PDA

Bekijk Volledige Versie : Hadith and Current Situation....?



Wizdom
22-11-03, 20:37
The Current Situation & Prophecies of the Holy Prophet
The attacks of 11th September, 01 on New York and Washington have not only jolted the Americans and it’s allies, the events have militarily pitched the entire community of the non believers of the world against the Muslim Ummah and in particular against Osama Bin Ladin and the Taliban.

Both Osama and the Taliban have been declared terrorists without providing any evidence and every effort is in hand to annihilate them. In this context thinking men are asking as to why these atrocities are being perpetrated against them?
Why Muslim rulers have joined hands with the non-believers? What is the underlying meaning and implication of such elaborate and destructive military preparations, when the aim is only to capture Osama and his colleagues?

Prophecies made about the last days of the Holy Prophet are proving true with regard to the events of September 11, 2001 and the days after.

At the time, when the Muslim Ummah will have abundance of wealth, gold and silver, the Muslims will be extremely belittled, weak and helpless. The enemy nations will invite each other to pounce upon them as hungry people invite one another for food.

The Sahabah (R.A) asked with utter worry, "O Prophet of Allah! Would we be very few in number?"

Prophet Muhammad (S) replied: "No! You’d be as great in quantity as the foam of the sea is, seen wherever the eye can reach. But you’ll be overtaken by ‘wahn’."

The Sahabah (R.A) asked, "O Prophet of Allah! What is ‘wahn’?"

He (S) replied: "Love of this world and fear of death!"

You’ll join hands with a Christian group and war with another. You’ll gain victory. At that time, you will be present in a plain of great mountains with plenty of trees.
In the meantime, the Christians will raise the crucifix and refer the victory to it. At this, a Muslim will become angry, and will pull the crucifix down, at which, the Christians will unite breaking all treaties with the Muslims. (Note: The Hindus have announced the breaking of all the treaties signed with Pakistan.)

The Christians will demand their wanted people, to which the Muslims will answer: "By Allah! They are our brothers. We will never hand them over." This will start the war. One-third Muslims will run away. Their ‘Tawbah’ (Repentance) will never be accepted. One-third will be killed. They will be the best 'Shaheed' (martyrs) near Allah. The remaining one-third will gain victory, until, under the leadership of Imam Mehdi, they will fight against Kufr (non-belivers).

This group will belong to Khurasan (ancient name for Afghanistan). They will be wearing black turbans.

People will rise up from the East who will keep on coming forward, trampling the ground under the feet, to the aid of Imam Mahdi (Alayhis-Salaam) to help establish his government. (Ibn Majah)

From Khurasan will emerge black flags, whom none will be able to turn back (and they, the flag bearers, will continue moving forward) till they reach Illya (Jerusalem) and embed their flags into its earth (Tirmizi)

In the era preceding Qeyamah the Christians will control/govern the whole world. The Christians will reach Khyber. (Place in present day Saudi close to Madina. US forces are already positioned there) (Hadith quoted in Bab-al-Qeyamah by Muhaddith Shah Rafee-ud-din RA)

If we were to take the Prophet's (peace be upon him) Hadith and his predictions into account and then measure them up to current world conditions it would become apparent that they fit perfectly into what He (peace be upon him) prophesized:

Today’s Muslims have an excess of wealth.

Muslim’s have no respect and are seemingly helpless in front of their enemy Christian countries. They are compelled to collaborate with the Anti-Muslim countries in attacking a Muslim State implementing the Law of Quran and Sunnah.
We are suffering from "Wahan". We crave materialism and are terrified of death.
With the help of Americans, the Muslims defeated Russian Christians in Afghanistan. Muslims sacrificed 1,500,000 lives to attain success in the war but the Christian power, that is the US, claimed this victory for itself and became the only superpower (after the USSR’s downfall). It began to busy itself in ungratefully trying to subjugate the entire world to its recently initiated New World Order
The land of large hills and green tree is more than obviously Khurasan, Itself Afghanistan. (As previously mentioned by the translator) the land of Khurasan in the time of the prophet (peace be upon him) included Afghanistan, Iran and the Northern Provinces of Pakistan.

The whole world and the Muslims in specific have come under the sway of the Christians. The Arabian Peninsula’s wealth of Oil lies in the clutches of a Christian (America)

From an area close to Madina Al Munawwara all the way to Khyber, Christian (American) Soldiers have opened up military bases. Behind these Christians the real hand in the building and functioning of these bases lie in the hands of the Jews. According to Iqbal (A famous poet of the Asian Subcontinent) "The veins and life of a European (Christian) lie in the claws of the Jews" Currently the real economic might and military symbol of the Cross-were the tall buildings of World Trade Center and Pentagon, which stand, demolished.

