In a comment on the publication of a recorded tape Hamed Abdel Samad, in which he spoke about Islam and the conquests, a Facebook friend commented, denouncing the publication of the tape, and directing harsh accusations at Mr. Abdel Samad, and especially at the spiteful Syriano, who allowed the publication of the tape. Our friend is still with intellectual repression, deletion and banning. The friend kindly spoke about citizenship and the homeland, and how to deal with those who insult him day and night, as they have no place among his people of believers. He wrote the following: “We are the Arabs, we are the Muslims, we are the absolute majority in the Syrian homeland. Whoever among you wants to adhere to his etiquette and preserve the rights of citizenship, then you are most welcome. As for whoever wants to insult us day and night, there is no place for him among us because he is the one who declared it a sectarian war, meaning that atheism is a sect that hides behind distorted secular ideas and wants to fight the rest of the sects. Let him resort to his ancestors in the lands of the Romans and Persia and enjoy With their blessings
Calling on those who insult the friend day and night to return to their Persian and Roman ancestors, suggests that Mr. Al-Siddiq has a very special definition of homeland, citizenship and their conditions. Here we are surprised by the intrusiveness of this Brotherhood member in the subject of homeland and citizenship, he is a pious and pure Brotherhood member who derives his principles from religious heritage, and who does not have sufficient experience or knowledge of the complexities of homeland, citizenship, belonging, the concept of the state, then the people and authority and the relationship of all of the above with each other.
We will dare to claim that our friend’s understanding of citizenship and homeland and the way of dealing with them is distorted and confused. We consider their assassination to be taboo in relation to the concept of homeland and citizenship. The same applies to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948, which prohibits the deprivation of a person from his homeland. Citizenship is a natural right for every human being, and it is not permissible to attack it no matter what the circumstances. The commentator and his ilk are not excused by the fact that they consider some Syrian citizens to be guests in the first place! The host has the right to expel his burdensome guests at any time he wants. They are not guests at all, and there is no logic in considering them guests!
These Brotherhood members have confused citizenship with hosting and cohabitation. No wonder! The heritage we live in and its provisions have shown no tangible interest in homeland and citizenship. Most of them categorically reject the idea of homeland. They reject the worship of idols, and homelands, in their view, are idols. They reject loyalty to anyone but God and the Chosen One, the Beloved of God, and not to the homeland. The head of the homeland, the “governor,” is imposed by the Creator and is responsible to Him. There is nothing in religious literature worth mentioning about the homeland and earthly citizenship. They see their homeland in religion and heaven, alongside dozens of houris. They see themselves as believers, not citizens. We are almost certain that the concept of citizenship does not exist in their heads, and their talk about homeland and citizenship is nothing but a usurpation of the concept of homeland and citizenship. Whoever’s homeland is religion can, with the stroke of a pen, throw the infidels outside the state of religion. The homeland is not in religion, but there are religions in the homeland.
The flaw in the view of homeland and citizenship seeped into the friend’s mind, and led him to threaten to strip some of their homeland, if they did not adhere to what he considered good manners and behavior. This matter represents a social phenomenon and problem, not an individual one. We have heard many of these sayings from different, multiple and repeated sources, which demand that the polytheists who did not believe in Muhammad offer thanks to the believers because they sheltered them, fed them and tolerated them, because they dared to denounce their conquests in what they consider their country. It is not our country, but the country of the believing Bedouins of the Arabian Peninsula. How and why? Do not ask, O man, because the machete may reach your neck before the question leaves your mouth !
Let us learn what Sheikh Al-Hanbaky wrote to understand the flaw in the Brotherhood’s understanding of the issue of homeland and citizenship. He wrote, “Democracy, as it calls for religion to be for God and the homeland to be for everyone, and that the status of minorities in the state is like that of the majority in rights and duties, enables minorities to unite and support each other to exploit the democratic situation against the majority and its principles, beliefs, and religion, and enables them to infiltrate the centers of power in the country and expel elements of the majority, little by little. When the majority awakens from its slumber, it finds itself in the clutches of the minority, ruled by a revolutionary dictatorial rule!” Then he added, “With the contemporary concept of nationalism promoted by the greedy, believers are stripped of their rights to sovereignty over Islamic homelands, and the slogan of nationalism is expanded to include all residents, even if they are residents and guests or those residing under a covenant, security or protection. With this concept, which is intended to deceive the believers, the true owners of homelands, these people have equal rights, and with a well-planned cunning, the phrase ‘religion belongs to God and the homeland belongs to all’ was launched. Then there was resort to another trick, which is calling for the separation of religion from politics, and calling for a secular state”!!!
It is not limited to Sheikh Al-Hanbaky, even the elders in the Brotherhood flocks such as Sayyid Qutb and Hassan Al-Banna adopted the same position. The young social media pioneers do not deviate from this position by a hair’s breadth. Some of them go around in circles and deceive, but the content of their methodology is one and clear: religion is the homeland and the homeland is religion. Whoever knows this is not surprised by their belittling of the concept of the earthly homeland, nor is he surprised by the atrophy and defect in their understanding of the concept of homeland and citizenship and the confusion of citizenship with cohabitation and hosting.
On the occasion of the disappearance of the Syrian homeland, we do not want to claim that Sheikh Al-Hanbaky or others were exclusively responsible for this disappearance, but they were one of the many tools that destroyed the country. It is difficult to save a homeland whose inhabitants were unable to transform into citizens!
