Muslim Women & Non-Muslims Share Same Fate!

Society Religion & Philosophy
1

Ladies, you are not the only ones being choked by the antiquated & extremist sharia laws; the non-muslim are also getting a good dose of it!

Taliban Fatwa to non-Muslims:

All non-Muslims, including Hindus and Sikhs, living in Afghanistan were told by the Taliban militia a while back to abide by the ``Ten Commandments’', issued recently in accordance with the rules of Islamic Sharia.

There are some pockets in Kabul and Jalalabad, inhabited by Hindus and Sikhs. The Law Ministry in Kabul has issued ten directives to all non-Muslims, including Hindus and Sikhs, determining their conduct in their daily lives.

The latest commandments reflect the style of functioning of the Taliban militia who have not hesitated in issuing highly discriminatory directives and code of conduct to non-Muslims in Afghanistan, according to well-placed sources in the Government.

The order stated that non-Muslims were not allowed to build any place of worship like temple, church or gurudwara but can worship and repair only those places of worship which were damaged during the war.

The non-Muslims are also not entitled to put any case against Muslims, according to the order. Further, all non-Muslims have been asked to put a two-meter long yellow cloth atop their house for identification.

The order banned non-Muslims from living together with Muslims in one house and asked such houses to be vacated within three days.
Women of non-Muslim families have been prohibited from walking in a street or bazaar without wearing a ``chadar’’ which covers them. Women can only wear iron jewellery, the order said.

Moreover, the Law Ministry in Kabul said there must be a difference between non-Muslim and Muslim dresses. Non-Muslims must wear a yellow dress with a mark to ensure identification from a distance. The order also barred non-Muslims from wearing dresses of a priest or saint.

2

This reminds of Jews wearing Star of David in 40’s Germany. Adbulmalick, do Afghans write their decrees by holding a pen in their ass?

3

who's the bigger enemy of islam? taliban or the US?

4

[quote]
Originally posted by NYAhmadi:
*Adbulmalick, do Afghans write their decrees by holding a pen in their ass? *
[/quote]

they may not. why don't u offer ur experience to them & stage a pratical demo in kabul?
make sure u wear a yellow dress when u go there.

ps: taliban will provide the pen, ass will be yours.

5

KK,

how come you got so excited at NYA's abuse on the taliban, but didnt even bother with a comment on the misuse of Islam by the taliban?

6

KK knows that Taliban are pain in the ass. Perhaps first hand.
Liberals will be cheating themselves if they say this is not true islam. talk of taliban and their abuse. they will say that it is not true islam. talk of shia rule in iran., that is not true islam. what is true islam.
Fact is that taliban is true islam. these are but islamic rules by which non muslims are treated in muslim states. i can go to library and checjk it. but as far as i remember, any muslim can go to anon-muslim's house and stay for three days. taliban seem not to have implemented it.

[This message has been edited by ZZ (edited May 23, 2000).]

7

Queer, give him a little chance. He will say something when he understands what is being discussed. Until now let him bang his head facing Afghnistan.

8

Queer,
I have always viewed the taliban as extremists and people who have very limited understanding of Islam.Though I am particularly proud of some of their actions,I absoltely detest others.

BUT a word of caution!The taliban have denied many reports of western media alleging such actions and I would trust the taliban more than the western media which is known to be a liar.
But if these (and some other)reports are true than I would say that the bigger enemy of islam are the taliban.

[This message has been edited by Ahmed (edited May 23, 2000).]

9

I had posted this back in April under the thread: WHEN ISLAMIC LAWS COLLIDE WITH PROGRESS! The treatment of dhimmis (non-muslims) by Taliban are in accordance with the Sharia; just u wait, it'll happen in Pakistan also. The only way out is to revise the laws surrounding Women as well as Non-muslims!

NON-MUSLIMS AND SHARIA:
When Islam captures state power in each country it will enforce Shariah in business and finance; it will ban drinking and gambling; non-Muslim women will not be allowed to display their beauty as in the days of Jahiliyya (ignorance); the cinema, television and the press will be censored; non-Muslims will not be permitted to own weapons; certain organizations will have to be banned for the sake of the general welfare; non-Muslims will be replaced as expeditiously as possible in the public service and all instrumentalities.

"The vile and ignorant dhimmis (non-Muslims in an Islamic country) must be humiliated, belittled and rendered abominable and able to be distinguished by their appearance." For example, "different colored shoes, one white the other black"; for males badges such as an "ape for a Jew and a pig for a Christian: for women yellow veils."

