Sami Hamdi – Gaza Resistance and Betrayal
AI: Summary ©
AI: Transcript ©
Now, many have speculated that this required a great degree of
planning. The humiliation for Netanyahu is that these beasts and
animals, as his interior minister described them, have launched a
most unprecedented attack. Israelis could not believe. They
were stunned that this ragtag group of Palestinians, from their
perspective, could inflict such a damage on Israel let the batteries
die on the phone, so that when we go in and ethnically cleanse,
there'll be nobody to see it. Is there a hope in this very bleak
time, hundreds of 1000s of people are watching your videos. But why
are they watching your videos?
But inhumane aggression by which Israel treats Palestinians is
known to everyone who possesses an ounce of justice. This excludes,
of course, Western nations for whom, apparently, history began
last Saturday. However, they are very aware that the colonial
outposts they set up in the Middle East is * bent on extracting as
much land as possible to accommodate racists, Americans and
Europeans, they are well aware that in the process, Israel slowly
squeezes Palestinians and of the daily humiliations that trigger
happy border guards and the maiming and the murder, they know
all of this yet remain death to the cries they give the murderous
State weapons of war, instruments of torture and diplomatic cover.
Just this past week, the main political parties on both sides of
the Atlantic were falling over each other to give Israel the
green light in an age of impunity, Israel has a free pass. But what
lay behind the events of last week, and what can we expect in
the coming weeks from the regional and international actors to help
us untangle political issues? We once again invite onto the
thinking Muslims? Sami Hamdi. Sami Hamdi is the managing director of
the international interests and a Middle East commentator. Sami
Hamdi, Assalamu alaikum. Warahmatullahi Wabarakatuh. Thank
you for having me. Mohammed, it's great to have you with us once
again. Well, Sammy, let's start with Hamas' surprise attack last
Saturday. Now, many have speculated that this required a
great degree of planning, and there is some speculation that
maybe there was some international hand at play and some fingers the
Wall Street Journal point towards Iran. Now I note that the
Americans, I think it was the Secretary of State and Jake
Sullivan also suggested that Iran didn't have a direct hand in the
attacks on Saturday, but the speculation still remains. I mean,
do you think Iran had a role in the events on Saturday? I think
that when it comes to the role of Iran, I think the first thing to
note is that the Wall Street Journal did come out, and it did
say that there was an Iranian involvement. And the sentence that
it used was that Iran had given the green light to Hamas to to
embark on this particular attack. The first thing that's worth
noting is it's not just Hamas that is attacking. There are good 910,
different groups that are attacking. And I think one of the
reasons that the Israelis are emphasizing on Hamas is because if
you say it's a Hamas offensive instead of a Palestinian
offensive, that it becomes very easy to paint the whole thing as
if it's some sort of terrorist operation, as opposed to a
Palestinian resistance towards an apartheid regime that has
blockaded the Palestinians in that Gaza open air prison to go back
towards the Iran I think that first thing that's worth noting is
that the US deny Iranian involvement. Iran itself is
denying that it's involved, and even the Israelis are denying that
the Iranians are involved. And when you consider it, there are
two reasons why, the first or the two possible reasons why the first
is perhaps that the Iranians are involved, and the Americans and
the Israelis are very keen to prevent this escalation from
becoming a region wide issue. We've seen that Hezbollah in
lubnan has been showing some sort of restraint, not trying to be
dragged into the particular conflict. We've seen Turkey
Erdogan with a very toned down messaging. I don't want to get too
involved in this, either the Saudis. We don't. We want
restraint. We want it to be toned down. We've seen that Iran
genuinely has not been trying to encourage it too much in public,
or the like. The idea being that if Iran is involved in helping the
Palestinians to plan it, perhaps they didn't give the green light,
then the Israelis and the US don't want this to go beyond the
confines of the current conflict, and this is why they're
downplaying the role of Iran publicly. The second scenario,
however, is that Iran has been doing what it's always been doing,
which is helping to provide some logistical support, some military
know how, or the like, and that this is, quite frankly, a uniquely
Palestinian affair. The reality is that the Palestinians don't need
an excuse to lash out at Israel. Consider the context. Last week,
Netanyahu was at the United Nations last week from the
recording of this podcast, Netanyahu is at the United Nations
in the map that he held up of the United Nations, he's completely
erased Palestine on the map. He has Israel, and then he has Jordan
and Saudi Arabia and.
Like in the same breath that he hold up, held up this map, he was
talking about normalization with Saudi Arabia and how it would be
the greatest deal since the end of the Cold War. Then the Israeli
ambassador to the UN in an interview with can channel, which
is one of the Israeli channels, is asked, Will Netanyahu, is right
wing government sign off on normalization with Saudi Arabia,
implying that they wouldn't, because there'll be concessions to
Palestinians. And the Israeli ambassador responds and says,
normalization means the Arab abandonment of the Palestinians.
And when the government realized this, they'll know exactly what
decision they should be making. The point here being is that in
this context of the build up, the raids on Jenin as Netanyahu pushes
aggressively to try to annex the West Bank, with Netanyahu sitting
with Erdogan for the first time in the United Nations, and Erdogan
telling him, Look, I want a gas pipeline. I want warmer ties. I
want us to be friends again. My proof is, this is the first time
we're meeting since Erdogan came to power in 2003 this is the first
time that we're sitting together. Netanyahu was lulled into this
complacency that given that the Muslim nations, or those who are
supposed to rescue Palestine are now abandoning it, he wasn't
expecting this to take place. But the point here is, what I'm saying
is that the Palestinians, in light of this heavy pressure coming in
this sense of abandonment by many of the Muslim nations, didn't need
Iran to give them a green light to launch this offensive some will
say yes, but such an offensive needs months to prepare. But
normalization talks with Saudi Arabia have been ongoing for more
than a year. So if it takes one year to plan the offensive, one
year from when Saudi Arabia have hinted that they're going to
abandon the Palestinian cause, and also, if you think that the Saudi
ambassador went to the Palestinian Authority to discuss the
preparations for announcing normalization of ties with Israel,
something that angered ordinary Palestinians so much that they
prevented the Saudi ambassador from going to pray in Al Aqsa. I
think that for the Palestinians, the reality is that the explosive
nature of this attack by the Palestinians, I know everybody
wants to focus on Hamas, but by the Palestinians, because those
who are talking about it in the media, like Hossein, the
ambassador, Mustafa baruti, they are associated with the
Palestinian Authority, not with Hamas, with whom the Palestinian
Authority have an issue with. But the point here being is that the
Palestinians didn't need an excuse to go. So it may well be Iran has
a role. If it has a role, Israel doesn't believe it's a significant
or it wants to downplay that role. But the second scenario, and I
think this is the more important part, is the Palestinians didn't
need encouragement, and they have shown an extraordinary
demonstration of their agency, and reminded everybody that they still
exist, and they still have agency, irrespective of political
developments which suggest that perhaps their cause was dying at
one point. I mean, the last time we spoke, we talked about Saudi
normalization. It just seemed to us that the Palestinian role in
this crisis was somewhat being downplayed, and they were now
subject to the tyranny of the Israelis, and there was nothing
they could do about it. Do you feel that, in a sense, the
Palestinian cause has now become center stage in this crisis. Once
again, I think that one of the biggest issues currently,
particularly with regards to attempts to de escalate the
situation, is that Netanyahu has been humiliated because Netanyahu
told the Israelis that as a result of these normalization processes,
nobody would come to the rescue of the Palestinians, and therefore
the Palestinians have no power. And when Netanyahu raised that map
that we mentioned, when he erases Palestine, it means that, now that
normalizations are taking place, we can wipe out the Palestinians,
eventually we can cleanse them, send them to Egypt or wherever,
whatever people are talking about at this moment in time the
humiliation for Netanyahu, it would have been better for in
Netanyahu perspective, if Saudi or Taeko UE had provided help to the
Palestinians to fight, then he could say that this is a regional,
international effort to come and attack Israel, and we're
internationally under threat. The humiliation for Netanyahu is that
these beasts and animals, as his interior minister described them,
these people who are blockade in open air prison, who have homemade
weapons, who are supremely inferior, in his opinion, to the
Israelis, have launched a most unprecedented attack and the
greatest threat to Israel since 1973
put it into context, this is the first time since 1948 that the
Palestinians have been able to take land back from the Israelis.
They've been able to take the land that was taken from them violently
by the Israelis, even if they don't hold on to that land. That,
in itself, is unprecedented, and it's this is the reason why the
Israelis declared war, a state of war for the first time since 1973
some people would be thinking, But wait, Gaza's been bombarded and
the like. But Israel hasn't actually declared a state of war
when it's bombarded Gaza in the past, the extent of the threat
that these Palestinians, who were supposed to have been abandoned,
who were supposed to be inferior, who were supposed to be lacking in
capabilities and technology, meant that Netanyahu has had to declare
a state of war. And there was this sense of the confusion in the
first 24 hours and 48
Hours over how to handle it, and the confusion was because the
Israelis could not believe. They were stunned that this ragtag
group of Palestinians, from their perspective, that this ragtag
group of Palestinians could inflict such a damage on Israel.
So this is why, when you ask the question about the agency of the
Palestinians,
I think it's less political agency in the sense that the Palestinians
have to be talked to, or the like, and more, an agency of being able
to ruin, spoil and impose themselves on anything that
doesn't guarantee their rights, or anything that doesn't respect
them. In the words of King Abdullah of Jordan, the
Palestinians have demonstrated that you can't just fly over
Palestine and make a deal that's going to condemn them or the like.
I think the Palestinians have reminded everybody that they're
there, that they have agency. And this is why, and this is why we
also talk about the war of narratives. This is why Israel is
keen on framing it as Hamas versus Israel. Because if you assert that
it's Hamas versus Israel, then the US and Israel can say that we
don't talk to terrorist group. We're not going to be talking to
the Palestinians even after this de escalation takes place. But
when you say it's the Palestinians, and this is why it
was a welcome breath of fresh air to see members of the Palestinian
Authority also defending the Palestinian front. And the idea of
people saying it was a mobilization from the river to the
sea, suggesting from West Bank and from and from Gaza, I think that
the saying it's a Palestinian offensive means that the
Palestinian agency in any diplomatic settlement, means that
the Americans are now aware that if they want to pursue
normalization or peace, as they're calling it, remember, Biden was
deprioritizing the region and outsourcing policy to Brett McGurk
and some of these others. The Palestinians are reminding
everybody, you can't go over our heads. You have to talk to us. And
that in itself, is a mighty victory that has left Netanyahu
floundering to try to find a way to de escape in a manner in which
he will not have to recognize that political agency. Now, one news
that came out this past week was that the Egyptians argue they had
notified had told the Israelis that a something was brewing in
Gaza and had forewarned them of a possible attack, yet Netanyahu
government ignored those calls. Can you give me your view on that?
It seems that, I mean, I think I'm right in saying that some Israeli
defense sources have today or yesterday, have accepted that they
were given this tip off, and maybe they didn't take it very
seriously. What does that tell us about how the Israelis may be
viewed for Palestinians? And maybe there is a a feeling that
potentially, they allowed this to happen. What's your view on that,
I think that CC's relationship with Israel is a complicated one
that suggests that I'm going to justify it, but I'm not what I
mean a complicated one is that the Wall Street Journal, in the early
years of CC's reign published a headline, I cannot remember the
year. It might be 2015 2016 but you can search it on Google, the
sentence that a CC's blockade of Gaza is even worse than Israel's,
and this was the words of some of the officials. The idea being that
Sisi, in his pursuit for international recognition for his
coup over Mohamed Morsi was democratically elected, was trying
to align himself and show himself to be valuable to American foreign
policy in the region. And part of that was trying to provide or
trying to prevent access via the Rafah border. For context,
Mubarak, even if the border was closed, used to turn a blind eye
to the tunnels underneath Gaza. The suggestion was that Sisi was
destroying even those tunnels. In recent years, they've been
suggesting that Sisi has relaxed and eased up on this. The second
point that is worth noting is that there is confusion as to whether
Egypt told Israel that there is a major offensive coming, or whether
Egypt told Israel that they shouldn't be complacent over the
security risks, that their normalization of ties doesn't mean
that the Palestinian issue is going to be quiet, and that in
fact, there are Netanyahu approach to ignoring the Palestinians is
going to result in a security threat or the like. There are
reports. There is a huge difference of opinion. I know it
sounds different Egypt, but I'm saying what's being reported.
