 2010/08/19 15:43:43
    maggiemay
    And that is the scary part.
  • Lady Whitewolf 2010/08/18 16:47:32
    Lady Whitewolf
    +1
    Fine. Then he can GO HOME.
  • Patrioteer 2010/08/18 13:55:52 (edited)
    Patrioteer
    +1
    Here's an interesting little history lesson.



    http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/ISLAM...


    You should read the whole page but I found this interesting:





    " This committee would prove to be pivotal, for on its choice would eventually grow Islam's first schism. The committee narrowed down the choices to two: 'Uthman and 'Ali. 'Ali was the son-in-law of Muhammad and had been a companion to the prophet from the inception of his mission. He may also have been named by Muhammad as a successor. " Uthman was an Umayyad, one of the wealthy clans that had bitterly opposed Muhammad. In fact, 'Uthman had started out opposed to Muhammad.



    'Uthman, however, was a supremely practical and intelligent military and political leader while 'Ali was fervently devout religious disciple. 'Ali was largely convinced that Islam had gone astray and that it was not following either the religious, ethical, or social principles laid down in Muhammad's revelation. This profound difference between the two candidates led them to choose 'Uthman, for the growing Islamic empire seemed to need a practical, unreligious approach . "



    Like today, it seems there was a violent, militaristic faction bent on conquest, and a more devout, peaceful group that truly wanted to follow the teachings of Muhammad.



    Uthman was also responsible for t...



    Here's an interesting little history lesson.



    http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/ISLAM...


    You should read the whole page but I found this interesting:





    " This committee would prove to be pivotal, for on its choice would eventually grow Islam's first schism. The committee narrowed down the choices to two: 'Uthman and 'Ali. 'Ali was the son-in-law of Muhammad and had been a companion to the prophet from the inception of his mission. He may also have been named by Muhammad as a successor. "Uthman was an Umayyad, one of the wealthy clans that had bitterly opposed Muhammad. In fact, 'Uthman had started out opposed to Muhammad.



    'Uthman, however, was a supremely practical and intelligent military and political leader while 'Ali was fervently devout religious disciple. 'Ali was largely convinced that Islam had gone astray and that it was not following either the religious, ethical, or social principles laid down in Muhammad's revelation. This profound difference between the two candidates led them to choose 'Uthman, for the growing Islamic empire seemed to need a practical, unreligious approach. "



    Like today, it seems there was a violent, militaristic faction bent on conquest, and a more devout, peaceful group that truly wanted to follow the teachings of Muhammad.



    Uthman was also responsible for the recension of the Qur'an, according to this article.



    " 'Uthman's death was ironic for many reasons, including the fact that he was the first Islamic caliph or leader to be killed by fellow Muslims. But 'Uthman's greatest and most lasting achievement was the formal recension of the Qur'an . Until 'Uthman, the Qur'an was largely an oral text that was recited by followers who had memorized it. The wars of conquest, however, had thinned their ranks, and the introduction of foreign peoples into Islam threatened the integrity of the text as an Arabic text. So 'Uthman ordered that all versions, written and oral, be collected together and a definitive version written down. It is this definitive version which became the central text of Islam and the bedrock on which all Islamic history would be built. And it was this version, this brilliant achievement, that 'Uthman was reciting from when he was killed. "
    (more)
  • George 2010/08/18 09:51:21
    George
    +2
    and he is okay with this too. Lets not forget, he refuses to condem Hamas.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?...
  • Gina 2010/08/18 00:48:59
    Gina
    +4
    keep in mind what they are required by their faith to rid the earth of "infidels"
    Infidel (literally "one without faith") is a chiefly archaic English noun, meaning one who doubts or rejects the central tenets of a religion other than one's own or has no religious beliefs; especially in reference to Christianity

