The National Council of Imams and Masajid


British Government has been frustrated that a large number of Imams were born and educated in Pakistan, speak limited English, but well versed in their mother tongues, Arabic, Urdu and Farsi, making it difficult for the Government to know what is going on in the Masajid. The drive to encourage British Muslims to become Islamic clerks and to teach English to Imams is planned by British establishment with the help of so called Muslim leaders. Imams were accused of being out me grown”. The home grown Imams are neither well versed in English nor in Urdu or in other community languages. The Imams from the Sub-continent must be freely allowed to come to satisfy the spiritual social and emotional.


In reality, Islam isn’t about beliefs, it’s also about culture and identity. According to BNP, Islam has become a toxic racial proxy. Atheists and fundamentalist Christians are using popular slogans to incite against Muslims whom they see as the new source of danger for Europe. Pope Urban 11 in 1099 called the faithful to join the first Crusade and expel the Muslims from the Holy Land. It is now high time to react once again and defend Western civilizations as well as everything else which is threatened by radical Koran-Islam. The modern Crusades plan to save western civilization from Islamisation. Islamophobia is a deliberate defamation of Islam and discrimination and intolerance against Muslims. It is the worst type of terrorism the world has ever witnessed. British education system has already eradicated the languages of the young generation of Muslims. Now the British establishment is trying to kick out Urdu and other community languages from the Masajid. Bilingualism is an asset and not a problem.


Education experts say that a celebration on community languages in schools is one way of riding Britain of its reputation as the world’s language “dunce” and promoting better relations between different ethnic groups. The study of such languages is considered important for the future health of the economy. Research by CILT shows a revolution in the take-up of non-traditional languages in secondary schools. Experts say promoting community languages could also persuade native Brits to take an interest in them. The linguistic map of Britain was changing, with multi-linguals spreading from typically multi-ethnic areas to more “traditional” parts. By encouraging children to develop their existing knowledge we will be building up an important skills base as well as raising educational achievement. There is a huge body of research testify to the benefits that bilingualism has for educational development. The future of Britain is multi-lingual, and this needs to be reflected in the school curriculum.


Unfortunately with the rise of anti-immigrant sentiment, racism and Islamophobia, bilingualism has been neglected and ignored intentionally. Article 29 of the Convention on the Rights of a child states that “the education of the child should be directed to the development of respect for the child’s parents, his or her own cultural identity, languages and values.” Article 30 states that “a child belonging to an (ethnic, religious or linguistic minority) should be educated in a manner that affirmatively acknowledges their native language abilities as well as ensures their acquisition of English. The Education Act of 1944 clearly states that children should be educated according to the needs and demands of the parents. The silent majority of Muslim parents would like to send their children to state Muslim schools. Dcsf and OFSTED must take the responsibility that all schools must abide by the human rights issues.


Iftikhar Ahmad


www.londonschoolofislamics.org.uk

Waterboarding IS Torture, Mr. Bush


Waterboarding involves submerging the head of a captive in water and holding him down until he nearly drowns - and then yanking his head up, only to repeat the process again and again.


By Ibrahim Abdil-Mu'id Ramey


MAS Freedom Civil and Human Rights Director


WASHINGTON, D.C. (MASNET) Nov. 6, 2007 - "The presidency of George W. Bush has now evolved into a conspiracy to cover the a** of George W. Bush."


These words, uttered by syndicated television host Keith Olbermann, do not refer to some sinister plan to shelter the donkey on the President's ranch in Texas. On the contrary, they mean something far more important, not only to the executive branch of the government, but to the integrity of American law and morality.


Mr. Olberman, you see, interviewed Mr. Daniel Levin, a former Acting Assistant Attorney General under former AG Alberto Gonzales. In his attempt to find out how dangerous the technique of "waterboarding" actually is, he allowed himself to undergo this form of "enhanced interrogation", surrounded by medical and rescue personnel - confident that the waterboarding would not result in his death.


Mr. Levin's conclusion? Simply this: "Waterboarding is torture."


When Mr. Levin conveyed this message to his superiors in the Justice Department, he was promptly fired from his post.


There is now the façade of a national debate about waterboarding as an interrogation technique used by the U.S. military and covert intelligence agencies to extract information from captives deemed to be "terrorist suspects".


As you probably know, waterboarding involves submerging the head of a captive in water and holding him down until he nearly drowns - and then yanking his head up, only to repeat the process again and again.