There is confusion as to whether the Egyptians said there is a
major offensive coming and the Gazans are planning something, so
be careful, or whether the Egyptians said to Netanyahu, who's
been very arrogant in recent times in his dealing with the
Palestinians, whether Egyptians said to Netanyahu, Netanyahu, the
Palestinian cause, cannot be ignored in your in your
normalization talks with Saudi we counsel you that you should take
the Palestinians more seriously, or else they will revolt and they
will cause a shock. And I think those are two very distinct
things, because one suggests ultimate treachery in that I sell
my brother out and I won't try to warn the Israelis that when the
other suggests would be a very normal diplomatic cable that the
King of Jordan has been saying, that Erdogan has been saying, that
everybody else has been saying, which is, you can't ignore the
Palestinians in any settlement that you make with normalization
or the like, having said.
That the reason why it's such a big topic to talk about is because
it shows you how far Egypt has fallen with regards to its stance
regarding the Palestinian issue in the eyes of public opinion,
Mubarak, for example, or let's go even before Abdel Nasser, for
example, launched a war. He said, For the sake of Palestine, perhaps
67 was for the sake of Palestine 73 Anwar Sadat launched the war to
retake the Sinai Peninsula, which he lost, which the Egyptians lost
in 1967 but the Egyptians can claim that we fought for the sake
of the Palestinian brothers or the like Mubarak. Even though there
was or Sadat signed the normalization peace treaty, or the
like Mubarak never really developed on it. You could not say
that there was really warm ties between Mubarak and the Israelis.
For context, people might say, What do you mean? Look at the
flights between Istanbul and Tel Aviv. They don't compare at all. I
don't think there are any flights between Tel Aviv and Cairo, for
example, but, but the point here being is Mubarak at least, used to
allow protests in support of Palestine, whereas Sisi perhaps
has been limiting them a bit more. I think the fact that people
believe that it's possible that Sisi could have sold out the
Palestinians and warned Netanyahu, or tried to warn Netanyahu, shows
how little people now think of Egypt with regards to it stands
for Palestine however, to finish on this point, I will say there's
a difference between telling the Israelis that the Palestinians are
going to attack next week, and between telling the Israelis that
if you continue on your course, there's going to be An explosion
of Palestinians, which I think any Tom Dick and Harry on the street
would have been able to tell Netanyahu. So you don't believe
there's any possibility that Netanyahu realize an attack of
some sort, maybe not the gravity that it turned out to be. But an
attack was coming, and he turned a blind eye to it, in a way to
resolve his domestic problems. I think that it's possible that the
Egyptians did tell him that the Palestinians were going to attack.
I gave two scenarios, primarily because we don't have the proof of
either. And the Israelis are not being clear about it either, and
the Egyptians, when they said it, or when the report came out, it
seems the Egyptians are quite proud of having warned Netanyahu
that some security risk was coming in, but I don't think the
Egyptians would have been proud of telling Netanyahu that the
Palestinians were attacking next week, which is why I think the
scenario, the second scenario, may be more likely. If you ask me what
I believe, I'm not sure. I think both scenarios are very plausible,
but I think that Netanyahu ignoring the security threat would
be in line with how he perceived the situation, how the Americans
perceived the situation. I'm sitting with Erdogan. I'm sitting
with Bin Salman. I'm sitting with Bin Zayed. I'm talking to the
Muslim leaders. Azerbaijan is raising my flag, and they are
celebrating our alliance against Iran or the like. If you are
Netanyahu, why are you going to worry about the Palestinians?
Who's going to help the Palestinians Saudi Arabia is
talking to Iran, the hot spots in Syria and Iran are supposed to be
cooling down at some point. If you're Netanyahu and somebody
tells you that there's a security that coming from Palestine, you're
not immediately going to say wallahis, or he doesn't say
Wallahi but you're not immediately going to say the Palestinians. Oh,
this is a serious threat. It may be. Oh, whatever. I don't think
they can do anything because of and that's why. Like, bear in mind
when we use the word unprecedented, Israelis are saying
the word unprecedented is because they believe that even if the
Palestinians were to attack, they would never have been able to
achieve what they achieved in this latest attack, in taking
settlements and managing to send rockets all the way to Ben Gurion
Airport and having the airport closed two hours before, three
hours before I got here for the recording the reports, Ben Gurion
Airport is now closed and planes are being 10 planes are being
turned away, more than 72 hours after the conflict has started,
and more than 72 hours after Gaza has been bombarded and pounded. So
I think the scale of it, I think not even the ordinary Palestinians
would have been able to envisage it. So how would you have expected
Netanyahu to take it seriously? There is an interesting analysis
of you, Sammy, when I when I hear you speak, because you're a
political analyst, and I see a lot of political analysis, pretty bad
political analysis on social media, actually on on YouTube,
you follow the events, you try to make sense of the events, and when
you can't, you give options. That seems to me to be a very
particular way of of of doing political analysis, but also a
very granular way of of conducting political analysis. How important
is it to have a real understanding of the events and this and the
issues almost on a daily basis, to be able to form opinions. Because
I get the impression most people, Muslims, even non Muslims,
journalists, don't really have that. Sometimes
I think that, look, politics is, in my opinion, politics is a
science of human relations in that the same way that a human being
feels anger, jealousy, fear, concern, despair, is the same way
that states feel because states are run by human beings. What I
mean is in this context, is the same way you feel uncertainty
about an event that is unfolding. Is the same way states feel
uncertainty. And I think the easy example to give in the context of
the topic that we're talking about is to look at the way the
statements have developed over the past 72 hours.
Hours with regards to what has been happening in Palestine. Let's
start, for example, with the Turkish position, and we'll work
from there. We'll go through the geopolitical powers. Turkey
starts, for example, when Erdogan comes out, Erdogan gives an
unprecedented statement with regards to what's happening in
Palestine. What I mean is, we all know, over the past decade,
whenever Erdogan used to talk about Israel, it used to be Israel
is a terrorist state. Israel is violating international law.
Israel is conducting genocide Israel. He compared Netanyahu to
Hitler. This time, he gave an unprecedented statement in which
he didn't go after Israel. Instead, he called for restraint
on all parties and tried to present Turkey as a diplomatic
effort, which suggests that Erdogan, who I'm convinced his
convictions, lie much closer with the Palestinians, far closer with
the Palestinians and the Israelis. Which means that Erdogan is in a
position whereby he doesn't want to offend Netanyahu. Netanyahu,
put yourself in erdogan's position in the g20 summit the UAE, Saudi
and Israel announced the Middle East corridor that's going to go
India. It's going to cross a short journey on the sea. Then it's
going to land in the UAE, go to Saudi, then go to Jordan, then
Israel and into Europe. Turkey is bypassed completely. This will
have sweeping economic consequences for Turkey. Erdogan
is trying to get the Israelis to say, don't go via Jordan and
Saudi. Go via Turkey. We make more sense geographically. Erdogan is
very aware that these plans are becoming advanced, and he wants to
deter the Israelis from doing it, because it will completely change
the landscape of the region. Erdogan is also keen, as a result
of his economic crisis, to build a joint pipeline with the Israelis.
Remember, for the for those who don't, who don't remember, the
reason Erdogan got involved in Libya in the first place was
because if you open a map of the Mediterranean, you will see that
Egypt, Syria, Cyprus, Greece and Israel, all of them have the
ability to put a chokehold on Turkish maritime interests.
Erdogan announced the unilateral border with Libya that cuts
through all of them in order to break that maritime chokehold, and
then sent his troops to Libya to rescue the internationally
recognized government to ensure that no deal can be struck without
Turkey's permission. When Turkey bullied the rest of the states
into establishing a maritime zone favorable to Turkey, Turkey
changed its approach to one that is more come let's sit down and
talk, and part of that is about Israel as well. He tried to invite
the Israeli energy minister, and that was ruined by what happened
in Gaza afterwards. But the point is, Erdogan believes that as a
result of the tenuous economic situation and the chokehold that
almost formed in the Mediterranean, and I had to break
by force, by the by actors, and I won't be able to break it by force
again, because they'll know that it's coming. No one believed
Erdogan would intervene at the time, he wants to talk to the
Israelis to build a gas pipeline, to establish shared economic
interest to ensure that threat never emerges again. So when the
Palestinians are now revolting against the Israelis, Erdogan says
to himself, I'm now in advanced talks with Netanyahu. I invited
him to Ankara. The only reason he didn't come to Ankara was because
he had to go to hospital because he had a heart problem. And people
I have enough credit with the Muslim world to talk to Netanyahu
about my economic interest, people will say, I'm doing it for
weakness or whatever. I don't want to offend Netanyahu over an
offensive that might achieve nothing. So this was Erdogan
stanzibing About restraint. 72 hours later, Erdogan starts gives
a speech in which he completely changes his rhetoric and goes back
to what we're used to hearing from Erdogan that Israel is considering
to put genocide. Why does the US send the warship? This is Israel's
fault, and this is all Israel's fault, and it's the occupation. Is
because you don't give rights to the Palestinians. The reason that
has changed is because Erdogan fears that the Palestinians might
achieve something via this offensive and he doesn't want the
historians to write that Turkey was on the wrong side of what is
unfolding. The point here being, is that when you're looking at
scenarios or the like, then going back to your question, Erdogan
said, Look, if the Palestinians fail, I haven't offended
Netanyahu. And if the Palestinians look like they have momentum, I
will come out to the station that says that I support them. And if
the Israelis push even further, then I'll mobilize the OIC and the
like. You leave your options open. So the political analyst, when he
gives the scenarios, in effect, he's doing exactly what the
policymaker is doing. Consider Saudi Arabia. Mohammed bin Salman
spoke to Fox News and told them, we are getting closer every single
day to normalization of ties with Israel, while bin Salman is
talking about that, I won't let go of the Palestinians. Reuters
publishes an exclusive in which it says that the Saudi officials, or
they said regional officials. But the sentiment here's the Saudis.
The consensus is Saudis have said this, that bin Salman has said to
the Americans and said to the Israelis, that I that, look, if
you can give me a NATO style security agreement and you give me
nuclear technology, I'm willing to accept that and say we can talk
about a Palestinian state. And one thing that was noteworthy is the
White House statement went from talking about a Palestinian state
to preserving a negotiations over a two state solution, suggesting a
shift in the rhetoric that's taking place. Mohammed bin Salman
in the statement.
Is during this period of talk about normalization, stopped using
the word til he stopped using the word occupation, stopped using the
word colonization to describe Israel. In one of the statements,
he puts Israeli between quotation marks. Israel between suggesting
the quotation marks is for him to say, I don't recognize them, but
Israeli is to say to the Israelis, look, I'm not calling you an
occupation or whatever anymore. That's So Bin Salman, in the build
up, has been using that language, but in the statement, when the
Palestinians suddenly took back land, Bin Salman came out in a
strong statement to say, we condemn Kuwait al the forces of
the occupation, the forces of the colonizer. Bin Salman has not
overnight, decided to abandon normalization. He hasn't overnight
decided to stop talking to Netanyahu. Something else has
triggered that change. Milton man has said to himself that I have a
population that is overwhelmingly sympathetic to the Palestinians.
I'm already being accused of selling them out, and I'm not in a
position where I can be seen to be selling them out. I have to push
this narrative that I'm arguing for a Palestinian
state to preserve myself from criticism that I'm against public
opinion and Bin Salman tends to buckle much quicker than bin
Zayed. Let me release a statement saying colonization, but rokav
newspaper, Saudis national newspaper, on the front page, I
won't celebrate the Palestinians, so on the front page they've got
bin Salman the day after. So on the front page they had bin Salman
on the top left, celebrating economic development. On the top
right, they had a picture of King Salman about another particular
issue. And on the bottom corner, they have the destruction of Gaza.
And they said there is a destruction taking place in Gaza
when all the other media was talking about unprecedented
Palestinian offensive, unprecedented since 1948 and
palaces are making gains. The Saudi national newspaper was
suggesting that the Palestinians have messed up, and Saudi tutorati
now is in a schizophrenia. There are commentators who are saying,
we told you that we need a Palestinian solution, and there
are commentators who are saying that, with a normalization is not
dead, and the Palestinians are the reason, or the cause, for the
conflict. Vincent man has now three media fronts, one that calls
Israel a colonizer, one that says that you have to give Palestinians
a solution, and one that says that Palestinians are the problem.
Depending how the situation goes, Vincent man will adopt one
particular course of action the UAE.
Bin Zayed is quiet in the beginning the Palestinian
offensive is taking place. Bin Zayed doesn't release a statement
immediately, which means that bin Salman is monitoring the
situation. Why does it mean that? Because if bin Zayed is a close
friend of the Israelis, and the Israelis are demanding solidarity,
and everybody's coming out in solidarity with the Israelis. If
bin Zayed was supremely comfortable with normalization, he
would have easily come out with a statement supporting the Israelis.
