Introducing the well-observed comedy of Mr Khan:
Mr Khan (the Muslim Community Leader who made Bellamy’s People famous) gives his no-holds barred assessment of the political situation, with a harsh analysis of the Tory Party, Labour Party, and the other one. As the general election reaches fever pitch, Mr Khan brings it all into perspective – the Muslim perspective. No matter how irrelevant, you can be sure Khan will say the word “Muslim” every 25 seconds. If not, please complain to your local Mosque. Discover why David Cameron, Gordon Brown and Nick Clegg would all be better off with beards.
Well, at least Mr Khan votes, which cannot be said of the muslims who pronounce voting to be “shirk” or idolatrous and therefore blasphemous. This idiot, for example, who bases his opinions on a fatwa by Yusuf al-Qaradawi, spiritual leader of the Muslim brotherhood and Ken Livingstone’s token-Islamist accessory:
Most of what I say is based on the Fatwa of our noble Shaykh and Imam Yusuf al-Qaradawi[i] on the issue of political participation in a non-Islamic state.
1. The Basic Principle
The basic principle is that it is not permissible for Muslims to participate or support a non-Islamic government or government which does not govern according to the dictates of the Shari’ah. A state that does not govern according to the shari’ah and goes as far as to enact rulings that goes against the laws and principles of the divine law cannot be supported. That is because Allah said:
“It is not for a believer, male or female, when Allah and His messenger have decreed a matter that they should have any option in their decision.”
But what can be said of this “Unofficial Poll Card”?
"Saving the People from Shirk"
19 Comments
You seem to have been misinformed of Qardawis position
Islam and Democracy
On the Islam’s stance on democracy, Qaradawi said that Islam calls for democracy and grants people the right to choose their governor.
Qaradawi told the lecture that religion and politics are compatible and cannot be separated.
He said those who advocate separation between religion and politics use religion to serve best their interests, but when it runs counter to their personal gains, they just ignore it.
On Islam’s position of establishing religious parties, he said Islam is not against establishing religious-oriented parties provided that all parties respect law and constitution.
He also stressed that Islam places men and women on an equal footing, when it comes to politics.
http://www.islamonline.net/English/News/2004-09/01/article02.shtml
Muslim world needs democracy, says Qaradawi
http://www.muslimnews.co.uk/news/news.php?article=11311
“You seem to have been misinformed of Qardawis position”
Don’t you think you should take that up with Abdullah Hasan, who says he has based his anti-voting stance on a fatwa by Yusuf Qaradawi?
“On Islam’s position of establishing religious parties, he said Islam is not against establishing religious-oriented parties provided that all parties respect law and constitution”
“provided that all parties respect law and constitution” – that’s good to know. And if the constitution is framed as legislation which separates judicial and executive institutions from religious ones, then Islamic parties will have to support and respect secularism in principle and the rule of law.
“He also stressed that Islam places men and women on an equal footing, when it comes to politics.”
Except he forgot to mention that the Islamic State can never have a female caliph or even female ministers.
“Muslim world needs democracy, says Qaradawi”
Yes, but to be more precise, secular liberal democracy, in which imams stay in the mosque and members of parliament run the country by electoral mandate.
Munafiqoon…as ever spinning the yarn of deceit and treachery, Muslim community activists or as you would call anyone engaged in faith inspired politics have been the most active in this election, sites such as http://www.getoutandvote.info http://www.youelect.org.uk and http://www.muslimvote.org.uk say it all..
Yasin. Nowhere have I suggested that the entire Muslim community is rejecting voting because it is shirk/blasphemy.
But are you completely ignorant of the fact that Hizb and and large swathes of the Islamist community (such as Salafi idiots like Abdullah Hasan for starters) are saying that voting is haram? Why aren’t you taking it up with them instead of coming here and calling people “munafiqoon” for criticising them?
Grow a brain before you come here and make a complete fool of yourself.
You fucking Bangladeshi Hinduised Jew-loving homosexual cocksucking cunts.
Yasin
I hope you accept that it is possible to be a Muslim community activist without being “faith-inspired”?
This blog will be putting its support behind Rushanara Ali in the constituency of Bethnal Green and Bow. She is Muslim and a community activist without being “faith-inspired”. Does that count?
Your fucking Bangladeshi Hinduised peasant mothers were gang-fucked by thousands of our Pakistani soldiers, and we loved it.
marwan scumbag
you are less than filth, truly subhuman deserving nothing less than extermination.
