Ed on Holiday in Egypt
It just makes you wonder about the extreme agenda of the British government who sent a “representitive Muslim delegation” to Egypt. Do you they really think that by taking an idiotic heretical cult like the Quilliam Foundation along with naive Muslims like Abdul Rehman Malik that you might actually change the views of the Muslim heartland ? As Ed said
There is alot of work to be done
Watch out for his wonderful reference Jamal al Banna! Ed starts out and says
“…..Jamal al Banna, Shiekh al Banna God bless him! His brother is sitting there in a room in Cairo, today 7/7 refuting everything that his brother stood for”
Now Jamal al Banna ,la Jamal lahu! is a notorious heretic that is well known among the Egyptian Ulema. Just for you Ed, we are going to have a special article on this man and his awful beliefs!
Now my concern is with the “naive” Muslims like this Abdul Rehman Malik and others that we shall not mention for the moment.
Isnt it time that certain ulema have something to say about this? We wait and wait for our Ulema to protect our religion! Abdul Rehman Malik seems to be a representitive of the Radical Middle Way and thinks that the Quilliam Foundation is good organisation to promote despite its heretical views. It seems (and I emphasis that) that the Radical Middle Way is on the same route towards our “beloved” “Government Islam”. Isnt is shameful that we have major Ulema who are part of this “middle way” yet here we have a supposed representitive supporting clear Kufr! Of course this needs clarification and we are not accusing this foundation yet.
Abdul Rehman Malik’s link to the Radical Middle Way can be found here
http://www.muslimcafe.tv/pages/guests.php?guest=151
We also cannot forget Hamza Yusuf’s support of the Radical Middle Way
Now I know Hamza Yusuf and Abdullah Bin Bayyah are innocent of this filth the Quilliam foundation. Now Ulema come out in the open and disown yourself from this Government agenda to make you “Rand Muslims”
salaam aleikum,
solid blog and posts, however I came across this post on Sunniforum and feel that you need to connect all of your posts to the SOURCE of Quilliam, the Radical Middle Way, and the Sufi Muslim Council:
http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=33440&page=12
———————————————————————————
Rather interesting discussion and excellent articles and links posted. However, nowhere did I see the original RAND report link posted, which I am posting
here (http://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1716/MR1716.pdf)
3 main points to keep in mind:
1. The author of the above report (Cheryl Bernard) is married to Zalmay Khalilzad, America’s imperial overseer in Afghanistan and now in Iraq. That he is a self admitted neo-con, should not be in doubt:
http://www.democracynow.org/2005/4/7…lmay_khalilzad
http://www.counterpunch.org/issam04172003.html
he is also a signatory to the PNAC (Project for a New American Century) a blueprint for 100 years of American global domination.
2. The RAND corporation and its above report (name dropping some good “reformist scholars” and “urging for the promotion of sufism” for U.S./UK interests) should be one of the main issues in ANY discussion on this issue, especially given the tight security relationship that it enjoys in the service of Empire, something that is also the subject of a recent new book:
http://www.amazon.com/Soldiers-Reaso…/dp/0151010811
the authors of this book use detailed analysis and research to show the damage that RAND has done to the American public (one can multiply this by a factor of 100 or 1000 if we are to talk about Muslims/Islam or the Muslim world).
3. Intentions are not the issue, ACTIONS are. Many sincere and ignorant Muslims a generation ago urged the promotion of “Islamic communism” or “Islamic socialism” and took money from the former Soviet Union to promote this throughout the Muslim World. The disastrous side effects of this — i.e. the rise of Arab Ba’athism, Saddam, Gamal Abdel Nasser, the Arab/Israeli wars, the wars in Afghanistan, and the countless guerilla wars in Africa as a result of this speak to the outcome of this. That the ideology itself failed (despite all the money the USSR poured into promoting these personalities/”sheikhs” and these concepts) should be a lesson to those promoting the secularization of Islam or “islamic secularism” in the guise and under the cover of “spiritual sufism”.
———————————————————————
Hafiz
July 16, 2008 at 8:55 pm
As of yet, I hope for the sake of the Radical Middle Way Abdel Rahman Malik is not a representative! I hope his supportive position towards the Quilliam scum is something personal.
Inshallah I shall give this organisation the benefit of the doubt for the moment, but wouldnt it be better if they come out in the open and denounced these Da’leen?
traditionalislamism
July 16, 2008 at 10:08 pm
“Ed” is now even annoying his ‘friends’, such as Sunny of Pickled Politics:
http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/2164
Ali Abdullah
July 17, 2008 at 4:26 am
RMW take money from the government.
