Hindu’s land grabbed by Muslim extremists in Bangladesh


A ruling Awami League leader has forcibly occupied a piece of land of a Hindu family in Patgram upazila of Lalmonirhat. On February 9, Bhabani Kanta Sen and his two sons were picked up by a group of ruling party men and held hostage at the house of an AL leader, Nazrul Islam, in Rasulpur village of Bawra union.

An Awami Leaguer is getting structures built on a piece of land that belongs to Bhabani Kanta Sen at Rasulpur of Patgram in Lalmonirhat. The Hindu family had to seek help of the police to ward off the aggression by the ruling party man.

An Awami Leaguer is getting structures built on a piece of land that belongs to Bhabani Kanta Sen at Rasulpur of Patgram in Lalmonirhat. The Hindu family had to seek help of the police to ward off the aggression by the ruling party man.

Bhabani and his sons were forced to sign a non-judicial stamp, stating that they were handing over the ownership of a 32-decimal plot of land to Rabiul Islam Miron, president of the AL Bawra union unit.

Bidyut, son of Bhabani, said they had to sign the document as Rabiul’s men forced them to do so.”I inherited 43 decimals of land. As a legal owner, I sold 11 decimals of land six months back,” Bhabani said, adding that he had been cultivating crops on the remaining 32-decimal piece of land.

Contacted, Rabiul said Bhabani and his sons had willingly signed the stamp stating that they did not have any claim on the land.  Meanwhile, Rabiul has started building structure on the land. Nazrul, also a close aide of Rabiul, said a meeting was held at his house where Bhabani had willingly signed the paper.

Bhabani Kanta Sen at Rasulpur of Patgram in Lalmonirhat. The Hindu family had to seek help of the police to ward off the aggression by the ruling party man.

Bhabani Kanta Sen at Rasulpur of Patgram in Lalmonirhat. The Hindu family had to seek help of the police to ward off the aggression by the ruling party man.

On February 16, Bhabani filed a case with Patgram Police Station. Bhabani had shown necessary documents in support of his ownership, but Rabiul could not produce any, Officer-in-Charge Amiruzzaman told The Daily Star on February 26. Rabiul claimed that his documents were gutted as his house caught fire a few years back.

The OC then said they would take legal actions in this regard after the upazila polls on February 27.When contacted on February 28, the OC said they had asked Rabiul to show his documents by March 2 . If he fails, he [Rabiul] would have to give up the land, the OC added. Upazila AL president Anwarul Islam Nazu said they would take action against the AL men, if found guilty.

Source: The Daily Star

 

8 thoughts on “Hindu’s land grabbed by Muslim extremists in Bangladesh

  1. Where are the secularists and the moderate muslims Now?? I agree that the moderates in Bangladesh did voice their anger and opposition towards the genocide against Hindus in Bangladesh in the recent months but why not the Secularists / moderates/communists of India speak up against this ? I guess Hindu blood does not deserve their attention .

    • Hindu blood is very important as NO blood should be spilt for any religion. Those who commit atrocities against humanity should be condemned and executed according to the Law of the Land!

      • BANGLADESH

        Acts of Killing: How Asia Still Struggles with Histories of Genocide
        
By Ishaan Tharoor
        17 July 2013

        On Monday, a controversial special tribunal in Bangladesh deemed a 90-year-old man a war criminal. Ghulam Azam, the spiritual head of Bangladesh’s far-right Islamist Jamaat-e-Islami party, was found guilty of “crimes against humanity” for the part he played in inciting and organizing death squads that allegedly slaughtered thousands in the final bloody months of Bangladesh’s 1971 war for independence. Rather than give Azam the death sentence — as it had already ruled for a number of others connected to him — the court sentenced the frail nonagenarian to 90 years in jail. A Bangladeshi state official who hoped for Azam’s execution voiced his disappointment: “Some kind of justice is done but we are not happy.” (read more)

        Bangladesh Jamaat leader gets 90 years for genocide
        
By Haroon Habib

        15 July 2013

        A Bangladesh war crimes tribunal on Monday sentenced Ghulam Azam, former chief of Jamaat-e-Islami, to 90 years’ imprisonment for his role in the 1971 genocide of Bangladeshis who fought the Pakistani occupation army for independence. (read more)

        Bangladesh Unrest Seen Intensifying
        By Syed Zain Al-Mahmood, the Wall Street Journal
        30 April 2013

        DHAKA, Bangladesh—Protests that have destabilized Bangladesh and challenged its garment industry are expected to intensify next week, as the country’s war-crimes tribunal issues a fresh round of verdicts.

        Disagreements over the tribunal, meant to heal wounds of a bloody war of independence against Pakistan in 1971, have led to mass street protests and strikes since February. The disturbances have hurt the $20 billion garment industry, which estimates it lost $500 million in orders to India in recent weeks due to street blockades and port shutdowns.

