No scholar of Islam or even average Muslim would ever say such words. If you believe that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah, then you must obey him—for he does not command except that which is good. So, even if he tells you to kill, you must— … The story about our prophet Musa [Moses], when al-Khidr killed the boy and Musa said “you killed and you did!” But then he [Khidr] revealed why he killed the boy, and why he punctured the boat. So we cannot distort the facts in order to please the people. Let the people be satisfied with the Truth [Sharia teachings], not the false.
Give me an example, of where an intrinsically Moslem country, is laissez affair, I gave you two, under authoritarian regimes, Libya under Quaddafi with his own original blend of 'herbs and spices' was likewise not Sharia dominant, Benazir Bhutto,
And which examples do you proffer for that argument, Tunisia, under Bourguiba and then Bin Ali, was quite moderate, Ghannouchi's Ennadha is not, Mrchouki (sic) who heads the government comes from a secular party. Same for Morocco, under Prince Mohammed, but you don't think they are legitimate,
No, those were never democratic movements, like the examples I stated. Arabia was not always Wahhabi, although the ouster of the Hashemites, made that prospect very nearly impossible, The ruling class, determines the regime, to large measure, hence Jordan is generally sensible, although one can look at examples, when they have not been,
I put a period, between both ideas, the former illustrated how pervasive, Islamism is in the frequently corrupt, morally lax Mubarak regime, that was then, the liberals, have historically been outnumbered, except in places like Cairo with the referendum, everywhere else the Islamist/Salafi swept the ballot, among the Fellahin,
It is likely the last opportunity that Egypt had for a liberal regime, was probablyin 1925, when Zaghoul the leader of the Wafd, finally came to power, and resigned in the aftermath of the assasination of Brigadier Lee Stack, Mahfouz spends a fair amount of time, on that in his second book, Souief in her era spanning tome, describes a brief period in the 1900s, which ended with the assasination of Prime Miinster Boutros, that offered an opportunity for 'enlightened leadership,
They came from 60 years under a secular nationalist, modified Nasserist perspective, Islamism has expanded it's grip in the public square, since the time that Al Aswani chronicled in his Yacoubian institution, in the early 90s One might think a variation of O'Sullivan's maxim, any institution that is not explicitly anti Islamist, (Salafi/Wahhabi/Tafkiri) will become so,
Yes, just like Charles Colson;
No scholar of Islam or even average Muslim would ever say such words. If you believe that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah, then you must obey him—for he does not command except that which is good. So, even if he tells you to kill, you must— … The story about our prophet Musa [Moses], when al-Khidr killed the boy and Musa said “you killed and you did!” But then he [Khidr] revealed why he killed the boy, and why he punctured the boat. So we cannot distort the facts in order to please the people. Let the people be satisfied with the Truth [Sharia teachings], not the false.
Give me an example, of where an intrinsically Moslem country, is laissez affair, I gave you two, under authoritarian regimes, Libya under Quaddafi with his own original blend of 'herbs and spices' was likewise not Sharia dominant, Benazir Bhutto,
And which examples do you proffer for that argument, Tunisia, under Bourguiba and then Bin Ali, was quite moderate, Ghannouchi's Ennadha is not, Mrchouki (sic) who heads the government comes from a secular party. Same for Morocco, under Prince Mohammed, but you don't think they are legitimate,
No, those were never democratic movements, like the examples I stated. Arabia was not always Wahhabi, although the ouster of the Hashemites, made that prospect very nearly impossible, The ruling class, determines the regime, to large measure, hence Jordan is generally sensible, although one can look at examples, when they have not been,
I put a period, between both ideas, the former illustrated how pervasive, Islamism is in the frequently corrupt, morally lax Mubarak regime, that was then, the liberals, have historically been outnumbered, except in places like Cairo with the referendum, everywhere else the Islamist/Salafi swept the ballot, among the Fellahin,
It is likely the last opportunity that Egypt had for a liberal regime, was probablyin 1925, when Zaghoul the leader of the Wafd, finally came to power, and resigned in the aftermath of the assasination of Brigadier Lee Stack, Mahfouz spends a fair amount of time, on that in his second book, Souief in her era spanning tome, describes a brief period in the 1900s, which ended with the assasination of Prime Miinster Boutros, that offered an opportunity for 'enlightened leadership,
They came from 60 years under a secular nationalist, modified Nasserist perspective, Islamism has expanded it's grip in the public square, since the time that Al Aswani chronicled in his Yacoubian institution, in the early 90s One might think a variation of O'Sullivan's maxim, any institution that is not explicitly anti Islamist, (Salafi/Wahhabi/Tafkiri) will become so,