The government has its own agenda.
If RMW didn’t fit into that agenda – they would not get money
Intentions aside – they are being used, and AR Malik is a main man for the RMW so i think we can take what he says. Maybe he didn’t think it would be noticed back here.
After all, it seems these type of groups seem to think we Muslims are stupid
Wasalam
Abdulla
July 17, 2008 at 8:05 am
A R Malik IS part of the RMW, he and his wife Fareena, together with Fuad Nahdi are paid employees. The RMW received £350,000 this time round and around £150,000 last time.
As for the innocence of scholars, sometimes I do wonder. I heard from someone that went to the Shaykh bin Bayyah event organised by RMW a few weeks back – where he gives and example of how we should not be fighting each other but getting on. So he gives the example from Islamic history of a muslim poet who is asked by his Prince to go and fight the rebels from the front. Once there, the poet says to the enemy, why are we fighting somebody else’s battle? Wouldn’t it be better if we sat down and drank some wine together. At this point sh bin bayyah reminds us that wine is haram in Islam.
I found this story quite disturbing – what was the message being given here? Further, could he not find a single example where the muslim involved was not either a drunk or disobedient to his leader? From what I hear from my source there was consternation around the room!
Whistleblower
July 17, 2008 at 2:31 pm
Comment is free on the Guardian – Seamus again – what does he say in the comments section?
“Thanks for the positive responses – I’ll try to respond to a few of the others later.
In the meantime, truthplease is very keen to know the evidence for government funding of the Quilliam Foundation, which he says denies it.
In fact, only yesterday, Maajid Nawaz, who is a co-director with Ed Husain, gave a briefing at the Guardian and stated that the foundation is now taking government funding.”
As if we didn’t know – good to see “taxpayers money” paying for their tailored Boss suits
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jul/17/islam.race
Abdulla
July 17, 2008 at 3:27 pm
salaam aleikum,
sometimes we need visual evidence to remind us of how bad things have been and how bad things are potentially going to be:
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.image?id=8181
please STUDY over and PONDER this photo before reading further.
———————————————————————
in the late 1970s and mid 1980s the U.S. govt. gave money to salafis/wahabbis and the govt. of Saudi Arabia via the CIA to recruit Muslims to become jihadis
source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/1999/jan/17/yemen.islam
this eventually led them to consolidate their efforts into the creation of al-quaeda itself. Al Qaeda was created by the CIA, in their offices in Washington D.C., According to Richard Clark in his most recent book. It was created for Saudi Arabia to bankroll Osama bin Laden, through the House of Saud, “in the covert Afghan war against the Soviet Union during the 1980’s and Riyadh and Washington together contributed an estimated $3.5 billion to the mujahideen.”
“In late 2003, U.S. News & World Report conducted an exhaustive study titled. ‘The Saudi Connection.’ Its findings included the following.”
“The evidence was indisputable: Saudi Arabia, America’s longtime ally and the world’s largest oil producer, had somehow become, as a senior Treasury Department official put it, ‘the epicenter’ of terrorist financing’
source: http://www.rense.com/general61/myths.htm
this eventually led to the creation of the mythical man himself:
http://www.greenleft.org.au/2001/465/25199
———————————————————–
Now 20 years later, the cycle is REPEATING itself, only with SUFIS substituted for Wahabbis. As the links brother Hafiz has provided show, the U.S./UK governments are now FUNDING SUFIS the SAME WAY THEY HAD EARLIER FUNDED THE WAHABBIS IN THE 1970s and 1980s. They had meetings BESIDES that of just RAND corporation to do this, here ia another one in which FIVE U.S. govt. agencies met in the summer of 2003 (chaired by Rumsfeld, Cheney, and a U.S. General) to discuss “changing Islam” to fit into their military presence in the Middle East:
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/050425/25roots.htm
If people don’t learn from the mistakes of the past, they are condemned to repeat them.
Oh Muslims! PLEASE WAKE UP!!!!!
salaam aleikum,
Sameer
Sameer
July 17, 2008 at 4:19 pm
I have personally seen Abdul-Rehman Malik criticise Ed Hussain for the shit he peddles in the papers, including saying how misguided Ed’s viewpoints are and how unhelpful his stunts are.