        Some of the factories in the eight-story Rana Plaza building that collapsed last week, killing at least 400 people, were facing financial pressures because of lost orders, company executives have said. Rescue work continued Tuesday at the site of the accident outside the capital, with authorities saying the death toll could still rise significantly. (read more)

        Marchers in Savar on Tuesday demand a death sentence for Sohel Rana, the owner of the building that collapsed last week, killing about 400. (Agence France-Presse/Getty Images)
        The police used a baton on a protester in Dhaka on Thursday. (Reuters)

        Death Toll From Bangladesh Unrest Reaches 44
        By Julfikar Ali Manik and Jim Yardley, New York Times
        1 March 2013

        DHAKA, Bangladesh — The death toll from violent clashes between protesters and security forces in Bangladesh reached at least 44 on Friday, one day after a special war crimes tribunal handed down a death sentence to an Islamic leader for crimes against humanity committed 42 years ago, during the country’s 1971 war of independence from Pakistan.

        The verdict against Islamic leader, Delawar Hossain Sayedee, a leader of Jamaat-e-Islami, an Islamist party, resonated across the country. It was celebrated by the hundreds of thousands of young protesters who have taken to the streets in recent weeks to condemn Jamaat and demand justice in the war crimes cases against other party leaders, insisting that those who were convicted be hanged. (read more)

        Delawar Hossain Sayedee is facing a death sentence. (Reuters)
        The 1971 Bangladesh Genocide

        The formation of an independent Bengali state in 1971 was a result of a genocidal campaign carried out by Pakistan during the Bengali liberation movement. The genocide carried out by West Pakistan led to the extermination of close to 3 million people, along with the forced rape of a quarter of a million young girls and women. During the Genocide ten million people fled to neighboring nations to seek refuge and close to thirty million people were displaced within the country.

        After India was partitioned as a result of religious conflict in the British Raj, the newly formed state of Pakistan was established with a strong Muslim majority in 1947. The region of Bengal was divided along religious lines. The predominantly Muslim eastern half was designated East Pakistan and became part of the newly independent Pakistan. West Pakistan is the Pakistan we know today.

        From the creation of the independent Pakistani state, animosity existed between East and West Pakistan due to linguistic, cultural, and ethnic differences. These tensions grew even stronger as West Pakistan tried to impose Urdu as the sole language of both East and West Pakistan. Urdu was only spoken by 7% of East Pakistan’s population, most of whom spoke Bengali. Bengali students and other citizens strongly resisted such neo-colonialism but their resistance was met with increasing restrictions imposed by West Pakistan in an attempt to wipe out not only the Bengali language but to eliminate what was seen as a “Hindu leaning” culture. Bans were placed on certain words, literature, and music that were deemed too “Hindu leaning.”

        As a response to West Pakistan’s attempts to eliminate Bengali culture, Maulana Abdul Hamid Khan Bhasani along with other East Pakistani leaders created the Awami League to promote Bengali interests. During the1970-1971 elections the Awami League won almost all the East Pakistan seats in the Pakistan national assembly, and would have become the majority party, since East Pakistan had more seats than West. Following the election West Pakistan initiated talks on power allocation. The unsuccessful talks ended in 1971 when the Pakistani President Yahya Khan indefinitely postponed the pending national assembly session and banned participation in the Awami league, which prompted many of it’s leaders to flee to India to seek refuge and set up a government in exile..

        In the weeks leading up to the first massacres in 1971, generals in West Pakistan planned a campaign of genocide to crush the Awami League’s campaign for independence of Bangladesh. President Yahya Khan stated that to stop Bengal’s secession from Pakistan, Pakistani troops would have to “kill three million of them (Bengalis).” He called this plan his “Final Solution.”

        On March 25, 1971 West Pakistani troops began massacres of unarmed citizens in the capital city of Dhaka. The main targets during the first massacres were students and professors at Dhaka University, the Bengali police force, Bengali Paramilitias, and the Hindu minority. The Pakistani elite believed that the roots of the liberation movement were Bengali intellectuals and Hindu minorities.

        The first massacre in Dhaka left 7,000 people dead in a single night. The massacre failed to quell nationalist sentiments. Instead on March 26th Bangladesh declared independence from Pakistan. Nationalist pride grew as the news of the March 25th massacres spread to surrounding areas and an amateur Bengali army was assembled. The small ill-equipped army failed to keep Pakistani troops out of Bangladesh and led to a large number of casualties along with the displacement of many Bengali nationals into neighboring countries. The first six weeks of the genocide was characterized by weak, uncoordinated counter-attacks by Bengali militias and mass slaughter of Bengali civilians by the West Pakistani army.

        To combat the larger Pakistani army, Bangladesh increased the number of its guerilla troops and sought external support, especially from India. As the violence intensified, mass rape was used as a weapon of war by the Pakistani army. Women were raped in their homes in front of their families to cause lasting mental and physical trauma. They were also taken to rape camps. It is estimated that 200,000 women and girls, from 8 to 75 years of age, were raped during the genocide.