24 hours later, Abdullah bin Zayed on Twitter, tweets, I've just had
an extensive phone call with Anthony Blinken. Two hours after
that tweet, the UAE released a statement about two hours, three
hours, the timings might be a bit off, but shortly after that
statement, the UAE releases a statement in which it says, We
condemn the escalation caused by Hamas and the Palestinians,
essentially blaming the Palestinians, which implies that
Blinken must have said to them, please come out and support the
Israelis or the line. UAE gets lambasted on social media,
treachery and the like the UAE tries to point to Abdul Khaliq
Abdullah and other commentators who are overwhelmingly in favor of
Palestine, suggesting that UAE has lifted restrictions on expressing
support for Palestine. These are commentators within these are
commentators when the Abdul Khaliq Abdullah was tweeting and
everybody was stunned. Everybody said, Wait a minute. Abdul Khaliq
Abdullah is in the UAE tweeting such brazen support for the
Palestinians, blaming the Israelis, which means that Abdul
Khaliq Abdullah, who knows the rules in the UAE, is aware that
there is a green light from above that allows people to express
solidarity for Palestine. Which means that bin Zayed is very wary
and monitoring the situation. If anybody accuses UAE of selling
out, look at my commentators. They're all defending the
Palestinians or the line. But even after the statement, when they get
lambasted that they have criticized the Palestinians and
condemned the Palestinians. Bin zay then announces 20 million in
aid for the Palestinians. So you can see the UAE now has options.
I've appeased Blinken with a statement blaming the
Palestinians. I've tried to appease Arab public opinion by
letting prominent UAE commentators defend the Palestinians, and I'm
offering aid and to deliver aid to the Gazans to show that I can
leverage my normalization of ties in favor of the Palestinians. I've
left three scenarios open. If the Palestinians win, I can show I was
with them. If the Palestinians lose, I can show the Israelis I
was with them. There is a development of this, even with
regards to the US. So we talk about the US position. We talk
only the Muslim positions, and I won't go in for everybody, but I
hope people are keeping up with this. But I would like to ask you
about the US and the Western position general. Because from
afar, at least when I look at the Western stance towards it, it
seems pretty monolithic. It seems like they're squarely behind the
Israelis, and nothing has really changed. They're pretty much, you
know, even even this past day, where the.
Israelis have now announced and have have taken steps in in
tightening the blockade around Gaza the Western countries, both
sides of the Atlantic. You know, bipartisan support for Israel.
There's a green light for them to do whatever they want and to to
seek their defense by any means. I mean, even Keir Starmer yesterday
at the Labor Party Conference was was not going well. You know, this
is a human rights lawyer. It was pretty clear that Israel has the
right to defend itself. So from afar, it seems like the Western
perspective hasn't changed. I mean, from your reading, what, how
do you see? Let's break this into three, three. We'll look at the EU
and the US, and we'll see the how internally, there is deep division
over how to approach it. Wow. Okay, first of all, the problem
with public statements is they don't often reflect the sentiment
behind the scenes, right? And we saw an example of that last week
when a US military base struck down a Turkish drone. A Turkish
drone flew too close Turkey is bombarding the Kurdish populations
in Syria. It's bombarding they will be upset with that there's
bombarding the PKK and YPG bases and the SDF and the like, because
they're worried about that existential threat that these
armed separatist groups might pose to Turkey. Yeah, of course, these
groups are allies of the US. Us openly supports them, and us help
them to revamp their image from PKK and YPG to SDF, Syrian
Democratic Forces. There's a video of a general who says it was a
master stroke to include democratic in there. It made it
easier. A rebrand, a rebranding. Yes, the US struck down the drone,
the Turkish drone. Yeah, the Turks will live it. It's it looks public
like a real slap of the hand in public, the US justified the
downing of the drone in private, Lloyd Austin, called the Turks,
and said, Listen, like, really, it was a decision that was taken by
the commander at the base. It got too close. They warned it. The
drone came back. Don't let this ruin the ties. And Turkey
continued to bombard Syria. The like, suggesting the Americans
said, Look, this is a one off in public. We are defending it in
private. We are sending this image, that's an example of how
public and private don't necessarily coincide one another.
And I think that's a natural human thing in that when your
subordinate does something wrong, defend your subordinate in public
and lambast them in private and give them the hair dryer dry
treatment, because to lambast him in public would undermine your
whole leadership and your whole authority and the like. Starting
from this premise, if we take a recent thing, we'll go into the
US, because the US is a bit more committed. But let's start with
the EU,
another example. So the EU, Oliver valehey, if I pronounce his name
correctly, Commissioner, announced that the EU would cut all aid to
Palestine, that the horrific crimes in His Word of the
Palestinians and the horrific scenes in Palestine and Israel.
Means we're going to cut off all aid to the Palestinians, in direct
contravention of international law. Everybody said, this is the
EU position, and this is the French position. Then Joseph
Burrell comes out a few hours later and he says, We condemns.
And he goes, We're not going to stop aid to the Palestinians. A
high representative of foreigners. The high represents foreigners.
Foreign Affairs, a major, powerful voice. Yeah. Then Antonio
Guterres, head of United Nation, says that it's immoral to stop the
aid going to the Palestinians. Von der Leyen puts the Israeli flag on
the EU parliament. So you have one who says, I'm going to cut aid,
one who says I'm not going to cut aid, and one who says, who need
restraint. And the other puts the Israeli flag on the EU building in
public, it looks like they're family with Israel. But these when
when something spills over into the public, it may look little in
public, but to get to that spillover means there are deep
divisions behind the scenes in terms of how to approach this
issue. Spain said it would not vote for the cutting of aid,
suggesting that the European Union is not in unison with regards to
what's happening with Israel, and members of the European Parliament
are lambasting von der Leyen, telling her you are unelected. You
have no right to speak on behalf of the EU, with regards to what's
happening in Israel and Palestine. So from afar, it looks like the EU
is firmly pro Israel. But when you look at the details, when you look
at the statements. When you look at the spillover, it's abundantly
clear that it cannot be said that the EU is firmly in line with
Israel, even the Keir Starmer interview that you talked about,
and I watched it because I was stunned by the comment. You can
feel Keir Starmer. It feels like he's walking on eggshells, trying
to calculate every word, terrified that he might make a mistake and
suffer the consequence of what happened with Jeremy Corbyn, which
has led people to believe that Keir Starmer is a robot in his
stance and it might not actually reflect his time. I'm not
defending Keir Starmer. I think Keir Starmer is the worst of the
labor leaders, particularly with regards to Muslim interests of
life. Now let's go to the US. So the US comes in. Put yourself in
Biden's situation. One of the great things about the political
risk industry is a lot of the analysis is putting yourself in
the places of policymakers, but without the responsibility or
consequence of decisions. Biden has an election coming up. Biden
has been flagging that normalization will be the
highlight of his presidency. He's failed on the Iran deal. He's
failed on Syria, he's failed on Libya, he's failed on Sudan. He's
failed.
With in his relations with Europe. He's failed with regards to
Russia. He's struggling on the issue of Ukraine. Biden wants the
success, and that success was supposed to be the normalization
of ties with Saudi Arabia. Some people have said that maybe this
was a all set up by the Israelis. This analysis might answer some of
that. Biden is on the verge. Bin Salman is telling him that I'm
willing to compromise on the Palestinian issue. And part of my
job is to sit with diplomats privately, and I advise
governments. I advise foreign ministries, European foreign
ministries. I've advised the State Department before and the like,
and in private meetings, and I'm not allowed to say who or with
who, the diplomats have all said that the Saudis never talked to
them about Palestinians. They have no plan for the Palestinians. And
in the words of a particular diplomat that the Saudis sort of
said to one delegation, you write for us what you want for the
Palestinians, and we'll go with it. But the point here being is
that Biden has been told by bin Salman Palestine is not a
priority. Biden has the issue of getting the deal through Congress.
Congress won't vote for NATO style supreme through Saudi Arabia. So
Reuters suggests that what Biden is going to do is to move the
Fifth Fleet, or send another fleet, in the same way they do for
Bahrain, where they don't have an official NATO style agreement, but
the Fifth Fleet is designed to protect Bahrain from Iran. They'll
send a fleet that is ordered to protect Saudi at all costs. So
Biden is already making the concession. On that part, Biden,
the Israelis have privately agreed. Again, according to
Reuters and Axios, they've agreed to allow nuclear technology for
Saudi Arabia. So the second demand for Bin Salman is beginning to be
filled. The idea being that everything was proceeding and
moving, and Netanyahu in the UN was flaunting his map and saying
that we're on the cusp of normalization with Saudi Arabia.
People keep looking at the Saudi statements, I don't think that
Israel or Biden would be so loud about negotiations if they didn't
feel they were proceeding in a manner that was moving forward. So
the US when it sees this escalation, what do you think
Biden's immediate reaction is? Biden's immediate reaction is not
go and bomb them and go and do what you have to do. Palestinians,
Biden's immediate reaction is, my whole foreign policy prize with
elections bearing down on me, coming down is is about to be
ruined. So in that situation, let's go with it. We're talking
scenario planning. What do you think Biden's conversation with
Netanyahu is, it's Netanyahu, I beg you, I have an election. Come
on, Netanyahu, like don't let this escalate. Don't let this go to
board. And Netanyahu says to them, I can't I've been humiliated. I've
I need to do something to the Palestinians. I have to pound
them. Biden says, How long do you need? It? Can't go on for too
long. Maybe I can allow it here and there. Now, Biden's initial
reaction is, let's try to get some sort of de escalation. And one of
the things worth noting is that Blinken announced in a tweet that
he had spoken to his Turkish counterpart, and in the tweet, you
know how foreign ministers, they have a team who run their Twitter
accounts. They put the tweet, they say, we talk to our counterpart
about so and so, and we agreed on the need for an immediate
whatever, in this case, ceasefire. Blinken Twitter account posted a
tweet that said that we talked to the Turkish foreign minister and
we agreed on the need for a swift ceasefire. Within one hour, that
tweet came down. It was edited, and Blinken said, we have ironclad
support for the Israelis, which suggests that in the room where
Blinken sat with his team, somebody said that we should
pursue ceasefire, and the other person said, No, we shouldn't
pursue ceasefire, which suggests Division of Policy. They're not
agreed with regards to the policy of what's going on. So Biden now
is trying to rescue normalization, talk of ceasefire, then reigning
back on ceasefire. Ask yourself, why would they roll back on
ceasefire? It would be as a result of talks with Israel. Why would
Netanyahu not want a ceasefire? Because Netanyahu believes he's
been humiliated by the Palestinians, and he badly needs
to crush them. Why? Because the Israeli journalists domestically
are calling for his resignation. Haaretz has a front page spread.
This is Netanyahu, so, and you're building these scenarios. So Biden
went from oh my goodness, the normalization deal is in jeopardy.
And then Biden sees Republican candidates, we are firmly with
Israel, go and hit them. Lindsey Graham says this is a religious
war, if you consider it has to be a religious war against Muslims
that there can only be his interpretation. Nikki Haley says,
Go and get them. Jordan Peterson, somebody who I never understood
why Muslims really Raven and like him a lot. Jordan business says,
give them *. Biden now sees that the Republicans are coming
out heavily in favor of Israel. Donald Trump. Donald Trump coming
in favor of Israel. Now he has to outmatch them, because his prize
was supposed to be normalization. He's livid that that prize has
been blown out of the water as of the escalation. So he has to
adapt. He's seen the mood, so now he changes his rhetoric. But the
point I'm making is, from far away, it looks like that the US
resolve for Israel was rock solid from the beginning. What I'm
trying to argue and what I think happened is that Biden's stance
has evolved from the first hour he received the news to now it's gone
from Netanyahu, please don't let this go on. And now he's pressured
by the Republicans and Netanyahu to continue supporting and I think
what's very interesting, and I know I've gone on this, but I
think what's very interesting is that the Americans sent an
aircraft carrier.
Area to Israel, but didn't say it was to support the Israelis in
their attack against the Palestinians. They said it was to
prevent other regional powers from getting involved and taking
advantage of it. In other words, they sent it in order. Biden wants
a guarantee that what's happening is that Israel and Palestine will
fight each other. Iranians won't get involved. Nobody else will get
involved. The Americans will be careful not to get involved too
much, because what Biden wants is to publicly show ironclad support
for the Israelis, while begging the Qataris to try to come to some
sort of deal in which the hostages are exchanged between Palestine
and Israel. The de escalation will take place. Biden can claim that
he gave ironclad support to the Israelis by sending Blinken to Tel
Aviv and giving the aircraft carrier, while equally rescuing an
environment in which there might be normalization of ties, because
the Saudis haven't yet called an Arab League meeting. They're
supposed to be meet on the day that we're hosting. But four days
into the conflict and still no Arab League meeting. Somebody made
a joke on Twitter. I said that Arab League meeting a meeting on
Wednesday. He said, Why so soon? Why are they rushing to to meet
with Arab League but the point here being is Saudi hasn't taken
any drastic steps. OIC hasn't had an emergency summit. There's no
Iran Khan, for example, to come out and in the way that he was
very trigger happy with the OIC, you know, Palestine and Kashmir or
the like Erdogan, is very careful, doesn't want to provoke too much.
