Four hours of US-Iran talks produce more questions

Four hours of US-Iran talks produce more questions

At last the ice was broken in the US-Iran relations. On Monday, the two countries' ambassadors in Iraq met face-to-face to discuss Iraq's future. The talks were the first in 28 years after the two countries broke diplomatic relations in the wake of the Iranian people's revolution led by Ayatollah Rohollah Khomeini.

US ambassador Ryan Crocker shook hands with his Iranian counterpart Hassan Kazemi Qumi at the high security Green Zone office of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki in Baghdad for four hours.

The meeting was businesslike but the undercurrents were hostile though the two countries agreed to discuss nothing but Iraq.

As to who set the agenda for the meeting, both sides claim the credit. The United States said that it was at the request of Washington that the meeting was narrowly confined to the Iraqi situation.

But the Iranians say it was they who set the stage and set the agenda too.

The Iranians say their officials had higher morale and gained the upper hand throughout the meeting.

They say that victory was theirs from the moment the process started. The Iranians say the Americans, caught up in the Iraq quagmire, were sending informal requests through various diplomatic channels for talks but Tehran insisted that they would only respond to an official request.

According to Iranian news reports, the US then submitted such a request through the Swiss embassy in Tehran. Iran then put forward two conditions — a strict focus on Iraq's security and the presence of Iraqi officials as the third party.

In practice, it was Iran that set the agenda, the reports said.

It is clear from the statements of U.S. officials, including the article by Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns published in the Boston Review, that the main reasons for the US to talk to Iran were the U.S. entrapment in the quagmire of Iraq and Afghanistan, internal disputes in the U.S. government, Israel's humiliating defeat in its 33-day war against Hezbollah, and other regional and international problems of the United States, the reports said.

That the United States agreed to talk to its arch foe is indicative of the Bush administration's desperation. Last year, the Iraqi Study Group — a bipartisan expert panel — proposed that the Bush administration talk to the Iranians. But the White House was adamant — until the Iranians gave up their nuclear ambitions the Americans would not talk to them. But Monday's meeting shows that the White House now sees wisdom in the study group proposal.

The heat on the Bush administration is really increasing. The anti-war cry is getting stronger and louder in the United States. The administration's military "surge" in Iraq have only exacerbated the crisis with more and more US troops being killed. Last week, the US Congress passed a bill approving funds for the Bush administration's wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, but the passage of the bill came along with caveats. Several Democratic Party members said they favoured an early US troop withdrawal from Iraq.

The Bush administration policy, especially its scant respect for international law and issues such as climate change, has made the United States the most unpopular country in the world followed by Israel. It stands stripped today before the international peace community for the lies it uttered in the build-up to its invasion of Iraq. The weapons of mass destruction which the Bush administration cited as its reason for the invasion were nowhere to be found in Iraq. However much the corporate US media tried to protect the Bush administration and project Bush's war as a just war, the alternate media — especially the internet-based news groups and bloggers — and a handful of independent mainstream journalists have exposed the Bush administration's charade.

When the going got tough in Iraq, the Bush administration wanted excuses. First it blamed Osama bin Laden's Al-Qaeda. The Bush administration named them Al-Qaeda in Iraq. The Iraqi Shiites, who comprise 60 percent of the population, the pro-US Kurds who make up 20 percent and even most Sunni Arabs are not friends of al-Qaeda. Yet the Bush administration was unable to rein in this handful of Sunni Muslim foreign fighters of al Qaeda although it had the support of 2000,000 coalition troops. So it started pointing its finger at Iran.

The US Defence Department has alleged that the Iranian Revolutionary Guards are active in Iraq and supplying armour-penetrating explosive devices that have become a deadly weapon in the hands of the Iraqi resistance forces, be they Shiites or Sunnis.

Iran may or may not be playing a role in fuelling the anti-US insurgency in Iraq. But the reality is that as long as the United States stays in Iraq, it will be a threat to Iran's sovereignty. Iran's rapidly progressing nuclear programme is being viewed by the United States and Israel as a direct threat to them. No one could rule out the possibility of either the United States or Israel or both launching an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities.

Iraq, aware of these realities, does not want their country to be used as a battleground for settling scores. So the Nouri al-Maliki government in Baghdad is a strong advocate of a US-Iran meeting.

Iran has been an opponent of US occupation in Iraq and of late has been calling for a timetable for the withdrawal of occupation troops. Then why should they hold talks? Have the Iranians decided to help the Bush administration in return for some concessions such as a promise not to pursue tough sanctions on Tehran? For four hours they discussed and in the end there was nothing much to tell the media. The two ambassadors who took part in the talks said the talks were positive. US ambassador Crocker said: "As you surely know among diplomats, you don't need a lot of substance to take up a lot of time."

