PDA

View Full Version : Dardashaat - Full Version (Iraq and Al Maghreb)


Salahudin
3rd May 2007, 06:01 AM
Bismillah al-Rahman al-Raheem

Dardashaat

1- The current events in Iraq have been coming thick and fast lately in a manner confirming that America has succeeded in achieving a major infiltration within the ranks of the resistance she could never have dreamt of. The Brigades of the Revolution of the Twenty have split up and the Iraqi Hamas Movement has been established; this was followed by a fatwa from Sheik Hamed al-Ali regarding the “Islamic State of Iraq” and by the announcement that the Iraqi Scholars Council was established; and finally, the Islamic Army issued a communiqué in which they responded to the speeches of al-Baghdadi and listed against al-Qaeeda a host of accusations of killing, terrorising, violating property and sowing animosity among other resistance groups.

America has come to realise that after her withdrawal from the cities of Iraq, matters on the ground would only be in her hands if there were a loyal secular government that replaces her. However, because the circumstances at present are not proceeding in this direction, she would for the time being accept a central government that is nationalistic and non-sectarian in its orientation; this government would include several representatives who are close to the various resistance movements, in addition to forming the nucleus of a regional Sunni government with an Islamic tinge and a nationalist orientation. It seems that the Islamic Army, the Association of Muslim Scholars in Iraq and the Iraqi Hamas, which is the military wing of the Islamic Party, have all agreed to proceed with America in this direction. As for the issue of a withdrawal timetable and the recognition of the resistance, which represent the two prerequisites for entering into negotiations with America, this does not pose an obstacle for America when the military and political conditions become in her favour as she begins her withdrawal and establish a Sunni regional government with an Islamic flavour, which the omens of its backing with funds and weapons have began to take shape, especially that the Arab states have recognised the Association of Muslim Scholars in Iraq; some Arab states have in fact hosted the Secretary General Dr Hareth al-Dari and the Media coordinator Dr Muthanna Hareth al-Dari.

With a conspicuous American backing, Aljazeera satellite channel, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Jordan have played a major role in embracing the Iraqi resistance men who adopt the nationalist approach in terms of liberation and the departure of the occupier. The Head of the Cultural and Media Committee in the Association of Muslim Scholars in Iraq Dr Muthanna Hareth al-Dari revealed during a conference in the Jordanian capital Amman that efforts were made to formulate a unified project that would be approved by the Iraqi resistance. Dr Muthanna mentioned the official Arab states’ recognition of the Committee and their cooperation with it; he also stressed the important position of the Committee and its leading role among the forces resisting the occupation in Iraq. He added that” The importance did not emanate from the Sunni aspect of the Committee, but from the national framework it supported.” It is in this context that the statement made by a Saudi official about backing the resistance should be perceived; also, king Abdullah described during the Arab Summit the American presence as occupation.

As Muthanna al-Dari was holding a press conference in Amman about the unified project for the Iraqi resistance, a number of political and tribal personalities Basra, Thi Qar and Misan announced during a conference they held in Baghdad the formation of the “interim government of the Southern Province” to be headed by Abdul Razzaq al-Saidi.

The “resistance” who will negotiate with America is in fact the various factions that the media spokesperson of the Islamic Army Ibrahim al-Shummari mentioned during Aljazeera’s programme “Without Frontiers”. These are the Islamic Army, the Mujahideen Army, the Brigades of the Revolution of the Twenty, the Jami’ Brigades and al-Rashideen Army, through there are other groups such as al-Qaeeda organisation and Ansar al-Sunnah, who is renowned for its spectacular operations and who has a sizeable dominance and presence in the northern areas. This recognition by al-Shummari of these fighting groups to the exclusion of the others acts as a prelude to negotiating with them in order to explore the conditions of the American withdrawal and what America may gain in exchange for announcing her withdrawal from Iraq; specifically, recognising the provinces (states) that will be established inside Iraq, giving America long-term oil contracts and permanent military bases and not working towards establishing an Islamic Khilafah.

As for the fate of the so-called Islamic State of Iraq, which is facing a media onslaught in addition to a number of skirmishes with other armed factions, America will exploit the “Sunni-Sunni” rift in the same way she exploited the “Sunni-Shia” rift to end the project of that state and swap it for a regional government with an Islamic inclination, which will satisfy most of the parties set to back an agreement which will end the internal Sunni fragmentation and inter-fighting and will stand up to the sectarian cleansing and will adopt the aspirations of the Sunni regions.

What is sad is that some Muslims do not learn from recent history nor from past history, and in Iraq itself. Are those about to embark in negotiations with America going to be more faithful and more loyal to America than Saddam Hussein or the Ba’ath party in serving the American plans? And Yet, when America decided to get rid of him, she did not bat an eyelid, nor did she take his past services over thirty years into account and she threw him in the dustbin of history. Allah (swt) says: “Satan makes them promises, and creates in them false desires; but Satan’s promises are nothing but deception.” [T.M.Q.]