Biden will say, look, yes, it was a disaster for normalization, but
I've saved but the de escalation has come about at a time in which
I can give ironclad support to Israel and rescue the environment
for normalization. But the point of all that I've said is
the suggestion is always that stances don't shift. They shift
every single hour, depending on the news. But here is where we
bring the Palestinians into it. It's shifting because the
Palestinians are forcing the shift. It's the Palestinians who
were supposed to have their cause. Was supposed to be dying. They
were supposed to be irrelevant. Their action is causing all of the
shifting. In Ankara, in Riyadh, in Abu Dhabi, in Paris, in the UK, in
Washington, with Blinken, with Biden, with the Republicans, the
Palestinians that we thought were weak stuff. I never thought they
were weak, but other people might have thought they were weak. Yeah,
the Palestinians, we thought had no agency, are forcing all of
these policy makers to come up with all these various different
scenarios. And that's why, going back to your your question, and
I'll finish on this point in which you said, you know, you're an
analyst who, if you don't know, you give the scenarios, you give
the scenarios, because even the decision makers themselves have
not made the decision, and the scenarios will adapt according to
the situation. Hezbollah has not gotten involved yet. There's
always these talks that Hezbollah might cross the border. Hezbollah
might cross the border, but Hezbollah hasn't. Ask yourself,
why? How do you understand these rocket attacks across the border
from Lebanon too? The reality is that there's news of rocket
attacks, but let's take, for example, the rocket attack that
took place within the first 48 hours. Yeah, the 48 within the
first 48 hours. And people, forgive me, it's been a rough
three days. Some of the timings might be off, but there'll be
roundabout Hezbollah attacked what is recognized as contested areas,
not Israel proper. Yeah. They attacked contested areas. And the
reason they attacked contested areas, in my opinion, is to send a
message to the Israelis, which is, we don't want an all out conflict
with you. We don't want this to spread to the Lebanese border. But
we can't be seen to be abandoning Hamas and we can't be seen to be
abandoning the Palestinians. We want to send you a message that
says, Please tone down in what you're doing with the
Palestinians, but we're not ready to fight you for it at this stage,
you haven't gone far enough, which is why I think it's fascinating
that a ground offensive hasn't happened yet despite 72 hours or
even longer into the conflict. It's as if even the Israelis are
aware that we're pounding Gaza with airstrikes, but we're not
sure what the reaction will be with the ground offensive, because
a ground offensive would force everybody would force everybody to
reconsider their options, so as if everybody is sort of looking at
each other and saying, we're going to allow this amount the
airstrikes, but not enough. And I think Israel understood the
message, which is why they sent a few flares. They sent a rocket
that killed two Hezbollah soldiers. But even the Hezbollah
did not really react to the killing of the two soldiers,
suggesting Hezbollah interpreted it as an accident as opposed to an
actual attack. And the reason why I mentioned all this is to show
that a lot of people want to talk about this issue as if it's black
and white, but everybody involved, including Netanyahu, has no idea
what's going to be coming in the next few days, and everybody's
making decisions in a fog of war, and everyone's trying to prevent
that escalation and try to pursue a de escalation in a way that
suits their interests. So what's amazing here is that the
Palestinians have, in effect, upended the strategic
calculations, the long term strategy, strategic thinking of
all of the powers, including the United States. And they've have
to, they've had to put together strategies and and and revise
those strategies depending on the events and that that's pretty
amazing, actually, from, from what you've you've said there, but, but
it's a huge victory. And one of the things that is worth noting in
this part in the beginning of the conflict, one of the reasons that
Israel is so adamant on the narrative war, and why Netanyahu
is resist.
A de escalation at this moment in time is because there's something
else that's major that the Palestinians achieved, aside from
their agency here, which is that, if you remember, in the first few
hours, and people were talking about terrorists have crossed into
crossed into Israel, and they are and then Al Jazeera published a
video, or showed a video, of the Palestinian fighters with the
Jewish woman who is terrified and she's holding her baby, and the
Palestinian
cover her, cover her and reassure her and show her the humanity that
we have that the apartheid regime doesn't have. When that video went
viral, people translated it and went viral. I put just to give you
a content in terms of viral, I only have about maybe 45,000
followers on Twitter or the like, only sadly, compressing to others,
but within 24 hours, that translation got to 1 million on
Omar bin Abdulaziz account. It got to 8 million on somebody else's
account. It got to 2 million on another person went through, it
went viral, because suddenly people were like, wait a minute,
there's humanity here. And those who've seen channel 12, that
Israeli settler, when she's talking, and she says, They came
into my house, yeah, and they said, Well, what did they do? What
did they do? And and she goes, Well, the first thing you said to
me was, I won't harm you. I'm Muslim, and I wanted a banana or
something. And she's and she says, the statement, put me off. I won't
harm you because I'm Muslim. She goes, it put me off. But I felt
suddenly at ease. And they walked around the house for two hours.
One of them asked me for a banana, and then they left. The thing that
the Israelis are panicking and why they're not de escalating it, and
I know we'll go into it later on, is that the image of the
Palestinians has transformed in mainstream public opinion in the
beginning when all these Palestinians, Muhammad, Al Quran,
you could sense the wave, even amongst non Muslim audiences that,
wait a minute, wait, these Palestinians actually have a
point. Why do they have to condemn themselves when they have this
situation? And I'm seeing what the fighters are look like. I'm not
saying that there are no atrocities in war. War is a nasty,
nasty I come from. My maternal side is an Algerian background.
The war for liberation saw huge atrocities, horrific things on the
on the on the path to liberation. I do think that it's interesting
that in law, generally, I studied law at uni, there is this concept
of diminished responsibility, where a victim is never held to
the same accountability as somebody who is not a victim. I
think that's very important in this context of Palestine. But the
point here being is that you are marveling as well at how the
Palestinians are changing the policy making considerations.
They've also changed the image, and that's one of the reasons that
Israel feels not only have I been humiliated by the Palestinians,
but they might actually be able to rip the cover of my propaganda I
was telling the world these are barbarians and these are animals,
and people are now seeing them as magnanimous fighters. This is a
disaster. Let's tell the world they beheaded 40 babies, for
example. Do you think that's changing? I mean, today we've seen
this horrific story, you know, which is just a made up story
about 40 babies that have been beheaded in, you know, in a
village, in, in in, in southern Israel. And the public opinion
seems to be shifting, especially here in the West. Do you think the
Israelis are now coming together and developing a more coherent
strategy to change that narrative? First of all, let me rescue you
from the YouTube comments. When you say southern Israel, you're
using it to make it easier for people to identify on a map, not
because it's actually southern Israel, yeah, so let's get that
aside, because I know people pick up on every single sentence, yeah.
The second point that is worth noting is that
I think that certainly over the past 24 hours, I think that
mainstream media is having a very deep debate within itself, was it
wise to bring these eloquent Palestinians? But I think the
reason they brought them was because they didn't know they were
eloquent. Bear in mind, there is, this is a new generation of
Palestinians. They are tech savvy, they speak English fluent, yeah,
and they're able to convey themselves eloquently. This is, I
don't want to insult the previous generations. They are very brave
generations. But there is a consensus that this is quite
unprecedented, yeah, the idea that you don't have to have a
translator now to to bring the Palestinian view. When hosumot
came and shut down the presenter, when she asked him to condemn
himself, and he says to her, Look, 200 Palestinians died last month.
You didn't bring me here. Five Israelis die, and you drag me here
and you tell me to condemn myself, or that I when those things went
viral, I think the media didn't realize how eloquent these
Palestinians are. Even the guy from Gaza on BBC, when he came, he
said, we have nothing to lose like so I think the media sort of got
together again. I'm speculating, but I think the media got together
and said, Wait a minute. We were supposed to bring these people.
They tell themselves to give balanced coverage. Yes, whatever.
Yeah, but it appears that our coverage has been more favorable
to the Palestinians as a result of these Palestinian guests. And
that's why it was quite interesting that Nora Erekat, for
example, somebody who's worth following on Twitter, a lawyer in
the US, she actually put out and said that her three interviews
were suddenly canceled by CNN and by some of these other media
outlets as well. Have you had interviews that have been
canceled?
Good Sami, I've had a couple of interviews that have been
canceled, but for me, it's but with regards to this in
particular, I think that when it comes to the media, I think that
it's less about being anti Palestinian and more about the
pressure from the Israelis. I think it's Israeli saying, Why are
you giving these people air time where they are justifying
terrorism in their words? And I think what made it really
difficult for the media is that the guests who were coming on were
not Hamas, and a lot of them were not even from Gaza. They were from
the West Bank, from the Palestinian Authority, who are
known to have differences with Hamas. When Mustafa baruti spoke
with fare Zakaria, for example, Mustafa baruti from the
Palestinian Authority. And then, of course, and then he ran for his
own presidential campaign afterwards, Mustafa Baruch gave a
very eloquent account responding to Fareed Zakaria, tobat
terrorism, and the response went viral. I was seeing non Muslims
who in the past had supported Israel saying this interview has
changed my perspective on what's happening with regards to the
Palestinians. I think if you're a media editor in chief, and I work
and you know, I work in media. Yeah, I know that medias have
considerations, and sometimes media want to push a particular
message, and they do that via choosing good guests. I think when
the editorial team comes together, they come and they sit and they
say, Hang on a second. These Palestinians have made excellent
points. But I'm not yet convinced that I'm worried, because I've
been brought up to be taught that the Israelis are the good guys and
the Palestinians are the bad guys. And I'm terrified that in my heart
as an editor, that I'm beginning to sympathize with the
Palestinians, and that's because of the guests that I'm bringing,
and that's why I think what we're seeing is that Palestinians,
a lot of them, are reporting that the interviews are being canceled.
I think the media saying, Look, this is causing controversy.
Let's, let's keep it out of here. But I think that, having said
that, I know people like to paint the media with a broad brush, but
credit where credit is due. The issue of the 40 babies being
beheaded, which hasn't been confirmed, the reason why I what I
resent the fact it's being shared, is because it hasn't been
confirmed. Whether it's happened or not. You shouldn't say
something until it's confirmed. When journalists were reporting
it, and we've seen today, the morning of when we're recording
we've seen now a lot of papers have put it in quotation marks,
front page, front page. Yeah, in quotation marks from an IDF
source. Any journalist with integrity would never print news
that came from one source, and that source happens to be a party
to the conflict from the IDF itself, and that's why I thought
it quite interesting that Dominic Waghorn, if I pronounced this name
correctly, the foreign correspondent for Sky News,
actually came out in a tweet and said, this is very irresponsible.
We haven't corroborated and by all journalistic standards, we
shouldn't even be sharing this news until it's been confirmed.
And Adora agency even called the Israelis through their contacts,
and the Israeli said, we have no proof of it. The Israelis had no
proof. The source was an i 24 reporter who came out and said
that a soldier has told me that the bay that they've seen it. And
then she later said, Wait, I didn't see it. So it all has this,
this, and the reason it was shared is because it exposed the
Islamophobic tropes that people were tended to be inclined
towards. But what I liked about the Sky News, foreign
correspondent and even Sky News, Sky News brought in their show
with the paper front pages. They said, look, the papers are saying
40 babies. We've seen nothing to corroborate it. There's only one
source. It's the IDF, which is dubious in and of itself. And I
like that. I thought that was and that's why I think sometimes when
you paint things or look at things in black and white, you miss the
opportunities. Opportunities are always in gray. And one of the
reasons why I think sometimes that Allah subhanahu wa says women as
Alain Muslimeen, when he says those who call to Allah, when
Allah elevates the idea of dawah, it's because what ALLAH SubhanA wa
Taala is telling you is, don't just talk to those who are your
friends or who believe, go and talk to other people, because this
is the best kind of speech. Talk to those who are against you.
Engage them. That's what you should be doing. And part of
engaging them is the way of Musa ibn ramayr, the first diplomat in
Islam who went to Medina. And Saad Ibn WA is threatening him, and
Musa bin Ramey says to him, yes, Adina Muay, hear what I have to
say. If you don't like it, you can go your way and I'll leave you
afterwards. And I think sometimes Muslims in our I don't want to say
our trauma, because, Alhamdulillah, I have a very
optimistic image of Allah, Subhanahu wa and I'm very
optimistic in his power. And I always believe ALLAH is in supreme
control and able to change everything. And Surat hood is a
good reminder of these things. But the point is,
I think that some Muslims, sometimes in their anger and in
the tro the subconscious trauma, they forget to look for the
opportunities. And they're all and are straight away looking for the
battle. And I think in the media, we should be aware that there are
opportunities, and the Palestinians have been able to use
that to maximum effect, and that's why the Israelis are panicking and
peddling this fake news, including the one about the girl that they
said Hamas had paraded, that they had killed and paraded, and
Newsweek reported yesterday that she's in a hospital being treated
for her injuries. So I think that with regards to the media, and you
talk about the media being one sided, I think it's more
complicated than that. Certainly there's been a shift in the tide
in that the media are confused, but I don't.
