Boycott Israel [IslamCity] Why Iran War has been allowed...
*Capuano and Kucinich Come Clean About the Lobby* Why is the Peace Movement Silent About AIPAC? By JOHN WALSH AIPAC! was the forceful one-word answer of Congressman Michael Capuano when we asked him, Why was the Iran clause forbidding war on Iran without Congressional approval taken out of the recent supplemental for the Iraq war funding? I nearly fell out of my chair at his reply - not because this was news but because of who had just said it. Capuano is a close ally of Nancy Pelosi, her fixer and enforcer. That was last Friday morning when a small delegation from Cambridge and Somerville, MA, were visiting the Congressman, known for his bluntness, as part of the nationwide UFPJ (United For Peace and Justice) home lobbying effort during the Congressional recess. Later that day, Dennis Kucinich made an appearance at Harvard, where he was asked the same question, the reason for removing the Iran provision. AIPAC, I volunteered out loud. Kucinich looked my way and said, Exactly. Again my chair almost failed to contain me. A few weeks earlier we had gone to the offices of Senators Kennedy and then Kerry to discuss the war. (My intention was to call their attention to www.FilibusterForPeace.org http://www.filibusterforpeace.org/ to which the Kennedy aide was sympathetic and the Kerry aide predictably hostile.) I raised the question of AIPAC directly with Kerry's aide, inquiring about its hawkish influence on Kerry and other Senators. Suddenly the aide was quite engaged. Leaning forward, he said: That will never be discussed publicly. That will never be discussed publicly. Clearly even Kerry's office is unhappy with the pressure that comes from AIPAC. It is widely acknowledged that the reps and senators are ticked at AIPAC, and their hostility seems to be growing these days. With upwards of 60% of their campaign contributions coming directly or indirectly from the Israel Lobby, the Democratic congressmen are not free to respond to their antiwar base. This opens them to an antiwar electoral challenge on the Left or Right from forces not subservient to AIPAC. And that could cost them their next election, a little thing which has them very worked up. Capuano's cry of AIPAC was no simple outburst of candor but a *cri de coeur** *for his career. So here we have even Congressmen and Senator's aides complaining publicly about AIPAC. AIPAC is being outed all over the mainstream media, largely thanks to the door opening work of Mearsheimer and Walt. AIPAC is skewered routinely by Justin Raimondo on Antiwar.com and by Alex Cockburn and many others here on CounterPunch. But there remains no anti-AIPAC campaign within the mainstream antiwar organizations, like UFPJ or Peace Action. (Even one supposed Congressional ally of the peace movement was announced as a celebrity guest at the recent colossal AIPAC meeting in Washington, where half the Congress shows up and Dick Cheney is a regular speaker. What gives?) I have been told by leaders of the peace movement that AIPAC is a distraction from the main thrust of the antiwar movement. And so we should not engage it; AIPAC is to be immune. But with all due respect to the sentiments of that leadership, immunity for AIPAC is a prescription for disaster. To use a military analogy, which I do not especially like, suppose that we were trying to take a hill in Germany in 1944. And suppose we said that we would not attack one pillbox, which kept devastating our forces. Leave just that one pillbox alone! The result would be devastating; we would be cut down with every succeeding attempt at advance. So it is with AIPAC which campaigns relentlessly for war on Iraq, war on Iran, war on Syria, war on Lebanon and the slow genocide of the Palestinian people. AIPAC constantly puts the peace movement on the defensive while it is free to be on the offensive all the time. AIPAC is not just an issue for Jewish Americans or the Jewish wing of the peace movement like Jewish Voice for Peace; it is a major force, although not the only one, driving the U.S. to wars in the Middle East. AIPAC is no less a force for war than is the Republican National Committee. In fact it is worse, because it sinks its teeth into the foreign policy establishment of both parties, perhaps the Dems more so than the Republicans. If the peace movement is to be worth its salt, then it must take action against AIPAC. (It is marathon season here in Boston and my friend, Israeli expatriate Joshua Ashenberg, tells me that the foregoing thought harbors a logical error. As he says: A 'movement' that does not work against AIPAC is NOT a peace movement by definition. It will not help if I call myself a marathon runner, while I never ran a marathon.) In the Boston area, AIPAC appears to be especially powerful, and so we have a special responsibility to take it on. At the recent AIPAC conference in Washington, the delegates from Boston/New England were the most hawkish toward Iran. Just before the last election a notorious ad
Boycott Israel [IslamCity] War With Iran : Who Would Benefit From It?