Anyone who has ever nearly drowned will tell you the sheer terror of this barbaric act.


And the suspects held in Guantanamo, in Abu Ghraib, and in the nameless, faceless secret U.S. detention centers around the world, have no assurance that their torture will not end in death.


Both the President and Vice-President Cheney have declared that the United States does not torture captive combatants. In their convoluted logic, waterboarding isn't really torture, but a form of "enhanced interrogation". This pronouncement, straight from the mind of Machiavelli, allows them to sleep at night, thinking that just because a form of torture is called something else, most of the rest of us will believe it, too.


But Daniel Levin didn't believe them - and he was fired for telling the truth about one form of torture that is, in fact, used by the United States against Muslims deemed to be the "enemy".


Levin, Keith Olbermann suggested, is a real hero in the ongoing struggle for real justice.


The National Religious Campaign Against Torture (NRCAT), and numerous other human rights groups, have maintained a long and principled stand against waterboarding and numerous other forms of "enhanced interrogation".


Why the resurgence now in discussions surrounding the issue of waterboarding?


President Bush's nominee for Attorney General, Judge Michael B. Mukasey, refuses to declare his position on whether waterboarding is really torture.


Some Democrats may oppose Mukasey's confirmation on the floor of the U.S. Senate because of his refusal to make a declaration on the issue of waterboarding, but the majority of the Senate is likely to approve him anyway.


I doubt that Daniel Levin or Keith Olbermann would approve Mukasey's confirmation as U.S. Attorney General.


We should not approve Mukasey's confirmation either.


Regardless of what you call it, waterboarding is torture.


And the last time I checked, torture was still a violation of U.S. and international law - in addition to being an abomination in the eyes of the Creator.


We must not tolerate torture, or those in positions of authority who continue to allow torture to happen in the name of the people of this nation.


RELATED


Mukasey Refuses to Call Waterboarding Torture


"Torture is a Moral Issue" NRCAT Letter to U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary Opposing Confirmation of Judge Michael Mukasey


Destroying Democracy in Pakistan is Not an Option


It is unthinkable that Muslims, and real democrats of any description, would allow Pakistan to devolve into becoming another Somalia - and in this case, a Somalia with nuclear weapons.


By Ibrahim Abdil-Mu'id Ramey


MAS Freedom Civil and Human Rights Director


WASHINGTON, D.C. (MASNET) Nov. 6, 2007 - As I write this commentary, Pakistan is imploding.


General/President/Dictator, Pervez Musharraf, has suspended the constitution of the nation. The supreme court, and parliament, have both been dissolved. Martial law has been declared, and more than 1,500 political opposition leaders, lawyers, and judges have been arrested. Thousands of citizens are battling police in the streets of Islamabad, and other cities across the country.


The chaos of constitutional crisis and autocracy now verge on catastrophe - a catastrophe in an unstable nuclear weapons state that, if left unaddressed, could spiral into the virtual disintegration of the nation itself.


All dictators have their own made-for-mass-consumption reasons for attempting to squash the fundamental democratic rights of their own people.


In the case of General Musharraf, the big, public card in his geopolitical hand is the (alleged) war against Islamic 'extremists' in Pakistan's remote northwest region. This is, of course, the primary glue that binds Pakistan to the global "war against terror", led and orchestrated by the United States.


The 'war against terror' is also the single most important factor in maintaining the personal relationship between General Musharraf and the ruling circles of the U.S. government, including his personal relationships with President Bush and Vice-President Cheyney, who guarantee the unrestricted flow of money and weapons to their Pakistani 'ally'.


But this time, the General may have overplayed his 'anti-terrorism' hand in his brutal attempt to end any semblance of real democratic rule in Pakistan.


By dismantling Pakistan's national judiciary, and throwing hundreds of political opponents in jail, Musharraf is saying, in effect, that any challenge to his autocratic rule only emboldens the supporters of Al Queda and the Taliban.


Is it in the national interest of the United States to tolerate Musharraf's attempt to destroy his opposition, and the democratic institutions of his country? The answer is an emphatic NO.


If left unchecked, the current crackdown will only result in a bloody civil conflict in Pakistan - possibly even civil war. If this happens, there is no guarantee that the entire Pakistani military will remain loyal to Gen. Musharraf. And any internal rebellion will leave open the unthinkable possibility that the control of Pakistan's small atomic arsenal might become compromised.


