Adopt the British way, urges Dr Lodhi

[ak47]

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by daas: *

would you consider Iran an Islamic state, with shariah as the law of (their) land ? If not then why and how Iran is not compatible with YOUR shariah ?
[/QUOTE]

Iran unfortunatly is no different than Syria or France when it comes to implementing a goverment system if you look closely at the Iranian system in fact you don't even need to look closely just look at the constitution and government structure and you can clearly see the Irans system is in fact the same system as the French Republican system.

Iran claims to be islamic as some people say but this claim is as valid as Saudi arabia who implement a Monarchy system but with a few rules based on islam they have only one or 2 rules which have any basis in islam and these are usually the social ones such as marriage, death etc.

[ak47]

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by daas: *
iran is not khilafah, afghnistan/taliban was not khilafah, saudia is not khilafah, pakistan is not khulafah, israel is not khilafah and even timbuktu is not khilafah. Pray tell where the hell is this khilafah hiding ?

Maybe what y'all ought to do is stop preaching and talking on these internet boards and instead go out and establish a small model khilafah, even if it is in a small town, neighbourhood or even in your own house. If it is such a great thing then maybe rest of us ignorant masses will see the greatness of your small model and join you. Until u prove it with your actions, no one is gonna listen to your BS.
[/QUOTE]

What you ought to do is understand what khilafah is before you start ranting about something you have no clue about.

Khilafah is not a small model like some experiment as you say it is the combined muslim lands as one ummah.

[Madhanee]

^ Yeah, United States of Ummah… with Bush as Khalifa. Dream on.

[ak47]

Dream on ummm read history fool the dream was a reality on your doorstep and inshallah it will be coming back to a state near you!

[Raihan]

daas,

Again you use what some people did and apply it to the system. How does Islam justify what they did? Islam doesn't justify what they did and hence the Islamic system has never failed only the people following Islam failed in their implementation of Islam. However secularism could justify what they did. Yazeed wanted to implement it. Yazeed want the political power and he didn't care who became the head of spiritual affairs.

Maybe you should study Iran's system and then comment.

Since khilafah doesn't exist anywhere we are working to reestablish it.

Khilafah is the name of the Islamic ruling system. A village is not a state. RasulAllah(saw) didn't accept the support of weak tribes to establish the Islamic state. He(saw) used to ask them questions about warfare about the types of weapons they use, he (saw) wanted to see their strength. When the strong tribes of Banu Aws and Banu Khazraj accepted him he(saw) established the Islamic state. InshAllah when Allah (swt) gives us(Muslims) the Nussrah then we will prove how Islam can give justice and peace.

Hizb ut Tahrir cannot establish the Khilafah by itself we need the support of the Ummah and it is the Ummah that will establish the khilafah InshAllah.

Seminole,

I have never called Islam a religion because a religion doesn't give a political or economic system and doesn't have a comprehensive viewpoint on life. Islam is an ideology.

It isn't a theocracy. No Muslim would support communism or socialism or capitalism.

Difference of opinion is a norm in Islam and is respected. Anyone who has a different opinion is not automatically a sect however today the secular states do not promote the respect for other opinions. A clergy has been put in charge of these affairs who promote sectarianism, who promote nationalism and vigilantism and the states do nothing to stop this because they use them as an example when they say to the people 'Do you want to be ruled by them? Look at them , look at how they fight with each other' I don't want to be ruled over by a Maulvi or a clergy or a secular kafir I want to be ruled over by Islam.

Can you be specific in which problem you think wouldn't be solved by Islam?

Your selective view on history can prove anything it wants to I mean if you want to close your eyes and ears then there's nothing bad happening anywhere. Also where are your theocracies? All we have is secular states.

If you use your senses you will see that what Israeli secularism is doing, you will see what American secularism is doing all over the world, you will see what India is doing in kashmir, china in xinjiang province, russia in chechnya, islam karimov in uzbekistan or are these not secular states because in secular states somehow everybody gets along reading fairy tales and singing songs and solve their disputes through the power of love or flower power or whatever

[antiobl]

[QUOTE]
Originally posted by Raihan: *
.....hence the **Islamic system* has never failed only the people following Islam failed in their implementation of Islam......
[/QUOTE]

System constitutes both people and a set of rules (for the people). A System fails when either people or the rules or both fail.

You may argue that rules didn't fail but the people failed. So far the Islamic system as implemented by Ottomons, Abbasis, Omawees etc. was no different from the rest of the world. We had the Khalifa (same as King), Wazeers (same as the court) etc. The difference on few occasions was the way an individual Khalifa was able to run a good government.

As Monarchies were largely replaced by elected officials, so would the Khalifatic system. You won't be able to install a Kahalifa without elections and elected parliament. So quit harping on the obsolete systems. They are gone the way of dinosaurs.

[ak47]

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Raihan: *
daas,

hence the Islamic system has never failed only the people following Islam failed in their implementation of Islam.

[/QUOTE]

That is very good point. the islamic system is not a problem it is the way it is implemented and by whom.

why did it last for 1400 years as a superpower over the world. And then why did it fail was it because it was old or was it because it was not implemented correctly in its later stages.

Capitalism has been around for what is it 100 , 200 years and its on its last legs already, where the likes of the amerikkkans have to use military brute force to make the people accept it in places like iraq and even then they reject it!

[Raihan]

antiobl,

A system fails when it is unable to solve problems it doesn't fail if it is not being used. A system is rejected when the people stand up against it. Both of these scenarios do not apply to the Islamic system. Islam never failed in solving human problems and of course it wouldn't it is from the creator of humans. The Khilafah was destroyed by Kemal AtaTurk who was a Doenme Jew not by the Ummah.

Based on the system of Islam a ruler cannot forcefully take leadership. This is why many of the scholars were killed because they opposed this.

However the khaleefs did rule with Islam and didn't implement kufr. You cannot call them monarchs because a monarch says he is sovereign but the Khaleefs always accepted Allah(swt) as sovereign and all laws were based on Islam.

Elections are allowed in Islam and will be used to elect the khaleef.

According to your criteria capitalism has failed time and time again so why is a failed system of capitalism being forced onto the Muslims of Pakistan.