        In the final weeks of the liberation war, India heavily supported Bangladesh. To retaliate Pakistani forces pillaged and destroyed towns and villages. Large-scale massacres were perpetrated by Pakistani troops in the final weeks of the conflict. Intellectuals and professionals were systematically exterminated, using a list of names created by Major-General Rao Forman Ali. On December 16th, 1971 Pakistan surrendered to Bengali and Indian troops, but only after three million lives had been lost and tens of millions of people had been displaced.

        After the Bangladesh Genocide there were years of “national forgetting.” While many nations reached out to support Bangladesh after the genocide, Bangladesh government policy was more to cover up and forget the genocide than to seek justice and reparations.

        India brought a case against Pakistan to the International Court of Justice for violation of the Genocide Convention (the first legal case ever brought under the Convention), but dropped the case by diplomatic agreement. Bangladesh resisted any action to bring the genocide to the international court.

        Women who were raped were left without support of their male family members, were rejected as polluted, and left to support themselves. The rate of suicides following the genocide increased substantially due to feelings of shame and dishonor. The state launched large-scale international adoption and abortion campaigns to “cleanse” the nation of Pakistani children of rape. A national “Marry Them Off” campaign was also launched to marry widows and victims of rape to restore the nation, as part of the campaign of national forgetting.

        Successful trials were never held for the war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide committed by the Pakistani Army. Indeed many of the Generals who led the Genocide were promoted and one even became President of Pakistan.

        Send information to: Bangladesh@genocidewatch.org.

        Updates

        19 June 2012 ” Bangladesh: Mass Sentencing Raises Fair Trial Concerns Prosecution Should Halt Trials Until a New System Is Created” By Human Rights Watch

        4 June 2012 “Prominent Jurist: Bangla Government Not Protecting Human Rights” by Anis Ahmed

        26 April 2012 ” Bangladesh: Alarming Rise in ‘Diassaperances'” by Human Rights Watch

        24 April 2012 “Bangladesh: Authorities must account for deaths amid spate of disappearances” by Amnesty International

        13 February 2012 “Bangladesh: Student Activist at Risk of Torture” Amnesty International

        3 August 2010 “Bangladesh: Bringing a forgotten genocide to justice,” by Ishaan Tharoor, Time Magazine

        22 February 2010 “Bangladesh: Trial people killed and villages burnt in army and settler attack,” by Survival International

        January 2010 “Defiant Voices,” an exhibition by Bangladesh Dalit Human Rights and One World Action
        11 December 2009 “Bangladesh: Getting Police Reform on Track,” by International Crisis Group

        August 2009 “Historicizing 1971 genocide: State versus person” by Imtiaz Ahmed

        18 May 2009 “Ignoring Executions and Torture: Impunity for Bangladesh’s Security Forces,” by Human Rights Watch

        5 June 2008 “End Mass Arrests, Release Detainees,” by Human Rights Watch

        31 May 2008 “Bangladesh Detains 50 Grassroots Leaders, Police Say,” by Reuters

        28 April 2008 “Restoring Democracy in Bangladesh,” by International Crisis Group

        24 April 2008 “Seven Jumma villages burnt down in Chittagong Hill Tracts,” by Survival International

        15 February 2008 “Independent Team Denounces Repression of Jumma Tribes,” by Survival International

        9 October 2006 “Claiming a Past, Making a Future: The Liberation War Museum (Dhaka) as a Site of Struggle,” by Shelley Feldman, Cornell and Binghamton University.

        11 December 2003 “30 are Killed in Bangladesh as Villagers Stalk Bandits,” by Agence France-Presse, The New York Times

        • “A Bangladesh war crimes tribunal on Monday sentenced Ghulam Azam, former chief of Jamaat-e-Islami, to 90 years’ imprisonment for his role in the 1971 genocide of Bangladeshis who fought the Pakistani occupation army for independence.”

          Correct, that is what should happen to anyone who terrorises!!

          • ONE DOWN THOUSANDS MORE NEED TO BE IMPRISONED:

            THE 1971 BANGLADESH MOHAMMEDAN/PAKISTANI GENOCIDE

            The formation of an independent Bengali state in 1971 was a result of a genocidal campaign carried out by Pakistan during the Bengali liberation movement. The genocide carried out by West Pakistan led to the extermination of close to 3 million people, along with the forced rape of a quarter of a million young girls and women. During the Genocide ten million people fled to neighboring nations to seek refuge and close to thirty million people were displaced within the country.

            After India was partitioned as a result of religious conflict in the British Raj, the newly formed state of Pakistan was established with a strong Muslim majority in 1947. The region of Bengal was divided along religious lines. The predominantly Muslim eastern half was designated East Pakistan and became part of the newly independent Pakistan. West Pakistan is the Pakistan we know today.

