Proud to be a Pakistani - Printable Version

Proud to be a Pakistani - Printable Version

+- Accountancy Forum (https://www.accountancy.com.pk/forum)
+-- Forum: General (https://www.accountancy.com.pk/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: General Discussion (https://www.accountancy.com.pk/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=5)
+--- Thread: Proud to be a Pakistani (/showthread.php?tid=2016)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5

- ehson - 05-28-2005

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by fahim239
 <blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by farazthegreat
 If you don't like something about your country, stand up and try to make a differenece. Blaming the government and whining about it won't accomplish anything.

---------------------------------------------------------
God is dead - Nietzsche
Nietzsche is dead - God
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Yes Faraz, i totally agree with you. That's the way of men. If I were in Ehson's shoes that's what I wud hv opted 4. Simply to stand up and fight. Not that I wud hv waisted my time in some mumbo-jumbo writing.

You Nietzsche fan, Faraz? I like this qoute. So strange for a CA student eh, lol.

Â«â¢Â´`â¢.(*â¢.Â¸(`â¢.Â¸ Â¸.â¢Â´)Â¸.â¢*).â¢Â´`â¢Â»
Â«................. Fahim .................Â»
Â«â¢Â´`â¢.(Â¸.â¢*(Â¸.â¢Â´ `â¢.Â¸)*â¢.Â¸).â¢Â´`â¢Â»

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Incase you didnt realise i raise my voice because i dont want to sit rather inform other about what is happening and if i was in your shoes i wouldnt have passed such a remark as i'd have unaware of what ehson is doing and in what capacity. )

- Sahar_M - 05-30-2005

hmmm.................. i ofen start my post with this D .

hmmm....... even after reading alll the wht u guys hv said [D] i will still stick to wht i hv said earlier , apnay apnay giraban may ghank ker dekho n try to make a diference instead of pointing it out.

there were many points where i wanted to comment but i guess as i dont read news papers much I will keep my views to my self

Therefore if u really wana make a difference the first step is to become a GUD MUsLIM n spread islam cos i find it being the only way out i.e. only solution to our problems.

n dont let these minor distractions make u forget ur main aim , the reason u hv been sent here..........................

Y is the WorLd so full of ..............FOOLs ?????? n y am I one of them ( .

- Desert Sleet - 05-30-2005

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">You say even at present Pakistan is being DICTATED by the financial institutions. I say no thatâs a perfect lie. No more dictations like it used to be in the so-called democRATic eras of Nawaz & B.B. Now, we only borrow on our own conditionalities, with our own preferences & our own recommendations.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Democracy is no guarantee that those currently in power won't start abusing it--at which point there may not even be ballot boxes any more.

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">didnt show the agreement to the words that you own. I agreed to the concept of uniting he muslim ummah and led by a single Khalifa. As practiced and tought by prohpet(s). Incase you think it was s'thing personal you are mistaken. "haha"<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

And you think that States are so alike as to ensure that totalitarianism can happen here? Dream on....

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">gone are the days when I used to sit an blame the govt. i try to make difference now. now I believe muslim ummah really need people who understand that mere blaming would not reap any result. the only solution to this vicious ruling is the Khilafa. I'm willing to talk about it at any forum. If you agree with me then try to get some knowledge about what the Islamic way of ruling (i.e. Khilafa) is and I'm positvie and even a single drop would have a great impact.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
As for Govt, sure it can't be trusted and there will always be some corruption however your own government is one of the more corrupt on the planet and I dont see your country men all up in arms, I hear a lot of talk about people who would love to change things and have this fantasy that they will do it but back in the real world it simply is not feasible to change the government that way. They have too much power now.
<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">You say there are social problems in our society. And I admit there are. Should that make you the most hateable article in this world? Should that make you ashamed of your own country, the land where you live, where you feed you belly on, where you earn a living, where your forefathers lie, where youâre gonna die? Tell me one single country on the face of this earth with no social problems n Iâll admit that yes, we are some kind of aliens. Man, there are problems everywhere. All we need to do is to find ways to curb them. Not that we should get obsessed with them and lose sight of our own cherished goals and targets.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
The land mass the system is on means nothing. Western politicians have the same ambitions wherever they are. It's only because it is currently unnaceptable. But we keep letting governments hack away at our rights, so its just a matter of time.

Although i am not in favour of democracy but i believe that democracy and Islam are compatible. Islam speaks of the importance of shura which is consultation, of ijma which is consensus and of ijtehad which is independent reasoning. I believe that these three Islamic principles provide a basis for democracy.

__________________
<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">The Only True Wisdom Is In Knowing You Know Nothing <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

- ehson - 05-30-2005

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Sahar_M
 ....become a GUD MUsLIM n spread islam cos i find it being the only way out i.e. only solution to our problems.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
I'm seriously trying to become a good muslim. And really wish and pray from Allah(swt) to make me the reason for the change of single heart. pray for me

- ehson - 05-30-2005

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Desert Sleet
 
And you think that States are so alike as to ensure that totalitarianism can happen here? Dream on....<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"> ), I understand the difficulties. But lets say i can change one heart, just one. which due to conviction chnages another and another and another. I know it is a dream but what is wrong with putting your efforts to achieve it. Let say I die doing efforts for it and my coming generation dies likewise and thier comming likewise atleast s'where there would be a differences. All the revolutions in history of the civilizations had been made like this. After all I'm pursuing the purest and true way of harmony and peace.

