Channel: Khalid Yasin
to be a left
Fushi man FC,
very kV and
you will see boo boo
ku de vida de
Hamdan Cathedral, Mubarak Kofi
Alhamdulillah wa salatu wa salam O Allah Rasulullah
sallallahu alayhi wa sallam
he was happy he was was he women wanna
for industrial Howdy.
Howdy howdy Muhammad sallallahu alayhi wa sallam
was Sharon more data to have a coup de COVID-19 de la
boca de la fille now.
want to say that salaam aleikum wa rahmatullah wa barakato.
And to our respected non Muslim guests,
we ask that your hearts be open. And your minds also be open and
to our advice, and the subject that we are addressing, and that, that you receive it in the light of academic and more information,
and that you modify, perhaps, the
subjective conditioning, that
that the whole world has been affected by through media, and the unfortunate
misconceptions and distortions about Islam and Muslims. Because I'm delivering this in that light. This is a provocative subject, but I'm not delivering it in a provocative manner.
There are Muslims, who themselves would take this opportunity to be as provocative as they feel they need to be, and and when they have the opportunity, and this is their Hall, and they are the ones speaking they can do so.
But I do try to be academically, intellectually, and politically responsible. And in that sense, I'm going to try to be very balanced, and objective in the treatment of this particular subject. Although to be very frank with you,
I try not to
even deal with this kind of a topic in the climate that we're living in today. Because perhaps it is better in the days and times that we're living in in to write about this topic and let people read, because words have an opportunity to be digested, whereas when the individual speaks, he can be misunderstood, misquoted, and sometimes emotion, personality, and other things get mixed up. But because the brothers and sisters here felt that this was a topic that they wanted me to deliver, I don't duck and dodge on the way of contemporary issues. And of course, this is one of the most This is one of the important contemporary issues relative to Muslims, and for that matter, relative to
the entire world, since it has been used as a tool to misconstrue and to
to cause distortion, and misunderstandings about Islam and Muslims and the values of that great religion and system of life called Islam.
Having said that, I'm asking both of them
that when it comes time for question and answers to act in a civil manner, because if you ask your questions in an uncivil manner, because you came here with a preconception, you come here with a predisposition, then I'm going to excuse your question, you won't have an answer, you'll have to answer it yourself or in another venue.
Because I didn't come here to juxtapose with anybody, I didn't come here to Joyce with anybody, I didn't come to fence or to defend or to argue, a particular point, I came to deliver a perspective, if you can appreciate the perspective, from the Muslim, from the Muslim position, good. If I'm not radical enough for you, some of the Muslims that are here, then rent your own Hall, distribute your own fliers, and produce your own speaker.
And as for the non Muslims, if you think that a little bit
provocative about the subject or bias from an Islamic point of view, then you have your own opinion, again, and and this is a free country, and this is the the free Western press media, so forth and so on. And so we should all walk out of here with at least
the position that we can honorably disagree.
Now, as I understand that the the topic has to do with jihad,
and or terrorism, of this anonymous, what did the terminologies mean? So I want to be very fundamental. And first of all, I'm not going to assume that either Muslims or non Muslims understand the terminologies.
And I'm delivering this not as a scholar, or for that matter, as a student of knowledge from the Islamic perspective, but maybe,
but I'm going to be quoting from some scholastic sources. And myself, I may be like a student, of a student, of a student, of a student of a scholar, maybe. So in that light, whoever doesn't agree again, there's some trash baskets, you can take my opinion, and or your own, you can put it in the receptacle that you think it belongs, and if it's not scholastic enough. Now regarding the word jihad,
the word jihad is an Arabic terminology and it generally
So it has a general meaning from point of
language. And then it has a shy meaning meaning in terms of Islamic concepts and the Islamic law. And sometimes it is used back and forth very freely, and it loses its context. Now, since it isn't Islamic terminology, first we should first define the word Islam. And therefore we use the word jihad, we have to use it in the context of the meaning of Islam.
Now, the word Islam
is a noun that comes from a verb meaning to submit.
To be peaceful, Selamat selama means to be peaceful, to be in submission, to be at rest, to be in accordance to to be in conformance to surrender. Therefore, Islam means submission,
conformance, in acknowledgement, and under the surrender to the law,
to the system
of the author and the Creator of the heavens and earth. Therefore, Islam is not just a religion, in the western sense of the word, it is a comprehensive, universally understood principle, just like the law of gravity. But it is more diverse and more profound than the law of gravity, for the law of gravity has its own sphere of influence, and that's the earth because outside of the earth, we know the law of gravity, maybe it doesn't apply, it is even more powerful than time and space, because outside of the earth, and what we consider to be time and space, time is timeless, whereas Islam has its application wheresoever there is existence where the man or jinn time or space or substance. Now
if you can understand that
that which the whole of the creation conforms to as a law
that has been offered
The author of existence, the Creator of the heavens and earth, the one that deserves all praise, and whom there should be no one else to recognize or to submit to. That's the basic context of Islam. Now, a Muslim is an individual that makes a commitment
to be in surrender in submission, in conformance to that law, which has been revealed divinely and understood in the context of a scripture, a law or legislation. Now, if a person is born with a Muslim name with Muslim parents, and born in a ethno cultural situation that suggests that they are also Muslims, they may not act as a Muslim, because they may not really be aware.
Just like if my father has an automobile or several automobiles, and my and and, and I watch him drive it, and I learned how to drive it. And I drive my father's automobile, I am a driver. But if I don't have a license, I will probably be stopped and arrested or fined because I am not a licensed driver. And most are many Muslims in the world today. They are not licensed Muslims, meaning that they didn't study Islam. They may not themselves be actually under the influence of Islam. They may not be consciously aware of Islam, they might not even care, but from a cultural ethnic point of view, they have inherited Islam, like I would have inherited my father's cars, and I'm driving them
So for that matter here, when we talk about Muslim, we really mean those that are consciously
Therefore, they have accepted the responsibility and the accountability of being a Muslim. Now, when we look at it from that perspective, when we look at the definition of a Muslim, we have to look a little bit closer.
