Monday, 12 Muharram 1447 | 2025/07/07
Time now: (M.M.T)
Menu
Main menu
Main menu

Liberalism is a Deceitful Manipulative Falsehood that Enslaves Man to his Fellow Man

  • Published in Analysis
  •   |  

The key ideas in Liberalism emerged and developed in Britain from the 17th Century to the 19th Century CE. In these centuries, the ideas of Liberalism were used to defend important vested interests against their opponents. Locke used Liberal ideas to support the English mercantile elite against the monarchy; and the Utilitarian philosophers used Liberalism to support British Capitalists against entrenched country lords. Meanwhile, Liberalism was used by radical French revolutionaries, presumably with covert British support, to destabilise their own state leading also to the destabilisation of other states of continental Europe. It was also used by a faction of Capitalists in America in their struggle against another faction in Britain. Liberalism was used internationally against the Uthmani Khilafah "Caliphate", and after its demise against the new ideological enemies of Fascism and Communism. Finally, in the 21st Century, Liberalism is being again used against the Islamic ideological revival. Consequently it is important for sincere Muslims to correctly understand the philosophy of Liberalism and its use as an ideological weapon by the West.

Liberalism sanctifies liberty, or freedom (Latin: ‘Liber' = free, ‘Liberalis' = freedom), which is a highly attractive slogan, particularly for those who are oppressed; but its meaning in Liberalism is different from its usage in ordinary language. The conventional meaning of freedom is similar to liberation, i.e. to be free of some particular constraint, such as freedom from slavery or from military occupation. However, the political meaning of freedom, as given to it by Liberalism, is that man is to be allowed to do as he pleases. Thus freedom, politically, has become a label for the idea of sovereignty for man.

It is important to comprehend the implications of the idea of sovereignty for man as distinct from the simpler conventional idea of freedom. Sovereignty for man means that man himself must determine his own path in life - he is not permitted to submit to the sovereignty of another, even if he does so of his own choice. A man who freely chooses to live under absolute monarchy, for example, has abandoned his sovereignty and so contradicted the meaning of freedom in Liberalism. It is the idea of sovereignty for man, under the popular label of freedom, that is the cornerstone of Western civilisation and a founding principle in its various systems of life, in particular its Liberal Democratic ruling system and its laissez-faire Capitalist economic system.

Freedom means man's enslavement to the powerful

Liberalism, with its enchanting but misleading idea of freedom, is a highly potent tool in the hands of the powerful. In reality, individual man does not have the capacity to devise his own solutions to every problem that he faces in life; therefore, he ends up following solutions devised by others. In Liberal societies, the powerful have patronised the development and propagation of solutions that favour their own interests at the expense of the ordinary man: Capitalist economics favours the business elite; and ‘representative' democracy favours the political elite. The freedom of Liberalism is thus simply a facade for man's enslavement to the powerful.

In truth, man is not qualified to be his own sovereign. Sovereignty can only rest with the one who has created man, as He alone knows the purpose for which He has created man, and He alone has perfect knowledge of man's nature. By illegitimately acquiring sovereignty, man seized for himself the right that belonged to the Creator of man alone; man made himself god.

Man did not create himself but discovered himself already created; man does not innately know the purpose of his existence, and man has imperfect knowledge of his own nature. Man is incapable of being sovereign over himself just as any other created or manufactured object is incapable of being sovereign over itself. Even the atheist, who disbelieves in the existence of the Creator, does not claim that he created himself; therefore it is false to claim sovereignty for man. Just as man discovered his own creation, it is necessary for him to discover who created him, in order to acknowledge his Creator as his true sovereign.

Liberalism is the enemy of religion

After living under Christianity for more than a thousand years, the West separated religion from life, adopting Liberalism as the spirit of their new civilisation. Liberalism was made attractive to Christians by deceiving them into thinking that, under the idea of religious freedom, they would be able to practise their own religion as they please. In fact, Liberalism is an anti-religious idea that is an enemy to all religion. This is because religion, by its nature, calls for man to submit himself to a higher authority. No religion can sanction sovereignty for man, leaving man to act according to his own whims and desires. Religion, by definition, binds man to a specific code in life, whether this code extends to the entirety of his life or is limited to spiritual or ethical matters alone.