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Desert Sleet
 
As for Govt, sure it can't be trusted and there will always be some corruption however your own government is one of the more corrupt on the planet and I dont see your country men all up in arms, I hear a lot of talk about people who would love to change things and have this fantasy that they will do it but back in the real world it simply is not feasible to change the government that way. They have too much power now.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">By your choice of words, I realise that you think i'm assosiated with some religious group which is working to achieve what i've written earlier. If you think that way, you are mistaken the truth is, I'm not assosiated with any group/sect etc. I'm an individual who believes that see the problems and has been analyzing various solutions and has now reached a point with conviction that the best solution is what i've mentioned earlier. That is a simple equation of why i say what i say.

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Desert Sleet
 
Although i am not in favour of democracy but i believe that democracy and Islam are compatible. Islam speaks of the importance of shura which is consultation, of ijma which is consensus and of ijtehad which is independent reasoning. I believe that these three Islamic principles provide a basis for democracy.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
i guess it is only the perception of the word "democracy" which makes it aligned with the Islamic principals and/or make it unaligned. You the democracy which is practiced now a days where every individual has a power of "one" vote to choose the leader is not what Islam has tought. And I personaly believe this should be like this. As an educated and an ignorant cant be and are not the same. So why give equal power to both. Secontly you see the importance of shura to which you are pointing you must be aware that shura constitutes of the "greatest" scholars.
Then in modern democracy if you are elected as a ruler of the country you are taken to a palace which is surrounded by number of guards. you escot costs God knows how much and a common man can not have access to you. While in Khilafa, once you are elected as a ruler, even if you are most richest person of the nation you can not increase living standard more than that of a middle class average family, which off course puts you in a better position to find out about the problems of the majority of your nation. And if a person in a Friday sermon can point out Omer(ra) and hold him accountable for taking extra piece of cloth from the 'bait-ul-maal' then you can very well imagine the extent of 'freedom to speak' and 'democracy' and 'transparancy' at the top level.
It was good to talk to you Desert Sleet and share views with you. hope to see you around.

- Desert Sleet - 05-31-2005

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">I understand the difficulties. But lets say i can change one heart, just one. which due to conviction chnages another and another and another. I know it is a dream but what is wrong with putting your efforts to achieve it. Let say I die doing efforts for it and my coming generation dies likewise and thier comming likewise atleast s'where there would be a differences. All the revolutions in history of the civilizations had been made like this. After all I'm pursuing the purest and true way of harmony and peace.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

There is no guarantee that mankind will enter the next century completely healed from totalitarianism. To understand this it is sufficient just to look at the growing popularity of right extremism in France but inspite of the benifits the danger of totalitarian ideology is that it is not only the wide masses of population that are subject to its influence, but also the intelligentsia which provides it with apologists and translators, and multiplies the number of people subject to totalitarian ideologies.
<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">your choice of words, I realise that you think i'm assosiated with some religious group which is working to achieve what i've written earlier. If you think that way, you are mistaken the truth is, I'm not assosiated with any group/sect etc. I'm an individual who believes that see the problems and has been analyzing various solutions and has now reached a point with conviction that the best solution is what i've mentioned earlier. That is a simple equation of why i say what i say.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Guess I am the only one to vote for oligarchy, [)] but most do not know what it means. Of course, it is a real big open catagory...

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">i guess it is only the perception of the word "democracy" which makes it aligned with the Islamic principals and/or make it unaligned. You the democracy which is practiced now a days where every individual has a power of "one" vote to choose the leader is not what Islam has tought. And I personaly believe this should be like this. As an educated and an ignorant cant be and are not the same. So why give equal power to both. Secontly you see the importance of shura to which you are pointing you must be aware that shura constitutes of the "greatest" scholars.
Then in modern democracy if you are elected as a ruler of the country you are taken to a palace which is surrounded by number of guards. you escot costs God knows how much and a common man can not have access to you. While in Khilafa, once you are elected as a ruler, even if you are most richest person of the nation you can not increase living standard more than that of a middle class average family, which off course puts you in a better position to find out about the problems of the majority of your nation. And if a person in a Friday sermon can point out Omer(ra) and hold him accountable for taking extra piece of cloth from the 'bait-ul-maal' then you can very well imagine the extent of 'freedom to speak' and 'democracy' and 'transparancy' at the top level. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Before one can argue what the best form of government would be, the real purpose/role of government should first be established. It exists to establish order. In order for that to happen, those under the government must forfeit some rights, otherwise you'd have chaos, and the society wouldn't progress. The level of freedom one must give up, is thus one of the major differences among all those forms of government mentioned.

But what should determine that? The priorities of the people. Is the good of the community important enough to make sacrifices for it? Is personal well being most important? Obviously it's impossible for everyone under the same government to agree on the form and role it should take. However if the majority is satisfied, you have a generally better functioning society. But this idea doesn't necessarily lend itself to democracy. A socialistic society would work as well as a democracy in such a case.