            From the creation of the independent Pakistani state, animosity existed between East and West Pakistan due to linguistic, cultural, and ethnic differences. These tensions grew even stronger as West Pakistan tried to impose Urdu as the sole language of both East and West Pakistan. Urdu was only spoken by 7% of East Pakistan’s population, most of whom spoke Bengali. Bengali students and other citizens strongly resisted such neo-colonialism but their resistance was met with increasing restrictions imposed by West Pakistan in an attempt to wipe out not only the Bengali language but to eliminate what was seen as a “Hindu leaning” culture. Bans were placed on certain words, literature, and music that were deemed too “Hindu leaning.”

            As a response to West Pakistan’s attempts to eliminate Bengali culture, Maulana Abdul Hamid Khan Bhasani along with other East Pakistani leaders created the Awami League to promote Bengali interests. During the1970-1971 elections the Awami League won almost all the East Pakistan seats in the Pakistan national assembly, and would have become the majority party, since East Pakistan had more seats than West. Following the election West Pakistan initiated talks on power allocation. The unsuccessful talks ended in 1971 when the Pakistani President Yahya Khan indefinitely postponed the pending national assembly session and banned participation in the Awami league, which prompted many of it’s leaders to flee to India to seek refuge and set up a government in exile..

            In the weeks leading up to the first massacres in 1971, generals in West Pakistan planned a campaign of genocide to crush the Awami League’s campaign for independence of Bangladesh. President Yahya Khan stated that to stop Bengal’s secession from Pakistan, Pakistani troops would have to “kill three million of them (Bengalis).” He called this plan his “Final Solution.”

            On March 25, 1971 West Pakistani troops began massacres of unarmed citizens in the capital city of Dhaka. The main targets during the first massacres were students and professors at Dhaka University, the Bengali police force, Bengali Paramilitias, and the Hindu minority. The Pakistani elite believed that the roots of the liberation movement were Bengali intellectuals and Hindu minorities.

            The first massacre in Dhaka left 7,000 people dead in a single night. The massacre failed to quell nationalist sentiments. Instead on March 26th Bangladesh declared independence from Pakistan. Nationalist pride grew as the news of the March 25th massacres spread to surrounding areas and an amateur Bengali army was assembled. The small ill-equipped army failed to keep Pakistani troops out of Bangladesh and led to a large number of casualties along with the displacement of many Bengali nationals into neighboring countries. The first six weeks of the genocide was characterized by weak, uncoordinated counter-attacks by Bengali militias and mass slaughter of Bengali civilians by the West Pakistani army.

            To combat the larger Pakistani army, Bangladesh increased the number of its guerilla troops and sought external support, especially from India. As the violence intensified, mass rape was used as a weapon of war by the Pakistani army. Women were raped in their homes in front of their families to cause lasting mental and physical trauma. They were also taken to rape camps. It is estimated that 200,000 women and girls, from 8 to 75 years of age, were raped during the genocide.

            In the final weeks of the liberation war, India heavily supported Bangladesh. To retaliate Pakistani forces pillaged and destroyed towns and villages. Large-scale massacres were perpetrated by Pakistani troops in the final weeks of the conflict. Intellectuals and professionals were systematically exterminated, using a list of names created by Major-General Rao Forman Ali. On December 16th, 1971 Pakistan surrendered to Bengali and Indian troops, but only after three million lives had been lost and tens of millions of people had been displaced.

            After the Bangladesh Genocide there were years of “national forgetting.” While many nations reached out to support Bangladesh after the genocide, Bangladesh government policy was more to cover up and forget the genocide than to seek justice and reparations.

            India brought a case against Pakistan to the International Court of Justice for violation of the Genocide Convention (the first legal case ever brought under the Convention), but dropped the case by diplomatic agreement. Bangladesh resisted any action to bring the genocide to the international court.

            Women who were raped were left without support of their male family members, were rejected as polluted, and left to support themselves. The rate of suicides following the genocide increased substantially due to feelings of shame and dishonor. The state launched large-scale international adoption and abortion campaigns to “cleanse” the nation of Pakistani children of rape. A national “Marry Them Off” campaign was also launched to marry widows and victims of rape to restore the nation, as part of the campaign of national forgetting.

            Successful trials were never held for the war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide committed by the Pakistani Army. Indeed many of the Generals who led the Genocide were promoted and one even became President of Pakistan.

      • “Hindu blood is very important as NO blood should be spilt for any religion”.

        YOU ARE EITHER A TAQIYYA/LYING MOHAMMEDAN OR AN IGNORANT MOHAMMEDAN

        “Kill an innocent person You kill the whole of Mankind”.

        Many websites and public figures have claimed that the following verse appears in the Qur’an, and that it denounces killing and equates the slaying of one human life to that of genocide against the entirety of mankind.

        “If anyone slays a person, it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people.”

        Qur’an

        However, this verse cannot be found in any printed copy of the Qur’an, regardless of whether or not it is in the original Arabic or in one of its many English translations. The reason for this is simple: the verse in question does not exist.

