Akhwani leader hanged for war-crimes in 1971 in Bangladesh

[RevolutionThroughReason]

Speaking of Syed Qutab and Maulana Maudidi, a Jama’at Islami activist, Khalil Hamedi has quoted an Egyptian magazine giving some detail of the trial of Syed Qutab, before the military tribunal. Referring to his militant views the tribunal asked Syed Qutab, “Did you not copy these thoughts from the writings of Maududi.” Syed Qutub replied, “I have benefited from the books of Maududi.” The tribunal again asked. “What is the difference between your movement and Maududi’s movement”, Syed Qutub Replied, “No difference.” (20)

So basically Not the actual quote but a THIRD hand reference. Since when did Sayyd Qutb speak Urdu? When did Jama'at members speak Egyptian Arabic?

The quote you state is inconsequential.


Remember you wrote this,

I have read Ikhwani literature from different countries and they all support Pakistan regarding the 1971 war and all support Jamaat and are indifferent to war crimes against the Bangladeshi people.

Here you claimed Ikhwan Literature Supported Pakistan regarding the 1971 War on Bengalis and that all support Jama'at

You have not shown ANY literature which shows this but a Third hand quote....which has not been verified.

[jankhan]

So basically Not the actual quote but a THIRD hand reference. Since when did Sayyd Qutb speak Urdu? When did Jama'at members speak Egyptian Arabic?

The quote you state is inconsequential.


Remember you wrote this,




Here you claimed Ikhwan Literature Supported Pakistan regarding the 1971 War on Bengalis and that all support Jama'at

You have not shown ANY literature which shows this but a Third hand quote....which has not been verified.

hahahah ... Bengal Tiger just copy paste from here and there loads of text to prove his point but he failed. This is his typical style.
Badlun's style is to repetition.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

hahahah ... Bengal Tiger just copy paste from here and there loads of text to prove his point but he failed. This is his typical style.
Badlun's style is to repetition.

There's nothing wrong with copy and pasting material if he's quoting things thhat actually support his claims but here he's quoting a QUOTE of a QUOTE; but we don't even know where the ORIGINAL quote came from, just some Jama'at guy running his mouth.

All this AFTER he claimed he read Ikhwan literature, you'd think he'd be able to actually find Ikhwan literature to support his claims

but no .....

[jankhan]

There's nothing wrong with copy and pasting material if he's quoting things thhat actually support his claims but here he's quoting a QUOTE of a QUOTE; but we don't even know where the ORIGINAL quote came from, just some Jama'at guy running his mouth.

All this AFTER he claimed he read Ikhwan literature, you'd think he'd be able to actually find Ikhwan literature to support his claims

but no .....

Once again hahahaha

sorry bengal tiger and badlun but you both need to be more precise and relevant knowledge of what you both claim to have knowledge of.

[Bengal_Tiger]

So basically Not the actual quote but a THIRD hand reference. Since when did Sayyd Qutb speak Urdu? When did Jama'at members speak Egyptian Arabic?

The quote you state is inconsequential.


Remember you wrote this,




Here you claimed Ikhwan Literature Supported Pakistan regarding the 1971 War on Bengalis and that all support Jama'at

You have not shown ANY literature which shows this but a Third hand quote....which has not been verified.

RevolutionThroughReason.

1. The text which I pasted was not for you but for the wider audience reading this thread (including lurkers), it was to draw attention to the ideological connection and ties between Maududi and Qutb.

It was not meant to be as evidnce of Ikhwani/Brotherhood literature supporting Pakistan.

Anyway you and JanKhan are both trolls. JanKhan posts low-quality one-line messages mocking and insulting members personally rather than comment on the topic. You are a well-known troublemaker, Arab nationalist and hater of Pashtunwali, who insults members here and calls members "rapists" and so on. You have also called for India to conquer Bangladesh.

Not going to happen since we have a 0.2 million strong army and a 6 million strong reserve force of Ansar/VDP.

You are now both going to be permanently placed on ignore as I do not come on this forum to waste my time responding to nonsense from Arab nationalists or racist Pakistani Pathans.

BYE.


Everyone else


2. Ikhwanis in general believe that Bangladesh should never have been created as it was in their eyes obligatory for a Muslim country to remain one (this is a valid and understandable opinion). However they are ignorant to the atrocities carried out by the Pakistan army or indifferent to them. One example of an ignorant Ikhwani is Qardawi. Qardawi is not some obscure figure but arguably the spiritual reference point of the Egyptian Brotherhood.

Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi Address Govt. of Bangladesh[Sub]-2012. - YouTube

In fact on the eve of operation searchlight, most Bengalis did not want independence but greater rights within the federation of Pakistan and the implementation of the six point plan. It was the Pakistan army's massacres that made the people defend themselves and resist and self-preservation and independence were the only thing on their agenda.

