As brother Danial mabsout said: " If Islam is targeted , it is not any Islam . It is the Islam of the Resistance, the Islam that has defeated Israel and turned Iran in to an independent strong country in spite of the world order. This is the Islam that is intended."
However, I share Talal Salman his appreciation "the fertile debate taking place in Egypt, in particular, regarding the nature of the system that is appropriate in light of the great sacrifices the people have made for the sake of freedom, progress and achieving a regional leadership role for their country."
 |
Egypt's President Mohammed Morsi (L) talks at the Arab League headquarters in Cairo, Sept. 5, 2012. Morsi, promising to put Cairo back at the heart of Arab affairs, made an impassioned appeal to Arab states to work for an end to the bloodshed in Syria and said the time had come to change the Syrian government. (photo by REUTERS/Egyptian Presidency/Handout)
|
These days, political Islam is obsessed with the notion of authority. It has found itself close to a position of power, and is attempting to seize upon this notion and focus on nothing else.
It is no longer interested in taking advantage of this historic opportunity and presenting itself as a unifying factor, on the basis of a joint program to advance [Arab] countries and rid them of the oppressive legacy of tyranny.
It is strange that the United States labeled these popular movements the "Arab Spring," given that they chanted Islamic slogans and were careful not to utter a single word regarding exceptionally important Arab issues. These are the very issues that concerned the youth in the squares of various [Arab] capitals, particularly in those states where "Islamists" came to power as a result of being the most organized minority.
They have not mentioned Palestine — a sacred topic — nor the fate of its people, who are displaced abroad or imprisoned by the Israeli occupation within. They also haven't mentioned the expansion of settlement projects — established under the banner of "the world's Jewish state." These projects have become a consistent approach for governance in this entity, which has forcefully held the land of the Palestinian people.
Nor have they mentioned the blatant US intervention in the internal affairs of these nations, in which popular movements brought political Islamic forces to power. These forces from the "square" were scattered, and did not have an organized unified program for political change.
They have not mentioned the oppressive legacy left behind by tyrannical rule, including mass corruption, economic ruin, and cultural and educational destruction, from kindergarten to university level. This legacy highlights the certain role of US influence, as it became a reference point for topics related to science, technology and a new economy.
Not a single one of these serious issues became a cause for concern and, therefore, a title for a plan or measure to address these issues and respond to their ramifications.
These are the issues that are actually deserving of slogans calling for liberation and the reclaiming of sovereignty and decision-making. All of these tyrannical regimes were protected by the US’s hegemony — or under its direct sponsorship — until the very last minutes of the last hours before their thunderous crash.
Perhaps as a result of all of this, these new regimes were struck in extreme confusion when it came to confronting this trivial film, which was produced by an Israeli-American and promoted by a man who had betrayed his homeland — who happens to be an Egyptian Copt.
This film claims to expose Islam, and visually portrays the religion's noble prophet. Thus, [these popular forces] did not go out to protest, they left this task to the Salafists. They also left any "decision" to Washington, the same leadership that when faced with the destruction of the twin towers, its former president responded by announcing a renewed crusade!
The film was never the "issue," and it shouldn't be.
The main issue here is the political approaches adopted by the parties that achieved power under the banner of Islam. These parties still depend on ambiguity in their positions, with the knowledge that the "public" will hold them accountable based on whether or not their achieve the people's demands.
This includes those demands related to daily life, as well as those that confirm that these countries have the dignity of independent national determination and are adopting approaches that guarantee they will no longer be subjected to foreign influence.
They strive to be free from this influence, whether it relates to foreign policy, the economy or pressing social concerns.
It is not necessary to totally break off relations with the US, for example, nor is it necessary that we declare war on Israel tomorrow. It is not imperative that we export the revolution to other Arab countries or support liberation movements in Asia and Africa.
What we must do, first of all, is oppose any policy approach that involves dominating the national decision-making process.
We must do this by raising Islamic slogans in the face of those participating in the square, those involved in the popular movements that toppled tyranny. This is particularly true given that these slogans were applied in a variety of ways in Egypt, Tunisia or Libya. These slogans forcefully gave birth to Islamic organizations that do not have a distinguished history when it comes to the struggle for change.