Think it's the media saying, oh, let's support the Israelis. I
think it's the media saying the Palestinians were so good on our
platforms. Are we doing the right thing? And I think it's about now
capitalizing on that momentum to say to the media or even through
the social media platforms, look, we can actually make a difference.
The final point worth making noting is on the on this is the
decentralization of information has helped this cause a lot. I
think that even social media, social media, I think even I have
deep misgivings about Elon Musk. I'll put it quite bluntly. I'm not
one of those who sees and celebrates but
the restrictions that he's lifted on X or Twitter or whatever
has resulted in the proliferation of the Palestinian narrative, the
truth of what's happening on the ground that has allowed it to
reach so many people, and those who used to dominate the narrative
are complaining and calling it disinformation. What they're
complaining about is that they are saying, without proof, that Hamas
beheaded 40 babies, but videos of babies actually having been killed
by the Israelis have gone viral on social media. Is that why you
think the EU Commission sent this letter? This is exactly the point
I was making, and this is why I think the EU, which is deeply
concerned or not the EU, we just said, the EU is divided. This is
why I think that people in the EU are so concerned that the
Palestinians have been so effective in conveying their
narrative in an unprecedented manner that they are trying to
warn Elon Musk and trying to warn social media to rein in the
proliferation of this information. Because what they're terrified of
is that the people that the Israelis said for 70 years were
beasts and backwards and people who should be exterminated. They
are terrified that the world is seeing them something that Israel
is so frightened of, which is that they're actually human and not the
beast that Israeli. So let's talk about this possible ground attack
now. The Israelis have moved 300,000
troops on the so called frontier with Gaza, and there seems to be
ever so clear evidence that they're looking to start a ground
offensive. How likely in your mind is a ground and offensive? Likely
in the next few days? I think that it's easier to explain
the short answer is, I don't know. And it's easy to explain the
answer I don't know by thinking that Israel, at this moment, is
like a tiger that's had its tail stepped on. So it's weighing
things up. So not weighing things up, it's in a hysteria. Israel is
in an unprecedented situation, right? Israel has just been
humiliated by Palestinians as it looks down upon they've taken land
back from the Israelis rockets have landed in Tel Aviv Ben Gurion
Airport has been shut. There was even a photo or a video, I'm not
sure if it's corporate or not, that showed a former president
actually trying to flee via Ben Gurion Airport as well. I think
that for the Israelis, there is this hysteria in that the world
has seen us humiliated. How can we address this humiliation? We took
the lands back, and people are still talking about Palestinian
victory. We've bombarded Gaza, and they're still talking about
victory. When can we get to a point where we feel the sense that
we have wiped away this humiliation that the Palestinians
have incurred upon us? And that's why I think that where people
before have said that Israel might be reined in, I think this
hysteria is where there is the greatest threat, and this is why
people say they don't know Israel has amassed for this grand
invasion or the like, but the reality is that they've amassed it
because Netanyahu is ego is hurt. Netanyahu is be is under pressure
to resign from his position for bringing the greatest calamity to
Israel. According to Israeli journalists, to Israel, Netanyahu
is waiting for this point at which he can say to the Israelis, I've
humiliated the Palestinians, and now they've gone back home, and I
strike the comparison with the uprising in stiff and Algeria in
1945 in 1945 France was liberated from Germany, and France was
celebrating. And on the same day, the Algerians in stiff took to the
streets and gelma and other places to say that this UN charter of
yours looks amazing. It says every man is born free and freedom, and
we really like what you're saying in this chart, and we like this
sudden reflection. We want it as well. We want to be free as well.
And the French result, and some of the groups in Algeria launched an
attack on some of the French colonizers, or the like the French
were brutal in their reprisals, but the reason they were brutal
was because they said, if we're soft, it will encourage Algerians
to start challenging us. We have to give them a lesson that is so
brutal and so hard and so decisive, we have to shed so much
blood. We have to make it as in the words of Golda Meir, we have
to make it so that they fear the death of their children more than
they hate us, we have to utterly deliver a reprisal, a sweeping
communal punishment in order to prevent this from happening. The
irony, of course, is 17 years later, the France were kicked out
by the Algerians. It ended up sparking a movement that the
Algerians eventually led to war for liberation. But Israel is in
this state that given that the Palestinians who last week, we
were.
Saying we're at the weakest point that the Palestinian cause is
dying, given that now 1000s of people are on the 1010s, of 1000s
of people on the streets in Jordan, 1000s are on the streets
in Yemen, 1000s are on the streets in in other Muslim countries,
supporting Palestine, given that there's this way Vincent man is
buckling. He's calling me a colonizer. Again. Erdogan is
buckling. He was sitting with me, sharing tea with me, and now he's
saying that I'm whatever. UAE is buckling. It's starting to give
aid. And Abdul Khaliq Abdullah, out loud, is supporting the
Palestinians, all these people who are begging me to speak to the US
and the Congress, they're all buckling one by one. I need to
send a lesson. These Palestinians have committed something so grave
I have to pound them and demolish them, and until they believe that
the price for resistance is too high. And going back to your The
reason this links to your question is, does a ground invasion serve
that purpose? Because Netanyahu has done ground invasions before,
and he's failed every time. The reason why he's failed is one, he
never seems to exterminate Hamas or the other Palestinian groups.
The second is, Israelis don't have an appetite for a high death toll
when the grand evasion goes in, and then there's a delay even now.
Look, for example, people will see the pictures of Gaza being
pummeled and pounded,
and then you'll see a simultaneous video of rockets landing in
Ashkelon landing in Tel Aviv. So on the one hand, I'm seeing
pictures that the Palestinians are being decimated and obliterated,
and the buildings are and it's a TR honestly, it's a huge tragedy
that moves the heart. It's so upsetting. Where are these rockets
coming from? How is it that they are still firing those rockets?
And that's the question. The Israelis will say that if you do a
ground offensive, and he might do a ground offensive, but Neto is
weighing the risk at this moment. It's one of the scenarios, if I go
into Gaza
and I end up there, 3456, days, and rockets still land in Tel Aviv
with. What face do I face the Israeli people? People will laugh
at me. Yes, I may kill 2000 Gazans or 3000 cousins, but they have
nothing to lose. They're used to it for 70 years. My people, the
Israelis, are not used to it, and that's why I think that the
question I started with, I don't know, but I'm trying to go through
the process of why? I don't know, because Netanyahu himself is
probably doesn't know either. Netanyahu has been trying to form
a government. And I think I just read just before we started,
literally breaking news, Netanyahu and Benny Gantz have managed to
form a government. The factor took 72 hours to form a war government,
or longer than 72 hours suggest how deep the divisions are between
the various different factions. Regardless, they've managed to
unite. That still doesn't mean there will be a ground offensive.
It may well be that there is. But even if there is a ground
offensive, it's important to put it into context. A ground
offensive will be conducted in order to serve the purpose, to
send that message to everybody that your opinion, that the
Palestinian cause is alive is false, and here I am crushing it,
but history shows and that's why I give the Algeria example that the
French did exactly the same. They killed 30,000 people in less than
a week. And 17 years later, their 132 years of occupation was
finished. And that's why I think that Netanyahu, the lesson from
history, suggests that Netanyahu is making a grave mistake in
putting his ego ahead of the safety of the people that he
claims to protect. So Netanyahu had to, has to satiate the
bloodlust that Israeli public opinion required from him.
But, you know, many Israeli ministers have suggested that
victory would not be achieved unless Hamas is completely
dismantled. In fact, Netanyahu gave that speech where he said
that the outcome of this would be a change in Middle East. So
they've set the bar quite high, and Ariel bombardment alone is not
going to solve that problem, as you've just demonstrated. So it
seems to me that the options are narrowing for Netanyahu, and he
needs to send in a ground force of some sort in order to dismantle
Hamas, I think that to put us into wala and this is the this is the
darker part of of my role as a consultant, sometimes for the
clients, in that the easiest way to analyze these things is to put
yourself in the position of people that you perhaps wouldn't like to
be in another life. If I put myself in Netanyahu position
again, and imagine you are Benny Gantz. Let me get you. Let me, let
me drag you into this scenario as well. Yes, let's say you're Benny
Gantz, and I'm and I'm Netanyahu, and you're telling me, for
example, I'm not going to join the government except these
conditions, this condition, this condition, and I'm Netanyahu, I'm
on the verge of going down in history as the worst Prime
Minister in Israeli history, I'm about to go down in history as the
person who brought the greatest threat to Israel since Golda Meir.
Golda Meir resigned after the Six Day War because the Israelis
blamed her for her intelligence failures in allowing Egypt and
Syria to cross and break those Israeli defensive lines. They
didn't even penetrate Israel proper people always look at 1973
in 1973 when the Egyptians broke the Israeli line, they broke the
Israeli line in Sinai, not Israel proper. When the Syrians broke the
Israeli line, they broke the Israeli line around the golden
heights, not in Israel proper. Since 1948 there's never been a
penetration of Israel proper. So Netanyahu would go down in history
as worse than goldemir. He would go down in history as the person
who.
Who brought Israel the worst disaster since it was announced
that it was a state itself, Netanyahu, if you're, if you are,
Netanyahu, ayahu Billah, Over my dead body. Am I leaving this
office in the current situation? I desperately need something to show
for it, and I have Benny Gantz breathing down my neck, and the
other Israelis arguing for my resignation. They've been arguing
it before over my judicial reforms. They're pressuring me.
The journalists are telling me I should resign. There's a viral
video in Israel of two people who lost their family members in the
assault who are saying that I blame Netanyahu and it's your
fault. I hold you responsible. It's gone viral, millions of
views. In Israel itself, Netanyahu is saying, I can't leave. If I
leave now, my person or his legacy is going to be in tatters. And
that's why I think that the question Netanyahu asks himself
is, is there an alternative way, aside from a ground invasion?
Because Netanyahu has always failed in the ground invasions.
Netanyahu, you said they set the bar high. They always set the bar
high. They always say they're going to exterminate Hamas. They
always say they're going to pomogaza. They always, and it may
well be this time, they might be more serious than they were
before, but what I'm saying is we don't judge based on the
statements. We judge based on the circumstances that they find
themselves in. If they do launch a grand evasion, let's suppose that
they do, and it is possible if they launch a ground invasion and
the death toll starts mounting, it's hard to imagine Benny Gantz
continuing to support Netanyahu. It's hard to imagine the other
allies in the government supporting it's hard to imagine
yay Lapid, who was Prime Minister before saying, you know, and
Netanyahu, keep going, keep going, and let the Israel bear in mind,
more Israelis have died, and I don't celebrate war. I don't
celebrate death. And one thing worth noting to the Muslims, the
Prophet Muhammad Sallallahu alaihi salam said that the Muslims should
never wish to find the battlefield. The Muslims should
never wish to find war. The Muslims should never dream of
being on the battlefield. But if he finds himself in the
battlefield defending something or the like, then he should fight as
if the, I can't remember the rest. But the point is, he should fight
with no reserves back, yeah, until the until the enemy turns back.
And when they turn back, the Prophet said, do not transgress.
ALLAH says, take your justice and don't go beyond that. And I think
that's a very important message. Important Message to the Muslims.
We don't celebrate blood lust, we don't celebrate death and we don't
celebrate war. What Muslims are celebrating is not war. They're
celebrating the revival of a cause, the just cause that
everybody thought was dead. This is an important distinction, and I
think it's very important to stress. But going back to the
point the Netanyahu, when the death toll rises and more Israelis
have died over the last three days than they have since 2002
1019 just think about that for a second. More Israelis have died in
three days than 19 years put together in 19 years, which have
seen more than five wars between Gaza, between the Palestinians and
between the Israelis.
When that death toll rises, put yourself back in Netanyahu his
position, waia, now you're sitting on table with Benny Gantz, with
Yahi Lapid, with these other other Israeli politicians. It's hardly
likely they're going to look at Netanyahu and say, Netanyahu, keep
leading us. And netiyo might be forced to resign, and then another
person might come in who doesn't have that baggage, the ego, and
might say, You know what, let's sign a de escalation. It may well
be there's another alternative, by the way, which is not a grand
evasion, which is that Netanyahu, the Qataris now are in fierce
negotiations to try to find a de escalation. The Qataris are
talking to the Israelis and the Palestinians to negotiate the
hostage exchange. It may well be that Netanyahu secures a deal on
the hostage exchange. Instead of to put into context when Jalad
Shalit in 2012 1013 I could be wrong in the year in 1000 and 10s.
