Re: Bangladesh amends war crimes law, mulls banning Islamists
So, Nawaz sharif was on the right track back then! :lol:
Re: Bangladesh amends war crimes law, mulls banning Islamists
The JI opposed him back then. The JI has actually been generally happy with the shariah status of Pakistan’s constitution - the constitution fits Maududi’s definition of Islamic government. in Pakistan at least, the JI complains that the Islamic provisions of the constitution are not being implemented, however. They want power so that they can act on it.
Re: Bangladesh amends war crimes law, mulls banning Islamists
You cannot establish islamic state when system is secularised which the pakistan system is from the constitution to the economics to the judicial system it is left overs from the legacy of the British raj. so nawaz sharif was never on right track from day 1.
Re: Bangladesh amends war crimes law, mulls banning Islamists
You cannot establish islamic state when system is secularised which the pakistan system is from the constitution to the economics to the judicial system it is left overs from the legacy of the British raj. so nawaz sharif was never on right track from day 1.
The constitution clearly states in article 227:
All existing laws shall be brought in conformity with the Injunctions of Islam as laid down in the Holy Quran and Sunnah, in this Part referred to as the Injunctions of Islam, and no law shall be enacted which is repugnant to such Injunctions.
This is why the Islamic parties opposed Nawaz Sharif's fake so-called Shariah Law - the constitution already makes the appropriate provisions, but the constitution itself is not being followed by any government.
Thankfully, Pakistan's Islamic parties recognised Nawaz's power grab in the name of Islam for what it was and helped to make sure that it was rejected in the Senate.
Re: Bangladesh amends war crimes law, mulls banning Islamists
It is not enough to Use islamic terminology to make a constitution islamic.
Islamic republic - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Pakistan was the first country to adopt the adjective “Islamic” to modify its republican status under its otherwise secular constitution.
aside from wikipedia confirming pakistan constitution is secular
the pakistan constitution mentions laws should not be in conflict with Islam – however parliamentarians can make the laws and check (they dont check by the way) they comply with islam. This contradicts Islam, if you accept parliament to decide on laws this makes them the legislator, rather than Allah
in article 2 of the constitution, Islam is viewed NOT as a divine source of legislation but as “the state religion of Pakistan”.
this no different than Denmark as an example:
Folketinget - Chapter 1 - The Form of Government
section 4 states lutherian christianity is state religion of Denmark.
yet everyone agrees denmark fully secular.
Even in American occupied Iraq they have allowed same sentence in Iraq constitution
Article 2:
A. No law that contradicts the established provisions of Islam may be established.
In Afghanistan the american made constitution it states
Article 3 “no law can be contrary to the beliefs and provisions of the sacred religion of Islam”
The Americans who proof checked these constitutions know these terminologies are just words and no chance islamic state to be established in practice in an otherwise secular constitution.
Re: Bangladesh amends war crimes law, mulls banning Islamists
According to Maududi, the JI's founder (to make this relevant, as Bangladesh's Islamists are mostly from the JI and not the Hizb-ut-Tahrir) , laws that are in accordance with Islam are made by the Shura council (the group of people elected by the people to represent them, a.k.a Parliament in western words) ** and the role of the Caliph to to approve those.**
Does that mean the Caliph is just a figurehead with all the power resting with the Parliament. BTW how is the Caliph chosen.
Re: Bangladesh amends war crimes law, mulls banning Islamists
^ the caliph is not a figurehead he has power as the leader of the state. Under him are the governors, judges, delegated assistants, military, department of economy etc.
this organizational chart which shows the structure in more detail.
Re: Bangladesh amends war crimes law, mulls banning Islamists
why would anyone want a caliphate now? it is a primitive system of the bygone past. Mankind is lot more advanced now and while not perfect, there are much more fairer and efficient systems prevail now, thank GOD!
Re: Bangladesh amends war crimes law, mulls banning Islamists
why would anyone want a caliphate now? it is a primitive system of the bygone past. Mankind is lot more advanced now and while not perfect, there are much more fairer and efficient systems prevail now, thank GOD!
The irony is that this kind of thinking went out of style with anti-establishment communists of the 70's.
The call for a caliphate, whatever the shape or form, is in reality a call for unity. That's a noble cause, one that never was realized in the "bygone past", and one that we need to continuously strive towards because there are far too many people out there claiming how it's impossible, or impractical, or, well....sentiments from a bygone past.
Re: Bangladesh amends war crimes law, mulls banning Islamists
It is not enough to Use islamic terminology to make a constitution islamic.