However all this supposes ideal situations. Idyllic democracy wouldn't work unless everyone was well-educated. That's why the government has controls (e.g. the electoral college, etc.). On the same token, pure communism would only work if each party performed its function properly (leaders not becoming corrupt, lol)

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">It was good to talk to you Desert Sleet and share views with you. hope to see you around. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
I do my best. S*o*briety makes all the difference in my posts. [)]

__________________
<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">The Only True Wisdom Is In Knowing You Know Nothing <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

- Sahar_M - 05-31-2005

[)]

- ehson - 05-31-2005

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Desert Sleet
 There is no guarantee that mankind will enter the next century completely healed from totalitarianism.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
I'd say that the concept of totalitarianism is some what different from the Khilafa. You see the totalitarianism still follows the man made laws. Where as in Khilafa man made laws are only subjected to places where the devine guidance is quite. In totalitarianism "the individual is subordinated to the state". In Khilafa the individuals are subordinate of the Khalifa only if his verdict are in accordance to the devine guidance, otherwise capital punishment might become applicable for the ruler and an individual is no more bound to do as ordered by the govt. as is the case in the totalitarianism. Again in totalitarianism "opposing political and cultural expression is suppressed" where as in Khilafa it is an obligatory duty for the ruler to maintain the worship places of all the religions.

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Desert Sleet
 To understand this it is sufficient just to look at the growing popularity of right extremism in France but inspite of the benifits the danger of totalitarian ideology is that it is not only the wide masses of population that are subject to its influence, but also the intelligentsia which provides it with apologists and translators, and multiplies the number of people subject to totalitarian ideologies.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">Still the difference prevails the totalitarianism is led by the intelligentsia who may mould it as per thier benifits as is the case in the capitalism and socialism. Khilafa still is different and I belive the best way to govern.

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Desert Sleet
 Guess I am the only one to vote for oligarchy, [)] but most do not know what it means. Of course, it is a real big open catagory...<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">It sure is a big open catagory. I only advocate the Khilafa, however.

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Desert Sleet
 Before one can argue what the best form of government would be, the real purpose/role of government should first be established. It exists to establish order.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
And suppose the orders which you to establish are the divine orders. So as with little education all can be very well aware of them and can hold the ruler accountable for any discripancy.

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Desert Sleet
 In order for that to happen, those under the government must forfeit some rights, otherwise you'd have chaos, and the society wouldn't progress. The level of freedom one must give up, is thus one of the major differences among all those forms of government mentioned.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">You see the freedom in case of the Khilafa ruling-in case of an individual-is only taken to the extent which is described in the divine books. So, as mentioned earlier, you educate people about how to live, and give the code of conduct, they will very well know about the extent of freedom and the extent of submitting ones freedom. The govt. does forfiet power in the case of Khilafa the in the example which i wrote in my previous post the Khalifa was held accountabe by an idividual merely becuase he thought that the 'public' property has been miss used.
Security to public property to this extent is not visible in any form of the govt. other than the Khilafa. I suppose.

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Desert Sleet
 But what should determine that? The priorities of the people. Is the good of the community important enough to make sacrifices for it? Is personal well being most important? Obviously it's impossible for everyone under the same government to agree on the form and role it should take.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"> And now i yet again write that the freedom given away should be determined by the divine guidance not what the individuals want and how much they can sacrifice. Had individual given this to deciede the poor and non influenceial would still be deprived and the uneven distribution would lead to social unrest.

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Desert Sleet
 However if the majority is satisfied, you have a generally better functioning society.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">Read "Animal Farm". By your writing I asume you are a frequent reader. This book would hardly take 2-3 days of reading (if done in spare time). It is a very good example of what happens when majority is satisfied. You see to satisfy the majority there should be leaders who represent the majority (idealy taken from that majority). Now when these leaders are given powers they are again taken to the palaces and esscorted by huge squads. It doesnt take long when these people become same as those who represnt the minority (rich) in this case. Now as their status change, thier attitude, thinkin, behavioural aspects change and the vicious circle starts again. So in pursuit of 'good' system we lose some potential revolutionists. Again this is personal thinking.

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Desert Sleet
 But this idea doesn't necessarily lend itself to democracy. A socialistic society would work as well as a democracy in such a case.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"> socialism has seen its slum without actually reaching the boom. Now as far as the democracy is concerned you can see what is happening around in the world. Where the difference between the rich and poor is widening (around the globe i.e.). And social unrest is at its peak.

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Desert Sleet
 However all this supposes ideal situations. Idyllic democracy wouldn't work unless everyone was well-educated.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">None of the system can be properly implemented without actually educating 'everyone'. Utopia, which is i guess, as difficult as pursuing the dream of an ideal govt.

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Desert Sleet
 I do my best. S*o*briety makes all the difference in my posts. [)]<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"> ) at least your S*o*briety lets other say what they want to and likewise help them to share what a ginious like you has in mind.

- Desert Sleet - 06-01-2005

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">I'd say that the concept of totalitarianism is some what different from the Khilafa. You see the totalitarianism still follows the man made laws. Where as in Khilafa man made laws are only subjected to places where the devine guidance is quite. In totalitarianism "the individual is subordinated to the state". In Khilafa the individuals are subordinate of the Khalifa only if his verdict are in accordance to the devine guidance, otherwise capital punishment might become applicable for the ruler and an individual is no more bound to do as ordered by the govt. as is the case in the totalitarianism. Again in totalitarianism "opposing political and cultural expression is suppressed" where as in Khilafa it is an obligatory duty for the ruler to maintain the worship places of all the religions. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Still the difference prevails the totalitarianism is led by the intelligentsia who may mould it as per thier benifits as is the case in the capitalism and socialism. Khilafa still is different and I belive the best way to govern.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">It sure is a big open catagory. I only advocate the Khilafa, however.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
I totally agree with your views regarding Caliphate system.
We reject the smug arrogance which presumes that if you are anti-democratic you are totalitarian. We are against human beings making laws.
During the 1300 years of Islam being implemented as asystem of life, there were no world wars, no mass genocide, no mass sexual deviancy, no extremely high crime rate, etc. As soon as the Khilafah was abolished, we had world wars, the Cold War, increase in crime and sexual deviancies all over the world, the advent of plagues and diseases like AIDS, and so on.