In Recent times, the signs of the Crosses societal grandeur and military might were the World Trade Center and Pentagon. Both were taken into the clutches of annihilation. (As previously mentioned there is no proof whatsoever that this was even carried out by the Muslims. Since America seems so adamant on blaming Muslims it does prove a convincing argument.) The whole Christian world has ganged up against Afghan Muslims in order to destroy them. The Muslim Ummah is agitating against the Christian world but Ummah’s rulers are providing all kinds of facilities to the Jews and Christians.

The non-believers are demanding a couple of Arabs whereas Muslims are declining to hand them over the required persons. Consequently, the Muslims of Afghanistan have been declared terrorists.

President Bush in his address to America Raised his hands and said that he was going to wage a crusade against terrorism. The US claims Muslim Osama Bin Ladin and his Al Qaeda group are terrorists who were involved in the 11th September bombing. Thus far they have not been able to provide a shred of conclusive evidence to prove their claims. When asked what proof America had against Bin Ladin, the US Secretary of State, Colin Powell had to admit that the "US did not even have circumstantial evidence!" America is also waging a "crusade" against the puritan Islamic Taliban regime. In effect Bush has raised to wage a Christian Holy War against any person who opts to follow Islam. In doing so he has fulfilled the prophecy of Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him) when He (peace be upon him said)" a Christian person will raise the cross and ascribe his victory to it. Bin Ladin responded to Bush’s statement saying "It is a certain fact that Bush carried the cross high Whoever stands behind Bush has committed and act that stands as an annulment of their Islam". In saying so he fulfilled the second part of the prophet’s Hadith,that, a Muslim will get angry and that he will break the sign of grandeur and might associated to the Cross. Bin Ladin finished his announcement saying "Fear Alllah, O Muslims and rise to support your Religion, Islam is calling you, O Muslims, O Muslims, O Muslims. Alllah Bear Witness that I have conveyed the Message. Alllah Bear Witness That I have conveyed the Message, Allah Bear Witness that I have conveyed the Message" Wake up O Muslim!"

Rasool-ul-lah (peace be upon him) said they would break several treaties…Professor Francis A. Boyle (University of Illinois, College of Law Qualifications as an Expert on International Law Doctor of Law (1976) from Harvard Law School. Master's Degree (1978) and Ph.D. (1983) from Harvard University, in political science specializing in international relations and international politics) writes: "Indeed, there are a good 12-13 treaties out there that deal with various components and aspects of what people generally call international terrorism. That could have been used and relied upon by the Bush administration to deal with this issue. But they rejected the entire approach and called it an act of war. They invoked the rhetoric deliberately of Pearl Harbor. December 7,1941.
It was a conscience decision to escalate the stakes, to escalate the perception of the American people as to what is going on here. And of course the implication here is that if this is an act of war then you don't deal with it by means of international treaties and agreements. You deal with by means of military force. You go to war. So a decision was made very early in the process. We were going to abandon – junk – ignore the entire framework of international treaties and agreements that had been established for 25 years to deal with these types of problems and basically go to war. An act of war has a formal meaning. It means an attack by one state against another state. Which of course is what happened on December 7, 1941. But not on September 11, 2001.""

Non-Muslim powers have asked the Muslims to hand over the Arab people whose custody they (the Non-Muslims) desire but the Muslim reply is that we will not hand over our brothers to you. On this very basis they have been branded terrorists and preparations are being made round the clock for an all out war against them. And the American Government has labeled this (as mentioned before) a war of the Cross.

These are the very warriors of Khurasan who wear Black Turbans on their heads and they are called the Taliban

The Real Job To Be Done

All signs and indications point to the advent of an extremely harsh long and daunting war that the Prophet (peace be upon him) referred to being "Al Mulhima al Uzma". (Mulhaima: Fierce Battle; Uzma: The Greatest of all) In the Bible this battle has been referred to being Armageddon. The Prophet (peace be upon him) described the horrifying scenario. "That a bird would start flying from the East and would reach the West, but, there would be so many corpses littered on the ground that there would not be any place for it to land and it would die (from lack of a resting place) (khurasaan.com: see article from the bbc 'Birds missing after US bombing')

ZbaqZbaq
22-11-03, 20:53
5:109.......Gedenkt de dag, waarop Allah de boodschappers zal verzamelen en zeggen: "Hoe werd gij aangenomen?" Zij zullen zeggen: "Wij hebben geen kennis, Gij alleen zijt de Oerkenner van het verborgene."