        Qur’an 5:32
        What is actually presented by apologists is a distorted, out-of-context and wholly misleading paraphrasing of the following verse:

        On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if anyone slew a person – unless it be in retaliation for murder or for spreading mischief in the land – it would be as if he slew all mankind: and if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of all humanity.
        Qur’an 5:32

        ANALYSIS

        Its Context

        Firstly, this verse is written in past tense (Ordained, not Ordain) and clearly does not apply to Muslims but to “THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL” i.e. the Jews who, according to Islam, received an earlier set of scriptures. In fact, it’s mistakingly referencing a rabbinical commentary found in the Talmud as if it were the words of God.

        Secondly, when the clause which allows killing is reinserted and we read it in context with the following 2 verses directed at Muslims (notice the reference to Allah’s messenger and the switch to present tense), what first appeared on the surface to be a peaceful message, is in actual fact a warning to non-believers:
        The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter; Except for those who repent before they fall into your power: in that case, know that Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.
        Qur’an 5:33-34

        KILL AN INNOCENT PERSON & YOU KILL THE WHOLE OF MANKIND

        Its Application to Muslims

        According to the highly respected Qur’anic exegesis of Ibn Kathir- early Qur’anic commentator and Tabi’un, Sayid ibn Jubayr (who lived at the time of Muhammad, and was a companion of Aisha), had said:
        [فَكَأَنَّمَا قَتَلَ النَّاسَ جَمِيعاً]

        …..Sa`id bin Jubayr said, “He who allows himself to shed the blood of a Muslim, is like he who allows shedding the blood of all people. He who forbids shedding the blood of one Muslim, is like he who forbids shedding the blood of all people.” In addition, Ibn Jurayj said that Al-A`raj said that Mujahid commented on the Ayah,

        Human Beings Should Respect the Sanctity of Other Human Beings
        Tafsir Ibn Kathir
        Also reported by another Tabi’un and commentator of the Qur’an, Mujahid ibn Jabr (a student of Ibn Abbas; a paternal cousin of Muhammad) while commenting on verse 5:32:

        He who kills a believing soul intentionally, Allah makes the Fire of Hell his abode, He will become angry with him, and curse him, and has prepared a tremendous punishment for him, equal to if he had killed all people, his punishment will still be the same.

        Human Beings Should Respect the Sanctity of Other Human Beings
        Tafsir Ibn Kathir

        Being a companion of Muhammad, Ibn Abbas was present around the time these verses were revealed. Together with ibn Jabr, he went through the Qur’an thirty times and memorised the meanings. Muslim scholars consider ibn Jabr to have the highest reliability.

        THE WORTH OF A NON BELIEVER

        We now know that verse 5:32 is NOT CONDEMNING THE KILLING OF A NON MUSLIM, and that a Muslim must not murder another Muslim, but what of the non-believers? What is the worth of their lives? According to sahih hadith, Muhammad SAID THE LIFE OF A NON MUSLIM IS NOT SACRED.

        Narrated Anas bin Malik:
        Allah’s Apostle said, “I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.’ And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally and their reckoning will be with Allah.” Narrated Maimun ibn Siyah that he asked Anas bin Malik,
        “O Abu Hamza! What makes the life and property of a person sacred?” He replied, “Whoever says, ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah’, faces our Qibla during the prayers, prays like us and eats our slaughtered animal, then he is a Muslim, and has got the same rights and obligations as other Muslims have.”
        Sahih Bukhari 1:8:387, See Also: Sahih Bukhari 1:2:24

        KILL AN INNOCENT PERSON & YOU KILL THE WHOLE OF MANKIND

        Furthermore, Muhammad also gave the verdict (fatwa) that a Muslim can not be killed for killing a non-Muslim.

        Narrated Abu Juhaifa: I asked ‘Ali “Do you have anything Divine literature besides what is in the Qur’an?” Or, as Uyaina once said, “Apart from what the people have?” ‘Ali said, “By Him Who made the grain split (germinate) and created the soul, we have nothing except what is in the Quran and the ability (gift) of understanding Allah’s Book which He may endow a man, with and what is written in this sheet of paper.” I asked, “What is on this paper?” He replied, “The legal regulations of Diya (Blood-money) and the (ransom for) releasing of the captives, and the judgment that no Muslim should be killed in Qisas (equality in punishment) for killing a Kafir (disbeliever).”
        Sahih Bukhari 9:83:50, See Also: Sahih Bukhari 1:3:111, and Sahih Bukhari 4:52:283

        The vast majority of Muslim scholars hold this view, while a minority believe that a Muslim can be killed if he kills a non-Muslim Dhimmi who is under the “protection” of the Islamic community.

        The Meaning of “Mischief”

        The Qur’an is vague in what actions deserve punishments such as execution, crucifixion, the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land.

        Putting aside the fact that no Muslim is allowed to be killed for the killing of a non-Muslim, “Murder” is quite straight forward, but what does it mean to “spread mischief”?

        In the Tafsir ibn Kathir, Qatada, one of Muhammad’s companions, explained the definition of “Mischief” according to Islam:

        (And when it is said to them: “Do not make mischief on the earth,”), means, “Do not commit acts of disobedience on the earth. Their mischief is disobeying Allah, because whoever disobeys Allah on the earth, or commands that Allah be disobeyed, he has committed mischief on the earth.