Iranian ambassador Kazemi said Iran had offered to train and equip the Iraqi security forces to create a new military and security structure and to build Iraq's devastated infrastructure.

Iran, being the powerful neighbour of Iraq, is certainly an influential factor in Iraq's politics. It gave tacit support for the United States when the sole superpower invaded Afghanistan first and then Iraq which was under Saddam Hussein, the nemesis of the Iranian regime.

Now that the US has got rid of Saddam and pro-Iranian politicians calling the shots in Iraq, one would expect that Iran obviously wants the US out. Has the Iranians compromised on this oft-stated policy?

Helping the Iraqis to rebuild their country with security for all the Iraqi people is certainly a noble goal, but if the Iranians step in with selfish ends — for instance, forcing the Americans to adopt a soft approach on the Iranian nuclear dispute — to extend a hand to the United States - then they would be doing it against the will of the Iraqi people who clamour for freedom from occupation or the shame of occupation.

Shameless BUSH

Bush Okays "Soft Revolution" in Iran

IslamOnline.net & Newspapers

"One way to sabotage a program is to make minor modifications in some of the components Iran obtains on the black market," Fitzpatrick argued. CAIRO — Wartime US President George Bush has authorized the CIA to conduct a series of "black" operations to destabilize and eventually topple the Iranian regime, including funds for alleged terrorist groups, The Sunday Telegraph revealed on May 27. The "soft revolution" plan allows a propaganda and disinformation campaign against the Iranian regime as well as manipulating the country's currency and international financial transactions, intelligence sources told the paper. The presidential directive also authorizes the CIA to gather intelligence from Iranian exiles and emigrés within the US, an area that is usually the preserve of the FBI. "Iranians in America have links with their families at home, and they are a good two-way source of information," a security source in the US told The Telegraph. The CIA will be supporting Iran's opposition groups and militias including Jundullah, a militant group clustered in Pakistan-Iran border. The group, reportedly affiliated with Al-Qaeda, is part of the Baloch fighters in Pakistan as well as in Iran's Sistan and Baluchistan Province, and has carried out attacks on Iranian forces in the past. Iran arrested 10 members of Jundullah last weekend, carrying $500,000 in cash along with "maps of sensitive areas" and "modern spy equipment". The Telegraphreported in February that the US is secretly funding Iranian separatist groups in an attempt to pile pressure on the regime of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Iran said on Saturday, May 26, it had uncovered spy rings organized by the US and its Western allies and made up of "infiltrating elements from Iraq's occupiers." Nuclear Sabotage A main target of the new CIA campaign will be to sabotage the Iranian nuclear program. "One way to sabotage a program is to make minor modifications in some of the components Iran obtains on the black market," Mark Fitzpatrick, a former senior State Department official, told The Telegraph. Fitzpatrick, currently an expert in the Washington-based International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), noted that industrial sabotage is preferable to combat Iran's nuclear program "without military action, without fingerprints on the operation." Security officials told the British paper that Teheran has already been sold defective parts on the black market in a bid to disrupt its uranium enrichment. They blamed such defective parts for an explosion that destroyed 50 nuclear centrifuges at the Natanz nuclear plant last year. Western nations, led by the US, suspect Iran's nuclear program is aimed at producing atomic weapons. Iran has repeatedly defended the program, insisting it only aims to supply energy for a growing population. The Security Council has passed two resolutions since December, targeting Iran's nuclear and military sectors and severely impeding its financial transactions with the outside world. No Strike "Cheney helped to lead the side favoring a military strike," Riedel noted. Experts say the new CIA campaign has replaced the option of a direct military strike, long sponsored by Vice President Dick Cheney. "Cheney helped to lead the side favoring a military strike," Bruce Riedel, until six months ago the senior CIA official who dealt with Iran, told the British paper. "But I think they have concluded that a military strike has more downsides than upsides." Talks about a looming US strike against Iran gained more credibility recently with a massive military build-up in the Gulf. The nuclear-powered carriers USS John Stennis and USS Nimitz sailed into the Gulf last week along with a helicopter carrier and amphibious assault ships carrying an estimated 2,200 marines. Award-winning American investigative reporter Seymour Hersh has recently revealed that the Pentagon had a special group to plan an attack against Iran that can be implemented, upon orders from the president, within 24 hours. He believes the Bush administration is intent on striking Iran and would do that with or without the UN authorization as was the case with Iraq in 2003. The leaking of the report comes just a day before a meeting in Iraq between US Ambassador Ryan Crocker and his Iranian counterpart.