Ikhwanis are heavily influenced by the Pakistani narrative of a "good" and "Muslim" Pakistan army fighting against "Indian-backed" insurgents.

In fact the resistance to the Pakistanis was in fact mainly formed around ex-Pakistani soldiers (ethnic Bengalis) of the East Bengal Regiment, some who had saved Lahore from being captured by India 6 years earlier in 1965. However some of these same East Bengal Regiment soldiers were called by their West Pakistani officers and shot simply for being Bengali. One of the key soldiers of the Bengali resistance was Ziaur Rahman, who is subsequently known for his great work for pan-Islamic unity as president of Bangladesh.

So the resistance were Muslim Bengalis, who believed in Islam, prayed and fasted and merely defended their people.



Ziaur Rahman.

Qardawi in the video above simply regurgitates the Pakistani/Jamaati narrative and speaks ignorantly as if trials of Jamaati leaders is an attack on the whole of Bangladeshi Islamic scholarship or ulama when in fact the vast majority of 'ulama in Bangladesh hate Jamaatis and face no trials or anything.

Nowhere in Qardawi's propaganda video is any acknowledgement of the huge slaughter and mass rapes that Bengalis suffered. The Pakistani narrative and the Ikhwani narrative which bases itself on it, de-Islamizes Bengalis but totally "Islamizes", Pakistanis or the Pakistan army. Only they are Muslim, Bengalis are not. If they are, they are a lesser type of Muslim or their Muslimness is irrelevant.

Ikhwanis are ignorant of or indifferent to the huge discrimination that Bengalis suffered at the hands of JanKhan style Pakistani racists.

- The economic discrimination.

- The daily humiliation and belittlement by Pakistani civil servants.

Many other things.

The only Islamic group that I am aware of which is even remotely cognizant of the discrimination against Bengalis/East Pakistan are ironically "Hizbut Tahrir" (who are more extreme than the Ikhwan/Jamaat supported by RevolutionThroughReason and JanKhan)

3. Extending this whole Pakistani-promoted concept/narrative of the "illegitimacy" of the Bangladeshi state, that its existence violates Islam, is the belief that it must either re-unite with Pakistan, be subservient to it, or friendly to it.

Support - in the eyes of this narrative - must be provided to pro-Pakistani forces e.g. Bangladesh's Jamaat e Islami.

Bangladeshi nationalism, a desire for a free sovereign Bangladeshi state, is illegitimate and the suffering of Bangladesh Muslims at the hands of Pakistani soldiers is irrelevant and must be forgotten.

This is the belief held by the Saudis and the AKP/Milli Gorus in Turkey.



Saudi dictator and enemy of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood but supporter of their allies, the Bangladeshi Jamaat e Islami, Abdullah Al-Saud.

They thus support all pro-Pakistani forces in Bangladesh as part of a Pakistani-centric policy towards Bangladesh.

This is the Ikhwani view.

4. The Muslim Brotherhood and Ikhwani organizations through out the world in general support each other and this is clear in the way that the Egyptian government when controlled by the Ikhwanis, Morsi, lobbied in support of the Jamaat.

The Jamaat in Bangladesh in turn supports the Ikhwan in Egypt and one Jamaati was even arrested for trying to attack the Egyptian embassy in support of the Jamaat.

Erdogan supports Morsi in Egypt and the Jamaat in Bangladesh. There is a Ikhwan-Jamaat-Milli Gorus axis.

5. They may not be organizationally under one structure but they are part of the same ideological movement.

Let's give an example.

The BNP in the UK is a far right racist organization, so is Golden Dawn in Greece. They do not have any leader above them but they are both part of the same far right movement and will support each other. Thus in Stormfront you will see BNP supporters from Britain supporting Golden Dawn in Greece.

However the links between Jamaat and the Brotherhood are even closer than that and they are allied together, speak in the same conferences, reading similar literature.

To say that they have nothing in common with each other, and are not allied to each other and support each other as Arab nationalist and hater of Pashtunwali, RevolutionThroughReason seems to be doing is flawed and highly incorrect.

6. I do not have to provide quotes to support my opinions but for the benefit of the wider audience reading this thread and not for Pakistani Pathan troll, Jan Khan (or "Jamaati Khan") or Arab nationalist troll and hater of Pashtunwali, RevolutionThroughReason. Here is just one quote:

Maududi's influence was widespread. According to historian Philip Jenkins,[40] Egyptians Hassan al-Banna and Sayyid Qutb read him. Qutb "borrowed and expanded" Maududi's concept for being a modern as well as pre-Islamic phenomenon, and of the need for an Islamist revolutionary vanguard movement

Abul A'la Maududi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Here however is another text which shows the ignorance and arrogance of Arab nationalist and hater of Pashtunwali, RevolutionThroughReason as well as his sidekick, Pakistan Pathan, JanKhan.