So unless all you armchair warriors have actually made the effort to speak to Abdul-Rehman Malik, please restrain yourselves.
If Radical Middle Way were cosy with QF, then their staff and their org would be listed prominently on the QF website and vice cersa. They aren’t and never were – even before QF was forced to remove the names of some ‘advisors’ recently.
All i can see in the video is Abdul-Rehman Malik generally including everyone at the table in his comments. It’s the Foreign Office who should be kicked in the butt for inviting people like Ed Hussain. He does not represent me and the FCO is very misguided in choosing him as a ‘representative’.
However, the FCO also picks other ‘Islamists’ as delegates such as from the MCB, FOSIS, Cordoba Foundation…. so what does that say?
Safir
July 18, 2008 at 10:44 am
When I see RMW people engaging on joint ventures with Ed Husain I wonder if Banglawala’s revelation of the government’s threat that funding will be cut off from those who do not work with Quilliam Foundation has worked. Not only has it worked RMW is now following Ed Husain’s suggestion few months back that Western Islam should be taken to the Muslim heartlands.
Perhaps fear of losing funding is the explanation why people who tried to distance from Ed husain in the past are now cosing up to them. See the happy families picture below.
http://www.quilliamfoundation.org/index.php/component/content/article/200
See the fitna of government funding? The Prophet (AS) made dua and sought refuge from debt because debt puts you in a situation where you are susceptible to lie. When you are indebted to the government this puts you in a vulnerable position that makes compromise easier.
Brothers in RMW, avoid the fitna, its not worth it, don’t sell your Deen for a paltry price.
Abu Omar
July 18, 2008 at 2:28 pm
SAFIR
Come on – the video was very clear
First of all – Malik has bought into the British Government, neo-con and QF narrative
He opens with the statement that the problem for british muslims is that Islam has become an ideology
!!!
So – the problem ISN’T war in Iraq and the slaughter of civilians there
It ISN’T war in Afghanistan, and the slaughter of civilians there
It ISN’T backing the invasion of Somalia, backing the Israeli’s, propping up dictatorships
NO – NONE OF THAT RADICALISES
ITS ——- IDEOLOGY
SubhanAllah – whatever he says that is straight from the neo-con/ QF narrative, and any MUSLIM should be ashamed to say such things
What do we expect – you can hardly take government money and then proceed to criticise them and their Foreign policy, as shown by what happened to the MCB etc.
Secondly – this was said in public and published on the web
Either 1. he was misrepresented or 2. he is in with the QF
IF he was misrepresented – it shows that RMW is being used by the government and there can be no doubt about that
Why does he not write here and state clearly his opinion of the QF and British Foreign Policy?
STRANGELY ENOUGH – now that it has been EXPOSED the video has been taken down by the Foreign Office user on you tube, I guess they realised it was INCRIMINATING for their tools
Finally – you accuse people of being armchair critics
My own thoughts on the brothers who work on this blog – may Allah Reward them for standing up and speaking out against the munkar and danger of the QF and those like them, when very few people are doing so
Its not called “armchair criticism” its called forbidding the munkar by the tongue
Unless you are suggesting that people should correct the munkar of the QF by their hands?????? Is that what you or the RMW suggest to muslims?
If some of the scholars whose names are being used/exploited by these groups had publicly clarified this munkar and stood up against this corruption, maybe others wouldn ‘t have to
Abdulla
July 18, 2008 at 3:11 pm
According to RMW man Abdul Rahman Malik:
‘Im sorry our agenda is not da’wa and conversion.’
What’s wrong with da’wah? Did not God say ‘Invite to the Way of Allah with wisdom and fair speech.’ Da’wah is a great obligation of Islam and that one person should be guided to Islam is better than the best of possessions..
So if he speaks of this obligation is such pejorative way, I wonder what type of da’wa he’s interested in. Sorry i forgot, its called da’wa to the way of Western Islam bankrolled by Her Majesty’s government.