Yawma yajmaAAu Allahu alrrusula fayaqoolu matha ojibtum qaloo la AAilma lana innaka anta AAallamu alghuyoobi



7:188........Zeg: "Ik heb buiten hetgeen Allah wil, geen macht over goed of kwaad voor mijzelf. En als ik het onzienlijke kende zou ik een overvloed van goed hebben bemachtigd en het kwade zou mij niet hebben gedeerd. Ik ben slechts een waarschuwer en een drager van goede tijding voor een volk dat gelooft."

Qul la amliku linafsee nafAAan wala darran illa ma shaa Allahu walaw kuntu aAAlamu alghayba laistakthartu mina alkhayri wama massaniya alssoo-o in ana illa natheerun wabasheerun liqawmin yu/minoona



6:50........Zeg: "Ik zeg niet tot u, dat ik de schatten van Allah bezit, noch dat ik het onzienlijke ken, noch zeg ik tot u: 'Ik ben een engel'; ik volg slechts hetgeen mij wordt geopenbaard." Zeg: "Kunnen de blinde en de ziende gelijk zijn? Wilt gij dan niet nadenken?"

Qul la aqoolu lakum AAindee khaza-inu Allahi wala aAAlamu alghayba wala aqoolu lakum innee malakun in attabiAAu illa ma yooha ilayya qul hal yastawee al-aAAma waalbaseeru afala tatafakkaroona

Blade20
22-11-03, 20:53
Mooie type van het caliber 'Nostrodamus' verhaal.
Gelukig geld het niet voor Atheisten; ik geloof alleen in wetenschap, niet in fabeltjes die door de honderden jaren heen zijn aangepast door mensen om hun vijanden te demoniseren


"Aku Soku Zan"

Wizdom
22-11-03, 21:01
Geplaatst door Blade20
Mooie type van het caliber 'Nostrodamus' verhaal.
Gelukig geld het niet voor Atheisten; ik geloof alleen in wetenschap, niet in fabeltjes die door de honderden jaren heen zijn aangepast door mensen om hun vijanden te demoniseren


"Aku Soku Zan"

De ziende en de blinde zijn niet aan elkaar gelijk.... Al zou je de hel zien branden zou je jezelf noch verloochenen... sommige mensen zijn nou eenmaal niet in staat zaken in de juiste proporties te herkennen c.q. te onderkennen....

Blade20
22-11-03, 21:13
Geplaatst door Wizdom
De ziende en de blinde zijn niet aan elkaar gelijk.... Al zou je de hel zien branden zou je jezelf noch verloochenen... sommige mensen zijn nou eenmaal niet in staat zaken in de juiste proporties te herkennen c.q. te onderkennen....

Iedereen is gelijk, zelfs bij gelovigen en de Islam. Daarbij maak je een fout in redeneren Wizdom.

Iemand die een moord heeft gepleegd en er, zogenaamd, voor naar de hel gaat zal dit net zo als de hemel ervaren als iemand die zijn leven lang goed heeft gedaan. Kwaad trekt kwaad aan Wizdom en dus zullen kwaadaardigen zich in de hell thuisvoelen, wat de straf ook is.

Ookal denk je dat ik blind ben, ik ben liever blind dan onwetend zoals jij Wizdom.


Aku Soku Zan

Wizdom
22-11-03, 21:21
Geplaatst door Blade20
Iedereen is gelijk, zelfs bij gelovigen en de Islam. Daarbij maak je een fout in redeneren Wizdom.

Iemand die een moord heeft gepleegd en er, zogenaamd, voor naar de hel gaat zal dit net zo als de hemel ervaren als iemand die zijn leven lang goed heeft gedaan. Kwaad trekt kwaad aan Wizdom en dus zullen kwaadaardigen zich in de hell thuisvoelen, wat de straf ook is.

Ookal denk je dat ik blind ben, ik ben liever blind dan onwetend zoals jij Wizdom.


Aku Soku Zan

[40:58] Not equal are the blind and the seer. Nor are those who believe and work righteousness equal to the sinners. Rarely do you take heed.

Blade20
22-11-03, 21:43
Geplaatst door Wizdom
[40:58] Not equal are the blind and the seer. Nor are those who believe and work righteousness equal to the sinners. Rarely do you take heed.

hehe, er staat niet dat blinde lager zijn dan gelovers Wizdom, blinden kunnen net zo goed hoger zijn als de gelovers. (racistisch stukje tekst trouwens)

Wizdom
22-11-03, 21:59
Geplaatst door Blade20
hehe, er staat niet dat blinde lager zijn dan gelovers Wizdom, blinden kunnen net zo goed hoger zijn als de gelovers. (racistisch stukje tekst trouwens)

Dat bedoel ik nou... Met je onvermogen.... Het gaat om de waarde zien en niet zien... Oftewel de waarde van een rein en een zondig mens...