How can I describe that land, beaches, peoples, trees,and BIRDS of Bird Island. I don't have words for that. it is really interesting. I have spend 3days and 2 nights in bird Island between 18th of May till 20th Of May 2007. Bird Island is located in Indian Ocean, it is belongs to Seychelles Islands. me and my friend Poojitha jointly organize this trip (http://timeseye.blogspot.com/) poojitha made a good coverage about our visit on his blog you can see that also. but I want to raise few points regarding birds island
first point - The natural life is so peaceful and pleasant
Bird island is a model Example for that- average technology and facilities but it is welcomed by all the human beings, fresh air, fresh water, sounds free nature, no police, no boundaries it is really natural but we cannot find this natural life everywhere in the world.

second birds- who is the creator of those birds? the common Noody and lessa noody drink sea water they have a system in their body to separate the fresh water from salty water....... ohh who make it ?
the laying system and feeding system
long fly
who gave them this ability ?
let us search something from Quran

Do they not see the birds committed to fly in the atmosphere of the sky?
None holds them up in the air except God. This should be
(sufficient) proof for people who believe. (16:79)

Have they not seen the birds above them lined up in columns and spreading their wings? The Most Gracious is the One who holds them in the air. He is Seer of all things. (67:19)

Do you not realize that everyone in the heavens and the earth glorifies God, even the birds as they fly in a column? Each knows its prayer and its glorification. God is fully aware of everything they do. (24:41)

1000- meanings

There are friends who remain true and trustful under all circumstances and there are friends who remain with you only desiring the good. Islam urges to have cordial relations with others and to avoid corruption and the harmful effects of the company of the wicked and the mischievous, strictly forbidding every kind of contact and intimacy with them. The first kind of friend is very few, and their friendship is like a mirror to you. In deed, we must be fair to our friends, and must want for them that which we want for ourselves.

Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) said,"A true believer is a mirror to his brother. He prevents him from any harm."
Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) said,"A person follows the ways and conducts of his friends."

On the other hand, one encounters fools, avaricious, people cowards, and liars. The fool wants to help others, but cause more harm to them despite good intentions. The avaricious one takes but does not give back to anyone. The coward flees at the smallest danger, abandoning everyone. And the liar does not benefit others, brings animosity and resentment, and causes serious damage to others. Also, the liar is not trusted even if he/she is telling the truth. It is reported,

” As for a liar, life with him can never be pleasant for you. He carries tales from you to others and from others to you. If he gives you a true report, a false one follows it. His reputation is slurred. So much so that when he says something true, nobody believes him. Due to the enmity which he entertains in his heart for people, he estranges them from one another and creates malice in their hearts. Be careful and do your duty to Allah.

“These kinds of individuals might call themselves as your friends, but they do more ill-service to you as well as to the society and in the long run. It is advised,"

Avoid the company of the vicious, because your character would pick up their degenerate and deviant qualities without your knowing it." The Glorious Qur'an says,"O woe is me! Would that I had not taken
such a one as my friend." 25:28

This is an article I have read in mail box I have thought about it deeply. So many things came across me suddenly I found one think, it is very interesting that is why I bring it here

One Friday we went to Mosque for Jummah prayers my wife goes into ladies Prayer room and me into gents’ prayer room. After the prayers my wife accompanied with and Indian lady with Indian costumes like Shalwar from that day the Indian girl has stared a good relationship with my wife finally last weekend she leave for good from Seychelles, I found a lot of changes in his life style see the way they are dressed

It is Not a Dream But It is Reality,
My Moon, Always throw a smile from top of my head
EN NILA EPPOLUTHUM- THOORATHIL NINIRU KAN SIMITTUM
SILAPOTHU NEENDA AMAWASAYYAHA
SILAPOLUTHU NEENDA MUZU NILAWAHA
ELLAM ENAKKU PALAHIPPONATHU

Cool Player Muttiah Muralitharan

Muttiah Muralitharan, the Sri Lanka spinner, has no plans to retire and intends to play both Test and one-day cricket for at least two more years.

The past six months has seen several high profile names bow out of the game - Shane Warne and Glenn McGrath the two most notable. But Muralitharan, a youthful 35, has no such desire.

"I will have to call it a day some time. But I am hoping to play for at least another two years and see how good it is and how my fitness is," he said. "I need to be involved in the game to be fully motivated and interested."