But a more probable scenario is the diminished possibility of an open, democratic electoral transition to a representative civilian government that is capable of addressing the myriad of divisions and contradictions in Pakistan. And that would leave the business of government to those political elements in Pakistan with the most guns - and the most money behind them.


It is unthinkable that Muslims, and real democrats of any description, would allow Pakistan to devolve into becoming another Somalia - and in this case, a Somalia with nuclear weapons.


The United States, which has supplied Musharraf with weapons, foreign aid, and international political cover, must not be allowed to remain on the sidelines while things in Pakistan become more bloody and desperate.


If America truly means what it proclaims to the world about respect for democracy and human rights, it must do now what is absolutely necessary to safeguard both.


The United States must immediately halt all military and foreign assistance to the government of Gen. Musharraf, and use all its power and prestige to persuade Gen. Musharraf to resign from office, thereby ending his personal onslaught against popular rule in Pakistan.


As I have stated previously, it is time for Gen. Musharraf to go. And that time is now more urgent than ever.


RELATED


NEW: Thousands Face Down Pakistani Police


Musharraf Imposes Emergency Rule


Text of Emergency Declaration


Timeline: Pakistan Emergency Rule


General Moves Deeper Into Labyrinth


World Leaders Respond (Quotes)


Musharraf Targets Key Opponents


UK Urges Restraint

Bismillah: Assalamo Alikum.


I was surfing on the net as usual to collect some information regarding this topic and I found an interesting Christian website talking about <b>how Jesus pbuh was born</b>!! Here are some quotes.

Quote:290.010.000 Torrey: p287, T:I
Topic 10:How the Holy Spirit Worked in Jesus Christ.


290.010.010 Torrey: p287, T:I, P:1


POINT 10: Jesus Christ was begotten of the Holy Spirit.


Luke 1:35 The angel answered, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God.


In regeneration the believer is begotten of God; Jesus Christ was begotten of God in generation. He is the only begotten Son of God.

Quote:POINT 90: Jesus Christ was raised from the dead by the power of the Holy Spirit.
Romans 8:11 And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit, who lives in you.

Salaam Brothers and Sister


I pray to Allah that may he bless you and bring peace within you. and May Allah forgive me for the GREAT sins that i have commited and that he may grant me heaven one day inshallah.


my brothers and sister i want to know when praying do you have to wear a hat or can you pray with out a hat.

Bismillah


as salam alykom


I was so surprise, upset and amazed when I logged into a paltalk room run by Nazarine. I mean we do disagree certainly on our faith, yes, However, I really want to ask one of them or any other Nazarine, where in Quran or when did they encounter us slandering Essa prayer and peace be upon him, disrespecting his mother or any other Messenger and Prophet. Why all this slander? why all this hatered? Not once that on any Muslim boards which I m on that for example I read something like, pay a dollar and you pin a pin in the coffin of Christianity like I read them saying about Islam. Where did they encounter a Muslim making such comments. Leave alone that Muslims are constantly being accused of haterd and ....etc.


La hawal wala qowata ila billah.


Alhamdulelah I dont meet them either here or on other boards. Let them be restricted to their paltalk rooms.

Are muslim women allowed to remove their facial hairs except their eyebrows?

Bismillah


as salam alykom


I receive the link to this video on an email, it is really worth watching and spreading around.


The film documents how Rumsfeld, together with the White House legal team, were able to convince Congress to approve the use of torture against prisoners of war. Taxi to the Dark Side is the definitive exploration of the introduction of torture as an interrogation technique in U.S. facilities, and the role played by key figures of the Bush Administration in the process.


Over one hundred prisoners have died in suspicious circumstances in U.S. custody during the "war on terror". Taxi to the Dark Side takes an in-depth look at one case: an Afghan taxi driver called Dilawar who was considered an honest and kind man by the people of his rustic village. So when he was detained by the U.S military one afternoon, after picking up three passengers, denizens wondered why this man was randomly chosen to be held in prison, and, especially, without trial?


Five days after his arrest Dilawar died in his Bagram prison cell. His death came within a week of another death of a detainee at Bagram. The conclusion, with autopsy evidence, was that the former taxi driver and the detainee who passed away before him, had died due to sustained injuries inflicted at the prison by U.S. soldiers.