Liberalism directly contradicts religion because Liberalism requires that man submit to himself alone; Liberalism makes man sovereign instead of God. This is why France's rejection of the veil is in accordance with Liberalism: the veil manifests man's submission to God and is hated throughout the liberal West even if all its countries have not legally prohibited it. A truly liberal man cannot be sincere to religion; the liberal man may choose to follow particular aspects of religion but he undertakes these or abstains from these under his own will and desire.

The worship of a Liberal man is in fact worship of himself not of God. It is the worship of a sovereign who chooses for himself how he is to think and act according to his own pleasure. If he worships, it is because he desires this, and not because he considers himself under any external obligation. The Liberal is happy when he sees a Muslim who prays and also, for example, drinks alcohol; the Liberal considers such a Muslim to be ‘moderate', by which he means he follows his own desires in religion. The truly Liberal man abhors the one who submits himself fully to his Creator.

Responsibility not freedom

Perhaps most damaging of all, the concept of freedom undermines man's personal sense of responsibility.

The Creator of man has honoured man above all other creation by endowing man with the faculty of thinking and a mind that is capable of choosing between the path of good and the path of evil. In Islam, every adult, sane individual is considered responsible and accountable over what he has been obligated with regarding his affairs in life (in the terminology of usool al-fiqh, man is ‘mukallaf'); he must thus assume the responsibility that he has been charged with and not freedom. Man is responsible for choosing between the two paths, and is accountable for this on the day of judgement.

Responsibility and accountability are manifestly different from freedom. Freedom is a destructive, anarchic, hedonistic idea that leaves man to act according to his own transient wishes and desires, no matter how harmful to himself or to others. Responsibility requires that man be aware of the potential consequences of his actions for himself and others. Every sane and mature individual is capable of being responsible for his own actions in life because he is capable of comprehending the consequences of his actions for himself and for others. Indeed, all religions make the individual conscious of his responsibility for his actions in life; no religion offers man freedom.

Liberalism is a false philosophy that has misled generations and created the conditions for tyranny and oppression in the world by surrendering practical sovereignty to the powerful. It has already been used to destroy the Christian and Islamic civilisations that dominated the world for more than a thousand years. Now it is being used to obstruct and prevent the resurgence of Islam. Liberalism is invalid in its basic and core idea. Modifications and amendments to the philosophy of Liberalism cannot salvage its error and falsehood. Liberalism must be rejected in its entirety, along with the entire edifice of thinking that has been constructed upon this faulty foundation. Western civilisation must be dismantled and reconstructed anew upon a religious basis, so that man, in worshipping his Creator, can be freed from the worship of his fellow man.

 

By: Ibn Nusrah

Pakistan

Read more...

Dr. Ahmed Saleh Touma al-Khadr, President for the Position of the Interim Government in Exile, Its Mission (if it gets to See the Light) is to Take Over the People's Leadership from the "Islamists" and to Pave the Way to Strike Them

In a meeting attended by 97 from a total of 115 members, the Syrian National Coalition on Saturday 14/09/2013 in Istanbul chose Dr. Ahmed Saleh Touma al-Khadr for the position of the head of an interim government in exile, whose first mission is to take over the management of the areas under control of the rebel fighters. He was the only nominee for the position. Touma is an independent Islamist and a former preacher from the founders of the Damascus Declaration in 2005, which calls for "safe, gradual, peaceful change in Syria, and transferring Syria from its state of despotism to a state of democracy". Both Salim Idris and Ahmad al-Jarba have been pushing for his election, which then took place with 75 votes. It is expected that Touma chooses an interim government of 13 ministers to manage the Syrian areas controlled by armed groups. Touma said after his election: "The priority for this government will be to restore stability in the liberated areas and to improve living conditions and provide security." He stressed that "Syria will be for all Syrians, and will not be a place for killers and criminals." Touma's assistant said: "The opposition is under international pressure to enhance its credibility, and the goal is that the coalition becomes more like a parliament, while the government works as an executive authority."

Touma's government comes to fill the time gap, such that America frees itself from the organization of the conditions to create a transitional government in the Geneva Convention and its likes, as a result of negotiations between the coalition and the regime. This is to find a subsequent agent ruler to take the place of the preceding agent ruler! This is what America is up to, after the talk of a strike and chemical weapons and its ramifications... Therefore it is not expected from Touma's government to take decisive positions, rather America entrusted it with the role of harassing anyone that works for Islam in Syria... It seems that things are moving in this direction. Khaled al-Khoja, a member of the Syrian National Coalition, said that the interim government will have to prove itself quickly, otherwise the whole coalition would be undermined in favor of the most radical Islamists.

