Bharat Rakshak

Islam is a religion similar to Christianity and Judaism. They all worship the same god and are of the Abrahamic faith.Good Muslims prove that Islam is good
There are no jihadists, just extremists fueled by poverty.“Extremists” cause the violence.The “bad stuff” in the Koran is due to how it is interpreted
Islam must be accommodated in as many ways as possible.One of the proofs of Islam’s greatness is the Islamic Golden Age, thought by some to be humanity’s best daysViolence is perpetrated by Muslims because they are poor and
abused
can’t we all just get along?----
The fact of the matter is that
Mohammed attacked every single neighbor he had. His only success came
through violence. His dying words were to hurt Jews, Christians and all
Kafi rs. Mohammed was Islam and he was never compatible with any Kafi r.
The Big Lie is just that. There is no way to live with Islam. Life with Islam
is a succession of demands. Mohammed never stopped until 100% of his
demands were met. That was life with Mohammed—the Sunna.
Islam is a civilization that is designed to extinguish all Kafi r civilizations
down to their last cultural vestige. Annihilation is Sunna. Mohammed did
not stop until the Kafi rs surrendered to his demands to change the smallest details of their lives into his way of doing. The last 1400 years of history
is proof of the brutal effi ciency of Islamic politics. There has never been
a culture where Islam and Kafi rs existed in long-term peace. After a long
enough time period, Islam takes over the civilization. This is the goal of
Islam
Solution/ Debate etc
In debating about Islam do not engage the others’ arguments on their
points. Instead create a new basis by bringing in facts from Islam’s political nature, Kafi rs, duality and submission.
Instead of resisting your opponents, use the principle of duality to show
both sides of the contradiction. Point out that Islam always has two ways
to treat the Kafi rs and what you want to do is provide the rest of the doctrine that is left out of Offi cial Islam. The apologists and Muslims present
their viewpoint so all you want to do is to show the Kafi r viewpoint.
All of the arguments found here are based on having read the Koran,
Sira, and Hadith. You cannot argue about Islam, if you do not know Islamic doctrine.

can you read arabic?
You may be asked if you can read Arabic. The implication is that Arabic
is a unique language that can’t be translated and therefore, how could you
know what you are talking about? First, the Koran claims to be a universal
message for all humanity for all times. If the message is universal, then it
must be understood by all. If everybody cannot understand the message,
then by defi nition it is not universal. So, which is it?
Another thing to consider is that over half of the Koran is about Kafi rs
and politics. Do you really think that a political message about a Kafi r
cannot be understood by the Kafi r? If so, what is that message that cannot
be understood?
Also, it must be made clear which Arabic is being spoken about. The
Arabic of the Koran is classical Arabic which is about as similar to modern
Arabic as the English of Chaucer is to modern English. Said in another
way, not even a modern Arab can read classical Arabic. It is estimated that
fewer than a thousand scholars who read classical Arabic can compose a
paragraph in classical Arabic script on a random topic.
And what about the billion-plus Muslims who don’t understand modern Arabic? If it is necessary to understand classical Arabic to understand
what the Koran is about, then how can all those non-Arabic-speaking
Muslims understand the Koran? And if they cannot understand the Koran, how can they be Muslims?
hadith—some of those aren’t realIf you quote a hadith to a Muslim and they don’t like it, they will say,
“Well, some of those hadiths are not acceptable (or not true or some other
disclaimer).” Actually, when Muslims say this, they are practicing taqiyya,
sacred deception and duality. If it is a hadith, then a Muslim cannot be
denied the right to follow it. The Hadith are Sunna, the perfect example
of Mohammed.

1. Economic aid = more jijya payments
2. Education = madrassa education
3. Gender equality = 1 wimmen == 1/4 abdul
4. Rule of law = sharia

ramana wrote:Jhujar, The psychology of the grand poohbah vis-a-vis succesful women is given in the Guardian article posted in GDF.

ramana wrote:Jhujar, The psychology of the grand poohbah vis-a-vis succesful women is given in the Guardian article posted in GDF.

ramana wrote:

ramana wrote:Jhujar, The psychology of the grand poohbah vis-a-vis succesful women is given in the Guardian article posted in GDF.

