One can only hope that the shrill, ideological voices that distort the meaning of the Egyptian revolution will not prevail, for these are the voices that could lead to catastrophe.
Some of these voices claim that the revolution is the leading edge of a radical Muslim attempt to control the Middle East and then the world.
Some have claimed -- Glenn Beck is a notable case in point -- that the Egyptian revolution is the harbinger of a menacing "one-world government."
Others claim that the Egyptian revolution will ultimately lead to a massive Muslim attack on Israel, thereby ushering in the final "battle of Armageddon" and the end of this world.
What the ideologues all share in common is this: a fear of the Muslim faith which they routinely seek to distort.
In the final analysis, these kinds of fears and apocalyptic warnings undermine the growth of democracy and the best interests of the United States.
That, of course, is a deep and terrible irony, since from its birth as a nation the United States has always sought to inspire democracy throughout the globe.
The truth is this: The Egyptian revolution is being waged by a vast coalition of Muslims, Christians, secularists, and others. Some are old. Some are young. Some are students. Some are workers. Some are desperately poor, and some are not.
But they all share one thing in common: a passion for freedom and democracy. Many Egyptians, in fact, view America as the grand example of the kind of society they hope to create.
How tragic it would be if the shrill, apocalyptic voices so widely heard in America today -- voices that badly misread the meaning of the Egyptian revolution -- finally undermine American support for a movement that could help establish democracy in that vital region of the world.
Once before in America's history, we tragically misread the meaning of a popular revolution and paid a terrible price.
In 1945, seeking independence from French colonial control, Ho Chi Minh created the Democratic Republic of Vietnam with a "declaration of independence" modeled squarely on America's own Declaration of Independence.
The Vietnamese declaration proclaimed that "all men are created equal; they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness."
In 1945, Ho Chi Minh addressed a letter to President Harry Truman that affirmed "the sentiments of friendship and of admiration which our people feel towards the American people." His letter concluded with this strong expression of admiration for the United States: "America's fine stand for peace and international justice on all occasions is not only appreciated by our governing spheres but also by the whole Vietnamese nation."
In 1946, Ho addressed another letter to President Truman, begging for American support against the French who sought to extend colonial control over his country. Ho wrote, "I most earnestly appeal to you personally and to the American people to interfere urgently in support of our independence and help making the negotiations more in keeping with the principles of the Atlantic and San Francisco Charters."
President Truman never responded.
The United States rebuffed a popular movement for Vietnamese independence for one primary reason: our fear of Communism. The Truman administration felt that French control of Vietnam would provide a powerful wall against the spread and growth of Communism in that part of the world.
But by refusing to support the democratic aspirations of that country, we left the Vietnamese with only one other choice -- to turn to Communist powers for their support.
America paid a very high price for that decision, and if we listen to the apocalyptic voices that can find in the Egyptian revolution only the birth of a "one-world government" or the dawn of a great "battle of Armageddon" or the creation of radical Muslim control of the Middle East, we will once again act against our nation's own best interests.
And we may once again pay a terrible price for allowing our fears to subvert our own democratic principles.
Richard T. Hughes is Distinguished Professor of Religion and Director of the Sider Institute for Anabaptist, Pietist, and Wesleyan Studies at Messiah College, and the author of 'Christian America and the Kingdom of God'.
Mary Slosson: Mosque Approval in Southern California: Bellwether for the Rest of the Country?
The reality is this was not a revolution - Far too small a part of the population was involved. The Egyptian Military that has controlled Egypt* since the 1950's is still in control. In fact, they never gave up control. They got rid of Mubarek. The Military suspended the constitution. What happens next is entirely within their hands. Will they relinquish control in six months at the next vote? That's not likely.
*always with the collaboration of a President who took off a military uniform to take office.
"Jihad is the way"is a book written by Mustafa Masshur, who was the official leader of MB in Egypt in 1996-2002. His definition of jihad:
"It should be known that Jihad and preparation towards Jihad are not only for the purpose of fending-off assaults and attacks of Allah's enemies from Muslims, but are also for the purpose of realizing the great task of establishing an Islamic state and strengthening the religion and spreading it around the world..."
"...Jihad for Allah is not limited to the specific region of the Islamic countries, since the Muslim homeland is one and is not divided, and the banner of Jihad has already been raised in some of its parts, and it shall continue to be raised, with the help of Allah, until every inch of the land of Islam will be liberated, the State of Islam will be established,..."
"Jihad is a religious public duty... incumbent upon the Islamic nation, and is a personal duty to fend off the infidels' attack on the nation..."
http://www.palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=157&doc_id=4603
No doubt I had never been to a mosque nor do I have any muslim friends. Experience is a better teacher. My country was under Islamic rule for 800 years and what is the resu;t? Reade this:
"The Mohammadan conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precarious thing, whose delicate complex of order and liberty, culture and peace may at any time be overthrown by barbarians invading from without or multiplying within." - Will Durant
The battle still rages!!!