Thus, the formation of this government will not see the light as long as America does not want it to. If America views such an interim government to benefit its plan to hit the Islamists before the formation of the transitional government and to engage in the process of solution through the gate of Geneva 2, they will go forth with. What will help their stance is that all regional and international systems of governance that are pro-American in particular or pro-Western in general, all of these systems are going in the direction of striking the Islamic movement that is prominent in Syria today.  Everyone has conspired against the Muslims in Syria who are free of guilt, except that they believe in Allah, the Mighty, the Benignant. Therefore they chose Touma, the owner of an Islamic face, for presidency of the interim government, such that they are free to organize the conditions for the Geneva Conference and create the transitional government.


Oh Muslims in Syria as-Sham, the abode of Islam:
The West and their lackeys from the Muslim rulers in the region conspire against you because they are afraid of the establishment of the rule by what Allah has revealed in Syria, and prefer the survival of the criminal Syrian regime to rule. There are serious attempts to hit the Islamic movement in Syria and to eliminate those who represent it. This preoccupies the West, because it is a threat to its colonial project in the region, and to the tyrant regimes in the Muslim countries, since it will overthrow their devilish thrones. The Muslims in Syria should beware of all those gathered and scattered, and of all those they utilize from personalities and groups, and of the aid they provide under the pretext of compassion, while its true intention being a torment. Working for the West and betraying the Ummah and the Deen is what controls all the actions of the Muslim rulers, even as they pretend to help the Muslims. All of them, and especially the rulers of the Gulf States who have taken humiliating positions towards the issues of the Ummah, are working to purchase the consciences with their money, conditioning to accept the civil state and not to demand the Islamic state in exchange for arms... Indeed, what they are doing is a great evil.


Oh Muslims in Syria ash-Sham, the abode of Islam:
The Western conspiracy against us has reached a level that leaves no excuse to the Muslim for not calling attention to it and standing up against it. Those malicious rulers who govern us add to our pain, because if they only wanted to, they could have provided money and weapons to prevent our tragedy. But they remain deedless, because they have received their orders from the embassies. There is no way out for us except to unite to establish what Allah imposed on us from the establishment of the Khilafah "Caliphate" State, which will rid us from all the Western caused tragedies. Hizb ut Tahrir calls on the Muslims in Syria, as in other Muslim countries, to work with it to establish the rightly guided Khilafah "Caliphate", whose existence has become a matter of life or death for Muslims on top of it being a Shar'i obligation.

Allah (swt) says:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا مَنْ يَرْتَدَّ مِنْكُمْ عَنْ دِينِهِ فَسَوْفَ يَأْتِي اللَّهُ بِقَوْمٍ يُحِبُّهُمْ وَيُحِبُّونَهُ أَذِلَّةٍ عَلَى الْمُؤْمِنِينَ أَعِزَّةٍ عَلَى الْكَافِرِينَ يُجَاهِدُونَ فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ وَلَا يَخَافُونَ لَوْمَةَ لَائِمٍ ذَلِكَ فَضْلُ اللَّهِ يُؤْتِيهِ مَنْ يَشَاءُ وَاللَّهُ وَاسِعٌ عَلِيمٌ * إِنَّمَا وَلِيُّكُمُ اللَّهُ وَرَسُولُهُ وَالَّذِينَ آمَنُوا الَّذِينَ يُقِيمُونَ الصَّلَاةَ وَيُؤْتُونَ الزَّكَاةَ وَهُمْ رَاكِعُونَ * وَمَنْ يَتَوَلَّ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ وَالَّذِينَ آمَنُوا فَإِنَّ حِزْبَ اللَّهِ هُمُ الْغَالِبُونَ * يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا لَا تَتَّخِذُوا الَّذِينَ اتَّخَذُوا دِينَكُمْ هُزُوًا وَلَعِبًا مِنَ الَّذِينَ أُوتُوا الْكِتَابَ مِنْ قَبْلِكُمْ وَالْكُفَّارَ أَوْلِيَاءَ وَاتَّقُوا اللَّهَ إِنْ كُنْتُمْ مُؤْمِنِينَ