Cameron grow up. These Bangladeshi Hinduised peasants don’t know the first thing about our noble shaykh Yusuf Qaradawi.
Sorry, we are have a particularly nasty Islamist troll on our hands, which we are dealing with.
‘Sorry, we are have a particularly nasty Islamist troll on our hands, which we are dealing with.’ Munafiqoon, why do you say this imbecile mother insulter is an Islamist…this is why you are Munafiqoon, because you belittle and smear Muslim workers at every oppurtunity…Abdul Wahab ‘Do we need an Islamic state’ Effendi what is is wrong with being a faith inspired activist or prospective, many modern politicians are driven by their faith…Mr Bush, Tony Blair but to name a few, why aren’t Muslims allowed to?
“why do you say this imbecile mother insulter is an Islamist”
Er, because he is a long-time offender on this site, whom we have tolerated and indulged far too much. We know he’s an Islamist because he
1) Supports the genocide of Bangladeshis by the Jamaat-e-Islam
2) Apologises for any Islamist viewpoint you wish to mention
His is the very first post on this thread.
“Effendi what is is wrong with being a faith inspired activist or prospective, many modern politicians are driven by their faith…Mr Bush, Tony Blair but to name a few, why aren’t Muslims allowed to?”
Well, look at the examples you have cited for “faith-based” politicians. Are they the kind of individuals you would support, Yasin?
And less of the “munafiqoon” slurs, Yasin. You’re not a complete douche-bag, are you?
Then you have admitted that you are not a muslim and neither were your soldiers. Your filthy language confirms it.
You think you represent muslims?
You represent Shaytan. Know this.
“Don’t you think you should take that up with Abdullah Hasan, who says he has based his anti-voting stance on a fatwa by Yusuf Qaradawi?”
The article at Maqasid Press isn’t written by Abdullah Hasan – the author is Abdul-Malik Sheikh, whose name appears at the end of it. The article is cross-posted from here.
The article doesn’t advocate an “anti-voting stance” either. Its conclusion is that “the circumstances under which we are living in the UK definitely requires us to vote”.
In future, if Abdul Hamid wants to attack an article, wouldn’t it be a good idea if he made the effort to read it first?
Bizarre sight of Islamists joining forces with the atheists of (inter alia) the Anarchist Federation, the Left Communists of the International Communist Current and the post-Maoists of the Communist Party of Great Britain (Marxist-Leninist) to condemn the habit of voting in general elections…
But wait, they line up with exactly the same people over matters of Israel and the mighty allegedly world-dominating octopus known as Zionism…
Interesting too to note that voting appears to not be shirk, indeed appealingly halaal, where the Islamists can conduct massive electoral fraud, as in the recent “elections” in Sudan.
Oh how we laughed to discover that Tuti Island (an island at the confluence of the two Niles at Khartoum) had no ballot boxes delivered to its population at all; but still managed to return over 5000 votes for the Islamist president’s party.
How we rolled on the floor in hysterics when at least one ex-pat Sudanese community in the Gulf similarly voted, despite the number of votes cast being greater than the number registered there to vote.
Of course, nary a word of protest from the Islamists about (a) the Sudanese doing allegedly bad things like VOTE; and (b) the utter fraud committed by the “bruvvas” to assure their favourite sub-Saharan dictator another term of power.
Presumably these nutters also think the uber-Islamists of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt are morally depraved for encouraging Egyptians to damn their souls to hell by voting for MB candidates in elections?
No, thought not.
Voting for da Bruvvas iz different, innit?
Bob
Yes, I have attributed the authorship of the article to Abdullah Hasan incorrectly. However, I disagree that the article is unconditionally supportive of voting. The article outlines its default position at the very beginning:
It references Wahhabi and Muslim Brotherhood-friendly Shuyukh such as Qaradawi, ibn Baz, bn Uthaimin, Al-Zuhaili etc.
From the outset, the author is suggesting that it is haram to vote, but he then provides exclusions to that rule based on *circumstances* not theology.
In other words, he allowances are made such that Muslims may vote to *protect their interests and safety from harm* in countries which have adopted democratic elections.
But what does this say about Muslim-majority countries which have adopted democracy must be haram? The article might be allowing voting under the circumstances, but it is anti-democratic in substance.
Muslims should vote in non-ideal circumstances, it insinuates. But what are the ideal governmental circumstances for Muslims? The author does not say. Can you guess what they might be?
Look what Al-Muhaijroun have come up with:
http://www.votingisshirk.tk/