He is but a spring chicken to his team-mate Sanath Jayasuriyra, though, who turns 38 at the end of June, and Muralitharan is adamant age should not be a factor in limiting a player's career.

"Sanath is very fit and although he is nearly 38 he can play in any ODI side. He can play as long as he is fit," Muralitharan said. "And knowing Sanath he looks after himself so well. And [Chaminda Vaas] is just 33. [Courtney] Walsh played until he was 37 or 38, [Curtly] Ambrose too played well into his late 30s and [Glenn] McGrath was 37 when he retired.

"I don't think Vaas should be looking to retire. He should maintain his fitness and continue and should be looking at the next World Cup too. As for [Russell] Arnold, maybe he thought it was time. He was somebody who was in and out of the side and it is only he who knows what the best time is to quit. I think he has realised it is now."

Muralitharan is second on the all-time list of wicket-takers in Test cricket with 674, trailing Warne's 708. He is also placed second in one-dayers with 455, just 47 behind Wasim Akram.

This is a model example of LTTE and their attitude- I don’t know why the world still allow them to fight.

The Sri Lankan Politics coming worst day by day especially after the CFA nations rushed towards a peaceful life, but it has changed like a climate LTTE as a rebel group they cannot hold these type of diplomatic move for long term, because they will loose their strength and ability. I am much worried about this horror situation; it is all depend on the political leaders and the international community. If our Hon. President wishes to short out this matter he can make it one over night. He can use his executive power but he doesn’t want……

From other hand Prabakaran wishes to short out this case he also can in over night with his power but he doesn’t………

This is not a childish talk. It is through experience with these matters I am writing here.

Only poor people going to struggle with the war and fighting not only directly but also indirectly

I am often asked what the origins of the War in Sri Lanka are. Here is a brief outline:

First, I must explain that this is not a war between the Tamils and the Sinhalese, contrary to what many believe. For example, there are many Tamil tea pickers living in central Sri Lanka. They are not involved in the war. The Muslims are also not involved.

Sri Lanka was once a peaceful country. The movie "Bridge on the River Kwai", widely regarded as the greatest movie ever made, was filmed entirely in Sri Lanka. If you rent a video and look at the movie, you will learn and understand a lot about Sri Lanka. For example, in the scenes where William Holden is tromping through the impenetrable jungle with a train of women following him carrying loads of explosives destined to blow up the bridge, those women are all Sri Lankan ladies and perhaps some of them might even be back to work carrying similar loads of explosives to blow up bridges in this war now.

The movie "Bridge on the River Kwai" could never have been made during the current level of fighting and killing in Sri Lanka. That movie was made before the war started.

The war started in 1983, when the widow of Solomon Bandaranaike was in power. Her husband, Solomon Bandaranaike, was assassinated in 1959, as almost every other Prime Minister since then has been, and he was succeeded by his widow, aptly named Mrs. Bandaranaike. Her policy was that Sri Lanka was the national home of the Sinhalese people, that the national religion of Sri Lanka was Buddhism, and that therefore all the Tamils should go back to India. This was obviously an inflammatory policy, because there are over a million Tamil Hindus in Sri Lanka and they were born there, although their ancestors may have come over from India as recently as 100 or 200 years ago. (When they actually came is one of the major items in this dispute.)

The Bandaranaike policy was to crack down on the Tamil "foreigners", even denying them the right to use the Tamil language, the right to vote, the right to a public education and so on. The rebellion started because of her toughened the policies against the Tamil minority, and escalated until she was finally voted out of office. By that time, the war was underway full blast.

The leader of the most effective group of Tamils was and still is Velupillai Prabhakaran. He is the leader of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam. He was trained by Moscow in terrorism, weapons and explosives. I know a former classmate of his, a fellow chess player, who says that Prabhakaran is extremely intelligent, with a high IQ.

When Rajiv Gandhi came to power in India in 1984, he summoned Prabhakaran to the Presidential Palace in New Delhi (which is about five times bigger than the US White House for those who have never seen it.) Rajiv Gandhi started supplying Prabhakaran with arms and ammunition to fight his war against the Sinhalese majority.

However, Rajiv had a different agenda than that of Prabhakaran. Prabhakaran wanted to set up an independent Tamil state in Jaffna, Northern Sri Lanka. Rajiv, however, like many Indians, felt that Sri Lanka should be part of India. Rajiv wanted to annex Sri Lanka, along with Nepal and Bhutan, just as his mother had previously annexed Sikkim and Goa.