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 7#p1355907

devesh wrote:that sheik Munir in the video is basically confessing to molesting a young girl of 13 or 14 when he says he "took something out of the girl's vagina". only in Islam will this kind of sh** sell on national TV without repercussions...

The National Council of Resistance of Iran Foreign Affairs Committee

A publication of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the National Council of Resistance of Iran.

Correspondence address: B.P. 18, 95430 Auvers-sur-Oise, France

Chapter Two - Prime Victims

Equality does not take precedence over justice... Justice does not mean that all laws must be the same for men and women. One of the mistakes that Westerners make is to forget this.... The difference in the stature, vitality, voice, development, muscular quality and physical strength of men and women shows that men are stronger and more capable in all fields... Men's brains are larger.... Men incline toward reasoning and rationalism while women basically tend to be emotional... These differences affect the delegation of responsibilities, duties and rights.

Hashemi Rafsanjani, June 7, 1986(1)

This medieval theocracy's first and foremost victims have been women. Khomeini and his heirs view women as sub-human, and deny their fundamental rights. Indeed, misogyny is the underpinning of the velayat-e faqih mentality. Under the mullahs' rule, discrimination against women was institutionalized, and violence against them became the norm. In every aspect of life, women were doubly oppressed. The economy was no exception.

While poverty affects households as a whole, because of gender-based discrimination, Iranian women bear the brunt of the burden. Their plight is aggravated by an unjust legal system, which deprives women of their share of capital earned during marriage; the absence of a social welfare system geared to their needs; and a lack of economic opportunities. This situation has had grave consequences for the society. Infanticide and abandonment of children by mothers crushed under the weight of severe poverty have become common in today's Iran.

Persistent and chronic poverty among women has forced multitudes into begging or pick-pocketing.

While no sector of Iranian society is immune to the mullahs' oppression, the sharpest edge of this misogynous rule's savagery is directed at Iranian women.

The clerics have systematically launched one crackdown after another on women, arresting, beating, flogging and torturing tens of thousands on the pretext of combating mal-veiling, enjoining good and prohibiting vice.(the mullahs are the ROP guardians- they follow the dictates of rop ) This terror is extended into every household through severe restrictions on women, and vicious punishments for infractions. Regardless of economic or educational level, ethnic or religious background, political or personal outlook, no Iranian family can escape the pervasive threat of violence to its female members.

Violence against women is the only sphere where there is no discrimination between men and women. If anything, there is a policy of reverse discrimination, and women are treated more viciously. The mullahs show a particular vengeance towards women who become politically active and join the resistance. Tens of thousands have been arrested on political charges and severely tortured and executed. Many have died under torture. One method is particularly revealing: the Pasdaran (Guards Corps) fire a single bullet into the womb of the condemned women political prisoners, leaving them to bleed to death in a slow process of excruciating pain. Even pregnant women have not been spared. Hundreds, including Massoumeh Qajar-Azdanloo, Azar Reza'i, Zahra Nozari, Nayyereh Khosravi and Parvin Mostofi, have been executed with their unborn children.

Women political prisoners are kept in so-called "residential units" (cement cages, 50 cm square), with their heads cramped down onto their knees, for months at a time. They are beaten regularly, up to 50 times a day. Another common torture of women political prisoners, besides systematic flogging, is suspension for hours from the ceiling by the hands, or upside down, by the feet. In some cases, the torture leads first to paralysis, then to the woman's death.

According to a "religious" decree, virgin women prisoners must as a rule be raped before their execution, "lest they go to Paradise." Therefore, the night before execution, a Guard rapes the condemned woman. After her execution, the religious judge at the prison writes out a marriage certificate and sends it to the victim's family, along with a box of sweets.

Note (1) of Article 102 of the penal code on Ta'azirat (penitences) states: "Women who appear on streets and in public without the (prescribed) `Islamic hijab' will be condemned to penitences of 74 strikes of the lash." As reported by the state-controlled newspaper Kayhan on March 30, 1983, the regime's Prosecutor General announced that if an improperly veiled woman is arrested, there is no need for a court, since the crime is established. Public floggings of women in the streets are common.

