Sami Hamdi – Gaza Understanding the Houthis & Will US Muslims Abandon Biden
AI: Summary ©
The Israelii-Al conflict has caused political and economic warfare, leading to deaths and criminal violence. The conflict has caused a shift in public opinion and a potential conflict between the United States and Iran. Islam has a historical and cultural context, including the loss of Biden and the use of religion to obtain political concessions. The legion of Islam in Algeria, including its impact on political environments, is discussed.
AI: Summary ©
Israel is struggling to tell the world that killing 10,000 babies
is a justified and proportionate response to October 7. The
Americans are the ones, ironically, who rescued the
Houthis from defeat. I think that what Netanyahu wants from
Hezbollah is for Hassan sallallah to say, jihad, let's go. There are
back channels that have opened up between Iran and the United
States. So Blinken not to reign in Israel. Blinken wants to rescue
the genocide and ethnic cleansing and abdominals who they said, Gaza
is a fitna. Don't talk about issues that you don't know.
Muslims, mathematically and politically, have the power, in my
opinion, to punish Biden. The Democrats are gambling that the
comfort of the American life will be enough to deter Muslims from
compromising that for the sake of punishing Biden for the genocide
that he's done. The chicken doesn't automatically lay down and
die. Sometimes it runs around, you know, with it's within a headless
chicken, headless chicken. And remember, and I promise, this is
what I finish.
We have now passed three months of the Gaza slaughter, and according
to the United Nations, Gaza has become uninhabitable. During these
past few days, we have seen another frenetic series of
diplomatic meetings by US Secretary of State, Antony
Blinken, in the region, as the US looks to consolidate the status
quo the genocidal intent of the Israeli state, if it was unclear
at the start of the conflict, it is pretty clear now that the US
has given the green light to the Israelis to mete out their
punishment. The Arab and Muslim states have, it seems, mostly
acquiesced with the United States. In public, they condemn, whereas
in private, they look the other way, or in the case of Egypt,
conspire with the US and Israel to make sure Gaza's resistance is
erased. We have, however, seen signs that can be interpreted as
further escalation. The Houthis in Yemen have now accosted over 20
ships in the Red Sea and on Lebanon's Lebanon's southern
border, there remains an active engagement with Israeli soldiers
to help us understand the complexities of the current
crisis. I have invited Sami Hamdi back into the studio. Sami is the
director of the international interest a risk advisory. Just a
quick reminder, please remember to subscribe to the channel, and if
you want to support our work, sign up to our Patreon. Sami Hamdi,
Assalamu alaikum, warahmatullahi, and welcome that back to the
thinking having been back Sami, it's great to have you with us
now. A lot has happened since the last time we spoke about the
terrible situation in Gaza, and the situation continues. We're now
into the third month of this crisis. Today, I want to focus on
some of what the commentators regard as being an escalation
since we last met, a newer front has opened up, that of the hoofies
in the Red Sea. The US has mustered together what they call a
global coalition to police one of the most important waterways in
the world in terms of trade. Is this a substantial front, you
think? And is Iran behind that activity? I think that first and
foremost, it's important to highlight two things. The first is
that the US announced that it is trying to set up a coalition of
more than 20 countries. But when it tried to set up this coalition,
France withdrew, Spain withdrew, Australia withdrew, and so did
other countries, and not even Saudi Arabia and the UAE joined
this coalition. You would have thought they would given that they
are the ones who are also badly affected by what's happening in
the Red Sea. And of course, they have their reasons, which we'll go
into later on. I think what the Houthis have done, and I say this
reluctantly, given the damage that they've done in Yemen, given that
they are now in their seventh war to achieve hegemony for a select
family, because they believe only a family has a divine right to
rule Yemen, they're in their seventh war to try to achieve
that. Nevertheless, the Houthi missiles on the Red Sea have had a
sweeping impact on international trade in my own capacity as a risk
consultant for corporate clients around the world, all of my work
for the past two weeks has been about the Red Sea, about whether
ships should go through or not, and nearly every single client
I've spoken to has decided to redirect their ships away from the
Red Sea because they believe the US does not have the capacity to
restore security in that Red Sea area, given the US is unable to
convince even its own allies to join that particular coalition.
That's around Africa. It's a it's going around half week journeys.
Some have even set the ships back and said there's no point in even
going around Africa because it's too expensive. But the point is
that, and this is why there's talking about land corridors
through Saudi Arabia or turkey announcing today, at the time of
the recording, that they're going to be building a railway from the
far port, which is in bustline Iraq, to go through to connect
Iraq to Turkey, but the or turkey, so the Turks don't get upset. But
the point is that when it comes to what the Houthis have done,
they've had a siasmic impact in terms of the course of the war,
not necessarily because they've made.
Wish to apply significant pressure on the Israelis, albeit they have,
there has been a significant reduction in the ships that are
arriving on the Israeli ports because they always go through the
Suez Canal. But more so in demonstrated the limited options
of the United States in its ability to enforce or impose
itself as the linchpin of the global order, the inability of the
US to discipline a militia in northern Yemen that is firing
rockets on the Red Sea speaks volumes of how US power has
generally declined, and also the perception of the US amongst its
own allies, that the US should no longer lead the way, which brings
back memories of Macron calling NATO brain dead of Europe, trying
to pursue its own policy. Essentially, what the Houthis have
demonstrated more than anything else, is the inability of the US
to rally the world's opinion behind its cause in the way that
it was able to do once upon a time, on Afghanistan, on Iraq,
even if public opinion was again still they managed to establish an
international coalition. So I think this front is significant,
but at the same time, it's also limited in that one of the reasons
why the nations won't join the US is not because they believe that
the US is incapable or the US is not worth supporting. Nor does it
indicate they believe in a future where the US is not the linchpin.
Rather, it's because they believe that the problem is not the
Houthis. They believe the problem is not the rockets in the Red Sea.
They believe the rockets in the Red Sea will stop when Biden
reigns in Netanyahu. They believe that as soon as the genocide and
ethnic cleansing attempt stops in Gaza, ships can go through the Red
Sea once more. And that's why, I think for France, which is already
called for a ceasefire, I think for Spain, which has already
announced that it's already to recognize a Palestinian state, I
think, for Saudi Arabia, which is trying to sign a peace deal with
the Houthis so that bin Salman can focus on vision 2030 I think for
the UAE, which doesn't want rockets to be fired on Abu Dhabi.
Again, all of them collectively are in agreement that if the issue
was a security one, we will join the international coalition. But
it's not. It's a stubbornness on the part of the Americans who
refuse to reign in Netanyahu. And therefore, while you've described
it as a new front, they see it as a symptom that has opened up and
that can be easily remedied by bringing about an end to what's
happening in Gaza. What's the connection between a Houthis and
the Iranians when it comes to these actions in the Red Sea? I
think there is often a lazy assumption that the Houthis are
the Iranians run the Houthis by remote control. I think that while
that can largely be said to be true in Iran's relationship with
the Iraqi militias, in Iran's relationship with the militias in
Syria, in Iran's and I'll have set many Lebanese by saying this in
Iran's relationship with Hezbollah, you'll note, for
example, that Hassan assala did not intervene in Syria until the
Iranians told him to cross over to break the back of the free Syria
Army. And Hassan assala Allah said, I obey, and I obey. And he
went, and he crossed over and he broke the back of the Syrians who
were trying to topple Bashar Al Assad's regime that has committed
its own massacres in Syria or the like. I think that when it comes
to Iran, Iran's relationship with the Houthis is one of mutual
respect. There certainly is a hierarchy where Iran's interests
do take priority. We saw that the Houthis pulled off on offensives
that they believe to be of paramount importance for context,
there is a province in Yemen called has a lot of oil. It's near
the areas where the Houthis control. The Houthis. In order to
achieve autonomy, they need to take matter, because it's the only
way they were able to have resource autonomy. Otherwise, if
they get autonomy in the lands they have now, they will be
dependent upon Saudi Arabia to the north and dependent upon a
southern state that might emerge with the support of the UAE and
backed by the Israelis, who've already established military bases
in some of the islands, when the Houthis believe matter to be of
paramount importance, when the Iranians asked them to hold off
because now they were talking to the Saudis, Houthis pulled off at
the request of the Iran So there certainly is a hierarchy, but
there is also mutual respect between the two. And the reason
why I highlight the word mutual respect is because the dynamics of
that relationship does not exist between Saudi or any of its
allies. Does not exist between UAE and any of its allies. The
relation between Saudi and its allies is about paychecks, and
even when they give the paycheck, they find their allies betray them
later on with the Houthis and the Iranians, it's a mutual respect
based on an ideological conviction that resembles very closely to the
12 e thought, which is that we are collectively beit who are fighting
together for the revenge of Al Hussein and to re establish some
and they believe that wholeheartedly, and that results
in a commonality between them. That means the Houthis willingly
aligned themselves with Iranian interest, which is why I think the
Americans themselves acknowledge that the solution to the Red Sea
is not to talk to Tehran because Tehran doesn't have the power to
get the Houthis to stop. I think that this is a unilateral action
as well on the part of the Houthis that the Iranians are supporting,
but not something the Iranians have ordered, because the Houthis,
ideologically, do believe.
Palestine. Ideologically, they do believe in Raza. And somebody you
know, you see some comments sometimes they say the Houthis are
doing it for popularity and for show. I think that's true to some
extent. I think they are aware
that their popularity is soaring in the Muslim world that has no
idea why Yemen plunged into war in the first place, that believes
somehow that it was because the Saudis started bombing Yemen. I'm
not defending the Saudis here, but I'm saying as a result of an ummah
that does not pay attention to the affairs of the other limbs of the
Ummah, as a result of their ignorance of what's happening in
the Ummah and the intricate details they are led to very
simplistic conclusions, such as in this case, that Houthis are good
because they are supporting Palestinian Gaza. The Houthis do
support Palestinian Gaza. They took on that action. They do
believe that it will help them in public opinion. But in the words
of Muhammad Ali and Houthi, he made a good point. He said, If you
say, we're doing it for popularity and public opinion, why don't you
do the same thing and get public opinion and popularity instead,
why don't you they say, masrahi, are you doing it for sure? Okay,
at least you do a show, then you're not doing anything at the
moment, at least do a show. But I also think the Houthis have a
conviction. Again, I say it reluctantly, because I know how
much Yemenis have suffered in those seven wars that are designed
to establish a rule in which national consensus is less than
the word of abdomen Houthi. But nevertheless, they are doing it
for reasons that they believe are for Philistine are for they
believe one day it is the Shias turn to take over Mecca Medina,
that there should be a Shia liberation of Al Aqsa that might
upset some people listening. But this is their belief, that they
are the ones entitled to it. Khomeini once said in his book, he
said, Allah gave the caliphate to the Kurds, to the Arabs, to the
Turks, and this is the time now for the Persians, for our line of
thought, to do so, but in terms of to answer your question directly,
even though it sounds like you said, Where's your ear? And I did
that, the point is that the Iranians are supportive,
sympathetic, but Houthis do have agency, and this is largely
governed by their own desires. The hoofies are probably in control of
most of Yemen now, and at this stage, the United States has not
attacked the hoofies on Yemeni soil. There has been a sinking of
a hoofy vessel in recent in recent days, and very some discussion
about maybe escalating to mainland Yemen. I mean, how plausible Do
you think that is on behalf of us? And would that count as a further
escalation? I think that when it comes to Houthi control over
Yemen, I don't think they control most of Yemen, or perhaps even
half of Yemen. I think that there is this, what? Second largest city
is still under a blockade from the Houthis, yeah, Havana moat, the
large province in the east is being fought over by Saudi and
UAE, not by the Houthis. It's by Saudi groups and pro UAE groups
who are fighting over control of Havana mod the UAE want to include
it in a southern state of Yemen. The Saudis don't want to because
they don't trust the Emiratis, and they want to maintain an access
way through Havre mode down towards the sea that bypasses Bab
Al mendab, where the Houthis are firing those missiles in the Red
Sea. They want a way to bypass by land the threat of the Houthis, I
think that one of the reasons that the Americans are less inclined to
go enter a front against the Yemenis, or against the Houthis in
Yemen, is for a number of reasons. The first is it's worth noting
that when the Houthis toppled the internationally recognized
government, when they stormed into Sanaa in 2015 when the Yemeni
parties came together, Ali Abdullah Saleh in Yemen is toppled
by a popular revolution, albeit slightly nudged by the Saudis and
the like, who were worried that the Arab Spring was spreading,
Yemeni parties come together. Saudis think this time we won't
make the mistake like Egypt and the like. Let's get the parties
together, get them to have an agreement and move forward from
there. So all the parties, including the Houthis, they come
together for a national dialog. The Houthis had just been defeated
in their sixth attempt to launch a war in order to establish
themselves. So they were in Sada, in northern Yemen, essentially,
you know, suffering from the Yemeni army, who were pushing in
and closing in. The Yemeni army withdrew. The Qataris believed it
was a good idea to get the Houthis on board with this national
dialog. Everybody. Dialog. Everybody said, Okay, let the
Houthis participate. During those two years of negotiations, the
Houthis engaged in the process. They engaged in the discussions
while retaking control of sada and the other states in the north,
removing the other factions and remnant factions of the Army,
regaining their control over the stronghold. When eventually got
close to signing the national dialog agreement, which all Yemeni
parties and civil societies were about to sign, the Houthis at that
point, had finally recovered their strength and they decided to pull
out of the national dialog. There was a bit of skirmishes here, and
there a few assassinations here and there, and the Houthis said,
we're leaving. We're not going to be part of this national dialog.
The Houthis eventually allied with the former dictator Ali Abdullah
Saleh, who was livid that he'd been toppled by his people after
ruling for more than 20 years. Ali Abdullah Saleh gave them access to
the army the Houthis. They marched out of sada. They took Johan
ammaran in the north. Johan Amaran fell very easily because the
tribes there were worried. They didn't know if the Saudis felt who
was worse, Iwan or Houthis. They were worried. They said maybe
they've.