Your points were rather off the mark. The fact is, Denmark does not have a clause in their constitution proclaiming that no law should contradict the dictates of the church. In Pakistan, Islam is not only recognized as the state religion, and not only a mere source of law, but it clear states that no law shall contradict Islam.
Re: Bangladesh amends war crimes law, mulls banning Islamists
Your points were rather off the mark. The fact is, Denmark does not have a clause in their constitution proclaiming that no law should contradict the dictates of the church. In Pakistan, Islam is not only recognized as the state religion, and not only a mere source of law, but it clear states that no law shall contradict Islam.
off the mark? "If no law should contradict islam"
ok answer me these 2 simple observations:
q1. why is the economic policy and transactions of pakistans based 100% on riba( interest) which contradict islam?
q2. You have US military, XE, Dynacorp and CIA with bases and offices dotted across pakistan, islam forbids the security of a land to be compromised by enemy states this is another contradiction with islamc laws pakistan committed?
Re: Bangladesh amends war crimes law, mulls banning Islamists
??? ?? ??? - ?BBC Urdu? - ??? ??? ??? ?? ???](آپ کی آواز - BBC Urdu - مسئلہ آخری سال کا ہے۔۔۔)
Re: Bangladesh amends war crimes law, mulls banning Islamists
off the mark? "If no law should contradict islam"
ok answer me these 2 simple observations:
q1. why is the economic policy and transactions of pakistans based 100% on riba( interest) which contradict islam?
q2. You have US military, XE, Dynacorp and CIA with bases and offices dotted across pakistan, islam forbids the security of a land to be compromised by enemy states this is another contradiction with islamc laws pakistan committed?
1) You have to clarify what you mean with specific examples. What transaction are you talking about?
And interest is a fact of economics. The idea of riba is to prevent loan sharking and predatory loans. If you remove all forms of interest, including safe loans, then there is no upward mobility, no middle class, and no growth. Why would I lend you $100, with the agreement that you'll pay me back in a year, when I can spend that $100 now, or invest it somewhere else where I might get $110 back in a year. I have to charge you interest so that you compensate me for the opportunity cost.
2) That's a reality of life. Pakistan is a poor country that takes aid from the West. On what basis can it demand that the bases be removed?
Indians were beaten in the age of exploration, and the industrial revolution. We weren't able to keep up with Europe and you see the effects of that today. Either we learn from them to see what they did right, or we'll continue to be irrelevant. You hate the US, I get it, but if you don't think we have anything to learn from them then you're being close minded.
Re: Bangladesh amends war crimes law, mulls banning Islamists
Does that mean the Caliph is just a figurehead with all the power resting with the Parliament. BTW how is the Caliph chosen.
The Caliph, as per Maududi's explanation, does have real power in that he can veto the laws proposed by the Shura council (parliament). Maududi explained that Khilaafat rests with the Muslims of the ummah and that they select a man from amongst themselves to hold this power on their behalf. As the holder of this position on behalf of the ummah, this individual is obligated to relinquish his power should he no longer enjoy the confidence of the ummah.
Re: Bangladesh amends war crimes law, mulls banning Islamists
1) You have to clarify what you mean with specific examples. What transaction are you talking about?
And interest is a fact of economics. The idea of riba is to prevent loan sharking and predatory loans. If you remove all forms of interest, including safe loans, then there is no upward mobility, no middle class, and no growth. Why would I lend you $100, with the agreement that you'll pay me back in a year, when I can spend that $100 now, or invest it somewhere else where I might get $110 back in a year. I have to charge you interest so that you compensate me for the opportunity cost.
2) That's a reality of life. Pakistan is a poor country that takes aid from the West. On what basis can it demand that the bases be removed?
Indians were beaten in the age of exploration, and the industrial revolution. We weren't able to keep up with Europe and you see the effects of that today. Either we learn from them to see what they did right, or we'll continue to be irrelevant. You hate the US, I get it, but if you don't think we have anything to learn from them then you're being close minded.
having military bases and giving offices to blackwater, CIA, XE is idiotic move of the worst kind it compromises security. You claim you can learn from these terrorists wow hows raymond davies these days?
and finally You didn't deny there was contradictions with islam on these 2 simple observations. Only you tried to justify and confirmed the contradictions with islamic laws by the governments of pakistan.
Re: Bangladesh amends war crimes law, mulls banning Islamists
q1. why is the economic policy and transactions of pakistans based 100% on riba( interest) which contradict islam?
Well, the law stands as it is. The real question is, is Pakistani participation in the global economy unconstitutional?
A learned person will probably answer that question differently than a street Mullah.