        MEANING OF MISCHIEF

        Tafsir Ibn Kathir
        In the Tafsir ibn Abbas:

        (For that) because Cain wrongfully killed Abel (cause We decreed for the Children of Israel) in the Torah (that whosoever killeth a human being for other than man slaughter) i.e. premeditatedly (or corruption in the earth) or because of idolatry, (it shall be as if be had killed all mankind)
        Surah al-Ma’idah, ayah 32
        Tafsir Ibn Abbas
        In the Tafsir al-Jalalayn, by al-Suyuti, the following commentary is found:

        Because of that, which Cain did, We decreed for the Children of Israel that whoever slays a soul for other than a soul, slain, or for, other than, corruption, committed, in the land, in the way of unbelief, fornication or waylaying and the like, it shall be as if he had slain mankind altogether; and whoever saves the life of one, by refraining from slaying, it shall be as if he had saved the life of all mankind — Ibn ‘Abbās said [that the above is meant] in the sense of violating and protecting its [a soul’s] sanctity [respectively]. Our messengers have already come to them, that is, to the Children of Israel, with clear proofs, miracles, but after that many of them still commit excesses in the land, overstepping the bounds through disbelief, killing and the like.
        Surah al-Ma’idah, ayah 32
        Tafsir al-Jalalayn

        This understanding of what constitutes ‘mischief’ in Islam is confirmed by looking to other verses found within the Qur’an. Verse 7:103, for example:

        Then after them We sent Moses with Our signs to Pharaoh and his chiefs, but they wrongfully rejected them: So see what was the end of those who made mischief.
        Qur’an 7:103

        Clearly “mischief” which is also equated to “waging war against Allah and His Messenger” in the very next verse, can and does apply to someone who simply refuses to accept Islam.

        According to Shaykh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the world’s most quoted independent Islamic jurist:

        Surah al-Ma’idah (5:33) says: “The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His apostle is that they should be murdered or crucified.” According to Abi Kulaba’s narration this verse means the apostates. And many hadiths, not only one or two, but many, narrated by a number of Muhammad’s companions state that any apostate should be killed.

        So what was first offered as the height of moral teachings found in the Qur’an, turns out to be an intolerant call to violence.

        CONCLUSION

        In this instance, as in many others, it is the apologists, not the skeptics, who are misinterpreting verses and quoting them out of context. A simple reading of the verse and those that surround it makes this clear.
        In the Islamic world, those who propagate their non-Islamic faiths or publicly criticize Islam are often harassed, imprisoned and even executed by their communities or their governments, under laws against “spreading disorder [mischief] through the land” and apostasy.

        If verse 5:32 means what some apologists claim it to mean, why are they so reluctant to quote the verse accurately rather than presenting a misleading paraphrasing of what they wished the verse had said? Furthermore, why are moderates unable to silence fellow Muslims on an intellectual level by using that very verse?

        They are unable to because their claim is false, and (as proven by the actions of many) anyone who is familiar with the Qur’an already knows this.

        • Lucky bin “intelligent Satan” : OK, let us analyse briefly the verses 5:33-34 since we have nothing else to do:

          First, Q 5:33 “The only reward of those who make war upon Allah and His messenger and strive after corruption in the land will be that they will be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet on alternate sides cut off, or will be expelled out of the land. Such will be their degradation in the world, and in the Hereafter theirs will be an awful doom;”

          1. The Quran warns us ALL, believers and Non-believers, NOT to wage war on Allah and his Messenger, meaning Islam. Then why do you want to be the first to provoke? If somebody commits Treason against his country and the leaders, what would be the punishment? Is it good to wage war against anybody??????

          2. “And those who strive after corruption” : meaning going against the established Principles of Islam…be it the Leader or his cronies, applying to believers and Nonbelievers. Corruption is NOT allowed in Islam! Is corruption good or bad??????

          3. “They will be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet on alternate sides cut off”. You ARE warned already!! That is the maximum punishment prescribed. Anything wrong with that?????????

          4. “Or… or….or…or will be expelled out of the land”. Isn’t that an ALTERNATIVE to the above severe punishment??????????

          5. “Then in the hereafter..will be painful doom”. referring to punishment after death!!

          And the next verse, 5:34 says: “Save those who repent before ye overpower them. For know that Allah is Forgiving, Merciful”.

          Allah is forgiving to those who repent and accept their mistake of forming such evil intentions as waging a war against Islam!!!!!!!

          What is wrong with the above verses as they are mere fore-warnings????

          So, you Catholic slag, scum, nincompoop…why do you want to wage a war against Islam when you have already been warned and the punishment that will be given to you…numbskull????

          • LISTEN YOU STUPID, IGNORANT MOTHERFUCKER!

            THE PERVERT OF MECCA ATTACKED ALL THE TRIBES OF ARABIA & FORCED THEM TO CONVERT OR DIE!

            THAT’S YOUR FUCKING RELIGION OF PEACE!