Anyway, Israeli soldier who was captured. This was a very famous
case, captured by the Palestinians. The Palestinians
managed to trade him for 1500 Palestinians. So they traded him
for 1500 Palestinians, not just fighters, Palestinians, who are
arbitrarily detained illegally by the Israelis.
Netanyahu may say that we've traded 36 hostages for 36
hostages. So another government would have traded 1500
Palestinians. I've only traded 36 Palestinians for 36 Israel it may
well be he finds it. But the point here is that a grand invasion? You
asked if a grand invasion is possible? I think anything is
possible, not because they've planned it, but because everybody
is operating with a limited set of facts and making decisions based
on that set of facts in a situation that is unprecedented,
right? Can I ask you about Egypt now? Effectively, the rougher
crossing is shot to a humanitarian corridor, but also shot to
refugees, and those who are who are injured, and the Israelis have
been permanent, have been destroying, in fact, and they say
they're destroying the tunnels, but effectively making it far more
difficult to cross that border. But the Egyptians do not want
Palestinian refugees to cross into Sanaya.
Why is Egypt doing this? What's what's behind CC's motive that you
know it because it's a very risky strategy where, in effect, you're
allowing Palestinians to be destroyed, to be killed by by
Israeli bombs. As far as.
I'm aware
humanitarian aid has been trying to cross the Rafah border, and
CC's given the green light for it, right? The videos that show the
humanitarian agencies moving, turning back from Rafa ha Buddha,
it's not because it's closed, but because the Israelites. So for
example, there was a video I think madam Assa shared it, but I could
be wrong, but madam Master is very good to follow, by the way, for
this, for this kind of news, when it comes to Egypt. But it shows a
video of eight fuel trucks turning back from the Rafah border. And
the reason being is that they are terrified, of course, if, if they
get bombed, it's a huge disaster if fuel gets hit by whatever. I
think that the Rafah border the general procession from the
Palestinians, that it's open, and that even if Sisi doesn't want the
Palestinians to come in, I don't think the Palestinians necessarily
fleeing to Egypt. Some of them are but I think also that humanitarian
aid is supposed to go through Rafa crossing. The Arab League meeting
is meeting at the time in which we're recording this podcast. So
we can't comment on the results of the Arab League meeting, but
according to reports, they are discussing how to deliver
humanitarian aid to Gaza, and the only way to deliver it would be
through the Rafa crossing.
I think that while the Israelis have bombed the Rafah crossing,
I think that
it's unclear to what extent they will antagonize the other Muslim
nations. I think the US are operating on the belief and the
Israelis that the Muslim nations are not seeking any outright
confrontation with the Israelis. How long the Muslim nations will
be able to keep that up is unclear. Minsan man is always
buckled in or has already buckled in his statement. Erdogan has
already changed his rhetoric, and it's very difficult to see them
sitting idly by over a prolonged conflict. I think it would become
very difficult, particularly as public opinion starts to really
express itself, as we saw in Jordan, as we saw in these other
places, public opinion does matter. Some people often say, or
they quote, what does all this social media stuff do? Or the
like, if it didn't matter, Vincent man could have said, normalization
talks are still ongoing. He can't not because he's afraid of the
Americans. It would please the Americans to say, we do
normalization. The only reason he's saying they can't continue,
or suggesting they can't continue is because he's scared of public
opinion. So your tweets and reshares and and comments, they
all matter. It all these trending stuff, they they matter. So I
think that the public opinion may make it untenable for them. Having
said that, I think that Israel, in places, is still showing restraint
on the border with Lebanon, for example, in the way that it's
denying Iranian involvement. Iran is probably involved, but Israel
is denying it because it because it doesn't want to expand the
fronts that are taking place. Israel is limiting its attacks on
the West Bank. The West Bank hasn't really borne the brunt of
it either, suggesting Israel is also trying to limit that as well.
Even domestically. Inside Israel, there are some Palestinians who
are under there's a report of two Palestinians being shot by police,
but not a real huge crackdown on the Palestinians, either. I think
the Israelis are very wary of provoking a backlash inside Israel
from the Palestinians themselves. All these suggest that Israel is
showing some sort of restraint,
which means that, going back to your question, which means that
the Israelis themselves, given that they're showing restraint,
it's unclear to what extent they will continue provoking the
Egyptians. The Egyptians who, to be honest, Sisi, has unprecedented
ties with the Israelis. And there was a leaked report in Saudi
Arabia that suggested that one of the things that upset bin Salman
about Sisi or that bin Salman made a remark to reporters in which he
said that our relations with the Qataris are thriving. The UAE
agrees something with us in the night time and say something else
in the morning, and Sisi is trying to use the Israelis to flex
against me. So the idea being is that even the Saudis, according to
reports, I know it's a leaked report, and sometimes some people
doubt it, but the point is that Sisi has generally decent
relations with the Israelis in comparison to those before him. I
don't think it's as strong as people suggest it is. I don't
think the Israelis will continue antagonizing the Egyptians. I
think the Israelis in bombing the Rafah crossing might have been a
lashing out, which is why I started with the Israelis are
hysterical in terms of what's happening, but I still think a lot
of the things are unknown, but it's hard to imagine the Israelis
trying to open a front with the Egyptians. Either they're mugging
Sisi off, to use a very colloquial term, right? Believing that Sisi
is so weak he can't do anything anyway, or either it's a lashing
out, and they will revise it, and they will say to Sisi, look, okay,
let humanitarian aid go through Gaza, and let's see what the
Qataris provide in their negotiations. Mustafa barkuti, I
think, on the freezer career program, he mentioned that
there's a potential for ethnically cleansing Gaza through that
rougher crossing.
Do you believe? Do you buy the argument that maybe Netanyahu
would use this opportunity to, if not, remove all and that's very
difficult, 2.2 million Gazans. But, you know, take the
opportunity to evacuate large numbers of Palestinians from their
land as a way of similar to the West Bank as a way of
taking more land for Israel.
I think that when you remember the map that Netanyahu held up at the
United Nations, I know people say, Sam, you've mentioned it now three
times that map.
Is important because he mentioned it in the same breath as
normalization of ties with Saudi Arab which suggests that his
vision normalization will lead to this vision where everything
belongs to Israel. I think certainly, Netanyahu believes this
is a golden opportunity to ethnically cleanse Gaza. Let's
drive them out the way we've driven them out out of everywhere
else in Israel. Let's drive them out the way we did in the Nakba in
the 1940s Let's drive them out the way we did Intifada. Let's drive
them out the way we did. It's a golden opportunity. And I think
one of the things that's quite fascinating is the cutting of
electricity to Gaza had less to do with limiting the operations of
the Palestinian attack on Israel, and much more to do with gradually
removing or letting all the phone batteries die of charge so they
don't have the battery life anymore, so that when the ground
offensive begins, if it happens, there's nobody to cover it. Think
about it. Where is all of our information coming from? With
regards to what's happening in Palestine and I think awesome, Dr.
ASAM Qureshi made a very good point on Twitter. I said, Doctor.
He sent me a message once where he said, I use doctor so to force the
Islamophobes to show me respect. Muslims don't need to say doctor.
But in any regards, Assam Qureshi had a very interesting tweet where
he said, on the Israeli side, we're being told what is
happening. On the Palestinian side, we're being shown what is
happening. And I think this is a very important distinction in that
when Israel cuts off the electricity, I think the
preparations for the grand defense of are let the batteries die on
the phone, so that when we go in and ethnically cleanse and
massacre the way the Serbians perhaps did to the Bosnian
villages in the 1990s there'll be nobody to see it. There'll be
nobody to see exactly what's happening. And then, as one it's
been debunked. Apparently, it was fake news. But the sentiment,
perhaps, is there the idea of sending the Palestinians, let them
go to Egypt instead, or let them, you know, flee to the West Bank or
like, I think Netanyahu certainly sees this as a golden opportunity,
and that's why I think many Palestinians haven't fled Gaza
despite the incessant bombing. Palestinians have a very unique
sense of bravery. And I think the Palestinians sometimes, and this
is why, when people sometimes criticize tactics or the like, I
think people should be aware that this is a people who, 70 years on,
are still holding very dear to their cause, and people who
genuinely appreciate that the world has abandoned them and that
they have to fight for themselves, and they are desperately trying
for their cause. And that's why I think that people should be very
easy in the criticism of any transgressions that they might
commit. I don't think that you should always you should bully the
victim or criticize the victim of what's happening. And I think it
was interesting, there's a Pierce Morgan show on talk TV. Yeah,
there is a lady who gave a very good example of people who enter a
home and throw the owner in a cellar, and then they change the
home and whatever, and they abuse the seller. They don't feed him.
And when he comes out and sees the home has changed, he says, I'm
going to burn it down. He says, no sane person would blame the guy
who was hidden the cellar. You'd blame the people who put the
person in the cellar. And that's, I think it was a very good example
that she gave on the talk TV appears Morgan show. But the idea
being is that I think that
Israel preparing for the grand offensive and turning off the
electricity, something that's against international law. Yeah,
shutting off the water. I think the interior minister just did
polluting the water as well against international law. It's a
war crime under international law. But of course, international law
doesn't necessarily apply when it comes to Israel. I think all of
that is in preparation that if Netanyahu, if he's considering
ethnic cleansing, and I think it's very much possible, Netanyahu has
been trying to ethnically cleanse the West Bank for ages and hasn't
found the opportunity, he may say, I have my solution to
wipe the humiliation off, which is to exterminate the Palestinians
from Gaza, I've turned off so there'll be no proof. There'll be
no video from Gaza to say that I did it. I can always say that they
left willingly, as the Israelis always say, whenever they take
land, they say, oh, but they left willingly, which is not true at
all. I think it's a very frightening thing, a very
frightening concept. I think it's very much possible. And as I said
before, and I've said it numerous times, and I hope people will
forgive me for it, I don't know. I think it's a possibility, but I
think nobody knows. It's all up in the air. And I think that's the
frightening thing about what could happen next. Can I ask you about
Pakistan? I mean, when, uh, normalization between Saudi Arabia
and Israel was on the table. There was discussion about Saudi Arabia
bringing Pakistan with them to normalize relations, and there was
some signs that the Army leadership in Pakistan were
willing to go in that direction.
What's your message to the Pakistanis about whether that
should ever be allowed.
I think that one of the the reasons that that rumor, that
suggestion, and when I say rumor, I'm not saying that it's not true.
I'm saying the reason why people are really concerned about
Pakistan's stance, because it's important to understand that in
the Arab world, it's an unfortunate reality. But there is
a perception in the Arab world that Arab world that the South
Asians and the Pakistanis and Indonesians and Malaysians are
Mashallah. Their stance on this is rock solid. They don't mess around
the way, the way the Arab leaders do. I think that the rumor was
really fueled by the visit of a journalist.
Stick delegation that went to Israel. It was believed that,
apparently, it had been sent by the Prime Minister's Office. And
then some journalists said, No, it wasn't an official visit. It was
an unofficial visit. I think that when it comes to Pakistan, I think
that what's important to highlight is that
when Imran Khan was prime minister, one of the things that
really upset the UAE and the Saudis, quite bluntly, is that at
a time in which Saudi and the UAE were courting India and courting
Israel, Imran Khan was calling Emergency sessions on the OIC to
talk about Kashmir, which India doesn't want to talk about, and
talk about Palestine, which Israel wasn't talking it wasn't, wasn't,
wasn't keen on and the OIC, when there's a vote at the end where
the states have to sign, UAE and Saudi Arabia found themselves very
reluctantly, having to sign off on draft documents that the Imran
Khan would very passionately write about the need for the Muslim
consciousness to talk about Palestine and Kashmir. Some people
criticize Imran Khan and say, Yeah, but it was all talk and not
action. But I think that if it was a talk that had no potential, the
Saudis in the UE who not have been happy, or would have been happy
for him to remain in power. The fact that they celebrated him
leaving meant that he antagonized them, and he antagonized them with
his words, because his insistence on talking about these issues
meant he kept it alive in the Muslim consciousness. And it's
important to highlight this point because,
and without exaggeration, the reason that it upset the Saudi in
the UAE so much was that it created an environment and a haven
for Pakistan to pursue alternative alliances to Saudi and the UAE.
