Response to UK Muslim Brotherhood on Takfir of Humza Yusaf

As I was saying, I had very brief engagement with Dr. Osama al Azimi. He's a prominent Muslim academic, from Oxford, a very polite and respectful engagement and I only know of him from others to be a lovely brother. I asked him squarely I said What are your thoughts on Hamza use of statements are number one, gay sex isn't a sin. Number two, that he can't change what's in Scripture. And also on the following policies that he's unequivocally advocating for? Pro LGBT curriculum in primary schools be towards youngest children as young as five, no to conversion therapy by the conversion therapy brothers and sisters when someone is a homosexual or identifies as a gay or lesbian. That

Hamza user said he will ban criminalize any kind of data or to see how any therapy to bring them back to heterosexuality. So that means in Scotland, if a Muslim father, his child has become a homosexual, an imam or a community leader or a therapist cannot bring them back into or let them realign or consider coming back to becoming a heterosexual he's going to criminalize that. And abortion rights are up to bone. So killing off to birth up to birth. So does that mean like an eight month old? Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So I thought he supposes Yes, he openly said, Oh, it's unbelievable. So So doctor, someone asked me, he goes, in as much as he says, does these things.

He's obviously sinful? Believing that gay sex is not sinful in Islam as obviously, Cofer. But it's possible to interpret his words to avoid calling him a careful, I'm just holding the well known distinction between general and specific tech fear.

Is that is that a private message or a prominent public? Because there's a public truth? Yeah, yeah. Well, I mean, as I say, to what extent are you willing to hold that position? Because if you hold that position, to its logical extreme, like someone's saying that I am your Lord Most High, I believe in Jesus as God, I believe in whatever, so long as they have uttered the shahada and for that, then you can't make the laity economic to fear and the question will be then, is the laity sinful for making tech fear on such a person? I think what's happened is that because of the ISIS situation, ISIS and Takfiri movements, people have been reluctant to make tech fear at a level

that's probably unprecedented. And here's why simply ISIS Syria. 2000 didn't want to be linked. They know that people link tech Futurism and they link or tech fear in general with tech fear ism, or Futurism and violence, but there's also the incident where I called the shopkeeper was killed by someone because the person who killed him profess their love for a saucer seldom do you buy this incident? No. Yeah, so So those are called the on your argument, the shopkeeper who was killed, and the person who killed him wrote a letter and he identified as a Sunni. The obviously we had the murder of the MP Joe Cox. We have the by a far right individual, we had the murder of David honest

by a person who identified as a Muslim. So I think the concerns are coming from there. All right. So let's let's begin. It's very clear, making fear of someone. Okay. And like, for example, my attack fear of Hamza Yusuf is absolutely not a call to violence. In fact, we would consider someone doing violence to this person to be a sinful act in and of itself, because of the detriments the societal detriment would have. And because no one's a partner, he knows the judge, jury and executioner we're living in the West, you know,

which actually is very important because you only when people think about tech fear, they automatically think I can be the judge of this or someone who pronounces tech fear of someone's effect for to kill them. This is absolutely not the case. Okay, so we make if one makes it very clear, there's a distinction between tech fear, removing someone from the fold of Islam, which we all are entitled to do as Muslim people. Otherwise, let's start religion become like Christianity, where you can have gay priests saying that we you know, I'm speaking on behalf of God, and so on. And with the rainbow,

color, and so on. We can't have that anomaly. We won't have that in our religion. But it seems like we're edging towards that the prophets assalam told us Alyssa Tatiana settlement can a couple of them Chevron Chevron with the Iran B, the euro, the euro and the euro had to edit the Hello hat data Hello, just wrapped up in the hope that you will follow. Okay, Marcos assalam, that you will follow the way of the Jews and the Christians inch by inch, arm's length by arm's length, such that if they go into a hole, a religious hole, you'd follow them in there as well. What we're seeing with in America and Canada and even in the UK, I was privy to my own studies. When I was learning in Oxford

University of Oxford, I was the Anglican Church of England church, it is absolutely fine to be to believe in homosexuality is moral. And to and to be a practicing homosexual clergy person is absolutely, in fact, I would go as far as to say, an opposition to that is not fine anymore. In the Church of England. It's not and of course the Church of England is just like a white Muslim on their spectrum. So there are people more conservative there are people, but I'm saying this is what has happened now, with the Church of England I can tell you this firsthand experience.

Do we do we read

Do you want to see Islam go into that direction? Do we really want to see Islam become like sorry to say North America has is behind us in this regard? Because if people like Ilhan Omar, people like Rasheeda Talib, and others, they have been allowed to, Bro, can you imagine the discussion we were having maybe some time about her discussion with the homies on the public record.

And the discussion I was having with him was to do with whether or not he would even condemn her public for her belief. Forget about tech fear.