Vice squads regularly mount crackdowns against women; some include roadblocks to enforce the dress codes

Besides the "normal" penalty of 74 lashes, female government employees who violate the dress code are liable to temporary suspension from work for up to two years; expulsion and suspension from the public service, and indefinite deprivation of any employment in the public service. According to the state-controlled daily, Ressalat, on May 23, 1991, the head of the Security Forces' Politico-Ideological Bureau announced: "Employees whose wives appear in public improperly veiled are considered to have violated the administrative law." This means that the woman's husband is also summoned at his workplace for administrative violation. In this way, the husband, too, becomes part of the "vice patrol," controlling the behavior of his wife for fear of losing his job.

The penalty for adultery under Article 83 of the penal code, called the Law of Hodoud is flogging (100 strikes of the lash) for unmarried male and female offenders. Married offenders are liable to stoning regardless of their gender, but the method laid down for a man involves his burial up to his waist, and for a woman up to her neck (article 102). The law provides that if a person who is to be stoned manages to escape, he or she will be allowed to go free. Since it is easier for a man to escape, this discrimination literally becomes a matter of life and death.

Article 104 of the Law of Hodoud provides that the stones should not be so large that a person dies after being hit with two of them, nor so small as to be defined as pebbles, but must cause severe injury. This makes it clear that the purpose of stoning is to inflict grievous pain on the victim, in a process leading to his or her slow death.

Most of the time, the regime's authorities force the victim's family members, including children, to watch the stoning to death of their loved one, and in some instances, even when the woman miraculously managed to escape, contrary to the regime's own law, she was recaptured and either stoned again or killed on the spot.

The leader of alleged suicide bomb plot said non-believers deserved to be attacked because they “have sex like donkeys”, orgies and took drugs, a court heard. Ifan Naseer said the whole world was **** and people deserved to be terrorized. The al-Qaeda inspired gang is accused of plotting to use eight suicide bombers detonating rucksacks packed with explosives in crowded places to cause “mass death” and carnage on the streets of Britain. Naseer, 31, Irfan Khalid, 27, and Ashik Ali, 27, all unemployed from Birmingham, are the alleged “senior members” of the group and were among 12 people arrested and charged last year. They all deny the charges against them.

The Saudi king’s **** habits
US says King Abdullah older than previously assumed, was still using **** at age 92

Ynet
Published: 09.07.11, 23:46 / Israel News


Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah was still using **** pills at the grand old age of 92, according to a classified US State Department document published by WikiLeaks this week. According to a telegram sent from the American embassy in Riyadh on July 13, 2008, the king is also about 10 years older than what was previously assumed.

The telegram was based on information provided by a Western medical source that had frequent contact with members of the Saudi royal family. According to the telegram, this source arrived in Saudi Arabia in order to examine one of King Abdullah’s four wives, but received the king’s medical file by mistake.


According to the file, King Abdullah was born in 1916. Even though he was 92 at the time, the report noted that he was still a heavy smoker, received hormone shots regularly, and was using ****. The telegram noted that the Saudi royal family always made sure not to provide information about the king’s medical condition or age. The US embassy added that according to past estimates, King Abdullah’s age was in the 82-87 range. However, if the newly released figures are correct, he is much older than previously assumed.

On Friday, Princess Sara’s lawyers notified the Home Office of her intention to seek asylum. Ministers must assess the truth of the allegations and decide whether to offer her a safe haven – a diplomatic dilemma because Saudi authorities want her to return.

Princess Sara has lived in the UK since 2007 after she fell out with her 80-year-old father, Prince Talal bin Abdulaziz al Saud, known as The Red Prince.

She says of her relationship with him: “Everything goes back to a certain aspect that I don’t discuss in public. Something happened with my father and he didn’t take it lightly. He retaliated against me and wanted to crush me. I had been his closest; I had been his favourite. It shook my world.”

Newspaper slams 'dancing' Saudis abroad
By Staff
Published Thursday, February 03, 2011

Sharq Arabic language paper said many young Saudi who travel on holidays abroad dump their local traditions and plunge into obscene parties, night clubs and mixing with the other sex. (AGENCIES)

A Saudi newspaper Thursday devoted its main page to launch a virulent attack on nationals who travel abroad and indulge in mixed-gender parties, dancing and spending their nights at pubs.

Sharq Arabic language paper said many young Saudi who travel on holidays abroad dump their local traditions and plunge into obscene parties, night clubs and mixing with the other sex. The paper ran the story along with several pictures and films showing Saudi girls with boys and other local men and women dancing in parties. One picture showed a Saudi scattering money notes on the head of a singer in a pub in Syria.