The documentary, by award-winning producer Alex Gibney, carefully develops the last weeks of Dilawar’s life and shows how decisions taken at the pinnacle of power in the Bush Administration led directly to Dilawar’s brutal death.


http://www.informationclearinghouse.info...e18635.htm

Sharh Al Aqeedah Al Wasiteeyah -- by Ibn Uthaimeen


This is a great book. If you want to learn the basics of Islam then this book is a must. The original Al Aqeedah Al Wasiteeyah is a letter from Ibn Taymiyah to a town called Wasit. It's mainly a good batch of verses from the Qur'an, many hadeeths, and a small amount of commentary.


Ibn Uthaimeen, on the other hand, goes deep into explaining everything with great detail. He sometimes spends pages explaining the meanings of a single sentence.


The book focuses on setting a barrier between the true Islam and the innovations that were brought into it. A good portion of the book describes the attributes of Allah (swt). Then it talks about other issues with faith and the stance of Ahlul Sunnah wal Jama'a and compares it to the other sects.


So yeah, even though this book brings up a lot of things that may be basic, I believe that it is necessary for every person that really wants to learn the correct <i>aqeedah</i>.

salam


The Etiquette of Lending Books


AUTHOR: Shaikh Saalih bin 'Abdil-'Azeez Aali Shaikh


SOURCE: Taalib-ul-'Ilmi wal-Kutub" (pg. 11-12)


From the etiquettes related to books, also, is: The manners of lending out books. Giving out books for people to borrow is not allowed unless you are giving them to someone that you trust will care for the books. The reason for this is because you have the most right to your book, unless you find someone else that is in need of the book and who, when he finishes using it, will return it back to you. It is mentioned in the biography of Al-Khateeb Al-Baghdaadee that a man once asked him if he could borrow one of his books, so he replied saying: “You have three days to use it.” The man said: “That is not enough time.” So Al-Khateeb said: “I have counted its pages, so if you want to make a copy of it, then three days is sufficient for you. And if you want to read it, then three days is sufficient for you. And if you want to do more than that with it, then I have the most right to my book.”


This is correct, since in the past I had lent the first volume of a large book consisting of eight volumes to a brother - I don’t want to mention the title of the book, since perhaps he may hear this and think I’m insinuating him - and now nearly twelve years have passed on, and he still has not returned it to me,. And he tells me he doesn’t know where he put it. Similarly, the eighth volume of another set – even though I’m not worried so much over it – however, more than twenty years have passed and until now, he has not given it back. This is why a poet once said:


“Do not lend your books


And make your answer some excuse


Whoever does in fact lend a book,


I swear, he has not done something good.”


Another person said: “The perdition of books is in lending them.”


It was once said to a man from India who had opened up a huge library: “How did you create this library?” He replied: “By borrowing books from people.” He was asked: “How?” So he said: “I borrow a book and don’t return it. This is how I was able to create this library.” The man asked: “Isn’t this a crime against those you borrow from?” He replied: “Whoever lends his books to people is crazy. And whoever gives back what he borrows is even crazier than him.”


This is since souls are attached to books. In his book al-Qawaa’id, while speaking about a principle, Al-Haafidh Ibn Rajab mentioned that there is no capital punishment of cutting the hand for stealing them – i.e. if a person steals a book, then according to some scholars, he does not have to have his hand cut off. This is since there is a doubt in this – i.e. that the truth contained in books is for everyone.


So for example, one of your fellow students or colleagues may get a book and then believe that he has a right to it, especially if the book is a charitable copy or it was given to you as a gift or so on. So this would cause him to take the issue of returning it lightly. He will be lax in giving the book back. and you will be the one who loses out on the book.


Therefore, if you are not sure if the one who is asking to borrow a book from you is serious and will benefit from it in a short amount of days and nights, then do not lend him the book. This is since when you lend your books out to people, you are depriving yourself from their benefit. And not every one that borrows a book can be trusted with it, for how many people have borrowed books and not retuned them!

