?Is it really necessary to destroy the statue of Uqba bin Nafie Al-Fihri
?Is it really necessary to destroy the statue of Uqba bin Nafie Al-Fihri 1--476
On the 20th and 21st of April 2013, there were demonstrations celebrating the 33rd anniversary of the Amazigh Spring. This year was marked by its quantity and spread outside Algeria. This year spread to a number of countries in North Africa and Europe, including Tizi -Ouzou , Bejaia in Algeria, Meknes in Morocco, Paris in France, Matmata in Tunisia and some Libyan cities. But what is new this year is the attempt of some demonstrators in Algeria, and exactly in the center of the city of Tobrit (Buira), to try to destroy a statue or idol of Uqba bin Nafeh al-Fihri while they were carrying Amazigh flags. See the video:

For this, we must stand on this historical event for several reasons:
The first reason : It has been customary these years in all Arab and Arabized countries that every time the demonstrators try to destroy a statue, it is followed by a turmoil that does not subside except by removing its symbol and by force from power. Will Oqba bin Nafie fall from power in North African countries? Which religion do they rule with its religious symbolism ? The first symbolic statue in the present era that was destroyed by the demonstrators was the statue of Saddam Hussein. It was at the height of the Gulf War when all the Arab peoples were eagerly waiting for Saddam’s missiles to destroy the Israeli city of Tel Aviv . Hussein falls to the applause of the Iraqis. Some Arab streets did not believe that the fall of Saddam Hussein himself became a reality. It was followed by the statue of Hosni Mubarak, then the statue of Muammar Gaddafi When the people of Benghazi destroyed the statue of the Green Book in the early days of the protest, Pharaoh al-Qaddafi fell a year later. These days, the free Syrians are destroying the statue of Bashar al-Assad. In all these cases, the Torah does not subside except with the fall of the symbol of power.
The second reason : is that the event represented a profound and significant shift in the degree of political and religious awareness in North Africa. If we add to it the actions of 137 Amazigh imams and jurists in the Atlas to raise the Amazigh flag over mosques, denouncing the Wahhabi Salafists in Morocco who threatened and accuse Amazigh thinkers of infidelity and gathered them in what they called Amazigh Islam, announcing their steadfastness against the new Umayyad Islam represented by Wahhabi Salafism, it is certain that North Africa It is coming on a major intellectual and liberal revolution, which it criticizes from petrodollar imperialism in the Arab East.
Is it really necessary to destroy the statue of Uqba bin Nafie?
If we look (see the picture) from the Arab angle, Uqba bin Nafie is the symbol of the Arab Islamic conquests in North Africa. By doing this great Arab conqueror, he brought the Amazighs out of darkness into light. This is why all Arabs are proud of him, including the Arabs living in North Africa. And they impose respect for this Arab general, and in return they work for the annihilation of the barbaric leader Axel who opposed him and waged wars against him and killed him and his soldiers after his return from Morocco in which he said his legendary saying in front of the Atlantic Ocean in the city of Safi?
Or if we look from the Amazigh angle, Uqba bin Nafeh is a hideous political and religious symbol who committed, and his followers, many crimes in the name of God. To this day, especially in Morocco, there are families that control power with the symbolism of their descent from Aqaba Al-Fihri, and others that control power with the symbolism of their descent from Idris? Another Arab leader came after Aqaba - and for these reasons his statue must be destroyed:
First : Because it is an idol and making idols is forbidden in Islam.
Who among us does not remember the Taliban destroying the idols of Buddha in Afghanistan despite the intervention of the chief Muslim scholar Yusuf al-Qaradawi to persuade them to abandon this act politically and not religiously. And no Islamic scholar came forward to denounce the idol of Uqba bin Nafeh and call for its removal because it is contrary to Islam, including the moderate Muslims on Facebook and the Algerian and Maghreb Salafist Muslims in general .! Didn't the Messenger say, " God and His Messenger prohibited the sale of wine, dead animals, pigs, and idols," or are these idols, if they belong to Arab leaders, then there is nothing wrong with them?
?Is it really necessary to destroy the statue of Uqba bin Nafie Al-Fihri 101110
secondly: Because it gives a bloody and brutal image of Islam.