2- Regardless of the communiqué by the so-called al-Qaeeda in the Islamic Maghreb, in which it claimed responsibility for the blasts of Casablanca and Algiers more than two weeks ago, the timing and the recurrence of these operations will pave the way for America and give her the regional and international pretexts to forge ahead and execute what Defence Secretary Robert Gates had announced on 6th February 2007 to Congress about the decision to establish a new U.S. Africa Command headquarters, to be known as AFRICOM. The headquarters will be operational by the end of 2008; it will coordinate all military and security interests throughout the continent. Hence, after that America used to coordinate her military and security operations in Africa through three Commands HQs, the Central, the European and the Pacific, AFRICOM will coordinate the military and security matters of all countries of the African Union except for Egypt, because of her special situation vis-à-vis the Middle East.

This announcement was immediately followed on 7th February 2007 by a meeting in the Senegalese capital Dakar that gathered the Chiefs of Staff of the United States and eight countries from the Arab Maghreb and the Sahel under the theme of “fighting terrorism” in the Sahara region. The meeting was in fact designed to propagate the AFRICOM and to explore the readiness of the countries that America wants them to host the HQs of the New Command. If we excluded Algeria, who has already rejected the idea of being the host country for AFRICOM, though she allowed America to set up the biggest satellite-based Military Surveillance and Reconnaissance System in the area of Tamanrasset, Morocco, Djibouti and Cape Verde remain among the favourites to play hosts for AFRICOM. The republic of Cape Verde is strategically important due to its proximity from the oil-rich gulf of Guinea, that supplied all of America’s oil needs that come from Africa, i.e. about 15% of her oil consumption; this rate is expected to rise to 25% or even 30% by 2015, which prompts America to undertake the direct protection of her energy supplies. As for Djibouti, it hosts since 2002 more than 1800 US soldiers in the Camp Lomonier Base. This US base is only 40 Km. away from the strait of Bab al-Mandab, which separates the Red Sea from the Gulf of Aden.

It is clear that America would not hesitate in carrying out any terrorist act for the sake of propagating her projects and executing her strategic plans in Africa, especially in an area deemed as a vital extension of the Arab region, i.e. North Africa and the African Sahel. America aims to besiege that region with a host of military bases as she did in the Gulf, Yemen, Turkey and as she endeavours to achieve in Iraq and Syria. It is under the theme of “fighting terrorism” that America has decided to establish AFRICOM to fight Islam and to monitor the moves of the Muslims; also to eradicate the presence of the French headless cockerel in the Black Continent.

It transpires from the statements made by the US officials that the practical participation of the US army will include supervision, training, logistical support and military intervention whenever necessary.

Hence, under the theme of fighting terrorism, US-African partnership, supporting developing programmes and fighting AIDS etc, America will consolidate her presence in Africa and will exploit the African organisations such as the African Union as obedient tools to bolster her unilateral dominion over Africa. What Gaddafi says about establishing an African army and establishing a United States of Africa is but a lip service aimed at helping America achieve her plans and projects in Africa.

abu imaan an-nepalee
3rd May 2007, 10:29 PM
interesting.....


http://forums.islamicawakening.com/s...3198#post23198

Logic lover
4th May 2007, 03:47 PM
If one is to assume the truthfullness of the reports about the split between the semi-Islamic elements and the 'Islamic state of Iraq', one has to see which side one wishes to win.

There is no way that one may mix or legalise the nationalistic element in Jihad as has been reported. What has been reported about the 'Islamic state of Iraq' may raise some questions about the validity of some of the attacks. But, what is the greater evil? To assume the validity of a so-called 'Islamic Army' which seems to be no more than a nationalistic one - and supporting it or to reject such notion and going for the 'Islamic state of Iraq' even with its apparent flaws in tactics and operations?

umm lina
5th May 2007, 07:46 AM
I don't know when muslims are gonna be united and think wise about what tragedy they're putting themselves in.If African rulers accept that so called protection against terrorismthat would be only protecting their self interest and their dictatorship but that's an illusion and one day they will be killed by the same sword.