And that means Islam as a universal, perfect law cannot be indicted
by Muslims, by the wrong action of Muslims.
No more so than the queen, or the parliament could be indicted by criminals, who who act out crimes or perpetuate crimes in the UK. No, those criminals should be when they found they should be tried. They should be convicted, and they should be. The law should be executed upon them on the basis of what their crime was. But we would never indict the country, because of some criminals, therefore, we could not indict Islam.
If something takes place in the world that is irregular, or criminal, because of some Muslims who themselves are unlicensed, are unaware or unconscious or for that matter, that may be rebellious or criminal in the activities.
Now the word jihad,
jihad, from a linguistic point of view, was understood in the Arabic language before the Quran was revealed. It meant to struggle to exert oneself,
it may be to exert oneself, to maintain a certain moral conduct or principle gehad it may be to exert oneself to protect one's honor of family, a jehoiada might mean to exert oneself to arrive at a certain moral spiritual station. The word Jihad from a linguistic point of view, it means to struggle or to exert oneself in some
way, shape or form. Now the word Jihad
from a legislative point of view, from an Islamic point of view, it means
to exert oneself to protect
the honor of Islam, or the honor of one's family, the honor of one's land, the honor of one's property against an invader, against a criminal against an intruder against someone who does not carry any concern for sanctity. So Allah subhanho wa Taala has mentioned to us in the Quran, what to do in a feasibility levy and why they come full circle. He said, So,
you people collectively meaning Muslims, make jihad. That is, gather your forces. Gather your strength, gather your
resources, make a solid
line and make a solid front to do what to dispel, to repel, to act as a deterrent, and to defend the honor and the sanctity of the Muslims, the Muslim lens and the Muslim belief.
Now, in this sense, we think that Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, men, women,
people of all backgrounds would agree
that any people that have any sense of honor or concern about themselves, their families, their life, their property, their country,
would respond in the same way that God has ordered us to do as Muslims. So in this sense, Jihad for us, is no different than the honor of the sanctity that anyone would have in the protection of their lives and their property in the honor. So in that context, I think that almost all of us adopt at one time or another in our lives, the spirit of jihad. Now, some scholars say that Islam is that jihad is a justifiable or defensive war.
Well, it is justifiable and it has to be justifiable. For the if there's there's no reason to make jihad, what would Muslims be doing doing jihad?
I mean, why would a country have an army invading another country? Or why would a country have an army defending themselves against unless it was justifiable?
There are no countries in the world, who have not found it justifiable to at least have a standing army because of the aggression, and and the possible aggression of others in the world today.
Therefore, there should not be any question that Muslims in their lands, and their sovereign territories, should themselves have standing armies. And those standing armies should have the same justification to defend their people, their beliefs,
their land, just as anyone else.
Even though the proponents of globalism, would say that only the developed nations have the right to invade, and only the developed nations have the right to defend at all cost, that they only the ones that have the justifiable right to enact wall, or to defend themselves with warfare. That is because there are people who believe that they are the rulers of the world, and that they're the ones who should set the rules. And if they think they should set the rules, they think all the rules should be subordinate to them and their interests.
But the world is changing.
And those people who thought like that, and who have been thinking like that, their minds will also change, too. So the social justice, social, political, economic, moral justice swings both ways. You see, when that pendulum on the clock, swing back and forth, it doesn't just swing over here and come to the center and swing over there and go to the center, it swings both ways. And over a period of history. nations have come and gone and and succumbed to social justice, because there is a justice and the justice is not Muslims or non Muslims. The Justice is the one that has created balance from the beginning. And balance from the beginning, is in the hands of the one who put forward
measurement, accountability and law and measurement accountability and law is not painted with stars and stripes.
is not painted with the
what I call it, jack, the union jack.
It's not red, white and blue. It doesn't have an ego and it doesn't have a cross in a lion on it.
Justice, supreme justice is in the hands of the Creator of the Universe, and balance and law is throughout the universe. And has been in the universe long before there was a United Nations long before there was the main proponents
manipulators of the United Nations, long before there was a gap. There was social justice and there was supreme law that existed in this world. And what we want to talk about here is jihad.
In response to the right of every human being to maintain their dignity and their honor, and that's what we want to talk about a little bit here tonight, also the terminology of Islamic terrorism because we need to talk about the word terrorism, along with the word Jihad because Jihad and terrorism has become synonymous in the media, but there's an oxymoron.
And of the morons who have made it like that.
You cannot say, Islamic terrorism,
Islamic fanaticism, Islamic extremism,
because by definition, to be a fanatic is to be a non Muslim. You cannot be a Muslim. You can't be in submission to the law, the Supreme balance of the Creator of the heavens and earth, you cannot be a Muslim and be fanatic that is rejecting moderate, reasonable, rational, principled living and values you cannot be
to be a Muslim. One has to be balanced.
You can be extreme.
And one want you to become an extremist. You have polluted your Islam in your Islamism.
So to say Islamic extremism, is oxymoron to say Islamic fanaticism is an oxymoron. And to say Islamic terrorism is even more of an oxymoron. Because what is the what is the meaning of terrorism? Let's, let's give a definition. And it's a very brief definition. It's not my definition, but just look at this definition here.
Definition in the English dictionary, I mean, you choose which dictionary you on funkin, Wagner, Webster's Cornwall, which one you like
the unlawful use
of the threatened use of force, or violence by a person or an organized group, including governments, against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons. Now, you might say to yourself, Well, that sounds like some individuals that have instigated terrorism in different parts of the world, you will say Yes, it does. Well, yes, it you. You're right, it does. And let me give you a list of some of the
groups that have instituted terrorism historically. I mean, before we get into the, the so and so Obama, before we get into this phenomena that happened in September the 11th, before we get into people that are blowing up themselves over here, there, before we get into all these little individual scenarios that brought people to Guantanamo Bay extra camp X ray, before we get into all those phenomenons that seem to be painted Muslim, Islamic militant.
