Archive for the ‘Al Azhar’ Category

Egyptian Brotherhood Violates Rights Using ‘Divine Mandate’

April 8, 2013

 

A protester in Cairo holds a sign reading, “If Brotherhood controls Al-Azhar, Morsi will beat us, Brotherhood has no religion” during a protest in support of Al-Azhar Mosque’s assertion of independence from the Muslim Brotherhood, April 5, 2013. (photo by REUTERS/Amr Abdallah Dalsh )

By: Alaa al-Aswany Translated from As-Safir (Lebanon).
اقرا المقال الأصلي باللغة العربية
 
In 1492, the city of Granada — the last stronghold of Islam in Spain — fell when Abu Abdullah, the last of the Arab kings, was defeated by the army set up by the Catholic monarchs King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella. Although the king and queen had signed a convention in which they pledged to respect the country’s Muslim and Jewish citizens, it was never followed. They decided to expel the Jews from Spain (something Spanish King Juan Carlos apologized for five centuries later), while Muslims were given the choice of converting to Christianity or death.
 
Thousands of Muslims who refused to convert were killed; men, women and children alike were beheaded. Many Muslims embraced Christianity, fearing for their lives. These converts were degradingly referred to as “Los Moriscos” [baptized Moors].
 
However, forcing Muslims to embrace Christianity was only the beginning of their agony, as authorities then took a number of severe measures to oppress and impoverish these citizens. Their efforts to annihilate Islamic culture and traditions led these converts to rebel multiple times. Later, authorities realized that many of these converts were still practicing Islam secretly.
 
Here the issue became complicated, for these converts — from a legal standpoint — were Catholic Christians like all other residents, yet from a practical standpoint they were secret Muslims. Authorities feared that they would teach their children the principles of Islam, something that would create a new generation of Muslims that officials did not want. Furthermore, the Roman Catholic Church had serious doubts about the converts’ beliefs. Would Christ accept their faith, or would they remain outside the fold of the church?
 
Then a strange and mysterious figure emerged who would play a key role in the evolution of events. He was a monk from the Dominican Order named Jaime Bleda, famed for his piety and eagerness to maintain pure Catholic doctrine. After much thought, Bleda became convinced that it was impossible for the church to know for sure if the converts truly believed in Christ or were merely pretending to be Christians for fear of their lives. Thus, the only solution was for these converts to face Christ so that he himself could decide whether they were sincere in their faith or hypocrites. Of course, they could only face Christ in the afterlife, so Bleda proposed killing all of the converts so that their souls would ascend to Christ and he could judge whether or not they had faith.
 
The strange thing is the church agreed to Bleda’s plan and was enthusiastic about it. Clergymen were ready to kill hundreds of thousands of converts so that they could be closer to God and maintain the purity of Catholic doctrine. The Spanish government, however, objected to killing such a large number of converts, anticipating resistance that could exhaust the authorities. Thus, the government decided to finally expel all of the converts from Spain. Bleda accepted this solution, although he preferred the idea of killing the converts. The French historian Gustave Le Bon (1841-1931) describes these events in his book The Civilization of the Arabs:
 
“In 1610, the Spanish government issued an order to expel the Arabs from Spain. Many of the migrants were killed during the journey. Bleda expressed his satisfaction that three quarters of these migrants were killed in the process. Nearly 100,000 migrants from a single convoy consisting of 140,000 Muslims were killed on their way to Africa.”
 
 Here one must wonder: How could a religious man agree to the killing of such a large number of innocent people merely because they disagreed with his beliefs, without feeling the slightest sense of guilt? How can one reconcile faith in Christ — who taught humanity peace and love — with this bloody temperament shown by Bleda? The answer is that faith in any religion does not necessarily make us more humane. The manner in which we understand religion is what determines our behavior. Our interpretation of religion is what teaches us tolerance, justice and compassion, yet it also can push us to fanaticism, hate and aggression.
 
If we believe that all religions are merely different ways of getting to know our Lord Almighty, then we must realize that we’re not better than anyone else regardless of whether we’re Muslims, Christians or Jews. The majority of people inherit their religious beliefs from their parents, and we must realize that God will judge people based on their actions, before judging them on their religious convictions.
 
If this were our understanding of religion, then we would be tolerant of those who have other religious beliefs. We would defend the rights of all humans, regardless of their religious beliefs. However, if we believe that our religion is the sole absolute truth that transcends all other religions, then we would feel that we alone are the pure believers and those with differing religious beliefs are impure infidels living in delusion. If this is the case, then — logically — we would not acknowledge that those who differ from us have the same rights, and our fanaticism could push us to believe that we are authorized by God to elevate his word and implement his will.
 
This false divine mandate could push us to feel that we are above all others and abuse their rights. It could result in us committing the most heinous of crimes without feeling any guilt, for we believe that we are carrying out God’s will. Bleda had a clear conscience when he agreed to killing innocent people, because he felt that he was carrying out God’s will, which was for Spain to be a Catholic country in which there was no room for Muslim and Jewish infidels.
 
This belief in a divine mandate repeated itself many times throughout Spanish history, and often led to heinous crimes committed in the name of religion. Here there is no difference between the monk Bleda and the terrorist Osama Bin Laden. Although there are differences in time and circumstances, they have the same train of thought and the same vision for the world. They both believed that they had a mandate from God to implement his will and defend religion, and that those who differed from them in religion were less human. They also both believed in collective responsibility. Bleda believed that all Arabs were responsible for the actions of any Arab, while Bin Laden believed that all Westerners were responsible for the crimes committed by US and Israeli soldiers against Arabs and Muslims.
 
When it comes to the concept of a divine mandate, there is no room for personal responsibility. It was impossible to persuade Bin Laden that there were millions of people in the West who repudiated the crimes of the American army, just as it would have been impossible to convince Bleda that there were Muslims he had killed who could have been good citizens. The value of others’ lives and their rights are totally absent in the mind of people who believe they have a mandate from God.
 
Bin Laden wasn’t concerned with the lives of non-Muslims, just as Bleda wasn’t concerned with the lives of Arabs. Both of these men killed thousands of innocent people believing that they were doing something good that would get them into heaven.
 
When you believe that you have a mandate from God, you will never allow others to criticize your actions or judge you. Regardless of what you say, you would never respect those who differ from you nor acknowledge their rights. You would feel as though you were always correct, for you are carrying out the will of God. You would never be able to see reality correctly; you would live in a closed virtual world that never develops or changes. You will deny the truth, regardless of how obvious it is, and you would treat anyone who questioned your virtual world with hostility. You live inside this world, and if you lost it your life would be destroyed.
 

The Simple Act of Tying Shoes Reveals Brotherhood’s Program

This idea may help us to understand the Muslim Brotherhood and many others who are affiliated with political Islam. Months after the Brotherhood came to power, Egyptians are asking: How can the Brotherhood claim that it represents religion, while at the same time continually lying, breaking all agreements it has signed, and colluding with other parties to achieve their own interests, even if the price for this involves the blood of martyrs and the collapse of the state itself?
 
Why do Brotherhood members not feel any guilt as they attack, degrade and kill those who disagree with them? The answer is that Brotherhood members do not see themselves as politicians who have made mistakes or are hurting others; they believe that God has sent them to save Egypt from infidels and delusion. They believe that they are carrying out the will of God, and thus cannot be held accountable in accordance with the same standards applied to ordinary people, who act solely based on their ideas. The Brotherhood believes that God has given it a mandate to elevate his word and carry out his rule. Accordingly, anyone who criticizes it or argues with its politics, in the Brotherhood’s view, is an enemy of Islam. The Brotherhood is Islam, and no one else can represent the religion.
 

Acts of Torture Reveal True Nature
Of Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood

Brotherhood members believe that everything happening today is reminiscent of Islamic history — they are the Muslims and their opponents are the enemies of God. A few days ago a Brotherhood member wrote an article in which he compared the clashes in Moqattam to the Battle of Uhud. Naturally, in this comparison they were the companions of the Prophet Muhammad and their adversaries were the infidels. This is how the Brotherhood views this political dispute. Brotherhood members are true believers who want to carry out Islamic law, while their opponents are remnants of the Mubarak regime, Western or Zionist collaborators, or infidels who hate religion.
 
What is happening in Egypt is quite clear. An elected president has turned into a dictator for his group; he has trampled on the law and imposed the will of the Brotherhood’s supreme guide on all people. He has used an illegitimate attorney general to punish all who oppose him, while his security services have killed hundreds of citizens and tortured thousands.
 
The Brotherhood, as a result of its belief in a divine mandate, is unable to see the truth. It is always prepared to deny, argue and deceive. There is no use in trying to convince the Brotherhood of the truth. Even if the Brotherhood’s supreme guide killed thousands of Egyptians and the group’s politics brought about major catastrophes, Brotherhood supporters would still defend everything the organization does. Its members believe that they are carrying out the will of God. The Brotherhood’s supreme guide is exactly like Bleda and Bin Laden. He is a man who feels he represents the will of God. He is ready to violate the rights of others without blinking an eye, for he believes that God has enabled his group, and thus the will of the people worries him.

 

So, what can we do?