            WHEN THE PERVERT OF MECCA WAS MURDERED BY HIS WIVES & COMPANIONS, THOUSANDS OF ARABIANS LEFT THE CULT OF DEATH & RETURNED TO THEIR OLD RELIGION!

            THE PIMP ABU BAKR & THE PSYCHOPATH UMAR WENT ON JIHAD AFTER THE ARABIANS, KILLING MANY OF THEM & FORCING THE OTHERS TO RE-CONVERT!

            THEN THE PSYCHOPATIC MOTHERFUCKER UMAR SPREAD ALL OVER THE MIDDLE EAST, SPREADING THE CULT OF DEATH BY THE SWORD OR OFFERING DHIMMI STATUS TO JEWS & CHRISTIANS:

            JEWS IN ISLAMIC COUNTRIES:THE TREATMENT OF JEWS

            Arabs sometimes claim that, as “Semites,” they cannot possibly be anti-Semitic. This, however, is a semantic distortion that ignores the reality of Arab discrimination and hostility toward Jews. Arabs, like any other people, can indeed be anti-Semitic.

            The term “anti-Semite” was coined in Germany in 1879 by Wilhelm Marr to refer to the anti-Jewish manifestations of the period and to give Jew-hatred a more scientific sounding name.(1) “Anti-Semitism” has been accepted and understood to mean hatred of the Jewish people.

            Princeton University historian Bernard Lewis has written: “The Golden Age of equal rights was a myth, and belief in it was a result, more than a cause, of Jewish sympathy for Islam.”(2)

            Muhammad, the founder of Islam, traveled to Medina in 622 A.D. to attract followers to his new faith. When the Jews of Medina refused to convert and rejected Muhammad, two of the major Jewish tribes were expelled; in 627, Muhammad’s followers killed between 600 and 900 of the men, and divided the surviving Jewish women and children amongst themselves.(3)

            The Muslim attitude toward Jews is reflected in various verses throughout the Koran, the holy book of the Islamic faith. “They [the Children of Israel] were consigned to humiliation and wretchedness. They brought the wrath of God upon themselves, and this because they used to deny God’s signs and kill His Prophets unjustly and because they disobeyed and were transgressors” (Sura 2:61). According to the Koran, the Jews try to introduce corruption (5:64), have always been disobedient (5:78), and are enemies of Allah, the Prophet and the angels (2:97­98).

            THE DHIMMI

            Still, as “People of the Book,” Jews (and Christians) are protected under Islamic law. The traditional concept of the “dhimma” (“writ of protection”) was extended by Muslim conquerors to Christians and Jews in exchange for their subordination to the Muslims. Peoples subjected to Muslim rule usually had a choice between DEATH & CONVERSION, but Jews and Christians, who adhered to the Scriptures, were allowed as dhimmis (protected persons) to practice their faith. This “protection” did little, however, to insure that Jews and Christians were treated well by the Muslims. On the contrary, an integral aspect of the dhimma was that, being an infidel, he had to openly acknowledge the superiority of the true believer–the Muslim.

            In the early years of the Islamic conquest, the “tribute” (or jizya), paid as a yearly poll tax, symbolized the subordination of the dhimmi. Later, the inferior status of Jews and Christians was reinforced through a series of regulations that governed the behavior of the dhimmi. Dhimmis, on pain of death, were forbidden to mock or criticize the Koran, Islam or Muhammad, to proselytize among Muslims or to touch a Muslim woman (though a Muslim man could take a non­Muslim as a wife).

            Dhimmis were excluded from public office and armed service, and were forbidden to bear arms. They were not allowed to ride horses or camels, to build synagogues or churches taller than mosques, to construct houses higher than those of Muslims or to drink wine in public. They were not allowed to pray or mourn in loud voices-as that might offend the Muslims. The dhimmi had to show public deference toward Muslims-always yielding them the center of the road. The dhimmi was not allowed to give evidence in court against a Muslim, and his oath was unacceptable in an Islamic court. To defend himself, the dhimmi would have to purchase Muslim witnesses at great expense. This left the dhimmi with little legal recourse when harmed by a Muslim.(4)

            Dhimmis were also forced to wear distinctive clothing. In the ninth century, for example, Baghdad’s Caliph al-Mutawakkil designated a yellow badge for Jews, setting a precedent that would be followed centuries later in Nazi Germany.(5)

            VIOLENCE AGAINST JEWS

            At various times, Jews in Muslim lands were able to live in relative peace and thrive culturally and economically. The position of the Jews was never secure, however, and changes in the political or social climate would often lead to persecution, violence and death. Jews were generally viewed with contempt by their Muslim neighbors; peaceful coexistence between the two groups involved the subordination and degradation of the Jews.

            When Jews were perceived as having achieved too comfortable a position in Islamic society, anti-Semitism would surface, often with devastating results: On December 30, 1066, Joseph HaNagid, the Jewish vizier of Granada, Spain, was crucified by an Arab mob that proceeded to raze the Jewish quarter of the city and slaughter its 5,000 inhabitants. The riot was incited by Muslim preachers who had angrily objected to what they saw as inordinate Jewish political power.