War With Iran Who Would Benefit From It? By Arash Jalali Freelance Journalist - Tehran Forward By : http://www.shariqkhan.page.tl Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addresses a news conference in Tehran, April 4, 2007 (Reuters Photo). The International Community is increasingly tightening the ropes of sanctions on Iran with the hope of budging Iran's stance on the nuclear issue. Yet, the Islamic Republic's tone seems to be moving more boldly towards embracing the possibility of total isolation, or even military confrontation, rather than attempting to diffuse the tensions and managing the issue within the realm of diplomacy. In fact, not only is Iran not showing any willingness to take any positive steps, with the ceasing of the 15 British sailors and the subsequent war of words, but also it seems that the Iranian leadership is looking forward to further fueling an already volatile situation. The reactions of the Western countries, notably the United States and the United Kingdom, with respect to all these issues, have not been any more promising. While Americans say they should be given credit for seeking cooperation from and sitting at the same table with the Iranians on the issue of security in Iraq, they all the same capture Iranian citizens allegedly members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) who Iran claims to be diplomats in Iraq. This is in addition to the retired Iranian defense ministry official who is claimed by the Iranian government to have been kidnapped by US and Israeli intelligence operatives in Turkey, a claim both the United States and Israel deny (BBC). The question that hovers in the minds of many Iranians is on whether some sort of non-diplomatic (i.e. military) confrontation between the United States and Iran would eventually occur. How unreasonable or far-fetched a confrontation scenario might seem to the average person has little bearing on whether or not it will actually happen. What does matter is how committed the two sides are to a cause, be it diplomacy or military confrontation. This was certainly the case when everyone wondered if the United States would really invade Iraq, and the same logic applies to the current situation with Iran, except that this time, it is not just the dominant Neoconservative doctrine within the US administration that would like to see the standoff end with a military confrontation. Parts of the Iranian establishment, as also witnessed by some political analysts, seem to have some interest in escalating the situation to something more than just a diplomatic row (Ansari). During the 1980s, there was no room for any form of freedom. The state interfered with every aspect of people's private lives. The 1980s Nostalgia Certain elements within the Iranian regime, specifically the hardliner president as well as part of the IRGC that supports him, have strong reasons to not only invite but also to actively pursue a path that leads to some sort of political cul-de-sac, which could in turn call for a preferably limited military solution as opposed to an all-out invasion. These reasons are both political as well as economic. Since the very first day of his election, President Ahmadinejad has not hidden his deep admiration for the 1980s as a golden era. Politically, the 1980s was marked by what Ayatollah Khomeini called the unity of words. There was no open talk of Left or Right in the political spectrum. There was only one party and that was Hezbollah (the Party of God)[i]. You were either with the party of God or with the infidels. Socially, there was virtually no room for any form of freedom. The state interfered with every aspect of people's private lives. Scenes of the regime's agents raiding houses and arresting people for no crime other than cheering and dancing at a wedding party were quite ordinary. At roadblocks and checkpoints, the armed men searched almost every car that passed by, not really hoping to find anything obviously illegal, such as weapons or drugs, but simple things such as music cassettes. The situation with the press was much worse than it is now. Not even mild criticisms were tolerated. In fact, the regime saw to it that nobody with that mindset would even be allowed to work for the press. The country's economy was completely controlled by the state. Everything was either owned or totally controlled and regulated by the government. Economy was really the art of giving out rations of life's necessities. Anything more than that was considered luxury at the time, which by definition was a symbol of the corrupt lifestyle of the royalty that existed before the revolution. All this could easily be justified by the fact that the country was engaged in a devastating and costly war, not just with Saddam Hussein's Iraq, but effectively with the whole World,
RE: Dangerous Layman ;Boycott Israel [IslamCity] SHOULD I TELL MY FUTURE HUSBAND OF MY PAST WRONG DOINGS?
Assalaamu 'alaikum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuh, With all due respect brother, What do you mean by 'muftis such as this have doubtful credentials and are a nemesis'? Who made islam-qa the all authority on giving fatawah (for all we know - Islam -qa generally follows the Hanbali position on issues - and since not every Muslim follows the Hanabilah madhhab - many fatawa would not apply to the bulk of Muslims) - where did the shuyukh from islam-qa receieve their credentials from and do they have an unbroken chain that goes back to the Salaf us Salih and to the Beloved of Allah sallAllahu 'alaihi wa sallam (no disrespect intended to the TRUE inheritors of the prophets)? We know that mufti's can err, and personally, we all know that we should not be a mujahir - or one who reveals sins which Allah subhaanahu wa ta'ala has covered up (with repentance or not). That said, I would personally take the opinion of not revealing one's past sins, but however i would respect the opinion which the sheikh has given (perhaps for a certain 'urf or culture or people etc) - remember that his training is from South Africa - not the US or Middle East or Turkey or Australia. In Turkey, there was a custom where the mother of the groom would have to