 
History teaches us that there is no hope in coming to an understanding with religious fanatics who see themselves as God’s instruments for achieving his will. There is no point in talks and negotiations. The solution is to apply pressure until this fascist regime is toppled. The revolution should not get lost in corridors of politics or sterile negotiations.
 
We are demanding early presidential elections, the dismissal of the illegitimate attorney general, the cancellation of the invalid constitution and the prosecution of those responsible for murder and torture — first and foremost President Mohammed Morsi and his interior minister and executioner Mohammed Ibrahim. These are the just demands of the revolution, which should not give up on them or accept compromises of any kind. The revolution will continue to victory until it triumphs over fascism and achieves all of its goals.
 
Democracy is the solution.
 

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Islam On Trial

April 1, 2013

Daniel Mabsout,

Tantawi-Perez2 - Copie[1]
Big deal ! The Al Azhar University has broken its golden Sphinx silence and has condemned the Fatwas- issued by certain Sheikhs of the religion- licensing the marriage between teenager women- fourteen of age and above- and different fighters subsequently, as a form of Jihad permitted during the war on Syria. The al Azhar labeled these Fatwas as illicit and not allowed in Islam.
Rejoice O Muslims and human beings because the Al Azhar has finally spoken , and has decided to deliver something for the occasion after the crimes have extended and multiplied , after girls have been abducted from Tunisia and elsewhere and have eloped with terror groups that call themselves Mujahideen . But this happy interference- that made our day- will be restricted and limited to this domain .There was no follow up and no will or desire -on behalf of the Al Azhar- to expand more on the subject and break the silence concerning the dubious practices of the Syrian opposition .There was no mention of the crimes committed by people who claim to be Sunni Muslims . No mention of the torturing , the killing of helpless civilians, the liquidation of soldiers , the rape of women , the sacking and stealing of belongings and other material, the abduction and evicting of people and the conspiring with foreign forces and Intelligences and the killing of Sheikhs and notorious ‘Ulemaa’ in addition to the destabilizing of a whole peaceful nation and society .
The Al Azhar does not seem concerned with such illicit acts and will not condemn the killing of innocents and that of ‘Ulemaa’ and label them as non religious and non Islamic . There is no doubt that the hateful acts of the thugs of the opposition are covered by most Sunni religious authorities and sanctioned as a form of Jihad , otherwise , the fighters would not have claimed to fight under the banner of Islam . There is religious license given to this war on Syria under the pretext that it is carried on by a certain sect against another .
No doubt that this ugly war is justified by major religious authorities instead of being denounced and condemned and seen in its ugly true picture as a war launched by Israel and the allies of Israel, against the forces of the Resistance. Sunni Islam in general and- especially al Azhar- and the high religious authorities of the religion have embarked on a very dangerous trip exposing their own religion to great misfortune . All this because these religious references are playing in the hands of rulers and kings, and have become affiliated to them, and have subjugated Islam and religion to the forces of corruption and blasphemy and evil bringing thus Islam under the control of the Zionists and their masters and slaves.
What will remain of Sunni Islam after all this is done? Not much I presume unless a real religious consensus is formed that condemns and labels -as non Islamic- all the illegal , illicit practices of the opposition witnessed in Syria . Religion – in general- whether Islam or Christianity – cannot afford such distortions and deviations and evil doings committed in its name . If not corrected or straightened, these distortions and deviations and evil doings will cause religion to turn into something else that is not itself. As a result, religion might become an institution – maybe rich and flourishing – but it will cease to be a real religion because it will lose its ethical foundation and moral background that is the platform for all spiritual knowledge and true commitment . Sunni Islam cannot recover alone from such a defamation caused by people who claimed to be Sunni Muslim ; therefore this Islam needs to review its position, and go over its choices, others wise it will be doomed to undergo the fate of other degenerate practices.
 

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

"The Brotherhood & the Jews are one; Israel’s security is part of the Brotherhood’s security & the security of the Brotherhood is part of Israel’s security,”

March 8, 2013
 

“The Brotherhood & the Jews are one; Israel’s security is part of the Brotherhood’s security & the security of the Brotherhood is part of Israel’s security,”

“… Speaking to protesters in Cairo’s Tahrir Square, Sheikh Mohammed Abdullah Nasr, leader of the Front “Ozharyoun with civil state,” said U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry is coming to Egypt on March 2 to support “Mursi the Zionist.”He described Kerry as a “Jew and the son of a Jew,” saying the American top diplomat would be received with mobs hurling eggs and tomatoes at him upon his arrival to Egypt.…”

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Abu Arfa: calling for national Reconciliation in Syria,

February 28, 2013
فيديو – الشيخ صلاح الدين أبو عرفة : كان أحرى بيوسف القرضاوي وبمشايخ الأزهر أن يدعوا إلى عصمة دماء المسلمين
أكد الشيخ صلاح الدين أبو عرفة أحد أئمة المسجد الأقصى أنه كان أيسر لمن بدأ الحرب على سورية وأعان عليها ودعا إليها وأرسل بالسلاح أن يدعو إلى الخير لأنه أنفع لأهلها وأنجى له يوم الدين .
 
وقال أبو عرفة في رسالة وجهها إلى السوريين من مدينة القدس المحتلة “أقول لكم يا أهل الشام ما نصح لكم ولا صدقكم من دعاكم إلى الحرب وحرضكم عليها ودفعكم في نارها وأوارها وهو آمن طاعم.. طامع في قصورها” موضحا أنه ليس في كتاب الله ما يدعو إليه هؤلاء المفسدون الذين سعوا في الأرض فسادا وأهلكوا حرثها ونسلها داعيا أهل الشام إلى إصلاح ذات البين والسلم والرحمة.
وبين أبو عرفة أنه كان أحرى بيوسف القرضاوي وبمشايخ الأزهر أن يدعوا إلى عصمة دماء المسلمين من أمة محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم كما دعوا إلى عصمة دماء المصريين مبينا أن المرجع والإمام الأكبر للمسلمين جميعا هو كتاب الله.. من قال به فقد صدق وأفلح ومن خالفه فقد كذب وخاب وخسر وغش وهو ليس من المسلمين في شيء.

( الخميس 2013/02/28 SyriaNow)
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

How to unite muslims?? Two ways to stop the "Shiite tsunami"??

February 18, 2013
[WilI Muslims wake up to the ugly truth; for “Israel” to survive it needs and wants Sunni-Shia war…

It wants Sunni Muslims to see Shia Muslims as their enemy. It wants Muslim to kill his brother.

It wants Muslims to DESTROY EACH OTHER for the sake of the satanic entity “Israel”.] - nahida the Exiled Palestinian

—— 

THE ZIONIST’S WAY

Listen to the Amy Ayalon taking about the future of ME.

It (ME) should be based, the concept of security, stability, statehood, should be based on several paramters, first of all we have to accept that it is very important to creat coalition a Sunni coalition led by Turkey. Why turkey?

We can’t live with Iran heavy nuclear millitary power, we should not accept it, the question is how much time we do have in correlation to what should we can do because if, if we are going to act unilaterally without any American or international support, without creating the atmosphere in the ME, it is not only we have to face the reaction, propably its too late, all we can we achieve with our military power, propably is to delay the program for either 12, 16 or 6 months, but if the assumptions is that we are a part of a coalition, based on a kind of a Sunni coalition, and America…

What do you mean by Sunni coalition?

Sunni coalition, it means that Turkey with Egypt with Jordan with Saudi Arabia, understand that the major conflict is with shea led by Iran and they create this coaltion, as I mentioned before…in order to create this coalition that will face Iran, and the Paletinians is very com?…. this is the coalition.

Now let us move to Al-azhar, and meet the Rabbe

So the Sunni concern is not Jerusalem nor the muslims unity. It is stopping the so-called Shiite tsunami.

NARAM SARJOUN WAY


Finally, here is a Syrian history lesson for rhe Azhar Rabbe, and a road map towards stopping the Shiit’s tsunami, and a Sunni counter tsunami.

It is very difficult to translate the below long article of Naram Sargon written in elegant arabic language. So, I will only aknowledge the non Arab readers that according to the Author, the shortest way to stop the so-called Shiite expansion, and to sweep the Shiite strongholds down to the capitals of shiism in Najaf and Qom is embrasing the resistance.

Rats desert a sinking ship, fools ride

BTW, Hamas as resistant movement has washed with the blood of its martyrs all the historical sins of the Brotherhood since the founding of their movement in the twenties of the last century.

So when the Muslim Brotherhood’s leader, Rashad Bayoumy asked “Is it a pre-condition to recognize Israel in order to govern?” I wrote:

The answer is clear, Mr. Bayoumy, and its up to you and your party. The shortest way govern is Pleasing the USA, Via pleasing its Tool Israel, and its Zionist Lobby. Ask your brother Ghanushi. But it’s also the shortest way to lose power, morals, and political future….

Thirty years ago, Khomeini, faced a similar situation, without storming his brain and thinking about the “spasmodic and uncalculated statements (ACTIONS) may do more harm than good…that could invite uncalculated reactions from the United States and its western allies, and its tool the Zionist entity, he turned the Zionist embassy into a Palestinian Embassy….