You prefer the Houthis over Ikhwan? So we're not going to go
and rescue Ikhwan. We're not going to rescue the parties. Houthis
strolled into Johan am they entered the capital. They stormed
the capital, and they went in. When they went into the capital,
and they toppled the internationally recognized
government. There was a very naive view amongst those of the national
dialog that the Americans would rescue the internationally
recognized government, that the Americans would back a democratic
process. Democratic process, that they would back the national
dialog, or the like. Instead, John Kerry is on record as saying that
the Houthis can be viable allies in the fight against terrorism,
suggesting an incalation to work with the Houthis. Not only that,
the Houthis were seen as an extension of Iran, and the
Democrats are heavily in favor of an Iran deal of a negotiation with
Iran, which is why Obama in 2014 2015 one of the concessions he
made to Iran was to incorporate the Iranian militias, the pro Iran
militias in Iraq, into the Iraqi army, effectively handing over the
Iraqi army to the Iranians in exchange for a deal at peace.
Because the Democrats believe the problem is Saudi, not Iran, and
that Iran is just reacting to what the Saudis are doing themselves.
The reason why I mentioned that context is to bring it back to
this point. Do the Americans really want to fight the Houthis?
Do they really believe that the Houthis are such a horrible entity
that they should enter Yemen to fight? Or do they believe the
Houthis, as they suggested in 2014 could be a viable ally for the
Americans as part of this framework of cooperation with the
Iranians under the idea of an Iranian deal. That's why the
Americans have no interest in reigniting a war in Yemen by going
after the Houthis on Yemeni territory, especially at a time
when the Houthis and Saudis are about to sign a peace agreement in
Muscat to in order to ensure that deal. So I think the Americans
don't have an appetite to attack the Houthis. On the ground, the
Americans are struggling to get international support to attack
the Houthis in the Red Sea itself. Think about ijele, a ragtag group
of militias. From the perspective of the Americans, the Houthis have
survived nine years of bombardment. I will no longer call
them ragtag, I'll be honest,
but the Americans, America, Wama adrak America, is struggling to
contain a ragtag militia in Yemen from firing missiles into the Red
Sea, which so when you ask the question, will they go into Yemen
and start bombing the Houthi position if you can't even prevent
those rocket attacks, what makes you think you're capable of a
campaign inside Yemen itself and reigniting not only that, here's
the third point I want to make. You're so close to elections, why
would you send your boys to fight abroad in a war where the American
people are not in support for and you know historically that the
more American soldiers die, the faster you fall in the polls, and
the less likely you're going to win an election. So you see all of
these dynamics suggest that the Americans won't go into Yemen and
won't go bombard the Houthi, having said that Allah is the only
one who knows the unknown, this is an analysis of the dynamics that
we see before us, seeing Biden's stubbornness on Israel, seeing the
way that he's adamantly refusing the advice of those around him
that this is becoming a disaster and he needs to act to reigning
the Israelis, given his very pro Zionist ideals. It's not far
fetched, maybe a 1% chance that Biden says, Forget it, go in and
attack the Yemenis either. Let's just go for it, because I love the
Israelis more than I love anybody else. But that's the general
point, and that I don't think the Americans have any appetite or
desire or even in the past. One thing worth noting here is and I
know I've gone on about this point, but I'm doing this to
encourage people to read about Yemen. So they finally open and
they read about what happened in 2018 the Houthis were on the back
foot. The UAE and Saudi Arabia finally decided to do a concerted
push to push back against the hood. This is before the UAE
changed its mind and decided to go for separatism. They pushed the
Houthis back to Huda. For those who don't know the map, Hodeida is
not too far from the capital, Sanaa. It's the port city, but if
they had taken Hodeida, Sana is cut off from the sea, they can
blockade Sana and kick the Houthis out and restore the
internationally recognized government. When Hodeidah was
about to fall, it was the Americans and the United Nations
that rushed in and stopped the forces from kicking out the
Houthis. There was a sort of unusual panic on the part of the
Americans that said, Wait a minute. Do we really want the
Houthis to be defeated in Hodeida? And therefore they rescued the
Houthis from the cusp of defeat and dragged the internationally
recognized government by the collar to negotiations in
Stockholm. The Houthis spent the period of negotiations, re
entrenching and rearming themselves. They went to
Stockholm. They signed an agreement. Khalid aliamani, the
foreign minister at the time, held up the hands of the Houthis, and
he said, We are brothers. This was just a civil strife, and we're
ready for peace. As soon as the UN went into Hodeidah to implement
the agreement, the Houthis opened fire on the on the on the UN
convoys and the like, and the Houthis went back to war again.
The point here being is 2018. Was a turning point for many people,
where people began to say, are the Americans truly against the
Houthis, or are the Americans in favor? Essentially, you're working
with whoever is willing to work with them. And that's why many
people say that the Americans are the ones, ironically, who rescued
the Houthis from defeat. And the reason why I say that so people
say, What's why?
You bring all this stuff in. The reason why, I said is to answer
your question, Americans believe there is a capacity to work with
the Houthis. They've always believed there's a capacity to
work with the Houthis. They also believe the Houthis are reacting
to ghaza and are not inherently against the Americans. Therefore,
there's no need to go into Yemen, given that's not a symptom, not
the disease we deal with ghaza, the Houthis will fall in line from
your analysis, it seems that in many ways, the United States,
despite the fact that at one stage, the Saudis were fighting
the Houthis at a very ferocious rate. I mean, they were carpet
bombing parts of Yemen, and we know that it caused immense
destruction across the country, the United States was, in a way,
supporting, or at least semi supporting, the Houthis, and
enabling them, at least to remain in control of swaves of Yemen
explained that. Untangle that in my mind, you know, Saudi Arabia,
strongest ally of American region. Saudi Arabia is fighting the
Houthis, yet America is playing this, this double game in in
supporting Saudi, Saudi opponents, especially, I mean, 2018 we're
talking about Trump's era, right? So, you know, the Republican Party
were extremely close to the Saudis. Explain that to me, I
don't think it's necessarily that the Americans have any love for
the Houthis or the Iranians, right? Or that the Americans
really care about what happens in Yemen. I think a lot of it had to
do with the manner Saudi went about Yemen. They did it in such a
way that nobody could defend it. They went in, let's put it
bluntly, the Saudis did not go in to rescue the international
recognized government. Saudis went in because they were terrified. If
the Houthis take over Sana'a, then they are effectively encircled by
the Iranians, which we've talked about in other Shia crescent, the
Shia crescent. Shia Crescent mainly goes towards Syria,
Lebanon. This is more a pincer that goes around that locks this
the Saudis in. So Saudis were terrified. So they said, We need
this internationally recognized government, and we need to restore
it, because they are better than the Houthis. We thought the
Houthis were okay. They made a deal with the Houthis in 2009
anybody can look at the damage agreement. Then the Houthis, of
course, reneged on it, and then eventually they ended up into war,
and the Saudis panicked when they saw the Houthis. The Houthis, by
the way, they got to the gates of Aden in the south in a very short
period of time. If they had taken Aden in the south, or Aden, I
think there's an English, English way of saying it, then they would
have taken over essentially all of Yemen, or most of Yemen, and they
would have been a de facto rule. Saudis intervened when the Houthis
got to the gates of Adam. They were hesitant before them. I don't
think it's that the Americans care what happens to Yemen, or that
they care about the Houthis, or even that they care about the
Saudis. I think it was more the fact that there was so much
international attention on what was happening in Yemen because of
the tactics the Saudis used. The Saudis demonstrated that they
really didn't really care about the Yemenis at all, as you said,
they were carpet bombing. They were destroying hospitals. They
were destroying and even those who support the internationally
recognized government started to become very uncomfortable. Yes,
Saudi is the ally of the internationally recognized
government, but is this really the only way you guys have in order to
rescue the international recognized government? And that's
why they ended up turning on the Saudis themselves. The Saudis
created this mood where even charity organizations, whenever
they would talk about Yemen, would never mention the Houthi coup or
what the Houthis did. They would only mention what Saudi Arabia was
doing, and legitimately so, because the Saudi carnage and
destruction in Yemen was so much that even to have a discussion as
to why the Saudis were in the first place became irrelevant.
Because people said, Okay, who just did a coup? But that doesn't
mean you have to do very similar to talk about ghaza and Israel in
terms of what Israel is doing in Gaza in response to October 7. But
the reason why I say this that for the Americans, it's very
pragmatic. 2018 Yes, Trump was in power, but Trump was also trying
to renegotiate the Iranian deal. In the beginning, Trump, when he
came in, when he tore up the Iran deal, he didn't say, I'm doing it
because I want to go to war with Iran. He said, I'm doing it to
negotiate a better deal with Iran. And that's why it's quite
fascinating that Trump, although he was considered to be an ally of
the Saudis and UAE, and was seen to be somebody who would enable
them to unleash against Iran, the reality is he really did, aside
from assassinated Qassem Soleimani, it's hard to and Qassem
Soleimani was a reaction to Iranian militias. It wasn't Trump
goading them, it was Qassem Suleiman. You're organizing the
Iraqi militias, the Iranian militias, going into Baghdad in
the green zone, storming the US Embassy. And Trump said, Whoa,
guys, you've gone too far. How can you humiliate me on the public
stage like you, you, you, you humiliate me. I have to humiliate
you. And you want and then it sort of toned down after that. But the
the point I'm making is that with the Americans in Yemen, it's not
that they have a strategy. They have no strategy in Yemen, but
what they are aware of, they don't believe that their interests lie
in a complete victory for one party over the other. They don't
believe that this internationally recognized government is worth
rescuing, and they don't believe the Houthis are necessarily a bad
that it's a bad thing if the Houthis win either. And that's
why, when they saw the opportunity in 2018 to negotiate a peace. They
felt it was a way to reassert themselves on an issue that they
felt they were losing control over because the Saudis were shutting
them out because the Iranians were no longer negotiating on the Iran
deal, it was their way of reasserting themselves, and they
brokered a Stockholm deal agreement that ended up collapsing
within a year. So let's talk about the.
Yeah, this idea that there may be further escalation. So you've
settled the issue of of the Houthis and the seriousness of the
potential for that to to escalate. Recently, there was a killing of
Saleh al Auri by an Israeli, Israeli drone in southern Beirut.
And again, this is raised for specter of Hezbollah retaliation,
as we know that Hezbollah in effect, for Defoe, de facto
security operators of Lebanon,
yet we haven't seen any substantial moves by Hezbollah
since the assassination of this Hamas leader. How do you interpret
that? I think, to put it bluntly, Hezbollah knows full well that the
assassination of Salih on Lebanese territory is designed to provoke
Hezbollah into an all out war that will lock in the Americans into
the conflict. Because Netanyahu is concerned, the Americans are no
longer as committed as they were yesterday. You'll note that the
aircraft carrier that was sent to the Mediterranean has been
withdrawn, or was withdrawn the day before Salah al Rudi was
assassinated in Lebanon itself. The Israelis are concerned that
American patience is running out, that the Americans are no longer
as keen on the genocide and ethnic cleansing in they were in the way
they were on the first day. And they are concerned that pressure
is being brought to bear on the Israelis in order to stop the
genocide and ethnic cleansing, and Netanyahu believes that that will
result in an end to the war. And the only way to prolong the war is
to expand it. And that's why I think, and I know it sounds very
strange to say it, I think that what Netanyahu wants from
Hezbollah is for Hassan SallAllahu to say, jihad, let's go. We're
going into because that will mean that will make their conflict more
profitable or more easier to market to the world right now.
Think about it.
People are not sympathizing with the Palestinian cause. People are
sympathizing with the Palestinians. People are not
sympathizing with the rights of the Palestinians to go back to
their land. Yet it's important distinction. They're sympathizing
with the plight of the Palestinians because they believe
regardless of the issue, so they're not making a determination
on the issue these these people now who are now talking about
Palestine, they're not saying Palestinians now should be allowed
to go back to their land. They're saying, whatever the issue between
Palestine and Israel is Palestinians don't deserve to be
killed in this manner. That's a very important distinction to
make. Why? Because it answers this question. Israel is struggling to
tell the world that killing 10,000 babies is a justified and
proportionate response to October 7, but when you flip that script
and say that the mullahs of Hezbollah are now crossing over
Lebanon and invading Israel against us. It becomes much easier
for Israel to market to the world that it is, once again, the victim
against these very dangerous Arabs who are coming in because they
want to commit genocide against the Jews. Hezbollah is well aware
of that, and Netanyahu is well aware of it, which is why
Netanyahu what he wants. And I know this is going to sound quite
horrific to say, and this is very difficult for me to say, what
Netanyahu believes is that, if things continue on their current
course, the window for his genocide is closing. France is no
longer sympathetic. Belgium has already called for sanctions.
Spain has already called for recognition on Palestinian state.
David Cameron has said the casualties are not worth. What
Israel shouldn't be. Should take more care, and what Israel has
done is not proportionate. We've seen, for example, the whole
global public opinion has shifted. We saw in the last un vote that
everybody except the US and a couple of three, four countries
that are essentially US states, everybody voted against the
Israelis. Netanyahu knows his window is closing. Domestic
criticism is getting louder. In Israel itself, we've seen former
heads of intelligence coming out and saying Netanyahu has no
strategy. Netanyahu has compromised Israeli security.
Netanyahu needs to go. There are protests in Tel Aviv, 1000s of
people asking for Netanyahu to go. We're seeing Biden fall in the
polls, and the Democrats panic about their prospects for the
elections. And Netanyahu believes that if things continue as they
are now, the window of opportunity for genocide and ethnic cleansing
is closing, and he believes that Blinken visit to the Middle East
is a last gasp effort to expand that window in order to try to win
more time for Netanyahu to make a last ditch effort to bomb the
Palestinians into swarming onto the Rafah border on Egypt and
enter Egypt itself. And Sisi is saying absolutely not nobody
crosses unless they pay $9,000 to cross the border. But nobody
crosses this border. I'm not taking in those particular
Palestinians. So Netanyahu has deduced that, given that that
window is closing, given the public opinion is turning, given
the Americans are hesitating, the only way he can extend this war is
to try to provoke Iran and Hezbollah into an open conflict
that will force the Americans to send in troops against.