            Similarly, in 1465, Arab mobs in Fez slaughtered thousands of Jews, leaving only 11 alive, after a Jewish deputy vizier treated a Muslim woman in “an offensive manner.” The killings touched off a wave of similar massacres throughout Morocco.(6)

            Other mass murders of Jews in Arab lands occurred in Morocco in the 8th century, where whole communities were wiped out by Muslim ruler Idris I; North Africa in the 12th century, where the Almohads either forcibly converted or decimated several communities; Libya in 1785, where Ali Burzi Pasha murdered hundreds of Jews; Algiers, where Jews were massacred in 1805, 1815 and 1830 and Marrakesh, Morocco, where more than 300 hundred Jews were murdered between 1864 and 1880.(7)

            Decrees ordering the destruction of synagogues were enacted in Egypt and Syria (1014, 1293-4, 1301-2), Iraq (854-859, 1344) and Yemen (1676). Despite the Koran’s prohibition, Jews were forced to convert to Islam or face death in Yemen (1165 and 1678), Morocco (1275, 1465 and 1790-92) and Baghdad (1333 and 1344).(8)

            As distinguished Orientalist G.E. von Grunebaum has written:

            It would not be difficult to put together the names of a very sizeable number of Jewish subjects or citizens of the Islamic area who have attained to high rank, to power, to great financial influence, to significant and recognized intellectual attainment; and the same could be done for Christians. But it would again not be difficult to compile a lengthy list of persecutions, arbitrary confiscations, attempted forced conversions, or pogroms.(9)

            The situation of Jews in Arab lands reached a low point in the 19th century. Jews in most of North Africa (including Algeria, Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and Morocco) were forced to live in ghettos. In Morocco, which contained the largest Jewish community in the Islamic Diaspora, Jews were made to walk barefoot or wear shoes of straw when outside the ghetto. Even Muslim children participated in the degradation of Jews, by throwing stones at them or harassing them in other ways. The frequency of anti-Jewish violence increased, and many Jews were executed on charges of apostasy. Ritual murder accusations against the Jews became commonplace in the Ottoman Empire.(10)

            By the twentieth century, the status of the dhimmi in Muslim lands had not significantly improved. H.E.W. Young, British Vice Consul in Mosul, wrote in 1909:

            The attitude of the Muslims toward the Christians and the Jews is that of a master towards slaves, whom he treats with a certain lordly tolerance so long as they keep their place. Any sign of pretension to equality is promptly repressed.(11)

            The danger for Jews became even greater as a showdown approached in the UN over partition in 1947. The Syrian delegate, Faris el-Khouri, warned: “Unless the Palestine problem is settled, we shall have difficulty in protecting and safeguarding the Jews in the Arab world.”(12)

            More than a thousand Jews were killed in anti-Jewish rioting during the 1940’s in Iraq, Libya, Egypt, Syria and Yemen.(13) This helped trigger the mass exodus of Jews from Arab countries.

            Sources:
            1. Vamberto Morais, A Short History of Anti-Semitism, (NY: W.W Norton and Co., 1976), p. 11; Bernard Lewis, Semites & Anti-Semites, (NY: WW Norton & Co., 1986), p. 81.
            2. Bernard Lewis, “The Pro-Islamic Jews,” Judaism, (Fall 1968), p. 401.
            3. Bat Ye’or, The Dhimmi, (NJ: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 1985), pp. 43-44.
            4. Bat Yeor, pp. 30, 56-57; Louis Gardet, La Cite Musulmane: Vie sociale et politique, (Paris: Etudes musulmanes, 1954), p. 348.
            5. Bat Yeor, pp. 185-86, 191, 194.
            6. Norman Stillman, The Jews of Arab Lands, (PA: The Jewish Publication Society of America, 1979), pp. 59, 284.
            7. Maurice Roumani, The Case of the Jews from Arab Countries: A Neglected Issue, (Tel Aviv: World Organization of Jews from Arab Countries, 1977), pp. 26-27.
            8. Bat Ye’or, p. 61
            9. G.E. Von Grunebaum, “Eastern Jewry Under Islam,” Viator, (1971), p. 369.
            10. Bernard Lewis, The Jews of Islam, (NJ: Princeton University Press, 1984) p. 158.
            11. Middle Eastern Studies, (1971), p. 232.
            12. New York Times, (February 19, 1947).
            13. Roumani, pp. 30-31.

            ONLY ONE WISH:

            A Canadian, a Kenyan, and a Chinese heard about a mountain that if you jumped off it and said something you’d land in it. So they decided they’d try it when they got there the Chinese jumped of it and yelled money and landed in millions of dollars, then the Canadian ran and jumped off and he yelled hot naked woman and he landed in a pile of hot naked woman. Finally the Kenyan guy ran for the edge, tripped and yelled SHIT and he landed in a pile of shit.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s