And I presume that the perpetual conflict that mired Islamic history was the reason why the Islamic world was the pinnacle of human civilization for centuries (a documented fact that is acknowledged by all credible historians, including non-Muslim ones). And so many nations and people embraced Islam and till today hold on to Islam Shia and Sunni because there is something in the human being that attracts him to civilizations steeped in bloodshed and turmoil.

If one goes beyond simple common sense and actually screens these historical accounts, one will find that they are nothing but gross exaggerations, twisted facts, and outright lies fabricated by sources who have no credibility, and these historical accounts were magnified by the Orientalists (who added their own twisted jargon) and incorporated into the educational systems in the Muslim lands.

That aside, we should not expect that the Islamic history be a utopian one because history is an account of the actions of human beings, and human beings are not perfect. Therefore, it is expected for the history to have periods of progress and stagnation, prosperity and regression. And the Islamic history is no different. Also, the history is not a measure of the correctness of the system itself. The Islamic system is correct because it is the system from Allah the Creator and is established upon the correct idea, which is the Islamic belief. Therefore, the Islamic system provides the correct mechanism to organize the life and address the problems and issues of human beings. Allah provided us with the correct mechanism, and He illustrated to us how to correctly apply this mechanism through the example of the Prophet (saaws). If, after all of this, the human being fails to utilize this mechanism properly (or, as in the case of today, refuses to use this mechanism altogether), then we have only ourselves to blame for the outcome.

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">And suppose the orders which you to establish are the divine orders. So as with little education all can be very well aware of them and can hold the ruler accountable for any discripancy. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Even in the absence of any divine guidance, human beings on their own can figure out that they require a system to live by. And since the beginning of civilization, various statesmen, thinkers, philosophers, and intellectuals, have proposed a myriad of systems to address the human being and to organize the human life. However, because these systems are all man-made systems that stem from man-made ideas, then all of them are incorrect and incapable of addressing the human being in the correct and productive manner. Recently, humanity has suffered under the Communist system and continues to suffer under the Capitalist system.

For this reason, we turn to Allah (swt) to provide us with that correct system. Because Allah (swt) created the human being along with his needs, instincts, and inclinations, then Allah (swt) is the only One who is fit to design a system of life to address our needs, provide solutions to our problems and issues, and organize our lives in the correct manner. And it is our responsibility as Muslims to implement the Islamic system in its entirety - not only because it is the correct system for human beings, but because this responsibility is an order from Allah (swt).

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">You see the freedom in case of the Khilafa ruling-in case of an individual-is only taken to the extent which is described in the divine books. So, as mentioned earlier, you educate people about how to live, and give the code of conduct, they will very well know about the extent of freedom and the extent of submitting ones freedom. The govt. does forfiet power in the case of Khilafa the in the example which i wrote in my previous post the Khalifa was held accountabe by an idividual merely becuase he thought that the 'public' property has been miss used.
Security to public property to this extent is not visible in any form of the govt. other than the Khilafa. I suppose.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

The rulings issued by the Khalifah or judges, as long as these rulings and judgments are valid Islamic rulings and judgments, then they are binding. The Khalifah can adopt certain rules, and he is free to adopt any rules, as long as these rules were based on valid Islamic opinions. If somebody has a different Islamic opinion than the Khalifah's regarding an issue, he still must obey the Khalifah, but he can keep that opinion and even teach that opinion to others. Ideally, the Khalifah only adopts general rules that are critical to the state and the Ummah, and the adoption of specific rules are left to the governors and judges in each locality, in order to promote creativity and research in jurisprudence.

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">And now i yet again write that the freedom given away should be determined by the divine guidance not what the individuals want and how much they can sacrifice. Had individual given this to deciede the poor and non influenceial would still be deprived and the uneven distribution would lead to social unrest.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Finally History is a chronicle of the action of human beings, who are imperfect and make mistakes by nature. Therefore, we should expect any history, even the history of Muslims, to have ups and downs. History is not a determinant of the correctness of the system itself because the subject matter of history is people and the actions of people, not the system itself

What Islam provides is the correct mechanism to organize the society and resolve issues and problems.

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Read "Animal Farm". By your writing I asume you are a frequent reader. This book would hardly take 2-3 days of reading (if done in spare time). It is a very good example of what happens when majority is satisfied. You see to satisfy the majority there should be leaders who represent the majority (idealy taken from that majority). Now when these leaders are given powers they are again taken to the palaces and esscorted by huge squads. It doesnt take long when these people become same as those who represnt the minority (rich) in this case. Now as their status change, thier attitude, thinkin, behavioural aspects change and the vicious circle starts again. So in pursuit of 'good' system we lose some potential revolutionists. Again this is personal thinking. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I have read this book log time ago. In recent years the book has been used to compare new movements that overthrow heads of a corrupt and undemocratic government or organization, only to become corrupt and oppressive themselves over time as they succumb to the trappings of power and begin using violent and dictatorial methods to keep it.