When it became apparent that Rajiv was shipping arms and ammunition to Prabhakaran, the Sri Lankan navy tried to blockade the narrow Palk strait which separates Sri Lanka from India. However, Rajiv Gandhi was always able to get his arms across to Prabhakaran in small boats, which were able to evade the blockade. Whenever Prabhakaran wanted to see Rajiv, the Indian Air Force would come pick up Prabhakaran from his jungle stronghold near Jaffna and take him to New Delhi to see Rajiv.

In 1987, Sri Lankan President J. R. Jayewardene came up with a brilliant solution to this incredible problem (at least I thought it was brilliant, even though almost nobody in Sri Lanka thought it was.) Jayewardene had two enemies (not counting the JVP in the South who were eventually exterminated): Rajiv and Prabhakaran. Why not get them to fight against each other!

Therefore, Jayewardene made a deal with Rajiv. He would allow the Indian Army to come into Sri Lanka, provided that the Indian Army fought against Prabhakaran. Rajiv got what he actually wanted, which was the military occupation of Sri Lanka. Jayewardene hoped that Rajiv Gandhi would be successful in killing Prabhakaran.

Unfortunately, this deal did not set well with the people of Sri Lanka. There is one thing they will all fight against to the last man and woman, and that is an annexation by India. There would have been massive rioting in the streets, except that a total 100% curfew was imposed on the country.

This is where Sam Sloan came in.

On the fateful day, which was July 29, 1987, I was walking down the street in Kandy on a perfectly normal day, when suddenly crowds started surging out of Kandy. Baton wielding police were ordering everybody to return to their homes. Nobody knew the reason.

A few hours later, we learned the reason. Rajiv Gandhi was coming to Sri Lanka that day.

How was this possible, when every man, woman and child that I knew of wanted to kill Rajiv Gandhi?

The answer was that the entire country was locked in their houses. Anybody who came out of their house was shot on the spot. One elderly man who woke up late and wandered out his front door was shot and killed in Katugastoda. Another man was killed in Kurunegela.

But I walked around in the streets freely because I was a white man. I must have walked 20 miles that day.

When Rajiv arrived at the airport in Sri Lanka, there was the traditional honor guard to greet him. However, there was a catch. The soldiers in the honor guard had no bullets in their weapons. They had nothing to kill Rajiv Gandhi with.

Still, one brave soldier made a heroic effort to do so. As Rajiv walked up and down, approvingly inspecting the honor guard, one member of the honor guard, who had his rifle on this soldier, suddenly swung it over and hit Rajiv Gandhi with it.

The soldier was quickly subdued and taken to prison. Rajiv Gandhi sustained only minor injuries.

After that, Rajiv quickly signed the agreement to allow the so-called "Indian Peace Keeping Force" to enter Sri Lanka, and then got on his airplane and flew back to India.

The Indian Peace Keeping Force never accomplished its objective, which was to kill Prabhakaran. The Indian Army chased Prabhakaran through the jungles of Sri Lanka, but was never able to catch and kill him. They once even announced that he had been killed, but he denied it. One Indian officer was quoted in the press as saying: "All I can tell you is that we have killed more of them than they have killed of us."

Meanwhile, Rajiv Gandhi continued his policy of bullying his neighbors. He invaded the Maldives, blockaded land-locked Nepal, aided insurgents in Bhutan, almost started a fourth war with Pakistan, and increased tensions with China and Bangladesh.

Rajiv Gandhi was defeated in the Indian elections and voted out of office in 1989.

The next Indian government withdrew the Indian Peace Keeping Force from Sri Lanka, leaving the Sri Lankans to fight amongst them again.

However, once the opposition coalition had gained power, they started arguing among themselves. The government fell and new elections were called. Rajiv announced that he was running for election again. In his campaign, he criticized the new government from withdrawing from Sri Lanka and made it clear that, if elected, he would send the Indian Army bank into Sri Lanka again.

By this time, I was no longer in Sri Lanka, but I was watching these events abroad with dismay. Was not there somebody who can stop this madman who wants to start wars between India and all of its neighbors?, I wondered.

Just at the very moment that I was wondering if there was not somebody who could stop this madman, a brave woman named Dhanu stepped up to Rajiv Gandhi in the middle of an election crowd and blew Rajiv Gandhi to bits.

Evidence indicated that Dhanu did this substantially on her own. The previous day, she had entered a boutique in Madras shopping for a large dress for a pregnant woman to wear. The employees at the boutique were wondering why she wanted a dress for a pregnant lady, when she was not pregnant.

The answer came the next day, May 21, 1991, when the dress she bought in that boutique was packed with explosives underneath it, which she detonated to blow up herself and Rajiv Gandhi.