He did it because, the vision was clear, the enemy was clear, and because he was after power to put Iran on the right track, and he did.

Iran now, despite the 8 years war launched by Arabs (almost all Arabs except Syria, Islamists, and nationalists except Syrian) and 30 years of sanction, is super power who dared to say to US: get out of Gulf.”……
 
“You could have done the same thirty years before Khomeini, I mean with Nasser in early fifties, instead you tried to kill Nasser. You could have done it last year (2011), but you didn’t, because:
  • you are looking for power, just power, and would deal with the devil for power.
  • You dealt with Sadat, with Mubarak for 30% of the Parlament seats, with Tantawi, and with the USA,
  • Like Sadat (No 20 years before Sadat), believed and still believe that the USA holds 99% of the cards, that the shortest way to govern is to please the USA,
  • You believed and still believe that you may please the USA, without pleasing its “Chosen” tool.”

Because of your wrong calculations, and for short term political benifets, you missed a great chance to lead the revolution to the end, putting your history (Your best offspring), your future at risk.

Hamas, as a resisrance movement washed all you historical mistakes/sins.
Hamas is entiltled to be your “Hezbollah”, you crane, all it needs is a MB Assad in Cairo, to destroy all walls with Gaza Hashim, Gaza Al-izza.

Don’t kill your best offsping.”

And they did it, killed Hamas, and revealed their sectarian ugly face.  The sectarian thug Khalid Hamayreh claimed that the so – called Arab spring is good for Palestine, he meant for Hamas, now, I would ask that thug what Hamas have achieved by siding thier brothers in Syria, Egypy Tunis and Jordan, nothing, but they lost the support of the rest of the people.
As far I see now, the real Arab spring in both Tunis and Egypt has just started.

Read the full comment here.

Ahmad Jibril, in a famous Brotherhood dinner in Cairo gave a similar advise. Jibril appears in the following two pictures taken in the house of brotherhood’s murshid.
 نقره لتكبير أو تصغير الصورة ونقرتين لعرض الصورة في صفحة مستقلة بحجمها الطبيعي
Ahmad Jibril (L), Khalid Mishaal (R), Brothers Murshid (M)

نقره لتكبير أو تصغير الصورة ونقرتين لعرض الصورة في صفحة مستقلة بحجمها الطبيعي
Standing from Left: Abu-Ahmad Foad -PFLP, Jibril-PFLP GC, Ramadan Shallah -Hihad, MB Mushid, Mishaal-Hamas. Sitting from right Anwar Raja-PFLP GC…
  ..
In case you missed it: Rats desert a sinking ship, fools ride

Part 2

كيف نوقف التشيع؟؟

درس في التاريخ لشيخ الأزهر / نارام سرجون
الثلاثاء‏، 12‏ شباط‏، 2013
أوقات الشام

 

هل دحر ايران وهزيمة حسن نصر الله سيحمي المذهب السني؟؟

ليس في فن الكتابة أخطر على الكاتب من أن يتناول الشأن الديني ان كان بخير أو بسوء .. فحسبه أن ينجو من اللوم والتعنيف من الطرفين .. فاللامتدينون العاتبون لايرون ماكتبه كافيا .. وأما المتدينون من الهائجين والغاضبين فيرون دم الله مسفوكا على أوراقه .. لكن أخطر أنواع الكتابة في الشأن الديني هي ما يتناول الطوائف والأديان في زمن السعار الديني والهياج اللاهوتي حيث يوضع رب العالمين (الله) في دائرة الطباشير وتشد الكنائس والمساجد والكنس ذراعيه .. والكل يدعي ملكيته وحده لله وحده حتى كدنا نسمع أنين الله في سمائه من شد المؤمنين لذراعيه .. الكل يريد اجتياح السماء والجلوس الى جانب عرش الله .. والبعض يريد الجلوس على عرش الله ذاته .. فمن يحكم السماء يحكم الأرض ..وكي تحكم السماء عليك أن تحكم الأرض ..
لكن كم يثير الشجن هذا التراشق بالكلام بين الطوائف الاسلامية في زمن الربيع الاسلامي .. زمن يوسف القرضاوي وأحمد الطيب وعدنان العرعور .. انه زمن النهش في الاسلام .. وزمن الطوائف المسمومة .. زمن يقف فيه الاسلام عاجزا بلا حول ولاقوة في نفس دائرة الطباشير التي وقف فيها الله نفسه .. ولانسمع فيها الا تأوّه الاسلام من شد ذراعيه الكبيرين ولحيته الطويلة حتى بدأنا نسمع طقطقة عظامه وهي تنفصل في مفاصلها ممزوجة بصوت انفتاق اللحم عن اللحم وتمزقه من أثر الشد والتجاذب ..
أعرف أنني سأكتب اليوم مقالا ربما كان الأخطر على الاطلاق لأنه يعرج على شأن ديني .. سأرصف فيه الكلمات بعناية فائقة وأضعها كلمة كلمة على السطر بهدوء شديد كمن يضع عبوة ناسفة ولغما نزقا ينفجر حتى من مرور نسمة هواء على صواعقه .. أو كمن يمسك مشعلا بيد في غرفة ضيقة مكتظة ببراميل البارود وباليد الأخرى ينقل براميل البارود .. كل غفلة قد تقرب اللهب من شفاه البارود المنفعل .. بل يخالجني شعور أحيانا أنني باقترابي من الشأن الديني أنني كمن ينقل قنبلة ذرية بسيارته .. انه اقتراب من منطقة مسورة بالمذابح عبر التاريخ والحرائق.. وبينها وبين العقل خندق مليء بالدم القاني .. وهي مسيجة بتابوات ولعنات وأساطير ومطوقة بملايين الكتب والحجج والذرائع والجدال والمنافحات التي لم تصل الى قرار..ولن تصل..
ومع هذا فانني سأكتب غير عابئ لأن الصمت هو دين الشياطين ..وأن كنت سأفعل شيئا فهو أنني سأحاول أن أمحو دائرة الطباشير كيلا يقف فيها دين أو اله .. وكي تحار الطوائف بعد ذلك أين تضع مذاهبها في غياب رسوم الطباشير.. الساحة العربية امتلأت بدوائر الطباشير ..وكل المذاهب والنحل تقف على حدود الدوائر تبحث عن أذرع لتشدها .. ولكن سأمرّ على الساحة وسأمسك قطعة قماش وأمحو كل الدوائر لأن الحقيقة هي أن الله لايقف في أية دائرة وكل الدوائر ترسمها يد جاهلة..
هذه الأيام سمعنا خطابين دينيين في الشرق .. واحد مسيحي صدر في دمشق في تنصيب البطريرك يوحنا العاشر .. والآخر اسلامي صدر من القاهرة من شيخ الأزهر أحمد الطيب بمناسبة زيارة نجاد للأزهر .. ولم يكن هناك أي فرق بين الخطابين سوى مايقارب 48 ساعة لكن الفارق حضاريا وفكريا بينهما كان قرابة عشرة قرون .. فخطاب البطريرك يوحنا العاشر وكل البطاركة المشاركين في حفل تنصيبه كان بردا وسلاما ويؤسس لمستقبل كنيسة للانسانية .. وكان مثقلا بالهم الانساني والوطني وبالرقي الحضاري وفلسفة التسامح والانفتاح والتلاقح .. أما الثاني فكان خطابا مخجلا ويؤسس لثقافة الحارات الشعبية والمقاهي المعزولة .. وأجزم أنه يؤسس لمقولة من الفرات الى النيل حدودك يااسرائيل .. لأن حدود اسرائيل تنتهي عند الفرات كما تدعي وما بعد الفرات يراد للدولة الشيعية أن تقوم .. وقام شيخ الأزهر بوضع حدود اسرائيل الدينية باقامة الحاجز النفسي والبشري بالحدود السنية الشيعية .. وهو يريد حبس الشيعة خلف الفرات .. فتنفرد اسرائيل بما قبل الفرات ..
ومن يستمع لشيخ الأزهر في وعظيته الغاضبة للرئيس الايراني أحمدي نجاد ونصحه بعدم تدخله في شؤون السنة يشفق على نفسه ويصله احساس غريب أن الاسلام في محنة مابعدها محنة في فقر الفقه وفقر التفكير .. ويحس أن الجامع الأزهر دخل كهف دقلديانوس وسينام لثلاثمئة سنة يترك فيها المسلمين بقيادة عتاولة جبهة النصرة والقاعدة .. والحقيقة أن من يتولى قيادة الاسلام في هذه المرحلة لم يعد الازهر ولا الحرم المكي وبالطبع ليس الأقصى الذي باعته حماس لقطر والقرضاوي وليست جبهة النصرة ولا القاعدة .. بل من يقود الاسلام هم مجموعة من الخبراء والمستشرقين الغربيين والباحثين الخطرين في شؤون تفكيك الأنظمة الاجتماعية والنسج الثقافية الموروثة بحقنها بالسم الطائفي بنكهة (الحرية والديمقراطية الثورية) ..