The discussion was whether or not she would be condemned for believing in LGBTQ transgender stuff, and would you be condemned? And he said, No, the muscle? Have you heard what he said. And he even told us, you know, in the UK, you've got nothing to do with the US kind of lucky, I'm paraphrasing, we've got nothing to do with the US. And now he's commenting on the UK, by the way, the same person, he's making a big thread about the UK, and others and others. I'm saying that Yanni, this whole idea of state of our, which is nonsense. I mean, you both know, this is nonsense. But the idea of say, of the US, he's now commenting on the UK, but the issue is, look what's happening in the US. I went to

economic convention, it's the biggest, I think it's the biggest,

if not, it's the second what the first or the second, but there's a lot of people that it can RAS materials. And there was 10s of 1000s of Muslims there. It was shocking, actually, I've never seen that many Muslim Western Muslims in one place.

And robot, like Ilhan Omar was in that conference, no one condemned her in that conference, I when I came back, I realized that I didn't even know she was in the conference. Or like, I didn't even know when I came back out to make a statement of condemnation that you know, who's this, they're letting her in. The reason why they're letting her in is because of this muscle Hacket. Because once again, we go back to the muscle of this simulation, gradualism policies. The first question is to the Muslim Brotherhood in the West, who has given you the permission to make decisions on our behalf that we are okay with this kind of thing. Who's given you permission? The reason why a lot of them

are upset, bro, is simply because we've decided not to accept the narrative anymore. And the reason why I did this really quickly, is because now look at what we're discussing whether or not he's a Muslim. We're not discussing whether or not his policies are good for Muslims over they should be condemned or not. That's, that's now that goes without saying, yeah. Do you see what I'm saying? It's like fear has had the net impact of moving the goalposts from discussion of whether or not I mean, yes, they put out a post talking about you know, I believe in this and I believe in that, you know, it's a good thing and he doesn't say it's a good thing, but yeah, you can see is

95% of the people commenting on his posts, without any exaggeration, condemned Him.

Many of them put the video of me saying, you know, 10 feet of him, but 95% of his own false, condemned Him. And they were making stll the lay people making a steal from Abu Bakr, Siddiq and Amara and this and that. They'll make this a lot though there was telling him we were not taking this anymore. I told us this, I feel just just want to echo that point. Anyone who says you because we have Zara Muhammad from the Muslim Council of Britain, come on to Sky News and said that she spoke on behalf of Muslims here, by the way, bro. She said, Muslims are ecstatic with excitement and all upon his appointment. How dare you come on live TV.

As a representative of all Muslims in Britain, to say that we are in awe and excitement about the appointment of Hamza Yusuf, you could have said the Muslim Council of Britain are in excitement and in order, but you chose to speak on behalf of Muslims. And if you see the online conversations and the offline conversations, because I'll handle the conversations that we've been having the relevant noise, unnecessary noise that had to be made.

No one is in excitement and all there might be some elements of those who subscribe to that level of thinking or that type of ideology or methodology to attain power. But from what I'm seeing the public opinion, the Muslim public opinion on these specific issues, has been overwhelmingly against Hindus from very critical. That's what I find ironic about the liberal aspects or the liberal segments from the whiny Muslim Brotherhood movement, is because they're not taking account to account what Muslim people actually want on the grassroot even even though in the Muslim countries they talk about democracy, for example, but look at look at all of the for example, I've had

conversations with Hanafis deobandis, the Brel visa, they've been

the brothers basically of him, the deobandis matric fear of him, the Salafist metric fear of him, the motormouth hips metric fear of this guy. And although a lot of them, I think the majority, you'll find that the majority opinion among the the learned men and all of these places, but these brothers who are affected by will have a membership in an informal membership or a formal one or the Muslim Brotherhood. It's affecting their policies. That's why things happen. No other representative of their movements, not here. So in their absence, I will posit the following to you. Yes, we are a Muslim minority living in the West. We are living in a hostile environment where Islam

phobic hate crimes on the increase. There are people that want to, you know, change, not just change our religion, there are people that want to attack us, kill us, ship us away, kick us out of their countries, or press us for draconian policies, surely, surely, it's a no brainer to have a Muslim who identifies outwardly as a Muslim would be a better person to be in power for the betterment and the safety of our rights than someone who's a non Muslim or potentially someone who's right leading and quite open about that, some of which wasn't even the case of Kate folds and Hamza Yusuf, but that is generally what they'll posit that Sadiq Khan was better than that Goldsmith that any of the

17 Muslim MPs are better than their non Muslim MPs, that Hamza Yusuf is certainly better than Kate Forbes for the Muslims. Yeah. Tell us how because he's not putting forward the policies that we want to see as Muslim people.