Hudhaifa
22-11-03, 22:00
IRAQ & SYRIA: Two Important Ahadeeth of the Prophet (SAWS)

The following two important Ahadeeth of the Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wasallam) are so relevant in understanding the events of the contemporary world. In my view, these Ahadeeth describe the current reality very accurately. They, among many other Qur'anic verses and sayings of the Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wasallam), even further re-confirms and testify to the true messengerhood of the last messenger of Allah (sallallahu alaihi wasallam).

1. IRAQ's Boycott (followed by SYRIA’s Boycott?!)

Abu Hurairah (RA) narrated that the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alaihi wasallam) said: (Iraq will be forbidden its dirhams (money) and bread, and Syria will be forbidden its food and dinars, and Egypt will be forbidden its crops and dinars; and you will return to where you started, and you will return to where you started, and you will return to where you started).

Section 67 The Book of Trials, Chapter 39 Iraq's Boycott, No. 2033, Page1079.



Saheeh Muslim (The Book of Trials) as in: Summarised Saheeh Muslim Arabic - English Volume 2; Compiled by: Al-Hafiz Zakiuddin Abdul-Aziz Al-Mundhiri; Published by: Darussalam



2. A Caliph in the last ages will collect money


Al--Jurairi reported that Abu Nadhrah said: we were with Jabir bin Abdullah
(RA) when he said, (Iraqi people will be forbidden their food and money), we asked, (who will do that?). He said: (The non-Arabs will forbid that). He added: (Syrian people will (also) be forbidden their money and food), we said: (who will do that?). He said: (The Romans). Jabir was silent for a while then told that the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alaihi wasallam) also said: (There will be a Caliph in the last days of my nation, who will collect money abundantly without counting), I asked Abu Nadhrah: (Is he Umar bin Abdul Aziz?), He said: [(Absolutely) No]

Section 67 The Book of Trials, Chapter 41 A Caliph in the last ages will
collect money, No. 2036, Page 1081.Saheeh Muslim (The Book of Trials) as in: Summarised Saheeh Muslim Arabic - English Volume 2; Compiled by: Al-Hafiz Zakiuddin Abdul-Aziz Al-Mundhiri; Published by: Darussalam.



Note also the very interesting following observation: In Jabir’s Hadeeth the Iraq’s embargo is due to non-Arabs, which is a much wider concept than the Romans only (Romans are currently the Europeans and the Americans). But the Syria embargo as attributed only to the Romans, which seems to indicate a lack of wide international support: very interesting!!

Hudhaifa
22-11-03, 22:01
Further analysis of Hadith about Iraq, Syria & Egypt

From: - Sahih Muslim - Kitab Al-Fitan wa Ashrat As-Sa`ah.

The Book Pertaining to the Turmoil and Portents of the Hour

Book 041, Number 6923:
Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: Iraq would withhold its dirhams and qafiz; Syria would withhold its mudd and dinar and Egypt would withhold its irdab and dinar and you would recoil to that position from where you started and you would recoil to that position from where you started and you would recoil to that position from where you started, the bones and the flesh of Abu Huraira would bear testimony to it.



===============

Clearer English translation of the words in bold indicate: "The country of Iraq will be forbidden its dirhams (money) and Qafiz (i.e. Sanctions imposed on it), and Syria will be forbidden its food and dinars (Sanctions imposed on it), and Egypt will be forbidden its crops and dinars (Sanctions imposed on it).

As the Hadith shows - there is going to be difference between the sanctions between the three countries.

Starting from Iraq - we need to first investigate the word "Qifaz" - so what is Qafiz ?. The Sicilian language has a word called "Cafisu" which they describe has come from Arabic. According to Sicilian language dictionaries "cafisu (cafiso: measure of oil) [Arabic :Qafiz]". The word Qifaz is an arabic word used for measure of "OIL"!

Now in 2003 - more than thousand years after this hadith was recorded - we already know that in Iraq - the sanctions were and are for "Oil-for-Food" program - as Oil is the basis for this sanction - it fits well with "Dirhams and Qafiz".

According to latest export data from Syria - "Syria has a diversified economy based in agriculture and industry. The agricultural sector generates employment for a large percentage of the population. Wheat is the most important crop. ... its major exports are Petroleum, natural gas, textiles, food and live animals and manufactured goods".

Comparing with Islamic terminologies "mudd" is also a unit of measurement and interestingly almost always refers to a measure of Wheat! Here is a Hadith from Sahih Bukhari that mentions about Mudd as a measure of Wheat (grain).