“Many of those young men and women just break their country’s traditions and decent religion once they are out of Saudi Arabia as if those traditions are confined only to home not abroad,” it said.

“Many Saudi female students have been seen mixing with men….many Saudi women have been seen with unveiled faces filled with make up in the streets of Cairo and Malaysia…many Saudi families have been seen at night clubs…many Saudi young men have been seen at pubs and obscene parties….and many Saudi women have been seen dancing in public place.”

devesh wrote:especially the educated suited, booted variety still dream of "Islamic Republic of Deccan". don't believe nonsense about "education" and "literacy" and "economy" and other assorted nonsense. the "professional" and "developed" Muslim class in Hyderabad is Islamist to the core, regardless of what outer garb of "development" they wear. even in US, people from this class readily and happily accept "invitation" into Paki/BD ummah groups. for all intents and purposes, even people who grew up there and spent majority of lives there will drop the "Indian" out of "Indian Muslim" very quickly. seen it happen. interacted with many such types and thoroughly disgusted. the Islamist core thought process of the Hyd Muslim elite has survived. in the aftermath of 1948, letting the Owaisis and M-i-M establish themselves was a major blunder. the military collapse of the Nizam was ideal time to wipe out such thinking. but the bad seeds were once again given shelter and this perennial thorn refuses to die. the mistake should not be repeated in the future. scattering the Islamists in and around Hyd to the four winds should be part of the minimum required agenda for the nation.

Jhujar wrote:http://dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?pa ... 2012_pg3_5
PakiJaan yeh Hai Islam Orr Hamko Maloom Hai

For sake of clarity a full paragraph from Will Durant’s voluminous Story of Civilization is reproduced here from which OMJ picked up a quotation: “Writing continued, even to the nineteenth century, to play a very small part in Indian education. Perhaps it was not to the interest of the priests that the sacred or scholastic texts should become an open secret to all. As far as we can trace Indian history, we find a system of education, always in the hands of the clergy, open at first only to the sons of Brahmans, then spreading its privileges from caste to caste until in our time it excludes only the Untouchables. Every Hindu village had its schoolmaster, supported out of the public funds; in Bengal alone, before the coming of the British, there were some 80,000 native schools — one to every four hundred population. The percentage of literacy under Ashoka was apparently higher than in India today.” Will Durant in this section was discussing the education system in ancient India but OMJ picked up a Bengal-related sentence and forcibly linked it with the Mughal period to create a misleading impression.Intellectual honesty demanded that OMJ should have also told his readers what Will Durant wrote in the same book about the Muslim rulers in India. For instance, Durant writes about our hero idol-smasher: “Each winter Mahmud descended into India, filled his treasure chest with spoils, and amused his men with full freedom to pillage and kill; each spring he returned to his capital richer than before.” We are told that the idol breaker would sometimes spare the population of the ravaged cities and “took them home to be sold as slaves; but so great was the number of such captives that after some years no one could be found to offer more than a few shillings for a slave.” Similarly referring to other rulers of the pre-Mughal era, Durant writes, “There was constantly in front of his royal pavilion and his Civil Court a mound of dead bodies and a heap of corpses, while the sweepers and executioners were wearied out by their work of dragging the victims and putting them to death in crowds.” OMJ fondly mentions Firoz Shah about whom Durant writes, “Firoz Shah invaded Bengal, offered a reward for every Hindu head, paid for 180,000 of them, raided Hindu villages for slaves.” Similarly, Sultan Ahmad Shah is said to have feasted for three days whenever the number of defenceless Hindus slain in his territories in one day reached 20,000. Based on such numerous examples, Durant says, “The Mohammedan Conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilisation is a precarious thing, whose delicate complex of order and liberty, culture and peace may at any time be overthrown by barbarians invading from without or multiplying within.” Durant in his work appreciates the art and sculpture of India. However, he laments, “We shall never be able to do justice to Indian art, for ignorance and fanaticism have destroyed its greatest achievements, and have half ruined the rest.”
OMJ in his concluding lines makes a passing reference to Lord Cornwallis, accusing him of establishing a religious seminary in 1781 to destroy educational system of Muslim rulers. Interestingly, in 1781, Major General Cornwallis was in America with a mixed record against rebel colonists culminating in the capitulation of his force at Yorktown and came to India in 1786. Cornwallis, however, is credited with establishing an institution that OMJ never found detestable: the Indian Civil Service. Hope our former deputy commissioner would be more careful with both dates and facts of history.