Abu Omar
July 18, 2008 at 3:15 pm
and – he didn’t “generally include everyone on the table”
He specifically mentioned Quilliam Foundation by name
It shows how funding corrupts and leads to pure appeasement, if he was not strong enough to not fall into this appeasement he should not have spoken
This is a typical trait of those muslims on tv who come on with good intentions but thier weak personalities lead them to saying very damaging things in front of the masses
Abdulla
July 18, 2008 at 3:18 pm
Read article in New Statesman by Ruth Kelly who is Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government entitled:
‘Time for a British version of Islam’
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2007/04/deep-faith-british-government
Abu Omar
July 18, 2008 at 3:32 pm
Safir seems to be someone closely aligned to the Radical Middle Way. Unfortunately he has not addressed the core issue . He has dressed it in red herrings
1-He assumes the criticism is an issue of engagement and funding, while I have mentioned no such thing
2-He then thinks that the RMW is being victimised, Why not address the same issue with the MCB, FOSIS etc and finshes off with
“…what does that say?”
Well it just says that there are certain foundations that are willing to engage with the British government if they find common ground.
Unfotunately that does not address the issue. It is very rare to find a Muslim group in this country engaging with the government yet at the same time supporting a heretical group like the Quilliam foundation!
This is our criticism of Abdel Rahman Malik. He thinks that the Quilliam foundation was doing a good job promoting tolerance and a good image of Islam! I mean, whatever he said privately we have the video of him saying this publically until the FCO removed the clip!
Now our question is this. Would Abdel Rahman Malik say that Michael Gove is doing a good job promoting Islam? How about Daniel Pipes? What do you think of him?
Yet we have this heretical foundation who calls our prophets edicts barbaric, equates orthodox Islam with the BNP! and Abdel Rahman thinks this this is a good organisation to promote. You have just brushed that aside with this generic statement that Abdel Rahman was including everyone on the table. No his SPECIFICALLY mentioned the Quilliam Foundation as well among the other groups and he promoted them!
All this for funding? Subhan Allah! Maybe we are just “armchair” warriors and cant understand the complexity of this world. I mean we have to compromise right?
May Allah save me then from being a “pragmatist” then and may I always rock in my arm chair!
traditionalislamism
July 18, 2008 at 5:07 pm
traditionalislamism, so these groups are willing to engage where there is common ground? But I was specifically referring to FCO delegations. Many others – ‘Islamists’, have gone on ‘holiday’ with the FCO, including Kemal Helbawy’s son AbdurRahman Helbawy who has been on numerous delegations (including one to Egypt), and Wakkas Khan while he was President of FOSIS, on numerous occassions, Abdullah Faliq of LMC and Cordoba Foundation, Imam Mushfik of Ebrahim College and one could go on and on.
These are exactly the kinds of delegations that this one to Egypt was – it’s all in the public record.
Secondly, some of these groups take govt funding with regards to ‘common ground’ issues such as citizenship programs, etc. In fact, many, many groups are taking funding where they feel they can make a difference but they are too afraid to announce this because the wolves will be out to get them. But okay, I respect the fact that you say the funding isn’t the problem.
I am not disagreeing with you that Ed Hussain has been way out of line – I AGREE, I AGREE, I AGREE. And it was totally unnecessary for Abdulrahman malik to ‘bring’ QF into the comment he was making in that video. It’s his fault and naviety for trying to be inclusive because I think the QF does not do anything worth including or praising.
I know him and his position on the methods used by QF and I know for a fact that he does not agree with them in any shape or form.
Do you WANT to believe our brother shares QF’s vision of our world, or do you want to do everything you can to prove otherwise?
Safir
July 18, 2008 at 5:52 pm
Some points…
1) The Q-News team of Fareena, Abdur-Rahman, Fuad Nahdi and a few others possibly, have been had by the government. They are forced to accept the QF.
2) Other organisations have to accept the QF in order to secure funding and support. The gov is clearly moving the wrong way as usual.
3) RMW can no longer distance itself from the QF and people’s fears are being proven. RMW is no longer independant in its message – how can you be if you are taking government funds and towing their agenda…?
4) Main man isn’t Abdur-Rahman – but is Fuad Nahdi (founder of Q-News).
I think Abdur-Rahman and Fareena Alam are getting their reptations dragged through the mud – they should get out now, before they lose all credibility.
5) Shaykh Hamaz Yusuf pulled out of RMW (I think not the happiest man and clearly realised that RMW may do more harm to him than good). Good on him. I do not believe the scholars are particularly responsible in any way.
6) Do not expect to see mutual public support or exchange between RMW and QF just yet. They know the consequences of aligning together. But I think the public know better.
Ahmad
July 18, 2008 at 7:04 pm
I see that Usama Hasan was there with “Ed”! This is something else he needs to explain!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/foreignoffice/2653288451/in/set-72157604932239015/
Ali Abdullah
July 19, 2008 at 5:04 am
Wow… talk about delusional.. lol
With such incisive intelligence, no wonder the ummah is doing so well! 