Therefore, it is necessary that we accelerate work on developing a united national front that involves all active forces from society. This includes, of course, those movements that have a history of confronting tyranny and working for total emancipation from foreign dependence.
Arab countries have yet to see an "Islamic system" that is truly viable. Current systems that claim to be Islamic are merely a new form of tyranny that conquers its people under the pretext of applying Islamic law by means of "obedience."
Likewise, majority Muslim nations have yet to see a truly democratic system that depends on an Islamic system, rather than merely adopting Islam as a slogan.
Islam has never been implemented as a serious approach for governing. Even those who ruled under the banner of Islam — with the exception of the righteous caliphs [from the early days of Islam] — have ruled as though they were kings and emperors.
It is not without meaning that popular memory has forgotten the name of those "caliphs" who were more like kings or emperors. They ruled and controlled their people, except for a small minority that were considered "good" or "just rulers."
The era of the religious state has ended. No nations based on a religious model are left, except for the Vatican, which — despite being a religious authority that enjoys some political influence — does not rule or exercise authority.
However, the process of diminishing the Vatican's authority resulted in multiple wars, which altered the destinies of numerous European countries and gave birth to new countries that previously did not exist.
I appreciate the fertile debate taking place in Egypt, in particular, regarding the nature of the system that is appropriate in light of the great sacrifices the people have made for the sake of freedom, progress and achieving a regional leadership role for their country. These are safeguarded rights that they deserve to enjoy.
However, the fear still exists regarding the possibility [that Islamic forces will] resort to excluding movements with popular appeal [from the political arena]. These forces will do this under the pretext of Islam, claiming that members of these popular movements do not follow the true religion.
Conversely, the absence or exclusion of fundamental issues such as Palestine, and thus Israel's occupation of its lands and subjugation of its people, is neglecting the sanctity of the blood of Egyptian martyrs.
It also represents Egypt abandoning its Arab leadership role, in the period after consciousness has returned to the top of the political system.
The Arab public has blamed [Egyptian President Mohammed] Morsi for his improvised speech — which was more like a spontaneous reaction — at the Non-Aligned Movement summit in Tehran.
However, that same public greatly appreciated Cairo's efforts to arrange the quartet meeting — which Morsi proposed — to discuss the steps that must be taken to try to extinguish the fire in Syria. This conflict threatens to descend into a series of endless Arab civil wars. In contrast, the Arab public did not appreciate Saudi Arabia's decision to boycott this quartet meeting, regardless of the justifications it gave for this boycott.
Syria is now the bleeding wound of the Arab world, and it is necessary that we enact an initiative to help its people escape from their brutal ordeal — at least through working to maintain the unity of its body politic, even if the country is ruined from many sides, cracked foundations; sedition threatens the unity of its people, and divided along religious and sectarian lines, with sects fighting one another.
The Egyptian leadership certainly realizes the various dimensions of this awful, bloody conflict that Syria is witnessing, between a tyrannical regime and opposition forces have widely varying loyalties.
These loyalties include foreign states which are eager to reclaim control of the region, as well as other Arab regimes that are full of resentment and are moved by a desire to dominate [the region], through both money and ambition.
These Arab states are hoping to be the sole agent for joint US-Israeli interests, as well as interests of the Israeli enemy, which does not hide its expansionist project to eliminate the existence of Palestine and its people.
From here, it is necessary that Cairo continues with its efforts to contain this national crisis, and then treat its causes. It can do this by restoring its once powerful role, a role that no other Arab nation can replace.
Perhaps the meetings on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly meeting will provide the opportunity for extensive discussions with a variety of forces and influential parties, which could end with the drafting of a proposal for a solution that is executable.
This must be done before the flames consume what is left of Syria, and then move on to destroys its closest neighbors. This will then continue on to those who are under the delusion that they are safe because they are so far away.
These would definitely be more beneficial than a decision to ban the trivial American film that is insulting to the dignity of the Prophet. The Prophet's dignity is unshakable, and cannot be harmed by blind fanatics or those with greedy purposes.