be shown the 'blood' after the marriage consumation - right or wrong - this was cultural - so which cultures are respected (as long as they do not conflict with Islam - who knows?). There are many times where muftis give verdicts (even Saudi scholars) which seem to go against the majority, and yet we do not go bagging the sheikh. Who made us the authority in the area of fatawa giving to disagree? If you have the requisite knowledge, then Alhamdulillah, but if you do not, then be quiet! Better yet, it would be better to stop posting 'fatawa' which may apply to one certain case or individual, instead, people seem to post fatwas all over the net, and this causes unnecessary problems at times. Since certain fatawah may only apply to a certain locality - not to the globe as a whole! This is a difficult issue, and in regards to deceit, what would be the condition of say a female who were 'bald', and kept that a secret until she was married? Or a male who knew that he had HIV and kept that also a secret until after the marriage and potentially harmed the other side? What about getting tests done to see that the person does not have any STD's? In some countries the couple to be must take these tests beforehand (a good thing in my opinion), since it will prevent in most cases the offspring from inheriting deadly diseases due to the sins of one or both parents. So although at face value what the mufti has said may seem to be going against the Sunnah - I would hardly believe that the sheikh has overlooked the Prophetic advice on this issue (he would certinly know the issue of the mujahir and of not revealing one's sins to others). Perhaps the issue of deceit is greater than not revealing ones sins? Allahu 'alam - better ask him to clarify if you have any problems rather than to do gheeybah. Remember that if he or she (scholar) delivers a right opinion gets 2 ajr, and if they make a mistake they still receieve one hasanaat. But us the layman? We should use hiqmah and wisdom and take from those whom we trust - and this sheikh is a trustworthy source - but there may be differing opinions in this regard by other 'ulama. One fatwa can never be the outcome of people labeling the learned as people of nemesis etc And Allah Alone Knows Best - and we seek His Guidance and Help at all times. Fi Amanillah Wassalaamu 'alaikum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuh Your brother in Islam Orhan Abu Khadijah Sheriff [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Assalaam Alaikum w r w b Muftis such as these have doubtful credentials and are a nemesis. They will destroy lives and should not be approached. Br. and Sis please look for answers in islam-qa.com or islamhelpline.com Brother Ansar Raza is perfectly right. The prophet has clearly ordered not to volunteer to make sins such as these known to others. He said do not to disclose what Allah has hidden. For people in such a dilemma, keep shut but first and foremost correct yourselves. Keep asking for firgiveness and continue to pray to Allah swt not to disclose their sins at any point in their lives and even after death till eternity. For this sister in particluar, be extra good to the husband once married. Build a bond of sharing, caring and love that inshaAllah will never be broken and only get stronger by time. abumaryam Ansar Raza@yahoo.com wrote: Mufti Sahib's verdict is totally wrong. We commit many sins, but at the time or after our marriages we do not open the whole catalogues of our wrong doings to our spouses. Allah is SATTAR and He does not like wrongdoings to be made public unless it becomes a ZULM to
Boycott Israel [IslamCity] Re: SHOULD I TELL MY FUTURE HUSBAND OF MY PAST WRONG DOINGS
Assalam alikum, you're missing the main point here. The first muslima said she is not a virgin, and yes islamically she should conceal it to protect herself. But when she gets married, on her first wedding night, her husband will find out - he will see it and will wonder where is the blood. All Muslim Eastern men look for the blood on the first night of marriage. However this is not the case in Western societies, because Muslims over there are converts to Islam therefore there is an understanding that any past wrongdoing was committed out of ignorance and is therefore forgiven. Don't take this word for word, but a Pakistani sister told me and then an Egyptian sister told me that when a woman is not virgin, and she has no sexual relations for a while her virginity hymen reappears. The Pakistani sister told me that it takes 5 years, whereas the Egyptian lady told me that a woman who gets divorced and after her iddah period is over the virginity hymen can reappear. But she must avoid every possible temptation not to touch herself and fast as well to avoid any temptations when she is alone. (Forgive me for being so blunt but we are all humans and prone to sin and it is because of shyness we sometimes cannot receive the knowledge about something!) Note that I did not read this fact from anywhere, I am just passing on what these two sisters told me, the Egyptian sister is very religious and she reads loads of stuff about Islam. But do make sure you find out for yourself whether this is really true and speak to someone who is knowledgable about these things. Secondly, the second Muslima said, He tried to do the worst though the utmost did not happen. This shows from what i understand that she did not lose her virginity. And if she conceals this sin it will work fine. The first muslima's dilemma is what does she say to her first husband on her first wedding night. In islamcity@yahoogroups.com, Shahid wrote: It really is pathetic when dumb people started thinking they are islamic or have islamic enough to give fatwas. We should do our part to make sure the person giving the fatwa is even knowledgable. It is not allowed to disclose your past (sins) to anyone. This is islam not christianity. The prophet (sallallahu alyahi wassalam) told people that the dirty filthy things that people do, they should conceal it with the concealment of Allah. Allah knows what you do and it is HE who concealed for you so that no one found out. To reveal that is a big sin because then you're saying