Volume 2, Book 24, Number 497:

Narrated Abu Masud Al-Ansar:

Whenever Allah's Apostle (p.b.u.h) ordered us to give in charity, we used to go to the market and work as porters and get a Mudd (a special measure of grain) and then give it in charity. (Those were the days of poverty) and to-day some of us have one hundred thousand.

Another mention of Mudd in relation with Wheat comes from the time of Umar (ra). It states:

Yahya related to me from Malik from Nafi that Abdullah ibn Umar used to do kaffara for a broken oath by feeding ten poor people. Each person got a mudd of wheat. He sometimes freed a slave if he had repeated the oath. [Book 22, Number 22.7.13: ]

So the Sanctions imposed on Syria would be "Wheat-for-Money" or some similar sanctions. Today in 2003 - USA is calling for sanctions on Syria after it has dealt with Iraq already. And this hadith was recorded in Sahih Muslim more than a thousand years ago!

Now - coming to the Sanctions that would be imposed on Egypt. According to the Hadith above it is about Irdab and Dinar. Notice that there is no oil in Egypt - so the sanctions on it will have nothing to do with oil. Checking what the major exports are from Egypt we find out that "The main agricultural products of Egypt are cotton, rice, corn, wheat and beans.". So what is Irdab. Irdab - just like Mudd is a quantity of measure. In islamic history the terminology of Irdab is used also for Wheat or for general food crops. As an example see below:

In Cairo, in 1365, the Mamluke prince, Yalbagha Al-Umari, ordered that each student at the mosque of Ibn Tulun (who was living there as someone who live in a hostel/dormitory in a university today) be given forty dirhams and one irdab of wheat every month.

Mudd is the basic unit - and around 2.5 mudd equals one Sa'. If one Irdab is sufficient for a youth for one month - that means that an Irdab of Wheat is a lot more than a Mudd of Wheat. This is because one Mudd is considered enough food for one person at one time. Sa' is considered enough for a day - so if Irdab is enough for a month - it would be a much larger measure.

Based on this information - in my humble opinion - this means that the Hadith is telling us that the "measure" of Sanctions on Egypt - the "Wheat, or Crops for Money" program imposed will be much worse than that on Syria.

So next time - if someone asks "who is next" on the US list - you know exactly who that would be.

Notice also that the three reasonable size countries that had any chance of standing up to Israel - are all listed in this - Iraq, Syria, and Egypt. As the policy of Eritz Israel (Greater Israel) is enshrined in the Zionist books - the two "blue lines" in the flag of Israel represent - River Nile (in Egypt) and River Eupharates (in Iraq) - meaning that the greater Israel is to be established from the land of the river nile to the land of the river Eupharates.

=====

May Allah (swt) allow us to contemplate and ponder on the meanings of Qur'anic ayat and on Ahadeeth and allow us to open our eyes to the fitna and the shar - and the trials and tribulations 'ameen.

Hudhaifa
22-11-03, 22:04
New Cheney Adviser Sets Syria In His Sights

by Jim Lobe
October 21, 2003



A neo-conservative strategist who has long called for the United States and Israel to work together to "roll back" the Ba'ath-led government in Syria has been quietly appointed as a Middle East adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney.

David Wurmser, who had been working for Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security John Bolton, joined Cheney's staff under its powerful national security director, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, in mid-September, according to Cheney's office.

The move is significant, not only because Cheney is seen increasingly as the dominant foreign-policy influence on President George W. Bush, but also because it adds to the notion that neo-conservatives remain a formidable force under Bush despite the sharp plunge in public confidence in Bush's handling of post-war Iraq resulting from the faulty assumptions propagated by the "neo-cons" before the war.

Given the recent intensification of tensions between Washington and Damascus – touched off by this month's U.S. veto of a United Nations Security Council resolution deploring an Israeli air attack on an alleged Palestinian camp outside Damascus – Wurmser's rise takes on added significance.

The move also follows House of Representatives' approval of a bill that would impose new economic and diplomatic sanctions against Syria.

Wurmser's status as a favoured protege of arch-hawk and former Defence Policy Board chairman Richard Perle at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) also speaks loudly to Middle East specialists, who note Perle's long-time close association with Cheney, Pentagon chief Donald Rumsfeld and Rumsfeld's chief deputy Paul Wolfowitz.

Wolfowitz was the first senior administration official to suggest that Washington might take action against Syria amid reports last April that Damascus was sheltering senior Iraqi leaders and weapons of mass destruction in the wake of the U.S. invasion.

"There's got to be a change in Syria," Wolfowitz said, accusing the government of President Bashar Assad of "extreme ruthlessness." Rumsfeld subsequently accused Syria of permitting Islamic "jihadis" to infiltrate Iraq to fight U.S. troops.