What other words,
Qaeda, was other words
it? Before we get into all those terminologies, let's go back in history a little bit and see
if there are some historical events that we can relate to that now I'm gonna read it one more time. So I read these historical events so that you tell me if I'm, I'm way off somewhere.
The unlawful use of the threatened use of force or violence by a person or a group, including governments, against people or property with the intention of intimidating, overwhelming, coercing societies, and or governments, often for ideological or political reasons. Now, let's start with the African slave trade.
The African slave trade of which the Catholic Church, the Protestant church, America, Great Britain, Germany, France, all of them
participated in the displacement, and the genocide of over 50 million human beings. Over a period of 300 years. I said 50 million.
I don't say 3000.
I said 50 million over a period of 300 years, all in the name of Jesus Christ.
All in the name of progress, all in the name of Western civilization, all in the name of sophistication, and the justification that they were in human anyway, they
Just property that could be bartered and traded, and what was commonly known as the triangle trade. I said 50 million you keep track with me.
Then there was the displacement of the American Indians, by a group of people who were so arrogant, that even though they said, Christopher Columbus to India, and he wound up in North America, what we call it now, with his arrogance,
they still call those people Indians. And until today, they're called Indians, although India's on the other side of the world,
and they are still occupying that land that they took forcibly from those people, displaced those people to loot their environments. And today, those people are living the most tragic life of any human beings on that continent called North America. And how many people did they displace and massacre? 4.5 million?
Let's keep moving down. What about the invasion of the Spanish and the Portuguese into South America,
in the name of the church now, and still in the name of the church,
where they displaced and polluted and corrupted and caused genocide, and continuing to do so even until today,
where they massacred forcibly brutally 7.8 million people over a period of 120 years and still occupying South America, with their corporations, with their churches, with their missionaries with their systems.
the invasion of the
the Germans into South Africa
until just recently set up an apartheid system where the the people of South Africa the inhabitants, the natives of South Africa, was considerably less than dogs. They weren't even constitutional human beings.
And were our brother, Nelson Mandela spent 27 years just because he stood up and said that it was immoral. He spent 27 years. And it was only after 27 years that the world said enough is enough. And justice swung a different direction. And that same man came out to become what the President
of South Africa.
How many people were killed in that scenario?
11 point 2 million.
Just keep adding up for me, I want somebody to keep the track, keep the record here.
Now let's talk about
27 million South Africans that were totally displaced and still remain displaced today. Even though a new government is in place. Still, they are still displaced, disenfranchised, with no empowerment 27 million
and new group of people called Afrikaners who are not native so that
they are the rulers and still are the rulers.
Let's talk about Australia. Were the same people went into Australia and killed displace the Aboriginal people who today is has the highest rate in the whole world. Think about this. Now. The Aboriginal people of Australia, one of the most sophisticated countries in the Western Hemisphere are one of the most sophisticated Western countries, although it's not in the Western Hemisphere.
The Aboriginal people have the highest rate of
the highest rate of alcoholism, the highest rate of
of crime, drugs, suicide, totally disempowered,
totally displaced. Until today. And even that the Constitution of the country doesn't even allow them the right to stand up and say, This is our country. Can you imagine that?
That's Australia 16 million genocide
killed over a period of 180 years.
What about the the Afghanistan when the Russians invaded Afghanistan?
How many people did the Russians kill in the name of socialism? expansionism, communism,
6 million, 6 million before those ragtag Mujahideen with the help of
Morocco, with the help of others, was able to push them out. And subsequently,
the Russian Empire, the USSR, collapsed after they collapsed. The winners were not the Mujahideen. The winners were those who helped them with God. And those are the ones that are in Afghanistan today. The winners, who are the winners, the ones that invaded them afterwards, the Americans, the Americans invaded Afghanistan, after the Russians. And in that just that invasion by itself that lasted a period of months, they killed 76,000 Afghanis.
men, women and children, not combatants, because they couldn't see combat in from the air.
What about Bosnia and Herzegovina?
with the UN collaboration that is with the UN forces standing right there. How many people were killed in Bosnia and Herzegovina over a period of three years? 3.8 million while the UN stood right there did nothing whatsoever.
What about the British colonization and invasion into India and Far East Asia? How much did that take? 14 million.
What about the American
invasion into Iraq to get one leader, one leader who they eventually found in a hole with a bag of money.
One leader whom they could have went in and got took out the same way they did general Noriega, they went in and made a precision.
Recall that when they slapped somebody out, extraction
and pull them out, just like that,
while he was dealing drugs with them for like, 18 years,
human Nixon and now what is the guy?
The general Colonel Colonel, North was the name of an orphan Nixon and CIA and all them guys. They were all dealing drugs to support the Vietnam War. And Noriega was their man because he was producing and dealing more drugs and cocaine than anybody else in South America.
But after they finished with him, and he flipped on them and said, no more. The money is mine. The power was mine. They said no good.
They went and snatched him out. And where's he right now in America, life without parole, but it was less saddam out there and put them where they got them right right now.
Because it wasn't saddam they wanted. It was iraq itself.
Because iraq sits at the mouth at the most critical position of the Caspian Sea. And that Caspian region is the new energy region of the world. And 15 years ago, the g8 decided that that region, was sensitive and critical for Western civilization and development as a new source of energy. So Afghanistan and Iraq, and others was already set. 15 years ago, it had nothing to do with saddam. That was just convenient. And now we found out you see dead fish swim, and the live ones keep me the dead fish float. And steak and live ones keep swimming.