The distinctive dress shows the Muslim that the dhimmi is to be treated as an inferior - not to stand up for her or shake his hand, not to give them Muslim charity.

He(Muslim)is to expect respect and deference from the dhimmi who shall not join a group of Muslims or raise his voice in their presence.

The non-Muslim is to stand aside if the pathway is narrow. It is haram (unlawful) for him to slaughter animals; reserved for him is the cleaning of lavatories and sewers, and carrying away rubbish and refuse. His house should be painted a dull color and be no larger than that of a Muslim neighbor.

10

Queer & ZZ,
first off, i never expressed my gratitude for taliban in a blind folded manner. Islamic rules are there, its upto us to either use 'em or abuse 'em. This is what going on in afghanistan i.e use & abuse
Now ZZ....u seem to be suffering from constipation lately. u know nothing about Islamic history (except that ur forefahters got a kick in the rear by Muslims) & yet keep babbling nonsense about Islam. In ur thread about Zimmis, u had mentioned some hypothetical perseuction of jews of medevial europe by Muslims, i wonder which libray do u go to get these funny jokes and throw 'em here. U want to know how minorities (jews) were treated in Muslim Spain, here's a pie for u:

(also for those who rant about this much beaen up topic)

*"The Significance of 1492 to the Jews and Muslims of Spain"

by David Fintz Altabe

in Hispania (September 1992 pp. 728-731)*

When the Muslims first entered Spain, they made no attempt
to force Christians and Jews to convert to their religion, Islam.
Their holy book, the Koran, grants religious liberty and the
protection of person and property to Christians and Jews as long
as they pay a special tax and do not blaspheme the name of the
prophet Mohammed. Thus, all groups were free to participate in the Arabic culture which was much more advanced in the sciences,
literature, and philosophy during the Middle Ages than other European cultures.........

Jewish physicians of the Middle Ages were highly respected and consulted even by the Muslims. One of the most renowned was
Maimonides, who was born in Cordoba in 1135 and served as physician tot he Sultan of Egypt.

==========================================

THE TREATY OF ORIHUELA
The Surrender of Orihuela (Spain), 713 C.E

The capitulation agreement between the Arab commander 'Abd'al-'Aziz (son and successor of Musa ibn Nusayr) and Theodomir,
the Visigothic prince of Murcia, on the surrender of the city of Orihuela has survived to this date. This agreement was executed in 713 C.E., within two years of the first organized entry of Muslims into Spain from the south by Commander Tariq ibn Ziyad.

The inhabitants of the conquered territories of Spain were suitably impressed by the tolerance which the Muslims offered them once active resistance had ceased, a tolerance which the Roman Catholics had not displayed to their own inhabitants when they were in power. It is these earlier agreements and their successful implementation in the conquered territories that prompted Theodomir and the population of Orihuela to agree to surrender to the Muslims.

Burckhardt has documented the clauses of the capitulation of 713, and Thomson has further elaborated upon its implementation:

**"The Christians were allowed to keep their churches and their monasteries, and the Jews their synagogues.

They retained most of their personal possessions.

The slaves were for the most part set free, either by accepting Islam - no Christian or Jew was allowed to have a Muslim for a slave - or by gradually buying themselves free, something that had not been permitted under the earlier Visigothic laws

The Christian and Jewish communities maintained autonomous jurisdiction in all disputes that did not involve the rights of Muslim subjects.

They also had their own leaders, bishops, or 'counts' (comites), who represented them in the Muslim government..."**

References
T. Burckhardt, "Moorish Culture in Spain," 1972.
A. Thomson and M. Ata'ur-Rahim, "Islam in Andalus," Ta-Ha Publishers, London, 1996.

so now u tell me where was that persecution against minorities that hasn't let u sleep for ages??
Next time u brag about going to a library, make sure u r not heading towards some hindu fanatic's den where all u could find is hate literature even to the extent of twisting historical facts

and yah... get rid of ur constipation problem as well!

[This message has been edited by KK (edited May 23, 2000).]

11

where did i talk of persecution of jews by muslims? I did not say anything about if it happened or did not happen.
I said that Hindus being idol worshippers and not the people of the book, ahilulkitaab, are considered inferior to Christians or Jews. Thus they have even fewer rights, if any.
I remember Ghazi saying that even Jazia is not applicable to Hindus. It is Islam or death.

[This message has been edited by ZZ (edited May 23, 2000).]