وهؤلاء القادة الخفيون من عيار برنار ليفي يعرفون أن الفرات هو حدود اسرائيل التوراتية ويجب فصل الأرض والشعب العربي والاسلامي قبل الفرات وبعده بالنار الطائفية .. فينكفئ شرق الفرات الشيعي عن غربه السني ويترك غربه لقدره .. لتتولى اسرائيل أمر غرب الفرات بعد أن كادت تنتهي من معركة نهر النيل وقد تركته منهكا ونهبا للصراع الاسلامي العلماني والاسلامي القبطي..
جهابذة التدمير الثقافي يعرفون أن اللغة والدين من أقوى النسج الثقافية على الاطلاق ومن أصعب المهام تفكيكهما .. وهما مترابطان جدا .. كما أن عملية تحطيم أحدهما ستسبب انهيار الآخر أو انهيار الأمة .. فتفكيك الدين مثلا سبب في هزيمة الأمم كما حدث في سقوط القسطنطينية بيد محمد الفاتح لأن بابا روما رفض نصرة بابا القسطنطينية ضد العثمانيين ما لم يعلن ولاءه الكهنوتي للبابوية في روما .. ويمكن أحيانا تدمير الدين بتدمير أساسه اللغوي ..ومن هنا تم مثلا الغاء رابطة اللغة مع الدين الاسلامي في تركيا أتاتورك بتغيير الحرف العربي الى اللاتيني فغابت اللغة عن الوعي التركي الحديث لقرن كامل .. وعندما استيقظت تركيا وجدت أنه لايوجد لديها لغة لتتعرف على دينها فنشأ من ذلك حزب العدالة والتنمية الاسلامي وهو حزب أقل مايقال فيه أنه نهج ديني جديد مبتور مهجن وبلا جذور وأقرب الى النسخة الأطلسية المسموح بها للاسلام العثماني الذي افاق في مزرعة العلمانية الأتاتوركية ولايعرف شيئا عن جذوره .. فاسلام حزب العدالة والتنمية يقاتل مع الغرب في كل معاركه في كل البلاد الاسلامية ولا يخوض معركة واحدة على أية أرض غير اسلامية .. من أفغانستان الى العراق وليبيا ومصر .. وسورية أخيرا ..
********************
لاشيء يستفز أعصابي الا الخوف على المذهب السني من اجتياح المذهب الشيعي له لأن في هذا اهانة لمذاهب أهل السنة التي يعتقد من يسمع هذا الزعيق أنها ضعيفة وهزيلة وبلا عمق فقهي صلب .. ومن يستمع لشيوخ الاسلام هذه الأيام وزعيقهم من تمدد التشيع يعرف أن الاسلام يقترب من مرحلة الهلوسة الدينية والضعف الشديد والجهل الشديد والتقاط الاسرائيليات .. وأنه بدأ في تأسيس حدود اسرائيل التوراتية .. بشطر الشرق الى ماشرق الفرات وغرب الفرات عمليا .. حيث بالضبط حدود الشيعة والسنة .. أو بدقة حدود اسرائيل الشرقية توراتيا..
المذهب السني يا شيوخ الأزهر ويا شيوخ قطر لايحميه الوقوف في وجه نجاد ولا بناء الأسوار حول ايران ولا تحطيم حسن نصر الله رمزيا ومعنويا وتشويهه ولا بتبديل نظام الحكم في سورية ..

المذهب السني لن يحميه الا التصدي لحسن نصر الله ونجاد والخامنئي في قلب اسرائيل .. أي التسابق مع نصر الله ونجاد والأسد في الحاق الاهانة باسرائيل وتهديدها .. نجاد ونصر الله والخامنئي والأسد لم تصل شهرتهم وسطوتهم بين شعوب المنطقة بسبب الحوزات الشيعية ولابسبب كتاب (الرياء والعجب) أو (زبدة الأحكام الاسلامية) للخميني بل بسبب التصدي للغرب العاتي ومشروع اسرائيل وتحدي جيشها وقهره وتمريغ أنفه في بنت جبيل ومارون الراس ووادي الحجير..
بكل بساطة ماعلى الأزهر وشيخ الأزهر أن يفعله لتفعيل وتقوية المذهب السني ونشره حتى في ايران نفسها هو عدم السماح لنجاد ونصر الله والأسد بالانفراد بمواقفهم ضد اسرائيل والغرب .. العالم الاسلامي يرى أن هذا الثلاثي قد قهر الغرب مرتين في العراق ولبنان وهذا مارفع من شأن المذهب الشيعي لأن من ينجح في الصمود قد يعني للناس أن مشروعه قوي وأن عقيدته صافية ..
شيخ الأزهر لايريد أن يفعل شيئا لبعث الحياة في المذهب السني الذي يتآكل في الروتين وبيروقراطية المؤسسة وطحن الفتاوى والانشغال بالرضاعة وطبخ الدين في مطابخ الصمت والمعاهدات وتركه لوعاظ الفضائيات وسماسرة الفتاوى .. المذهب السني لايكون الحفاظ عليه بالتقوقع وزيادة جرعة الخوف والتنفير من التشيع كمنافس رئيسي والتصرف بعصبية ونزق أمام العمائم السود .. هذا السلوك بحد ذاته سيدفع الناس للتفكير في مدى قوة المذهب الشيعي الذي يخيف كل مؤسسات السنة العريقة من المحيط الى الخليج ويجعل الأزهر مصابا بالهياج .. ويلقي المؤسسات الدينية الراعية للمذهب السني في الشك وهي ثرية للغاية بالمال والنفوذ عبر النفط ..والموقع الجيوسياسي .. ومع هذا تتقصف ركب الفضائيات رعبا من التشيع وكأنه اسطورة لايقف في وجهها شيء ..
لو وقف الأزهر كما يقف نجاد وحسن نصر الله لكان له في قلب (قم) أتباع ومحبون ومعجبون ..

غباء الأزهر لم يعد يصدق .. وللاستدلال على ذلك يكفي تذكر بعض تصرفاته المثيرة للحرج والجدل والخجل .. ففي أيام الراحل محمد سيد طنطاوي شيخ الأزهر السابق ظهر الشيخ طنطاوي وهو يصافح بيريز بيديه مصافحة شهيرة .. ثم ينكر ويكذب ويدعي أنه لايعرف من هو بيريز ..

وفي مناسبة أخرى عندما سئل عن حصار غزة قالها بالفم الملآن وبعصبية (الله .. واحنا مالنا؟؟) ..

وعندما كانت الجرافات الاسرائيلية تهدم بيت المغاربة ببث حي ومباشر سأل المذيع شيخ الأزهر عن موقفه فقال : ليس لي علم بأي اعتداء .. هو فيه ايه وبيحصل ايه؟؟ وقد سكت المذيع من حرجه وغيظه ..(التسجيلات متاحة لمن أراد)..
وبالمقابل كان نجاد يرعى مؤتمرا لهدم اسطورة الهولوكوست دون تهيب لأحد .. وكان نصر الله يلقي صواريخه على اسرائيل .. بعد كل هذا يريد هؤلاء ألا يتقدم المذهب الشيعي وينال الاحترام والشعبية .. فيدفعون ببعض المراهقين والصبية للتصدي للفكر الشيعي عبر الفضائيات وأعمال العنف الدموية المغطاة بصمت المؤسسة الدينية ..وغطاء التكفير..
كم فيها من الاهانة هذه الصرخات والرعب من اقتراب المذهب الشيعي الى عرين السنة .. وكأن المذهب السني لايملك أسلحته وفكره ومفكريه وعلماءه الذين يحاجون ويقارعون .. وليس لديه تراث راسخ في عقول أتباعه ليهتز في أية ريح .. انني لو كنت في موقع ديني في الأزهر لدعوت الحوزات الشيعية الى مصر لنعيدها سنية الى مواطنها .. تماما كما يحصل للمهاجرين العرب الى الغرب .. يذهبون شرقيين ويعود معظمهم متفقها في أصول الحرية والانتخابات وتحرر المرأة ..وحقوق الانسان ..
هل يريد الأزهر والثوار والباكون على المذهب السني انهاء اسطورة حسن نصر الله وايقاف الدعوة الشيعية؟؟ .. بل هل يريد الأزهر أن يرد على المذهب الشيعي من قلب النجف؟؟