"O you who have believed, whoever of you should revert from his religion - Allah will bring forth [in place of them] a people He will love and who will love Him [who are] humble toward the believers, powerful against the disbelievers; they strive in the cause of Allah and do not fear the blame of a critic. That is the favor of Allah; He bestows it upon whom He wills. And Allah is all-Encompassing and Knowing. Your ally is none but Allah and [therefore] His Messenger and those who have believed - those who establish prayer and give zakah, and they bow [in worship]. And whoever is an ally of Allah and His Messenger and those who have believed - indeed, the party of Allah - they will be the predominant. O you who have believed, take not those who have taken your religion in ridicule and amusement among the ones who were given the Scripture before you nor the disbelievers as allies. And fear Allah, if you should [truly] be believers." [Al-Ma'ida, 5:54-57]

Read more...

The Veil Debate is a Side Show The real debate is about how women are perceived in society

 Over the last few days, the Liberal Democrat MP Jeremy Browne has called for a national debate on banning the niqab (veil) in public places. Previously, Tory MP Philip Hollobone introduced his ‘Ban the Niqab' Bill in parliament and Sarah Wollaston MP has weighed in with a piece in the Telegraph titled "Veil debate should be a wake-up call for feminism" - as if this is the most important issue facing Britain.

Read more...

Chemical or Conventional Weapons! Does It Matter?

On August 21, 2013, the Tyrant of Damascus, Bashar Al-Assad, exterminated more than 1400 Muslim civilians with chemical weapons after failing to break their will. Such brutality immediately sparked words of condemnation from world powers, especially the West. America was initially very vocal in calling for a military strike then quickly backed away towards a political solution where the Assad regime would surrender the chemical weapons. Why now has America taken a strong stance against the Syrian regime? Why was it standing still when hundreds of thousands were being killed in the last two and a half years?

The lives of those hundreds of thousands of innocent men, women, and children killed before the chemical weapons attacks are no less valuable than the ones killed with chemical weapons.

What has caused great urgency for the US and Europe is that currently the revolution forces have come closer to triumph and victory, while the Assad regime is on the verge of collapse. The sudden collapse of Assad would create an unfavorable situation to the US and Europe. General Martin E. Dempsey, the chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, explains the US view of the Syrian massacres and the reason for US involvement: "Syria today is not about choosing between two sides... It is my belief that the side we choose must be ready to promote their interests and ours when the balance shifts in their favor. Today, they are not" Dempsey leaves no doubt that the real concern of the US is not the plight of people, rather it is the interest of the USA, which Dempsey stated in his own words "a regime in complete alliance with the US and its agenda in the Middle East".

America's main concern is who should or should not lead Syria after the collapse of Assad's regime. In his speech on September 10, President Obama further clarified America's position when he stated "the day after any military action, we would redouble our efforts to achieve a political solution that strengthens those who reject the forces of tyranny and extremism." What Obama means is that America would bring together the Assad regime with representatives from the opposition, of America's choosing, guaranteeing a "resolution" that would keep the current regime with minor face changes. So what has caused Obama and Kerry to drastically switch their position from a military strike after hyping for weeks that it was the only solution? It is clear that the Muslims in Syria do not want just a change of faces; they want to completely replace the regime. By choosing the path of a political process, America has bided more time for the Assad regime. It also bought itself more time to garner support amongst the opposition with the purpose of creating a viable, "moderate" opposition.

The reality of war in Syria is not about the use of chemical weapons or conventional weapons. It is a revolution that was launched under the banners of Islam for the removal of the US installed regime of the Assad family, which has caused mass suffering, pain, destruction, imprisonment, and killing of tens of thousands of people over the course of 40 years. Any involvement by America, or the West, would only continue this suffering.

