Hizb - Ut - Tahir once came to my mosque handing out leaflets calling for an Islamic Caliphate. Do we really need to have a Caliphate? Can a caliphate really fit in within the 21st Century World?
User login
Author Information
Poll
Why have you visited this website?
To check for updates
11%
Read posts
39%
Contribute to discussions
6%
Share content
3%
Social media brought me here
6%
Tis fate
35%
Total votes: 632
Active forum topics
Recent blog posts
Upcoming Events
- 5 May 2024 - 11:00 to 16:30
Quick Links
Who's online
There are currently 0 users online.
Can I lead it?
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
Ayatollah always speaks the truth. He is not affraid of Great Satan America.
Ayatollah once he said that Calphate was destroyed by the Jews to make way for Zionists state of Israel in Palestine. If Capliphate exists, then Jews knew they would be attacks by the Calipha of muslims.
In 1918, after the world war 1, they began working on how to dismantle the Caliphate. Then in 1923, they did got rid of it. Then in 1948, Israel was created. If Caliphate was re-established today, it would most certainly launch war against Israel to destroy it and free Palestine. Jerusalem is Islam's 3rd holy city. It belongs to Muslims, not Jews.
Ayatollah rightly named America as "Great Satan".
www.presstv.ir
You ignore THE important question. Will you accept me as your leader?
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
No, lol
#Before you look at the thorns of the rose , look at it's beauty. Before you complain about the heat of the sun , enjoy it's light. Before you complain about the blackness of the night, think of it's peace and quiet... #
Khomeni should be the new Khalifa!
Infact, Khomeni should be the president of America.
When Chuck Norris sees khomeni, chuck cries.
When Khomeni does press ups, the world moves down!
How dare you overlook me.
Besides, Khomenei is dead and burried. Khamenei on the other hand is alive and ... well, look at Iran. Despotism is setting in.
I on the other hand do not have any track record in oppression or murder.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
But ur too lazy to do anything! There'd be complete anarchy if u were the leader
"How many people find fault in what they're reading and the fault is in their own understanding" Al Mutanabbi
fun times.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
is that your new favourite phrase?
"How many people find fault in what they're reading and the fault is in their own understanding" Al Mutanabbi
Have I used it before?
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
well you've used it twice in the space of like 10 mins?
"How many people find fault in what they're reading and the fault is in their own understanding" Al Mutanabbi
well, what can I say?
accept me as amir ul mu'mineen and there will be some fun time ahead.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
(just noticed the "other" time u said good times not fun times lol)
u gotta write down ur policies or what ever, im not voting for a leader just like that!
"How many people find fault in what they're reading and the fault is in their own understanding" Al Mutanabbi
policy schmolicy. I just want to rule this world.
and its about trust - no point presenting policy if you don't stick to it.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
a lot of people want to rule this world. mostly evil people do it.
"How many people find fault in what they're reading and the fault is in their own understanding" Al Mutanabbi
It belongs to everyone. Not only Muslims have claim. [Quote from Kingdom of Heaven] "All have claim". Jerusalem...Important for Jews, Christians and Muslims. All are Welcome and have free access. Christians have right to the Church of Sepulchre, Jews have right to the Wall and Muslims have a right to the Mosques/Dome of the Rock.
If everyone [Christians, and mainly Jews and Muslims] are going to behave like silly children then non of us will get it.
And it is talk like that, that are not going to get us anywhere.
r@I
Actually, and I hope muslims dont mind me saying this, but Jerusalem does belong to the Jews. Lets not deny the facts.
Currently, but when has it stayed under rule of one religion/race long?!
and how did you figure that one out?
r@I
of course you need a caliphate its part of the religion, and islam it doeshnt matter whether your in the 21st centuary or the 31st centuary nothing changes, what if someone was to say this is the 21st centuary isnt it too modern to poray, oviously its a brainless thing to say same applies to caliphate. And when isa AS comes khilafa will be restored so if thats possible to do in the future when isa AS comes why cant it be possible now? salauddin achieved it from the brink of detstruction to become a heavyweight empire.