12

if it was really the case of Islam or death, u wouldn't be here today, kicking around. There would not be any hindu worship place left around in this region of subcontinent. The choic of Islam or death was only put to the ruling elite class and even that before the two sides were pitched against each other ,once the non-believers would get their ass kicked in the battle field, the masses were usually still left with their choices. Again India being the home to world's largest hindu population bear testimony to Muslims' tolerance towards other religions, otherwise, ur ashes would been laid over himalyan peeks long ago!

13

This also could mean that Muslim rulers were happy to collect taxes and rule than spreding religion.
You can easily remember that before 1857 rebellion, British tried to spread religion. But after 1857, they just concentrated on looting the people economically and stopped playing with religion.
There were rulers who tried force like Aurangzeb. But you must be knowing that he spend 27 years in Maharashtra to end Maratha rebellion but did not succed. He is buried there.
Being Pakistani, u must be knowing Sikh rebellion very well. Ranjist singh ruled Lahore and still Punjabi mothers get childredn to sleep by taking name of Harisingh Nalwa.
Should I say that the fact that you are still Muslim points to generocity of Sikhs.

14

otherwise, ur ashes would been laid over himalyan peeks long ago!<<

Muslims would have if they had power to do so..they tried very hard (to do what you are suggesting) to kill or forcibly convert everybody but couldn't do it. Read Maratha and Sikh history and also Mughal rule from Jahangir to Aurangzeb. As of today any remaining minorities in Pakistan and Afganisitan (actually in all muslim countries) are being treated in inhuman way.

P.S. If Muslims were so powerful as you are suggesting, why didn't they conquer Europe. The fact is that Mughals were desperate having been driven out of their lands on the other hand Indians had become lazy due easy living in the land of abundance therefor become an easy target.

15

I just want to clarify on one point because it causes confusion & condemnation all the time

When I say these laws will have to be revised; pls note: that does NOT mean revising the Quran or authentic hadiths; it only means drafting the laws to reflect the changed environment.

You have to admit that the current laws are in conflict and needs to be revised.

16

[quote]
Originally posted by ZZ:
This also could mean that Muslim rulers were happy to collect taxes and rule than spreding religion
[/quote]

if collecting taxes was all the purpose, then read the following excerpt from the history:

[quote]
"After getting on peaceful terms with the people of Syria and collecting the dues of the Jizya and the Kharaj, news reached Abu
'Ubeida that the Byzantines had amassed their troops to attack him. The effect of this was great on Abu 'Ubeida and the Moslesm.
He sent messages to the rulers of cities with whose citizens he had made peace, asking them to return to their subjects the paid dues
of the Jizya and Kharaj, with an instruction to tell these: 'We hereby return to you the money you have paid us, because of the news
of the enemy troops amassed to attack us, but, if God grants us victory against the enemy, we will keep up to the promise and
covenant between us.' When this was delivered to the Zimmis and their money returned to them, they told the Moslems: May God
bring you back to us and grant you victory over them!"
[/quote]

Now this fact doesn't come from under my armpit, its their on the record for u to check & see where u stand now.

I'v yet to come across a single person who would get her/his child to sleep using such lame tactics :) it may be true on the eastern side.... among hindu families!

17

Ranjit Singh did rule Lahore, and even Peshavar (talk of true blue pathan blood) and of course Kashmir, though he could not get to Kabul. He ruled with an iron hand and perhaps better than the Shariefs.
What happened elsewhere is not applicable. We are discussing Indian history. Stick to that.

18

[quote]
Originally posted by Rani:
As of today any remaining minorities in Pakistan and Afganisitan (actually in all muslim countries) are being treated in inhuman way.
[/quote]

may be in ur stinky imaginations only. Try to come up with some new rhetorics rather than crying out loud same old gibberish and look back at ur own country's record.
In the meantime, try to get a lesson in history from some authentic sources, not something that was printed in the basement of Shiv Sena's headquarter.

19

Indian history!! wow!! where u'v been all along??
read the thread title and read ur first post... may be u need a break now. well, i sure do, so so long berader!

20

She is talking of present when she says 'being treated'.
Let me tell you something that was reported in 'Nation'. A pakistani christian boy was charged of blasphemy, of writing against mohammad and putting these slips in mosque. In the trial it turned out that boy could neither read nor write. During the trial his relative who used to accompany him was killed. The target was the boy. The judge threw off the case and released he boy. Judge was killed.
There is anothe disabled Muslim who changed religion and is tried under blasphemy.
And tell us the news item which appears in the begining of thread is true or not.
Bye I am also off for two weeks.

[This message has been edited by ZZ (edited May 23, 2000).]