The Influence of Al-Mawdudi on Sayyid Qutb’s Writings:

Qutb’s interest in al-Mawdudi’s Islamic thought can be
traced back to the early 1950s, when many of the latter’s
works were translated into languages of both
the Muslim and the Western worlds. Moreover, being a
new member of the Ikhwan enabled Qutb to gain access
to al-Mawdudi’s works, since the Ikhwan, as noted earlier,
had played an important part in translating and circulating
the latter’s ideas. Among al-Mawdudi’s major works
which had been translated from Urdu and English into Arabic
were Jihad in Islam, Islam and Jahiliyyah and
The Principle of Islamic Government.

Qutb’s exposure to al-Mawdudi’s ideas and his Islamic activism was also increased by al-Nadwi’s visit to him in the same year. It was a great
moment for Qutb as he found that many of al-Mawdudi’s ideas were in parallel and similar with the objectives for which he was struggling. Morever, al-Mawdudi’s theory of Islamic revivalism as the whole were enhanced by th painful experience of colonialism, similar to that which had been experienced by Qutb in his own country. The visit had a strong impact on Qutb political thought when both found their ideas to be in close affinity [11]. Many of Qutb’s works written in the 1950s quoted al-Mawdudi’s Islamic ideas and terms such as jahiliyyah, hakimiyyah (sovereignty) of God in Mustaqbal li hadha al-din (Islam: The Religion of the Future), for instance, referred to al-Mawdudi’s work, The Four Terminologies in the Quran. For Qutb, divine sovereignty was so comprehensive that it precludes all human sovereignty and authority. This idea was in parallel with al Mawdudi’s thought which emphasised that God is the ultimate and absolute sovereign of all creations.


....

Qutb’s other work which quoted al-Mawdudi’s ideas at length was Fi Zilal al-Qur’an

....

According to Leonard Binder, Qutb’s major role in transmitting the ideas of al-Mawdudi in his writings was fruitful in the 1950s when al-Mawdudi’s work and personality were gradually recognised and considered so immense in the eyes of the Da’wah groups emerged in Egypt. When questioned regarding the most influential contemporary Islamic thinker, many educated Egyptiannamed al-Mawdudi [14].

Source: The Influence of Al-Mawdudi and The Jama’at Al Islami
Movement On Sayyid Qutb Writings

Asyraf Hj. A.B. Rahman and Nooraihan Ali 1 2
Faculty of Social Development, Universiti Malaysia Terengganu, Terengganu, Malaysia 1
Faculty of Islam and Contemporary Studies, Universiti Sultan Zainal Abidin, Terengganu, Malaysia

URL reference to quoted extract: http://idosi.org/wjihc/wjihc2(4)12/5.pdf


Now in this instance I have quoted something which anyone who knows a little bit about Maudoodi, Qutb, Jamaat and Ikhwan would know. I could have not provided the quotes and links but merely mentioned the fact. Then ignorant Arab nationalist and hater of Pashtunwali, RevolutionThroughReason and his Pakistani Pathan sidekick, JanKhan, would have dismissed it - which is in fact what this pair have just done in their troll posts above.

RevolutionThroughReason in his arrogance would have said that Qutb never read any of Maudoodi's works and his Pathan friend JanKhan would have supported him with more low-quality one-liners and personal insults against members.

However this troll pair have proven to be wrong.

Their blind love for Ikhwan/Jamaat hides them from the truth. In Arabic we call this "ta'assub" (excessive loyalty) or "hizbiya" (partisanship).

The fact is [MENTION=1201]Toramana[/MENTION] is clearly right and merely saying what is known fact and common sense and should not even contested that Jamaat and Ikhwan are part of the same movement.


I would like to thank Toramana for opening this valuable thread and exposing the Muslim brotherhood/Jamaat network.

A few years ago on Pashtun nationalist forum, Khyberwatch I started a thread announcing Bangladesh had banned Maudoodi's works. All the Pashtun nationalists on that thread wrote in support of this ban.

Thanks to Pashtun nationalists for that and I wish all Pashtun nationalist brothers success in promoting progress, justice and freedom for our Pashtun brothers and sisters, despite what enemies of Pashtuns such as Arab nationalist, RevolutionThroughReason and dil dil Pakistani Jamaati, JanKhan might try.



Heroes of Muslims and Pashtuns, Bacha Khan and Khan i Azam (rahmatullahi 'alaihima).

[RevolutionThroughReason]

RevolutionThroughReason.

1. The text which I pasted was not for you but for the wider audience reading this thread (including lurkers), it was to draw attention to the ideological connection and ties between Maududi and Qutb.

It was not meant to be as evidnce of Ikhwani/Brotherhood literature supporting Pakistan.

Anyway you and JanKhan are both trolls. JanKhan posts low-quality one-line messages mocking and insulting members personally rather than comment on the topic. You are a well-known troublemaker, Arab nationalist and hater of Pashtunwali, who insults members here and calls members "rapists" and so on. You have also called for India to conquer Bangladesh.

Not going to happen since we have a 0.2 million strong army and a 6 million strong reserve force of Ansar/VDP.

You are now both going to be permanently placed on ignore as I do not come on this forum to waste my time responding to nonsense from Arab nationalists or racist Pakistani Pathans.

BYE.

]

If anyone on here would fit the characteristic of trolling, then It'd be someone who claims they have read literature they clearly have never read and using spurious citations which are at best under speculation.

I'm not responsible for what JanKhan says; he and I are not connected and his views and my views are totally distinct you're right now making cowardly excuses for clear inconsistencies in your claims and arguments.

Writing REALLY long responses is not credibility; writing meaningful, relevant and accurate responses is.

Even in the things you claim here ...your references would not show the "connection" between the Ikhwan and Jama'at; only that Jama'at admired the Ikhwan. We don't have any verification that such a quote exists by Sayyid Qutb. This is still a third hand quote.

What you're doing now is making excuses for sloppy work and poorly reasoned claims. The Hallmarks of Troll

Most of all you're trying everyone's patience; 99% of Afghans couldn't care less about Bangladesh. Stop bringing us into your mess. I'm happy you're taking action against the Razakars, but we're not here to lend you support. Man up and do it on your own and stop trying to smear the Ikhwan to get your points across.


Gee, it wasn't intended as evidence of supporting Pakistan you say? So that was all a coincidence how it came right after my response to you? Ok then.

Ignore me all you want; i'll still point out your erroneous claims. ...and with you not responding back it hurts your merit.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

2. Ikhwanis in general believe that Bangladesh should never have been created as it was in their eyes obligatory for a Muslim country to remain one (this is a valid and understandable opinion). However they are ignorant to the atrocities carried out by the Pakistan army or indifferent to them. One example of an ignorant Ikhwani is Qardawi. Qardawi is not some obscure figure but arguably the spiritual reference point of the Egyptian Brotherhood.

Do you have evidence that Ikhwans "In general" feel Bangladesh should never have been created?

Just watched the entire video; he's lamenting about Bangladeshi Secularism and how it lacks Islamic Shari'ah. Naturally him as an Islamist will lament such things. He's also lamenting about how some guy in a wheel chair is being put on trial without evidence presented. He does say " that Pakistan should never been separated", which I disagree with him on, but he seems to be saying that because of the lack of Islamic rulership, not that Bangladesh unjustly fought for its freedom. He's merely telling The Govt. of Bangladesh to give the wheelchair guy a fair trial.

Furthermore he's not apart of the Ikhwan Al Muslimeen; the Ikhwan revere him for many of his Progressive Attitudes. It is possible to be WRONG about somethings but right about others and be looked up to for that.

In fact on the eve of operation searchlight, most Bengalis did not want independence but greater rights within the federation of Pakistan and the implementation of the six point plan. It was the Pakistan army's massacres that made the people defend themselves and resist and self-preservation and independence were the only thing on their agenda.

And if you watched your video....Qarardawi alludes to that fact, people didn't originally want to separate. He merely states a fact, he did not say that HE HIMSELF supports Pakistan or that he thinks Pakistan is a pure and good Muslim nation or that the Ikhwan support Pakistan

You're grasping at speculation.

Ziaur Rahman, who is subsequently known for his great work for pan-Islamic unity as president of Bangladesh.

In other words he was an Ikhwan Al Muslimeen, according to your interpretation; since Ikhwan is a Movement for Pan Islam.

Nowhere in Qardawi's propaganda video is any acknowledgement of the huge slaughter and mass rapes that Bengalis suffered.

The video was intended to deal with a specific issue; not every and all issues. Get real.

Saudi dictator and enemy of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood but supporter of their allies, the Bangladeshi Jamaat e Islami, Abdullah Al-Saud.

If Anything, by saying this; you defeat your own position .by saying this you're alluding that Al-Saaud who helped Nasser persecute the Ikhwan would ally with people who support their persecutors or in league with them. Even your own sources, both the quotes from Morsi, Erdogan and video by Qaradawi only advise giving a fair trial.

Are you saying that People deserve unfar trials or that fair trials means supporting the Jama'at?

Your reasoning is nothing sort of absurd.

This is the Ikhwani view.

4. The Muslim Brotherhood and Ikhwani organizations through out the world in general support each other and this is clear in the way that the Egyptian government when controlled by the Ikhwanis, Morsi, lobbied in support of the Jamaat.

When did they LOBBY in support for Jama'at? you mean asking for fair trials? That's just a common standard of the rule of law.

The Jamaat in Bangladesh in turn supports the Ikhwan in Egypt and one Jamaati was even arrested for trying to attack the Egyptian embassy in support of the Jamaat.