Three of the world’s oldest mosques are about to be destroyed as Saudi Arabia embarks on a multi-billion-pound expansion of Islam’s second holiest site. Work on the Masjid an-Nabawi in Medina, where the Prophet Mohamed is buried, will start once the annual Hajj pilgrimage ends next month. When complete, the development will turn the mosque into the world’s largest building, with the capacity for 1.6 million worshippers.

But concerns have been raised that the development will see key historic sites bulldozed. Anger is already growing at the kingdom’s apparent disdain for preserving the historical and archaeological heritage of the country’s holiest city, Mecca. Most of the expansion of Masjid an-Nabawi will take place to the west of the existing mosque, which holds the tombs of Islam’s founder and two of his closest companions, Abu Bakr and Umar.

Just outside the western walls of the current compound are mosques dedicated to Abu Bakr and Umar, as well as the Masjid Ghamama, built to mark the spot where the Prophet is thought to have given his first prayers for the Eid festival. The Saudis have announced no plans to preserve or move the three mosques, which have existed since the seventh century and are covered by Ottoman-era structures, or to commission archaeological digs before they are pulled down, something that has caused considerable concern among the few academics who are willing to speak out in the deeply authoritarian kingdom.

“No one denies that Medina is in need of expansion, but it’s the way the authorities are going about it which is so worrying,” says Dr Irfan al-Alawi of the Islamic Heritage Research Foundation. “There are ways they could expand which would either avoid or preserve the ancient Islamic sites but instead they want to knock it all down.” Dr Alawi has spent much of the past 10 years trying to highlight the destruction of early Islamic sites.

With cheap air travel and booming middle classes in populous Muslim countries within the developing world, both Mecca and Medina are struggling to cope with the 12 million pilgrims who visit each year – a number expected to grow to 17 million by 2025. The Saudi monarchy views itself as the sole authority to decide what should happen to the cradle of Islam. Although it has earmarked billions for an enormous expansion of both Mecca and Medina, it also sees the holy cities as lucrative for a country almost entirely reliant on its finite oil wealth.

Heritage campaigners and many locals have looked on aghast as the historic sections of Mecca and Medina have been bulldozed to make way for gleaming shopping malls, luxury hotels and enormous skyscrapers. The Washington-based Gulf Institute estimates that 95 per cent of the 1,000-year-old buildings in the two cities have been destroyed in the past 20 years.


In Mecca, the Masjid al-Haram, the holiest site in Islam and a place where all Muslims are supposed to be equal, is now overshadowed by the Jabal Omar complex, a development of skyscraper apartments, hotels and an enormous clock tower. To build it, the Saudi authorities destroyed the Ottoman era Ajyad Fortress and the hill it stood on. Other historic sites lost include the Prophet’s birthplace – now a library – and the house of his first wife, Khadijah, which was replaced with a public toilet block.

Neither the Saudi Embassy in London nor the Ministry for Foreign Affairs responded to requests for comment when The Independent contacted them this week. But the government has previously defended its expansion plans for the two holy cities as necessary. It insists it has also built large numbers of budget hotels for poorer pilgrims, though critics point out these are routinely placed many miles away from the holy sites.

Until recently, redevelopment in Medina has pressed ahead at a slightly less frenetic pace than in Mecca, although a number of early Islamic sites have still been lost. Of the seven ancient mosques built to commemorate the Battle of the Trench – a key moment in the development of Islam – only two remain. Ten years ago, a mosque which belonged to the Prophet’s grandson was dynamited. Pictures of the demolition that were secretly taken and smuggled out of the kingdom showed the religious police celebrating as the building collapsed.

The disregard for Islam’s early history is partly explained by the regime’s adoption of Wahabism, an austere and uncompromising interpretation of Islam that is vehemently opposed to anything which might encourage Muslims towards idol worship.

In most of the Muslim world, shrines have been built. Visits to graves are also commonplace. But Wahabism views such practices with disdain. The religious police go to enormous lengths to discourage people from praying at or visiting places closely connected to the time of the Prophet while powerful clerics work behind the scenes to promote the destruction of historic sites.