You'll remember that in Azerbaijan, when they liberated
Nagorno Karabakh, there was the Pakistani flag that was waving
alongside the Azeri flag and the Turkish flag. And I went to
Azerbaijan a few months back for in my first visit, first time on
one of the main roads, there's actually a testament to Pakistan,
celebrating Pakistan's role in its support for Azerbaijan. That's an
Imran Khan phenomenon, in that Imran Khan's message was able to
transcend the nationalist rhetoric of the azaris and the Azeris were
able to look from a more automatic perspective that is rather unusual
in recent times for the Azeris, Imran Khan's rhetoric meant that
it gave this idea of a possible railway from Turkey through Iran
going up towards Pakistan or the or the like. The idea being is
that the Saudis and the UAE were concerned that the insistence of
Imran Khan on these issues, that people were saying were dying as a
result of the actions of Saudi and the UAE meant that there was this
antagonism, and that's why you always argue sometimes that Imran
Khan's talk was creating a potential for Pakistan to be
liberated from the relationship of dependency that it has on the gold
states, and that his ousting brought Pakistani back on
dependency. The reason why I start with all that is not to celebrate
Imran Khan, but to highlight why the current Pakistani Government
might consider normalization of ties with Israel, if Saudi does
it. Remember when UAE normalized with Israel, they brought Bahrain
as a gift, and they brought Morocco as a gift, and they
brought Sudan as a gift to the Israelis, to say to the Israelis,
look, I'm bringing all these people. If Saudi Arabia
normalizes, it will want to bring the country whose people are most
likely to riot about the idea of the land of the Two Holy MOS
normalizing ties with Israel. The reason the current Pakistani
Government might do so is because where Imran Khan was pursuing
alternative alliances that might be able to win Pakistan's
dependency on these states that no longer consider Muslim issues to
be of importance, on these states that are prioritizing India over
Pakistan, that the price prior to Israel over Palestine, this
government appeals wholeheartedly about upholding that relationship
with dependency going to Saudis and pleading for billions of money
going to the Saudis and giving of Pakistani assets to the UAE and
the Qataris selling Pakistan for the sole reason of staying in
power and essentially going along and aligning Pakistani foreign
policy with the very powers that Imran Khan refused to align
Pakistan with. So, for example, when, when Imran Khan refused to
get involved in the Ukraine war, the reports that Pakistani weapons
have gone to Ukraine in ceding to the US, when Imran Khan, for
example, contemplated going to the Kuala Lumpur Summit, Pakistan's
relations with Turkey and Malaysia are no longer the same as Imran
Khan's relations were with Turkey and Malaysia that had the
potential to transform the Muslim ummah and the like the point here
being, is that
I think that for this current Pakistani leadership,
I think the Muslim causes are less of an importance to them than it
was to Imran Khan. If you think that Imran Khan paid the political
price in foreign policy for taking these stances and still kept doing
it. It shows that this current government, which is not doing the
speeches that Imran Khan gave, believe that these Muslim causes
are not worth the political price that Imran Khan paid, which
suggests that the Pakistanis might say that if Saudi is doing it, if
Khadim Haramein Sharifa, if sir things that was quite fascinating
is, and I hope I don't forget the point. But the point is that when
Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman went to India for the g20
Summit, he didn't stop in Pakistan. Usually, when Saudis go
to deal with India, they throw something to Pakistan to say,
we're still with you this time bin Salman.
Even bother. It's true, the month before Khalid, Bin Salman met with
Pakistani generals or the like, and promised money, which hasn't
come yet. But bin Salman went to Saudi Arabia. When he went to
Saudi Arabia, there was a very unusual trend where people were
saying that bin Salman hasn't stopped in Islamabad because his
heart is broken at what the Pakistan his heart is broken at
what the Pakistani establishment is doing to Imran Khan. And
I think it shows how Pakistanis still view Saudi Arabia, in that
they don't see bin Salman's de Islamization of Saudi Arabia. They
don't want to believe that bin Salman might normalize ties with
Israel. They don't want to believe that the Saudis, you know, the
land of Islam, and the Pakistanis love the Prophet Muhammad.
SallAllahu said, one of the things that I found fascinating was that
I went to Konya in Turkey, and I asked the tour groups, we were
looking for partnerships as part of me and my wife, we run Halal
travel guide, we're looking for partners to help us with our
groups. But and we were saying, Who, where do the customers come
from? She says, it's overwhelmingly Pakistani. I said,
well, has always been like this. She said, been like this. She
said, No, since 2019, since erturle and these their affinity
for Islam is such that they were visiting every place that they saw
on those shows. They love the deen. They love Islam, and they
don't want to believe that bin Salman is trying to de islamite
Saudi Arabia. And this was an example, the idea that bin Salman
will go to India because his heart is broken about what Imran Khan
did, which is completely opposite. The Saudi celebrated that Imran
Khan went, I think that the Pakistanis will say, and going
back to the point, the reason why I mentioned is give context that
if Saudi Arabia did it, there must be something Halal in it. If bin
Salman did it, if the land of you know these mashayh, you know that
we love and celebrate and the like, did it, then why is it haram
for Pakistan to do it? Maybe there's something because they
understand Islam better than us. I'm not saying this is what
Pakistan is saying. I'm saying what people might argue right,
that maybe and therefore we should go along with them or the like.
But the last point that's worth noting is that
the Pakistani government may be concerned at a potential backlash,
but the Pakistani government, as it stands, when you think that at
this moment in time, they are pulling all the stops and
mobilizing all the institutions and and bringing out all these
confessions on live television, Osman dar and these others and the
like to denounce Imran Khan and trying to prevent Imran Khan from
running In elections in PTI and the like, because they're worried
that they might replicate the landslide victories in Punjab or
the like.
It appears that the government believes that it has the means
through which to suppress the people and suppress any backlash.
They'll be thinking, if we can do it to Imran Khan, if we can
prevent Imran Khan from running in elections and politically engineer
a result, we can handle any backlash with regards to
normalization of ties with Israel and the like. I think Saudi Arabia
is contemplating bringing Pakistan as a gift, but I still think when
you look at the way that the Pakistani establishment is still
struggling to indict Imran Khan on any of the 200 plus charges that
done Imran Khan, it suggests that the establishment are still facing
stumbling blocks. And the only stumbling block they have, in
reality, is public opinion, which suggests that Pakistani public
opinion still matters. Yes, so I think that the rumor, I think
there's some truth to them. Yeah, whether the Pakistani government
will do it, it depends how much Vincent man gives them, I guess.
Finally, Sammy,
you and I from from countries which are pretty much in a mess.
You're from Tunisia, and Tunisia has been run by a deranged
dictator. I'm sorry to say that, and I'm from India, and Muslims
are being persecuted in India and actually around the world. We're
bound by our automatic unity. We see ourselves as being beyond our
forged nation states, we see ourselves bound by this al Qaeda,
and we are one as an ummah, and we feel that Palestinian is not
because we believe in some anti imperious left wing struggle, but
we believe that these people are our people, and Palestine is our
land, and Al Quds is blessed because ALLAH blessed Al Quds and
you demonstrated that in in the last discussion we had, but there
is a sense of hopelessness today. You know, we are in a situation
where, but umatic Unity is in our minds, but it's not demonstrated
anywhere in our leaderships. It's not demonstrated. You know, maybe
there are a few green shoots. As you mentioned, Imran Khan,
possibly, you know, there are some green shoots. Mahat al Muhammad
gave a very good comment, actually, on, you know, as you may
have read on, on the Gaza conflict, which, you know, should
be praised. But these are small green shoots. The political
tendency is moving away from what you and I believe in, and what
should i We believe most Muslims believe in? Is there a hope in
this very bleak time?
I think that sometimes I understand where Muslims come from
when they present the bleak or.
They argue that the situation looks bleak. I know, in our first
podcast, we delved into this, but I also want to present another
angle that perhaps I didn't present it in that first podcast
that we did, the raving iriyad one, which is that, let's look at
the individual countries. If you look at Turkey, for example,
Ataturk comes in and dissolves the Ottoman Empire. Atatek struggles
to win Turkish support. The Anatolians distrust him, so he
calls on Sheik Ahmad Sanusi of Libya, invites him to Turkey to do
a tour of Anatolia. And he walks with Ahmad SANUS. He calls him a
Razi fisabi de la and that's what gets the Turks to follow. Ataturk
is aware of that. So after he liberates Turkey, because Ataturk
did fight. We shouldn't deny that when we're after Turkey is
liberated. He crushes those elements because he's aware that
they weren't willing to follow Him. They followed him only
because the ummatic connection with Ahmad sinusi, his
endorsement, a non Turks endorsement, encourage the
Anatolians, the Turks, to follow atatek. So he crushes the Muslim
movement. He changes the event to Turkish. He bans the printing of
the Quran, or his followers ban the printing of the Quran. And he
changes the Turkish language from Arabic alphabet to English or the
like. He suppresses the scholars, and then he goes to the Kurds, and
he utterly smashes them, the Kurds who revolt on the basis of Islam,
not of independence. I know Turks won't like to hear it, but I
always argue that you know when you tell a population they can't
speak their language and can't express their culture. 4050, years
later, a separatist movement is going to eventually emerge. It's
not, it's not rocket science. Ahmad bin Abu Aziz once was asked,
they said to my have an unruly group of people, send me more
troops to crush them. And Aziz Anhu replied, you know, Hassan
Habil Adel, fortify your area with justice. You don't need my troops.
You need justice here. That might upset some first person on the
point, but the point is that so a crushes all these Islamic
sentiments or the like. But even within crushing there, the mosques
and the ulama and the Muslims operating in those harsh
environments deliver Adnan mandares to power, and then
Mandela changes the Quran from Turkish back to Arabic. Military
gets angry, and they launch a coup, but they can't change the
Adhan back. Muslims are oppressed. 80s, another coup. And then it
gets to 90s. The Muslims through their work, through their
tawariya, through their education and the like, they deliver Erbakan
to the Premiership. Nash Medin, Erbakan, the fruit of his people
always think, Oh, these just polish. No, these are movements.
Erbakan becomes prime minister. He's accused of islamizing the
state. He's toppled, but five years or six years later, Erdogan
comes to power and transforms the face of Turkey. Whatever people
comes and we all have our issues with Erdogan, but Turkey has been
transformed in the Algerian liberation in the 1920s a movement
emerged in Algeria that said that we shouldn't fight the colonizers
anymore. We should be part of France. And I don't recognize the
Algerian state as Farhat Abbas, in particular, he led the movement. I
don't know of anything called Algeria, and I am arguing for
French rights within France. France should stay but should give
us equal rights. The reason that movement emerged is because in
there was a group of Algerians in Algeria who believed that the
French had been there for so long, for 100 years, that there is no
way they're ever going to leave Algeria. So we should just accept
that this is the situation. There was a shirk Abdul Hamid bin bedis
who set up, was called the Jamaica Muslim, who set up the the Council
of Islamic scholars, which was not a political movement. What it did
was, was that it set up in every place, like Azariah, like not a
Sufi order. People shouldn't confuse area with the areas in the
Sufi order, but set up these schools where people would be
educated in Islamic history. And the Quran reminding the Algerian
people who felt the despair about Allah, the victories that he gives
the people who came before us, reteaching that history to a
people who had lost despair and hopelessness. And the French
records argue that Abdul Hamid bimbadis, even though he never
made a political statement except that Algeria is Muslim and belongs
to Ummat Muhammad, Abdul Hamid bimbadis revived or gave renewed
hope to this identity that led to liberation. 40 years later, the
French were kicked out. I think that when you look at the
individual countries, Pakistan, for example, Pakistan was part of
India. India was part under the British rule, the Hindus decided
to persecute the Muslims and the Brit they didn't know what to do.
Eventually, the Muslims managed to separate and establish the
inhibits. Establish the Independent State of Pakistan,
regardless what you think of Muhammad Ali Jinnah later on, I
know Pakistanis revere him or the like, but I think Muhammad, as it
in his book, argues that he was concerned that when the Saudis
sent him to help write the constitution, he felt the
Pakistanis were not too keen on Islamic rule or the policy makers
at the time, even if the people were. But regardless, Pakistan,
you look at its development and the upheaval, or the like we're
talking today about the potential normalization, and I said to you
that the Pakistanis are unlikely to accept there's a fear that the
Pakistan, because they love Islam, they love the Saudis, that hasn't
been ruined. And I think that Imran Khan is not something that
happened in a vacuum. The Imran Khan phenomenon came about, but.
Because the Pakistanis backed him, because they believe, rightly or
wrongly, is irrelevant. The Pakistanis believed that somebody
who was a Muslim ambassador on the global stage is worth fighting
for. When you speak to Pakistanis, why do you support Imran Khan?
They don't mention economy. They don't mention politics. They
mentioned he stood up for Muslim Rights against the superpowers.