Is Allah that will make the whole narrative change from Palestinians
being killed to these Muslims coming in and want to commit
genocide against the Jews or the like Netanyahu believes this is
the only way to do so, and that's why Hassan as Allah, and again,
you asked me the question to analyze it. I'm not giving a
judgment. I'm not talking morally. I'm talking amorally, just
analyzing the dynamics or the like Hassan, a Salah, has deduced, I
will not give Netanyahu what he wants. I will not give him an open
war. Because we have a saying in Arabic. He's a deacon with boy. He
is the chicken. You know, when you when you sacrifice a chicken, the
chicken doesn't automatically lay down and die. Sometimes it runs
around. You know, with, it's with headless chicken. Headless Chicken
having English as well. So headless chicken that Netanyahu
knows he is the one in trouble, and that's why Hassan doesn't
enter an open I know that sounds cold and dark, given that people
will say, what Sami is effectively saying is that we're getting close
to the number of acceptable Palestinians to be killed. That
may be one way to interpret it, but what I'm saying is, if these
Iranian proxies respond to Netanyahu provocations, I think
whereas the war might end in two weeks with a ceasefire, Netanyahu
will get an additional six months with US troops going in, and that
might eventually, eventually plunge the whole region into a
crisis or so when Blinken says, I'm going there to make sure The
conflict doesn't spread. He means it in a dark way, but I agree with
him in so far as Netanyahu, he doesn't believe it this way, but
this is the way I would say the same statement, but means
something different, that Netanyahu wants to open new fronts
in the war, because, as it stands, his political future is about to
go up in flames, and he's looking for any desperate attempt now to
find a way to survive, and he believes the only way to do that
is to provoke by committing assassinations on Lebanese
territory, to force Hezbollah to respond. When they didn't respond,
they they assassinated a Hezbollah commander. Hezbollah still didn't
respond. They kept it as it is. I think that while people are
looking to and saying, Why is Hezbollah not doing anything? I
think Netanyahu is in his office going, why won't these guys
respond? Really? Because I'm in trouble here. So Sami, what you
say there seems to imply that Hassan Nasrallah strategist, he's
showing restraint because he doesn't want to give Netanyahu
what he wants from from his conflict. Is that how we should
interpret
nasrallahs intentions here? Absolutely not. I think the main
reason why Hassan assala doesn't want to escalate is because he
believes he doesn't have the capacity to escalate. It's
important to remember that before the the events of October 7, Iran
was pursuing de escalation in the region. They were pursuing
rapprochement with Saudi Arabia. They were looking to entrench the
Houthis. They were looking to make to try to get Assad rehabilitated.
One of the concessions they demanded of Muhammad bin Salman
was that he brings back the Saudi Crown Prince, was that he brings
back Assad into the Arab League. The Iranians were not looking for
confrontation because they were tired and they believed their
resources were stretched. They don't believe they have the
capacity in order to pressure the Israelis. And one of the reasons
that it is alleged that Israel began its grand offensive, you'll
remember the beginning there was a lot of hesitation of Israel doing
so, is because, according to a Reuters article, three days before
Israel launched his grand invasion, Hania, the head of the
Hamas Politburo, went to Tehran to ask for further assistance. And
the quote is that Khamenei said to him, You didn't consult us, you
didn't ask us. You didn't tell us this was going to happen. This is
the maximum you're going to get from us, which is a bit of
skirmishes on the border in order to show some strength to the
Israelis, to try to limit the worst of it. And the Israelis and
the Americans got wind of it through spies, or whatever it is.
They got wind of the conversation. Israelis said, aha. Okay, so this
is the maximum Iran is going to do. Let's go in for the ground
invasion. And that's why Hassan as Allah, has been humiliated time
and time again in that he keeps talking about red lines. Israel
keep violate, violating those red lines, and Hassan, as does
nothing. So I think it's less about strategic genius or the
like. It's much more that they don't have the capacity to do so,
and that's why Netanyahu is trying to aggressively provoke them into
a position where, even though they don't have the capacity, they have
no choice but to retaliate to the Israelis, which is why they went
straight inside Lebanon to attack salah, to attack and to also kill
Hezbollah commanders, to say to them, okay, you might not have the
capacity, but come at me anyway, and that's what they're trying. So
it's not about strategic genius, it's more that they didn't want to
get involved, and Anna Tina was trying his trump card Alaska's
effort to provoke them into a conflict they don't want. And what
do you make of commentary in the Western press that suggests that
there are back channels that have opened up between Iran and the
United States. I think back channels have always been there. I
don't think it would be anything new. I think that the Iranians and
the Americas have been talking regularly throughout this. I think
all of the this. I think all of the regional powers have been
talking to the US regularly about this. Erdogan himself once said,
you know, a few weeks back, he said, our allies are telling us
that when all this is over, Netanyahu will no longer be in
power. And I think that's from what the US said, and it was also
mentioned in the political Article Three weeks into the conflict,
that Biden's reaction when.
Saw the Israeli response was, Netanyahu is really frustrating to
work with. Will stand with the Israelis, but Netanyahu can't be
allowed to stay in power again, and they're hoping that Benny
Gantz will take over after him as well. So I think the back channels
are certainly there. I also think it's because of these back
channels that the Americans have not been as swift to pressure the
Israelis, because through these back channels, they're also
hearing from some Muslim nations that we don't really care what's
happening in Gaza, if it's Hamas, go after them. Don't worry about
us. We, you know, we're happy to see it go and you know, we can
mention these countries like later on or the like, but, but certainly
in these back it's important to note that while the world is
telling Biden he's isolated, Biden is receiving messages from Muslim
countries that are telling him Gaza is really not a priority for
us, so go get them if you want. And do you think the United States
certainly does not want an escalation to Hezbollah to others.
I mean, there was US action in Iraq. There was a killing of Abu
taqwa, Mushtaq talaba, Sayyidi, who was said to be responsible for
a string of attacks on US bases across Iraq. So there was direct
action against a Iran friendly ally in Iraq. And that does sound
like at least a further escalation. How do you how do you
prefer? I think that one of the things Biden has been firm upon,
firm on, with regards to what's happening in Gaza is preventing
the Israelis from opening a front with Lebanon. There have been
reports in Israeli press itself, which have said that while
Israelis or Netanyahu has wanted to open a front of Lebanon,
including even in the early stages of this genocide and ethnic
cleansing, Biden was adamantly against it and made Netanyahu back
down. Apparently, for the Americans, they absolutely do not
want this to escalate. They want this to remain limited to Israel
and Gaza. They don't want to be in a situation where they get dragged
into a regional war or a regional conflict. And that's why they're
caught in this. I don't say difficult position. You can never
be in difficult position if you support genocide and ethnic
cleansing. But they're caught in this calculation, which is, how
can we come out of this, having to be being seen as having given 100%
support for Israel, because the Jewish vote in the US matters.
AIPAC matters in the US more so than the Muslim vote. I don't
think Biden acknowledges there's even a Muslim vote in the US,
because they're not a united body or United bloc in the way that
APEC is. But I think it's more the Americans are saying we're going
to give full support for the Israelis. We just need to see a
plan. What's your strategy? And as Netanyahu has failed to give a
plan, they become more and more concerned about where this is
going. But I think for the Americans, the red line for the
Americans is not genocide or ethnic cleansing. They're more
than happy to see that happen. They don't mind that. They're
happy to facilitate it and give diplomatic cover. The red line is
a regional conflict that the US gets dragged into, that they feel
they will not be able to get out of. And that's why I think that
for the Americans, they believe Netanyahu attempts to provoke
Hezbollah, are a red line. And they've actually warned Netanyahu
not to provoke Hezbollah into a conflict. And they've even sent
messages to the Iranians to say, look, we really don't want this to
escalate. And the Iranians, I think, have said to them, thank
you. We appreciate that. So tell me about Biden's red lines. I
mean, we've had a lot from the very beginning of this crisis that
Biden has attempted to rein in the Israelis, but that never seems to
materialize. Many have surmised that probably I was speaking to
Azam Tamimi in a show a couple of weeks back, and his argument was,
you know, that's just for public theatrics. In reality, the Biden
administration has really just given the green light to the
Netanyahu regime. How do you interpret the US stance on Israel
and on Netanyahu? Are they trying to limit? Okay, you've talked
about the escalation beyond beyond Palestine, or beyond what they
call Israel. But in the theater of Gaza and Israel, are they trying
to limit the ferocity of of Israel? I think it's less that
they're trying to limit the ferocity of Israel, and more that
they're reacting to threats to their own interests that are being
brought about by Netanyahu brazen attempt at genocide and ethnic
cleansing. Consider the timeline of events in the beginning, in the
first week, Blinken account had a tweet where, after speaking with
his Turkish counterpart, Hakan Fidan, a tweet was out on Blinken
account where it said that we spoke to I spoke to my Turkish
counterpart, Hakan Fidan, and we discuss what's happening in Gaza
and the prospects of a ceasefire. Within half an hour, that tweet
was deleted. I think that somebody in the staff wrote the tweet as
the call happened, and Blinken saw and said, we don't use the word
ceasefire. We don't use the word pause. Israel has license to go
straight ahead. Blinken then went to Israel and went to Tel Aviv,
and he said, I'm here as a Jew before I'm here as a secretary of
state, as if somehow, you know, the Holocaust happened in Saudi
Arabia and the Spanish Inquisition happened in Tunisia in these other
countries. So I think that one of the things that is noteworthy is
that
Blinken went from banning the word ceasefire to.
Are aggressively pushing for a humanitarian pause, even when
Netanyahu was angry about it. Axios reported when the
humanitarian pause, Axios reports that it wasn't Netanyahu, his
idea. It was blinking. Went to Tel Aviv and said, there's a serious
problem that's taking place here. Public opinion is shifting. These
guys are shouting too loud on social media. People who are pro
Israel yesterday are becoming pro Palestinian. You're too brazen
your genocide and ethnic cleansing. We need a new marketing
strategy for our genocide and our ethnic cleansing. The point that
I'm making here is look at the shift that took place on the part
of the Americans. They went from banning the word ceasefire and
pause to going to Netanyahu and saying, Listen, give them four
hours to leave their homes and let them go through a humanitarian
corridor under the protection of the Israeli army. It's a good
marketing strategy, and CNN or New York Times, they will lap it up.
Axios reports that Netanyahu his reaction, he was so concerned at
this change in tone of the Americans that he said, according
to Axios, is my words. He said to Blinken, I need to know first and
foremost, this isn't a plot by Biden to lure me into a ceasefire
the way he did to me in 2021
why did this shift happen? It's because a threat was or pressure
was brought to bear on the Americans. They made a calculation
they could not continue on their current trajectory. They weren't
reigning in Netanyahu. They were trying to do everything, not to
rein him in, but to do that. They came up with this ideal
humanitarian pause, of course, then social media went wild with
the pictures of the humanitarian corridor and the pictures of the
1948 Nakba, it just made things worse. They were still accused of
genocide and ethnic cleansing, then blinking, got on a plane
again, went to Tel Aviv and said, guys, I think now we need a
genuine pause and a hostage truce. Why did the Americans go from no
ceasefire, no pause, to humanitarian pause to hostage
truce. It wasn't because they wanted to reign in the Israelis.
It was because they felt the pressure had become so heavy from
public opinion that now in the swing states, in Georgia,
Pennsylvania and these other places where somehow they happen
to be the provinces, or the states where Muslims have the potentially
the deciding vote, Blinken identified that there is too much
pressure being brought to bear, and the prospect of genocide is
being compromised by Netanyahu brazen attempt at genocide and
ethnic cleansing. So Blinken not to reign in Israel. Blinken wanted
to rescue the genocide and ethnic cleansing, so he went to Netanyahu
and said, We need a hostage truce. And Netanyahu hesitated, hesitate,
and then found no choice but to implement it. When those in Tel
Aviv began to protest as well, demanding his resignation because
they felt that he was killing hostages as well and showing no
regard for them as well. The question that I'm answering your
question with a question, what made Blinken go from no ceasefire,
no pause to humanitarian pause to hostages that made Ben gvir, the
right wing ally of Netanyahu, do a unilateral press conference. I'm
saying he did it without telling Netanyahu, saying to the Israelis,
if Netanyahu extends this ceasefire by one more day, I will
bring his government crashing. What is the threat that benve
identified in the American change in position that was not supposed
to be, designed to reign in the Israelis. It was the Americans
considering and saying, we're suddenly suffering these threats.
We're under pressure here from public opinion, from social media.
We went to Saudi Arabia. We got a fatwa from Abdul Ahmad, as today's
saying that Raza is fit and don't talk about it. Muslims are still
talking about it. We went to UAE. We asked for a statement
denouncing the Palestinians. They denounced the Palestinians. That
still hasn't made a difference. We went to cc we're begging him to
open the border so that he can take in the Palestinians. He's
refusing to do so. King Abdullah, we keep offering him money and the
like, but he keeps saying that displacement is a declaration of
war. Erdogan, who was supposed to be neutral, is becoming more hard
in his rhetoric, albeit, thankfully, he's not doing
anything beyond that. But we're seeing that, and we're seeing the
fall in public opinion where former Zionists are now coming out
in favor of the Palestinians. And it's not that they want to reign
in Israel, it's that they want the genocide and ethnic cleansing, but
they are finding that it's harder to keep doing it, because a
pressure is growing in the global public opinion. That means they
have to go to the Israelis. In the beginning, they tried to remarket
it, then they tried to repackage it, then they tried to get away,
to get the media to reframe it. You'll remember, for example, when
the IDF bombed the jabellia refugee camp, killing 400 people.
