Muhammad Al-Yaqoubi

http://hurryupharry.org/2010/09/14/muhammad-al-yaqoubi-the-gpu-and-community-cohesion/

You go to the Islamic world itself, Muslim governments, Muslims kings and presidents and prime ministers in the Islamic world itself do not bother about what is going on in their own country, let alone the West.

This is why the West now has more courage, especially with these wrong and false ideals like ‘freedom of religion’ or ‘freedom of expression’. In Islam I do not allow under the banner of ‘freedom of expression’ someone to come and curse or insult a Prophet of Allah (swt).

You do not insult others such as Ahlul dhimmah living in our Muslim countries, we know that they worship Isa (as) as the son of God, Christians for example, but we don’t beat them in the streets because they do this.

We sell, we buy, and we exchange business with them as needed in the Islamic world with respect of their blood and their wealth. We don’t insult them, although we know that they are very wrong by making Jesus the son of God and worshipping him and so on.

Now the West has crossed every red line in respect of norms and ethics and I don’t think Muslims should tolerate this. If you’re asking me about how to react, how to respond, I believe we should show the highest angry level of response.

We should tell the West that this is a red line you can never cross. When someone comes to claim God on Facebook, as happened recently, or when someone comes to call for the drawing of Rasulullah Sallallahu Alaihi Wa Sallam (Peace and Blessings be upon him) on Facebook, the government where Facebook is registered should have rules and limitations on the ‘freedom of expression’, and the same in Denmark.

A drawer cannot come from nowhere to draw under the banner of ‘freedom of expression’, he does so because he knows his government protects him.

Facebook is one of the biggest companies in the US, so when it is involved in something like this I believe Islamic countries should pull back their ambassadors from the US and protest against US policy in allowing this level of ‘freedom of speech’ – it is blasphemy, it is not freedom of speech at all.

[…]

We should put pressure on our Muslim Ambassadors to say to the US that we can stop your financial, economical or strategic interests in this area and cause damage. I don’t want to mention names but we have in the Middle East governments working in full alliance with the US.

We have 60 countries in the Islamic world that are doing nothing. We called for the boycott of Denmark and it succeeded until unfortunately there was a compromise and it was a big mistake to stop the boycott of Danish products. Muslims were united on that and their unity was one of the best examples.

[…]

I know the Muslim ummah listens to the ulema, so the ulema should stand up on these occasions, and should not play a role of suppressing people’s anger or telling them it’s alright or playing it down by telling them well this happens all the time.

I believe when Denmark protected the drawer and defended his ‘right to express himself’ Muslim countries one by one should have cut their ties, their diplomatic relations, with Denmark and should have pulled back their ambassadors and that would have meant a lot.

Denmark isn’t really a big country, and so we could have taught the West a great lesson, and every other country, that we don’t fear any country that follows the same pattern and that they will get the same treatment from the Islamic world. And this would not cost the Muslim world much.

[…]

We should unite – I don’t mind marching in the streets, I don’t mind boycotting products or companies, boycotting governments or countries, doing everything possible within our limits to stop such provocations. The ulema should especially unite and take a stand – the ulema should be responsible and should lead the ummah in such manifestations.

For individuals living in the West, I would say boycotting products, marching, writing articles and doing TV interviews is the best way to respond. I believe if the ummah did this for a week on a larger scale the West would have to adhere to Muslims’ demands.

We didn’t unite in doing this except for a week or so with Denmark, then unfortunately some scholars tried to compromise by starting a dialogue, any dialogue in this regards is of their own interests, and not of our interests.

By continuing to boycott the Danish products we were not going to lose anything. Cheese… we’ll get other types of cheese, engines… we’ll get engines from other countries. However other countries would have understood that their economic interests should be based on respecting Muslims religion if they going to export to the Muslim world or import oil from the Muslim world.

“The majority of the early generations, the early peoples and nations were in deviation, and in that there is a sign, and not the majority of them will be believers. Allah (SWT) says about this, talking about the majority, (Arabic) If you obey the majority of the people on the face of the earth they will take you away, they will make you deviate from the way of Allah (SWT). And this is I believe very interesting here. The Qur’an is opening for us the way to understand democracy as it is presented to us in today’s terms now. Because democracy in today’s terms now means the opinion of the majority. Well, if we’re travelling as a group of people we can agree on what meal to eat, what meal to cook, and we take the opinion of the majority. There is no harm from a shari’ah point of view to take the opinion of the majority on such examples. But to take the opinion of the majority on fornication, whether it is legal or illegal, you cannot. This is not an authority given to you. It is not an authority given to the majority, the peoples. This is not to be decided in a referendum. It is not to be decided in any legislation house, parliament. This is up to Allah (SWT) to the revelation to the message of Allah and up to the scholars to decide. Of course in case of fornication it’s already decided. No scholar can even add or omit anything. This is not a majority here.”

Yet equality nowadays means something different, man and women are equal indeed before Allah, in responsibility and in rights. Yet they are not identical, not even 2 people are created identical in the world, they have similar rights, equal rights, yet they do not have identical rights, not 2 human beings could ever be identical on earth.

Not in way of behavior, thinking, intellectual or any other social way of behavior. What modern societies are seeking is not equality between men and women, but giving women identical rights, exactly like the rights of men, which is completely wrong, because it’s against the very nature of human being, against the very nature of man and women together.

[…]

Allah is neither masculine nor feminine, we refer to Allah by a neutral pronoun, not a masculine pronoun, the name of Allah, ALLAH, does not come in a feminine form, it does not come in a plural form, it is Allah as it is a proper noun for Him, Almighty Allah.

Yet compare this to the English language, you have the word God, you say goddess and you have a feminine god, like Venus, because this is the impact of the Greek mythology on Christianity and European cultures, then you have gods masculine plural form and goddesses feminine plural form.

In Arabic you don’t have any of that. And we need to understand that the English language was not used as a channel of revelation at all, it is not a sacred language. I don’t consider any language that makes the name of god, when its reversed, turn into Dog, a sacred language.

[…]

“…it is not the Islamic culture that makes of women the worst in the society. It is the western culture that says women are evil, because it was believed that the woman is the source of evil, women were a curse in the Middle ages, now compare this to how Islam treats women and how Islam looks upon women.

When talking about Islam many questions are raised about the veil the laws of inheritance, polygamy and so forth. To answer these questions one has to have one basic rule, it is that we as human beings have to follow the laws of Allah and not the laws of human beings.

Because human beings make errors, may turn away from the truth, may not find the best solutions for themselves. The laws of human beings are relative, what is good today might be bad the next day, what is the actual norm of societies nowadays might become a source of embarrassment the next day.

And you can see how the laws developed in western societies and how social behaviour developed in western societies. What was shameful a few decades ago causes no shame nowadays. People can even walk naked in the streets and demonstrate, without any embarrassment, but if you ask how the elderly people feel about this they will say that such things were not possible a few decades ago.

So relativity is one of the signs of modern society while the laws of Allah are consistent with the needs of human beings and permanent and ever lasting, and this is why Allah made the final revelation the last and ever remaining revelation, the only valid message till the day of judgement.

People ask about Polygamy while in Sweden people can marry their own half-siblings, and it is not the only unique law within that respect within European laws.

This law of incest is still present TODAY! And then they come talking about Polygamy, where is their shame? They can marry their own sisters and brothers and then they come criticize polygamy in Islamic societies which is one of the marvellous features of the laws of Allah.

 

 

 

%d bloggers like this: