Khilafah Magazine August 2003

4EDITORIAL

5POSTER

6NEWS

8WMD ROCKS LONDON AND

WASHINGTON

11'ISLAMOPHOBIA'

THE PRODUCT OF A CLASHOF CIVILISATIONS

14THE WEST TREATS ITS POWSLIKE IT TREATS THE REST OF

THE WORLD

16DEMOCRACYBY THE IRON FIST

19SO YOU WANT TO DRIVE AFERRARI ?

21DEPRESSION - ANEPIDEMIC OF WESTERNSOCIETY

23DIVISION INTO 73 SECTS

26THE ROLE OF WOMEN INPOLITICS

30THE DILEMMA OF MUSLIMIDENTITY IN THE WEST

Con

tent

sJumada Al-Thani/Rajab 1424 - August 2003

Khilafah

3

magazine

Cover Issue 8 Volume 16

August 2003 Khilafah Magazine

Assalamu Alaikum wa Rahmatullahi waBarakatahu,

As increasing numbers of people inWestern society embrace Islam and a newgeneration of Muslims establish

themselves in the Western world, building on thesacrifices of our parents, we increasingly findourselves looking inwards as we seek tocomprehend the very different challenges facingour generation.

The recent war on Iraq caused some deeplyunsettling questions regarding our identity andpolitical allegiances to resurface. This combinedwith the increased 'Islamophobia' in the Westernworld and the effects of globalisation highlightsome of the new challenges facing us. Indeedmany Muslims remain uncertain about our futureand how we can fit in with British society.

For some time now, Western politicians,commentators, journalists and prominentpersonalities have all engaged in a discussionabout the present state of the Muslim communityin Britain. In this discussion, Muslims have beenasked to answer several questions: Are you withus or with the terrorists? Are you British orMuslim? Where does your allegiance and loyaltylie?

Upon studying and analysing the reality of thesediscussions about the identity, values, allegianceand loyalty of Muslims, it is evident that there hasbeen a deliberate attempt to sideline the clearIslamic view with regards to Muslims in Britain.

Muslims living in the West, including Britain,have undoubtedly been affected by the Westernway of life such that their identity has become

Edito

rial indistinct, their values have become tarnished

with the secular ones and their vision has beenconstricted to the narrow horizons of the Dunya.The Muslim who prays five times daily yet has amortgage, the Muslim who sends his children tolearn Qur'an at a Madrassa but is not bothered byhis wife wearing Western dress, the Muslim whofeels for the Muslims of Iraq but plays theNational Lottery and the Muslim who shuns Ribaonly to vote Labour or Conservative on pollingday have all been affected in one way or anotherby the Western thoughts and values.

It must be recognised that undoubtedly Islam hasmapped out a unique, distinct and characteristicidentity for Muslims that is based solely on theIslamic Aqeedah. It is the Islamic Aqeedah alonethat determines the identity of the Muslims, thevalues he adopts and the vision he aspires to.Allah (swt) has revealed Islam to provideguidance to mankind. The guidance implies thatwe recognise that Islam has the authority toregulate our lives in their entirety. Muslims inBritain cannot have the attitude of taking theguidance of Allah (swt) in the ibadat (acts ofworship) while leaving the guidance in mattersconcerning politics, economics and ruling to theothers.

Muslims are obliged to steadfastly adhere to therules of the Islamic Shari'ah in all matters andrealise the fallacies and errors of the Westernthoughts, values and way of life. Islam must bethe sole reference in life for Muslims in Britainwhen bringing up children, marrying, addressingthe problems of the community, embarking onbusiness ventures or solving disputes.

O Muslims! Islam is a trust (amanah) on thenecks of the Muslims and Allah (swt) willaccount us for this trust on the Day of Judgement.Living in the West is not easy and we will surelyface many hardships. The choice is ours - eitherwe succumb to the thoughts of Kufr or we standas a lofty pillar against them. We know that thepeople in the West - the non-Muslims - live inutter darkness. Their materialistic ideology hastaken morals out of society, taken modesty awayfrom women, taken honesty away from trade andtaken the innocence away from our children. Ifwe live according to Islam in its entirety, nomatter the hardships we face, then our communitywill be a shining light, like a lamp on a dark night,guiding through our good actions and through ourcomplete adherence to our Deen.

Dr Imran Waheed

Khilafah Magazine August 20034

Khilafahmagazine

EditorAsif Dawood

Editorial BoardDr Imran WaheedAsif KhanAhmad JassatJalaluddin PatelAbdul Hamid JassatSajjad Khan

No Copyrights

Since Islam rejects copyrights and patents you arefree to reproduce articles contained within thispublication. It is our kind request that when doing soyou cite the author and source of the article.

Translation of the Qur’an

It should be perfectly clear that the Qur’an is onlyauthentic in its original language, Arabic. Sinceperfect translation of the Qur’an is impossible, theterm ‘Translation of the Meaning of the Qur’an (TMQ)has been used, as the result is only a crude meaningof the Arabic text.