Muslims must not ask for America's help.  Nor should they seek protection from any non-Muslim nation. Allah (swt) has forbidden us from seeking such help:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا لَا تَتَّخِذُوا الْكَافِرِينَ أَوْلِيَاءَ مِنْ دُونِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ أَتُرِيدُونَ أَنْ تَجْعَلُوا لِلَّهِ عَلَيْكُمْ سُلْطَانًا مُبِينًا

"O you who have believed, do not take the disbelievers as allies instead of the believers. Do you wish to give Allah against yourselves a clear case?" [TMQ Al-Nisa: 144]

It is further supported by the saying of our noble Prophet Rasul'Allah (saw):

«لَا تَسْتَضِيئُوا بِنَارِ الْمُشْرِكِينَ»

"Do not seek light from the fire of the polytheists." [Baihaqi]

«فَإِنَّا لَا نَسْتَعِينُ بِمُشْرِكٍ»

"We do not seek help from the polytheist." [Ahmed and Abu Dawud]

 

The solution for Syria will not come from the East or the West.  The sufferings of people of Syria will not be resolved by democracy or capitalism.  The people of Sham will only get relief with the Islamic State. Only the Islamic State will give them honor and security.  Indeed, only Islam will resolve the problems in the Middle East and the world; only Islam will replace tyranny with justice.  Muslims should only work for the establishment of the Islamic State and support those who are working for its establishment in the Muslim World.

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا اسْتَجِيبُوا لِلَّهِ وَلِلرَّسُولِ إِذَا دَعَاكُمْ لِمَا يُحْيِيكُمْ

"O you who believe! answer (the call of) Allah and His Messenger when he calls you to that which gives you life." (TMQ Al-Anfal: 24)

Read more...

Wilayah Turkey: Urfa Conference "Ongoing Battle between the West & Islam... Continues in Syria"

  • Published in Asia
  •   |  

Hizb ut Tahrir/ Wilayah Turkey organized a large conference in the city of Shanley Urfa in support of the Syrian Revolution under the title "Ongoing Battle between the West & Islam... Continues in Syria."  Attendees included: Mahmoud Carr; Head of Media Office of Hizb ut Tahrir in Turkey, Aydin Osalb; member of media office, and Brother Mustapha Kachuk; writer for a magazine for radical change.  The Muslim men and women who attended showed their support for their brothers and sisters in Syria.

Monday, 10 Dhu Qi'dii 1434 AH corresponding to 17 September 2013 CE

 

Picture Slideshow: Click Here

Read more...

Headlines News 18/09/2013

  • Published in News & Comment
  •   |  

Headlines:

  • 11 Million Users Quit Facebook in the U.S and UK
  • Veil Threat: UK Muslims Outraged by Possible Ban on Religious Dress in Public
  • Syria crisis: Destroying Chemical Weapons 'Is Doable'
  • America Still Hopes for Taliban Talks: US Envoy
  • Butcher of Gujarat Modi Woos Muslims


Details:

11 Million Users Quit Facebook in the U.S and UK

Facebook users are quitting the social network in droves due to privacy concerns and fear of internet addiction, according to new research. Increasing numbers are taking part in what's been dubbed 'virtual identity suicide' and deleting their accounts.  Analysis of more than 600 people, by researchers from the University of Vienna, found that data protection issues and social pressure to add friends were also among the reasons for leaving. Others quoted shallow conversations, general dissatisfaction and loss of interest in the site. Compared to the sample of those who continued to use Facebook, the quitters were older, on average, and more likely to be male. Reasons for quitting Facebook were mainly privacy concerns (48.3 per cent), followed by a general dissatisfaction (13.5 per cent), negative aspects of online friends (12.6 per cent) and the feeling of getting addicted (6.0 per cent). Brenda Wiederhold, editor of the journal Cyberpsychology, Behaviour and Social Networking which published the findings, said: 'Given high profile stories such as WikiLeaks and the recent NSA surveillance reports, individual citizens are becoming increasingly more wary of cyber-related privacy concerns. [Source: Mail Online]

 

Veil Threat: UK Muslims Outraged by Possible Ban on Religious Dress in Public

The Muslim community in the UK has been ‘disgusted' by the idea of a possible ban on Muslim girls and young women from wearing veils in public places. Home Office Minister Jeremy Browne says the government should consider the ban. "We should be very cautious about imposing religious conformity on a society which has always valued freedom of expression," a Liberal Democrat Minister told The Telegraph. "But there is genuine debate about whether girls should feel a compulsion to wear a veil when society deems children to be unable to express personal choices about other areas like buying alcohol, smoking or getting married," Browne said.  "That would apply to Christian minorities in the Middle East just as much as religious minorities here in Britain," he added.  The chief executive of the Ramadhan Foundation, a group that works with young Muslims in the UK, said he was "disgusted" by Browne's comments.  "This is another example of the double standards that are applied to Muslims in our country by some politicians," Mohammed Shafiq said.  "Whatever one's religion they should be free to practice it according to their own choices and any attempt by the government to ban Muslim women will be strongly resisted by the Muslim community." The debate comes after Birmingham Metropolitan College changed its rules last week in an unprecedented move. It previously banned Muslim students from wearing niqab - a veil that leaves only a slot for the eyes. An online petition against the ban was signed by 9,000 in 48 hours and forced the institution to drop the ban, which had been in place for eight years.  [Source: Russia Today]