In the Arab history books themselves, there are expressions that show the extent of the bloodiness of the Arab invasion, including: After the transfer of the caliphate to the Umayyads by the usurpation of the caliphate by Muawiyah bin Abi Sufyan, Muawiyah bin Hudayj became the governor of Egypt, and the first decision he made was to send Uqba bin Nafeh al-Fihri to the north Al-Afriqi, as we read to Ibn Adhari Al-Marrakshi in his book: Al-Bayan Al-Maghrib, the following:"... And I invaded him against Ghayyah ... so he fought them with a terrible killing, so he went to Monastir and fought them with a severe killing until he thought that it was annihilation . " He also says “Uqbah reached Africa, conquered it, entered it, and put the sword on its people... He penetrated further into the West, killing and capturing nation after nation and sect after sect. ” Ibn Adhari adds on page 27: And his invasion of Al-Sous Al-Aqsa... So he killed them in a fight that the people of Morocco had never heard of until he defeated them and killed a great creation among them.” Dinars chastised him and rebuked him, saying to him (for an obstacle)
): What an evil thing you have done. The Messenger of God used to make friends with the Arab tyrants."
The abuses will reach their climax with the killing of Uqba at the hands of Kusayla, the leader of the Amazighs, as Abd al-Malik bin Marwan appointed Zuhair bin Qais al-Balawi to the task of taking revenge for the killing of Uqba, and about that task al-Qayrawani commented, saying, “Heavier killings were among the people of Morocco, so the people of Ifriqiya were terrified of him and their fear intensified and they resorted to the forts And the castles" to complete the battle of Zuhair, not by spreading Islam, but by avenging Uqba's death!!!.
Third : Because it covers the economic and financial plundering of the Amazighs for the benefit of the Umayyad and Abbasid Islamic states to build the palaces of Damascus and Baghdad.
This was as clear as the sun when the Commander of the Faithful in Damascus presented another aspect of Islam, namely economic exploitation. If the plundering of money and the captivity of Amazigh women and children before their conversion to Islam would pass unnoticed under the cover of spoils, then what would be the plundering of their money and the captivity of their women after their conversion to Islam? The Umayyads called this looting the "Excise Tax". Immediately after the great war of sedition, in which companions promising Paradise clashed for the sake of ruling, the Umayyads settled in Syria, but they soon discovered that the zakat tax, as stated in the divine law, was not sufficient to establish the state. They decided to enact taxes according to man-made laws, which today range between 20 and 50 percent of the monthly income, and not the annual surplus income, as in Islamic law.. But the Arab Muslims, who used to receive the Islamic state at the head of each period with their share of the spoils of money, slaves and sex slaves, refused to pass from a stage where the state gave them money for free to a period where they would give the money to the state.
?Is it really necessary to destroy the statue of Uqba bin Nafie Al-Fihri 1-263
The Arab Muslims did not understand that yesterday, spoils came to them from conquered peoples, such as the Amazighs, Kurds, Persians, and Armenians, and that was in return for their conversion to Islam and their access to heaven. However, after her conversion to Islam, Islam stipulated that only zakat be given to the Muslim treasury, and it never specified whether this treasury would remain in the hands of the Arabs or not. And others, but after her conversion to Islam
In the face of this rejection, and for the Umayyads to get out of the political impasse, they enacted this tax on non-Arab Muslims , and that is the great catastrophe. ! From here, the Amazigh discovered that if the face of the apparent noun says there is no difference between an Arab and a non-Arab except for piety, then on the ground the Umayyads came with another face of Islam saying, "There is no difference between an Arab and a non-Arab except for piety and taxation . "
Some may go ascribing this charge to the Umayyads only and the innocence of Islam from it, but what would explain the failure of any Islamic sheikh, Islamic group, Islamic party, or Sunni Islamic body, for a period of 15 centuries to date, to denounce this act, and to denounce the distortion of Islam? And why do not they submit to their atonement? Knowing that there are those who disbelieved a Moroccan Amazigh writer today because he commented on the Prophet’s message to the king of the Romans, who deserves to be declared an unbeliever Ahmed Assid , Uqba bin Nafeh and all the Umayyads?