The IDF said, We did it. New York Times took it upon itself to say
this is a bit too incriminating for the Israelis. Let's say an
explosion happened, and CNN said, CNN, I remember, for those who are
interested to go to see it, javelia, CNN, when the IDF
commander admits it, the CNN presenter, who's renowned for
being Zionist, is so stunned he forgets to ask the next question
for the next 10 seconds. He's stunned that it's being admitted
live on air, so see it and take it upon themselves to say that a
blast happened in the Java refugee camp. They don't want to say that
Israel did it. The point here is the rich. This is a good symbolism
of how the Americans felt about the situation, that Israel was too
brazen, and they are making our desire for genocide and ethnic
cleansing much harder, and therefore they.
Went from repackaging, remarketing, reframing, to now
trying to rein in the Israelis because they believe that it's
going overboard and they might suffer those circumstances. The
only obstacle now is Biden, who remains ardently committed to the
Israelis with Ike, even though his advisers and the staff are now
telling him that it's a serious situation. What's happening. But
the point is going back to your question, it's not that the
Americans are reigning in the Israelis. Is that the Americans
were on board with ethnic cleansing and genocide, but
Netanyahu is the manner in which he's done. It has been in such a
way that the Americans are uncomfortable at the consequences
that has brought about, particularly with regards to
public opinion, the Democrats are particularly concerned about it,
and that's what's resulted in a shift in the US position in which
I still think they're at a stage where they're trying to rescue the
genocide operation. They're trying to rescue Netanyahu has been to do
the genocide. But I think whereas before it was a carte blanche, it
was an open ticket, I think now Blinken is trying to squeeze the
last few days for net as many days as Netanyahu as he can. For
Netanyahu to say, Listen, you don't have months anymore. You
have a few weeks. Is a few weeks enough for you to finish the
ethnic cleansing, Netanyahu, you need to finish it. This is all I
can give you. I've done my duty to give you as much as possible, and
Netanyahu appears to be failing, because the Palestinians don't
appear to be going anywhere. Can I be frank with you, Sammy, about
the power of public opinion, or at least the Muslim vote? Because you
you insinuated verbat, there is a pressure that's bearing down on on
Biden. We're in an election year, and Biden is very worried about
his poor ratings, especially in those swing states, and you quite
rightly identify that his poll ratings and those swing states are
decisively moving away from the Democrats. There is a a feeling
amongst young democrats in particular, that, you know, the
United States is on the wrong side of history when it comes to when
it comes to the conflict. So all of that is very true. But when it
comes to the ballot box, it's that old Clinton adage, you know, you
care about the economy. That's really what counts. And the US
economy is doing pretty well in relation to the rest of the g8
economies, and the United States is probably doing much Well,
certainly do much better than most of the European economies, as I've
suggested.
And secondly, is the Muslim vote really about decisive? I know
you've got, you've been to the United States. I'm not sure why
you you visit the US so often Sammy, and it's, we've got lovely
weather here in the UK. But you've, you've been to the United
States. Is the Muslim vote really about cohesive and resilient, that
it's really going to be able to make an impact on Biden come the
end of the year. Let's first talk about the issue of public opinion
and whether the economy is going to make the difference or not.
We talked about it in the last podcast, but there's no harm in
doing a small reminder and then adding something to it.
When Blinken went to Tel Aviv, he was supposed to go to Tel Aviv and
come straight back to Washington. In the first
week when the journalists were expecting to fly back to
Washington, Blinken surprised them and told them, I need to go see
Mohammed bin Salman. I need to go see the other regional powers the
journalists were asking why. Washington Post reported the next
day that Blinken had gone to quote tamp down on public anger. That
means that Blinken and Netanyahu sat in a war room and they
identified a threat to their attempt to commit genocide and
ethnic cleansing. They identified a threat that would restrict or
limit their ability to commit genocide and ethnic cleansing in
the manner that they wanted to happen, and that threat was public
opinion. They went to the Saudi Quran Prince Mohammed bin Salman,
and they said to him, Your Highness, we need help and
assistance with regards to public anger. And the Saudi prince said,
no problem. Abdulham sudesh, I need the fatwa. And abduhamma
sudei said, Ghazi is a fitna. Don't talk about issues that you
don't know. Make dua, and that's it. The Imam and Medina gave a
khutbah said, Beware the mutarabisyn. Beware those who are
using Gaza to turn you against your rulers. Those of you going to
Amra, those I don't know if you're going to go into Amarna anytime
soon, but in any case,
those listening who are going to Amra. So my wife, she went to give
a talk in the world Halal summit in Istanbul about the state of
Halal tourism.
A former government advisor in Malaysia was with her, and he
said, Tell Sammy that I'm going to do Amra in December, and we're
past December, he would have been back by now, so he's won't get in
trouble. I'm going in December, and I was told by my tour group
not to bring a kefir, not to
bring a Free Gaza or free Palestine sticker, and not to
record myself making dua for Gaza, I told my wife, so I can't go on a
rumor. Every time I do a video on Saudi Arabia, it starts with
backlash, then acceptance. They always get a few Mashiach who say,
No, it's exaggeration. Then later they realize, okay, yeah, maybe it
actually turned out to be true. I.
I was in LA wonderful love Muhammad, let me tell you on a
side note. So I flew to I was invited to speak at the mass la
conference convention, yes And Alhamdulillah. They all watched
thinking Muslim podcast. They all send their salaam as well. So, you
know, we all know what the weather is like outside of the studio at
this moment in time. Yes, it's freezing. It's chilly. Your
fingers get cold very quickly. Yeah, it's miserable. Hamdulillah.
When I landed in LA Muhammad, the pilot says, Welcome to Los Angeles
airport, and the weather is something, something Fahrenheit. I
don't know what Fahrenheit? Yes, I said, whatever. And I'm just for
London weather. I step outside Muhammad oximo, blue skies,
sunshine, 27 degrees Celsius. I said to myself privately, I said,
I will never spend winter anywhere else like it was wonderful anyway.
Besabi, okay, California and Wembley, in any case, way, way up
in any case, in any case. While I was in LA for this convention, I
was sitting for dinner with a group of people. We were
discussing what's and I said, Guys, I've heard a rumor that
going to Amra. There is, you know, these rules in place, no kefir, no
free, has a stickers, no cause makers. And one person said, Sam,
you know, it's not a rumor. Here's the WhatsApp. And in the whatsapp
on his phone, it says he was going to December. Now he's come back,
and nobody wouldn't know who he is, because I won't make any more
references to him. But the WhatsApp says it is with a heavy
heart that we inform you that we've been informed by Saudi
authorities that you may not bring kefirs, you may not bring Free
Palestine stickers, and you may not record yourself making dua for
Gaza, and we urge you to respect these rules. The point I'm making
here is when Blinken went to bin Salman, Bin Salman said, I will
give you a fatwa to make sure the Muslims stop tweeting and talking
about it on social media. I will tell them it's fitna. I will have
my scholars say it, and I will ban those coming for Amara. I will ban
them from showing displays of support for the Palestinians. And
on the night that Israel wants to do his grand invasion, this part,
he didn't actually say it, but I'm saying that on the night that
Israel began its grand invasion, on the night they cut off the
internet on Gaza, that was the night Shakira performed her
concert in Riyadh and Turkey. Elishik says, I'm not canceling it
for a political event. Who canceled political event? The
irony is that they wouldn't cancel any concepts for Gaza, but they
canceled it for the death of the Emir of Kuwait Allah. They
canceled it for the death of Emir of Kuwait because they realized
that would cause a diplomatic crisis. But it shows
you Blinken goes to Saudi Arabia to ask for what the point I'm
making here is this, who is Vincent man targeting in his
support for Blinken, he was targeting the ordinary individual.
He wasn't targeting big organizations. The question here
is, why are heads of states and the Secretary of State of the
United States mobilizing all of this effort in order to get public
opinion to be quiet. And I think the reason is that while your
question suggests that public opinion is not as powerful as it
seems, they believed it to be powerful enough to hinder the
attempt at genocide and ethnic cleansing and potentially result
in a chain of events that will see the inability to complete the
genocide and ethnic cleansing that they desire. And the point that I
will push back on it, on the question as well, is this we have,
and this is the reason why I always tell people read Syrah as a
political book, because people brush over the brush over the
first 13 years of Dawa. The reason they brush over it is because
Muslims don't like to read about a period where the Muslims were
persecuted, because they somehow come to the conclusion that those
first 13 years were a period of weakness, when, in reality, it was
a period of spectacular strength. And I'll explain what I mean.
Think about it, the Zion Quraysh had all of the weapons. They had
all of the all of the armies, they had all of the money and the like.
And they kept persecuting the Muslims and wielding it against
them. But why did they continue to persecute the Muslims? You don't
persecute something that's not a threat. You don't repress
something that's not a threat. What is it that Quraysh with all
of their money, all of their weapons? What is it that they
feared amongst a group of Muslims who had no weapons, amongst a
group of Muslims who didn't have the money? What is it they feared
that meant they had to repress them in this way? And that's the
point I want to make here in that when you watch the film, the
message by Mustafa Akkad on the life of the prophet Muhammad,
there's a scene in it where Abu Talib is lying on his deathbed,
the uncle of the Prophet Muhammad, and he says to Abu Sufyan and the
leaders of the Quraysh, he says, all he wants from you is one word,
and Abu Sufyan responds, and he says, if it was a matter of one
word, we would have given him 100 words. The problem is the word he
wants. It's the word that made Ummah, Abu Khattab Rahul, leave
the elite of Quraysh to join the persecuted Muslims. Omar Al
Khattab left an army to go join a people with no army. Musa ibn
umayyah ANU would walk down the street. He would smell his perfume
across the whole street. He left the life of the elite. He left the
power of Quraysh to join the persecutor and they still didn't
have power. They had no Haven. They didn't have Medina at the
time. He still left the elite. He left the luxury to.
To join them. The Muslims were growing day by day because an idea
is more powerful than the tanks and the weapons. Public opinion
was so terrifying as a potential power that not even the weapons
that they had or the armies made them feel safe, not only that you
were you, your question, not you persi, because I know what you
believe your question was trying to belittle public opinion. When
the Muslims went to habasher, to Abyssinia, to flee the Quraysh,
quresh and Abu as to habasha to bring them back, because they felt
that despite their power, their money and their armies, the shift
in public opinion that they would cause in Abyssinia would result in
a chain of events that would undermine Quraysh entirely,
despite their armies and they were, that's why am I Banas, when
he goes after a ragtag group of refugees, they weren't ragtag. I'm
saying it from Croatia's perspective. They were honorable
people. But when Abu as goes, even the jeshi is, I don't understand,
you're coming all this way for a group, what is it that they've
done in Mecca that is so great that it's worried you guys in this
way? And that's the point I want to make. Is when people talk about
public opinion and they belittle it, they are the same people who
belittle the first 13 years of the Dawah because they don't see
strength in it. Instead, all they see is the death of Khadija during
the boycott. They see the Muslims being persecuted, they don't see
or the reason why they were being persecuted, which is that the
Muslims were displaying such strength that Quraysh could not
quell it with their armies. Or they even when they kill sumayyah,
when they put the rock on Bill of Allah, Anu, when they persecuted
the Sahaba, they would not give up La Ilaha, illallah, Muhammad,
Rasulullah. When Abu Sufyan sent somebody to reconnect, to do
reconnaissance on the Sahaba, when he comes back, he says to Abu
Sufyan Wallahi, these people will never give up the Prophet Muhammad
for anything. That's what terrified quresh. It's that public
opinion now take this context of the seerah, which everybody reads,
but sometimes comes to the opposite conclusion, if those
first 13 years where Allah doesn't give power to the Prophet Sallam
against Quraysh, not only that, after those first 13 years,
remember when the Prophet Sallam is told to leave to go to Medina.
I always used to assume that Haqq is something you always do when
you happy. But look what the prophet Salla says when he leaves
Mecca to show you how it hurt him. He leaves Mecca and he looks back
Allah has told him to go to Medina. He still turns around
Prophet Sallam and looks at Mecca and he says, Wallahi, you're the
dearest land to me, and if your people had not driven me from you,
I would never have left you. He says it with a heavy heart, even
though he's obeying the command of Allah, subhanho wa Taal. The point
that I want to make, though, is this, when people talk about
public opinion, what was so terrifying about the Muslims in
Mecca that made Quraysh persecute them for 13 years, and you'll find
it's not because the Muslims were weak, it's because they were
displaying a terrifying strength that Quraysh knew, if they left
unchecked, would result in their demise and would result in the
success of the Muslims. So when we look at public opinion, it may not
be in the way of the armies and the tanks, but Quraysh had armies,
and they couldn't beat the Muslims. Public opinion matters,
because when you read the Reuters article about the polls in the US,
usually when presidents fall in the polls over foreign policy
issues, it's usually because their boys are dying abroad. Why were
President some people of Iraq and Afghanistan, let's be honest here.
It wasn't only because it was an unjust or illegal war. It was
overwhelmingly because Americans could not understand why their
boys are dying in places they couldn't even point to on a map.
That's why they were upset about it. The reason the Reuters
article, this is Reuters, not semi Reuters said, The reason the polls
in the US are so extraordinary is because it's the first time a
president is falling in the polls over a foreign policy issue where
American troops aren't even on the ground. Think about it, the
opinions on Palestine are not changing because their boys are
dying in Palestine. They're changing because the social media
impact that has broken Israel's monopoly over the narrative has
resulted in a psmic shift, where a girl records a Tiktok in LA where
she says, I grew up in a pro Zionist environment, and Tiktok
May Allah preserve it for this ummah.