Perle, who last week was in Israel to receive a special award from the "Jerusalem Summit," an international group of right wing Jews and Christian Zionists who describe themselves as defenders of "civilisation" against "Islamic fundamentalism," has made no secret of his own desire to confront Damascus.

In a series of interviews, Perle applauded Israel's attack on Syrian territory – the first since the 1967 war – in alleged retaliation for a Palestinian suicide bombing in Israel. "I am happy to see the message was delivered to Syria by the Israeli Air Force, and I hope it is the first of many such messages," he said.

Perle said he "hope(d)" the United States would itself take action against Damascus, particularly if it turned out that Syria was acting as a financial or recruiting base for the insurgency in Iraq.

"Syria is itself a terrorist organisation," he asserted, insisting that Washington would not find it difficult to send troops to Damascus despite its commitment in Iraq. "Syria is militarily very weak," added Perle.

Damascus has been in Wurmser's sights at least since he began working with Perle at AEI in the mid-1990s.

For the latter part of the decade, he wrote frequently to support a joint U.S.-Israeli effort to undermine then-President Hafez Assad in hopes of destroying Baathist rule and hastening the creation of a new order in the Levant to be dominated by "tribal, familial and clan unions under limited governments."

Indeed, it was precisely because of the strategic importance of the Levant that Wurmser advocated overthrowing Iraqi President Saddam Hussein in favour of an Iraqi National Congress (INC) closely tied to the Hashemite monarchy in Jordan.

"Whoever inherits Iraq dominates the entire Levant strategically," he wrote in one 1996 paper for the Jerusalem-based Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies (IASPS).

Wurmser, whose Israeli-born spouse Meyrav Wurmser heads Middle East studies at the neo-conservative Hudson Institute, was the main author of a 1996 report by a task force convened by the IASPS and headed by Perle, called the 'Study Group on a New Israeli Strategy Toward 2000'.

The paper, called 'A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm', was directed to incoming Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu.

It featured a series of recommendations designed to end the process of Israel trading "land for peace" by transforming the "balance of power" in the Middle East in favour of an axis consisting of Israel, Turkey and Jordan.

To do so, it called for ousting Saddam Hussein and installing a Hashemite leader in Baghdad. From that point, the strategy would be largely focused on Syria and, at the least, to reducing its influence in Lebanon.

Among other steps, the report called for Israeli sponsorship of attacks on Syrian territory by "Israeli proxy forces" based in Lebanon and "striking Syrian military targets in Lebanon, and should that prove insufficient, striking at select targets in Syria proper."

"Israel can shape its strategic environment, in cooperation with Turkey and Jordan, by weakening, containing, even rolling back Syria," the report argued, to create a "natural axis" between Israel, Jordan, a Hashemite Iraq and Turkey that "would squeeze and detach Syria from the Saudi Peninsula."

"For Syria, this could be the prelude to a redrawing of the map of the Middle East, which could threaten Syria's territorial integrity," it suggested.

A follow-up report by Wurmser titled 'Coping with Crumbling States', also favoured a substantial redrawing of the Middle East along tribal and familial lines in light of what he called an "emerging phenomenon – the crumbling of Arab secular-nationalist nations."

The penchant of Washington and the West in general for backing secular-nationalist states against the threat of militant Islamic fundamentalism was a strategic error, warned Wurmser in the second study, a conclusion he repeated in a 1999 book, Tyranny's Ally ( http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0844740748/antiwarbookstore/ ), which included a laudatory foreword by Perle and was published by AEI.

While the book focused on Iraq not Syria, it elaborated on Wurmser's previous arguments by attacking regional specialists in U.S. universities, the State Department and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) who, according to him, were too wedded to strong secular states in the Arab world as the preferred guarantors of regional stability.

"Our Middle East scholarly and policy elite are informed by bad ideas about the region that lead them to bad policies," he charged, echoing a position often taken by Perle.

In the book's acknowledgments, Wurmser praised those who most influenced his work, a veritable "who's who" of those neo-cons most closely tied to Israel's far right, including Perle himself, another AEI scholar, Michael Ledeen and Undersecretary of Defence for Policy and the man in charge of post-Iraq war planning, Douglas Feith.

He listed former CIA director James Woolsey, who has called the conflict in Syria the early stages of "World War IV," Harold Rhode, a Feith aide who has also called himself Wolfowitz's "Islamic Affairs adviser" and INC leader Ahmed Chalabi.