Ibn Khaldūn (full name, Arabic: Abū Zayd ‘Abdu r-Raḥman bin Muḥammad bin Khaldūn Al-Hadrami, May 27, 1332 AD – March 19, 1406 AD) was an Arab polymath — an astronomer, economist, historian, Islamic jurist, Islamic lawyer, Islamic scholar, Islamic theologian, hafiz, mathematician, military strategist, nutritionist, philosopher, social scientist and statesman—born in North Africa in present-day Tunisia. He is considered a forerunner of several social scientific disciplines: demography, cultural history, historiography, the philosophy of history...Ibn Khaldun is considered by many to be the father of a number of these disciplines, and of social sciences in general for anticipating many elements of these disciplines centuries before they were founded in the West."
Wiki clearly says he was not a man in love with war.. Ibn Kaldun is really not the issue. You are wrong about the meaning of Jihad. I say this to all you cyber experts on Islam: You have never even set foot in a mosque or talked to real Muslims. You would not try to spread false things about Muslims if you had. The definition I give you for jihad is universal amongst Muslims. Please don't be an expert on france who has never been there or spoken the language. Ask us, who are Muslims and we will gladly tell you.
This definition is more exhaustive and more realistic; it also conforms to reality. Read:
What is the goal of Jihad? It was articulated concisely by the scholar Ibn Khaldun: "In the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the (Muslim) mission and the (obligation to) convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force .... Islam is under obligation to gain power over nations."
Muslims can not create a peaceful civil society based on democracy, freedoim and equality for ideological reasons. History confirms the position.
"If nothing else, the Muslim Brotherhood seems a lot different than the picture painted by anti-Muslims."
"MB denounces Al-Qaeda's call to Egypt's protestors to wage Jihad."
Do not believe the TV commercial advertisements!!!
I haven't read it yet; I just saw the title, and wanted to post it here.
MB denounces Al-Qaeda's call to Egypt's protestors to wage Jihad
http://www.ikhwanweb.com/article.php?id=27986
I had an idea ... one that's been effective for me in the past, in terms of getting to the facts about a given person, group or situation ... and which is: go to the source, and see what the source says of itself.
"Q: Some segments of the elite in Egypt and abroad are worried that the Muslim Brotherhood seeks to establish a theocracy. How would you react to that?
A:This concern stems from a wrong understanding of the nature of Islam. To those who speak about a religious state, in the same ecclesiastical meaning given to it in Europe in the middle ages, when the church had hegemony over a State’s authorities, we wish to say that the issue here is completely different.
**
Muslim Brothers think that the constitutional system of government is the closest system of government in the world to Islam. They prefer it to any other system of government."
(Click link below for entire answer; I had to select a couple of brief excerpts per space constraints.)
If nothing else, the Muslim Brotherhood seems a lot different than the picture painted by anti-Muslims.
Imagine that.
Source: http://www.ikhwanweb.com/faq.php
Allah is our objective.
The Prophet is our leader.
Quran is our law.
Jihad is our way.
Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.
This was left out of the English version of their website, which link you posted. Also missing is the official symbol of crossed swords under the book. Enough to make a die-hard apologist wonder?
"In recent months, in Rafsanjan, Iran, a wave of arson attacks was unleashed against Iranian Baha’is for making “friends” with Muslims. After more than a dozen Baha’i-owned shops were burned, a warning letter arrived at Baha’i homes and businesses demanding that the Baha’is “refrain from forming contacts or friendships with Muslims.” This follows arson attacks last year against Baha’i homes in Ivel, Iran — the same village where a decree was once passed forbidding Baha’i- and Muslim-owned cows from grazing together.
This week, four U.S.-based Iranian Baha’is will come to Washington, D.C. to advocate for the release of their innocent relatives, who have been jailed solely due to their religious beliefs. Three of the prisoners they represent are serving 10-year sentences for being part of a national administrative group known as “The Friends,” or Yaran in Farsi, while another prisoner is a young woman serving a four-year sentence for engaging in a project to teach underprivileged youth how to read and write. In efforts to shine light onto a dark and deplorable human rights situation, these relatives will meet with the Chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen; Senator Mark Kirk; Congressman Frank Wolf; as well as officials at the State Department, the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom and members of the press."
If the Egyptian revolution succeeds in a peaceful transition to a true democratic society, and if that society can transplant the major pillars of popular rule into one of the last theocratic holdouts, Heaven on Earth just might be a possibility ...
Just like the French revolution, just like the Russian revolution and just like the Chinese revolution.
It won´t say a darned thing about Muslims.
I agree. The position was caused by the secular's attack on the church and discrediting the institution for minor faultlines. Later they shifted the gear and attacked and discredited the religion itself; the vilification of the religion and its core values destroyed the family, the main institution of the society. Instant divorces and frequet break up of families made the children go astray. In short secularism and socialism led the Christian majority to sleepwalk to suicide.
Simple, name one muslim country that has functioning a democracy, fair treatment of minorities and genuine gender equality. Turkey and Indonesia are inching towards extremism; there are shariaa courts in Malaysia. Islam can not coexist with democracy or freedom. Likewise name one non muslim country where the host population is comfortable with muslim minorities.
I could likewise, ask you to name one muslim country where the host population is comfortable with non-muslim minorities. It's not a fair question, and neither is yours.
Your selective narrow-minded reading of history is frightening. Did Gandhi die for naught?
The United States of America.