Because there is nothing about a sovereign state of Islam. And when Jesus comes down it is something that definitley that is going to happen. If you read properly I was talking about Hizb - Ut Tahir mainly.
r@I
Talking about an Islamic Caliphate ignores many things and issues:
1. It does not actually define any governance model.
When Persia and Egypt were conquered, their governance and civil models were kept intact by Caliph Umar (ra).
When Salahudin Ayyubi came to power, the system created was one of separate states where there was an over arching ruler too over the "super state".
The Ottomans used a "Millet" model of governance where the various disparate communities governed themselves.
Moreover, even when it comes to leadership, Caliph Abu Bakr was selected in a pseudo-democratic fashion. Caliph Umar (ra) was nominated. Caliph Uthmaan (ra) was selected by committee. Caliph Ali (ra) was once again selected from that committee (or in a democratic fashion where the madinan community was given a deadline to select a new leader or there would have been consequences as promised by the rebels.)
Caliph Imam Hassan (ra) was hereditary.
Caliph Amir Mu'awiya (ra) was a need for unity government.
There is not "one way" to achieve the end goals.
Further, if you want an all conquering Islamic empire, that would go against the Ideals of Caliph Umar (ra), who did not want to continue with conquest but it was forced on him by eg the Persians who decided to fight when offered a peaceful co-existance.
2. in 1400+ years of Islamic history, people would unanimously agree on only 30 or so years of it being idealistic in any way (and if the person asked is shia, that number probably goes down to 4 years)
3. Will you accept me as your leader?
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
Actually, and I hope muslims dont mind me saying this, but Jerusalem does belong to the Jews. Lets not deny the facts.
Suppose Russians invade Britan and stays here for 500 years.
The Russians can claim that certain Crown Jewels are now their property.
But what about the Koh-i-Noor diamond?
The Gemstone will for ever remain property of India. That diamond [also spelled Kohinoor, Koh-e Noor or Koh-i-Nur] was seized by the East India Company and became part of the British Crown Jewels when Queen Victoria was proclaimed Empress of India in 1877.
India would still want the Koh-i-Noor diamond back from Russians on 9 Feb. 2510.
Similalrly, when Palestine was invaded by muslim armies, it does mean that Jerusalem is their city. It still belongs to the Jews. It is they who has established it.
We just took over the holy city from Romans. We should return it to its rightful owners.
The Romans were not Jewish. Nor were the Jews expunged by the Muslims.
And saying "owned by" as a whole is misleading - there are areas and lands legitimately owned by people of various ethnicities and groups.
What is important is that it becomes a "free" city - a place where not only are people of all faiths free to visit, but the local population - whichever that may be - is not oppressed.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
well khilafa is something that the muslims must follow theirs no choice of weether you want to do it or not so they are making a attempt but as the good scholar anwar awlaki said for khilafa to be restored a miracle is needed not what the ht is doing so yeah true ht may not use the best method but are doing something.
as for palestine, palestine is muslims and will always belong to us muslims, if you look into history their was no such thing as a israel their it was practically 99% muslims, muslims simply allowed the jews to stay their as a charity and they took advantage and took over.
if you argue in that sense then the whole world belongs to the muslims, when aadam AS came he was the only man who walked on earth theirfore everysingle country belongs to the muslims, so in that case it still belongs to us.
in salauddins case it was about uniting the ummah which he did, how the rule went isnt were things are discussed but simply of the fact that he united all the ummah and countried together.
As for uthman RA as khilafa he had to go through the voting system which he competed against Ali RA although Ali RA himself knew uthman RA was the better man for the job so he himself voted for him and uthman RA won by unanimous decision, in Ali RA turn everyone knew he was the best man for the job and not a single man out their knew thye could compete against him so again he easily got a unanimous decision.
Muawiyah as you said it was simply about having peace.
Actually no, he didn't. He united a *part* of the Arab world (and not the whole of it either). the left flank of the Arabian peninsula, Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and Israel is what would have been covered (with maybe a segment of Sudan, Libya and Tunisia too).
To pretend that it was like the whole ummah is false and misinformation. It was just a large part of the arab world.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
That seems something that a complete idiot might say, a real fool who should be laughed at because they are not only immune to reason but arrogant and proprietary, some nasty thicko the world threw up. But maybe you are well ahead of me. Can you see my problem with what you wrote?
Pages