Shocker: Egypt's Islamic parties vote to have themselves dominate panel that will write constitution

Shenouda the Third, the 117th Coptic Pope of Egypt, died on the 17th day of March 417 days from January 25, 2011, the start of the Egyptian Revolution-which is proving fatal for the persecuted Christians of Egypt. Ominously the 88 year old Pope (who bent over backward to accomodate and appease Egypt's Moslems) died on the 1388th anniversary of the Battle of Badr when in 624 Mohammed defeated the Quraysh of Mecca in what was his first decisive victory over infidels and the turning point for his new militant faith. This is a terrible sign of things to come for Egypt's eight million Christians as a sharia state rises from the ashes of the Mubarak regime.

The Ikhwan is an Islamic supremacist movement, but it is also a self-serving political entity that has already shown an ample propensity for cronyism and corruption, which it is doing again here by seeking a controlling share of the constitutional panel for the legislatures which it dominates.

Egypt's constitution will be re-written to better accommodate Sharia law. Islamic-Alla's Law guarantees retrograde principles of cronyism, favoritism, discriminations of all sorts, from religious to gender to dress to hair and beards; Allah's laws are hostile to modern concepts of human rights and equality, concepts of human social contract, of "innocent until proven guilty" and equality before the law, of religious freedom of conscience, because non of it is in the Koran. Allah either didn't care of these modern human concepts of good governance and equal rights, or he simply knew nothing of them. (I prefer the latter explanation, Islam being a figment of collective Arab imagination starting with Mohammud and ending with the Third Caliph.) So in Sharia, enslavement is okay, but equality is out; and Allah's world order and good governance is not based upon equal human rights and democratic constitutional principles, but rather on the 'perfect' master-slave relationship called "submission", where the stronger and more cunning, more devious, best at extorting bakshish and favors, those will win. This is the reality of Egypt sliding backwards having voted in the Ikhwan, so kiss all hopes of modern civil society in Egypt goodbye, and welcome in the red carpet for their retro World Caliphate. And the West will stand with its collective mouth agape and wonder "what happened?!" Well, boys and girls, read your Koran. But remember top big dog is best deceiver of contradictions in that strange Book of Allah. You don't get what you paid for.

The Luxor Massacre was an Ikhwan operation.

That action manifests concretely the type of government that those animals will run. And they have the US President in their corner.

There are 8,000,000 Copt Christians in Egypt, and 0 supporters of same in the White House.

Why do Christians no longer support persecuted Christians? Because muslim oil interests own our politicians.

This so-called Constitution will be written in the blood of the innocent and signed, Islam.

Clowns!

Oh no, this is terrible news. Who could possibly have forseen such a development? Historians will forever ponder...

Ibn Kathir, whose explanation of the Qur'an is likely the most widely used in the world today, wrote that manifold discriminations against non-Muslims are supported by Qur'an Chapter 9, Verse 29's command to put non-Muslims in a state of subjection

Wrote Kathir:

Paying Jizyah [protection money paid by non-Muslims to Muslim overlords] is a Sign of Kufr [unbelief] and Disgrace

Allah [the Qur'an] said,

(until they pay the Jizyah), if they do not choose to embrace Islam, (with willing submission), in defeat and subservience, (and feel themselves subdued.), disgraced, humiliated and belittled.

Therefore, Muslims are not allowed to honor the people of Dhimmah [non-Muslims forced to pay Muslim overlords in exchange for survival as second-class citizens] or elevate them above Muslims, for they [non-Muslims] are miserable, disgraced and humiliated. [Imam] Muslim [in his canonical hadith collection, Book 26, Number 5389] recorded from Abu Hurayrah that the Prophet said,

(Do not initiate the Salam [peace greeting] to the Jews and Christians, and if you meet any of them in a road, force them to its narrowest alley.)

This is why the Leader of the faithful Umar bin Al-Khattab [companion of Muhammad, and second caliph], may Allah be pleased with him, demanded his well-known conditions be met by the Christians, these conditions that ensured their continued humiliation, degradation and disgrace.