Fourth : Because it is full of captivity and sexual exploitation of Amazigh girls:
We would like to take a look at a historical letter sent by the Commander of the Faithful Hisham bin Abd al-Malik al-Umayyad (AD 741-691 AD) from Damascus to his agent in the land of the Berbers, in which he stated:Hisham wrote to his governor in Africa, but to proceed, when the Emir of Muzaminin , when he saw what Musa bin Naseer was sending to Abd al-Malik bin Marwan, may God Almighty have mercy on him, he wanted the same from you and you have among the barbaric female slaves who are financially rich for the eyes that capture the hearts , what is in need for us in the Levant and Gentleness in selection , elegance of beauty , broad shoulders, broad breasts , soft bodies , tenderness of fingertips , knotty nerves, braiding of stems, plucking of branches , impeccability of eyes , ease of cheeks ,And small mouths , and good gaps , and broad bodies , and moderate stature? And the marble of speech? And with that, I mean rationality and purity of origin. They take the mothers of children and peace. " Source: From the Book of the Majority State 909-800 The Political History of its author, Dr. Muhammad al-Talibi. The Arabization of Dr. al-Munji al-Sayyadi ? Published by Dar Al-Gharb.

So why did the Commander of the Faithful not ask the Amazigh girls, Muslims, for a medicine of faith that is characterized by good hijab, chastity, tenderness, parental satisfaction, and those who perform prayer until the end of the waat? But the Commander of the Faithful, may God be pleased with him, supported him, and made him enter the gardens of bliss. He wanted Amazigh girls to take medicine with special specifications for their bodies, chests, and thighs ? Did he want the Amazighs to understand that sex with slave girls has been one of its pillars since the beginning of Islam? And why did you talk about slave girls and not women and girls in the first place? Didn't the message come after the Islam of the Amazighs for decades? Is the slave girl no longer the only non-Muslim woman? Are Umar ibn al-Khattab’s saying, “When did you enslave people when their mothers gave birth to them free” pertaining to Arabs only? If so, is Islam the religion of Arabs only? And if not, is it obligatory to excommunicate the Umayyads, headed by Uqba, instead of expiating Ahmed Assid ?? And why did the Commander of the Faithful, may God be pleased with him, not request and support Amazigh youths and slaves to be the armies of the Muslims? Or is this the sexual jihad that the Wahhabi Salafis are still demanding? The Umayyads - from the Amazighs of Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco today to their armies in Syria, Bashar al-Assad?
?Is it really necessary to destroy the statue of Uqba bin Nafie Al-Fihri 1--108
Fifth : Because it embodies the symbol of slavery of the Amazigh youth:
The Algerian Amazigh thinker, Mohamed Arkoun, previously stated to a Moroccan newspaper, "If we had said the crimes committed by the Islamic conquests, it would have caused civil wars in North Africa." This was on the occasion of his hosting of the first TV channel, in which he said, "The greatest ignorance that threatens the Arab Islamic nation is sacred ignorance . " There is a set of shocking facts in which we only mention, for example, the case of the Amazigh leader Tariq Ibn Ziyad, who was sent by the Commander of the Faithful from Damascus to Morocco without armies, as was the custom in the conquests with Uqba bin Nafeh and Muhajir after him, and this young Amazigh was able to gather an army from North Africa And he conquers Andalusia and spreads Islam. He returned to the Umayyad caliph to tell him about this great achievement. However, the official history in all North African countries that sanctify Umayyad Islam does not study three facts about this leader:
1- The reward of the Umayyad caliph Tariq ibn Ziyad for his conquest of Andalusia was his imprisonment in one of the prisons of Damascus with criminals of public right. Tariq did not psychologically control his reward, and lost his mind in prison. The caliph pardoned him after that, and he died lost in the streets of Damascus.
2-How Tariq the Amazigh arrived in Damascus is a strange story, the basis of which is that the difference between an Arab and a non-Arab is piety and tax, "as we mentioned earlier. Ziyad the Amazigh, the father of Tariq, when the excise tax was imposed on him after his conversion to Islam - because he was a non-Arab pore - he was a poor Muslim. Since this tax is imposed Even for the poor? And it is not like zakat - except that it opens the door for them to collect this tax for their daughters, and if they do not have daughters, then for their children, and that is the weakest of faith. !Ziyad was one of the poor "of the weakest faith" and he had no daughters, so he collected the tax with his son Tariq. And was it more cunning and cunning when they predicted before that Islam is nothing but a cover? A group of historians challenged those caravans that carry excise taxes consisting of belongings, girls and boys every year, crossing the jungles of Africa from Tamazga to the Middle East. Said by a French historian? caravans? loss of sight ?