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">socialism has seen its slum without actually reaching the boom. Now as far as the democracy is concerned you can see what is happening around in the world. Where the difference between the rich and poor is widening (around the globe i.e.). And social unrest is at its peak.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
âA democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.â - Thomas Jefferson 

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">None of the system can be properly implemented without actually educating 'everyone'. Utopia, which is i guess, as difficult as pursuing the dream of an ideal govt. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Until every public school can provide Harvard-quality courses, I don't think democracy will work exactly as planned. The whole thing is basically about the people being educated enough to make sound choices, as opposed to today's Pakistan where the level of education is way below where it should be resulting in authority figures trampling all over civil rights and the people and just about everything democratic. You need people that can withstand a plane crashing into a building without throwing every last one of their rights out of the window just so they can be "safe."
<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> ) at least your S*o*briety lets other say what they want to and likewise help them to share what a ginious like you has in mind.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">Its always nice to have a conversation with a knowledgeable person like you.

__________________
<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">The Only True Wisdom Is In Knowing You Know Nothing <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

- ehson - 06-01-2005

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Desert Sleet
 I totally agree with your views regarding Caliphate system.
We reject the smug arrogance which presumes that if you are anti-democratic you are totalitarian. We are against human beings making laws.
During the 1300 years of Islam being implemented as asystem of life, there were no world wars, no mass genocide, no mass sexual deviancy, no extremely high crime rate, etc. As soon as the Khilafah was abolished, we had world wars, the Cold War, increase in crime and sexual deviancies all over the world, the advent of plagues and diseases like AIDS, and so on.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">Not to forget during the time of Khilafa non Muslims used to fight in the Muslim armies becuase they feared that if Muslims lose a system worse than the one they were living in would become dominant and they might lose thier rights and might face problems.

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Desert Sleet
 And I presume that the perpetual conflict that mired Islamic history was the reason why the Islamic world was the pinnacle of human civilization for centuries (a documented fact that is acknowledged by all credible historians, including non-Muslim ones). And so many nations and people embraced Islam and till today hold on to Islam Shia and Sunni because there is something in the human being that attracts him to civilizations steeped in bloodshed and turmoil.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">I'm sorry but english is not very good. I couldnt properly understand what you wanted to say in your last sentence. Would kindly elaborate/rephrase.

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Desert Sleet
 If one goes beyond simple common sense and actually screens these historical accounts, one will find that they are nothing but gross exaggerations, twisted facts, and outright lies fabricated by sources who have no credibility, and these historical accounts were magnified by the Orientalists (who added their own twisted jargon) and incorporated into the educational systems in the Muslim lands.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"> I asume this para and the history you are reffering relates to the unclease statement which I've highlighted above.

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Desert Sleet
 That aside, we should not expect that the Islamic history be a utopian one because history is an account of the actions of human beings, and human beings are not perfect. Therefore, it is expected for the history to have periods of progress and stagnation, prosperity and regression. And the Islamic history is no different. Also, the history is not a measure of the correctness of the system itself. The Islamic system is correct because it is the system from Allah the Creator and is established upon the correct idea, which is the Islamic belief. Therefore, the Islamic system provides the correct mechanism to organize the life and address the problems and issues of human beings. Allah provided us with the correct mechanism, and He illustrated to us how to correctly apply this mechanism through the example of the Prophet (saaws). If, after all of this, the human being fails to utilize this mechanism properly (or, as in the case of today, refuses to use this mechanism altogether), then we have only ourselves to blame for the outcome.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">This once again takes us to the start of our discussion where you wrote to me that I shall dream on achieving what I want to achieve. And I on the other hand reffered that It might take long, longer than one can imagine right now but at least we should try to achieve it. And Since this is the only solution that I see, I therefore advocate this and point out people who take sides with the current or the previous rulers of Pakistan. To me all are equal, no good for nations to rule.

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Desert Sleet
 Even in the absence of any divine guidance, human beings on their own can figure out that they require a system to live by.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"> Totally agree that human beings can "figure out that they require a system to live by". But unfortunately they cant (or at least not yet have been able to) make a system that works as well as the system of Khilafa.

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Desert Sleet
 And since the beginning of civilization, various statesmen, thinkers, philosophers, and intellectuals, have proposed a myriad of systems to address the human being and to organize the human life. However, because these systems are all man-made systems that stem from man-made ideas, then all of them are incorrect and incapable of addressing the human being in the correct and productive manner. Recently, humanity has suffered under the Communist system and continues to suffer under the Capitalist system.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">And the socialistic system had its sufferings too.

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Desert Sleet
 And it is our responsibility as Muslims to implement the Islamic system in its entirety - not only because it is the correct system for human beings, but because this responsibility is an order from Allah (swt).<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"> ), totally agree with you on this point and that is like a period to the argument. But I wanted to have a approach which would disclose the benifit of this system over the other systems. I did so becuase I've came across many people who would prefer to have a materialist view(weighing benifits and disadvantages) rather than accepting it as an order from Allah(swt). I mean you can understand by looking around you. How many people do actually fullfill thier obligatory duties (ordered by Allah (swt))

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Desert Sleet
 âA democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.â - Thomas Jefferson <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"> ), very good quotation you've chosen, my friend.

