MINAB: the Mosques and Imams National Advisory Body.
Make you mind up as this will affect every mosque up and down the country with someone sitting in a dark room deciding if your choice of a Imam is in line with theirs.
Personally I find it highly objectionable that as long as we stay within the law that anyone should dictate to me who I may call at our centre, after all no organisation/Govt dictates to any other faith group.
Poll #112
What are the objectives of the Zionist war on Lebanon?
Posted by Raza. Active from Saturday 29 July 2006 - 15:46:25 to Sunday 02 March 2008 - 00:41:35. Total votes: 255
The US by proxy looking to engage in war with Iran and Syria
25.1% [Votes: 64]
The Zionist entity aim to extend its borders
7.06% [Votes: 18]
The Zionist entity aiming to finish the annihilation of Gaza/West Bank
3.53% [Votes: 9]
All of the above
47.45% [Votes: 121]
The Zionist entity is rightly defending its sovereignty
What is the purpose or value of a poll that does not offer any genuine alternative opinions? Does it increase our knowledge or give any further mandate to our opposition to Zionist policy and propoganda?
Question 5. Since Zionism is an ideological movement that has no boundaries it cannot lay claim to sovereignty. To ask the question in this form suggests that Muslims believe the Zionist claims that all Jews and all Israelis agree with their criminal and racist assertions.
A more and thoughtful approach to framing the questions might have better served the the aspirations of the questioner.
Poll #106
United Arab Emirates, whose national airline bought the rights to Arsenal FC new stadium, have allowed the Israel to be promoted. Should the UAE and/or its airline be boycotted?
Posted by Raza. Active from Wednesday 01 March 2006 - 13:58:42 to Saturday 29 July 2006 - 15:46:25. Total votes: 129
I am surprised at those who take the view that if a Muslim State/Company does wrong then its OK. The Office of Sayyid Sistani along with all our Ulema is clear on those who support the Zionist entity, that is is not permitted, no exception to the rule.
So don't support the Zionist Entity or its friends.
I would boycott both, as the state owns the airline and the state was ultimately responsible for the decision.
Certainly that may sound drastic, but until the state acknowledges its error and uses its influence in pressuring****nal to revoke its sponsorship, we should boycott both country and company, that is unless people are hypocrites as I believe those who have voted for the option of not boycotting fall into, then is suppose carry on befriending the enemies of our Prophet and his Holy Family (Peace be Upon them all) and answer your Imam when the time comes.
If you look into history you will find that when Anwar Sadat of Egypt signed a peace treaty with Isreal in the 70's it more or less legitimised the exisistance of Israel from a muslim perspective.
Does that mean we should boycott Egypt as well?
If so why haven't we for all these years?
I think this is a trivial issue, and we are looking at it from a rather lofty view point.
If we were the majority perhaps we could have used an economic boycott.
But otherwise in my opinion a few less economy class tickets,(my apologises to the high flying first class travellers) and a few less tickets at Highbury ain't gonna make no difference.
Poll #86
Is Tony Blair preparing the grounds to support/take part on a military attack on Iran?
Posted by Raza. Active from Thursday 06 October 2005 - 19:08:37 to Wednesday 01 March 2006 - 13:58:42. Total votes: 206
Do people not think with the recent remarks by Blair and his allies in painting Iran as some sort of bad/evil guy that he is buttering up the population to be party to a future attack on Iran?
i think with the recent noises being made in the media etc, there definitely seems to be the start of a build up of anti irnain feeling. Tony Blair, it seems, is trying to prepare the groundwork for war.
my recent visit to iran, gave me a few answers from the iranians. When asked if there was going to be a war, they responded us by giving dates as to the beginning of the war. Looks all set to me...
Personally I think this is a dangerous stance, we need to look beyond the Shi'i / Sunni divide and look at the principle as the next step could be to ban Shi'i organisations
I will not agree with Raza. If shia organisations strcitly follow the path of what Imam Ali has said they will not get in trouble with any government. The problem is that some of these so called organisations which are fighting in the name of Islam are miles away from Islamic an fundamental Islamic teachings... Aren't this the same people who took away the Rights of Mulla Ali who are now potraying themselves as the saviours of Islam. Brother Raza this fight an grouping started since the day Prophet Muhamed(swt) left this world... Had the caliphate been given to the rightous man than, we would have never faced such attrocites an problems in this present stage...
its about looking at this in a lateral manner i.e. thinking outside the box, that is why I mentioned moving away from the whole Shi'i /Sunni issues.