The Humour and Jest of Rasullah s.a.w and his Sahabah


Asalamualikum


The Humour and Jest of the Prophet and his Sahaba are not things that we come across often, this is due to the utmost worry they had for the Ummah and the Deen, which was their priority however i came across a chapter in Hayatus Sahabah, which was entertaining and also gave an insight and more of an understanding of how the Sahaba R.A approached certain things in life,and how in certain matters things were taken very lightly by them, but in terms of deen they were consistant and strict. We as muslims should aquire this personality. The specific chapter was Humour and jest of Rasullah s.a.w and his Sahaba r.a


Here are some of the Humourous incidents in the lives of Rasullah s.a.w and the Sahaba that i would like to share with my readers, but before doing that i would like to quote a Hadith of the prophet s.a.w:


'Hadrat Abu Hurayrah r.a reports that the Sahaba r.a once asked, "O Rasullah s.a.w you manage to joke with us?" Rasullah s.a.w replied, "however i speak the truth (when i joke)." (Tirmidhi)


Firstly i will add some incidents that occured , which involved the Humour of our Beloved Prophet s.a.w ....


Hadhrat Anas r.a reports that a man once came to Rasullah s.a.w to ask for transport, Rasullah s.a.w said to him, "We shall give you the child of a camel to ride." "O Rasullah s.a.w!" the man said in surprise, "What will i do with a child of a camel (its too small to ride)?" Rasullah s.a.w replied "Is every camel not the child of another?"(Abu Dawood)


Hadhrat Anas r.a reports that Rasullah s.a.w once jokingly called hadhrat Anas r.a. saying, "O two eared one!" (Abu Dawood)


Hadhrat Anas r.a reports that a man from the country side called Zaahir r.a used to give Rasullah s.a.w things from the countryside and when he left, Rasullah s.a.w would give him things from the city. Rasullah s.a.w used to say, "Zahir is our countryside and we are his City"


Although he was not a good looking person, Rasullah s.a.w liked him a great deal. As he was busy selling his wares in the market place one day, Rasullah s.a.w grabbed him from the back (and covered his eyes) so that he could not see. "Release me!" Hadhrat Zaahir shouted, but when he turned and recognised rasullah s.a.w he started pressing his back closer to Rasullah s.a.w's chest. "who will buy this slave?" Rasullah s.a.w announced. "O rasullah !" Hadhrat Zaahir said "by Allah! if tou sell me, you will run at a loss". "Not at all," Rasullah s.a.w corrected, "You are not a loss in the sight of Allah. In Allah's sight, you are expensive" (Tirmidhi)


Hadhrat Nu'maan bin Basheer r.a narrates that when hadhrat Abu Bakr r.a was once about to ask for permission to enter Rasullah s.a.w's room, he heard (his daughter) Hadhrat Aisha r.a raising her voice at Rasullah s.a.w. When he entered, Hadhrat Abu Bakr r.a. grabbed her to give her a saying "Are you raising your voice about that of Allahs Rasool?!" However Rasullah s.a.w stopped him from taking action and Hadhrat Abu Bakr r.a.left in anger.


After Hadhrat Abu Bakr had left, Rasullah s.a.w said to Hazrat Aishah r.a " Now what do you think of me after i rescued you from that man?" It was a few days later that Hadhrat Abu Bakr r.a again sought permission to see Rasullah s.a.w this time he found that the couple had reconciled and Abu Bakr r.a said to them "Now enter me in to your peace as you had entered me in to your war." "We certainly will" Rasullah s.a.w said, "we certainly will" (Abu Dawood)


Hadhrat Aisha r.a. reports, "I once accompanied Rasullah s.a.w on one of his journeys when i was still a slim girl who not put on so much weight. Rasullah s.a.w instructed the others to go ahead and when they did, he said to me "Come! lets have a race." I then beat him in the race. Rasullah s.a.w let the matters rest, until the time came when i had put on some weight and forgotten about the incident. When i the accompinied him on a journey, he again instructed the others to proceed ahead, when they did so, he said to me "come! lets have a race ." This time he beat me and laughed as he said "This is for That" (Ahmed)


Hadhrat Anas bin Malik r.a narrates that rasullah s.a.w was once on a journey with his wives riding in front of him. Adressing the person who was reciting some poems to drive the camel on faster, Rasullah s.a.w said "O Anjasha! shame on you! take it easy with the crystels (the women, do not drive the camel to fast)" (Bukhari)


Hadhrat Hasan reports that an old women came to Rasullah s.a.w with the rquest, "O Rasullah s.a.w Pray to Allah to enter me in to Jannah" adressing her Rasullah s.a.w said, "Old women will not enter Jannah." when the lady went away with tears, Rasullah s.a.w sent someone to give her a message, that she would not enetr Jannah as an old women because Allah says:


"Indeed we have created these Damsels (of jannah) very specially and we have made them all virgins....." (surah Waaqia verse 35,36)