Whether he did it or not, effectively is irrelevant. That's
what resonated for Pakistanis to take to the streets and provide
the greatest threat to the political establishment since
Pakistan's inception. The point here being is that people always
talk about big political movements, but I think what
they're more upset about, they're more upset that Allah has chosen a
course that's not the course that they wanted, that Allah has chosen
a course for the development of the Muslim political movement that
they don't want. And that's why I think sometimes that when you
remember that Allah is in control, and Allah rewards and punishes as
He wills, that Allah, subhanaw taala, sent Noah to his people,
and for over 900 years, he's calling to them, and he still
destroyed Noah's people. This is why, when the Prophet said, Shay
abut ni Hu Dara, the surah of Surat HUD, hashey Abani giving me
white hairs, because in Surat HUD, you see all the examples where
Allah reminds you that success comes from him. I sent Salah to
tamud and samoud didn't believe. I destroyed them. I sent hood to
add, and Allah destroyed him. Didn't listen to hood. I sent
Shuaib to median. Median didn't listen. I destroyed them one by
one, because Muhammad SAW Salim was realizing that Allah was
saying that I'm ready to destroy these people when I said the
message, the point here being is that I think that when you look at
the way the Israelis are approaching the Palestine issue,
the Israelis were convinced Palestine was dying. They were
convinced, or they are, they were convinced that they were on the
cusp of finally eradicating the Palestinians. Look at the mood
last week and compare it to the mood today. With regards to the
Palestinian cause, it's roaring, Muhammad, it's roaring even though
Israel is pummeling Gaza. It's roaring even though there is a
death toll in Gaza. Because everybody is saying that the cause
is alive, and it's been proven to us here. Because the reality is
that success doesn't come on your terms. The striving is on your
terms, whether you choose to strive or not. But the success
comes from Allah subhanahu wa he gave victory to the Prophet
Muhammad Sallallahu Salla, but not necessarily to the people of Nur.
And I think sometimes we Muslims need to appreciate that and remind
ourselves what is our ultimate goal here, which is Jannah. We are
travelers in this dunya. We go past this dunya to give dawah to
call people to what is right. And some people pay a heavier price
than others. Some people are prevented from going to capitals,
prevented from going to Mecca, Medina, prevented from going to
Cairo or the like, because they are calling out for that which is
good. Allah gives people different degrees of power. Somebody, his
only power is to retweet. And retweeting fixes the algorithm so
that the algorithm promotes the tweet so more people see it.
That's power. Some people are given positions of media platforms
where we can convey our messages, where you can bring Sammy to talk,
or bring Paul Williams or these other some people are blessed with
power over an army. Some people are blessed with foreign ministry.
Some people are blessed with everyone has their own individual
power. And that's why I think that, oh, when you look at the
Muslim ummah,
how 90 or 100 years after the Khilafah was toppled, after the
Ottoman Empire fell, when you look at how they didn't give up, the
text delivered, that's why Erdogan. So people say sometimes
Sami or soft and Erdogan, it's not the time soft and Erdogan. He
said, I appreciate the efforts of the Muslim community, who believed
in Allah, who feel the same way we do, who feel they belong to an
ummah. I appreciate the sacrifices they gave when they went to
prison, when they were tortured, when they were executed, when they
strived to teach the Quran, when they kept the Quran in its
language to teach the people, when they gave the Advent in Arabic,
when they would hide in their circles in order to teach Islam. I
appreciate that. I appreciate that the Erdogan is the latest in this
chapter to break the chains of atatek. I appreciate that I'm not
the one to come today to destroy it. I appreciate that in Pakistan,
for all of the efforts of the establishment to control the
Pakistani people and make them ignore Muslim causes, I appreciate
that despite Pakistan being in an economic crisis, they come out in
force for Palestine because they resonate with Al Quds and they
resonate with the Palestinians. I appreciate that the Bengalis who
have been persecuted, they're ulama, imprisoned, tortured. They
die in prison for the because they love Allah and they love the
Prophet Muhammad Sallallahu Sen. I appreciate that they in what we
call bleak they gave their lives and they gave their struggles for
it that despite Khalid azi and Sheik Hasina and these leaders in
power, the Bengalis come out in force to protect the honor of the
Prophet Muhammad sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, in huge numbers when
Macron is trying to defend it, to say anything but our beloved
prophet, Muhammad, sallAllahu, alayhi wa sallam. And that's why I
think sometimes, and I said it in the first podcast, I think
sometimes when Allah says, were entered Allah, that when you count
the blessings of Allah, you can't finish counting them. I think
those who say are bleak. They haven't started counting the
blessings of Allah. They have tried. When Lindsey Graham, the US
senator, says, this is a religious.
War. It's a religious war against Islam, because they believe we
believe that we are somehow being defeated. They believe that
despite all the efforts, colonization, the state of our
weaponry, we still can't quash this ideology. Sammy is born in
London, and he loves Allah, and His Prophet, Muhammad, lives in
London. He loves Allah and His Prophet. Abu Muslims are growing
in and they sympathize, which will Abraham and wants to ban the
waving of the Palestinian flag, because she said, How can these
people still resonate with that? And the reason they resonate and
I, and I tell Muslims to be careful here.
Allah subhanahu, WA Dutt, Wahab allahuma, do not turn our hearts
away from this Deen, after you have guided us, Wahab qarama and
bestow upon us Your Mercy, implying that you could be turned
away from this religion, implying that the ingratitude to Allah
subhanaw taala could lead you out of this religion, implying that
your lack of appreciation of Allah subhanaw taala could lead you out
of this religion. When the Prophet Muhammad, sallAllahu, sallam said
yamuqa ibn Qul sab kal bihadina And the Prophet knew he was the
what he knew her. He'd seen the seven heavens. He'd gone to Al
Aqsa, and he said, Allah, don't turn my heart away from this.
Deen, implying, yeah, Allah, I know that it's a blessing and a
mercy from you that I follow this. Deen, I know that it's not a
right. It's a privilege that you guided my heart and you put it
here. I think that the reaction of the Muslim should be Subhan,
Allah. I recognize your authority. I read Surat hood, and I know that
at any moment, you can destroy any population, as you will, Allah, I
know that you can deal with success to anybody that you will,
and as this is why sometimes, I always argue, from my own
political analysis, being involved in politics, being involved in
advising policy makers. I've been in this industry now for for over
a decade, and I've seen that policy makers, they don't know it
all. They don't they are just as confused often as you are. They
are just as clueless as you are, sometimes, and you realize there
are so many opportunities to turn the levers, to turn the ledgers. A
public opinion is making Vincent man backtrack on his rhetoric
regarding normalization. Public Opinion made Erdogan go back to
lambasting Israel after he did a humiliating stance where he was
like, we call for restraint, with making Erdogan back down because
of public opinion, because Allah has given every human being the
ability to make a difference. Those who say it's bleak are
people who don't know how to use that power, and that's why I think
sometimes it's less about what, where are these people, and where
are these political movements? And more about if it's not there,
started, if it's there, amplify it. What can you do within the
powers that Allah has given you? That's why sometimes you talk
about thinking Muslim Allah has blessed you. Muhammad, hundreds of
1000s of people are watching your videos. But why are they watching
your videos? They're watching because they believe that in these
videos they are receiving information and guidance on how
they can deploy their power. Allah has given you that power to do so
at the moment, that's your place within this ecosystem that we have
in order to try to promote these Islamic movements. And that's why
I think that sometimes, and I won't go on too long about it,
Muslims should be aware of the arrogance of the heart, the
arrogance that says that if I didn't do it, it's not good if I
didn't do it, it's not worth it. I look at, for example, in Pakistan,
and may the brothers Forgive me, because, because I know a lot of
them, when I look at Jami had Islami, for example, and their
silence on Imran Khan, I think a lot of that silence, and I know
they would be very angry with me on this, I think a lot of their
silence is that we spent decades being the Muslim representatives.
How dare an ampstar like Imran Khan come and suddenly take the
leadership away from us? I think that the reality is that we should
be wary of this arrogance of the heart, which suggests that I have
to be on the podium. And that's why I think that Allah, Subhanahu
wa, if you think about it, the greatest thing you can give to
Allah is the sacrifice, not the goal. The Prophets didn't manage
to convince all of their people, only a few managed to convince
Allah didn't reward them for the number of people they managed to
win over to Allah. Allah rewarded them because they kept going even
when it looked bleak. We have duas in the Quran where the prophet
saying, Yeah, Allah, have had enough for them. I had enough for
them. Canada, far you see some AMITA no hen Surat nor is
describing how much he's tried to convince them, and in the end, he
says, Forget it. They are. They are useless. The prophets are, but
Allah is rewarding them for their striving and their effort. And
that's why I think that sometimes, to answer your question, I know
that it looks bleak, but I promise you that those who stand against
the Muslims do not believe we're in a bleak position. We might
think that we are becoming a defeated people. But I promise
you, in Washington, they don't think Muslims are becoming a
defeated people. In Washington, they're debating, why is it that
after 90 years of top down secularism, after 90 years of
giving them raves, of spreading alcohol, of bringing them girls in
bikinis, of giving them beaches and giving them financing and IMF
loans and the like. Why is it after 90 years, they still vote
for Islamic leaning parties? They consider that a failure. Why is it
that Erdogan wins election after election, not because of the
economy, but because people are terrified that the other side is
anti Islamic? Let's be blunt here. Erdogan won the last election, not
because of the economy. Erdogan won the last election.
Because Muslims were terrified. The other party was anti Islamic.
This is in Turkey, which is considered the king of secularism.
And this is why I think that sometimes for Muslims, when
Muslims talk about the bleak future, the reality is that, look,
you are the only one who sees it bleak. You are the only one who
thinks we are being defeated. Everybody else thinks we're in
descendancy. Everybody else thinks we're not being extinguished.
Everybody else is trying. The French are saying, how on earth
why we are? We are the civilizing mission. Why do they still hold on
to these principles? Why is it that when we went into countries
in Africa, they didn't adopt our religion or our values, but when
Islam entered, it never left. Islam entered Algeria in the seven
hundreds, it never left. When the Algerians celebrated liberation.
They didn't say, we are celebrating the Algerian state.
They yelled, Ya Muhammad, Mabrouk, Alik Al Jazeera, Raja, aliq, Ya
Muhammad, Prophet Muhammad. SallAllahu, sallam,
congratulations. Algeria has been returned to you. That's how the
ideology penetrated the heart and stayed there. And that's why Ibn
Khaldun says a civilization is not destroyed when it is physically
destroyed. Is destroyed when it's mentally destroyed, it's destroyed
when it's psychology is destroyed. And that's what colonizers are so
angry about that. Why is it it still stays in these hearts? Why
is it more Europeans are becoming Muslims? Why is it more Americans
are becoming Muslims. Why is it that when these scholars go to
debate Christians in the Spencer show, I don't know his full name
or the like, why is it that I can that the Christian identifies more
with Muslims nowadays? It's because the message is
resoundingly clear, because it's a message that didn't come from you
who thinks it's bleak, not you specifically, but But you who
thinks it's bleak. It came from Allah subhanahu wa, taala, master
of the seven heavens and the earth, who decides what he wishes,
does what he wants when he wants. And the greatest honor is in not
telling Allah. This is the course you should do. The honor is Ya
Allah, keep me on this Deen, and let me be the vehicle through
which you express your will. This is the greatest honor. The way I
see it is the Muslim promise to finish on this point. The way I
see it is this, the Muslim who says it's bleak, look at what you
can do
if you if you have the ability to share or retweet somebody in a
brain in a higher position of power. Do it. If you can go pray
in the mosque. Do it. People who notice Muslims going in and out,
and they start asking the question, Who are these Muslims
going out? If you can go and organize the stars, go and
organize their stars. Give dawah. Give dawah woman as there is no
better speech than one who calls to Allah subhanahu wa sometimes
like to lash out at people, but we forget, and this is why I brought
this point about Rabban Allah to zikulu banner. If you appreciate
that ALLAH blessed you with guidance and that he can take this
guidance away, you will take care of your guidance much more. You
will start looking at your guidance and saying, How can I
show my appreciation for this guidance? And the way you show the
appreciation is to try to guide other people. To say, Allah, I
love your message, so I'm going to say it so to answer your question
briefly, and I promise I'm going to finish on this point. To answer
your question briefly, when I look at Turkey, when I look at
Pakistan, when I look at the proliferation of mosques in the
UK, when I look at the defiance of the Muslims in France that they
are still growing despite the crackdown on France, when I see
Malaysia and how it preserves its Muslim identity, when I see that
China is concerned about the growth of Islam in China, when I
see that African nations are increasingly turning to Islam
because they see it as a liberating religion. When I see
that Mali resonates more with Turkey because of the Muslim
connection than it does with France, with which it speaks the
same language. When I see that Senegal Turkey, within the space
of five years, has almost pushed France out as a result of the
Muslim connection, not because Turkey is superior to France. When
I see all of this, I would be a fool and an ingrate to turn around
and say, Yeah, Allah, your religion is looking bleak. Sama
Hamdi, I may Allah, protect you and may Allah reward you and
accept from you and I and from all of us,
please remember to subscribe to our social media and YouTube
channels and head over to our website, thinkinmuslim.com to sign
up to my weekly newsletter to zakala.