Unfortunately no organisation strictly follows the teachings of Imam Ali (AS) and being fallible beings we will make mistakes its a fact of life.
The danger we face and it is very real is that today it is these Wahabi/Kafir organisations but tomorrow it could be our organisations/individuals for surportting Shi'i Muslims in Iran/Iraq/Lebanon.
salaam
i agree with raza 117.5%, because even though i disagree with those 2 groups and i personally think that omar bakri is a guy who is basically only interested in getting on sky news and newsnight, he had been on the tv more than posh spice since the london attacks and that is no mean feat.
However back to the point despite the fact that these 2 groups are no good their banning is symbolic, because lets say next year usa aand puppets invade iran and then me and you say that the iranian people have a right to defend themselves by whatever means neccessary does that then mean that me and you are terrorists.
And what happens if during this hypothetical war the shias in iraq start attacking the invaders, so the usa and associates will have an enemy who are shias does that mean that all shias are enemies and against the west and soes that then mean the shias will be banned.
another point to note is that so far i am unaware of any pro israeli groups who hav ebeen banned for their support of an illegal israel or for the state terror produced by sharon
I support the banning of such groups totally also, because their actions are designed to protray an image of Muslims and Islam which is totally misguided and incorrect.
They are fighting in the name of Islam and in the name of Allah (s.w.t) by whoose apointment???
A simple look at the Asmaal Husna (the 99 glorious names of Allah S.w.t) and a conclusion can be assertained as to the fact that Islam needs no MULLAH SAVIOURS.
While No Shi'i of Imam Ali (AS) would argue on the evil nature of such groups, what if, as I have argued, as has Hurricaine that by supporting this ban you are potentially supporting the ban on Shi'i organisations in the coming months/years.
All those supporting this ban have failed to acknowledge this potential, so remove these polemical arguments and look at the principle of the move, today it is them tomorrow it will be us, make no mistake on this issue.
Perhaps it is not that we have turned a blind eye to the possibilities of such a ban being placed n the shia, but a case of rational belief that we would not be incited towards violence like some of our misguided supposedly muslim brethren.
The pen is Mighter than the sword and who better to illustrate that lesson than the Shia Of ALi(a.s),Hassan(a.s) Zainul Abeidin(a.s) and Jaffer as Sadiq(a.s).
Make no mistake Brother Raza, the people who are members of such groups hate the Shia as much as they hate everyone else.
I don't think we should worry about our fate by looking at the situation of others, instead we should be concerned with our faith and upholding the laws of our land.
how about some comments?
i feel that this sect is the worst enemy of islam as it is within islam i.e. the sect masquerades itself as part of the muslim faith. i see it as a cancer within islam.
Poll #78
Should women be allowed/encouraged to hold the highest political office? i.e. Prime Minister/President
Posted by Raza. Active from Wednesday 11 May 2005 - 00:01:59 to Monday 01 August 2005 - 00:08:50. Total votes: 88
sallam
i think this is a very touchy subject, for a start, if our ulemas have disallowed women running as president, then that is something we cant really argue about or discuss about.
They say that behind every great man there is the hand of a woman.
Therefore it makes perfect sense if the Great man is removed from the equation and the woman who was behind him takes the lead role.
It would be a prettier sight, and perhaps we could classify it as the REAL ROSE revolution.
In The Name of Allah, The Most Beneficient and The Most Merciful
I just wanted to remind all those who have this question in mind about the status of a woman, a similar question was raised and a simple answer was given i would advise all to refer it for their satisfaction, it is very sad to see some of us twisting things with no reason. i just want to answer this with a refrence from a past poll from a very intelligent person who with refrences answers the similar question as follows:
"Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great."
(Suratun-Nisaa; Chapter 4; Verse 34)
According to Islamic Law - Ayatullah Al-Seestani, the Imam of the congregational prayers should be: Adult (Baligh); Sane; Ithna 'Ashari Shi'ah; 'Adil; Of legitimate birth AND Being able to offer the prayers correctly. Furthermore, if the follower is a male, the Imam also should be a male. To follow a boy of ten years of age is a matter of Ishkal.