to Allah that you don't want HIS concealment. Read the fatwa below from real scholars...especially the text in red and blue color. --- Effect of a wife telling her husband about her bad past, and the effect of that on her life Question: Kindly dont ignore this question. May Allah bless all for bringing light in the life of people in difficulties. I am a married and working woman who needs help and advice desperately. I got married a few months back. Problems began soon after that.I was not very religious during my college years and was studying away from my parents. Shaytan took me over and I found a non- Muslim guy very helpful and friendly. I was over confident about myself and I some times used to travel with him to my home town (By Road). On a cursed occasion, he started advancing physically towards me. I fell in the clusters of Shaytan and continued to be in the cursed situation a few times. Once I did the gravest mistake of being alone with him in a house. He tried to do the worst though the utmost did not happen. I realized the depth of my mistake only then. Although I never went back to such actions, after this evil incident, he has twice seen me formally. Although the relationship came to an end, he used to try me over phone and I used to attend it rarely. But nothing beyond that ever happened. I regret a lot for all these actions .Allah Subhantawla made me realize my mistakes and I have repented to him and prayed for his forgiveness. I am still praying. Later I became much regular in prayers, fasted and found time and interest to learn and adhere to the religion which gave me hopes. My parents started inviting proposals for me and for a long time I had the feeling that I shouldn't marry and spoil an innocent man's life. But as my passion for religion increased, I realized that I should not stay unmarried. Then my marriage got fixed with my husband. The thought haunted me, if I should disclose my past to him. I took the path of religion and kept quiet as I have repented deeply for my mistakes. My sense of insecurity made me feel that I should inform the non-Muslim ever not to try to disturb me by any means and I did inform him. Please tell me if this action was correct. My fiancé started calling me over telephone. In the beginning itself I found him very much suspicious by nature. He did not trust on anyone. He was not much inclined
Boycott Israel [IslamCity] Erdogan Picks Gul for Presidency - from islam online.net of 25-4-07
Erdogan Picks Gul for Presidency IslamOnline.net News Agencies Gul was chosen by Erdogan as a consensus candidate to calm down the secularist camp in the country. ANKARA Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul has been picked as the presidential candidate for the ruling Justice and Development (AK) Party, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan announced Tuesday, April 24. After all our research and discussions for the 11th president, our dear Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul has been proposed for the presidency, Reuters quoted Erdogan as telling a gathering of AK Party lawmakers in parliament. Erdogan, who said earlier this month he was not fixated on presidency, has come under intense pressure from the secular establishment, which includes army generals and judges, to pick a consensus candidate to run in the election. The secular camp accuses Erdogan of seeking to undermine the republic's separation of state and religion, a charge he strongly denies. Earlier this month, more than 350,000 people rallied in Ankara against a possible Erdogan presidency. Under Erdogan, Turkey's most charismatic politician, the country has achieved strong economic growth and secured the 2005 launch of European Union entry talks. Born in Kayseri, Gul, 57, studied economics at the University of Istanbul and wrote his dissertation there. Between 1983 and 1991, he worked at the Islamic Development Bank (IDB). In 1991, was elected a member of the Turkish parliament for Refah Partisi (RP) (Welfare Party) as a member from Kayseri. In the 54th government from 1996 to 1997, he served as Minister of State and government spokesman. Following the outlawing of the RP in 1999, Gul was re-elected to parliament a third time as member of Fazilet Partisi (the Virtue Party). On November 3, 2002, Gul was again elected to parliament under the AK party, which achieved an overwhelming majority in parliament. Two weeks later he was asked to form the 58th government. He formed a transitional government and relinquished power to the chairman of the AKP, Erdogan. The first round in Turkey's presidential election will be held in parliament on Friday, officials said Tuesday. A parliamentary committee scheduled the second round for May 2, the third for May 9 and the fourth for May 15. The AKP is virtually certain to elect the candidate of its choice thanks to the comfortable majority of 353 seats it holds in the 550-member parliament. But the AKP candidate is not expected to get the post in the first two rounds of voting, when a two-thirds majority of 367 is required, but in the third or fourth round, when a simple majority of 276 suffices. In Turkey, the government holds most power but the president can veto laws, veto appointments of officials, appoint judges and is commander in chief of the military. Veiled First Lady Gul's wife would be the first hijab-clad First Lady in Turkey's modern history. Gul's election to the highly prestigious post could put a hijab-wearing first lady into the presidential palace in Ankara for the first time in Turkey's modern history. Mrs Hayrunisa Gul came under the spotlight in 1998 after she joined hundreds of hijab-wearing women in suing the state before the European Court of Human Rights for denying them their right to put on the Muslim headscarf. The court, however, upheld the state ban. Outgoing President Ahmet Necdet Sezer, an arch-secularist, currently forbids such headgear on the premises of the palace. Last week, hijab-wearing women took to the streets of Istanbul, demanding the state to respect their religious freedoms. They want to wear hijabs in school, university and parliament, but the secular state forbids that. It's an