    faceless cowards.
  • Domino 2010/08/18 00:40:01
    Domino
    +5
    middle finger to mecca---Feisal!!!!
  • texasred 2010/08/18 00:06:26
    texasred
    +6
    And the Left just sucks it up.
  • maggiemay texasred 2010/08/18 00:46:16
    maggiemay
    +3
    With a straw of course.
  • texasred maggiemay 2010/08/18 00:55:08
    texasred
    +3
    One of those very big ones!!
  • Ssgtwaldo 2010/08/18 00:02:19
    Ssgtwaldo
    +5
    You got it right for sure. The Mosque is not about freedom of religion it's about a group that has vowed the destruction of the Great Satan (the USofA) and all of it's people.
  • Isma'ila (God has heard)! 2010/08/17 23:58:18
    Isma'ila (God has heard)!
    +4
    If this is the case I am against the mosque!
  • PartysOver 2010/08/17 23:04:58
    PartysOver
    +7
    It's about remembering alright, it's a shrine to stand in defiance and remind Americans that they hate us and intend to hurt us.
  • Arizona1950 2010/08/17 22:44:54 (edited)
    Arizona1950
    +5
    Accused of adultery, a 20-year-old woman and her 28-year-old lover were stoned to death in Kunduz province in northern Afghanistan on Sunday. Amnesty International said it was the first confirmed stoning in Afghanistan since the fall of Taliban rule in the 2001.

    Stoning to death is a cruel insane Islamic punishment ... This punishment was ordered by the "merciful" Prophet, who of course was the messenger of the "merciful" Allah.

    In stoning to death, the victims's hands are tied behind their backs and their bodies are put in a cloth sack. Then, this human "package" is buried in a hole, with only the victims heads showing above the ground. If its a woman, she is buried upto her shoulders. This is to give her an seemingly equal (but nonetheless impossible) chance to escape recognizing her lesser physical strength.

    After the hapless individual has been secured in the hole, people start chanting "Allah hu Akbar" (meaning, God is great), and throw palm sized stones at the head of the victim from a certain distance (a circle is drawn).

    The stones are thrown until the person dies or until he/she escapes out of the hole and crosses the circle. Escaping is impossible, given that the individual's hands are tied behind their backs and they are buried in a hole upto their necks or ...







    Accused of adultery, a 20-year-old woman and her 28-year-old lover were stoned to death in Kunduz province in northern Afghanistan on Sunday. Amnesty International said it was the first confirmed stoning in Afghanistan since the fall of Taliban rule in the 2001.

    Stoning to death is a cruel insane Islamic punishment ... This punishment was ordered by the "merciful" Prophet, who of course was the messenger of the "merciful" Allah.

    In stoning to death, the victims's hands are tied behind their backs and their bodies are put in a cloth sack. Then, this human "package" is buried in a hole, with only the victims heads showing above the ground. If its a woman, she is buried upto her shoulders. This is to give her an seemingly equal (but nonetheless impossible) chance to escape recognizing her lesser physical strength.

    After the hapless individual has been secured in the hole, people start chanting "Allah hu Akbar" (meaning, God is great), and throw palm sized stones at the head of the victim from a certain distance (a circle is drawn).

    The stones are thrown until the person dies or until he/she escapes out of the hole and crosses the circle. Escaping is impossible, given that the individual's hands are tied behind their backs and they are buried in a hole upto their necks or shoulders (in the case of males and females respectively).

    Naturally, the procedure is extremely barbaric and bloody.

    Stoning to death is still carried out in the current era, in Iran and was carried out in the previous Taliban-ruled Afghanistan.