Now we find out there was no weapons of mass destruction. They still looking for him. But now they've accepted that they are none. But they said, well, we're sorry about that. But we were still justified in going in there.
Okay, well, how many lives how many lives were taken in that exercise that only lasted by the way? it only lasted for 34 days, the actual
exercise 34 days, how many lives 51,000 lives
are close to the same amount of lives that were lost in the Vietnam War by Americans over a period of seven years.
Now you tell me 50,000 American lives that were lost in the Vietnam war, a war that they lost?
And 51,000 lives of Muslims, Iraqis that will that will last in 34 days. You think that's justice? Just to get one man?
What about Palestine?
Palestine that was divided by the mandate called the Balfour Declaration. Now those of you who are politically inclined you know this, you know that the Balfour Declaration written by Lord Balfour, who was one of the Lords of Wonder house, of which he called here the House of Lords. Lord Balfour. He wrote a
proclamation that the UN accepted. And based upon that Balfour Declaration, they divided Palestine. And they gave the Israel the Israelis one part of it and left the other part for the Palestinian people. And the UN went in there to do what the same thing they do today to act as a peacekeeping force. Did they? Did they did they keep the peace?
Well, I'll tell you, up to right now, more than 3.2 million Palestinians have been killed and displaced. And now there is no such thing as Palestine even.
It's all Israel.
Now, those people who were the ones who are the natives of that land and been there since time immemorial, they have to write a requisition
just to pass through what is called the greater Palestine, the greater Israel. Can you imagine that? And Israel is able to act with impunity to do whatever they want to do with, again, the UN, watching on
3.2 million. What about Nagasaki and Hiroshima. Even though the Americans already knew that the Japanese had already surrendered? they already knew the war was over. Still, they had to make a demonstration to the whole world that a superpower had arrived. The Japanese already defeated. Everybody knew that.
But the Americans had to make a statement for the whole world that a superpower had just arrived. And what did they do?
without any warning, without the Japanese even knowing what was going to happen to them, they dropped bombs on these two twin cities, Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
vaporizing, vaporizing in three days, 36,000 people just like that
36,000, vaporized no remains. And then after that 141,000 killed over the next 12 months. And since that time, more than 7 million people infected and still being affected by radiation over generations.
Now think about that. If you can imagine that. Now, somebody add up,
add all that up.
Over a period of
perhaps the last 200 years,
in the name of colonialization, Western imperialism,
added up how many do we get?
I'll tell you how many you get approximately 135 million lives.
Now, historians will say that,
especially Western historians will say well, all of that was justified.
But we say but others will say that Palestinians who have been suffering this kind of repression under the Israelis
for the last 40 years, that they have no right.
To do anything, not to bear arms, not to throw a stick, not the children not even to throw a stone because now most of those are slaughtered in Israel. They're not even shooting guns. They are young people who are between the ages of seven and 15 who are only throwing what
stones, the Israeli say How dare you even throw stones at our tanks and they are killing young people like flies, nothing.
Let's add the conspiracy of the AIDS virus.
an AIDS virus that is a classic
disease that was created in Fort McKinley, United States
fought McKinley, the AIDS virus 63,000 gallons.
A designer a designer disease was created 63,000 gallons of infant McKinley
and designated for Africa and designated for other places in the world in order to meet what was called the UN World Health Organization mandate called population 2000. How many people ever heard that?
population 2000 was that by the year 2000. The UN World Health Organization had the mandate to bring the population of the world down by 36 million to do what to protect Western civilization because the greatest threat to Western civilization at that time in 1971 was the threat of overpopulation of india
Far East Asia, Africa, South America. Now for Africa, they chose AIDS.
for China, they chose one child, for one family. And if you don't want to know what that means, somebody needs to visit China and understand what that means. One child, per family. What that means. It means that any body in China that has a second child, they are arrested, the woman has a history, the man has a vasectomy, they are put in jail as an example.
And that child that they had, the second one to pregnancy is aborted one child, that's the law in China who made that law, Chinese through the World Health Organization, I don't have to tell the people from Indian Pakistan about the birth control that they have, they have adopted in India. I don't have to tell anybody about that. But the AIDS virus is killing right now, if you want to know the AIDS virus is killing 8.7 million people per year.
Now you add that up per month, or you added up per week, 52 into 8 million. that'll tell you how many people a week have died in Africa by the AIDS virus, which is a conspiracy
going into and put in your Google into your search engine, put in their AIDS virus and put in their smoking gun of AIDS, and see the evidence in the documents, you will be shocked. But most of us, we think that AIDS is in Africa, because those are dirty people. They're sexually provocative. They're dirty people, or we think it came from green monkeys.
No missionaries from the World Health Organization and Christian and Christian roots, whether it's Africa and inoculated people for diphtheria, malaria, yellow fever, and they put into medicine, the AIDS virus. Now is that diabolical, isn't it? Well, it's the truth. And the smoking gun of AIDS came out in 1996. Because in America, we have something called the Freedom of Information Act, which means every 25 years, what they do that we don't know about, they have to reveal it after 25 years. Now we know about it. This one call is it. But people who study it know it very well.
Now, having said that,
I think that let's go back to the definition of terrorism, the unlawful use of threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating, annihilating or coercing societies and our governments often for ideological, political or economic reasons. So I asked you, are these people who perpetuated this over the past 200 years of a terrorist? Would you define them as such?
I think if we're being objective, we would have to say definitely so
to a mega scale.
Now let's go back to the subjective definition of terrorism. And that is, allegedly Muslims who are in Kashmir,
or Afghanistan, or Palestine, or Somalia, or Afghan, Kashmir, or Afghanistan, or Iraq or Somalia, or Palestine, or Bali, or Indonesia or in Buddha's
with lady with the lady, the lady had all the shoes. The lady with the Marcos was with the lady with the Philippines, or any place where Muslims have been displaced.