identity problem ... and it's a religious command, Ayse Nur Bulut, 20, told Reuters. The ban forced many families to pull their children from state schools and enroll them at private ones at home. Well-off Turks preferred to send their hijab-wearing daughters to the United States, like Erdogan, or some European countries to pursue their studies. Others go to university and either uncover at the gates or wear a wig. The obstacles do not end with university. Parts of the private sector are also reluctant to employ hijab-wearing women, as a glance around Istanbul's business district suggests. Secularists tend to see the headscarf as a threat to the modernizing reforms of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, who threw religion out of public life as he rebuilt Turkey from the ruins of the Ottoman Empire. They say any relaxation of the ban could quickly turn Turkey into another Iran. Islam sees hijab as an obligatory code of dress, not a religious symbol displaying ones affiliations. - SHOUT IT OUT! Tell everyone, from anywhere, that you're online on
Boycott Israel [IslamCity] Death-the destroyer of Desires
Death the Destroyer of Desires Death is not the absolute end. It is just the discontinuation of unity between the body and soul. It is a change from one state to another and a transition from this present life to that of the hereafter. The purpose of our existence is the worship of Allah as mentioned in the Book of Allah: And I [Allaah] created not the Jinns and Men except that they should worship Me [alone] Soorah az-Zariyat (51): 56 This life, which we are living, is the testing ground for which there shall be only two consequences, Paradise or Hellfire. Unfortunately more than often we disregard death, as we are so attached to this world and the love of which has been established in our hearts. Certainly, they see it as distant, but We see it as near Soorah al-Ma'arij (70): 6-7 Death only becomes a reality when a close beloved one dies. The heart feels heavy, the eyes shed tears and there is, at that moment, a present fear of death. If we were to spend even a single moment each day thinking about death, it would bring forth many concerns? The greatest being our Hereafter: He Who has created death and life, that He may test you, which of you is best in deed. Al-Mulk (67):21 So we stop and consider what we are doing with our time and where we are heading, and then realize that much of it is wasted in light talk, in laughing, in pursuing that which is not going to benefit our Hereafter.One of the Salaf said: Three characteristics are from Eemaan: Modesty, Chastity and Withholding of the tongue, not the with holding of the heart and actions. These are things which cause gain in the Hereafter and loss in this life, and what is gained in the next life is greater than what is lost in this world. [Re ported by Abdur-Razzaaq in his Musannaf from A'oon ibn 'Abdullaah] This World in comparison with the world to come is just like one of you putting his finger in the sea. Let him consider what it returns with. Saheeh Muslim (eng. trans. vol.4 p.l486 no.6843 The Prophet Muhammad (sallahu alihi wa-sallam) explained how this world is not even worth the wing of a mosquito! And how small is a mosquito, and then the wing of a mosquito- so what is the worth of the world we run after and are dearly attached to? The Messenger of Allaah (sallahu alihi wa-sallam) referred to death as 'the destroyer of desires. [Sunan at-Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah Nasaai and authenticated by Sheikh al-Albanee in al-Mishkaat (1/1607)] Because when each one of us remembers the awesome reality of death and what is to follow after that, our present desires and wordy concerns seem so insignificant and futile, and the life of the Hereafter becomes our goal and we become interested in the means to attain that goal. We find that the Companions of the Prophet (sallahu alihi wa-sallam) excelled on this point and were not deluded by the amusements of this world, knowing that love for this world would injure their Paradise. Hence, they faced trials and every hardship with the knowledge that a weighty judgement was yet to come and a full compensation yet to be paid - so they had hope and fear in Allaah, without exaggerated optimism or disparity. O you who believe! What is the matter with you, that when you are asked to march forth in the cause of Allaah [ie. Jihaad] you cling heavily to the earth? Are you pleased with the life of this world rather than the Hereafter? [Soorah at-Taubah (9):38] Regarding the shaheed (martyr), the Prophet (sallahu alihi wa-sallam) said: Nobody who enters Paradise will (ever like to) return to this world, even if be were offered everything on the surface of the earth, except the martyr who will desire to return to this world and be killed ten times for the sake of the great honor that has been bestowed upon him. [Saheeh Muslim (eng. trans. vol.3 p.1045 no.4635)] Let us see how these words affected the hearts and lives of the Companions, as we reflect upon one Companion in particular, who was guaranteed Paradise, Talhah ibn 'Ubaidullaah.. Whoever wishes to look upon a martyr walking the face of the earth, then let him look upon Talhah ibn 'Ubaidullaah. [Sunan at-Tirmidhi al-Haakim. Authenticated by Shaikh al-Albaanee in his as-Saheehah ( no.126)] The Prophet (sallahu alihi wa-sallam) said to Talhah when his fingers were struck by arrows in protecting the Prophet (sallahu alihi wa-sallam) at Uhud, as he let out an exclamation of pain: If yow had said. 'In the name of Allaah', then the Angels would have raised you up while the people were looking on at you. (And in another narration he added): until they entered you into the sky. [Sunan an-Nasaai. The addition is from al-Baihaaqee. Authenticated by al-Albaanee in his as-Saheehah ( no.217)] Talhah is one who has fulfilled his term. [Sunan at-Tirmidhi and authenticated by Sheikh al-Albani in as-Saheehah (125)]. Which means that he has exhausted his allotted time in the path of Allaah there remaining nothing between him and death - thus he is as one killed
Boycott Israel [IslamCity] Hadees on PRAYERS-SHORTENED ~*~ PART- 3 !*! HADEES SERIES !*!