This is a model example of LTTE and their attitude- I don’t know why the world still allow them to fight.

We sholud know about this Personality

Abul A’la was born on Rajab 3, 1321 AH (September 25, 1903 AD) in Aurangabad, a well-known town in the former princely state of Hyderabad (Deccan), presently Maharashtra, India. Born in a respectable family, his ancestry on the paternal side is traced back to the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessing of Allah be on him). The family had a long-standing tradition of spiritual leadership and a number of Maududi’s ancestors were outstanding leaders of Sufi Orders. One of the luminaries among them, the one from whom he derived his family name, was Khawajah Qutb al-Din Maudud (d. 527 AH), a renowned leader of the Chishti Sufi Order. Maududi’s forefathers had moved to the Subcontinent from Chisht towards the end of the 9^th century of the Islamic calendar (15^th century of the Christian calendar). The first one to arrive was Maududi’s namesake, Abul A’la Maududi (d. 935 AH).Maududi’s father, Ahmad Hasan, born in 1855 AD, a lawyer by profession, was a highly religious and devout person. Abul A’la was the youngest of his three sons.

Educational & Intellectual Growth:

After acquiring early education at home, Abul A’la was admitted in Madrasah Furqaniyah, a high school which attempted to combine the modern Western with the traditional Islamic education. After successfully completing his secondary education, young Abul A’la was at the stage of undergraduate studies at Darul Uloom, Hyderabad, when his formal education was disrupted by the illness and eventual death of his father. This did not deter Maududi from continuing his studies though these had to be outside of the regular educational institutions. By the early 1920s, Abul A’la knew enough Arabic, Persian and English, besides his mother-tongue, Urdu, to study the subjects of his interest independently. Thus, most of what he learned was self-acquired though for short spells of time he also received systematic instruction and guidance from some competent scholars. Thus, Maududi’s intellectual growth was largely a result of his own effort and the stimulation he received from his teachers. Moreover, his uprightness, his profound regard for propriety and righteousness largely reflect the religious piety of his parents and their concern for his proper moral upbringing.

Involvement in Journalism:

After the interruption of his formal education, Maududi turned to journalism in order to make his living. In 1918, he was already contributing to a leading Urdu newspaper, and in 1920, at the age of 17, he was appointed editor of Taj, which was being published from Jabalpore, a city in the province now called Madhya Pradesh, India. Late in 1920, Maududi came to Delhi and first assumed the editorship of the newspaper Muslim (1921-23), and later of al-Jam’iyat (1925-28), both of which were the organs of the Jam’iyat-i ‘Ulama-i Hind, an organisation of Muslim religious scholars. Under his editorship, al-Jam’iyat became the leading newspaper of the Muslims of India.

Interest in Politics:

Around the year 1920, Maududi also began to take some interest in politics. He participated in the Khilafat Movement, and became associated with the Tahrik-e Hijrat, which was a movement in opposition to the British rule over India and urged the Muslims of that country to migrate en masse to Afghanistan. However, he fell foul of the leadership of the movement because of his insistence that the aims and strategy of the movement should be realistic and well-planned. Maududi withdrew more and more into academic and journalistic pursuits.

First Book:

During 1920-28, Maulana Maududi also translated four different books, one from Arabic and the rest from English. He also made his mark on the academic life of the Subcontinent by writing his first major book, al-Jihad fi al-Islam. This is a masterly treatise on the Islamic law of war and peace. It was first serialised in al-Jam’iyat in 1927 and was formally published in 1930. It was highly acclaimed both by the famous poet-philosopher Muhammad Iqbal (d. 1938) and Maulana Muhammad Ali Jauhar (d. 1931), the famous leader of the Khilafat Movement. Though written during his ’20s, it is one of his major and most highly regarded works.

Research & Writings:

After his resignation from al-Jam’iyat in 1928, Maududi moved to Hyderabad and devoted himself to research and writing. It was in this connection that he took up the editorship of the monthly Tarjuman al-Qur’an in 1933, which since then has been the main vehicle for the dissemination of Maududi’s ideas. He proved to be a highly prolific writer, turning out several scores of pages every month. Initially, he concentrated on the exposition of ideas, values and basic principles of Islam. He paid special attention to the questions arising out of the conflict between the Islamic and the contemporary Western whorl. He also attempted to discuss some of the major problems of the modern age and sought to present Islamic solutions to those problems. He also developed a new methodology to study those problems in the context of the experience of the West and the Muslim world, judging them on the theoretical criterion of their intrinsic soundness and viability and conformity with the teachings of the Qur’an and the Sunnah. His writings revealed his erudition and scholarship, a deep perception of the significance of the teachings of the Qur’an and the Sunnah and a critical awareness of the mainstream of Western thought and history. All this brought a freshness to Muslim approach to these problems and lent a wider appeal to his message.