The real issue here is the dignity of the Arab-Islamic people, who have been oppressed through tyranny, subservience and national humiliation. This issue is the basis of the uprisings, which have extended from the Islamic Maghreb to the Levant and everywhere in between.
It is no longer interested in taking advantage of this historic opportunity and presenting itself as a unifying factor, on the basis of a joint program to advance [Arab] countries and rid them of the oppressive legacy of tyranny.
It is strange that the United States labeled these popular movements the "Arab Spring," given that they chanted Islamic slogans and were careful not to utter a single word regarding exceptionally important Arab issues. These are the very issues that concerned the youth in the squares of various [Arab] capitals, particularly in those states where "Islamists" came to power as a result of being the most organized minority.
They have not mentioned Palestine — a sacred topic — nor the fate of its people, who are displaced abroad or imprisoned by the Israeli occupation within. They also haven't mentioned the expansion of settlement projects — established under the banner of "the world's Jewish state." These projects have become a consistent approach for governance in this entity, which has forcefully held the land of the Palestinian people.Nor have they mentioned the blatant US intervention in the internal affairs of these nations, in which popular movements brought political Islamic forces to power. These forces from the "square" were scattered, and did not have an organized unified program for political change.
They have not mentioned the oppressive legacy left behind by tyrannical rule, including mass corruption, economic ruin, and cultural and educational destruction, from kindergarten to university level. This legacy highlights the certain role of US influence, as it became a reference point for topics related to science, technology and a new economy.
Not a single one of these serious issues became a cause for concern and, therefore, a title for a plan or measure to address these issues and respond to their ramifications.
These are the issues that are actually deserving of slogans calling for liberation and the reclaiming of sovereignty and decision-making. All of these tyrannical regimes were protected by the US’s hegemony — or under its direct sponsorship — until the very last minutes of the last hours before their thunderous crash.
Perhaps as a result of all of this, these new regimes were struck in extreme confusion when it came to confronting this trivial film, which was produced by an Israeli-American and promoted by a man who had betrayed his homeland — who happens to be an Egyptian Copt.
This film claims to expose Islam, and visually portrays the religion's noble prophet. Thus, [these popular forces] did not go out to protest, they left this task to the Salafists. They also left any "decision" to Washington, the same leadership that when faced with the destruction of the twin towers, its former president responded by announcing a renewed crusade!
The film was never the "issue," and it shouldn't be.
The main issue here is the political approaches adopted by the parties that achieved power under the banner of Islam. These parties still depend on ambiguity in their positions, with the knowledge that the "public" will hold them accountable based on whether or not their achieve the people's demands.This includes those demands related to daily life, as well as those that confirm that these countries have the dignity of independent national determination and are adopting approaches that guarantee they will no longer be subjected to foreign influence.
They strive to be free from this influence, whether it relates to foreign policy, the economy or pressing social concerns.
It is not necessary to totally break off relations with the US, for example, nor is it necessary that we declare war on Israel tomorrow. It is not imperative that we export the revolution to other Arab countries or support liberation movements in Asia and Africa.What we must do, first of all, is oppose any policy approach that involves dominating the national decision-making process.
We must do this by raising Islamic slogans in the face of those participating in the square, those involved in the popular movements that toppled tyranny. This is particularly true given that these slogans were applied in a variety of ways in Egypt, Tunisia or Libya. These slogans forcefully gave birth to Islamic organizations that do not have a distinguished history when it comes to the struggle for change.
Therefore, it is necessary that we accelerate work on developing a united national front that involves all active forces from society. This includes, of course, those movements that have a history of confronting tyranny and working for total emancipation from foreign dependence.
Arab countries have yet to see an "Islamic system" that is truly viable. Current systems that claim to be Islamic are merely a new form of tyranny that conquers its people under the pretext of applying Islamic law by means of "obedience."Likewise, majority Muslim nations have yet to see a truly democratic system that depends on an Islamic system, rather than merely adopting Islam as a slogan.
Islam has never been implemented as a serious approach for governing. Even those who ruled under the banner of Islam — with the exception of the righteous caliphs [from the early days of Islam] — have ruled as though they were kings and emperors.