اذا عليه ان يدخل في المنافسة ويعلن فتوى جهادية ضد اسرائيل لانقاش فيها واعلان موقف صريح رافض لمعاهدة كامب ديفيد .. وأن يطلب من أردوغان عند زيارة مصر والأزهر علنا الانسحاب من الناتو والعودة لقيادة المسلمين من غير ناتو واعادة اللغة العربية كلغة ثانية رسمية في تركيا كما هي في ايران الشيعية .. وتطهير الشرق من أذيال الغرب ومن تورط تركيا في الدروع الصاروخية الاسرائيلية والامريكية ..
انه ثمن بسيط لايريد الازهر فعله .. بل يفضل خوض حرب دينية تافهة من مقاس داحس والغبراء لعقود .. وبلا نهاية..ولانتيجة ..
لاأدري ان كان شيخ الأزهر يعرف أن كل حوزات العالم الشيعية لاتستطيع أن تمس جوهر المذهب السني بعمليات التبشير لأن هذا المذهب ببساطة مذهب قوي وعريق كما أن الدول الراعية له ثرية للغاية وهي أثرى مافي العالم الاسلامي .. وقد صمدت مذاهب أهل السنة مئات السنين وتماسكت رغم أن الدعوة الشيعية هي طعن فلسفي ومنهجي بالفكر السني وأسسه منذ قيامها منذ مئات السنين..
ان من سيحطم المذهب السني أيها السادة العلماء الأزهريون هو تركه رهينة بيد شخصيات ودعاة هزيلين أخلاقيا مثل القرضاوي وعمرو خالد والعرعور و(أبو اسلام) وحازم ووو … وتركهم يحولونه الى مذهب بدائي متوحش لايرحم ويصور جرائمه دون أن يخشى ادانة من الأزهر وغيره .. أولئك المجانين الذين يباهون بعنف المذهب السني وسكاكينه هم من يضعفون مذاهب أهل السنة .. لأن مشهد ذبح واحد لانسان، أو احراق الناس أحياء كما تنشر الثورة السورية في استعراضاتها الثأرية التي تتشفى من خصومها ستهز المذهب السني برمته .. وتخيفه من نفسه عندما ينظر في المرآة ويرى الدم على وجهه .. وستطلق الشك في صدقيته وصحته العقائدية..
ومما يدهش له أنه في ستينات القرن الماضي قاد الأزهريون محاولة جريئة لتوحيد المذهبين الشيعي والسني في جو كتب فيه اسماعيل مظهر كتابا بعنوان (لماذا أنا ملحد) فرد عليه محمد جمال فندي بكتاب (لماذا أنا مؤمن) وليس بذبحه امام الكاميرات ورفع التكبير.. لكن سكوت شيخ الأزهر والقرضاوي والعلماء المسلمين على السلوك العنيف للتنظيمات الاسلامية سيتسبب في نفور نفسي من الاسلام من قلب الطائفة السنية (كما تسبب سكوت مرجعية النجف عن اعدام الرئيس صدام حسين يوم العيد لأن ذلك الصمت أخجل الشيعة الوطنيين قبل السنة وهز من مكانة المرجعية الشيعية بينهم) .. وسيضرب هذا الشك في الشرعية الاخلاقية للسنة أهم أسس لأي مذهب .. لأن الناس لاتغير عقائدها بسهولة لكنها تغير من علاقتها بعقائدها وقوة شكيمتها في الدفاع عنها .. ان العنف الذي تصوره الثورة لارهاب غيرها وللمباهاة به وسكوت الأزهر والرموز السنية عليه سيكون أهم سبب لانهدام المذهب السني في نفوس متبعيه لأن هذا المذهب لم يتعرض لمثل مايتعرض له من تدمير ممنهج على يد أئمة السنة ووعاظ الفكر المتطرف .. بل ان عملية توثيق القتل وممارسة العنف واستخدام الاطفال في قطع الرؤوس تحتفظ بها القوى الغربية في ملفات تنتظر اخراجها على الرأي العام الغربي عندما يحين استعمال العنف المتناهي في السيطرة على بعض القوى الاسلامية السنية التي سينتهي دورها .. تماما كما ظهرت أشرطة عنيفة عن تعذيب السجناء العراقيين ونسفهم أحياء والقائهم من الشواهق بعد أن بقيت لدى وكالة المخابرات الأمريكية عقدين كاملين وتم اطلاقها الى العلن عندما تقرر الاجهاز على العراق ونظام حكمه ..
وربما سيفاجأ الجميع ان قلت ان المذهب الشيعي لن ينتشر في بلاد الشام لأن علماء الشام من السنة قد دخلوا في منافسة قوية مع السيد حسن نصر الله والرئيس نجاد في عملية التحدي لاسرائيل .. ولايستطيع السيد حسن نصر الله الا الاعتراف بأنه يتلقى الدعم من سورية ومن قصر لايبعد كثيرا عن ساحة اسمها (ساحة الأمويين) .. ولولا دعم علماء سورية السنة للرئيس الأسد في هذا النهج لما كان حزب الله بهذه السمعة والهيبة والمكانة ..

ولعل اغرب حقيقة تفاجئنا هي أن حزب الله مدين لعلماء الشام السنة بقوته .. ولولا دعمهم له لكانت القيادة السورية واحتراما لرأي علمائها السنة مترددة في دعم حزب الله .. ولذلك استحق هؤلاء العلماء منزلة لايضاهيها منزلة .. وهي أنهم حماة أهل السنة وحماة المذهب السني .. وهم من أعطى للمذهب السني هيبته في زمن ترهل الأزهر والحرم المكي وغياب الأقصى .. وهم من يحميه بوقوفهم أندادا لحسن نصر الله في مواجهة الغرب ..
ومن يعرف مثلا الشيخ العلامة محمد سعيد رمضان البوطي أو مفتي الجمهورية السورية الشيخ أحمد بدر الدين حسون وجسارته في قبول التحدي الاسرائيلي لعرف أن مثل هؤلاء هم من يوقفون أي تمدد للتشيع .. فقد تمكن الشيخ حسون من فرض احترامه بقوة بخطابه الواثق وعلمه وفقهه الجهادي الرفيع وقدرة خارقة على خلق التسامح .. وعكس في موقفه الصابر والجهادي مدى تبحره في الفقه السني وعلوم الدين والمذاهب وتحول الى أيقونة سنية .. بل وبتقديم ولده سارية شهيدا ارتقى ليكون بمثابة حسن نصر الله “السني” .. فكلاهما فقد ولده في معركة من أجل موقف وطني ولم يغير طريقه ..

ومن لديه قوة الشيخ البوطي وحسون لايحس أن الانتقال الى منصة مذهب آخر سيضيف على يقينه شيئا آخر .. لأن التفاصيل الفقهية في الخلاف لن تغير العمق الايماني للمسلم.. سنيا كان أم شيعيا..
يريد شيخ الأزهر والقرضاوي وكل ثوار الناتو أن يوقفوا انتشار المذهب الشيعي .. وقام الربيع العربي لهذه الغاية كما يبدو ولا يبدو أن الربيع قام لايقاف المد الاسرائيلي .. وبالفعل فان أول ثمن تعهد به هؤلاء هو اسقاط رمزية المقاومة وطهارتها واسقاط معاقلها في سورية وبدء الحرب المذهبية الشعواء .. ومن يريد الدليل فليفتح أية صفحة سورية للثورة منذ اليوم الأول وبمجرد فتحه الصفحة ستفوح الروائح الطائفية الكريهة وسينهض الموتى من القبور ليقصوا له حكايات الجنون .. والهوس بالشيعة والنصيرية ..
——————————
ماردده كالببغاء شيخ الأزهر يدل على أن عملية وضع حدود اسرئيل التوراتية يسهم فيها شيوخ المسلمين الكبار ومؤسساتهم الكبيرة .. فمنذ أن وضع مشروع قتل الخرائط القديمة للشرق الأوسط نشأت عملية التهويل من التمدد الشيعي لتحدث مبارزة سنية شيعية كبرى تبدأ رسم خطوط شعار اسرائيل التوراتية بشطر الجغرافيا السياسية الى شيعة وراء الفرات وسنة قبل الفرات بعد أن تم فصل الشام عن مصر في كامب ديفيد ..
وكان أول استهلال لهذه الخريطة هو تحذير ملك الأردن (الانكليزي) من الهلال الشيعي عام 2004 عقب سقوط العراق عام 2003 الذي آذن سقوطه بنجاح انطلاقة المشروع التقسيمي التوراتي على أرضية العراق .. ومنذ ذلك التاريخ انطلقت بكائيات ونواح الخائفين على أهل السنة ومذاهب أهل السنة وكان ذلك الانفجار العاطفي المبالغ فيه على المذهب السني مريبا للغاية .. ومنذ ذلك الوقت ظهرت الفضائيات التي أيقظت كل الجثث والمومياءات الاسلامية ونبشت القبور والجحور..