In the mid ’30s, Maududi started writing on major political and cultural issues confronting the Muslims of India at that time and tried to examine them from the Islamic perspective rather than merely from the viewpoint of short-term political and economic interests. He relentlessly criticised the newfangled ideologies which had begun to cast a spell over the minds and hearts of his brethren-in-faith and attempted to show the hollowness of those ideologies. In this connection, the idea of nationalism received concerted attention from Maududi when he forcefully explained its dangerous potentialities as well as its incompatibility with the teachings of Islam. Maududi also emphasised that nationalism in the context of India meant the utter destruction of the separate identity of Muslims. In the meantime, an invitation from the philosopher-poet Allama Muhammad Iqbal persuaded him to leave Hyderabad and settle down at a place in the Eastern part of Punjab, in the district of Pathankot. Maududi established what was essentially an academic and research centre called Darul-Islam where, in collaboration with Allama Iqbal, he planned to train competent scholars in Islamics to produce works of outstanding quality on Islam, and above all, to carry out the reconstruction of Islamic Thought.

Founding the Party:

Around the year 1940, Maududi developed ideas regarding the founding of a more comprehensive and ambitious movement and this led him to launch a new organisation under the name of the Jamaat-e-Islami. Maududi was elected Jamaat’s first Ameer and remained so till 1972 when he withdrew from the responsibility for reasons of health.

Struggle & Persecution:

After migrating to Pakistan in August 1947, Maududi concentrated his efforts on establishing a truly Islamic state and society in the country. Consistent with this objective, he wrote profusely to explain the different aspects of the Islamic way of life, especially the socio-political aspects. This concern for the implementation of the Islamic way of life led Maududi to criticise and oppose the policies pursued by the successive governments of Pakistan and to blame those in power for failing to transform Pakistan into a truly Islamic state. The rulers reacted with severe reprisal measures. Maududi was often arrested and had to face long spells in prison.

During these years of struggle and persecution, Maududi impressed all, including his critics and opponents, by the firmness and tenacity of his will and other outstanding qualities. In 1953, when he was sentenced to death by the martial law authorities on the charge of writing a seditious pamphlet on the Qadyani problem, he resolutely turned down the opportunity to file a petition for mercy. He cheerfully expressed his preference for death to seeking clemency from those who wanted, altogether unjustly, to hang him for upholding the right. With unshakeable faith that life and death lie solely in the hands of Allah, he told his son as well as his colleagues: "If the time of my death has come, no one can keep me from it; and if it has not come, they cannot send me to the gallows even if they hang themselves upside down in trying to do so." His family also declined to make any appeal for mercy. His firmness astonished the government which was forced, under strong public pressure both from within and without, to commute the death sentence to life imprisonment and then to cancel it.

Intellectual Contribution:

Maulana Maududi has written over 120 books and pamphlets and made over a 1000 speeches and press statements of which about 700 are available on record.

Maududi’s pen was simultaneously prolific, forceful and versatile. The range of subjects he covered is unusually wide. Disciplines such as Tafsir, Hadith, law, philosophy and history, all have received the due share of his attention. He discussed a wide variety of problems C political, economic, cultural, social, theological etc. C and attempted to state how the teachings of Islam were related to those problems. Maududi has not delved into the technical world of the specialist, but has expounded the essentials of the Islamic approach in most of the fields of learning and inquiry. His main contribution, however, has been in the fields of the Qur’anic exegesis (Tafsir), ethics, social studies and the problems facing the movement of Islamic revival. His greatest work is his monumental tafsir in Urdu of the Qur’an, Tafhim al-Qur’an, a work he took 30 years to complete. Its chief characteristic lies in presenting the meaning and message of the Qur’an in a language and style that penetrates the hearts and minds of the men and women of today and shows the relevance of the Qur’an to their everyday problems, both on the individual and societal planes. He translated the Qur’an in direct and forceful modern Urdu idiom. His translation is much more readable and eloquent than ordinary literal translations of the Qur’an. He presented the Qur’an as a book of guidance for human life and as a guide-book for the movement to implement and enforce that guidance in human life. He attempted to explain the verses of the Qur’an in the context of its total message. This tafsir has made a far-reaching impact on contemporary Islamic thinking in the Subcontinent, and through its translations, even abroad.