Ok and .....One student from the Jam'at planning an attack on the Egyptian embassy doesn't demonstrate the Ikhwan support Jam'at

There could be many reasons for doing the act. Maybe he sympathized with the EGyptian people being subverted by Western backed Military.

Erdogan supports Morsi in Egypt and the Jamaat in Bangladesh. There is a Ikhwan-Jamaat-Milli Gorus axis.

Arguing for fair trials is not an axis.

5. They may not be organizationally under one structure but they are part of the same ideological movement.

Yes in other words ; they're not the same organization ....moving on.

Let's give an example.

The BNP in the UK is a far right racist organization, so is Golden Dawn in Greece. They do not have any leader above them but they are both part of the same far right movement and will support each other. Thus in Stormfront you will see BNP supporters from Britain supporting Golden Dawn in Greece.

Bad example; Because we don't know the precise ideologies of the BNP or the Golden Dawn and furthermore Just like YOU supported the Taliban becuse they were "Muslims" doesn't mean that you're a Taliban does it? The merely feeling of sympathy towards the plight of other doesn't mean you automatically support others.

However the links between Jamaat and the Brotherhood are even closer than that and they are allied together, speak in the same conferences, reading similar literature.

You're just touting a bunch of very vacuous rhetoric here


Yes we all read similar literature .....like the Qur'an .....even members of Hizbut-Tahrir read "Milestones"

To say that they have nothing in common with each other, and are not allied to each other and support each other as Arab nationalist and hater of Pashtunwali, RevolutionThroughReason seems to be doing is flawed and highly incorrect.

Well obviously ALL Islamic Groups have SOMETHING in common; that being ISLAM


Not sure how being against Pashtunwali is "Arab Nationalism"; it's being Pro-Islam, Most of the rules of Pashtunwali; like forcing underaged girls into marriages, trading women to settle disputes, murdering women for choosing their own husbands, denying them rights of inhertance or property....contradict Islam , so where you're pulling Arab Nationalism from ...seems to be some Emotional Heart-string to gain support from a fringe group of Pashtuns on this forum.




Abul A'la Maududi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Here however is another text which shows the ignorance and arrogance of Arab nationalist and hater of Pashtunwali, RevolutionThroughReason as well as his sidekick, Pakistan Pathan, JanKhan.

Maududi's influence was widespread. According to historian Philip Jenkins,[40] Egyptians Hassan al-Banna and Sayyid Qutb read him. Qutb "borrowed and expanded" Maududi's concept for being a modern as well as pre-Islamic phenomenon, and of the need for an Islamist revolutionary vanguard movement

This isn't a quote by Sayyid Qutb; this is a quote by a commentator on Sayyid Qutb. This isn't a quote. This is an allegation.

The idea of a revolutionary Islamic Vanguard didn't come from Mawdudi, ....it came from Sayyid Jamaluddin Al Afghani and Shaikh Muhammad 'Abduh; who Hassan Al Banna used to study.

https://www.mtholyoke.edu/~orr20l/classweb/worldpolitics116/pages/leaders.html

Al-Banna dedicated time outside of his studies to reading the writings of founders of Islamic reformists, such as the Egyptian Muhammad Abduh and Abduh’s disciple, Syrian Rashid Rida (Brown). Al-Manar, the magazine Rida published in Cairo from 1898 until 1935, greatly influenced Al-Banna's vision of how the world ought to be.

Source: The Influence of Al-Mawdudi and The Jama’at Al Islami
Movement On Sayyid Qutb Writings

Now in this instance I have quoted something which anyone who knows a little bit about Maudoodi, Qutb, Jamaat and Ikhwan would know. I could have not provided the quotes and links but merely mentioned the fact.

You actually didn't provide any quotes; you provided a commentary by a historian; who makes an allegation.

Then ignorant Arab nationalist and hater of Pashtunwali, RevolutionThroughReason and his Pakistani Pathan sidekick, JanKhan, would have dismissed it - which is in fact what this pair have just done in their troll posts above.

And rightfully so; this is as inconclusive a reference as you can possibly get
poorly researched as well

[QUOTE]RevolutionThroughReason in his arrogance would have said that Qutb never read any of Maudoodi's works and his Pathan friend JanKhan would have supported him with more low-quality one-liners and personal insults against members.


"Would have said" ...is much different than did say. You're speculating about what I would say. Let's assume you're right that Sayyid Qutb took his ideas from Mawdudi, even though I've already presented a case where he didn't have to look for Mawdudi to get the idea for a revolutionary vanguard group from him.

The fact he took THAT idea does not mean he supports Pakistan or Mawdudi's views in general.


It's like how you support the Taliban because they're Pashtuns and you're a creepy Bengali guy who has some weird Pashtun fetishism. I'm sure as hell certain you wouldn't want Taliban who have murdered Pashtuns in scores to rule Bangladesh, but because they're Pashtuns you admire some of their sensibilities.

However this troll pair have proven to be wrong.

Their blind love for Ikhwan/Jamaat hides them from the truth. In Arabic we call this "ta'assub" (excessive loyalty) or "hizbiya" (partisanship).

What do you mean troll pair? I just responded to him twice ....I don't know this guy from Adam.

You have actually failed to make clear citations by the alleged Founders of th Ikhwan, that's NOT proving someone to be wrong; that's FAILING to prove something.

The fact is [MENTION=1201]Toramana[/MENTION] is clearly right and merely saying what is known fact and common sense and should not even contested that Jamaat and Ikhwan are part of the same movement.

If you're trying to patronize Toramana and gain his support, by all means do so, but trying to play the "common sense" card on Teritierary evidence at best is logically inconsistent. If it was "common sense" you'd have solid irrefutable evidence, but you do not.



Everything else you're saying seems to be just a bunch of Brown nosing. I have no need to even dignify that.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

What has happened here, in the Muslim world, and in other sectors is that an evidence basis for discussions has given way to conspiracy theorizing, ahistorical narrative, and team sportsmanship.

For instance, if a Pakistani Nationalist says that gravity should be considered in certain physics calculations, suddenly gravity is an ISI invented concept. If a secularist Marxist asks for some measure of social justice - that becomes akin to speaking out against the will of God and imposing Western mores, so on and so forth.

This discussion here, based on innuendos and lack of facts mirrors this pattern of behavior in our Muslim world.

Certain aspects of Bengladesh's independence are irrefutable:

-Pakistan's Panjab centric establishment lost an election and a Sindhi in cahoots with the military decided that true democracy was subservient to their interests.

Nonetheless, one has to rise above the notion that every Talib, every Jamaat, every Ikhwan, and every Secularist is a militant with investment in some intrigue or conspiracy.

I could rather frankly care less if Maududi or Qutb or Kim Kardashian or Ron Paul or Azzam or W Bush or Morsi is viewed with reflex antipathy by religionists or secularists. My goal is to unearth what they really say and what they really did at the time and what sort of things fomented their thought process.

So here are the facts of what we have uncovered in sources NOT marred by either the Pakistani or the Bengali narrative of some huge super conspiracy by the ISI, Hindus, or the CIA or the Saudis:

Page 139:

Maududi according to Mortimer and Sellers, actually found the Bengali grievances against the Central state, pre the East West war, as legitimate. Yet, according to page 139 he found that these grievances were being capitalized upon by unsavory characters in his view (communists, Marxists, Hindu Nationalists, India, etc) to further their goals and agendas.

On page 140, the authors go on to cite the first instance of violence as being propagated by the Awami league in Dacca's main park on 18 January 1970.

Page 141 documents with serious references the historical fact that Maududi went on to castigate the PPP and the central government of Pakistan as well as the Military for not respecting the election results. He then goes on to castigate Yahya himself with a certain Ghulam Azam in tow (leader of the Bengali Jamaat).

Subsequently, when civil war ensued, Maududi made a critical decision (that I do not find palatable myself) - that Pakistan breaking up would go against his ummah ideal and make his work harder.

So what was his work? Well the prior pages document a man who decided he would turn the system against its very own constructors. He felt that he could turn democracy toward his advantage and was stunned to learn that election politics and democracy do not go hand in hand with a guaranteed win for popular ideologies.

In this way, there is some similarity to what Morsi et al tried to do in Egypt - their critical mistake was to think that the world was ideal, and that by playing within the rules and constructs of the powerful and entrenched elite who were more often working at the behest of imperials (USSR and US and Britain and France)- that they could slowly but surely use the rule of law and of democracy to turn the tables and show the world that they were the will of the people.

The main link between Maududi and subsequently Azzam (though only over 1 particular ideology) are the writings of Muhammad Abdussalaam Faraaj.

http://journals.hil.unb.ca/index.php...ew/219/377#a23

I read this a while back because I was wondering, myself, regarding what links there may have been in that bygone era between these worldwide figures.

Yet interestingly enough, there are NO CLEAR references to The Neglected Duty in Azzam's writings... just the suppositions of scholars in the West et al that assume the link based on certain similarities.

In fact, those who allege a CLEAR link between the ikhwaanaan and takfirsts or even the jamaat have the burden to produce proof on them.

The reason being, Azzam apparently disavowed Takfirisim and the Egyptian jurist Jadd Al Haqq repudiated Faraj and took on his view of takfirism... interestingly enough, a view that Azzam practiced (i.e. not endorsing takfirism).

The main cited source for the oft repeated link between Ikhwaan and Maududi is this scholar:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_Jenkins

Yet each of these citations does not provide specifics as to where Dr. Jenkins wrote of or substantiated this link.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Now onto justice as a matter of fact:

The fact of the matter is that we have to hypothesize why various people might have found this trial unsavory.

Are Erdogan and Morsi apart of some super conspiracy to promote wahabism and viewed their colleague as in duress?

I think various factors show this is a conspiracy theory and nothing more:

1) Erdogan and Lula also tried to get the US to sit down at the bargaining table with Iran earlier on... something Saudi was not happy with
2) Saudi has funded Al Sissi now that the US is slowly titrating off the aid - and the Saudi Kingdom has viewed the Morsi government's removal as a great thing for their internal stability.
3) They might legitimately feel that the venomous behavior of their own secular militants was what they were witnessing in Bangladesh without being familiar with the intricate history of that region. (i.e. they may have had a knee jerk reaction).

Regarding Erdogan.... there is no doubt he has widespread support and the Anatolian elites (who derived from the rural background) propelled him into power... not wahhabites.

Regarding Morsi, I think the ground level work of Robert Fisk shows clearly where Morsi's support comes from (i.e. the people and not the elites or secularists):

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...l-8734453.html

Fisk's title says enough:
As Impoverished Crowds gather in support of Mohammad Morsi, the well heeled march behind their images of the General.

Finally, this article from the Economist documents clearly the injustices in the current Bengali trials:

http://www.economist.com/news/briefi...ned-we-explain

"The e-mails and phone conversations we have seen raise profound questions about the trial. The material suggests the government tried to put pressure on Mr Nizamul, albeit he seems to have resisted it. It seems to show he worked improperly with a lawyer based in Brussels, and that the lawyer co-operated with the prosecution—raising questions about conflicts of interest. And in Mr Sayeedi’s case it points to the possibility that, even before the court had finished hearing testimony from the defence witnesses, Mr Nizamul was already expecting a guilty verdict."

[afghan]

i don't know what did bangladesh wanted to prove? after so many years? now see the disturbance so many other died.

[Bengal_Tiger]

In my final post on this thread I would like to say the following.

In anger I had previously attacked the man executed a few days ago, Kader Molla. This was wrong.

1. Islam tells us not to speak bad of the dead.

2. I do not have enough confidence in that particular court to accept their verdict.

3. Some point to evidence which indicate he may have been another person.

4. If he is innocent, then in the hereafter I will have to apologize to him. He may chose to forgive me, he may chose to pass some of his sins on to me, freeing himself of those sins.

If however he was guilty then he will be in big trouble.

I do not have access to the trial details so am not in a position to comment either way.

I will be going through some of my posts and edit those which criticized him.

This is one reason why I prefer to place trolls on ignore as they seek to provoke and in my anger I may say something I regret, as I often have a short temper.

As for the nature of Jamaat and Ikhwan, I have refuted those who seek to de-link them.

I ask Allah to restore peace to Bangladesh, end the violent politics there and to ban Jamaat e Islami forever.

Ameen, thumma ameen.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

BarakzaiAbdali do you think the alleged connection between the Ikhwan Al Muslimeen and the Jama'at-i-Islami; i.e. the one being suggested in the thread, has been established ....or is this blown up propagandizing with a bunch of commentary used to pull at emotions more than evidence?

What is your feedback on all these allegations against Morsi, Ikhwan and Erdogan?

[RevolutionThroughReason]

Notice our guest has started copying Toramana's "Arab Nationalist" card to describe anyone who defends Pan-Islamist movements..

[Badlun]

What do you think about the following
and RTR if you still do not agree that JI and Ikhwans are ideologically one then please write few points where you find the differences except their geographical location.

The ideological forefather of every one of Pakistan's terror entities is the Muslim Brotherhood (MB), al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun, an extremist movement founded and headquartered in Egypt. In 1941, the Ikhwan was brought to Pakistan by Syed Abul Ala Maududi, who launched the group under the name Jamaat-e-Islami (JI).
The Mumbai Conspiracy - Pakistan and Jamaat -e- Islami - Militant Islam Monitor - Militant Islam Monitor

The Jamaat-e-Islami (JI) maintains close ties with the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, a religious party which has recently found its voice again in mainstream Egyptian politics, and a group that the JI claims it has a lot to learn from.

Historian and author of ‘Partisans of Allah: Jihad in South Asia’ Professor Ayesha Jalal said, “The Jamaat-i-Islami and the Muslim Brotherhood have been historically linked ideologically and have also had comparable social bases of support.

Meanwhile, international best-selling author Ahmed Rashid said the Jamaat-e-Islami branched out of the Muslim Brotherhood, which was founded in 1929 by Hasan al Banna, who spearheaded a movement that spread across the Arab world.

Drawing parallels between Jamaat-e-Islami and Muslim Brotherhood – The Express Tribune

“The idea that Jahiliyya was not a bygone era but a current condition connects Qutub to both Wahhabism and Maududi. There is no question that Maududi influenced Qutub: He had shepherded the Pakistani author’s works to publication in Arabic translation.

http://www.themuslimtimes.org/2013/07/asia/the-connection-between-jamaat-e-islami-maududi-and-muslim-brotherhood-banna-ideology

Read more: http://www.themuslimtimes.org/2013/0...#ixzz2nkeQ4EpM

Jamaat e Islami & Ikhwan ul Muslimoon - Forum Jamaat-e-islami Pakistan

Actually Jamaat-e-Islami is a carbon copy of the Ikhwan-ul-
Muslimeen founded by Syed Qutab in Egypt. Like the Ikhwan
the Jamaat also is based on anti-liberal fanaticism. The
Ikhwan has been gunning down liberal-minded Muslim leaders
from time to time. This same Ikhwan had assassinated
Egyptian President Anwar Sadaat. Therefore this organisation
is banned in most Islamic countries. If it could, Ikhwan
would convert the entire world to Islam. In its immediate
agenda it aims at establishing Islamic law under Shariat in
all Muslim countries.

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/soc.culture.pakistan/MMV8-Wgk6lU

Sayyid Qutb is easily one of the major architects and "strategists" of contemporary Islamic revival. Along with Maulana Maududi, the founder of Jamaat-e-Islami, the revivalist movement in South Asia, and Imam Khomeini, the leader of Iran's Islamic revolution
Syed Qutb Muqtedar Khan Islam Islamic movements ikhwan

Many pro-Saudi media outlets, such as Al Jazeera, Saudi Gazette, Ikhwan, and Muslim Observer also blindly support Jamaat-e-Islami.
The Power of the Islamists in Bangladesh :: Gatestone Institute

[RevolutionThroughReason]

Well for one Badlun

these are JUST STATEMENTS

so if I made a statement

"Badlun is a Western Imperialist stooge, his Ideological Forefather is Henry Kissinger, by use of stooges like Badlun, to bring colonilization ad sociocultural and economic subjugation under the umbrella of liberalism"

Would it make it true because you blind praise and happen to have a very sycophantic attitude towards Western progress and advancements? Logically speaking no; it is not enough evidence to make a statement, one must support the statement with corroborating evidence.

I can easily show how it is flawed.

a.) Ideological Parallels. What is the idea of Ikhwan? This is the same idea that is central to Islam; that MUslims exist as one Broadly Unified Community. So Basically ALL Muslims share an ideological parallel; even if they are progressive of liberal oriented.

b.) One of the statements you're using says Wahhabism, Maududi, Shi'a Iran under Khomeini and Ikhwan are all connected.Let's look at that LOGICALLY; how can Wahhabism be connected to Shi'a Khomeini ideiology? Wahhabism hates Shi'a and views Shi'a with enmity. The idea of a "Jahiliyah" has existed in every major Islamic Movement with different interpretations on how to address that. But really the REAL Ideological forefather is Sayyid Jamaluddin Al- Afghani. Even Shah Waliyullah could be considered an ideological forefather. Basically anyone who says that Muslims should revive and galvanize themselves as an international entity share the same view. This is across the board.However Ikhwan is Sunni and Khomeini was Shi'a; so just having the view of Pan Islam is not enough to say they're the same group. Same with Jama'at and Ikhwan. I'm sure you can google quotes which say anything like "Ikhwan support Pakistan" or "Ikhwan love Maududi" But you can never find ACTUAL Ikhwan statements which demonstrate either.

c.) Some of your references are just COMMENTS people make in groups and forums.

One of them said they're Anti-Liberal Fanaticism; This is ridiculous because Ikhwan are a MODERNIST group; Which means they promote Pan-Islam within the framework of MODERN Scientific development and Understanding, they stress Learning Modern Information which in turn shapes how they apply Islamic injunctions. This is totally contrary to Wahhabism which wants to restrict modern development. They are progressives Shar'iah is a goal for the Global Muslim community; whether Progressve or Traditional.Maududi never stressed on promoting Modern Development. Furthermore Maududid never stressed woman's emancipation; rather all evidence suggests in restraining women and keeping them from participating in society. The Ikhwan advocate the participation of women and the importance of Woman's role in creating and motivating an Islamic Society as well as the importance of her agency. So the only thing that all these groups have in common is Pan Islamic sentiment; otherwise they're very distinct and do not lead to the other. Pan Islamic objective is from Many different ideological backgrounds.


Actually if you think about it; Maududi's lack if sympathy towards women in Islam would coincide with the Misogynistic characteristics of Pashtunwali; so you as an advocate of Pashtunwali should embrace Maududi and Wahhabism as both of these would be compatible with Pashtunwali.

[Shah-i-Kot]

The Islamic political parties in Bangladesh are considered a threat to the secular government because of their upsurge in support. Jamaat has handed out many social services, has schools, clinics, and hospitals- basic services that Hasina's government is unable to meet.

This state execution was politically motivated to send a message.