Safir
July 19, 2008 at 9:14 am
Safir,
you are WRONG – please provide the name of Current FOSIS, MCB and Cordoba Foundation people the FCO uses? Mokbul Ali of the FCO is a personal friend of Ed and he is now making up for his earlier mistakes of speaking favourably of Sh Qaradawi.
As for AR Malik’s comments re Ed – yes all well and good, but where is his criticism in public?
Whistleblower
July 19, 2008 at 10:35 am
Ali – Usama already said previously – he thinks Ed stands up for Islam (!)
Safir – why don’t you ask Malik if he is willing to denounce QF in public, since you seem to think he has done so in private. (To be honest – he publicly praised them internationally on camera with the FCO, i don’t think he can make up for that, but at least he can try by publishing something on the net to make his stance clear)
QF does not represent some simple difference of opinion between muslims, they are a small group of heretics who are being used to wash clean the FO’s hands of Iraq and Afghanistan while at the same time putting more prressure on the muslim community to secularise, and separate from the ummah under the guise of a “British Islam”.
Does Malik disagree with these issues? Does he condemn their complete misrepresentation of Islam? Does he reject their lies and rewriting of history, both personal and Islamic?
If he does, and makes that clear publicly – it would show that all you have said is correct
If he is unable/ unwilling to do so – I think that would largely vindicate Ahmed’s points
WS
Abdulla
July 19, 2008 at 11:18 am
The challenge is open and clear Safir – Malik must either make a public statement or his silence will confirm his stance with QF. It has to be public and NOT just done personaly to the author of this blog.
It is quite clear now that Mockbul Ali has turned in favour of Ed and his goons, either by force or by his own will. Before this delegation I believe Mockbul did not have an issue with people like AR Helbawi, A Faliq or any other FOSIS/MCB individuals back in those days.
But the government realised that they dont want to engage with those who want to work together with them and at the same time would stand against them on issues they disagree with. But they want people like Ed, who tow the Gov line word by word. Hence you have this new delegation of so-called ’sufi’s. So I think it is vastly different and there is no chance of people like Helbawi, Wakkas or Faliq being taken into the delegation these days!!
Mockbul Ali has a lot of resonsibility on his shoulders and since he began to work with Ed, people have realised that Mr Ali has given into the Government plan hook, line…
Ahmad
July 19, 2008 at 1:13 pm
I am disgusted with Hamza Yusuf’s comments in the video – justifying making peace with the British government whilst it is occupying Muslim lands!
He seems totally and utterly politically naive thinking that somehow funds from the government are a “tax rebate” which organisations should take. The government does not give money for no reason!
Likewise, his political ineptitude when standing with Bush after 9/11 and telling him that invasions names infinite mercy are offensive to Muslims – not because Muslim blood will be spilt but due to the comparison with Allah’s attribute! Shame on him and his followers for not accounting him on such nonsense – The Messenger (saw) said “The blood of a Muslim is worth more than Ka’abah and all its surroundings”.
It is because of such political naivety the govt engages with such people to further their agendas and aims… however these guys if they are sincere should remember they will be accounted one day and to be careful…
jk
July 19, 2008 at 2:01 pm
Maajid resorts to having to lie about HT theory
In his explanation of HT’s views on the Caliphate, Maajid states HT believe the Caliph appoints/removes judges so cannot be removed or accounted. This is false – the Caliph cannot remove a judge whilst in session, so a judge reviewing/accounting the Caliph’s actions cannot be removed – thus such a judge can remove a Caliph if found in violation of the Shariah.
The only way Quilliam can critique others is by lies and fabrications – just as those it undertook when arguing the Dar paradigm (refuted on http://www.abu-ibrahim.blogspot.com).
His point appears around 35:00 below:
http://washingtoninstitute.org/audio/audio_popup.php?id=409&table=tblEvents
jk
July 19, 2008 at 5:25 pm
jk -
Someone who has lied/ continues to lie against Allah and His Messenger peace be upon him, and the sahaba, will of course make lies against any group of muslims
what is pathetic is that one or two muslims who seem not to be insincere and have not fallen into such depravity appear that they feel they have to support or sit with such people,
they cannot then blame others when they get painted with the same brush
Abdulla
July 19, 2008 at 5:59 pm
I wonder if we are witnessing the RMW philosophy of :’if there is fire don’t look to the one who is helping you put it out.’ So its ok to deal with and cooperate with the British government let alone Ed Husain and his ilk because there is a common purpose. Only problem is that its someone else’s fire that we have made our soul objective of putting out while ignoring our own priorities. That violence is committed by some is not condoned by most Muslims but it is the western foreign policy which is causing this backlash, a point attested to by many non-muslim commentators.