3-When the Amazighs became aware of this “forced migration of their livers from Tamazgha to the Arab East,” they saw with the help of their sons that you took from them to the East, headed by Rashid the European, with their help to the feet of the defeated Shiites in the great battle of sedition, and they are Idris to the tribe of Europe, Ubaid Allah to the tribal region of Algeria, and Abdullah to the region Sijilmasa . And these three are all Shiite imams, followers of Ali, and each of them claimed to be the expected Mahdi. These Shiite imams were set forth in Amazigh convoys and with their escorts from the east to Tamzagha It is a political deal in the modern sense. The goal of the Shiite imams was to achieve the establishment of an Islamic state in the Islamic West and to return to the East in order to liberate the Two Holy Mosques and restore the caliphate that was taken from them by the Umayyads. And this was actually achieved. Immediately after the establishment of the Shiite Fatimid Islamic state, the sons of the Fatimids left power to their Amazigh brothers and concentrated their rule in Egypt to regain Mecca and Medina. As for the Berbers, their goal was to give zakat, not the Kharj, and in Tamazgha, so that they would not be forced to carry it in convoys and travel for six months each year. What confirms the goal of the Amazighs is to stop exporting girls and leaving to the east, which prompted the Abbasid state, which saw that its entrances had shrunk, to send Suleiman bin Jarir al-Shamakh from Baghdad to Fez to kill Idris. But the Amazighs, so that they would not be forced to send their children to the East, made a son for the Amazigh woman, Kenza, the wife of Idris Al-Awzu . Ed was born 11 months after the death of his father, which is scientifically not his father's son - and the Amazighs were forced to sell the son in his mother's womb. That is, if a girl was born, they were ready to make her “honorable” and for her to give zakat in their tribe and not in Baghdad, which is contrary to Islamic traditions. Add to that that even the Abbasid historians doubted Idris' lineage, but the Amazighs were the ones who bore the burden of justifying him and created what is called stagnant, that is, he slept in his mother's womb for a few months. On the scale of the story of the people of the cave.
The important thing in the political deal is that the Shiite imams were able to regain power from the land of the Amazighs. As for the Amazighs, their goal was not to pay taxes only. What explains this in concrete terms is that even after the Fatimids left and left power to their Amazigh brothers, they did not pay taxes to the Shiite east, which prompted the Fatimids to punish them by sending Arabs . Bedouins on the border between Egypt and Sudan, and they built Nohlal and built Salim on the Amazighs as punishment for them. In conclusion, the Amazighs changed their strategic plan with the Arabs three times , and they all failed.
?Is it really necessary to destroy the statue of Uqba bin Nafie Al-Fihri 1-259
Fifth: Because it embodies the symbol of the slavery of Amazigh youth:
In the first stage, which lasted 70 years, when they were repelling the attacks of the Arabs, the second stage took place after their conversion to Islam and their entry into the rule of the Umayyads, when their money, daughters, and sons were robbed of them in the name of Islam . . This is what Ibn Khaljun explained in his introduction, where he said, “If the Arabs conquered a homeland, they quickly destroyed it, and the reason for that is that they are a savage nation, with the roots of savagery and its causes being firmly entrenched in them, and it became their character and nature . for politics. and nature The Arabs are contrary to urbanization and contradictory to it, so the purpose of all normal conditions is for them to travel and overcome, and this contradicts the stillness in which urbanization is, and contradicts it, for the stone .. is what they need to put the cooking pot on top of it, so they move it from the buildings and destroy it on it and prepare it for that, and the wood is also what they need to build their tents. And they take pegs from it for their tents and destroy the roof on it?