When we think about terrorism, today, we think about those people who are making frustrated efforts to address genocide upon themselves. And I say frustrated, because in most cases, the people who have done the acts that we call terrorists, even if they were allegations, they were frustrated. People who were trapped into a corner
and feeling so desperate, that there was nothing else they can do. Now you think about a woman that's 18 years old and beautiful.
Who has lost her children lost her father, lost her brothers
lost her mind. And she thinks that the only thing that she can do to send a signal back to the people who are the criminals of this is to do an act of reprisal is to strap on her 60 pounds of explosives
and walk out onto a bus or cafe or hospital or wherever where there are other innocent people and blow herself up as an example, that frustration. But is it justified islamically it is not. But can it be understood in the context of perpetuated
protracted oppression that brought about a sense of madness. Yes. And I think that MMP that lady, What was her name? Whoa, the lady who said that she could understand it. Hmm. tongue.
her colleagues said to her, how dare you?
How dare you even empathize with these animals?
Now this tells you the level of insensitivity.
Here's a lady
who naturally has emotion, she has children.
She's a lady.
She's politically aware. She's well read. She's an intellectual. She's a humanitarian.
And she said, I don't agree. But I can understand in the context of circumstances how that could happen. They didn't even want her to empathize. Can you see that?
Well, we don't agree. I say islamically. We don't agree with that kind of act. And why don't I agree with that kind of act. Because the Muslims in the time of the Prophet civilize him, they also faced conditions that were just as appalling, over long periods of time. But the message of a loss of a lot of them was never, he never gave me permission to the Muslims to to reciprocate acts like that simply on the basis of justifiable reprisals, never.
Because we don't act like them.
We have our own legislation, we have our own set of disciplines, we have our own set of etiquettes.
Even when it comes to warfare, the Quran
sets down a set of etiquettes.
We have our own rules of engagement. anybody here know what rules of engagement means?
Let me read out to you what it means.
Rules of Engagement, are directive issued by competent military authority, or in this case, religious authority. For us, it's a religious authority. It's a moral authority, it's a divine authority for them. From a temporal secular point of view, it's a military authority, a directive issued by competent military or divine or moral authority that defines and delineates the limitations and the circumstances under which forces can initiate or prosecute combat engagement with other forces which they encounter. That's called rules of engagement.
We Muslims follow the Quran for our rules of engagement. We Muslim follow the Sunnah, for our rules of engagement, we don't follow
the measures used against us, we don't justify the means what is called justified invited means that means by the end
we don't justify the ends by the means. That's maxwellian.
That's Machiavellian. Machiavellian was a Kaffir.
And we don't follow the makaveli. In theory, we follow the Islamic theory
kulula Melo been yet.
Every action will be judged by its intention. But the intention has to be based upon what knowledge and faith so a Muslim cannot act outside of the knowledge of the Quran and the Sunnah and think that he has pure intentions never. The Muslim cannot act outside of
the moral determination and directives given to them by Allah and His Messenger sallallahu alayhi wa sallam thinking that
Allah knows best, Allah knows my intention, this is what I'm going to do, and leave it like that no
intentions have got to be designed on the basis of the parameters of the law. And when a Muslim acts outside of the parameters of the law, the law of the Quran and the law of the Sunnah, forget about the law of the land because the law of the land is only the law of human beings. But the law of the universe is the law of Allah subhana wa tada we can act outside of that. So therefore, if Islam the Quran doesn't justify us to use force, or to use reprisals, and if the son of the province of Assam did not delineate for us the parameters by which we what we decide to use, then we become what law lists. We become therefore, criminal, even though it may seem in the context of what is used against
They appear by a motion by political terms it may seem to be justifiable but we don't measure what we do by political terms. And we don't measure it by the by what is done against us we measure it by what Allah and His Messenger Silla love and Islam has given to us because our profits or losses said
year kuno however terbang
Lee magic to be outcome according to the law, he solomani will sell them. Yes, the profit and loss him say said none of you, meaning us Muslims can become a true believer until you bring your house
what is our house? our ideas, our emotions, our feelings, our convictions
travelon Lima to be into accordance with what I have brought? What did he bring to things of why the Quran and the Sunnah, so Muslim Can I just use the emotions to act on reprisals and say that is justifiable by political, social, geographical, economic, or whatever kind of standards? No, we have to follow the end and the example of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wasallam.
because the issue of jihad is a moral issue, while terrorism is immoral,
what do we mean by morality?
morality is the quality of being in accord with standards of right and good conduct. And a law tells us in the Quran, in alladhina amanu Aminu Sati had the name
Illa de la la mano
verde those who have Eman What does that mean? They are acting in conformance with the covenant which they have with Allah
illa levina amanu they are acting those people with we say those who are believers but it doesn't just mean believers. Because a man is an Amana and Amanda is a trust. A man is a covenant. A man is a contract that we have with a loss upon with Allah. So in the Medina ama no means except those who have those who are in conformance with the Amana, with the trust with the covenant with the contract which they have with the loss upon Allah, we call it belief that attachment to the Quran and the Sunnah of the Prophet Awesome. Well, I saw they had and their actions produce solid, solid, useless.
Useless solid means it brings balance, goodness, prosperity, beauty benefit. So the ammo that brings benefit and beauty and conformance and prosperity. And terrorism doesn't bring that.
So we cannot say the terrorism is justified, justified within Islam. There's no such thing as Islamic terrorism,
morality, virtuous conduct, a rule or lesson in moral conduct
and the quality of an action which renders it good, the conformity of an Act to the accepted standard of right. Now look what Locke said, one of the contemporary Western philosophers when he said about morality, I am going to think that morality is capable of demonstration that means it must be demonstrated, it does not just abstract
the doctrines of rules of moral duties or the duties of men in their social character and ethics.