The scholars of Hadith narrated from Abdur-Rahman...that he [Abdur-Rahman] said,

I recorded for Umar [the second caliph], may Allah be pleased with him, the terms of the treaty of peace he conducted with the Christians of Ash-Sham [Ash-Sham = Syria. Muhammad died in 632, and Syria was the first Islamic conquest (634-636) outside Arabia]:

[Christians were compelled to sign this:] In the Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful. This is a document to the servant of Allah, Umar, the Leader of the faithful, from the Christians of such and such city. When you (Muslims) came to us [Christians] we requested safety for ourselves, children, property and followers of our religion. We made a condition on ourselves that we will neither erect in our areas a monastery, church, or a sanctuary for a monk, nor restore any place of worship that needs restoration nor use any of them for the purpose of enmity against Muslims. We will not prevent any Muslim from resting in our churches whether they come by day or night, and we will open the doors [of our houses of worship] for the wayfarer and passerby. Those Muslims who come as guests, will enjoy boarding and food for three days. We will not allow a spy against Muslims into our churches and homes or hide deceit [or betrayal] against Muslims. We will not teach our children the Qur'an, publicize practices of Shirk [Shirk means polytheism and worshiping anyone (including Jesus) that Muslims believe is not God], invite anyone to Shirk, or prevent any of our fellows from embracing Islam, if they choose to do so. We will respect Muslims, move from the places we sit in if they choose to sit in them. We will not imitate their clothing, caps, turbans, sandals, hairstyles, speech, nicknames and title names, or ride on saddles, hang swords on the shoulders, collect weapons of any kind or carry these weapons. We will not encrypt our stamps in Arabic, or sell liquor. We will have the front of our hair cut, wear our customary clothes wherever we are, wear belts around our waist, refrain from erecting crosses on the outside of our churches and demonstrating them and our books in public in Muslim fairways and markets. We will not sound the bells in our churches, except discretely, or raise our voices while reciting our holy books inside our churches in the presence of Muslims, nor raise our voices [with prayer] at our funerals, or light torches in funeral processions in the fairways of Muslims, or their markets. We will not bury our dead next to Muslim dead, or buy servants who were captured by Muslims. We will be guides for Muslims and refrain from breaching their privacy in their homes.

When I [Abdur-Rahman] gave this document to Umar, he added to it,

We will not beat any Muslim. These are the conditions that we [Christians] set against ourselves and followers of our religion in return for safety and protection. If we break any of these promises that we set for your benefit against ourselves, then our Dhimmah (promise of protection) is broken and you are allowed to do with us what you are allowed of people of defiance and rebellion.

Islamic law, which treats non-Muslims as inferiors, is enforced to varying degrees in Muslim-majority nations, and sometimes hardly at all. Yet, as a regular stream of news stories shows, there is often what can be called an Islamic-law ethos operating even in nations where Islamic law itself is not formally enforced or present on the nation's lawbooks or constitution. I refer to a cultural sensibility that, nourished by Islamic core texts and traditions, instinctively treats non-Muslims as lesser human beings, takes advantage of them, abuses them, and prevents them from having any legal recourse against Muslim predators, since those in Muslim governments sometimes refuse to prosecute Muslim predation on non-Muslims, and police forces sometimes serve to aid and abet the predation. This happens to varying degrees in a sufficient number of Muslim-majority nations to be a grave concern to the rest of the world. And too many of the Muslims who immigrate to the West bring the Islamic-law ethos along with them.

"Egypt's Islamic parties vote to have themselves dominate panel that will write constitution".

Seriously who didn't know that was coming.?

"Egypt's Islamic parties vote to have themselves dominate panel that will write constitution".
.................................

Was this ever in doubt?

More:

The current language says the state religion is Islam and the principle of Islamic Sharia law is the main source of legislation.

However, some ultraconservative Muslims have called for the article to be changed to read that Islamic law is the only source of legislation — a proposal opposed by liberals and moderate Islamists.
.................................

Really, a distinction without a difference...