People always laugh and say, we say you should have jobs. I'm
being serious here, where the girl puts on Tiktok, and she says, I
grew up in a pro Zionist environment, never hearing the
Palestinian voices. Tiktok brought that Palestinian voice. She says,
I can't unsee what I've seen, and now all my videos are dedicated to
stopping the genocide in Palestine that public opinion terrified
blinking into going to bin Salman and asking for a fatwa from Abdul
Rahman a sudas. Terrified Netanyahu into bullying social
media companies to tell them to shadow ban accounts and restrict
hashtag Palestine. Terrified Oliver vahali of the EU, who went
to try to present a bill to the European Parliament to punish
social media accounts that wouldn't shadow ban or limit the
reach of Palestinian accounts that May.
Ian Bremmer, the US political analyst, come out and say, I've
never seen so much disinformation, meaning, I've never seen so much
pro Palestinian content. The question I always ask for Muslims
who question public opinion, why do they fear it and you belittle
it? Why do you see it as powerless, and they believe
Billies need to spend in order to keep it? Why does an article come
out in the hill by a Zionist writer who writes and says that
though Netanyahu may win the battle, he's done even more damage
to Israel, even if he kills more Palestinians, because the damage
he's done to public impression of Israel is such that in future, he
writes, I fear our allies will no longer rush to our rescue in the
way they did before. Why does a Zionist say in an interview that
what Netanyahu has done is he transformed the image of Israel
from a refuge of Jews, from the Holocaust to a genocide or maniac
that kills people. Why do they believe it's a turning point and a
great awakening? But my Muslim brother and sister looks me in the
eye and says, What's the point of public opinion? Why does it matter
when even in the Sira itself, we know Allah demonstrated that
public opinion matters so much so that when Abu Sufyan goes to
Heraclius and stands in front of the Emperor, when the Emperor
Heraclius asks about Muhammad, sallAllahu, alayhi wa sallam,
public opinion is so overwhelmingly in favor of the
Prophet Muhammad SAW that Abu Sufyan can't even lie in front of
his clansmen, who are the two who are witness against him. They're
not Muslims. They're Quraysh of his clansmen. The image of the
Muslims is so positive in public opinion because of the Prophet
Muhammad, sallAllahu, alayhi wa sallam, that Abu Sufyan cannot
even lie in front of his clansmen. Muhammad, he has to look at the
Heracles in the eye and say, he is Ameen. He is trustworthy. He calls
for rights to the poor. And Herakles says, Who are the people
who follow Him? This is the point I want to make about public
opinion. Who are the people who follow the Prophet Muhammad,
sallAllahu? And he says, it's the week of our society, the people
that we subconsciously look down on. Heraclius says this is the way
of the prophets, that it's those the power where you don't it's the
places where you don't think power is that deliver the changes. And
that's why I want to make this point in jail, and why I focused
on public opinion. Bin Salman is not the one who made Blinken move
from no ceasefire to humanitarian pause to host this truce, to
sustainable ceasefire, to now people talking about potential
ceasefire on the horizon. It wasn't Erdogan who was praying and
saying, Yeah, Allah, please make the situation go away. I need a
guest pipeline with the Israelis. And I need to convince them not to
do Middle East corridor through Saudi I want them to do Middle
East corridor through me. It wasn't bin Zayed who said, I'm not
interested in this. I've got a rampaging militia in Sudan that
I'm supporting, because I don't want Sudanese to choose their
leaders, because if they choose they will quote, in his opinion,
vote for a 1400 year old book to be the Constitution. And I believe
that's ridiculous, and we shouldn't have anything
whatsoever. This is in the New York Times article. It's not my
words. The point here being is it wasn't big nation states, it
wasn't even billion dollar industries. It's Israel that spent
the billions on PR but Jalal, the Ummah, broke it for free. It's the
ordinary Muslims on social media who broke that and delivered the
message of Palestine so emphatically that Biden is falling
in the polls on an issue where American troops are not on the
ground. Think about it. The Reuters poll said Biden is falling
not just over the economy he's falling because of his stance on
Palestine and Gaza itself. And that leads me to your second
strand of your question about the Muslim vote, yeah, the abandoned
Biden campaign. Do you think it has enough legs to truly achieve
the ends that we all want to achieve, where Muslims, en masse,
in the United States, they work against maybe their immediate
interests, and they were to undermine Biden's potential
political vote. Let's analyze it, and then I'll give you my theory
please.
As far as numbers are concerned, Axios reported the Israeli paper
that if, quote, Biden loses a sliver of the Muslim vote in
Michigan, Pennsylvania or in Georgia, Biden loses.
Politico writes that if the Muslim abandoned Biden campaign unites
the Muslims in punishing Biden. Biden loses the election for them.
It's not a maybe for them. He loses the election right? The only
ones who don't believe it are the Muslims. The only ones who don't
believe in the power of the Muslim vote are a large strand of the
Muslims. The reason why I say this is because it's an accurate
reflection of the state of the Ummah, in that the Ummah has never
actually been weak. The Ummah has always had power. Ibn Khaldun used
to say that the Ummah is always one generation away from glory,
because Ibn Khaldun argued that Allah has already equipped the
Ummah with the power it needs to be glorious. It's whether the
Muslims choose to deploy that power or not, and whether they
believe in that power. Once the Muslims do that, it unlocks an
irresistible wave that results in glory for the umm, when you look
at the states as it stands.
Right now in the US, it's abundantly clear that Biden is now
trading behind Trump. If elections are held tomorrow, Trump wins.
I think Shahid sakali always said, don't speak definitively about the
will of Allah. Use the word as if so. I will use it there. I'm doing
a shout out Sheik Ali. It
is as if Allah, subhana wa taala, out of all of the states that he
could have chosen to be the swing states to decide the election. It
is as if Allah chose the states where the Muslims have the
deciding vote.
It is an unprecedented opportunity where 1% of the population have
almost a power of 51% population. We essentially Muslims in America
essentially have the same power as the Zionists at this moment in
time. And I'll explain what I mean. What makes the Zionist lobby
so powerful in America, it's not that they deliver candidates. If
it was the case that they deliver candidates and that was their sole
power, then the candidates would do what Bush did to the Muslims in
2000 where the Muslims deliver him to power, but then he betrays them
when he gets to power, because he doesn't need to listen to them,
because we deliver them to power. What's the point now? The power of
the Zionist lobby is in its ability to punish candidates. Is
in its ability to say, if you veer left or right, we don't care what
you do, we will punish you and ruin your career. Muslims today
have the ability, for the first time, to demonstrate a power
similar to the Zionist and the black caucuses in which to finally
punish a candidate for supporting genocide, or the like the Muslim
vote, as far as numbers are concerned, are a significant
block. The reason why Biden it hasn't had the impact on Biden
that they want, is because Biden is convinced there is no such
thing as a Muslim vote. And I explain what I mean, Biden
believes that, although the mathematics show that Muslims can
punish Biden. Muslims are so badly divided that there is absolutely
no way they will organize like the Zionist block. There is no way
they will organize like the black caucuses block, that even if Omar
Suleiman and Sharia and all these mache come out and they say, Guys,
we cannot reward genocide, you will still have a last strand of
Muslims who will tell you, but what about Trump? But what about,
you know, the discomfort we might feel for the next four years. What
about these things? Biden believes that there's no precedent of
Muslim organization on a level in which it can actually pose a
threat. Instead, there have always been a small group of Muslims
who've engaged with the system, who have always been derided by
the Muslim community. So the Muslim community steps back these
small groups. They've never been a unified bloc,
and that's why Biden believes that when November comes, the Muslims
might be angry with the genocide, but come November, they will not
be able to mobilize in a way to punish him, and therefore their
fears are exaggerated. And that's why for Biden, the more important
vote is the organized Zionist vote to make sure they don't feel like
Biden abandoned. The Zionists make sure Biden that they he doesn't
want them to feel like Biden abandoned the Israelis. He
believes the Muslims will eventually come back anyway.
They'll be angry today, tomorrow, but when they sit in their lovely,
big homes, or the like, and they have, they have big homes.
Muhammad Yun mashallah, my flat is decent, but I can't lie to you
when I when I entered, I felt claustrophobic after coming back
from Texas and these places like Masha Allah, Biden says that as a
result of the comfort that many of these Muslims event, they will not
compromise it for the sacred event that takes place 1000s of miles
away. And that's why I think that to answer your question directly,
Muslims, mathematically and politically, have the power, in my
opinion, to punish Biden and set a precedent for the first time in
American political history that just as when you upset the
Zionists, they can punish you, just as you when you have said the
Black Caucus, they can punish you. They have an opportunity to
present that when you punish the Muslim vote, when you punish when
you when you do genocide, the Muslims also have the ability to
punish you as well. Whether the Muslims will take it is a
different issue altogether. And I think that one of the things that
is worth noting
here is that I understand
the concerns of the American Muslim. American Muslim says that
if Trump was in power, he would do worse. That's true, probably true,
although sometimes when I see the way Biden is digging his heels in,
I don't know how true it is. True it is anymore. That's probably
true, but the point of punishing Biden is not to reward Trump. The
point of punishing Biden is to let every American politician know
that there are red lines with the Muslim community that okay, we'll
tolerate this issue. We'll tolerate districts could scare the
Republicans, but surely, genocide is a red line. What I fear is, if
Biden wins the second term, the historians will write that not
even a genocide of 20,000 Palestinians on the other side of
the world could convince Muslims to punish genocide Joe. What I
fear is, if Biden wins the second term. Then, you know, right now
you have the congress people. They go to the mosque and say assalamu
alaikum, and they come and they say, Mubarak, Eid, or in the wrong
way. They're trying the assistant tried to tell them how to do it.
What I fear is they won't even come for Eid, because they'll say,
Look, guys, we committed the genocide against 20,000 of their
brethren on the side of the world. And still they were so scared of
Trump.
Yeah, they were so scared of four years of discomfort. Because let's
be honest here. And I know many Americans might be upset with me,
but let's be honest, Trump is not going to be sending people to
knock on the houses of Muslim doors and say, You know what? I'm
giving it over to this family now you have to go live in a refugee
camp. Trump is not going to mobilize the American army to go
and commit a genocide of 20,000 American Muslims. Trump will not
do anything remotely like what the Israelis are doing, and that's why
I liked Hinckley's tweet a student American Sudanese activist, where
she put a tweeter, and she said, because the Democrats to put
context to Hinckley's tweet, the Democrats are concerned. Even
though they believe the Muslims are divided, they are concerned
that rabble rousers
like us will tell the Americans that unite and do something and
punish genocide. Joe, I haven't said that. I'm just analyzing the
situation to make sure I get through the border. I'm flying to
Washington tomorrow, but in any case, don't
publish this before I get to America. In any case. So Kamala
Harris released a video where she said, we're launching the first
anti Islamophobia initiative in the history of the US. She
didn't do it because she was moved by the pictures of what's
happening in Gaza. Yeah, she did it because the Democrats sat at a
table and they came and they said, these Muslims, though they it's
likely they'll come back to us in November. There's a chance they
won't. There's a chance they'll punish genocide. Joe, let's throw
them a bone to make them feel like we care about them while we're
massacring and committing genocide other side of the world. Then they
sent out an email the Democrats, saying, we're against the Muslim
ban. I like him making streets. She responded to this, she said,
We survived four years of Trump. Trump is not something new, like
we saw Trump. It was bad, but we survived it. We sort of know what
we're getting with Trump. 15,000 Palestinians did not survive four
years of Biden, you're asking me to vote for genocide, Joe, who
committed genocide on the basis the other guy might commit a
genocide. And in the words of Imam Tom Allah, lovely, lovely. I meant
for the first time a few weeks back as well, lovely brother, more
I was about to say more impressive in real life. He's impressive in
real life. He's impressive on camera, and he's very impressive
in real life as well. Imam Tom also put a point where he was
asked, he said, Okay, so if Trump comes and he's worse, he said, I'd
rather take the possibility than the definite. I know now that
Biden is a genocide, there's a possibility Trump a genocide. I'll
take the possibility over the definitive. And that's the point I
want to make. Is that Muslims now have a golden opportunity to
elevate their status in American politics by being a society
capable, not only of a delivering candidates in the way they
delivered bush in 2000 I know some are scarred by what Bush did, but
the reason Bush turned his back on the Muslims was because he knew
Muslims couldn't punish candidates. This is the first time
in the history of America where the Muslim vote has the chance to
punish a candidate. I feel Allah gave this opportunity. Whether
they will take it is a different matter altogether. I understand
there are different it's easy for two people sitting in London to
say it when we don't live in the US, if the Muslim ban comes in,
maybe we won't be allowed in or the like, and we'll be here in
London. And London is Pretty nice, despite its miserable weather or
the like. They are the ones who perhaps will end up suffering, not
in the way the Palestinians are suffering, or the like, but
certainly, to answer your question directly, the Muslim vote is quite
possibly. I say it is, but we do quite possibly, in case someone
cuts it later and says, Sami got it wrong again, and I'm prone to
get it wrong as well. Okay, belongs only to Allah perfect.
It's political analysis. We only analyze the dynamics. Yeah, I
believe that the Muslim vote will be the decisive vote in November
Inshallah, and I believe also that the Democrats are gambling now
that the Muslims will remain divided, that the Muslims will not
be organized, that the Muslims will turn to each other and they
will say, okay, he committed a genocide. But guys, Trump might do
to us something worse, or Trump might do horrible things to us
instead. And the Democrats are gambling that the comfort of the
American life will be enough to deter Muslims from compromising
that for the sake of punishing Biden for the genocide that he's
done, and that's the issue for the Americans. So can I turn Ben as
we're on the subject of elections to the UK? I mean, it's very
likely that the UK elections will take place at the same time as the
American elections. And Muslims here, of course, have got they
similar to the US, probably even worse than the US, we tend to be
very disorganized when it comes to the political system. In fact,
when in on the 15th of November, when there was the ceasefire vote
in Parliament, the party whips of the Labor Party went around saying
to their MPs that were teetering between voting yes and no, but
just discount the Muslim vote, because it's never going to impact
the final election.