Dr Alawi fears that the redevelopment of the Masjid an-Nabawi is part of a wider drive to shift focus away from the place where Mohamed is buried. The spot that marks the Prophet’s tomb is covered by a famous green dome and forms the centrepiece of the current mosque. But under the new plans, it will become the east wing of a building eight times its current size with a new pulpit. There are also plans to demolish the prayer niche at the centre of mosque. The area forms part of the Riyadh al-Jannah (Garden of Paradise), a section of the mosque that the Prophet decreed especially holy..

“Their excuse is they want to make more room and create 20 spaces in a mosque that will eventually hold 1.6 million,” says Dr Alawi. “It makes no sense. What they really want is to move the focus away from where the Prophet is buried.”

A pamphlet published in 2007 by the Ministry of Islamic Affairs – and endorsed by the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia, Abdulaziz al Sheikh – called for the dome to be demolished and the graves of Mohamed, Abu Bakr and Umar to be flattened. Sheikh Ibn al-Uthaymeen, one of the 20th century’s most prolific Wahabi scholars, made similar demands.

“Muslim silence over the destruction of Mecca and Medina is both disastrous and hypocritical,” says Dr Alawi. “The recent movie about the Prophet Mohamed caused worldwide protests... and yet the destruction of the Prophet’s birthplace, where he prayed and founded Islam has been allowed to continue without any criticism.”

Mecca and Medina in numbers

12m The number of people who visit Mecca and Medina every year

3.4m The number of Muslims expected to perform Hajj (pilgrimage) this year

60,000 The current capacity of the Masjid an-Nabawi mosque

1.6m The projected capacity of the mosque after expansion

Nearly half of 600 Muslim-American citizens polled who plan to vote in the 2012 presidential election believe parodies of Muhammad should be prosecuted criminally in the U.S., and one in eight say the offense is so serious violators should face the death penalty.
...
The poll also found 40 percent of Muslims in America believe they should not be judged by U.S. law and the Constitution, but by Shariah standards.

“Almost half of those Muslims surveyed – an astonishing 46 percent – said they believe those Americans who offer criticism or parodies of Islam should face criminal charges,” said pollster Fritz Wenzel in an analysis of the survey’s results.

“Even more shocking: One in eight respondents said they think those Americans who criticize or parody Islam should face the death penalty, while another nine percent said they were unsure on the question,” he said.

Wenzel said even the 9 percent “undecided” on that particular question is alarming.

“Seldom in survey research does a response of ‘not sure’ carry such significance, but the response to this question certainly is a surprise, given the severity of the question, and offers insight into the conflict that some Muslims appear to face in making the ideals under-girding American society fit into their religious lifestyle,” he said.

Wenzel’s poll said 7.2 percent of the respondents said they “strongly agree” with the idea of execution for those who parody Islam, and another 4.3 percent said they somewhat agree.

While 80 percent said that they somewhat or strongly disagree with the idea, when those who said they were not sure are added, one in five Muslims across America cannot say they believe Christians or others who criticize Muhammad should be spared the death penalty.

More Muslim women (10.4 percent) than Muslim men (4.9 percent) said they strongly agree with the idea, while 12.4 percent of the women and 7.1 percent of the men were uncertain about the issue involving Muhammad.

Four in 10 said Muslims in America should not be judged by U.S. law and the Constitution, but by Islamic Shariah law.
....

“While 39 percent of Muslims said they believe existing U.S. courts should consult Shariah law when adjudicating cases involving Muslims, a plurality of 45 percent said they do not agree with this idea. Asked if the U.S. should establish separate courts based solely on Shariah law to adjudicate cases involving Muslim, 21 percent said it should. Two-thirds of respondents – 66 percent – said that separate courts are not necessary to adjudicate Muslims.”

While 9 of 10 of the Muslim respondents said they agree with the First Amendment, they are also in conflict with it, Wenzel said, citing evidence in answers to “another question in the survey which found that one-third of Muslims – 32 percent – believe Shariah should be the supreme law of the land in the United States,” Wenzel said.

“Another shocking finding from the survey is how Muslims view the religious freedoms of Christians. Asked whether U.S. citizens who are Christians have the right to evangelize Muslims to consider other faiths, just 30 percent agreed Christians have such a right. Another 42 percent said they do not have such a right, while 28 percent said they were unsure on the question.”