The influence of Maulana Maududi is not confined to those associated with the Jamaat-e-Islami. His influence transcends the boundaries of parties and organisations. Maududi is very much like a father-figure for Muslims all over the world. As a scholar and writer, he is the most widely read Muslim writer of our time. His books have been translated into most of the major languages of the world C Arabic, English, Turkish, Persian, Hindi, French, German, Swahili, Tamil, Bengali, etc. C and are now increasingly becoming available in many more of the Asian, African and European languages.

Travels & Journeys Abroad:

The several journeys which Maududi undertook during the years 1956-74 enabled Muslims in many parts of the world to become acquainted with him personally and appreciate many of his qualities. At the same time, these journeys were educative for Maududi himself as well as they provided to him the opportunity to gain a great deal of first-hand knowledge of the facts of life and to get acquainted with a large number of persons in different parts of the world. During these numerous tours, he lectured in Cairo, Damascus, Amman, Makkah, Madinah, Jeddah, Kuwait, Rabat, Istanbul, London, New York, Toronto and at a host of international centres. During these years, he also participated in some 10 international conferences. He also made a study tour of Saudi Arabia, Jordan (including Jerusalem), Syria and Egypt in 1959-60 in order to study the geographical aspects of the places mentioned in the Qur’an. He was also invited to serve on the Advisory Committee which prepared the scheme for the establishment of the Islamic University of Madinah and was on its Academic Council ever since the inception of the University in 1962.

He was also a member of the Foundation Committee of the Rabitah al-Alam al-Islami, Makkah, and of the Academy of Research on Islamic Law, Madinah. In short, he was a tower of inspiration for Muslims the world over and influenced the climate and pattern of thought of Muslims, as the Himalayas or the Alps influence the climate in Asia or Europe without themselves moving about.

His Last Days:

In April 1979, Maududi’s long-time kidney ailment worsened and by then he also had heart problems. He went to the United States for treatment and was hospitalised in Buffalo, New York, where his second son worked as a physician. Even at Buffalo, his time was intellectually productive. He spent many hours reviewing Western works on the life of the Prophet and meeting with Muslim leaders, their followers and well-wishers.

Following a few surgical operations, he died on September 22, 1979 at the age of 76. His funeral was held in Buffalo, but he was buried in an unmarked grave at his residence (Ichra) in Lahore after a very large funeral procession through the city.

May Allah bless him with His mercy for his efforts and reward him amply for the good that he has rendered for the nation of Islam (Ummah).

Month Of April - with a lots of remarks

Al-hambra- one of the most popular muslim university in Spain

Month of April we had a lots of Program and project in my Office

I have stopped in some fantastic points during this month

First-

Many people celebrate April fool day every year and make a fool to each other. But how many of us know the bitter facts hidden behind it.

It was around a thousand years ago when Muslims ruled Spain. And the Muslim power in Spain was so strong that it couldn't be destroyed. The Christians of the west wished to wipe out Islam from all parts of the world and they did succeed to quite an extent. But when they tried to eliminate Islam in Spain and conquer it, they failed. They tried several times but never succeeded. The unbelievers then sent their spies in Spain to study the Muslims there and find out what was the power they possessed and they found that their power was TAQWA (Strong Belief). The Muslims of Spain were not just Muslims but they were practicing Muslims. They not only read the Qur'an but also acted upon it.

When the Christians found the power of the Muslims they started thinking of strategies to break this power. So they started sending alcohol and cigarettes to Spain free of cost. This technique of the west worked out and it started weakening the faith of the Muslims in particular the young generation of Spain.

The result was that the Catholics of the west wiped out Islam and conquered the entire Spain bringing an end to the EIGHT HUNDRED LONG YEARS’ RULE OF THE MUSLIMS in Spain. The last fort of the Muslims to fall was Grenada (Gharnatah), which was on the 1st of April From that year onwards, every year they celebrate April fools day on the 1st of April, celebrating the day, they made a fool Muslims. They did not make a fool of the Muslim army at Grenada only, but of the whole Muslim Ummah. We, the Muslims were fooled by them, therefore they have the reason to celebrate April fool day, to keep up the spirit. Dear friends, when we join in this celebration, we do so out of
ignorance. If we had known about it, we would never have celebrated our own downfall. So now, that we are aware of it, and now let us promise that we shall never celebrate this day. We should learn our lesson from the people of Spain, and shall try to become practicing neither Muslims, never to let anybody weaken our faith NOR FOOL (OR MAKE A FOOL OF) US ANY MORE.