Local Francis Bacon said, the end of morality is to procure the affections to obey reason, law and not to evade it or to undermine it.
In this sense, jihad
is a principle that Muslims use
to set the boundaries to act as a determined because Allah subhanaw taala he mentioned in the Quran, that had it not been that Allah subhanaw taala check one nation by another. Verily there would have been churches, monasteries, synagogues, and mosques and what's the name of Allah is pronounced and there will be corruption in the earth. Look at this beautiful verse. Allah didn't say Masjid first Did he? He said churches monasteries and synagogues. So Allah subhanaw taala has given sanctity even to the other places of worship, and places where the name of Allah is mentioned. Had he not checked one people buy another? Secondly, Allah says to us in the Koran
of the delay militia tanaji hella de la Kamala t Jarrah Tintin G. Komen la
what to do with a
encounter Allah moon, Allah subhanaw taala said to us in this surah He's inviting us to a tee Jarrah account commerce a deal with him. What does he say? Hello, duality gelatin. I'm calling you. Hello? Can I lead you to a T Jarrah to a business to a commerce to a contract? That will save you from a grievous chastisement that mean punishment because of transgression?
what does it
mean to be like that you have a man with a law maintain your covenant with a law amendment that what to jail he do?
That you keep your Amana with Allah and His messenger. So also that you stay in conformance with the court and the Sunnah. What's your journey to the feasibility lab, and that you be prepared to give your lives to suffer, to sacrifice, to wage war, to defend the honor the land, the property of all human beings, not just Muslims, all human beings, because let me tell the non Muslims who are in the room here today in case you think in a very limited fashion, that the Muslims ruled the known world from the eighth century, until the 15th century. And they defended every human being and every government on this earth against transgression and immorality. And they did it successfully.
For how many years 700 years, not 70, not 200. In the case of the United States, snakes, some states
not in the case of Great Britain
700 years, the whole world, all the way from the ponies all the way all the way to India,
all the way to the Caribbean, all the way to the North Pole.
People knew that they could move from one place to another and if there was any immorality or transgression, all they had to do was subscribe and call the LFO.
And the Khalifa with dispatches armies and bring the transgressions and adjudicate the matter instantly. That's when the Muslims had a hit on the body.
Unfortunately, the reason most of us are acting the way we are acting, because the head is no longer on the body. That's another conspiracy.
But we pray that our Jihad will be to bring out a manner in line with a loss upon Allah to Allah and His Messenger, so a lot of them and that we will bring the head back onto the body, and then the head back onto the body will bring nobility into the world again, and identity to the Muslims. And then we'll move that body into the other bodies until there will become an Islamic State. And then there will be justice for Muslims. And there will be justice for the world. I wish I had more time.
But even this kind of subject has its constraints.
So I've dealt with it to a certain degree.
And my statements are not meant to be subjective, although I'm a Muslim, so I do have some bias to the subject. But I have dealt with it hopefully academically, ethically, in a balanced fashion. And whatever I have said about the people who have transgressed and committed terrorism throughout the last 200 years, don't take it from me.
Look into those events yourselves and you will be appalled.
Take the time to read for your own selves and then you make the judgement. terrorism in the Western world is a new terminology that just came about in the last 20 years. But terrorism in the world has been so blatant and diabolical. For the last 200 years, it has taken 135,000 135 million lives. But terrorism today is a terminology that seems to be resting upon one major action. And that was the unfortunate
incident called the World Trade bombing. That took place in America on September 11 2001. to two and a half miles from the home where I was born two and a half miles away from where I was born. And ironically, also let me keep this in mind of those 3000 lives. 618 of those lives one fifth were Muslims.
But nobody cares about that.
And holiday are seen as an American. I have my own tempered
opinion about that conspiracy.
But this is not the subject today.
So I ask all of you to, in regard to your questions that you may have, direct them towards what I have said. And I'll do my best to try to respond in the best way that I can.
And keep this in mind, brothers and sisters that this is a topic that
over 136 news agencies are covering on a daily basis, more than more than 2748 universities
have their opinions about and that millions of people are talking about. And so clearly, they're seeing could not possibly, in 55 or 60 minutes, he couldn't do much, except offer a perspective. And that's what I've tried to do is offer a perspective, thank you very much more behind the corner, shadow and de la land, want to start for those
of you raise your hands, our witnesses, I would prefer to be honest with you to take some questions from the ladies first. Since you know, men have a tendency to put themselves out first, let's see if we can take a couple of questions. And I think probably most of the written questions are going to be from lady. So I'm going to take a couple of questions from the ladies first brothers. And then I'll take each take recognize your hands if you don't mind. It is believed that all religions are from the same source. Now since the world has converted to a global village, there is a need that all the sincere followers from all religions come forward and show humanity humanity a path that can
take all of them to eternal success. Are there any efforts going on in that direction? Yes, that effort is called Islam.
And I say that the person who wrote that is very articulate. And I asked you to look into with an open mind and open heart that the Islamic proposition towards world peace, towards individual dignity, and bringing together the human beings on the one platform under one universal doctrine, which is called Islam. Thank you. Another question. I think it's also for the citizen. I'm gonna take two questions, and then I'm gonna come to the brothers is jihad or was it defensive? And how did the Muslim spread Islam to the world? Now, those scholars who say that jihad is limited to defensive war, themselves apologetic?
Now, it's not necessarily a defensive war? Because the, the the halifa, who is the supervisor, the global supervisor, coordinator of jihad can determine
that there's a necessity to take an offense to the ones who are transgression before they are able to transgress any further. So no, it is not just a defensive wall. Because if I knew you were going to rob my bank in the morning,
I got the right to come and arrest you at night. And you would agree if your money was in that bank.