Wurmser also gave thanks to Irving Moskowitz, a major casino operator and long-time funder of Israel's settlement movement, whom he described as a "gentle man whose generous support of AEI allows me to be here." 1996 Report ( http://www.israeleconomy.org/strat1.htm ), "A Clean Break" and "Coping With Crumbling States."

(Inter Press Service)

Blade20
22-11-03, 22:04
Geplaatst door Wizdom
Dat bedoel ik nou... Met je onvermogen.... Het gaat om de waarde zien en niet zien... Oftewel de waarde van een rein en een zondig mens...

Tja, dat is bij ons Atheisten anders, wij geloven dat de samenleving slechte mensen moet straffen aangezien een naleven voor ons niet bestaat.

Aan Hudhaifa, dat heb ik allemaal al eens gelezen.

Hudhaifa
22-11-03, 22:05
08/11/2003


If President Assad chooses not to respond, if he chooses to dissemble, if he chooses to find excuses, then he will find that he is on the wrong side of history.1 – US Secretary of State, Colin Powell

Being “on the right side of history” means being on the side of those whose roadmap for peace simply requires Arab governments to ally with the US, recognize Israel, collaborate in the suppression of Palestinian militancy, accept a noncontiguous Palestinian Bantustan state…. eliminate any weapons of mass destruction which might threaten nuclear Israel, actively suppress elements of Islam objectionable to Israel and the US, and accept the US occupation of Iraq. It would be helpful, too, if they fully open their markets, place their banks, industries and utilities under foreign control, and host US military bases.2 – Gary Leupp, Professor of History,Tufts University



Scenes from the aftermath of the Israeli airstrike

Events in the Middle East took a dramatic turn in the past few weeks when Israel launched an air strike against an alleged training camp for Palestinian militants in Ein Saheb, 15 km northwest of Damascus. The raid, Israel’s first attack on Syrian territory since 1973, came right after a Palestinian bombing, claimed by Islamic Jihad, in Haifa, northern Israel, which left 19 Israelis dead. While the Israeli-Syrian border has been relatively quiet since the armistice agreement following the 1973 Arab-Israeli war, both countries fought each other in Lebanon or through proxy forces during the Lebanese civil war. However, the Israeli raid signals an end to proxy warfare between both sides and the beginning of a new chapter in Arab-Israeli confrontations.

Leaders from all over the world condemned the Israeli attack on Syria as an act of “extreme gravity,” and an “unacceptable breach of international law.” On the other hand, US President George Bush said that Israel had a right to defend itself and that it “must not feel constrained in terms of defending the homeland.”3 In the following days, a war of words erupted between Israel and Syria, in which the Syrian spokeswoman, Bushra Kanafani asserted Syria's right of self-defense in case of further Israeli attack, and Israel responded provocatively by insisting that it had the option to attack anytime, against any country that harbored “terrorists.”4

At the same time, the US House International Relations Committee voted 33-2 in favor of the Syria Accountability Act, which threatens penalties that include prohibiting all US exports to Syria except food and medicine, barring US investments or business operations in Syria, and banning Syrian aircraft from US airspace.5 The Syrian Accountability Act of 2003 charges Syria with supporting “terrorist groups such as Hamas, Hizbullah, and Islamic Jihad, continuing to develop a weapons of mass destruction program and permitting Arab fighters to cross its border into Iraq to attack US troops.” It also criticizes Syria for refusing to withdraw its forces from Lebanon, where it maintains roughly 17,000 troops.6 The sponsors of the bill said that they have strong support for their cause even in the Senate and were confident that their bill would eventually make it to the president’s desk as a final piece of legislation. The Bush administration itself withdrew its opposition to the congressional measure, citing Syria’s failure to heed US demands.




US threats against Syria are not new. In fact, in the days after the fall of Baghdad, several US officials, including Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, issued strong warnings about Syria’s behavior. Syria was said to have given refuge to fleeing Iraqi leaders, to have permitted anti-Israeli “terror” groups to keep offices in Damascus, and to have stores of weapons of mass destruction.7 As if to underline this warning, the US bombed the Syrian trade center in Baghdad and shut down the oil pipeline from Iraq to Syria. Syria’s valuable trade with Iraq – which totaled about $5 billion in the period 1998-2002 – was and remains cut off. This is a serious blow to the Syrian economy, since Iraq had in recent years become Syria’s main trading partner.8