Sixth : Because Uqba bin Nafeh is an Umayyad, and the Umayyad face of Islam is filled with blood, which has imprinted Arab Islamic history itself with blood. We must know that the Umayyads had power before Islam, i.e. during the Jahiliyyah, and they are the fiercest enemies of Islam. They are the ones who displaced Muhammad and his followers from Mecca to Medina on foot, about 300 km, as refugees in the city of Yatrib, whose population is three quarters of the Jews. And when the Muslims in Yatrib strengthened, they allied themselves with the unbelieving Umayyads and conquered Mecca in the well-known way, in which the Messenger said, “Whoever enters the house of Abu Sufyan the unbelieving Umayyad is like one who enters a mosque.” Immediately after that, the Messenger appointed Muawiyah Ibn Abi Sufyan as the scribe of the revelation/Quran.
Rule will escape from the grip of the Umayyads for a few years. Muhammad is finished. Abu Bakr Al-Siddiq is finished. Umar Ibn Al-Khattab is finished, so that the family can restore the rule of its infidel ancestors from the Umayyad Caliph Atman bin Affan. After this human catastrophe, the Shiites emerged from the Persians and the Kharijites from the Amazighs. They fled Sunni Arab Islam !
And this, if it indicates anything , indicates that Islam mentioned in the Qur’an did not enter the hearts of the Umayyads by committing them to this heinous crime, which their descendants, Bashar al-Assad and Muammar al-Qaddafi , and others, have not yet been able to reach .
When the Umayyads seized power again, they shifted the capital from Mecca to Damascus in the Levant, unaware of guarding the Sacred House from another attack by the People of the Elephant. This shows that the "protection of the Two Holy Mosques" is not included in their Islamic principles !
?Is it really necessary to destroy the statue of Uqba bin Nafie Al-Fihri 1--468
Seventh : Because the Algerian authorities, who set out to construct this idol in a Amazigh region in which the aforementioned crimes were committed, is a provocation to the citizens because they did not consult them on the matter as stated in the Qur’an. Remember, in Algeria, the most important thing is that he handcuffed the Amazigh leader Kusaila after his conversion to Islam and traveled with him from Algeria to Morocco to frighten and terrorize the other Amazigh leaders.
And if the construction of the statue of Aqaba was intended to glorify it and not to provoke the Amazighs, then why were they not built to resemble the Rightly Guided Caliphs themselves? Weren't they greater degrees of obstacle? A statue of the caliph Umar ibn al-Khattab, who was killed by the sword while he was prostrating in the mosque by a person who accused him of wronging him, and a statue of Abu Bakr al-Siddiq who was poisoned, and a statue of the caliph Utman ibn Affan, who was killed after being besieged by Muslims who prevented him while he was a caliph from praying in the mosque and denied him water and food They stormed his house from behind (from the house of Abi Hazm Al-Ansari) and killed him while he was reading the Qur’an. And a statue of the caliph Ali Ibn Abi Talib, who had never prostrated to an idol before, unlike the other companions, and killed a hand Abdul Rahman bin Maljim in The month of Ramadan Aldi forbidden in which fighting.
Four caliphs are considered the most important product of the Islamic caliphate, all of them were killed and did not die an ordinary death, and none of them won the position of the statue except Uqba bin Nafeh al-Fihri, who distorted Islam by correcting the noble hadith from “There is no difference between an Arab or a non-Arab except in piety” to “There is no difference between an Arab or a non- Arab except with piety and tax.” This was a strong blow that distorted Islam.
he asked :
How can Muslims not revolt against an Islamic government and state such as the Umayyad state that distorted Islam when they revolted only against an Agni painter who drew caricatures against the Prophet? So who is easier to distort the words of the Prophet or to mock him?
?Is it really necessary to destroy the statue of Uqba bin Nafie Al-Fihri 1-264
Or is the Islam of the Umayyads is the true Islam? What confirms this is the confession of Sheikh Al-Islam Al-Qaradawi after fifteen centuries of the history of Islam when he said: Separation between Islam and Arabism is like separating the soul from the body, and we must adopt Arab Islam and Islamic Arabism. This was done by the head of the Supreme Council of Islamic Scholars in the month of December 22, 2006 at the Sixth National Islamic Conference in Doha, which brought together 270 delegates from all Islamic groups and parties and Arab and Islamic national personalities.






Source: websites