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Desert Sleet
 Until every public school can provide Harvard-quality courses, I don't think democracy will work exactly as planned.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">I'd still say even if the Harvard-quality courses are provided in every school of the world you'd still have problems. You see Harvard, certianly is a great place to learn but you see you'd find many things in Harvard which are dont "just to benifit Harvard" regardless of what impact it has. And there is a ex-Pakistani PM who entered into Harvard not becuause of the qualification that PM possesed at the age of entering Harvard. Rather influence was used to get that PM in. This fact is taken by a book writting on the ex PM of Pakistan. I'd preffer not write the name or the book or the author. The point i wanted to make here is that even icons like Harvard have 'some' curruption. After all they are run with the fear of Creator and the life after death. )

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Desert Sleet
 The whole thing is basically about the people being educated enough to make sound choices, as opposed to today's Pakistan where the level of education is way below where it should be resulting in authority figures trampling all over civil rights and the people and just about everything democratic. You need people that can withstand a plane crashing into a building without throwing every last one of their rights out of the window just so they can be "safe."<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">"interesting" approach

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Desert Sleet
 Its always nice to have a conversation with a knowledgeable person like you.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
"As for me, all I know is I know nothing." SOCRATES
I'm just another ignorant. Its just that since I feel conviced about s'thing I speak out. ) Pray for me.

P.S. incase you dont mind Desert Sleet would you email me your brief introduction. I'd have initiated but I thought you might not want to do it. )

- Desert Sleet - 06-02-2005

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Not to forget during the time of Khilafa non Muslims used to fight in the Muslim armies becuase they feared that if Muslims lose a system worse than the one they were living in would become dominant and they might lose thier rights and might face problems.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">well desert the islamic history is no 1300 years old its 1425years old ,, secondly who told u that during the khilafa there were no world wars.....when the first world war started there was khalifat in turkey that sided with germany ....<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

LOL, the law of the Islamic State is not some man made garbage that emanates from secular humanism. By the way, the same convention executed war criminals in WWII but no longer does that, since they think it is "cruel and unusual" punishment. Welcome to the inconsistency of man made law, tomorrow Child abuse will be completely legal. And when the problems of drugs canât be solved the goal post will be moved, hence crime rate will be low then the year before LOL

Secular values and principles are altered in the name of expediency and genuinely point out that if Western principles and values are so important and true, why are they not held firmly even in the face of inconvenience. As Will Hutton recently said âMore than two years after 11 September, the tally of core Western values and beliefs that we have allowed to become corrupted as we respond is lengthening by the week. Equality before the law, the presumption of innocence, the right to a fair trial - all have been seen as expedients to be put aside.â He goes on âWe are undermining our own civilisationâ

The challenge for Muslims is to adhere to the fixed principles of Islam regardless of time or situations.

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">This once again takes us to the start of our discussion where you wrote to me that I shall dream on achieving what I want to achieve. And I on the other hand reffered that It might take long, longer than one can imagine right now but at least we should try to achieve it. And Since this is the only solution that I see, I therefore advocate this and point out people who take sides with the current or the previous rulers of Pakistan. To me all are equal, no good for nations to rule. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
There is no concept of dictatorship, popism (mullaiyat) and totalitarianism in Islam. Islam doesnât believe in any kind of Monarchy and Oligarchy. The political system of Islam totally depends upon Shooraiat (consultation). The significance of consultation in governance proves by this that a complete surah in Quran is named âAl-shoorahâ (consultation). It is ordered in the 38th verse of this surah that you must consult with each other in dealing the problems and matters of people.

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Totally agree that human beings can "figure out that they require a system to live by". But unfortunately they cant (or at least not yet have been able to) make a system that works as well as the system of Khilafa. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Islam is unique from both systems in that the sovereignty belongs to Allah. In the Islamic State, the Khalifah, like the people, is a slave and servant of Allah, and he is confined by the Islamic rules. Although the Khalifah has the authority, he does not possess the sovereignty. And the sovereign, who is Allah, has determined conditions for the Khalifahâs authority, including how this authority is given to him and when this authority can be taken away from him. The Khalifah is given the authority by the Muslim Ummah to implement the Islamic system, and obeying him is obligatory only if he exercises his authority for this purpose. However, once he begins to implement non-Islamic rules or he becomes unable to carry out this position, then he must be di***eyed. Furthermore, implementing non-Islamic rules is grounds for the Khalifah to be removed, and Islam outlines the procedures for selecting and removing the Khalifah.