One in five say Muslim men should be allowed to follow their religion in America and have more than one wife, and 58 percent said criticism of their religion or of Muhammad should not be allowed under the Constitution.

While 43 percent said they disagreed with the idea of Christians evangelizing Muslims, another 27 percent said they were undecided. Only 19 percent said they “strongly agree” with the idea that Americans have a right to invite Muslims to consider another faith.

Nearly one in three said Israel either has no right to exist or they were uncertain whether it does.

Carl wrote: Suhail Khan was the son of Indian Moslem parents who had migrated to the US. Huma is the daughter of an Indo-Pak Moslem couple who had migrated to the US. In both cases, the parents were very actively involved with the Ikhwan. the kids were groomed as star children from the very beginning. In both cases the parents and children were handpicked by Saudis.

Haji Ali dargah in Mumbai shuts door on women

Edited by Ashish Mukherjee | Updated: November 06, 2012 08:32 IST

Mumbai: Trustees of Mumbai's Haji Ali dargah, the iconic Sufi shrine visited by thousands every year and immortalised in the movies, has shut the door on women.

The Haji Ali Dargah Trust says it's "un-Islamic under the Sharia" for women to visit graves and its decision is final.

The trust says women are free to be within the dargah's compound but cannot enter the sanctum sanctorum that houses the tomb of 15th century Sufi saint Pir Haji Ali Shah Bukhari.

"They can read their prayers, do namaaz and offer shawls and flowers. We are only requesting our sisters not to enter inside the dargah," says Rizwan Merchant, a trustee and noted criminal lawyer. "Women will not be allowed inside the sanctum sanctorum."

The dargah is located on a bed of rocks 500 yards into the Arabian Sea and off the coast of Worli in south central Mumbai.

The issue has been raging for the past six months and has started to spark off protests now. Many are furious and have called the trust's decision regressive.

"If Islamic scholars have issued a fatwa, in accordance with the Islamic law of Sharia, and have demanded that women not allowed in dargahs, then we have only made a correction," says Mr Merchant.

RoyG wrote:

Haji Ali dargah in Mumbai shuts door on women

Edited by Ashish Mukherjee | Updated: November 06, 2012 08:32 IST

Mumbai: Trustees of Mumbai's Haji Ali dargah, the iconic Sufi shrine visited by thousands every year and immortalised in the movies, has shut the door on women.

The Haji Ali Dargah Trust says it's "un-Islamic under the Sharia" for women to visit graves and its decision is final.

The trust says women are free to be within the dargah's compound but cannot enter the sanctum sanctorum that houses the tomb of 15th century Sufi saint Pir Haji Ali Shah Bukhari.

"They can read their prayers, do namaaz and offer shawls and flowers. We are only requesting our sisters not to enter inside the dargah," says Rizwan Merchant, a trustee and noted criminal lawyer. "Women will not be allowed inside the sanctum sanctorum."

The dargah is located on a bed of rocks 500 yards into the Arabian Sea and off the coast of Worli in south central Mumbai.

The issue has been raging for the past six months and has started to spark off protests now. Many are furious and have called the trust's decision regressive.

"If Islamic scholars have issued a fatwa, in accordance with the Islamic law of Sharia, and have demanded that women not allowed in dargahs, then we have only made a correction," says Mr Merchant.

http://www.ndtv.com/article/cities/haji ... eststories

Muslims in India continuing on their puritanical journey.

....
In my view all Sunni Islam will get Wahabised. The reason is its an Arabist revivial in Islam, after the loss of control after Persia fell to Islamic political power. The Sufi strain was developed to Islamise the Turks and with Ottomon decline, meaning Sufis on the wane, we see rise of Arabist Islam(Wahabi) in Arabia and in parts of North India(Deobandi). So in the big picture what we see are a hammer (Wahabi) and anvil (Deobandi) approach to re-Arabise Islam. The Deobandi anvil prevents the adherents to escape the Wahabi hammer to the Indic stream. The West sees this as a good thing for they fear Arab nationalism based on modernity and KSA is under their umbrella aka chaatra chaaya. Its the old Wilfrid Scawen Blunt plan and all this was before oil was found in Arabian peninsula.