Reports then surfaced that the US pledged to tackle the Syrian-backed Hizbullah group in the next phase of its “war on terror,” in a move that could threaten military action against President Bashar Assad’s regime in Damascus. Then, on July 21, 2003, Bush said after a meeting with Italian premier, Silvio Berlusconi: “Today, Syria and Iran continue to harbor and assist terrorists. This behavior is completely unacceptable, and states that support terror will be held accountable.” In addition, US Secretary of State Colin Powell repeatedly urged the Syrians to not only close down the offices of Hamas and Islamic Jihad, but to expel their members from Syria.9 Simultaneously, other reports indicated that as early as May 2002, the Israeli military was preparing for a major military offensive against Syria, in response to a series of Hizbullah attacks along the Lebanese border with the Jewish state. Israeli officials confirmed then that plans were underway for the assassination of Hizbullah chief, Hassan Nasrallah, and that their military reserves had been mobilized for a confrontation with Syria.10

Given America’s endless “war on terrorism” and the recent military campaign against Iraq, no one can precisely predict the nature of future confrontations in the Middle East. However, recent Israeli and US moves against Syria indicate that an important threshold has been crossed, and a new and dangerous chapter in the history of the region is unfolding.


Strategic Dimensions of US-Israeli Actions

Recent Israeli and American actions can be considered a manifestation of key strategic features of the post-September 11 world, and the result of the regional and international transformations which took place following the wars on Afghanistan and Iraq. The Israeli attack on Syria was intended to send a clear message to Damascus to cease support for militant groups considered “terrorist” by Israel.

In many ways, the Israeli attack plays upon the same logic of pre-emption found in the Bush doctrine. Once the world’s sole superpower begins to attack countries pre-emptively, it sets a precedent that can be used by other regional powers to attack their enemies under the banner of “fighting terrorism” or “preventing future terrorist attacks.” For both Israel and the United States, the doctrine of pre-emption is a convenient cliché, used to rationalize their aggressive behavior and enable them to deal with their enemies.




More importantly, however, the attack illustrated Israel’s potential to the US – not only as an historical ally, but also as a strategic asset in the post-September 11 world. Israel is aware that the US is bogged down in Afghanistan and Iraq, and is in no situation to open a new military front against Syria. In this regard, Israel’s attack against Syria sends a message to the US, that Israel can be its military arm. In other words, whereas the US would work to isolate Syria politically, economically, and diplomatically, Israel would be ready to go ahead with the military task and relieve the US of the cost of opening a new front. Hence, a symbiotic “division of labor” is emerging between Israel and the US. This would explain multiple diplomatic exchanges between both sides in the past weeks, from the US vetoing recent Security Council draft resolutions containing a condemnation of Israel, to its support for Israel’s recent and devastating military incursions into Gaza, and of course, for the attack against Syria.

Israel was encouraged in its act of aggression against Syria not only by an American “green light,” but also by the exceptional weakness of the Arab regional system following the occupation of Iraq, in addition to the fact that Syria is now sandwiched between Israel and the US military presence in Iraq.

Some analysts believe that Israel now plans to treat the Syrian regime much as it has treated Palestine’s Yasser Arafat over the past three years, i.e. accusing it of orchestrating every bombing against Israel and working diplomatically and militarily to isolate it both regionally and internationally with the help of the US.11 Sharon realizes that despite his use of various military means – large-scale military incursions, reoccupation of Palestinian territories and targeted assassinations – he has failed to crush the Palestinian uprising. Therefore, a successful attack on Syria would give him a badly needed political victory. In addition, a military escalation with Syria would represent a return to classical warfare methods in which Israel enjoys a relative advantage over conventional Arab armies, as opposed to dealing with a Palestinian uprising using guerilla tactics and asymmetric warfare.

Conclusions

Since 1990, Syria has engaged in many positive steps towards reconciliation with the US. It joined George Bush Senior’s grand coalition against Saddam Hussein in the 1991 Gulf War, and after September 11 it provided the US with much needed intelligence concerning al-Qaeda’s activities. In addition, it voted alongside the US in the United Nations in favor of a resumption of weapons inspections in Iraq. In this respect, it becomes more evident that current US and Israeli steps aim at punishing Syria not for what it did, but rather for what it did not do – support US military activities in Iraq and end its support for resistance groups in Palestine and Lebanon.

Hudhaifa
22-11-03, 22:09
Broeder Wizdom ,

de hadieths die worden gebruikt in jouw artikel zijn die sahieh?

wa salamu alaikum

Wizdom
23-11-03, 06:45
Geplaatst door Hudhaifa
Broeder Wizdom ,

de hadieths die worden gebruikt in jouw artikel zijn die sahieh?

wa salamu alaikum

Broeder Hudhaifa,

De Hadith over "Wahn" heb ik eerder gehoord in vertrouwde omgeving idem dito over de verzoeking van volkeren om de Moslim gemeenschap te intimideren. De rest weet ik niet zeker, heb het van internet, heb ik gepost om reakties van andere broeders te horen. Alleen Allah (SWT) weet het het beste!