Its not for us or for the likes of Hamza Yusuf to atone for this by forgetting the Ummah’s interest and taking her to a Western agenda where Muslims are made to feel guilty for the misguided actions of some and and told they have to clean up a mess created by the government itself. This is not too dissimilar to what the Israeli government tried to get the Palestinian Authority to do when it was told to insure Israeli security when the realty was that it was Israeli occupation that was causing the violence. The real issue there was occupation and not the reaction to the occupation.
We should not be used in this way, we should not be duped into following someones else’s agenda thinking it is our own when the real problem is occupation of Muslim lands, rulers who are agents of the West and care not for their people, ruling by kufr , political disunity of Muslims etc We should not be distracted from these vital issues and let our agenda be hijacked by one man’s desire to atone for his past anti American discourse.
Abu Omar
July 20, 2008 at 12:55 am
Salaams
Why is the second vid off youtube now?
Abu Laith
July 20, 2008 at 12:23 pm
salaam aleikum,
the claim that “Islam is NOT an ideology” that “Ed” Husain, Majid Nawaz, and now the Radical Middle Way founders/spokesman are parroting is NOT something that is unique or unprecedented, but rather emanates from those who supposedly ‘taught’ them this version of Islam at these functions.
This is from another Radical Middle Way sufi speaker:
http://theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/religion_or_ideology/009973
the primary (and rather ironic) errors in this article are:
1. in the 16th paragraph here:
“The implications of this reduction are grave. Perhaps the gravest of those implications is turning the primary focus of Islam away from the spirit or soul and orienting it towards the world, thereby reducing the sacred understanding to the level of the mundane.”
——————
Ironic because this is EXACTLY what Abdur Rahman Malik said and did in Egypt at the now removed video, i.e. calling for secularism with the “spiritual” side of Islam at the expense of the political one on behalf of the U.S. backed Egyptian dictatorship.
2. later in the 19th and later 20th paragraphs:
“Moreover, ideologies are also utilitarian in that the doctrines they espouse are informed as much by their effectiveness as they are by any overarching principles. Few ideologies would deviate far from the Machiavellian maxim that “the ends justify the means.”
“Hence, doctrine issuing from a particular ideology is marshaled based on its efficacy in advancing the cause, not on the basis of any preexisting moral or ethical standard. Such a formulation is at complete odds with Islam and, thus, largely alien to its classical tradition. However, when Islam is reduced to an ideology, it is inevitably relegated to the realm of political expediency. Whatever appears to advance the political cause is seen as Islamic…”
————————
Again ironic, because his own group and followers actions completely speak to this.
When you follow secularism, the overriding virtue is “benefit” or maslahah, or put into a maxim,
“the ends justify the means”
this is EXACTLY the logic that is given in the video above about why taking money from the British govt. is “simply collecting a tax rebate”, why British govt. support for both Quilliam and Radical Middle Way is justified Islamically (According to them), and why Islam is NOT an ideology (it is NOT of benefit to us spiritually).
Furthermore, this is the same bankrupt logic that justified:
a. Meeting and standing shoulder-to-shoulder with Bush post 9/11 when he said
“you are either with us or against us” and then justifying this by telling Muslims who hate the West (America or the UK) to go to a Muslim country:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/oct/08/religion.uk
b. The over-riding reason given why Muslim women were told they could take off the hijab post 9/11:
http://muslim-canada.org/hijabthesedays.html
read the Q&A and in the answer below this logic becomes explicitly clear here:
“…The laws are there to serve human beings; we are not there to serve the law. We are there to serve Allah, and that is why whenever the law does not serve you, you are permitted to abandon it, and that is actually following the law…”
this circular sophistry escapes me?
———————————
Q: Who is really following an ideology (secularsim) and is this ideology from Islam?
regards,
skh
Syed Khalid Hafiz
July 20, 2008 at 3:52 pm
“Why is the second vid off youtube now?”
The cover up? Inshallah, someone saved it.
Ali Abdullah
July 21, 2008 at 12:56 am