You know, as well as I do Sammy that we are extremely
disorganized. We're extremely messy when it comes to these
things. I mean, I was at a meeting in one particular city in the UK.
They invited me to talk about the elections. There were 25 people
around the table, and by the end of it, there were 50 solutions to
the problem of elections. So we are we don't have even probably,
the capacity of the Muslims in the United States to organize.
Of course, the US is far more consequential than the United.
Kingdom.
But from your perspective, is there an opportunity for us here
in the UK in particular, to bleed the vote of the Labor Party? As
you know, Muslims here in the UK are largely in labor
constituencies, and the Labor Party has been, you know,
horrendous when it comes to when it comes to Palestine, and you
know, Keir Starmer has an effect given a stronger green light than
even the conservative party here in the UK, towards towards
Israel's actions in in Gaza. So I suppose the same question applies
to us here in the UK. Do you think we'll be able to put it together?
I think that one of the things that hampers Muslim mobilization
generally in the US and in the UK,
is an enduring debate over the legitimacy of engaging with the
system and the benefits of engaging with the system. Yeah,
the reason why I resent the debate is because the massager that are
built where we gather, that were built by our elders, were built
through engagement with the local councils and engagement with the
local municipalities. So they are having this debate in the very
building that was built on the basis of engagement in the first
place, and I think that that debate badly hampered our ability
to leverage the power that the Muslim communities have. I believe
that what Raza has done is that Raza has demonstrated that we are
lacking as an ummah in many different industries, not by
design of those who don't like the Ummah, but by designs of unusual
conclusions that the Ummah has come about by itself. I'll give an
example, yeah, an anecdote from the US, please. I gave. I finished
the talk in Berkeley, in Berkeley, Berkeley, in the universe,
whatever. Yeah, so when I went to the US, I wanted to buy
Timberlands, because they're cheaper in the US than they're in
the UK. They're much cheaper in the US than they are in the UK. So
I said to my wife, I said, she said to me, you know, go buy
Timberlands. And then she did the research, and she found that they
support the Zionists. So, you know, the example I gave earlier,
the prophet Hausa said, I'm looking at Mecca and saying, If I
had not left you, if your people are driven me, I would not have
left you for me. I interpret that is that sometimes you know, when
you give something for the sake of Allah, it's okay to feel sometimes
that,
you know, Allah, I'm doing it for you. But this is a bit now, I'm
not comparing Timberlands to leaving Mecca, but the principle
is, what I'm mentioning, it hurt me that I couldn't buy Timberlands
in the US because they're really good shoes anyway. So we were
sitting for dinner afterwards with some students, and a student made
a very good point. He said to me, Sammy,
don't you think you know, we're all boycotting and we're all
making a difference. McDonald's has said, you know, its sales have
fallen, and Starbucks the share prices. McDonald's said it's
because of the boycott of Gaza and Philistine Zara had a couple of
stores closed down as well, and the boycott is having an impact.
But he made a good point. He said, But are you finding it as
difficult as I am to find Muslim alternatives? Are you finding it
as hard as I am? Okay, we're boycotting, and we're doing it for
the sake of Allah, and we're happy to do so.
But I speak for myself, Jared, finding alternatives. It's not as
easy as it seems, even Marks and Spencer shirts. You know, I'm
wearing this today only because all my shirts are Marks and
Spencer, really. And I thought, Where am I going to get, you know,
other shirts from? I got a few from Turkey which are quite good,
you know, decent quality. But the point is, you really have to go
out of your way to try to find a lot of these Muslim business. And
I have a theory why the Prophet Muhammad, sallAllahu sallam, said
that Allah loves the hand that earns its risk, and that hand is
better than the hand that takes charity. I feel that the Ummah
added to the Hadith. They read the Hadith, they said, Bismillah, this
is a wonderful Hadith, but we want to add to it. Allah loves the hand
that earns its risk through engineering, law and medicine, and
when you start thinking about it, we started expanding on this
theory, and I realized that let's think, and this is no disrespect
to the elders I have huge respect, because they're the ones who paved
the way and gave us the platform to take on you. They fought the
battles that we don't need to fight today. Yes, but I think a
lot of it had to do with something that the Allah looks down on
Pride.
It's nice to say to your friends, my son is a lawyer, yes. Or my son
is a doctor, or my son is an engineer, and then you go to one
person, what does your son do? He makes shoes. What does your son
do? He makes shoelaces. What do your son he makes shirts for
people, yes. And what I realized is the Zionists don't have that
complex in every industry that you look they have a mega company in
each industry, whether it's tech, whether it's clothing, whether
it's all these they have it. They're not hampered by these
prejudices. They went out. So when you talk about the Zionist lobby
being strong despite not having the numbers, it's because for
them, they don't put limits on themselves. Not only that. Let's
flip another angle as well. Zionists have a tolerance for
failure. Remember, their movement started in the late 1800s they
have a tolerance for failure. They considered Uganda once upon a
time. They consider Argentina. They put up with the Warsaw
program. They they went through the Holocaust. They have a they
have a tolerance for it. I feel like sometimes Muslims, we don't
have a tolerance for it. Somebody comes.
Business. He fails first time, second time, third time. If he
fails the first time, we tell him khalas. Sometimes I say it semi
jokingly, although I mean it quite seriously, the prophet Khalid Ibn
Walid to a tribe, and Khalid I Walid Alain who transgressed. And
the news came to the Prophet Muhammad, sallAllahu, sallam. And
Prophet saw him, lifted his hands in the air, and he said, Allahumma
ini, abraith Allahu, I'm innocent of what Khalid has done quite the
condemnation.
Sometimes, I believe that the ummah of today would, after that
statement, would never have sent Khalid back into the battlefield.
They would never allow Khalid, didn't Walid, to lead an army
again. They would have said, because you did this, you're not
entitled. But what the prophet Sallam do, he sent them back out.
Sent a mecca after Uhud when the archers come down because they're
excited by the spoils of war. This isn't me. This is Ibn Hisham. This
is all the seer. They say the reason they left the hill was
because they thought they had won, and they did. They wanted to be
first to the spoils of war. The dunya got to them
when they are to be punished. Usually, military punishment is
court martial. Allah tells them, wala kutafa and Khalid al qalbil
alum. If you are harsh on them, they will flee from you. So pardon
them, forgive them. And it's the last part that throws me like like
curveball, Oshawa, humphil Amr, pardon them, forgive them, and
bring them back into the consultation. The reason why I say
this is that what has shown us is that a lot of the limitations of
the community are self imposed. They are not imposed from the
outside. The Muslim community in the US today has the power to
punish Biden. The reason that it's taking them so slow to organize in
this regard is because the battle they are fighting now in order to
prepare for the organization is not a battle against those seeking
to repress them. It's the battle within the locks that they self
imposed in their own subconscious, the same way we have that here,
here when you're telling people, for example, and I've seen you,
Masha Allah, on your social media going around, trying to tell
people, let's come together and unite. And I can see the
frustration in your face when you are telling me the story of 50
different solutions. The reality is, the reason you mobilize is
because you believe there's a chance the Muslims can make a huge
dent in these elections. And I know that Muslims sometimes they
don't take it when it comes from Sami, because he looks like them,
or Jalal, who looks like them. Andrew ma
did a video for the New Statesman, for the Americans. Watching this,
Andrew Ma is one of the top political commentators in the
country, yes, English, white, non Muslim.
Andrew ma did a video for the new states, where he said, quote, I am
hearing that Imams up and down the country are telling their people
that they should punish labor and the conservatives and they
shouldn't vote for either, and that they might they're even
thinking of putting up independent candidates in certain
constituencies. And while some believe it to be hyper and there
are spreadsheets going around your spreadsheets,
talking about Thank you. And Andrew Ma said this, while some
people believe it to be hype and exaggeration, 30 seats in a
tightly contested election decides who wins and who loses. Exactly
this is what I mean by an ummah that believes itself to be weak
when everybody else believes it to have strength. Why did Blinken go
to the regional powers to ask to tamp down on public opinion?
What's the power he saw in the Ummah that the Ummah doesn't see
in itself. What's the power that Israel sees in the Ummah by in the
way that it goes to social media and tells it to limit hashtag
Palestine and to shut down accounts and shadow ban what is
the power Netanyahu fears in the Ummah that the Ummah doesn't see
in itself? What is it the power that those who are passing laws to
ban the boycott of Israel. What is the power they see in the way the
Ummah can deploy to boycott? What is the power they see in the Ummah
that the Ummah doesn't see in itself? That's why I think we live
in a paradox. We live in our own alter reality world where it's
almost as if those repressing the Ummah believe in the power of
Allah more than the Muslim does. The Muslim says the Ummah weak.
The one repressing the Ummah says it's strong. I have to repress it.
And that's why I think when it comes to the UK elections, let's
be brutally honest. Let's analyze it politically. Labor are expected
to win a landslide. What do you lose if you try labor expected to
win anyway. Why can't we test our power as Muslim constituencies by
just you lose Labor's winning, winning, they're winning. You're
not going to cause the debt that you think you're going to cause.
Yeah, if it's a foregone conclusion, why don't we gamble?
Why don't we have a candidate in a constituency where we think they
can viably win, and let's see how many votes we can get. We're
streeting. You keep mentioning him. You know that maybe we can do
a dental 5000 or do dent of 20,000 or like, why not? I saw numbers in
Dallas, in the US, where certain constituencies there are, like,
7000 votes for Muslims, for example, only 1500 went to vote.
That remaining 5500 vote. If they had gone, they would have tilted
the back.
Of the elections, right? That's what I mean when I say Ummah has
power but refuses to use it because they mire themselves in
debates that have no meaning. What has shown is that we didn't do
enough. We didn't use our powers enough. We didn't build enough. We
built Alhamdulillah, but we didn't build enough, and we found that
the reason we didn't build enough was not because they told us not
to build, because we refused to build, because we were minding the
base that had no meaning to answer your question directly. Muslims
can have a huge impact in the UK elections more than they think.
If they can rally around the idea of punishing the candidates not
delivering, punishing the candidates saying, I won't vote
for the candidates that refuse to back a ceasefire, whether it's
labor conservative or the like, when somebody steps up and he
says, Guys, I want to run on behalf, you know, to be the
alternative candidate. Instead of rinsing him, we say, You know
what, the Zionist allows somebody to make 15 mistakes, and on the
16th attempt, they produce a mega company. I give you the permission
to make five mistakes, go I'll support you. I'll trust you. In
this regard, ALLAH SubhanA says about Sahaba that they should
dawah, kufali, Rahama ubenah that they are tough on the
disbelievers, on the oppressors. By this, Kufa, in this context, is
referring to those who oppress, to those who are actively committing
wrong. But he says they are ruham, merciful. Between them, the
obstacle we have in front of us is the current Ummah is the opposite.
They are tough on the believers and very soft on the oppressors.
When Shi Rama Suliman does something that they believe to be
so profoundly wrong, when he trips up as is natural of a human being,
the reaction is not to say Shih Umar Barak Allahu for taking the
step that no one else wanted to take. Barakallahufiq for getting
off your couch and doing something when everybody else is sitting on
the couch. I know you buckled slightly. Hey, get up. Let me dust
down your truck and keep going. I got your back when these are the
mashek or Muhammad Jalal goes and tries to tell people and buckles.
Let's suppose you buckle on your human you buckle along the way. Do
you believe this is an ummah that would tell you, yeah? Muhammad
jail, we know why you set out to do this. You buckled on this. Get
up. Let me or do you think it's Ummah that would tell you, yeah,
look at this guy, and that's why this is the conclusion that I want
to make here,
the Muslims in the US and the Muslims in the UK, though, the
dynamics are different, the premise remains the same. We have
the power, as it stands, to cause a significant impact on the
elections. The American Muslims have the chance, for the first
time in American history to bring down a sitting US President. They
are 1.7%
of the population. It is as if Allah gave them the power to
single handedly bring down a genocidal maniac, genocide, Joe,
if they choose to deploy that power, one thing I always say
about them is Allah gives us opportunities, but then sees if we
will take those opportunities, which is why there is the Hadith.
If you take one step, Allah takes 10. The same here applies in the
UK. We have a golden opportunity to test our strength as a Muslim
electorate. We're all united now by Raza, I'm seeing strange
alliances. People who are slating each other left, right center are
now coming together. Yeah. The question is, will they take that
opportunity? There is a call now to punish those who refuse to
stand with the ceasefire. I've seen your website now, the Muslim
vote.co.uk, muslim.co uk, Muslim vote. Do code UK, I see you
gathered four organizations. Very wise. So at least we spread the
responsibility and spread the burden. Will people go onto the
website and see you, the information, data that you've
gathered painstakingly and decide and say, You know what, I want to
be part of this movement. Labor will win anyway, but let me see
how strong it is anyway. And that's why I think that going back
now to the idea of the 13 years of the life of the prophet Muhammad,
I like sometimes to throw controversial curveballs, and I
won't do one that gets you in trouble, but I always say
sometimes to some, to some Muslims who'd if I ask you a question and
you ask me quickly Without thinking, Who do you prefer? Um,
Sadiq. People say Abu Bakr,
but ask yourself, why? Why do they prefer someone who said of
himself, I am not even the equivalent of a hair on the chest
of Abu Bakr Sadiq. And I tell you why, because an ummah that field
believes itself to be defeated and self traumatized is attracted to
its misguided perception of strength that they see in Muhammad
Abu Khattab, they used to read Abu Abu Bakr Siddiq as somebody soft
who used to cry in praise and that kind of thing. And that, the
reason I use that example is to highlight the glaring subversion
of the understanding of Islam amongst many Muslims that they
don't even realize they have in their subconscious. Once you
accept that, that's when you start reading the cedar from a different
lens, where, the first 13 years, you start seeing that that's
what's relevant to what we're seeing today, the shift in public
opinion. We don't have the tanks, we don't have the weapons, we
don't have these things that you wish you had in order to bring the
outcome. Yes, but that doesn't mean we're in a period of
weakness, because you cannot say the Muslims were in a period of
weak.