*Asalaamu Alaikum Warehmatulahe Wabarakatuhu* *!::^::! HADEES SERIES !::^::!* * Hadees on PRAYERS-SHORTENED* *Sahih Bukhari Hadith * *8.** Offering prayer by signs while riding an animal* *Hadith 2.201 Narrated by Abdullah bin Dinar* On traveling, 'Abdullah bin 'Umar used to offer the prayer on his mount by signs whatever direction it took. 'Abdullah said that the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) used to do so. * * *9. Getting down to offer compulsory prayers* *Hadith 2.202 Narrated by Amir bin Rabia* I saw the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) on his Mount praying Nawafil by nodding his head, whatever direction he faced, but Allah's Apostle (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) never did the same in offering the compulsory prayers. Narrated Salim: At night 'Abdullah bin 'Umar used to offer the prayer on the back of his animal during the journey and never cared about the direction he faced. Ibn 'Umar said, Allah's Apostle (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) used to offer the optional prayer on the back of his mount facing any direction and also used to pray the Witr on it but never offered the compulsory prayer on it. *Hadith 2.203 Narrated by Jabir bin Abdullah* The Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) used to pray (the Nawafil) on his mount facing east and whenever he wanted to offer the compulsory prayer, he used to dismount and face the Qibla. *10.Praying Nawafil while riding a donkey* *Hadith 2.204 Narrated by Anas bin Sirin* We went to receive Anas bin Malik when he returned from Sham and met him at a place called 'Ain-at-Tamr. I saw him praying riding the donkey, with his face to this direction, i.e. to the left of the Qibla. I said to him, I have seen you offering the prayer in a direction other than that of the Qibla. He replied, If I had not seen Allah's Apostle (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) doing it, I would not have done it. *11.Not praying Nawafil prayer after compulsory prayer during a journey* *Hadith 2.205 Narrated by Hafs bin Asim* Ibn 'Umar went on a journey and said, I accompanied the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) and he did not offer optional prayers during the journey, and Allah says: 'Verily! In Allah's Apostle (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) you have a good example to follow.' (33.21) *QU'RAN: 33.21* Ye have indeed in the Apostle of Allah a beautiful pattern of (conduct) for anyone whose hope is in Allah and the Final Day and who engages much in the praise of Allah *Hadith 2.206 Narrated by Ibn Umar* I accompanied Allah's Apostle (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) and he never offered more than two Rakat during the journey. Abu Bakr, 'Umar and 'Uthman used to do the same. -- Please keep forwarding this Hadith to all ... Because the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) said: Pass on knowledge from me even if it is only one Verse. *Insha Allah Hadees on Prayers-Shortened will be continued... * * *** *NOTE:* *1.* If you has not received Previously sent PART'S of this series then please Send me a Mail mentioning the missed PARTS, Insha Allah I will send them to you. *2.* With the Last Part of this Series the word document will be Attached - It contains all the Hadees related to *Prayers-Shortened* since from the starting. *Insha Allah Remember me my Family members in your DUA* ** *Allah Hafiz.*
Boycott Israel [IslamCity] Siraj Wahhaj comes to Houston (Please Feel Free to Forward) 5/11/07
Raza Pasha [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:RE: Siraj Wahhaj comes to Houston (Please Feel Free to Forward) With Allah's Name, The Merciful Benefactor, The Merciful Redeemer Mercy Community Center presents Imam Siraj Wahhaj We sent thee (Prophet Muhammad, PBUH) not, but as a Mercy for all peoples (21:107) Coming to Houston Friday May 11 1:30 PM Jumah 8:15 PM Lecture and Fundraiser $10, limited seating Both at Shanai Party Hall 5920 Hillcroft @ HWY 59 South 713-953-1388 www.mercycc.org Bismillah, FYI Peace,Curtis Sharif Houston, Texas - Ahhh...imagining that irresistible new car smell? Check outnew cars at Yahoo! Autos. jpgNJYIZYiiFj.jpg Description: JPEG image
Boycott Israel [IslamCity] Volunteer training sessions / Pickups for Dallas Humanitarian Day
Volunteer training sessions for Humanitarian DayThe 2nd Annual Humanitarian Day is Saturday, May 19th. Last year with help of many organizations including Islamic Relief, around 200 volunteers distributed clothes, undergarments, diapers, socks, and books to about 1,500 individuals in South Dallas . The following training sessions have been scheduled to educate our volunteers on the operation and responsibilities. You would also be able to watch the video of last year's event. Please, attend one of the following: 1. Irving Masjid (ICI) - www.irvingmasjid.org Saturday, May 5th 10:30 to 11:30 AM 2. RichardsonMasjid (IANT) - www.iant.com Sunday, May 13th 10:30 to 11:30 AM Feel free to forward this message to others who may be interested http://www.dallasrelief.com Your donations are welcomed: 1. New T-Shirts for men, women and children 2. New Socks 3. Books for children 4. Diapers and wipes 5. Monetary donations could be dropped or mailed to Masjid Al-Islam 2604 S. Harwood Street Dallas ,TX 75215 (Add a note to the check that it is for Humanitarian Day) 6. Gently used clothes on hangers could be dropped at Masjid Al-Islam For more information, please contact Faisal Ghori at [EMAIL PROTECTED] Humanitarian Day Donation Pick-up, April 29 Last round of pick-ups for your donations for Humanitarian Day will be next Sunday, April 29th. This is for the Richardson/Plano area only, with hopes that your local area is conducting collections insha-Allah. Please freshly wash and press all gently used clothing that you will be donating. Also, please box items in small or medium boxes only. If you need a pick-up, email [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following information: Name: Address: Home Phone: Cell Phone: Best Time: (between 9AM-8PM) Number of items: Number of boxes: Bismillah, FYI Peace,Curtis Sharif Houston, Texas - Ahhh...imagining that irresistible new car smell? Check outnew cars at Yahoo! Autos.