So if the hill ever understands that some people are perpetuating injustice, in humanity, plotting to overthrow supersede subvert, dignity, honor property whatsoever in the world, and his job is to keep the peace? What should he do, as any other
moral force or force
adjudicating justice, he should act accordingly, and not necessarily wait until it reaches his gates or his
or his court, so to speak.
How can we make the difference between islamic jihad, this is the same like the same handwriting. I'm pretty good at him right here. So you can't, you can't ask several questions. I'm not gonna do that. That's not fair. How can Islamic difference between Islamic Jihad and terrorism put wrongly under the name of Islam, people just have to study and being objective. I mean, that's the point. If you want to be, you want to be subjective. You want to be conditioned, you want to be prejudice. You just want to follow what you hear. Then just just keep swallowing what is given to you. But if you want to be objective that I say read, and that's why more than 100,000 people in the Western world
are accepting Islam every year.
I said 100,000 people in the Western world between Europe, North America and Australia, more than 100,000 are accepting Islam every year because there are people who start to think, start to investigate, start to explore, start to consider and when they do, they find that there's some substance behind
What has been hidden? And I say you should look into it also yourself that even if you don't become Muslim, at least used to see if there is some substance behind what has been distorted or hidden. Okay, I'll take the question from first from the brother in the blue there. Yes. Okay.
The important thing is to be as brief as possible is
no, no, the more than even the median Muslim Nancy's speaking about democracy in every five minutes in TV, now, is this work and ideological work to spread democracy which they say day and night, and it is this war against Islam, but is mentioned or is that we're against?
Okay, let me just say this, and I'll say it put it this way.
If we look at the word democracy itself, it means rule by the people.
First of all, what amount of people have the right to rule when the law of the Creator has become known to the world who has the right to rule?
No one has the right to rule except by the justification of the Supreme creator. That's our position. But let's move out of this whole thing of this so called mystified democracy, because
contemporary democracy, as it's known in the Western world is really a political hypocrisy.
But it is really capitalism.
Now you take the aims and objectives of capitalism, and look at it from from a institutional point of view, and then you'll see that from a point of capitalism, the war in Iraq, the war that the invasion of Afghanistan, all these different wars, and all these things that have been mentioned, they can be explained on the basis of capital, altruism, expansionism, imperialism. So I say to you that let's not confuse the idea of democracy, because some people have a sense of democracy, civil Islam as a democracy. Well, if you say that Islam is a place where Muslims should have the right to vote, nominate, speak there speak, speak their mind. Yes. But that's not democracy, and in a sense
of the way it's played out in the world today. So Islam has some characteristics of what we call democracy. But Islam is not a democracy. Because democracy is the rule of the people. And Islam we say the rule only belongs Walla,
Walla, Hola, the Hong Kong belongs to Allah, and the Ummah belongs only to Allah subhanaw taala, and not to the people. So it is not a war of democracy. It is a war of spreading the values of Western civilization into the world, and dominating the rest of the world, and the resources of the world for the benefit of Western civilization. That's what it is pure and simple.
let me be very clear about an issue here.
I'm an American citizen, with an American passport, and the rights that all Americans have to move about the earth freely, to speak my word. And I'm grateful to Allah subhanaw taala. For that I'm not grateful to the Modi government for that, because American government gives to me as a citizen, just like it gives everybody else's citizen. So whatever is given to me as a right and a privilege, I don't abuse it. Like some other people think
that because we're in the West, all of a sudden that we can just abuse a privilege that is given to us. I don't abuse it. And I do realize that
the right to speak, to move about to speak my opinion, and to give criticisms to governments or individuals is also a profound responsibility. And one has to act with
wisdom, responsibility and with accountability and what they say. So I'm not going to be prompted by irresponsible people to say something that I shouldn't say here. And I asked a lot of saves me from being deceptive or being deceived from being misleading or being misled of saying something which I intend to be dignified, or for somebody to take it out of context and to say it was undignified. I'm just making that disclosure here.
Okay, another question. What can we do today as a student population to dispel the misconceptions of Islamic terrorism? First of all, I think that we have to be very fair as Muslims to say that many of the misconceptions
distortions about Islam and Muslims have come from the Muslims themselves
from our own behavior.
If you just examine the behavior of Muslims on an ethnic, cultural point of view, some of their own behaviors have contributed towards these misconceptions and distortions moreso than the behavior of the enemy outside. Sometimes I believe that the enemy within
is more profound and complex than the enemies on the outside. But we keep on pointing to America, we point into Great Britain, we point into France into he definitely pointing to this important to that, but what about the behavior of Muslims?
That static, narrow minded ethnic, cultural baggage that Muslims display that have nothing to do with Islam, I say, let's turn, let's turn the light on ourselves. And let's reform ourselves. When we are better Muslims, you find the image of Islam will also get better. And that's in all fairness. Now talking about it from the outside a law says Oh, either civilian a big invite to the way of a loss, apologize, that means invite to the court an invite to the son of Allah subhanaw taala, explain, tell him to the people explained rissalah to the people, explain social justice to the people explain Islamic values and principles to the people and then use your behavior as a proof for
what you invite people to and what you explain people to and that's one of the things that we can do to dispel this whole idea of Islamic terrorism, and the law he knows best.
What is the concept of jihad enough?
Jihad enough is coming from the the land, the misguidance, into the holder into the guidance to come from the from from the from the corrupt and the unlawful and to the Hillel and also from the disobedience into the obedience and to come also from Rebellion into order. All of this is a part of jihad enough. And you and I, as individuals, we have to use Jihad enough to make what is called Ischia to purify ourselves from the from the, from the tendencies, the inclination of human greed,
human excess, human corruption, make justia, purify ourselves, reform ourselves become better Muslim, because as we do that, we're going to more and more and more polish the image of Islam, and therefore those who are champions of the LFO. When the philosopher arrives, he will have some followers.