Never mind the fact that it's a poor example (how do you get paid, where do you keep your money, does your place of employment take out loans, how about yourself...do you own currency...shouldn't you fix yourself before you try to fix the state, if this is such an imperative problem)? Would we fault a sick man for taking a medicine where the active ingredient is alcohol, with no other alternatives available? I'm not saying your wrong, but that it's crazy to think Pakistan can snap it's fingers and do away with interest...every nation on earth deals with it...even the Taliban had too. They were just too ignorant to know.
This must neccessarily fall into the cateogry of "TODO" on the fixit list. It's a hard problem, and if anyone tells you differently a) They don't understand how economics work, or b) They're probaby selling snake oil, or c) They have no problem if the Ummah is weakened to a state of powerlessness. We have more pressing problems.
[quote]
q2. You have US military, XE, Dynacorp and CIA with bases and offices dotted across pakistan, islam forbids the security of a land to be compromised by enemy states this is another contradiction with islamc laws pakistan committed?
[/QUOTE]
Again, the real question is, is this constitutional?
Laws are words and phrases written down. If they are implemented or not is not really the fault of the laws themselves.
Are they non-enforcable, or simply ignored?
This is all besides the point. The fact is, Pakistan is markedly not secular. Is it Islamic? In a very flawed way. But that's because we're all very flawed, isn't it?
Re: Bangladesh amends war crimes law, mulls banning Islamists
The call for a caliphate, whatever the shape or form, is in reality a call for unity.
The Muslim leaders can't agree on dinner menu & you're talking about one united caliphate? Really? Unity in what? Faith? Is faith stronger than ethnic, linguistic and cultural links? The answer clearly is NO! Pakistan clearly was created based on the idea of united Muslims of India...why did it break up if faith was such a strong and uniting factor? Btw, in last 100 years more Muslims have been killed by other Muslims than non-Muslims. Where does that leaves this idea of caliphate?
Re: Bangladesh amends war crimes law, mulls banning Islamists
The Muslim leaders can't agree on dinner menu & you're talking about one united caliphate?
[quote]
Rather cliche. I'm speaking of ideals to aspire to. Again, I'm equating Khaliffa with the desire for more unity. See the qualifier there? See how it's relative to our current state?
[quote]
Really? Unity in what? Faith? Is faith stronger than ethnic, linguistic and cultural links? The answer clearly is NO!
Relax. Faith doesn't hurt in this context, that's for sure. It's just that when religion is used by a particular party to dismiss another, then naturally it's not going to help. Politics is about resolving differences, not about emphasising similarities. That distinciton is none to subtle. Dealing in good...well...*faith *is crticial to unity. Faith is an ideal bridge across ethnic and linguistic groups, but a desire for unity must be there. Any failure is hardly the fault of religion, but more so than the narrow mindedness of bigots who do not want to cross the divide.
[quote]
Pakistan clearly was created based on the idea of united Muslims of India...why did it break up if faith was such a strong and uniting factor? Btw, in last 100 years more Muslims have been killed by other Muslims than non-Muslims. Where does that leaves this idea of caliphate?
[/QUOTE]
Well, the Khaliffa wasn't around for the past 100 years, so it's rather asinine to balme it for anything. What you've states are the ill effects of lack of unity, and so you lambast me for suggesting that it is laudable and desirable to have more unity? LOL...
Re: Bangladesh amends war crimes law, mulls banning Islamists
having military bases and giving offices to blackwater, CIA, XE is idiotic move of the worst kind it compromises security. You claim you can learn from these terrorists wow hows raymond davies these days?
and finally You didn't deny there was contradictions with islam on these 2 simple observations. Only you tried to justify and confirmed the contradictions with islamic laws by the governments of pakistan.
I'm guessing you didn't understand my post. Yes, US bases compromise Pakistan's security but Pakistan can't do anything about it because they take foreign aid. You understand now?
And yes, we can learn from them because they are the ones who have invented the modern age. Where was your computer invented? Where is your internet hosted? Was you car made by a Muslim company?
Re: Bangladesh amends war crimes law, mulls banning Islamists
The Caliph, as per Maududi's explanation, does have real power in that he can veto the laws proposed by the Shura council (parliament). Maududi explained that Khilaafat rests with the Muslims of the ummah and that they select a man from amongst themselves to hold this power on their behalf. As the holder of this position on behalf of the ummah, this individual is obligated to relinquish his power should he no longer enjoy the confidence of the ummah.
Thanks for the clarification...This is the essence of any democracy and how does the Caliph renounce power if needed. Is it on the basis on referendum. Good concept. I would need to research on this more.