Boycott Israel [IslamCity] Join SHRC Humanitarian Campaign to Release Mr. Qattan
.grey { FONT-SIZE: 11px; COLOR: #a1a1a1; FONT-FAMILY:
arial,helvetica } A.white { FONT-SIZE: 10px; COLOR: #ff; FONT-FAMILY:
arial,helvetica; TEXT-DECORATION: none } A.white:hover { FONT-SIZE: 10px;
COLOR: #ff; FONT-FAMILY: arial,helvetica; TEXT-DECORATION: underline }
A.white:visited { FONT-SIZE: 10px; COLOR: #ff; FONT-FAMILY:
arial,helvetica } A.white:active { FONT-SIZE: 10px; COLOR: #ff;
FONT-FAMILY: arial,helvetica; TEXT-DECORATION: none }
Syrian Human Rights Committee (SHRC)
SHRC, BCM Box: 2789, London WC1N 3XX, UK
Fax: +44 (0)870 137 7678 - Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Humanitarian Campaign to release the Sheikh of Syrian Detainees: Mr. Abdul
Sattar Qattan
In conjunction with the Arab Orient Centre for Civilised and Strategic
Studies, the Syrian Human Rights Committee (SHRC) has launched a humanitarian
campaign for the release of Mr. Abdul Sattar Qattan
Mr. A. S. Qattan, who is from Aleppo (born 1943), has been arrested and
detained several times, his previous detention periods totalling twenty years.
He was last arrested on 27/11/2004, accused of giving financial aid to the
families of some Islamic detainees who have been suffering for decades, due to
the absence of their breadwinners. Subsequently, he was sentenced to death,
pursuant to article 49/1980. This sentence was then reduced to 12 years in
prison.
News from Sednaya Prison has revealed that Mr. Qattan, who suffers from
Arteriosclerosis, Diabetes, Hypertension and acute Kidney Failure, has not been
receiving the appropriate medical care that should correspond to his medical
condition and age (65 years), a third of which he has spent in degrading
conditions in jail.
The Signatories of this petition appeal to the President Bashar al-Asad and
the concerned Syrian Authorities to shoulder the humane, civil and legal
responsibilities they hold, and begin an initiative to release Mr. A. S. Qattan
as well as all prisoners of conscience and opinion in Syria, and to repeal
Article 49/1980.
You are kindly requested to add your signature to this petition, remembering
the Quranic verses: If anyone killed a person-unless it be for murder or
spreading Mischief in the land- it would be as if he killed the whole people,
And if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole
people. Whoever recommends and helps a good cause becomes a partner therein.
Add your name to the signature by sending an email to either of the addresses
below:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
or fax it to: +448701377678
The Syrian Human Rights Committee Arab Orient Centre for Civilised and
Strategic Studies
A.atshbar:link { FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 12px; COLOR:
#99; FONT-FAMILY: 'Verdana'; TEXT-DECORATION: none } A.atshbar:visited {
FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 12px; COLOR: #99; FONT-FAMILY: 'Verdana';
TEXT-DECORATION: none } A.atshbar:hover { FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE:
12px; COLOR: #99; FONT-FAMILY: 'Verdana'; TEXT-DECORATION: none }
A.atshbar:active { FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 12px; COLOR: #99;
FONT-FAMILY: 'Verdana'; TEXT-DECORATION: none }
);document.writeln()
document.writeln(); if (heading_display == Yes)
{// Print a new category heading
document.writeln();//document.writeln();
//document.writeln(+webfeed_heading+);} //
Start
loop for articlesfor (var counter=0; counter
+global_article[counter].headline_text+
);}else{
document.writeln(+global_article[counter].headline_text+
);} // Print out the source
if ((counter != (global_article.length - 1)) || moreover_text != 1){
document.writeln([+global_article[counter].source+ ]
); //document.writeln();
//document.writeln();
//document.writeln(+global_article[counter].source+ ); }
// Print out reg/sub if appropriateif
(global_article[counter].access_status == sub ||
global_article[counter].access_status == reg) {
document.writeln( );
document.writeln(+global_article[counter].access_status+ );
} // Print out the harvest timeif
(time_display == Yes) { // Make a new date
object time[counter] = new
Boycott Israel [IslamCity] UK: Let's hear it for the multicultural St George.