Those who are the champions of the Islamic State, first, regulate yourself before you ask for the world to be regulated.
regulate yourselves, regulate your families, if you can't regulate yourself, regulate your families, what make you think you can regulate the world?
I'll take that question back there, yes.
Now I say can go back to the time of the Spanish Inquisition and the Crusades itself, and they're taking again, 103 5 million plus aids really be further stretched out. And in addition to this, I mean, we know from the Quran, Allah tells us that the disbelievers will not stop fighting. Until we change our theme. What advice would you offer to the Muslim despite what we witnessed from the reality?
That still you're looking to the same people and same organizations which have participated in this terrorism as he put it against? You answered your own question.
You're very articulate and doing so. I don't think I need to answer any I don't need to add something to what you said you as you made a proposition. You You You asked a rhetorical question. And inside of asking it, you designed it in such a way that it was a statement, and I agree, that's it. I'm not going to add something else to it. Because to add something to it, I might take away or that I might add conflict to it. I'm not going to do either, I'm gonna say you did a good job.
How would the Prophet salallahu Islam?
Tell the Muslims who are oppressed in countries to act
in the proper Islamic manner? That's the answer.
The proper Islamic manner is that we follow the behavior of the prophet SAW lost in all cases, because what the law say, he said to us all to blame for the shutdown regime laqad can Allah
Also john has Anna lemon can a yellow Jolla, well Yamanaka Allahu costiera. He said, There is certainly for you, in the Messenger of Allah, some of our Sam The what?
The most profound, comprehensive, categorical human behavior, an example for anyone who will look at him, especially those who believe in law and last day and they opened their meeting with a lot. So I say for the non Muslims, look up the name and your search engines, Mohammed ibn Abdullah Salas them and see if you can find a human being whose life has been more documented in detail than his you will not find it. Secondly, compare his life with 100 human beings in history that you can find categorically. And you will find without any doubt, irrefutable evidence that his behavior is the most profound, comprehensively, categorically, as an example, for anyone to look into as a father,
as a husband, as a leader, as a brother, as a merchant. You see, in every capacity, his life is there. And so if we look to the province allows them at times of war, times of oppression, times of starvation, times of whatever leadership, legislation, adjudication, in every condition, see how he acted. And you'll find our example is there. No other example, the human example of the prophet SAW a lot of them as a messenger and as a prophet. And that's our example. That's the behavior that we Muslim subscribe to, and only the behavior and that itself is the exposition of the end, and want to know, how do we enact the Quran? Through Muhammad? sallallahu wasallam?
Okay, some of these questions a little bit of point out first, the complaining from the floor is the questions I have a large amount of them, but they don't seem to address the issue.
at hand that is
terrorism. So if I'll have one question.
Well, let me say this to you, sister. First of all, jihad in its most simplistic terms, if a person fights and invader into their home comes into their home, protecting their property, this itself is the premise. So wherever in the world where Muslims are protecting their land, their honor, their property, their religion, against invaders, this itself is a moral jihad, even if it is not classic. Okay, now, if you want to select, I can give you at least eight theaters where that has been done. Now, it may not be classic Jihad under Archie Laffer, because that will be classic under one global leader, but it is more jihad. And those you can choose the theater that you want, because any
Muslims in any land, who decide they're not going to accept foreign invaders, whether they be Christians, whether they be socialists, whether they be communists, whether they be Jewish, whether they be Hindus, whether they be whomsoever that are defending their land, and their armor and their people and their property against that invasion, or that insurgency of that genocide, they themselves are representing moral jihad.
That's my statement.
There's nothing called holy war. First of all, this whole idea of holy, we don't have the Holy Quran. We don't have holy Mecca. We don't have a Holy Prophet. And there's no such thing as holy jihad. Holy comes from the Crusaders themselves. No, there's nothing called holy jihad. But jihad is sacred, because of the moral context of it. But nothing called holy jihad, Panama, Allah would have gave the Prophet sallallahu Sallam the justification to make war from the very beginning against the kafala. He didn't. It is moral. And some of the Muslims, they wanted to look past the morality of jihad, into the social political realities of jihad. And so I don't want him or anybody else, you
see, to throw it out as if it's jihad is just a social political reality against non Muslims who are themselves are pressing Muslims throughout the world, because we Muslim still at the fall within the parameters of morality, and what is morality? Should I hear behavior? How are we acting without proper behavior, while we call them for something ourselves that we want to remove? We want to remove injustice, but we are acting in an in a criminal fashion. For instance, let me just give you a little small statement. Can a Muslim
Can a Muslim who is eating from the hands of the Kaffirs? The Kaffirs
eating from them
living under their asylum and protection going to their schools, benefiting from the National Health Service, living in their council houses living here carrying their passport? Can they stand up and talk about jihad in this country? as citizens? I don't think so. They can talk about proponents of Islam and social justice. And they also have the right to defend the issues of Islam, but they do not have the right while eating from the hands of the Kaffirs because a loss upon God did not give the Muslims those right, who was with the Prophet sauce now, as long as they was under the protection of the Quran. So, therefore, so therefore, I want Muslims to put everything into context.
There are many people who have are so passionate about the latha, about the Islamic State, but they themselves is eating from the hands of the Kapha. So will the will the cleanup of the candidate for the kidnapper, will he also be on the dole?
Will he also be a British citizen? Will you be living in Council houses? Will it depend on that? Will his children be born in these hospitals? Will they come out of these schools? Will he stand up in this kind of room? No, he won't.
So let's put things into context. I'm with you. And with that brother, and I'm with others, but let's put it in context. That's all I'm saying. are much mela blessed brothers and sisters who organize this year. May Allah guide the non Muslims that came and give them some insight into what we have intended for them. And thank you very much for your patience those of you who are non Muslims, and also the Muslims. Thank you very much for your attendance was salaam aleikum wa rahmatullah wa barakato