|Users Online Now: 2,734 (Who's On?)||Visitors Today: 1,033,757|
|Pageviews Today: 1,509,125||Threads Today: 385||Posts Today: 7,594|
User ID: 26023321
07/02/2013 08:09 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Soon, the Muslim Brotherhood will come to the same realisation as others Gradualists (in the revival of Islam) like the FIS (Algeria) and the Rafah Party (Turkey). One does not simply use the post-colonial political system in Muslim countries against itself. It is backed up, and underwritten, by the very foreign powers who created it as a cage over us.
This is like walking into a Casino, and using your money to play the gambling games, hoping that you'll win enough to buy the casino, and close it down. In reality, you've just wasted your money and made the casino richer, because 'The House Always Wins'.
The U.S. government realises that 'Islamist' parties are popular - representing the people's desire for a Islamic system. However, they realised that though they cannot prevent such parties coming to power now, the situation is not outside some means of control. Namely, the U.S. merely has to allow these parties to get into a very limited role of power, then 'shut all the doors' on them to make them appear to fail in the people's eyes. Since Morsi wasn't willing, or able, to really change the system - he and his party will be publicly hanged by it (as a warning to others).
Now the Muslim Brotherhood cries foul, and demands that people respect democracy (i.e. that Morsi is an legitimate elected leader). But they don't understand why Liberals use Democracy. Liberalism doesn't exist to serve Democracy. Democracy exists to serve Liberalism. This is why the U.S. constitution was created, because the founding fathers of America didn't trust the rule of the majority. The Constitution defines the essential laws and rights, and people only elect leaders to implement that Liberal constitution, or make laws WITHIN its limits [btw the American public was not given a choice on the US constitution]. Does Morsi not see that if Democracy doesn't produce the result the Liberals want, they have no problem with becoming violent to protect Liberalism, and ignoring democracy. This fact should have been apparent from anyone who studied history.
The Brotherhood should have changed the system, not just played games within it, hoping the system would allow them to overturn it. Morsi tried to appease the USA and ISRAEL by shutting off Gaza ever more than Mubarak did. He begged for foreign interest loans - even though he should of confiscated the ill-gotten property of the Egyptian Military industrial complex, and re-distributed to the poor. He could have changed the economy of cotton production (for export to Western countries) into food production for his own people. He tried to appease the Secularists by making Egypt fall well short of a Islamic State - content to apply a Islamic flavouring. But now he'll find out that the two billion dollars the USA pays to the mercenary Egyptian Generals, is not without strings. And the Egyptian Military are the real kingmakers of Egypt - and they were only waiting until the people turned against the Muslim Brotherhood, to depose them, or at least render their power negligible in a 'unity government' (composed of the pro-secular but electoral losers).
So instead of pushing towards the goal of the re-establishment of Islam, the Muslim Brotherhood were the unwitting pawns of a game designed to make Islamic movements look incompetent - pushing back the work for revival back by decades.
However, now is not the time for people to say 'I told you so' to the Gradualists, but to say 'now, will you do things a better way?'
It's time for us to liberate our 'kingmakers' - then we will be free to submit our nations to Al Malik (swt).
Possibility is the nature of God, and impossibility is the limitation of man.