*UK: Let's hear it for the multicultural St George.* By: Yasmin Alibhai-Brown Van and cab drivers will blazon the cross of St George today; proud men and women will wear it on their beating chests and heaving breasts, symbol of their England, their pride, their land which is looking especially lovely this sunny spring. Since the turn of this century the patriotic brave knight has become markedly more popular. I do genuinely wish the merry crowds a happy day and I hope this column doesn't wreck their good humour. The England they imagine and celebrate is prelapsarian, an innocent garden of Eden, only more neatly cultivated and ordered. Its pure-blooded natives are congenial unless provoked to Boadicean fury and care not for bloody foreigners, daring modern ideas or interfering governments. Much of this is fantasy. Stanley Baldwin's dreamy place of country smithies and corncrakes on dewy mornings never even existed in the 1920s when crashingly loud machines had turned over life in the countryside and towns. And the English are in truth a blend, a mongrel tribe, unable ever to resist the lure of outside delights. I should know. It took but 10 minutes to ensnare my good husband, son of old Sussex, with sturdy, ancestral roots deep in the South Downs. As Jeremy Paxman writes in his book The English: Any sensible reading of history would have to conclude that for the English to talk of racial purity is whistling in the wind; there is scarcely a family in the land which has no Celtic blood in it, to say nothing of the Romans, Jutes, Normans, Huguenots and all the others who have added to the national bloodstock. But reality checks like these hardly matter on this day. Life would be unbearable without flights of fancy and all nations make up myths to soothe the soul. April 23rd is also the birthday of the greatest Englishman ever, William Shakespeare, who lived partly in gently rural Warwickshire and partly in that other England which was noisome, busy, ruthless, inviting, conflicted, sexy and hedonistic - London, the city loved by all the world. There is irreconcilable tension between these two opposing ideas of what England is and means. London, I sense, is no longer seen as a part of England by true English patriots, and England is no longer interchangeable with Britain as it once was. The first schism will have profound consequences for the capital, and the second has set off a psychic shock that is making the English restive. As the majority, they had grown accustomed to owning these isles. Now that Britishness is open and inviting (or ordering) in all sorts of riff-raff - Black, Asian, Muslim Britons, Poles, even Romanians would you believe? - the English would like to create their own discrete kingdom. In this realm, the story of England is always rosy, its impact wholly benign and unsurpassed. Wars with Europe, slavery, colonialism, mercantile greed - all get spun into gold and the other Britons are put in their lower places. In some ways, these are the pitiful responses of a nation desperately seeking itself. One of the finest recent books written on this subject is by an American professor of South Indian background. Krishan Kumar's The Making of The English Identity (Cambridge University Press, 2003) sensitively examines the awakening English self-awareness: The English took pride, as did the Romans of old, in their role as empire-builders. ... [they] could not see themselves as just another nation in the world of nations. So what happens when the Empire ends? When industrial supremacy and global power disappear? These are the questions facing the English today, made more urgent by the move towards European unity and the calls for radical pluralisation and diversification of English society. England, the powerful favourite son, is getting resentful after devolution of its three siblings, too. Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are also no longer happy to be called British. Instead of integrating with the whole, each is causing a catastrophic disintegration. Why do none in our political classes seem to care or even notice this much greater threat to national integrity and cohesion than that posed by some anti-British Muslims? We ethnic minorities are continually extolled to claim a national identity that has been frayed and torn by the four nations. In a few years we may be the only Brits left, which would be tragic. England could save us; England must do so, even as she struggles with her pained soul and seeks the political definition to which she is entitled. And here is how. On this day, England parading ethnic pride and allegiance is fine and good, and perhaps necessary. However, the version on show is but a small, parochial and mean part of English heritage and history. There is another, even prouder narrative to instate, an England of many hues, culturally and sexually open and seductive, making and remaking herself through the centuries, unstill and vivacious, inventive,
Boycott Israel [IslamCity] Afzal Guru case for European Parliament
Afzal case for European Parliament Hasan Suroor http://www.hindu.com/2007/04/15/stories/2007041500380900.htm LONDON: The case of Afzal Guru, sentenced to death for his alleged role in the terrorist attack on the Indian Parliament in December 2001, will be raised in the European Parliament during President A.P.J. Abdul Kalam's visit to Europe later this month, the U.K.-based South Asia Solidarity Group has announced. The decision was taken at a meeting of leading human rights and legal experts held here on Thursday in support of Mr. Guru. The meeting decided to urgently bring the details of Afzal's case and the miscarriage of justice before the European Parliament. British MPs Jeremy Corbyn, Roger Godsiff, John McDonell and George Galloway have already signed a letter to the Indian President urging him to show mercy to Afzal Guru, the Group said in a statement A book by Nandita Haksar, Framing Geelani, Hanging Afzal - Patriotism in the Time of Terror, was released at the meeting. Moazzam Begg, one of nine Britons detained at Guantanamo Bay, called for an international campaign to get justice for Mr. Guru. He spoke about his own experience and drew parallels to Mr. Guru's case. Amrit Wilson from the Group said, The forces of Hindutva and the so-called war on terror have led to an erosion of democratic values in India. In trying to bring [U.S. President] Bush's version of `democracy', India is becoming an authoritarian state. With Regards Abi - Ahhh...imagining that irresistible new car smell? Check outnew cars at Yahoo! Autos.