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> ), very good quotation you've chosen, my friend. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Democracy is often confused with the style of elections and the concept of choice. Democracy is the rule of people, for the people, by the people

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">interesting" approach<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
[8D]

P.S. incase you dont mind Desert Sleet would you email me your brief introduction. I'd have initiated but I thought you might not want to do it. )
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
http//www.accountancy.com.pk/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1720
http//www.accountancy.com.pk/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1940

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">well u take to much side of khilafat have u ever thought about it with a moderate mind and not with that of a fundamental mind......in pakistan we have so much issues relating to the punjabi,pathan,sindi, balochi, muhajir,sarayki and so on.....is it possible in this time to have a khilafat system comprising of all the muslim countries......i think its not possibleat this time.....we have so much differences amoung us......for khilafat then there would be wars the arabs would say that the khalifa should be from them ,pakistanis would want that the khalifa should be from pak and similarly indonesia,malaysia, iran, bangladesh would want the same for there own countries........it will create a much more hovac in the islamic world than that we r facing it today.........

secondly if we make khilafat as our ruling system.....who will initiate this step....as all the muslims r divided in sects religious(shia,sunni), political(religious,socalist), geographical(arabs,indo pak,indonesians,iranians and so on) and then even in a singal country there r a lot of tribes...........what u think of it.....
as far as i see the khilafat system can't be brought back by normal procedures it needs a revolution not only in a singal country but in all the islamic countries......have ur say<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
The Khalifah must be selected utilizing whatever means such that the will of the Muslim Ummah is represented. Whatever means functions best to express the will of the Muslim Ummah should be used. In the past, the Sahabah would select a Khalifah from among them, and this was accepted because the Sahabah were considered the opinion leaders of the Muslim Ummah and their opinions truly represented the will of the Muslims at large. Also, you have to remember that, during those days, the Islamic State was huge, and the means of travel and communication made it impractical to obtain a "nation-wide vote" or to hold elections that would encompass the entire Ummah. However, it was also typical during those days that the top intellectuals, scholars, statesmen, and those with leadership qualities would be concentrated in the Capital city; and the consensus opinion among those individuals was considered truly representative of the Muslim Ummah's interests.

Nowadays, the means of communication are readily available to us, and we could theoretically have every Muslim cast his or her vote for the Khalifah through the Internet. Also, the selection process could be done through the Majlis-as-Shura, which would consist of individuals that the people of each region in the Ummah would select to represent their will and opinions.

__________________
<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">The Only True Wisdom Is In Knowing You Know Nothing [/quote]

- Pracs - 06-02-2005

Very Good you Guys, Nice to see that the two of you have actually agreed. Interesting reading there too, I just had a couple of questions, that spring to mind when you speak of an Islamic Government a Caliphate.

Which country of the 50 plus muslim countries would you say is relatively more of an Islamic Government ? Please bear in mind that the society is usually a good reflection of how an Islamic state and its benefits have seeped into fabric of society.

And do you think that implementing the Caliphate would be a step by step thing. What ehson says would take more time, more time than one would have imagined.

I for one believe that the ''Islamic Ummah'' concept is dead, I think the only actual Caliphate was during the time of the ''Khulfahae- Rashedeen'', thereon for the next thousand years were as golden only because of the initial system in place (which began to wither ofcourse). The Ottoman Caliphate (read sultanate) was a sorry sort of affairs, I can name a dozen Muslim countries today that are better Islamic Governments than the Mehmuds in Istanbul. Nor do I have any respect for the Monarchs of the Gulf and West Africa, or the socialist dictators, or military dictators, or for that matter most self actualising leaders in the Muslim world.

- ehson - 06-02-2005

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by lion_king
 .....when the first world war started there was khalifat in turkey that sided with germany ....<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Dear friend, the point is the concept of Khilafa can not be properly implemented with so many national divisions (e.g. countries) in various parts of the world. For all the Muslim Ummah there has to be one Khilafa at a time.
Second point is that the Khilafa of Turkey you are reffering to might not be a true picture of the Khilafa as the Ottoman empire was actually shrinking and only Turkey was left to be removed from this empire. Nationalism has been by that time injected into people and the rulers rather than the collective thinking of the Ummah.

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by lion_king
 ehson
well u take to much side of khilafat have u ever thought about it with a moderate mind and not with that of a fundamental mind......<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">First kindly tell me what is wrong with being fundamentalist. You see the westren media has given a negative connotation to this perticular word. The literal mean of the word fundamentalist areA usually religious movement or point of view characterized by a return to fundamental principles, by rigid adherence to those principles, and often by intolerance of other views and opposition to secularism.
so according to the defination I say all my actions are based upon a single point (therefore i obviously return to this point) and that point is the divine guidance.
And I'm off course intolerant to the other viewpoints becuase I can see many things which are for social and individual distrution in thier views(porposed mothods). So what is wrong with that?

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by lion_king
 in pakistan we have so much issues relating to the punjabi,pathan,sindi, balochi, muhajir,sarayki and so on.....<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">The point is my brother that who constitutes the sindi, balochi, nahajir, sarayiki and other population. You and I do. Suppose it is a single country two individual model. You and I agree on a similar thing would there be problems like this? The problem for the time being is that we are to be brought at a single point. And who has made us hate eachother (e.g. punjabi, sindhi etc) our ignorance has. Had we been close to Islam, do you think this would have happened?

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by lion_king
 is it possible in this time to have a khilafat system comprising of all the muslim countries......i think its not possibleat this time.....we have so much differences amoung us......for khilafat then there would be wars the arabs would say that the khalifa should be from them ,pakistanis would want that the khalifa should be from pak and similarly indonesia,malaysia, iran, bangladesh would want the same for there own countries........it will create a much more hovac in the islamic world than that we r facing it today.........<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">You've discussed on probabiltiy only. You see once you become aware of the Muslim teaching and ideology things like this wont happen. The point currently we have examples like the MMA and we think since they are currupt and hungry for the power, same would be the case later. But not to forget history has shown us the Khilafa Rule to most successfull till today. And why were there no fights at that time?
Point two, it does seem next to impossible. Now I've two options one i sit back becuase it is difficult to be done. second, atleast I speak about it where ever I get a chance. Which one do you thin is better?