Syria Crisis: Destroying Chemical Weapons 'Is Doable'

The chief UN weapons inspector says it will be difficult to find and destroy all of Syria's chemical weapons, but he believes it is achievable. Ake Sellstrom told the BBC much depended on whether Damascus and the opposition were willing to negotiate.  He said his team concluded after a visit to Syria that the nerve agent sarin was used in an attack in a Damascus area on 21 August. The UN Security Council is now trying to agree a resolution on the issue. Western nations blame government forces of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad for the deadly attack in the Ghouta area. Damascus - backed by Russia - says the opposition forces are to blame. Mr Sellstrom told the BBC's Newsday programme that dealing with Syria's chemical arsenal was "doable". "But of course, it will be a stressful work," he added. "Depending on the position of the Syrian government and the position of the opposition, depending on how much they could negotiate, it could be done. "It will be a difficult job." The report, however, did not apportion blame for the attack.  [Source: BBC]

 

America Still Hopes for Taliban Talks: US Envoy

A US envoy said Monday that Washington still hoped to talk directly with the Taliban to support an Afghan peace deal but that the militants seemed unwilling to do so. The Taliban opened an office in the Qatari capital Doha in June aimed at talking to the United States ahead of next year's withdrawal of most American troops, but diplomacy collapsed before it even began. "We would still like to see that dialogue initiated, a dialogue that would involve the US and Taliban directly but would also involve the Afghan government or its High Peace Council," said James Dobbins, the US special representative on Afghanistan and Pakistan. "We're not giving up hope. We continue to hope that there will be a positive development at some point, but we can't predict when," Dobbins, who was expected to lead the US side at talks, told reporters in Washington. "The Taliban are now, as a practical matter, unwilling to engage with the United States, with the Afghans, with anybody," he said. The Taliban office in Doha styled itself as an embassy of a government-in-exile from the Islamists' 1996-2001 reign, angering Afghan President Hamid Karzai who briefly pulled out of separate talks with the United States on a post-2014 security agreement. In turn, the Taliban refused to talk to Karzai, calling him a US puppet, even though the United States had hoped for the Afghan government to play the main role in talks with the Taliban. Dobbins blamed a "genuine misunderstanding" over the role of the office. President Barack Obama has promised the war-weary US public to pull combat troops out of Afghanistan next year, ending the longest US war that was launched after the September 11, 2001, attacks. The United States has set a goal of concluding the security agreement with the Afghan government next month.[Source The News International]


Butcher of Gujarat Modi Woos Muslims

Four days after the BJP announced that Mr Modi will be its candidate for PM for the 2014 general elections, the Gujarat Chief Minister is doing the rounds of Ahmedabad collecting blessings and good wishes. The BJP has organised a recruitment drive with special emphasis on inducting 100,000 Muslim youth. In Mumbai, Muslims linked to the BJP's minority cell gathered at the historic Makhdoom Shah Baba mausoleum or Mahim Dargah to "pray for Mr Modi's long life."  In organised effort in Gujarat, a group of Muslims linked to the BJP celebrated the Chief Minister's birthday with a giant, 64 kg cake. Similar cake-cutting ceremonies were held in a few other cities. As Mr Modi makes a bid to be Prime Minister next year, he needs to win friends and influence people. In that effort, he is also attempting to turn a debate over his secular credentials on its head. He is accused by political rivals of being a divisive leader, but his party insists that Mr Modi enjoys support among minorities too. The Gujarat Chief Minister is accused of not doing enough to stop the communal riots that mangled his state in 2002, leaving hundreds of people, mostly Muslims, dead. [Source: NDTV]

Read more...
Subscribe to this RSS feed

Site Categories

Links

West

Muslim Lands

Muslim Lands