It is not without meaning that popular memory has forgotten the name of those "caliphs" who were more like kings or emperors. They ruled and controlled their people, except for a small minority that were considered "good" or "just rulers."
The era of the religious state has ended. No nations based on a religious model are left, except for the Vatican, which — despite being a religious authority that enjoys some political influence — does not rule or exercise authority.However, the process of diminishing the Vatican's authority resulted in multiple wars, which altered the destinies of numerous European countries and gave birth to new countries that previously did not exist.
I appreciate the fertile debate taking place in Egypt, in particular, regarding the nature of the system that is appropriate in light of the great sacrifices the people have made for the sake of freedom, progress and achieving a regional leadership role for their country. These are safeguarded rights that they deserve to enjoy.
However, the fear still exists regarding the possibility [that Islamic forces will] resort to excluding movements with popular appeal [from the political arena]. These forces will do this under the pretext of Islam, claiming that members of these popular movements do not follow the true religion.
Conversely, the absence or exclusion of fundamental issues such as Palestine, and thus Israel's occupation of its lands and subjugation of its people, is neglecting the sanctity of the blood of Egyptian martyrs.
It also represents Egypt abandoning its Arab leadership role, in the period after consciousness has returned to the top of the political system.
The Arab public has blamed [Egyptian President Mohammed] Morsi for his improvised speech — which was more like a spontaneous reaction — at the Non-Aligned Movement summit in Tehran.However, that same public greatly appreciated Cairo's efforts to arrange the quartet meeting — which Morsi proposed — to discuss the steps that must be taken to try to extinguish the fire in Syria. This conflict threatens to descend into a series of endless Arab civil wars. In contrast, the Arab public did not appreciate Saudi Arabia's decision to boycott this quartet meeting, regardless of the justifications it gave for this boycott.
Syria is now the bleeding wound of the Arab world, and it is necessary that we enact an initiative to help its people escape from their brutal ordeal — at least through working to maintain the unity of its body politic, even if the country is ruined from many sides, cracked foundations; sedition threatens the unity of its people, and divided along religious and sectarian lines, with sects fighting one another.The Egyptian leadership certainly realizes the various dimensions of this awful, bloody conflict that Syria is witnessing, between a tyrannical regime and opposition forces have widely varying loyalties.
These loyalties include foreign states which are eager to reclaim control of the region, as well as other Arab regimes that are full of resentment and are moved by a desire to dominate [the region], through both money and ambition.
These Arab states are hoping to be the sole agent for joint US-Israeli interests, as well as interests of the Israeli enemy, which does not hide its expansionist project to eliminate the existence of Palestine and its people.From here, it is necessary that Cairo continues with its efforts to contain this national crisis, and then treat its causes. It can do this by restoring its once powerful role, a role that no other Arab nation can replace.
Perhaps the meetings on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly meeting will provide the opportunity for extensive discussions with a variety of forces and influential parties, which could end with the drafting of a proposal for a solution that is executable.
This must be done before the flames consume what is left of Syria, and then move on to destroys its closest neighbors. This will then continue on to those who are under the delusion that they are safe because they are so far away.
These would definitely be more beneficial than a decision to ban the trivial American film that is insulting to the dignity of the Prophet. The Prophet's dignity is unshakable, and cannot be harmed by blind fanatics or those with greedy purposes.
The real issue here is the dignity of the Arab-Islamic people, who have been oppressed through tyranny, subservience and national humiliation. This issue is the basis of the uprisings, which have extended from the Islamic Maghreb to the Levant and everywhere in between.
Palestinians ditched; Egypt next?
"...International donors are weary of Mahmoud Abbas' sorry little West Bank kleptocracy, while the squeeze on the state budgets of all the industrial nations makes it harder to shake loose money for an unpopular destination. The World Bank warned on September 19 of a "deepening Palestinian fiscal crisis" and issued an "urgent appeal" to donors. [3]
Diplomats and bureaucrats at international organizations will issue press releases, wring their hands, make promises and then break them. No-one is going to write a check to the Palestine Authority.
The question is: when will the world also grow weary of 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!
No comments:
Post a Comment