وجيء بالجمل من موقعته وتولى الجميع أمر العناية بعلفه ورغائه .. وسيق الناس من منصات التنوير واليقظة والرؤوس التي تشرئب لرؤية الفجر الاسلامي الى سقيفة بني ساعدة وجدل صفين وكربلاء لينبلج الفجر التوراتي .. ومن يسمع النواح يتخيل أن طوفانا من الجيوش وذوي العمامات السوداء يستعدون لغزو العالم العربي وأن مؤامرة نهاوند قد خرجت من أستارها الليلة بعد تخفيها بضعة قرون..
كان أول سؤال يخطر على البال هو سؤال بسيط للغاية؟ هل المذهب السني ضعيف وهزيل وهش حتى يخشى مبارزة مع الفكر الشيعي فيترك أمر التصدي للمؤامرة للفضائيات ولشيوخ من سوية عدنان العرعور؟؟

كيف يمكن لفقه اهل السنة العريق والهائل والمتمدد بكلكله على طول ألف وخمسمئة سنة وعلى امتداد 80% من العالم الاسلامي أن يخشى من مذهب ومن حوزات هنا وهناك؟؟ هل في التاريخ سابقة تبرر هذا الخوف؟؟

هل يخشى الاسلام السني بكل تركته وثقله ووزنه وفقهه من اسلام آخر يهزمه ببعض الدعاة والدراويش أو المتصوفين الباحثين عن لقاء المهدي المنتظر؟؟ الاسلام السني فقه راسخ وعمره مئات السنين لم يحدث في التاريخ أن هزم الاسلام السني أو أن تمدد التشيع خارج خرائطه بالتبشير أو بالغزو .. وهناك مثالان لايمكن انكارهما .. وهم مصر الشيعية أيام الفاطميين وايران السنية قبل التشيع .. بل ان عملية التخويف تلجأ الى الاستشهاد بتاريخي مصر وايران دون دراية بالتاريخ وتفاصيله .. وهذا التخويف يعتمد على جهل مطبق بعملية التحول الاجتماعي والتاريخي ..بل جهل أكثر في تفاصيل تاريخ مصر أو ايران ..
ففي مصر حكم الفاطميون لمئتي عام لكن المصريين عموما لم يتشيعوا تماما بل ان المصريين حولوا المناسبات الشيعية الحزينة ولطمياتها الى احتفالات بهيجة حتى في عز الدولة الفاطمية واستمر هذا حتى اليوم بالاحتفال بعاشوراء بطقوس احتفالية بهيجة ..بل ان المدارس الفقهية السنية في الاسكندرية كانت موجودة قبل عهد العاضد آخر الخلفاء الفاطميين .. وليس دقيقا أن صلاح الدين الأيوبي قضى على الدولة الفاطمية أوعلى التشيع بالعنف رغم بعض الحوادث .. بل لأن الدولة الفاطمية كانت قد وصلت الى سن الشيخوخة بعد مئتي سنة ووصلت الى التحلل الداخلي وفق منطق التاريخ ومنطق ابن خلدون في عمر الدولة .. حيث تصارع وزراؤها في سنواتها الأخيرة عندما نخرت الدولة حتى أن بعضهم استنجد بالصليبيين ضد بعضهم (كما يستنجد اليوم الثوار الاسلاميون العرب بالناتو وعلى رأسهم معاذ الخطيب والشقفة وطيفور والقرضاوي وعبد الجليل) فيما كان بعضهم يستنجد بنور الدين محمود زنكي حاكم حلب والشام الذي أرسل لهم جيشا كان من بينه ضابط شاب اسمه صلاح الدين تمكن من أن يسلب العاضد (آخر الخلفاء الفاطميين) سلطته سلميا دون قتال .. ولذلك كانت عملية انهاء الحكم الفاطمي في مصر سهلة للغاية ..

الفاطميون انتهوا في مصر لأنهم تآكلوا سياسيا في سياق صراعات الدولة الداخلية الهرمة وبسبب تحالف بعضهم مع الصليبيين كحليف ضد الحكم العباسي المنافس .. تحالف كان ممجوجا وتسبب في سقوط هيبتهم وشرعيتهم الدينية وقوتهم .. والدولة الفاطمية كانت قد وصلت الى نهاياتها كدولة منخورة..
مصر التي خضعت للفاطميين نقلها الأيوبيون الى الصف السني بسهولة من دون فضائيات الثرثرة واللطم على أهل السنة .. والسبب هو صلاح الدين الأيوبي الذي كان قائدا اسلاميا معتدا بسنيته .. اذ حولته هزيمته للصليبيين الى بطل وجعلت مذهبه ينتصر .. ومنحه تحدي الصليبيين الغزاة شرعية هائلة في نقل مصر الى حظيرة أخرى بسرعة..
أما ايران التي كانت سنية فيقال ان انقلابها على الأغلب الى التشيع كان بسبب السلطان غياث الدين محمد بن أرغون الملقب بشاه بنده بسبب قضية زوجته التي طلقها ثلاثا ولم يسمح له الفقه السني باستعادة زوجته لكن الفقه الشيعي اعتبر طلاقه باطلا .. فقرر غياث الدين اعتناق المذهب الشيعي وتشجيع نشره في دولته .. أما التهويل بقصة الشاه اسماعيل الصفوي ونشره التشيع فربما كانت غايتها تبرير الصراع بين السلطان سليم العثماني واسماعيل الصفوي والتنافس بينهما على التمدد في الشرق .. وقصة التشيع الايراني تشبه الى حد كبير قصة انقلاب ملك انكلترة هنري الثامن على الكنيسة الكاثوليكية بسبب زيجاته الست ورغبته في تطليق زوجته كاثرين فاعترض عليه توماس مور وزير عدله ومستشاره .. فسجنه الملك في برج لندن بتهمة الخيانة العظمى .. وقطع رأسه .. ثم قرر انشاء كنيسة جديدة لاتخضع للبابا فكانت الكنيسة الانغليكانية التي لاتزال حتى اليوم ..بسبب زيجات الملك هنري الثامن ومزاجيته..
ان شيخ الأزهر والقرضاوي وكل ثوار الناتو لن يوقفوا انتشار المذهب الشيعي بل يوقفون الاسلام الجهادي الحقيقي حيث يتلاقح جناحا الاسلام الشيعي والسني ..

هؤلاء الفقهاء الجهلاء يمهدون لاقامة حدود اسرائيل التوراتية على ضفاف الفرات.. لتقوم اسرائيل بين الفرات والنيل .. حيث الشيعة محبوسون خلف الفرات ويدافع السنة غرب الفرات عن اسرائيل التي ستبقيهم دوما يحسون أن العدو قادم من الشرق .. شرق الفرات ..


How to Unite Muslims??
Listen to Shaikh Ahmad Badridin Hassoun
Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!
 

Egypt’s Iran Policy Linked To Brotherhood

February 15, 2013
 

The new Brotherhood regime is in orbit around America’s regional clients, be they big or small!

Mustafa al Labbad

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s visit to Egypt has uncovered the shortcomings of Egyptian foreign policy, which is designed to serve the interests of the Muslim Brotherhood, writes Mustafa al-Labbad.

This article was first published in Arabic on 11/2/2013. Read original article.

Egypt’s Iran Policy Linked To Brotherhood

 

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad talks during a news conference at the end of his visit to Cairo, Feb. 7, 2013. (photo by REUTERS/Asmaa Waguih)
 
اقرا المقال الأصلي باللغة العربية
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad did not expect that series of prohibitive demands from al-Azhar: the rights of Sunnis in Iran, the rights of the Arabs in Khuzestan, non-interference in Bahrain’s affairs, stopping the bloodshed in Syria and ceasing the spread of Shiism in Sunni countries.

Ahmadinejad’s visit to Cairo to attend the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) summit took the spotlight away from the summit itself. The visit was the first by a sitting Iranian president. It signaled that the troubled relationship between the two major eastern poles has improved. That relationship has been troubled for more than three decades.

The grandiose airport reception that Ahmadinejad received from his Egyptian counterpart triggered speculation that relations between the two countries was about to resume and that a new regional axis that would break the existing regional balance is about to be born. But the Iranian president’s meeting with Al-Azhar Mosque’s Grand Sheikh poured cold water on Iranian dreams. What are the future Egyptian-Iranian relations after Ahmadinejad’s visit to Cairo? What are the shortcomings in Egypt’s new regional policy as revealed by the Iranian president’s visit? We will try to answer those questions below.

The future of Egyptian-Iranian relations

The Iranian president chose to stop by al-Azhar immediately after meeting with Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi because Tehran wants to build on al-Azhar’s illustrious history, bring closer the followers of different Islamic sects and ease the sectarian tension in the region between Sunnis and Shiites.

Religion plays a role in Iranian politics because religion is in the Iranian constitution and part of the country’s practice for more than three decades. So it was thought that Egypt becoming more religious would form common ground between Tehran and Cairo. Yet the sectarian tension plaguing the region for years, and for which all parties are to blame, has unfortunately become the main conflict in the Middle East.

The Iranian president sat next to al-Azhar Mosque’s Grand Imam Ahmed al-Tayeb and raised the victory sign with his hand in front of the cameras, but then the mood quickly changed.

Ahmadinejad was surprised that the joint press conference was attended not by Tayeb, but by his advisor Sheikh Hassan al-Shafei, who then listed a series of demands from Iran: the rights of the Sunnis in Iran, the rights of the Arabs in Khuzestan, non-interference in Bahrain’s affairs, stopping the bloodshed in Syria and ceasing the spread Shiism in Sunni countries. Those demands are in effect a list of accusations toward Iran’s policies in the region. However, to be fair, no Iranian politician, including Ahmadinejad, could agree to discuss such issues, especially those involving Iranian internal affairs (Arabs in Khuzestan and Sunnis in Iran).

Al-Azhar’s positions were different than those of the Muslim Brotherhood. Some al-Azhar scholars believe that the Muslim Brotherhood is seeking to dominate the institution and impose the Brotherhood’s ideology on it.

Then Ahmadinejad’s visit got worse. A Salafist group verbally assaulted the Iranian president outside of al-Azhar. It seems those protesters are not aware that Egypt’s guests should never be insulted in any way shape or form. Respecting the guest is a fundamental Arab value that goes back to even before Islam.

Ahmadinejad’s disappointment with the al-Azhar meeting and the protest aside, Iran was still able to score a goal against its opponents. It showed the region and the world that economic sanctions are not preventing regional doors that have for decades been shut in Iran’s face from opening up. Egypt was and will remain the biggest Arab country. Egypt scored a goal against its opponents in the Gulf by brandishing its relations with Iran. But the Egyptian government is using its relations with Iran to score short-term goals in a way that does not befit Iran’s regional importance.

The shortcomings of Egypt’s regional policy

So it seems that President Morsi’s administration does not really wish to upgrade its relations with Iran but only use them against the Gulf states. In addition, it will be difficult for the Egyptian administration to go further in its relations with Iran because of the price Egypt would have to pay.

To expand its relations with Egypt, Iran is only paying an internal price: the various Iranian political wings must agree with each other on the nature of these relations. But Egypt’s price would be much higher. The Muslim Brotherhood would have to pay both an internal and an external price. One, their Salafist ally will hinder any rapprochement with Iran. Two, the alliance between Turkey and Qatar will also hinder a rapprochement. So Egyptian-Iranian relations will show limited improvement in the next phase. There will be neither estrangement nor a regional partnership. The latter is not realistic in light of the current balance of forces nor with the way Morsi is managing the Iranian file.

Ahmadinejad’s visit to Cairo revealed three shortcomings: the first is about transparency. Who is setting Egyptian foreign policy? In Mubarak’s days, the president and the security agencies used to set the relations with Iran. But who is doing that now? That is a valid question given that the president’s foreign affairs advisor is a former foreign relations official for the Muslim Brotherhood’s international wing.

The second shortcoming is about Egypt’s agenda. How does the current administration define Egyptian national interests? And what are Egypt’s regional and national priorities?

The third shortcoming is about context because the improvement in relations with Iran is coinciding with deteriorating relations between the UAE and the Muslim Brotherhood. It seems that rapprochement with Iran is Egypt’s substitute for its relations with Gulf countries, especially after relations between the UAE and the Muslim Brotherhood worsened after the UAE arrested a Brotherhood cell. A visit from Morsi’s adviser Essam al-Haddad failed to resolve the crisis.
That was directly followed by a visit to Egypt from Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi then from Ahmadinejad. It is clear the current Egyptian administration lacks political imagination. Egypt needs no one’s permission to upgrade its relations with Iran, but upgraded relations with Iran should complement Egypt’s influence in the region, not compensate for lost influence elsewhere.

Iran, Turkey and a twist of fate

Replacing the Arab facade of the region with a purely religious one will open the way for regional non-Arab powers to play more than political roles and start interfering in Arab internal affairs. The Arab countries will be weaker relative to other countries in the region. It would be unfortunate to fail to achieve Egyptian-Iranian and Egyptian-Turkish convergence that would serve Egyptian and Arab interests. The former Egyptian regime closed the doors to any attempt for rapprochement with Iran or Turkey. It tried to avoid potential dangers and thus could not seize opportunities. It is unfortunate to see Egypt after the revolution open those doors only for tactical purposes, without a specific agenda that defines Egyptian national interests.

Relations with Iran are important and necessary to diversify Egypt’s regional relations. Yet the purpose of Egypt’s relations with any country, including Iran, is not for its own sake but only to serve Egypt’s national interest, which does not necessarily match the interests of a political current, even the Muslim Brotherhood.

What a weird twist of fate: The great Egyptian people rose up against their government because their country’s regional and international status declined under its rule and because it was a mere satellite of the U.S. administration, and now they are being asked to rise up, again, because their country’s foreign policy is being tailored to the interests of a particular political group. The new Brotherhood regime is in orbit around America’s regional clients, be they big or small!

Read more:

 

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

The Shocking Sermon

February 8, 2013

By Daniel Mabsout,

window

It is shocking that i heard from my window today the Sheikh giving his Friday speech at the MOSQUE calling for the fall of the so called despot of Damascus . Extremely shocking speech indeed very high pitched seeking to fuel hatred when all efforts are now converging to solve the problem by peaceful means that will spare blood shed . But it seems the sheikh has had his pockets filled by oil money and want to show that he had earned his money well. Extremely shocking that these dubious sheikhs sprouting from everywhere and reaching so many people ( the Mosque was full)are not accountable to any one , their mosques are similar to fiefs and they can turn them into anything . Why would a sheikh on Friday instead of calling for inner peace would start instigating sectarian hatred or call for the fall of an Arab president under the pretext that he is a tyrant and if tyrant he is , what about the other tyrants? What about the Saudi king who has taken hold of a whole country and subjugated it to the rule of one family ? or Jordanian King ? Why no one is calling for their fall? It is extremely worrying to have Sheikhs do as they please without being accountable and held responsible because they have access to so many people and there is already too much tension to allow any further escalation .

Finally the religious references of the Sunni sect are facing a great challenge that they do not seem up to . What are they going to do with all these religious figures and sheikhs who are mobilizing against rulers or against other sects or religions and who have an active role in the crimes committed in Syria and elsewhere ? Those who are fuelling the hatred and the others who are keeping silent are equally responsible and equally guilty .

The sheikh of Al Azhar- upon meeting president Ahmadinejad lately- told him that the Sahabas should not be insulted as if it was the president of Iran that was insulting the Sahabas and not the hateful actions of so called Muslims in Syria and elsewhere . The sheikh of al Azhar has forgotten that both Imam Khamina’I and late Sayyed Mohammad Hussein Fadlullah issued fatwas prohibiting the slander of the Sahabas while the Azhar did not issue any fatwa prohibiting the slander of Shi’as that is taking place everyday on every other Muslim channel or News Paper considering the Shi’as as irreligious heretic people . This, not to mention the books issued in the name of al Azhar that expose the Shi’a sect and speak ill about its adherents, and not forgetting the deaf ear that the al Azhar has turned regarding the slaughters committed in Syria by the thugs who were calling Allahu Akbar while killing innocents – shamelessly – in front of cameras most of the time so that their masters be pleased and increase their monthly pay . The sheikh of Al Azhar and the other references would have to answer for this in front of the Almighty if not now in front of us, and God is not going to be pleased as we assume regarding their silent collaboration in crime and fitna or their reluctance to speak up and call for the stopping of slaughters committed under the label of the religion !
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Anti-Islam Film Produced by American-Israeli, Azhar Strongly Condemns

September 12, 2012
 
Local Editor
 
The Wall Street Journal reported that the anti-Islam movie that ignited violence in Egypt and Libya against the United States, was produced and directed by an Israeli American.

The paper said that the “Innocence of Muslims” was written, directed and produced by 54-year-old Sam Bacile who is from California and heads real-estate companies.

As he was quoted by the WSJ as saying that he wanted to “showcase his view of Islam as a hateful religion,” considering that “Islamc is a cancer”, he reassured that he was behind the film and clarified that he took “five million dollars from 100 Jewish contributor”, but did not specify their identity.
“”The movie is a political movie. It’s not a religious movie,” he added.

He further said in a statement that “it is an American production, not designed to attack Muslims but to show the destructive ideology of Islam…”

In addition, the paper indicated that the film was “promoted by Terry Jones, the Florida pastor whose burning of Qurans previously sparked deadly riots around the world,” and noted that “Jones planned to show a 13-minute trailer at his church in Gainesville.”

The Israeli director pointed out that he worked with 60 actors and a 45 crew members to bring out the movie within three months last year in California.

Al-Azhar’s Stance

Al-Azhar regarded the “International Judge Mohammad Day” as an extremist call that motivated religious and sectarian racism and threatened the societies’ security and stability.

Azhar ChiefAl-Azhar condemned in a statement what he referred to as “chaotic invitations” by the international and Western media, indicating that “a part of those with spiteful hearts and sick minds that have always taken a stance from Islam and Muslims, are calling for what they refer to as the International Judge Mohammad Day under the claim of freedom of opinion and expression.”

US Pastor Jones, who burned the holy Quran last year, announced earlier that he planned to “prepare a public trial against Prophet Mohammad” on the 11th of September this year, which marks the 11th anniversary of the twin towers attacks in New York.”

Al-Azhar emphasized that “Islam is the religion of coexistance, harmony, mind and logic that calls for dialogue between civilizations and peaceful coexistance. It is not the religion of “the conflict of civilizations”, spreading hatred, igniting clashes and enemity among people.”

“Islam is a religion of love and sympathy with people of other religions who are peaceful to us,” it added.

“Accusing Islam of being a human religion is a madness, silliness, and a delusion of mind and opinion, and it is not new, as the infidels of Quraish repeated that during the time of the prophet, and all the corrupts who belong to them will do the same,” the statement read.

Al-Azhar praised the stances of people who belong to other religions inside and outside Egypt, who rejected those “extremist calls” and rather called for dialogue and forgiveness instead.
 

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Egypt’s Islamist-dominated Parliament on Sunday demanded the resignation of Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa over his controversial visit to Jerusalem last week.

April 23, 2012
Sun, 22/04/2012 – 18:15
<p>Egyptian Grand Mufti Sheikh Azzam al-Khatib said Ali Gomaa (C), walks out of Jerusalem's Dome of the Rock mosque during his visit to the Al-Aqsa mosques compound, Islam's third holiest site, April 18, 2012. Gomaa also visited the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and the Greek Orthodox patriarchate.</p>
Photographed by AFP
Egypt’s Islamist-dominated Parliament on Sunday demanded the resignation of Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa over his controversial visit to Jerusalem last week.
Despite Gomaa’s statements that the visit was unofficial and that it took place under the supervision of the Jordanian authorities, the visit angered those opposed to normalizing relations with Israel.
Parliament Speaker Saad al-Katatny read out a recommendation within a statement issued by the People’s Assembly’s Religious Affairs and Endowments Committee that demanded an apology from Gomaa, and his resignation.
The recommendation received the approval of a majority of Parliament.
It demanded Gomaa’s “repentance to God,” “an apology to the Arab and Islamic peoples” and his resignation.”
Katatny requested the removal of the line concerning his “repentance” and the committee agreed.
The majority of Egyptians continue to avoid dealing with Israel, despite the passage of 33 years since the signing of the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty. The international community did not recognize the occupation and annexation of East Jerusalem after the 1967 war.
The majority of Egyptians say they will not normalize relations with Israel until it agrees on the establishment of a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip with East Jerusalem as its capital. Gomaa had visited East Jerusalem, where he prayed at the Al-Aqsa mosque.
During a discussion that preceded the Religious Affairs and Endowments committee’s recommendation, the chairman of the Freedom and Justice Party’s parliamentary bloc, Hussein Ibrahim, said, “Dr. Ali Gomaa condemned himself when he said the visit was personal.”
“Sheikh Ali Gomaa does not respect our minds,” he added. “Didn’t he see the Jerusalemites as they were being driven out of Jerusalem … didn’t he see those who prevent them from praying at the Al-Aqsa Mosque?”
Salafi MP Mamdouh Ismail said the visit was a “poisoned dagger that stabbed the (Palestinian) case.”
Chairman of the Wafd Party’s parliamentary bloc Mahmoud al-Sakka said, “if he was sincere in his visit, he would have returned with Jerusalem in his right hand.”
“He will be held accountable by God and by the people because he made a huge mistake,” he added.
MP Margaret Azer said the visit would have no negative impact on Egyptian Christians’ decision to avoid visiting Jerusalem “until after its liberation.”
For decades, the Coptic Church in Egypt has prohibited Copts from visiting Israeli-occupied Jerusalem.
Meanwhile, a number of MPs said the visit should not be considered normalization with Israel as he did not meet with any Israeli officials.
MP Atef al-Maghawry for instance said, “visiting a prisoner is not considered normalization with the prison warden … the Mufti did not meet with any of the leaders of the Zionist entity.”
He added that the Palestinians consider visits by Arabs and Muslims to Jerusalem as support for their cause. However, a number of MPs said that allowing such visits could open the door to other visits not intended as support for the Palestinians.
According to the committee’s statement, “This brutal enemy [Israel] controls its entrances and exits, and its mosques and churches … [Gomaa’s] visit gives legitimacy to the occupation … and it also represents normalization with the Zionist entity that is conclusively refused by the people.”

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

The Sultan’s Preacher Goes to Jerusalem

April 20, 2012
Published Friday, April 20, 2012
Egyptian Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa (C),
walks out of Jerusalem’s Dome of the Rock mosque during his visit
to the Al-Aqsa mosques compound,
Islam’s third holiest site, on 18 April 2012. (Photo: AFP – STR)
Completely disregarding popular opinion opposed to normalization with Israel, Egyptian Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa visited the al-Aqsa mosque in occupied Jerusalem, stirring a storm of criticism.
Cairo – “Do not reconcile even if all the sheikhs stood against your sword…and men who are full of fractures…those who love the taste of gruel and riding slaves…whose turbans hang over their eyes…and their Arab swords forget the years of glory…do not reconcile.”
The words of Amal Donkol’s poem, harshly critical of sheikhs, were on the lips of the Egyptian public as they responded to Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa’s visit to Jerusalem under the patronage of Israeli occupation.
Some Egyptians are seeing the visit as a continuation of “the ruler’s sheikhs’” determination to minimize the influence of Al-Azhar, the centre for Arabic literature and Islamic learning, and of its religious scholars.
They compared the Mufti’s visit to the late Grand Sheikh of Al-Azhar Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi shaking hands with Israeli President Shimon Peres at a UN inter-religious conference in 2008.
Remarkably, the shameful handshake took place during the inhumane Israeli blockade on the people of Gaza. It triggered a violent debate in political and legislative circles in Egypt, with calls for the sheikh’s removal.
Tantawi had also received chief Israeli rabbi Lau in Al-Azhar in spite of the opposition of most scholars. He responded saying, “If my enemy comes to me, whether Israeli or non-Israeli, I will meet with him.”

Senior researcher at Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies, Amr Hashem Rabih, explained that the mufti’s visit and the al-Azhar sheikh’s handshake do not represent the policies of Dar al-Ifta, the highest authoritative Islamic institute, or Al-Azhar. But the acts were not out of line with the policies of the Egyptian government on this issue.  

The visit also opposed the policies of the Orthodox church in Egypt under the leadership of the late Pope Shenouda III. According to Rabih, the church adopted a firm policy on pilgrimage to Jerusalem that does not change according to government policy.
For more than 40 years, the church has barred Copts from visiting Jerusalem and has taken an absolute stand against normalization in all its forms.
Rabih explained to Al-Akhbar that during the time of late Grand Sheikh Jad al-Haq Ali Jad al-Haq in the 1980s, Al-Azhar vocally opposed normalization with Israel and Muslims visiting Jerusalem.
His position was in response to fatwas by some clerics allowing such visits following the Oslo Accords between the Palestinian authority and the Zionist government. Al-Haq also refused to meet Israeli President Ezer Weizman during his visit to Egypt in 1996.

Former Grand Mufti Nasr Farid Wasil condemned Gomaa’s visit to Jerusalem and warned that “visiting Jerusalem while it is under Zionist occupation is a form of normalization.”  

“It insinuates that the question of occupation has been solved, as if it can be visited by everyone and that there is no longer any need for independence or calling for Zionists to lift their control over Jerusalem,” he said.
Wasil said that solidarity with Jerusalem can be expressed by supporting its people politically and economically, thus establishing their presence in the city and being a thorn in the side of plans to Judaize it. The censure of political, cultural, and economic normalization with Israel should continue, according to Wasil.
Historically, Al-Azhar’s position on normalization and the Camp David agreement between Egypt and Israel has fluctuated depending on the general politics of the country and the president at the time’s position.
In 1952, a law was enacted giving the president of the republic the right to appoint the Grand Sheikh instead of senior Al-Azhar scholars.
This influenced the political positions of Al-Azhar clergy, who represent the oldest religious institution in the Islamic world.
While Sadat’s visit to Israel in 1977 caused widespread Arab and Islamic fury, Al-Azhar’s Grand Sheikh at the time, Mohammad al-Bisar, provided religious cover for the visit.
At the same time, Grand Mufti Abdel Halim Mahmoud issued a fatwa facilitating the peace accords, going against an Al-Azhar policy dating back to 1956 forbidding reconciliation with Israel because it had usurped Palestine and displaced its people.
The religious scholars’ committee at the time qualified the long-standing policy by saying that

“reconciliation with Israel is not permissible under sharia since the usurper insists on usurpation and it would enable the offender to continue in its claims.”

In 1952, a law was enacted giving the president of the republic the right to appoint the Grand Sheikh instead of senior Al-Azhar scholars.

Today, under the leadership of Sheikh Ahmad al-Tayeb, Al-Azhar’s stand on normalization remains unclear. He commented on the mufti’s visit to Jerusalem saying that he had not known about it and that he will not visit Jerusalem while it is under occupation.

Tayeb was reluctant to express an official position on Gomaa’s visit, which was made without the permission of the institution he represents. The current stance differs from Al-Azhar’s position during Mubarak’s time, when it was headed by Tantawi and explicitly supported normalization.
Tantawi was not satisfied by shaking hands with the Israeli president in front of the cameras, he also issued a series of fatwas, described by observers as unusual, allowing the creation of the separation wall between Egypt and Gaza. He said the wall would protect Egypt from its enemies.
Amna Nasir, professor of faith and philosophy at Al-Azhar University, said that regardless of the official position of the Grand Sheikh of Al-Azhar, most scholars have been in agreement for a long time about not visiting Jerusalem while it is under occupation.
“This position is shared with the Egyptian [Coptic] church that bars Christians from visiting until the liberation of the holy city from Jewish desecration, regardless of some Copts visiting Jerusalem lately,” she said.
Nasir expressed “fear that the Mufti’s visit to al-Aqsa mosque will extinguish the hostility Arabs and Muslims have toward Israel.” She considers it a call for normalization with the Zionist enemy under the pretext of visiting al-Aqsa mosque.
This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 63 other followers