Is in the first 13 years, and the proof is what we discussed
earlier. And when you come to those conclusions, I can't lie to
you, Jad, let's do it that Muslims listening in America, what do you
punish genocide? To do it for the sake of the ummah. Do it. Don't
let the Ummah say that genocide. Joe can commit a genocide against
20,000 palaces and still get a second term. Don't humiliate the
Ummah in this regard. Give the Ummah some of its dignity as well.
And even when Trump comes, Trump might not even be on the Joe. The
worst part is Trump might not even be on the candidate. When I was in
America, the Colorado Supreme Court disqualified him from the
ballot. The main election official disqualified you think that Trump
might be on, that he might not even be on the ballot, because
Allah is the One who knows situations, and that's where we
finish on this point. I promise this. Will I finish? Even though
someone made the meme, Sammy, Sammy, I'll finish on this point.
Hamdi, but, but here's the point.
A lot of it comes down to this. It's the idea that I want to see
the outcome in my lifetime, or I want to be the one who delivers
the outcome. And the reason why I believe that's an almost un
Islamic concept. I didn't say it's not. The reason why I believe it's
an almost un Islamic concept is because when you read the Quran,
Allah makes abundantly clear, the outcome only belongs to him. Yes,
when you read Surat hood, you see it's all about prophets who go to
their people, and Allah says only a minority of their people believe
who Dalai Salam, Salah alai, salam, shahibai, Salam Lu Talai,
salam, no. Hala, salaam, not only that,
these are prophets who make expressions of almost despair.
Lord Alayhi. Salam says in Surah, kahlau and nali become kowata No.
Elaqin in Shadid, if only I had power over you, or power to
resist, or powerful I like to resist you. No Haley, Salah does a
lamentation in Surat nor where he says, Robbie, any doubt to call me
Layla? Wanna be as itum? Do I in a Fira? What any cool amid the
autofill whatsoever? Allah, I've called on my people day and night,
the same way you're trying to do now in although you won't shalab.
Majority will believe in you. I call them my people day and night,
and every time I call on them, they run away from me, and when I
call on them, so you might forgive them, they put their fingers in
their ears and they cover their faces and they treat me with
arrogance.
Allah destroys all of those people. But no Muslim would dare
to say that those prophets failed. Why? It's not just because they
believe that it's haram or that it's wrong, although, you know
they cringe at it. It's also because when they start thinking
beyond the fact it's haram, they start to think, Wait, why am I
saying these prophets didn't fail? It's because you come to the
conclusion that their duty was not to deliver the outcome. Their duty
was to keep striving and mobilizing in the hope that they
might be the vehicle to achieve the outcome. The same way that
when you're talking to UK Muslims and you presented your question,
your question as we might not have the same impact, you don't know
what impact we might have because we haven't tried to mobilize.
We've never tested our power. We don't know the value of the Muslim
vote yet, because we've never, as an organized bloc, actually
mobilized to try to achieve something. In Tower Hamlets, there
are four or five Muslim candidates. Imagine if there was
one Muslim candidate and they all rallied behind one nobody. One,
nobody would win in Tower Hamlets, in other constituents. It's the
same. If there were one Muslim can instead of three or four, nobody
would be able to beat the Muslim candidate in that constituency.
We've never actually tried to do so, and that's why I think that
Islam, in the way that it's a religion of action, is that Allah
rewards action. When you mobilize, that's when Allah opens the
opportunities for you, that's when Allah amplifies and makes that
reward. And that's why I think that sometimes when we're
discussing about the US politics or the UK politics, it's important
to note here that what I'm saying is not that we will punish Biden
or even that we will punish Keir Starmer. We may not Jala. Allah
may have written that it's not to be, but that's not for me to
decide. My point is I see an opportunity in front of me. It's
up to me to decide whether I want to take it or not. And I ask Allah
to guide us in the way that we take that opportunity and try to
maximize that as well. And there are some who will listen to this,
and this is what I wanted to finish on this particular point,
because this is the this is the message that I want to leave every
Muslim who thinks about this. Because many people say, what if
Trump comes? What if this happens? It's all what ifs, but Allah is in
control of the what ifs. I have a battle in front of me. The battle
in front of me is I saw 20,000
Palestinians genocide, and I saw I've seen genocide live streamed
in my lifetime. I've seen ethnic cleansing live stream. In my
lifetime, I saw a world that told me that human rights mattered. I
saw them throw it out the window be just because the Palestinians
don't look the way they do. I saw the world throw out international
law that it implemented on everybody but itself. I saw the
Western world go and throw out the laws and the cases just to
facilitate that ethnic cleansing and genocide. I saw the Western
world that preached freedom impose restrictions and repression
because it was terrified that freedom would result in sympathy
for the Palestinians. I.
I saw the greatest hypocrisy of the century right before my eyes.
And I'm supposed to sit down and say, what ifs there's a battle
before me that we have to fight. It's the war of narratives. Don't
tell me. What if I see a man who committed genocide. I see a man
who facilitated it. I see a man who supported the ethnic
cleansing. And somebody is telling me, what if somebody is worse, am
I supposed to let him continue with the second term, after
massacring the people like this, what justice on earth? What
interests, self interest on Earth would lead anybody to consider
that there is a just scenario that allows him to win that second
term. How can it even be a discussion? And that's why, when
people say to me, Look beyond what if the story of Surat Al Kahf,
between Musa and Khidr Alayhi masala is that when hidal knows
the unknown of Allah subhanahu wa know that Musa is told by Allah
that hidal knows unknown knowledge that doesn't stop Musa from
rebuking hidal Because Musa sees only what's in front of him and
does his duty based on what's in front of him. Allah who deal with
the unknown, when Hidalgo goes and he puts the hole in the boat of
the people who of the poor people. And Musa says, Why are you doing
this? You're doing an injustice. Musa is doing it based on what he
sees. I've seen genocide. I will do what Musa alaihi salam did,
because that was relation to him and Allah. I'll do what Moo said,
and I will stand against the genocide job, because I tell you
what the outcome every Muslim should see it's not perfection in
this dunya
for Allah would not be hafur Rahim. If the aim was perfection,
Allah would not be the forgiving. If it would not have named himself
the forgiving, although an excess apprenticeship was perfect, the
greatest outcome a Muslim can have. And the honor that Raza has
given us, the honor Raza has given us is Raza has given us, the
child, all of us, the chance to be vehicles to bring about this
change, vehicles to make a difference. Yeah. Muhammad Jalen,
when I see that public opinion has had such a sweeping impact on the
position of nation states, I am proud and honored that you brought
me to thinking Muslim podcast, and that I believe, even if it's just
an atom. I believe we contributed to that. I believe that when I see
that public opinion is making the Democrats panic, and I know it
wasn't bin Salman who, in the through Haza, has launched his dog
fashion show and brought Shakira and is planning to bring Iggy
Azalea and all these other sports. I know it wasn't him who brought
the change. I know it was the ordinary Muslim who mobilized.
When people talk about fatigue, I don't understand it, because
you're seeing the change that's being made. I believe ghaza gave
us the honor to be vehicles. And the reason why I say this is that
I believe that every Muslim, when they look at what's happening in
Raza, when they believe they don't have the power, they should
remember one thing that the ultimate aim of a Muslim is not
perfection in this dunya, it's being able to look the Prophet
Muhammad in the face on the Day of Judgment, when you enter Jannah
and say, Ya Rasulullah. I didn't have the powers I wish I had, but
I still kept going. And this is the scenario I imagine. I hope one
day inshaAllah that
the ultimate outcome for every Muslim is that when we're lying on
our deathbeds, and the soul leaves our body. And it may well, it may
well be that we die in the middle of another genocide, seeing
another genocide unfold. We die through tears that we weren't able
to stop it or weren't able to do anything else. We may die and say,
I'm leaving a world that is even more horrific and disgusting than
the one I left it. And you we even though, through your life, you
kept striving, mobilizing, shouting, tweeting, charities like
you, you're going up around the country trying to mobilize. You're
saying 50 different things, and people won't listen to you, or
they're like, Yeah, Allah, I try, like, no doubt, to call me Layla.
Wanna you lie in your deathbed, and you think, yeah, Allah, I
didn't achieve anything. When your soul leaves your body, at least.
Muhammad Janelle, you won't hear, yeah. You won't hear, Oh,
disgusting soul, soul that did nothing, so that sat at home, so
that told people there's no point. So that said the system was
rigged. Soul that said, oh, what you're doing, there's no point in
doing that. Or soul that you will hear instead, yeah, oh, beautiful,
sweet smelling soul, Oh, lovely. Soul that kept striving even when
the odds were against you, that kept speaking even when the world
was against you, that kept making effort after effort, even when you
never saw its fruits, that kept going and telling people to keep
going, even though you felt that you wouldn't see the outcome in
your lifetime, that you kept going, even through the despair,
even through the heartbreak, even when you felt there was it was
futile, you kept going. You kept mobilizing only because you
believe that Allah was in charge of the outcome and victory was
eventually coming, and that alone was worth mobilizing and worth
moving. The angels will say guys. There is a sweet I don't know if
they say guys, but the angels will say there is a sweet, smelling
soul that is coming up. This is a soul that kept striving, that kept
mobilizing, even though they never saw the outcome. So let me tell
you to Maria, Allah is pleased with you. We are as you're going
up. Allah is pleased with you. Fed. Hurribadi, what?
Jannetty, and this is the scenario, and I promise, this is
where I finish. I promise, I
promise. You know, for me, the most beautiful scenario I can
imagine, in my opinion. And it might not be a beautiful scenario
for other people, but this is why I imagine it may well be we might
not seek what's liberated in our lifetime. Professor Selim never
sought liberated in his lifetime. Let's be honest. When he died, he
was in charge of Mecca, Medina, some parts of Yemen and some parts
of the Arabian Peninsula. When he died, he was asked by the angels,
do you want to stay in this dunya and see the fruits of your labor,
or do you want to go back to Jannah? Note how the Prophet
Muhammad Sallam did not choose to stay in the Duni. He chose to go
back. Why? Because the Prophet Sallam knew the outcome belonged
to Allah. He was fine. He said, Allah will sort that out. I'm
ready to go back to Jannah. Such was the level of trust in Allah's
outcome. The Prophet never saw Islam in London. He never saw the
thinking Muslim podcast. He never saw Islam in LA or in Dallas or in
or in or in Argentina. But he didn't need to, because he was the
vehicle. That was the honor. And this is the scenario I imagine.
And this is where I finish. I wanted to finish on this point. I
imagine one day if Allah accepts our efforts Inshallah, and if
Allah
rewards us with it, and it's something that we pray for, and I
hope one day, even if we're not deserving of it, Allah and His
mercy will give it to us, which is gentle for those. I imagine one
day, Muhammad, jalmi and you and the other people in this room, we
sitting in the gathering of the Prophet Muhammad, saw and we
arrived this so I imagine, I imagine we arrive and we walk and
we say salaam, warahykum. They say, walaikum salam. And
Salahuddin ayubi is just finishing his story telling how he liberated
Al Aqsa. And I always imagine maybe a conversation with your
mukhattab saying, but when you enter the assalaha din, did you
uphold the rights of the Jews and the Christians? Did you do to
them? What what they did to us? Or did you uphold the Islamic way? We
know they are anti Semites. We know they persecute the Jews, but
Muslims don't. What did you do with the Jews after you entered
Jerusalem? Say, we brought them back and gave them sanctity and
comfort. Because every time anti semitic Europe would persecute
them, whether in Spain or in Poland or after the Holocaust,
they always came to the Muslim lands. Omaha will say, ascend. And
then we sit down. We say, salami Rasulullah, and we sit down with
the sahaba. And they will say, which generation are you from? And
we might say we're from a generation that didn't achieve
much materially, but we did the best that we could. And then
another man will come after us, and he'll sit, or a sister, and
they will and they will come and sit, they say, salaam alaikum,
Salah. Which generation are you from? We're from the generation
that liberated Al Aqsa, after his generation there. And we will be
excited, envious, excited, but envious in a good way. We wish
we'd been that generation, but tell us how it was done. Do you
know what I want to hear? I hope that I hear one day. I hope that
the person turns around to me and you generally says, you know, when
I was a kid, I heard the thinking Muslim podcast,
and I saw the efforts of those who came before us, those who
liberated the Muslim world from colonization in the 1950s 1960s
paved the way for our semi independence, the Arab Spring that
showed us that authoritarian regimes are not invincible. And
then those Muslims who emerged and said, you could be Muslim, and you
could preserve your deen and you could succeed in life, and that
they changed public opinion. They broke Israel's monopoly over the
narrative, which allowed us to speak more freely. We were able to
call it an apartheid regime. Then we were able to take
opportunities. And I hope one day that he says to Rasulullah, and he
says to ya rasulallah, but for these people, we wouldn't have
liberated Al Aqsa, though, that perhaps they didn't achieve it in
their lifetimes. Ya Rasulullah, they are the ones deserving of the
credit. That's the scenario I imagine, inshallah. That's the
scenario that I hope, even if I don't achieve Aqsa. But what I do
know is we have to keep moving, and that's why, if you can't fly,
run, if you can't run, walk, if you can't walk, crawl. But I
promise you, Wallah, ILAHA, Illa, who blink and buckled because of
public opinion. When the Ummah roared and raised the voices of
the Palestinians, Netanyahu buckled. Bin Salman buckled. Bin
Zayed buckled. Erdogan buckled. All of these people. They buckled
not because they wanted to do anything for the for Gaza, but
because public opinion forced them to adopt positions that they did
not want to adopt. When a Muslim tells me that they feel tired, I
can't understand it, because how can you see Blinken go from no
ceasefire to sustainable ceasefire? How can you see that
shift that's taking place and No, it's because of you, and feel
fatigued. Instead, we are winning the battle after battle after
battle. It's hard, it's turbulent, but we have to keep going, and now
we have the chance, even in these elections, to make an impact, and
even the next four or five years, to plug those gaps in the
industries where we found ourselves exposed. And Allah
subhanahu is the one who knows the outcome. All I know is there's a
battle in front of us. Let's fight this battle, then deal with the
outcomes after us, and may Allah give us every success in this
battle. InshaAllah, Sami hamdu, I've got one last question for
you. You described there a very evocative scene of Jannah, and may
Allah allow me to be in your company in in Jannah, Inshallah,
Tala, and with the ALI salatu Islam, and with Salahuddin ayubi
and everyone that you've mentioned there,
I was thinking when you when you said that
there are people who we come across in Gaza who have the
qualities of the sahaba. They have these Jannati qualities that we
can we can we can point to.