    http://specials.msn.com/A-Lis... stoning couple

    http://www.apostatesofislam.c...
    (more)
  • maggiemay Arizona... 2010/08/17 22:47:55
    maggiemay
    +5
    Sicking. What happened to this country that we can over look such barbaric things that happen, and accept them.
  • Arizona... maggiemay 2010/08/17 22:51:14 (edited)
    Arizona1950
    +3
    If they immigrate here to escape this barbarism and embrace a new land and a second chance, I see them no different than our own Pilgrims. Sadly too many just want a different view as they carry out the same philosophies and beliefs.
  • DixieGirl Arizona... 2010/08/17 23:04:26
    DixieGirl
    +6
    So true. sometimes I think they live to destroy the U.S. It is coming. Obama is reigning it in and people are too stupid to open their eyes and see the writing on the wall.
  • DixieGirl maggiemay 2010/08/17 23:06:21
    DixieGirl
    +4
    we have been complacent and tolerant of evil ways. proof in point, Obama got elected.
  • Gina DixieGirl 2010/08/18 00:51:40
    Gina
    +4
    TOO Complacent and too Tolerant for TOO long.
    Wake up America.
  • DixieGirl Arizona... 2010/08/17 23:05:05
    DixieGirl
    +3
    great response
  • Kim 2010/08/17 22:34:37
    Kim
    +4
    this man...now works for Obama and the State Department
  • Isma'il... Kim 2010/08/17 23:58:49
    Isma'ila (God has heard)!
    +4
    That is a scary thought!
  • Kim Isma'il... 2010/08/18 00:01:44
    Kim
    +3
    yeah it is..but it is true...we now pay this man with taxpayer money to go around and "represent" our values...the only values he represents are Obama's and those are not so nice of values to have
  • Isma'il... Kim 2010/08/18 00:04:29
    Isma'ila (God has heard)!
    +2
    I know, right? This man wants Sharia law and that is a bad thing.
  • Kim Isma'il... 2010/08/18 00:10:32
    Kim
    +2
    he will have it too.....I am afraid....I do believe that if something drastic does not happen, like a Revolution against this govt...Sharia law will be here in 5 years...we already have a judge in NJ, I believe it was that now made it legal for a Muslim man to rape his wife..legal rape in this country...next they will make it legal for a Muslim man to "honor kill"...when that happens it is all over...
  • Isma'il... Kim 2010/08/18 00:44:15
  • Kim Isma'il... 2010/08/18 00:47:16
    Kim
    +1
    yep....legal rape....I could not believe it myself...I though women had rights and were protected in this country..I really fear for my daughters
  • Isma'il... Kim 2010/08/18 00:56:35
    Isma'ila (God has heard)!
    +1
    I will not tolerate this! I have been raped before so I know what it is like! I refuse to be some man's personal slave!
  • Kim Isma'il... 2010/08/18 01:00:35
    Kim
    +2
    I know sweetie..it is horrible and that is what life for us all will be like if we don't stop them now..

    I am sorry to hear that you had to suffer like that....god has blessed you and will always be there for you..
  • maggiemay Isma'il... 2010/08/18 00:51:01
  • Kim maggiemay 2010/08/18 00:59:11
    Kim
    +2
    thank you maggie for the link, I was going to get that for her.....your the best
  • maggiemay Kim 2010/08/18 01:02:41
    maggiemay
    +1
    Your welcome. As women we need to stand up for all women who are being treated the way Muslim women are.
  • Kim maggiemay 2010/08/18 01:04:07
    Kim
    +2
    I am sure they don't want my prayers but I do pray for Muslim women because of their treatment..noone should have to be flogged, stoned, raped and tortured.....
  • maggiemay Kim 2010/08/18 01:05:56
    maggiemay
    +1
    Now can Liberals not stand against this treatment. Where are all those women's groups that fight for the rights of women.
  • Kim maggiemay 2010/08/18 01:09:06
    Kim
    +2
    liberals =braindead...
    that is how
  • Isma'il... maggiemay 2010/08/18 01:06:54
  • Kim Isma'il... 2010/08/18 01:09:43
    Kim
    +3
    anger can be productive, channel it and we can prevail
  • Isma'il... Kim 2010/08/18 01:20:55
    Isma'ila (God has heard)!
    +2
    Amen to that! We have to stick together! It is not God's will for us to have Sharia law!
  • maggiemay Isma'il... 2010/08/18 01:13:42
    maggiemay
    +3
    Good. As women we should all be pissed off.
  • Isma'il... maggiemay 2010/08/18 01:21:10
    Isma'ila (God has heard)!
    +2
    I know, right?

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/10/01 08:33:30

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals