Islamic law forbids the construction of new churches, or the repair of old ones. It also forbids the display of crosses or the ringing of church bells. Umdat al-Salik, or The Reliance of the Traveler, a manual of Islamic jurisprudence certified as "reliable" by Egypt's very own Al-Azhar University, explains that non-Muslims are:
... "forbidden to ring church bells or display crosses, recite the Torah or Evangel aloud, or make public display of their funerals and feastdays, and are forbidden to build new churches" - o.11.5 (6,7)
When we post stories like this, one response we sometimes get from enterprising apologists in the comments section is that they've never heard of this Umdat al-Salik and so we must be pulling it out of the ether to defame Islam. Did we infiltrate Al-Azhar to certify it, too? Al-Azhar should probably know a "misunderstanding" of Islam when they see it. Or was someone asleep at the switch that day?
The other is that this must be a random incident by thugs, because Sharia could never, ever be so intolerant. But the evidence does not lie: similar cases keep cropping up in places far removed from each other. Problems with building churches, ringing bells or singing hymns, or displaying Christian symbols have been reported in Russia, Bosnia, Somalia, Gaza, the Philippines, Indonesia, and even Britain, to name a few.
Funny how that keeps happening. "Muslims Blockade Christian Village in Egypt, Demand Demolition of Church," by Mary Abdelmassih for the Assyrian International News Agency, September 8:
(AINA) -- Christians in the Upper Egyptian village of Elmarinab in Edfu, Aswan province, have been forbidden to leave their homes or buy food until they remove the dome of St. George's Church, which was rebuilt in its previous location. Village Muslims, backed by Muslim Salafists from neighboring villages, have threatened to demolish the church on Friday September 9 after prayers and use it as a mosque.
Despite the presence of security forces, Muslims have blocked the roads to the village, refusing passage of any Christians under any circumstance.
Yesterday the military governor in Aswan was contacted as Christians were starving in their homes. Security officers were sent and accompanied two Christian youths to buy food for the villagers. Muslims at the entrance of the village tried to stop the two security cars. "Failing that they threatened that this would be the last time," said one villager. "It was heart-breaking to see the elderly running with the children to get a loaf of bread."
Another farcical "reconciliation meeting":
On Friday September 2, a "reconciliation" meeting was held under the auspices of security between Muslims and Christians in which the Christians were forced to give in to the Muslim demands of the new church being stripped of crosses, bells and outside microphones (which churches never have).
"For the sake of peace we agreed to their demands," said Father Makarios Boulos, "although the approved permit included crosses, bells and domes."
On Tuesday evening, the same Muslims who attended the reconciliation meeting started to congregate near the church demanding the removal of the six small domes, which would, according to the church's priest, make the whole church collapse if removed.
Muslims also demanded removal of any signs of it being a church. "It has to be called a 'hospitality home,'" Father Makarios said.
Confronted with escalating Muslim demands, the Bishop of Aswan, Anba Hedra, refused and warned those who incite sectarian violence, pointing to the fact that the church was rebuilt legally, and any concessions on the part of the church was done for the love for the country, which is passing through a difficult phase. The military council was asked to send troops to protect the village against Muslim violence
Early this morning two army tanks arrived at the village, manned by officers. The military governor paid a visit to the village today together with area heads of security to solve this crisis.
They listened to the Muslims, who insisted the previous church was not a church, but a hospitality home. The Coptic side was represented by Father Makarious Boulos, Father Salib Elias of the Aswan Coptic Diocese and lawyers representing the church, who presented all valid documents.
According to Mr. Mikhail, a worker at St. George's Church, who was interviewed by Coptic TV, the Muslims were not represented by any official. "They said they are people who have control over the Muslim youths."
Muslims chanted "Allahu Akbar" (Allah is the greatest) and said they want the church razed. Mikhail said Security tried to calm them down but fearing the situation would turn for the worse, the meeting was recessed with the promise that "the army and security representatives will come to a solution acceptable to both parties before they leave the village."
The authorities demanded that no construction be carried out or services held in the church, and Muslims to refrain from violence.
Muslims have been spreading news that the new church was never a church but a hospitality home. Father Makarios said that the church was always a church and has been protected by the police for twelve years and they already have a hospitality home one block away.
The church of St. George, built a century ago with soft bricks and palm tree branches, was so dilapidated the local council said it would be unsafe to carry out services there. The church was given permission by the Aswan Governor in June 2010 to rebuild, and the authorities had approved the design. In June 2011 the building of the church began and services were held.
Father Makarious said the village Muslims never showed any bad feelings when permission for the rebuilding the old church was issued. "The church was nearly complete when Muslims started to complain."....
Therein lies an opportunity for psychological abuse: wait until the church is nearly finished and the Christians think they are on the homestretch, and there is an investment to threaten with destruction.
Unfortunately, the most effective government for a Muslim community is the authoritarian, strong-man model, where extra-legal, community-sponsored violence is suppressed immediately.
The Christians were safe in Mubarek's Egypt, as they were in Saddam Hussein's Iraq. This is another indication that the US is far better off not interfering in local, Middle Eastern politics. I don't really blame Obama for Egypt, as Obama just jawboned. Mubarek would probably have fallen sooner or later.
This sort of persecution is what happens under Sharia law. Note that a defining aspect of Sharia law is that Sharia is very weak in any sort of objective standards for justice. A lone apostate is in deadly danger in a Sharia situation, but an entire community of Christians, subject to unprovoked crowd attacks, has an extremely fuzzy avenue of appeal to justice.
There is no longer any excuse, except ignorance, for any thought that Sharia has a smidgen of compatibility with Western civilization legal processes. Of course, when we talk about forbidding Sharia law, we in no way limit the ability of the Muslim to worship.
"Security officers were sent and accompanied two Christian youths to buy food for the villagers."
Security forces? What a relief!
Egyptian Armed Forces Demolish Fences Guarding Coptic Monasteries
http://crossmuslims.blogspot.com/2011/02/egyptian-armed-forces-demolish-fences.html
Where are the escapees from loonwatch? You two should be here blaming this on the Christians!
Or is it just a misunderstanding?
Retaliation for Christians oppression of the musloid majority?
What excuse will you two twits spin for this?
It is always the same thing with the terrified muzlims. They gang up with superior numbers and then murder or rape, depending on how many young boys and babies there are. I dare any muzlim that reads this to come out openly, one on one, two on two or whatever numbers you think will help you. You can dress as girls and have your little plastic baby bombs in the carriage you push. Nature despises pedophiles and will take care of islam as it needs. You are satan's perfect creature and he loves you for what you do to destroy men's souls.
Watch how mosques are being built in kuffar countries : the similiarities... are inexistant.
(AINA) -- Christians in the Upper Egyptian village of Elmarinab in Edfu, Aswan province, have been forbidden to leave their homes or buy food until they remove the dome of St. George's Church, which was rebuilt in its previous location. Village Muslims, backed by Muslim Salafists from neighboring villages, have threatened to demolish the church on Friday September 9 after prayers and use it as a mosque.
..........................
How often have we heard this? First, the threats to attack on Friday after prayers. Imams use fiery Kutbahs to whip the Muslim faithful into a raging mob. The Muslim "Sabbath" is always the most violent day of the week in Dar-al-Islam. Secondly, the threat to seize the church and turn it into a mosque.
And now they are starving the Christians out—even with the presence of "security forces".
More:
Another farcical "reconciliation meeting":
On Friday September 2, a "reconciliation" meeting was held under the auspices of security between Muslims and Christians in which the Christians were forced to give in to the Muslim demands of the new church being stripped of crosses, bells and outside microphones (which churches never have).
"For the sake of peace we agreed to their demands," said Father Makarios Boulos, "although the approved permit included crosses, bells and domes."...
Muslims also demanded removal of any signs of it being a church. "It has to be called a 'hospitality home,'" Father Makarios said.
..........................
This is straight from the 7th-century Pact of Umar:
"We shall not build, in our cities or in their neighborhood, new monasteries, Churches, convents, or monks' cells, nor shall we repair, by day or by night, such of them as fall in ruins or are situated in the quarters of the Muslims...
"We shall not display our crosses or our books in the roads or markets of the Muslims. We shall use only clappers in our churches very softly..."
Oppression of dhimmis is mandated by Islam, which is strongly asserting itself in post "Arab Spring" Egypt.
More:
Muslims chanted "Allahu Akbar" (Allah is the greatest)...
..........................
Allah always shows his "greatness" through his followers oppressing, threatening, and committing violence...
More:
The authorities demanded that no construction be carried out or services held in the church, and Muslims to refrain from violence.
..........................
Ah, yes—Muslims may provoke matters with violence..while Christians may provoke matters by continuing to build or by holding a prayer service...really, just the same sort of thing...sarc/off
More:
Muslims have been spreading news that the new church was never a church but a hospitality home. Father Makarios said that the church was always a church and has been protected by the police for twelve years and they already have a hospitality home one block away.
..........................
Also a common Muslim tactic—claim that there never was a church there, or that the church is not really a church, or that the church is actually a mosque...
Do We Only Need More 'Security Measures'
Or More 'Common Sense'?
On Christmas day, a man identified as a young wealthy elite Nigerian Muslim (Abdul Farouk Abdulmutallab), with possible links to Islamic Radical groups, set off an explosive device in a failed terrorist attack on a Northwest Airlines plane as it was landing in Detroit, Michigan, federal officials said.11
The White House called the act an attempted act of terror. If the mission of this man had succeeded more than 270 people on board would have been killed and both tourism and airline industries in US could have been seriously affected.
It is vital to emphasize that it was just mostly luck that prevented the explosion. Otherwise, Christmas day in the US would have turned into a disaster.
The profile of Abdulmutallab adds another piece of evidence to support the view that lack of education and poverty are not the main cause of terrorism as some suggest. Abdulmutallab is from a wealthy family and is highly educated which fits with the pattern of many other Islamic Jihadists.
The question that we need to address is, do we only need more security measures or do we predominantly need more logic and more common sense in addressing the phenomenon of Islamic Radicalism.
It will be erroneous if we could not see this terror attempt in the context of the other recent terror plots such as Fort Hood massacre and the increasing home grown Islamic Radicalism in the US. Inability to see these atrocities linked together by a common ideological thread is like failure to identify the underlying disease that causes the patient's symptoms. In such a situation, treatment would be incorrectly directed to treat the symptoms rather than to treat the underlying disorder or the true cause of the problem. The same can happen if we only focused on treating terrorism and ignore treating the underlying factor, namely the ideology behind Radical Islam. Failure to address this ideological component and consequently failure to treat it effectively is disastrous.
Addressing the contribution of the religious ideology is crucial, as if Al-Qaeda adopted a new approach to attack Metro passengers, cinemas, sport stadiums and other big gathering areas in USA, it would be very difficult and extremely inconvenient to do a security check for every individual at these places.
If our only approach to terrorism is to increase security measures for individuals, the terrorists can in fact paralyze our life if they shifted their target from attacking airplanes to attacking the formerly mentioned places.
Our policy should move from only symptomatic treatment of the problem to include defeating the ideology behind it. It is vital in this situation to develop a complete comprehensive strategy to treat the cause of the problem at the psycho- behavioral and ideological levels rather than only working at the security front.
This is particularly significant when we realize that the phenomenon of Islamic Radicalism is using several fronts both tactically and geographically. At the tactical level terrorists planned to attack airplanes, buildings and shopping moles. At the geographical front new fronts for terror, include Yemen and possibly Somalia. Defeating Al-Qaeda at the military level in Afghanistan will not end the problem, as new fronts for terror will develop as long as the radical ideology exists. On the contrary, defeating Islamism at the ideological level can add a needed and fundamental component to the current antiterrorism approach.
CNN quoted President Obama as saying that America would continue to "keep up the pressure on those who would attack our country," asserting that the US is doing everything in its power to stop terror. This statement raises an important issue. If all previous US efforts intended to defeat terror, including expenditures of billions of dollars, have failed into today to eradicate this problem, then America MUST adopt new approaches and strategies. Previous measures, including President Obama's outreach to the Muslim world, were not very successful until today. This does not mean that these approaches must be stopped but significant improvement for their quality is needed.
In short, using military and security approaches to defeat terror without addressing the ideology behind it is not sufficient. We certainly need to improve our security measures and technology to protect civilians, however, we also need more 'common sense' to see the common factor or the Ideology behind terrorism and treat it.
by Dr. T. Hamid
---
After all if your car kept getting flat tires (the symptom). How many tires would you have to buy before you picked-up the nails in your driveway (the cause)?
----