1mran
5th May 2007, 10:28 AM
I don't know when muslims are gonna be united and think wise about what tragedy they're putting themselves in.If African rulers accept that so called protection against terrorismthat would be only protecting their self interest and their dictatorship but that's an illusion and one day they will be killed by the same sword.


exactly, thats what imam anwar explains in the story of the bull.
http://forums.islamicawakening.com/showthread.php?p=26185#post26185

im from africa and i now how things work.

its a system of corruption and bribery. everything you do, u need to bribe someone.

for exampl, to pay any bill, u need to pay the amount and bribe the person u paid, otherwise he wil say u didnt pay and take you to court, where, u will have now even bribe the judge!

they harass muslims and especially women who drive alone. the police stop them and make them pay alot or lock them up and jails.!!

these stupid people have turned into animals and the greed will kill them,

and its not issue of colour, you have everyone, black, white, brown, etc doing it. they have all lost it.

u should look at the state of some of the african countries.

u have governments that steal all AID money, and you have rebels going around chopping peoples arms off so they can vote !!!

and who is to blame?

the west!

they steal the resources and sell the people guns to kill each other.

u can have small chidlren walking around with ak47's

Africa will never be at peace until islam returns to it, this much i can tell u....

there is a saying, "why is the soil of africa so dark? because of all the blood that is shed on it"

Africa is the most beautiful continent in the world, if paradise was going to be on dunya, it would have been in africa.

you have to see the beauty to understand.....

umm lina
5th May 2007, 09:46 PM
Well said,brother1mran.The story of the bull falls right in the context.
Allah says about those selfish dictators who are ruining themselvesand their people at the same time by their stupidities:
2:7 Allah hath set a seal on their hearts and on their hearing, and on their eyes is a veil; great is the penalty they (incur).
2:8 Of the people there are some who say: "We believe in Allah and the Last Day;" but they do not (really) believe.

2:9 Fain would they deceive Allah and those who believe, but they only deceive themselves, and realise (it) not!

2:10 In their hearts is a disease; and Allah has increased their disease: And grievous is the penalty they (incur), because they are false (to themselves).

2:11 When it is said to them: "Make not mischief on the earth," they say: "Why, we only Want to make peace!"

2:12 Of a surety, they are the ones who make mischief, but they realise (it) not.
2:13 When it is said to them: "Believe as the others believe:" They say: "Shall we believe as the fools believe?" Nay, of a surety they are the fools, but they do not know.
2:14 When they meet those who believe, they say: "We believe;" but when they are alone with their evil ones, they say: "We are really with you: We (were) only jesting."
2:15 Allah will throw back their mockery on them, and give them rope in their trespasses; so they will wander like blind ones (To and fro).
2:16 These are they who have bartered Guidance for error: But their traffic is profitless, and they have lost true direction,

1mran
6th May 2007, 02:05 AM
Well said,brother1mran.The story of the bull falls right in the context.
Allah says about those selfish dictators who are ruining themselvesand their people at the same time by their stupidities:
2:7 Allah hath set a seal on their hearts and on their hearing, and on their eyes is a veil; great is the penalty they (incur).
2:8 Of the people there are some who say: "We believe in Allah and the Last Day;" but they do not (really) believe.

2:9 Fain would they deceive Allah and those who believe, but they only deceive themselves, and realise (it) not!

2:10 In their hearts is a disease; and Allah has increased their disease: And grievous is the penalty they (incur), because they are false (to themselves).

2:11 When it is said to them: "Make not mischief on the earth," they say: "Why, we only Want to make peace!"

2:12 Of a surety, they are the ones who make mischief, but they realise (it) not.
2:13 When it is said to them: "Believe as the others believe:" They say: "Shall we believe as the fools believe?" Nay, of a surety they are the fools, but they do not know.
2:14 When they meet those who believe, they say: "We believe;" but when they are alone with their evil ones, they say: "We are really with you: We (were) only jesting."
2:15 Allah will throw back their mockery on them, and give them rope in their trespasses; so they will wander like blind ones (To and fro).
2:16 These are they who have bartered Guidance for error: But their traffic is profitless, and they have lost true direction,

Jazakillahu khayrn umm Lina,

but i think those verse are refering to the Hypocrites?

http://www.tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=2&tid=927

Allah knows best

umm lina
6th May 2007, 02:37 AM
In fact brother1mran those rulers if you look at their constituation it says Islam is the religion of the country but it's only ink on paper to calm down the people's anger. Is not that a great Hypocrisy?

1mran
6th May 2007, 02:49 AM
In fact brother1mran those rulers if you look at their constituation it says Islam is the religion of the country but it's only ink on paper to calm down the people's anger. Is not that a great Hypocrisy?


ahh right i see what your saying,

Kenya is not an islamic country, so i was abit confused,

but yes, there are many muslim countries (not only in africa) that dont govern using the Shariah

this actually reminds me of something that happened in university, when the Pakistani society was having its elections, one of the candidates actually said he wanted to split Islam from pakistan. keep in mind that pakistan is called "the islamic replublic of pakistan" and the sole aim for it to be formed was because the muslims wanted their own country!!!

These oppressors have a big punishment and they will be held accountable for what they are doing

Narrated Ibn 'Umar:

The Prophet said, "Oppression will be a darkness on the Day of Resurrection."

[Sahih Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 43, Number 627]