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by lion_king
 secondly if we make khilafat as our ruling system.....who will initiate this step....as all the muslims r divided in sects religious(shia,sunni), political(religious,socalist), geographical(arabs,indo pak,indonesians,iranians and so on) and then even in a singal country there r a lot of tribes...........what u think of it.....<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Sects, I understand is a big problem. But I know many people who had left sects as they knew, their sects are not based on the truth. Secondly why cant we all belong to the sect of Muhammad(s). When did he ever said I'm a shiaite or a sunnite?

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by lion_king
 as far as i see the khilafat system can't be brought back by normal procedures it needs a revolution not only in a singal country but in all the islamic countries......have ur say
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">For revolution we need people who are convinced that this ideology is correct and only solution available. Let us start first step. Shall we?

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Pracs
 Very Good you Guys, Nice to see that the two of you have actually agreed. Interesting reading there too, I just had a couple of questions, that spring to mind when you speak of an Islamic Government a Caliphate.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">It is good to see that other people are participating in this as well. For a moment I thought we are alone

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Pracs
 Which country of the 50 plus muslim countries would you say is
relatively more of an Islamic Government ? Please bear in mind that the society is usually a good reflection of how an Islamic state and its benefits have seeped into fabric of society.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">If you ask my personal viewpoint. There is not single country in this world that can actually claim to be an Islamic state. You see being an Islamic state just becuase the majority of the population is Muslims is not a criteria to judge. We must judge these claims with the Quran and Sunnah. And have you seen a single country which is in allignment to that.

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Pracs
 And do you think that implementing the Caliphate would be a step by step thing. What ehson says would take more time, more time than one would have imagined.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">It is all the mater of conviction. When everyone is convinced, revolution would be triggered (as it has been happenin from the begining of the man kind) which would then reap the result. Now the porblem for the time being is that we are not convinced. And if we are, we think since it is difficult to achieve we plan not to do anything for it. So let us work in our individual capacity and pray to Allah(swt) for it.

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Pracs
 I for one believe that the ''Islamic Ummah'' concept is dead, I think the only actual Caliphate was during the time of the ''Khulfahae- Rashedeen'', thereon for the next thousand years were as golden only because of the initial system in place (which began to wither ofcourse). The Ottoman Caliphate (read sultanate) was a sorry sort of affairs, I can name a dozen Muslim countries today that are better Islamic Governments than the Mehmuds in Istanbul. Nor do I have any respect for the Monarchs of the Gulf and West Africa, or the socialist dictators, or military dictators, or for that matter most self actualising leaders in the Muslim world.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">You see as mentioned earlier if an individual didnt rule in the pure islamic way and claimed to be a Muslim that is not a fault of Islam. And I agree that the 'ummah' concept is almost dead. But brought it to this stage? and who can bring it back to life?

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Desert Sleet
 Welcome to the inconsistency of man made law, tomorrow Child abuse will be completely legal.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">I mean, you can obviously expect anything from the Democracy.

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Pracs
 The challenge for Muslims is to adhere to the fixed principles of Islam regardless of time or situations.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">And if you do that people would call you "fundamentalist" as if it is s'thing wrong/ill legar or pesimistic approach to the modren world.

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Pracs
 Democracy is often confused with the style of elections....<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">True that is

P.S. Good to see other people participating in this thread.

- ehson - 06-06-2005

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by lion_king
 ehson...i fully agree with u...that we should not sit aside.... lets raise our voice for the khilafat......<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
good to see people agreeing to a point.

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by lion_king
 but the problem is how to raise our voice and whome to elect our leader .....<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">If you take my advice, you should tell others why Caliphate is better than rest of the ruling systems. And for that you have to have thorough knowledge of all the systems and know the Caliphate system very well. A good way to start is that since you are convinced you tell the people around you (e.g. your close friends, people of your family, work place collegues etc) that Caliphate is the best solution and obligatory for the Muslims. And obviously people would ask you questions, if you know the answer good you tell them. if you dont know the answer then you tell the person who has asked the question that you are unaware of the proper answer and you'd try to find it out. Then you do some reasearch on the question which has made you speachless. InshaAllah, by the mercey of Allah(swt). You'd learn and be more convincing.
About your second question as to who should be selected as a leader. Well that is far fetched question. First things first, we must think alike and be convinced about the Caliphate system.

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by lion_king
 a leader such that he is fully aware of the current situation of the muslims and also has full grasp of the religion.......
what u have to say and whome u think is best for this job
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">Brother its a big responisibilty to nominate s'one as a ruler. I'd not answer your question. Besides to elect a scholar you've a 'shura' group of religious scholars, only they can vote for whom shall be elected a ruler. Ignorants like me better stay out of this.
By the way I see you very worried about choosing the leader. I understand that everyone is very keen to first identify if ther is a single individual who can actually be nominated as Khalifa. But the problem is we must stand united to this concept. I think for the time being we must concentrate on brining everyone togather.

- zaree1 - 06-06-2005

hi
i am a new visitor to the site
i am pleased to be part of a good forum

zee khan