It is often the case that when we look at our generation, we see
ourselves to be beneath previous generations. You know, we see
ourselves to have to be those the froth on the ocean. You know,
those people who.
Don't really have the sway and the charisma and the strength of of of
those who came before us, and maybe we imagine that that's gone.
Those days are over. We're never going to get a Salahuddin again.
We're never going to get a Khalid bin Walid again, let alone Ibn
Taymiyyah, whoever you know in our Islamic history, that period's
over. How do you contend with that type of notion, who would you
like? And maybe a more direct question, Who do you see from
amongst us that you would like to be in Jannah with
inshallah Talley, if we, if we reach that lofty position, one of
the things that is fascinating about the way that hadith is used
is that the hadith is often used to denote the weakness of the
ummah. But when you look at that hadith, that hadith is less about
the power of the Ummah and more about the state of the ummah. Now
explain the difference between the two? The Prophet has to Salim did
not say the Ummah would have no power. He would say that the Ummah
would be like the frost of the sea, leaving room for an
interpretation that the Ummah would have power but not use that
power, that it would be incapable of using that power. And the
reason why I say this is that when you look at the trajectory of the
Ummah, the first thing is you have to reconcile that hadith with the
ayat of the Quran, that Allah, Subhanahu wa, is always in control
of all affairs, and that Allah gives victory to whom He wills.
Allah did not say he gives victories to certain generations.
Allah says He gives victory to whom he wills implying it's an
eternal situation. It's an eternal point. The second point is people
often read the Hadith, ignoring the recent historical victories of
the ummah. By that, I mean that the way the Ummah was liberated
from colonization 60 years ago. We would talk about the Arab Spring,
even we talk about the period between the 1960s and 1990s the US
was unable to establish a single military base in the region,
because despite these rulers that many like to paint very
simplistically, were puppets of the West, which they weren't. One
of the things that is worth noting is this, a lot of the crisis in
the Muslim countries, we have to be fair, during that period were
less about Western intervention and more about fitna between
ourselves in the same way that we saw Ali bin Abi Talib and Muawiyah
fight between themselves, two very good men, Ali Bin, of course,
being much better man. But the point is that we saw even good men
fight between themselves. We saw even Sahaba go fitna between
themselves. There's nothing wrong in saying that during that period,
we also saw fitna between them. The reason why I say this is
during that period, the Americans were desperate for a military
base, but no one would give them one, until Saddam invaded Kuwait
and Kuwait invited them. And that's why Saddam, at the time the
people, the reason people say it was a huge mistake, irrespective
of what Kuwait was doing, was that he gave the door that allowed the
Americans to finally get into the region and finally establish their
military base. The reason why I say this is that when you look at
the way the Ummah has progressed, when you look at it from the
French perspective, they colonized the Muslim world for 132 years in
Algeria. Do you think they ever expected that the heroes of the
new French generation would be the Muslim Paul Pogba Muslim ngolo
kantee, Muslim Karim Benzema? Did you ever envisage that the
Americans, when they brutalized the Muslims abroad, expected that
they would ever have an election where those very Muslims in the
belly of the beast would now potentially have the deciding vote
in an upcoming election? Did you ever envisage that the Britain,
which used to rule an empire where the sun never sets, where Winston
Churchill says the dog in the major doesn't have any right to
the Palestinian land? Do you think Churchill ever envisaged a
scenario where Sami Hamdi and Muhammad Jalal now have the power
in the upcoming UK elections to deliver a body blow to the labor
and the conservatives, if only they can rally the Muslim vote and
rally them behind a particular candidate. Do you think that these
powers always existed? They are relatively new, and the reason
that they are new, the reason that they exist today, is because of
the efforts of the Ummah in moving forward and mobilizing and that's
why the people of Jannah are not the people of those you see on the
podiums who celebrate at the end of the victory. The people of the
Jannah are those who strove and those who mobilize, even though
they never saw the outcome. Musa ibn Umar, the first diplomat of
Islam who went to Medina to pave the way for the Prophet sallallahu
Sallam to come. Never saw Fatima. He never saw the liberation of
Mecca. He never saw the Prophet sallallahu Sallam in a position of
according to modern standard strength, he saw the Prophet. When
he left the Prophet, he left him in a state where the prophet
sallam was, according to political and this week, you can imagine he
probably died, saying, Yeah, Allah, please protect the Prophet,
for I'm going back to you while he's still in this particular
situation. Does that mean Musa? I mean failed. Do you think he's
sitting in Jannah? Going, Oh, I wish I'd stayed until Fatima
instead of coming here to Jannah, the reality is, when you when I
went to in the Turkish elections, when Erdogan, everybody thought he
would lose. So part of me felt that as a result of erdogan's
pragmatism, he's undermining the Muslim movement in Turkey, and
that the Muslim movement needs to badly reflect that this pragmatism
Erdogan demeshe cannot be the final solution, there must be
another way forward. And there must be a way to, you know, find
you know, re correct the trajectory. A Turkish Imam said to
me, Sammy, I agree with all of your criticism of Erdogan, all of
it, I said, so maybe, maybe, maybe he should lose the election, so
the Muslim movement can. He said, I.
Erdogan is the product of my grandfather who was executed for
teaching Quran, of my grandfather who was abused for wearing the
hijab, of our forefathers who kept Islam alive when Ataturk was
desperately trying to chain it. We are the ones who suffered in order
to finally bring back Erdogan. He's not the final product. He's
not the perfect product, but he's the result of our efforts, where
we are breaking the system, a system that was designed against
us. We broke it, and we're making it now work for us. Saw me, he
said, We will fix Erdogan, not Europe and America. We will fix
Erdogan because we believe that he is the product of our jihad, FISA
bilallah. Because when we could have laid down and allowed Ataturk
to have his way, we said, No, we will never allow Turkey to become
a land where they don't say Allah. When I look at the Bosnians, and I
go to these Bosnians, the, you know, the in the 1940s in 1938
they had this Muslim question. A big communist thinker, he said, we
have an issue of this Muslim identity. They don't identify on
ethnicities. So their solution was not to say, let's understand
Islam. Their solution was to execute students who led Muslim
associations and imprisoned the others
that 2223 year old executed because His only crime was and he
died proud. He refused to budge on it, and the others he they died.
When they died, communism was rife and the Muslims being persecuted.
You cannot say those. These are the people of Jannah, and the
Bosnians continued even after the Serbian genocide. Today, Islam
roars in Bosnia in the heart of Europe, Mitterrand is reported as
telling Bill Clinton, I will not accept Islam, Islamic State in the
heart of Europe today, regardless of what Mitterrand wanted, Bosnia
is a Muslim majority state in the heart of Europe, not because
they're being forced to accept Islam, but because despite
genocide and persecution and and bullying and despite all of these
things that were committed against them, they could have said, we no
longer believe. Accept us. They refuse to let go of la ilaha,
illallah, Muhammad, rasulallah. And we're not just talking about
hijabis. I was on a train going from musta to Sarajevo to try to
tell because sometimes we take the groups from Sarajevo to musta
journey is a bit tiring. I thought, let's try the train.
There's a lady sitting next to me. She's maybe 65 years old, 60 years
old, wearing a tight, you know, like shorts, and wearing a tight
top, and her hair is a bit short. I'm talking to an Australian
Bosnian about Bosnia, and I said, you know, but I want to understand
where the hatred comes that led to that genocide. And she looks at me
with her eyes, face fire in her eyes. She goes, it's because we're
Muslim and we never gave up Allah and His Prophet. And I had
goosebumps when she said it to me like that, this is an ummah when
you when you learn about it, when you see it, these, in my opinion,
these are the people of Jannah. Be people who when the world turns
against them, when the odds turn against them, when the world tells
them, give up la Ilala and we will stop persecuting you. Give up
Laham da Rasulullah, and you the French. When they were in Algeria,
they said, we want here as a civilizing mission. Islam is
backwards. Just leave Islam and be French, and we will give you equal
rights. They used to celebrate when the Algerians would speak
French or the like. The reason the French were horrified is because,
after 132 years of the civilizing mission, the Algerians still
roared on independence from 1962 Yeah, Muhammad. Mabuhay, Al
Jazeera, oh, Muhammad, Prophet. Muhammad, congratulations. Algeria
has been returned to you, and the French said, What is it about
this? Deen, that means that we can commit genocide, ethnic cleansing,
persecution, ban their religion, ban their language and the like,
and they refuse to give up on Laila, Muhammad rasulallah. That's
why the people of Jannah, you mentioned Salah ad ayubi. The
problem I feel with this ummah is we only believe people of Jannah
are people like Saladin ayubi, not those behind the scenes that you
never heard of, that gave their lives for their struggle, because
they weren't interested in the applause, they weren't interested
in the faith. They were a people who believe that Allah knows their
deeds, Allah knows what they're doing, and they believe, because
they loved Allah, as if they could see him, they died in with nobody
knowing who they were, but they paved the way for me and you to
take liberties, to then assess whether what they did was right or
wrong, while they sit in general, where he's still desperate,
unsure, even if we will go to Jannah or not. And that's the
point when you say the people of Jannah. I no longer believe the
people of Jannah are the grand individuals. Obi I believe Sahana,
yobis with Jannah. I believe, you know, when you meet these people.
And this what I always tell people sometimes, and I promise I finish
on this. No, I think the greatest crime that colonization did to the
Muslim ummah was not just the physical. They electrocuted my
grandfather. They chopped off the breast of his my great uncle was
1819, when he was killed by the French one day, the French
soldiers, they saw one of his cousins, she was pregnant. So the
French they mocked. They said, let's find out the gender of the
baby, what they meant. And they took out the knife, and they were
ready to slit her belly open to bring that's what the French used
to do in Algeria. He saw and he panicked, so he picked up a rifle
and he shot the four French soldiers they came into his house
and riddled him with bullets afterwards. The point is, the
French did horrific things in Algeria, but still, even so, when
I look at what these these people did, the people who refused to
give Islam, the ordinary people, that's why, when Heraclius says,
Who are the people who follow.
This prophet. They said it's the weakest of society, or those we
consider the lowest and hierarchy. Said this was the way of the
prophets before, and that's why I think if you're an ummah that
looks down on that but only looks up, you're already looking in the
wrong direction. You're already looking in the wrong way. The
Prophet saw him. Could have bought Quraysh. He could have taken the
money, and he could have, he chose not to, because he knew the deen
is not delivered by money. The deen is not delivered by this
thought influence. The deen is delivered by the hearts of the
ordinary people, by Sumayya, Radha laha, who dies before Fatima. She
dies in Quraysh before they even go to Medina after just turning to
Islam. By Muslim way, by Hamza Ravi Lahan who who dies in Ohad
and having never seen the Fatah Mecca or the other. Sahaba, who
died beforehand. You see all of these, none of these. Sahaba
failed. They were pillars that we stood on. And that's why I come
back to this collusion. When I said, Be the vehicle. I believe
this ummah will have glory when the Muslim believes that there is
just as much honor in dying the way Musa Imran may did as being
Salah hadil. We this ummah will thrive when it realizes that Musa
bin rahmael, who died before Fatah Mecca, has just as much glory as
the Sahaba who entered Mecca itself with the Prophet Muhammad,
sallAllahu Salla. When we reorient what it means to be great in
Islam, when we finally realize that it's not Muslims that make
Islam great, it's not Salah di ayubi That made Islam great. It's
Islam that made salah, hadil ayubi great when we realize that it's
not us that makes Allah great. It's not us doing the favor for
Allah. It's Allah who makes us great by allowing us to be
vehicles and then rewarding us, even if we don't get to the
outcome, rewarding the Quran teacher who gets executed for
teaching Quran, but rewards him because he kept the message of
Islam alive, teaching a generation that produced Erdogan. Erdogan
learned from this generation, and so did the others. And remember,
and I promise this is where I finish. There is a book on Algeria
that I bought in order to try to see why the French don't apologize
for colonization. I wanted just to see from their perspective. I
said, You know what? Forget complaining. Let me see the book.
He identifies two turning points. The one is the massacre that we
talked about in previous podcasts. But the second he identifies is
1920s when Abdul Hamid bin medis and the Council of Islamic
scholars revitalized the Algerian identity with Islam, because 30
years later, the generation that entered the FLN that would
liberate Algeria were fluent in Islam, fluent in Arabic, fluent in
their identity after being battered by the French, those
scholars revived it. They revived the deen. That's why, when people
talk about Quran, it's fundamental. It's so important.
And that's the point I want to make. To answer your question,
short terms, you ask me, who are the people you want to be with in
Jannah? I've come to realize that the people of Jannah are not the
ones on the podiums or be May Allah give them Jannah. The people
of Jannah are those who never wanted the podiums and were ready
to sacrifice their lives for Allah, so I might have the liberty
to shout in front of a microphone and tell people, please punish
genocide. Joe samakar, thank you very much for your time.
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 The.