In contradiction to ali_d's argument, here it shows male can lead both male and female, whilst female can only lead female in congregational prayers. Also, our 12 Imams (LEADERS) are all male. In this day and age it is impossible to get a female who is near to, let alone equivalent to Bibi Fizza (A.S.), let alone Bibi Faatimah (A.S.) or Bibi Zaynab (A.S.). Furthermore Bibi Fatimah (A.S.) was Sayyidatun-Nisaa-il Aalameen - Leader of the WOMEN (not Men) of the Universe. I am totally conversent and support female leading female. My argument is how can female be leaders of Khoja Institutions (which includes both male and female members)???
The verses quoted by ali_d are partially misworded changing the meaning of the verse and also out of this topic. The actual verses are:
"O Prophet! when believing women come to you giving you a pledge that they will not associate aught with Allah, and will not steal, and will not commit fornication, and will not kill their children, and will not bring a calumny which they have forged of themselves, and will not disobey you in what is good, accept their pledge, and ask forgiveness for them from Allah; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful."
Suratul-Mumtahinah; Chapter 60; Verse 12)
"And (as for) the believing men and the believing women, they are guardians of each other; they enjoin good and forbid evil and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, and obey Allah and His Messenger; (as for) these, Allah will show mercy to them; surely Allah is Mighty, Wise."
(Suratut-Tawbah; Chapter 9; Verse 71)
The above verses talk about pledging allegience to the Holy Prophet (S.A.W.) and that Men and Women are guardians of each other. If you note in the second verse, the way it is worded, it shows men mentioned first, then women. Nothing it talks about the Leadership of Women of institutions (Both Men and Women).
I think sukaina has probably not understood that Hazrat Ali bin Husayn, Zaynul Aabideen (A.S.) was the Imam (LEADER) at the time of the revolt against evil Yazeed. Bibi Zaynab (A.S.) was Sharikatul Husayn (A.S.) - The Partner of Husayn (A.S.). If you see the life history of Bibi Zaynab (A.S.), she was known as Saani-e Zahra (A.S.), as she followed the footsteps of her mother in teaching the women (not men) of her time the true religion. Infact Bibi Zaynab never came out in public in presence of men until after the event of Karbalah.
Please do not compare Holy People with normal Men and Women like us. They are supposed to be role models for us.
I therefore think that it is valid for Women to lead institutions containing Women only,
but not to lead institutions which include both male and female members. For such institutions, that contain both male and female members, we need a male leader according to the initial verse I quoted at the start of my comment.
Salaams and Du'aas
Poll #77
Election 2005: Who did you vote for?
Posted by Raza. Active from Thursday 05 May 2005 - 16:41:02 to Wednesday 11 May 2005 - 00:01:59. Total votes: 24
Labour
25% [Votes: 6]
Conservative
4.17% [Votes: 1]
Liberal Democrats
25% [Votes: 6]
Nationalists
0% [Votes: 0]
UKIP
4.17% [Votes: 1]
Respect
20.83% [Votes: 5]
Green
0% [Votes: 0]
Other
0% [Votes: 0]
Did not vote
20.83% [Votes: 5]
Poll #73
Election 2005: Who will you vote for on May 5th?
Posted by Raza. Active from Wednesday 06 April 2005 - 18:26:14 to Thursday 05 May 2005 - 16:41:02. Total votes: 85
Could be because we all have some element of capitalism within us, or that some of us are anti-immigration/asylum. I would go with the former after all Maggie Thatcher would be proud with us and our ability to be the standard bearers of the capitalist movement.
FYI: Birmingham Sparkbrook & Small Heath ward the sitting MP is Labour's Roger Godsiff who back in the beginning of February 2005 called for an end to economic migrants, what next an end to all immigration? Can we vote for someone who is against immigration?
Some very funny voting going on, lets not treat this as if it was a postal ballot, I know that Brummies like to have multiple votes per person as opposed to one man one vote!!
But on a more serious note, I cannot believe that so many people are siding with UKIP, my personal view of UKIP and their supporters are:
if you think that the Shalwar Kameez does not fall into the category of modest attire for women then can you please explain
I am dumfounded by those who seem to claim that it is not acceptable attire especially as tens if not hundred of millions of women wear the shalwar kameez on the understanding that it is modest attire.
My personal opinion.....The modern day 'shalwar kameez'.....that hugs on to the body & shows the curves of the person (male or female) is definitely unislamic.
The big baggy 'shalwar kameez' that is likened to the 'Jilbaab' covering the bodyparts is more modest in comparison.....
Should the UK Government promote Islamic groups/ ideals? Do you trust the Government to be objective on Islamic Issues or do you think they have a hidden agenda?
40.38% [Votes: 21]