Subscription details

Subscription charges:

£20 per annum including postage UK€40 per annum including postage Europe$60 per annum including postage USA

To subscribe to Khilafah Magazine please refer to: Internet Site: www.1924.orgemail: [email protected]

or write to: Khilafah Magazine, Suite 298, 56 Gloucester Road, London, SW7 4UB

please make cheques payable to ‘khilafah publications’

Published by Khilafah PublicationsSuite 298, 56 Gloucester Road, London, SW7 4UBwww.1924.org · [email protected]

Khilafah Magazine is a monthly magazine publishedin London with a wide distribution across the Muslimand non-Muslim world. The magazine is dedicated toarticulating the case for Islam as an ideology thatdeals with all human problems, whether individual orsocietal. Islam must be understood ideologically andhas a defined political and ruling system – theKhilafah System. We maintain that the 'Clash ofCivilisations' is not only inevitable but imperative. Asthe Capitalist ideology dominates the world today, theonly challenge to it must come from Islam.

We write to inform, inspire and create a movementfor true intellectual revival.

Sisters EditorialAdvisorsDr Nazreen NawazRuksana RahmanSameena Asghar

News EditorDr Samiul Muquit

Production and PublishingMokbul HussainKosser Mohammed

August 2003 Khilafah Magazine 5

WHO KILLED DR. KELLY?

By now, it has become a tired cliché, butAeschylus' famous maxim "In war,truth is the first casualty" is particularlypoignant when considering Dr DavidKelly's death. Caught in the midst of afutile war of words between thegovernment and the BBC, the pressureof being the subject of a ruthlessexamination by the Foreign AffairsSelect Committee, eventually proved tobe too much. The entire fiascosurrounding BBC allegations that thegovernment's dossier on Iraq had been'sexed up' has fuelled a ferociousdebate.

Chaos has ensued from what started outas little more than a sideshow. Kelly'sappearance before the SelectCommittee should have been little morethan a routine affair. Yet it ended intragedy when police confirmed thegrizzly news that Kelly had bled todeath in a field, having slashed hiswrist. He had told his wife that he wasgoing for a walk, apparently leavinghome with a knife and a packet ofpainkillers.

In the fallout from this event, attentionhas shifted away from the initial issueof whether or not the governmentdeliberately misled the people. It is nowdominated by the curious circumstancessurrounding Kelly's suicide. Despitethese late developments, no one isprepared to accept responsibility. TheBBC continues to protest its right tomake the allegations whilst thegovernment remains unapologetic. ThePrime Minister, in response to questionson whether or not he would resign overthe issue replied; "You've got to havebroad shoulders in this job ... I've gotthem."

In a desperate attempt to absolve itselfof any blame, the government haslaunched an independent judicialenquiry. This is a seasoned politicalstunt, designed to give the appearancethat the government has nothing to hideand wants to uncover the truth. Whilstmany will eagerly await the results ofthe enquiry, significantly, it will notinvestigate the main issue of whether ornot the government producedmisleading intelligence reports.

With these investigations often runningon for many months, if not years, itseems as though much of the publicoutrage will dissipate by the time thefindings are published. In the process,the government will have successfullyside stepped the issue on weapons ofmass destruction whilst stifling anydebate on Kelly's death.

Shiraz Maher

LIBERIA IN TURMOIL

There have been calls for internationalhumanitarian intervention following theoutbreak of a third rebel assault on theLiberian capital, Monrovia. For the pastfour years, rebels have been engaged ina bitter conflict with government troopsto oust Liberian President CharlesTaylor from power. This four-year waris just the latest round of a fourteen-yearold civil war, which has cost thousandsof innocent Liberian lives. The latestconflict has disrupted water and foodsupplies and deprived shelter for thoseMonrovians trying to keep away fromthe fighting.

UN Secretary General Kofi Annan wasquoted as saying; "Liberia today ispoised between hope and disaster,"adding that the Liberians fighting must;"understand they will be heldaccountable for any humanitariandisaster the fighting causes inMonrovia." Annan also urged thatpeacekeeping forces be deployed so thata similar outcome as that inneighbouring Sierra Leone could beachieved.

However, despite calls by currentPresident Taylor, who is prepared toresign and accept an offer of asylum inNigeria once peacekeepers enter thecountry, he has been told by PresidentBush and the rebels that peacekeepers

will only be sent once he resigns hispost. The unfortunate fact is that, whilstnegotiations continue for a ceasefire,more and more Liberians will die in thebloodshed.

Liberia has a history with the UnitedStates. It was established by freedAmerican slaves sent to the West coastof Africa by anti-slavery societies. Thename of the country means ‘Liberty’and the coat of arms of the countryreads "Our love of liberty brought ushere."

Despite the admiration the Liberiannation has for the US, we see that theUS administration in its neo-colonialistarrogance has not been returning thefavour and is quite happy to see a nationnear catastrophe than to jeopardise theopportunity to deal with a more USfriendly regime and gain access to astrategic part of Africa.

Mohammed Ashifuddin

"MUSLIMS FOR LABOUR"

This month, Parliament was home tothe official launch of a new groupentitled "Muslims for Labour" (MFL),which aims to create a strong newchannel of communications between theLabour party and the Muslimcommunity. Attending the launch wererepresentatives from communitygroups, local councillors, MPs and twocabinet ministers.

The formation of the MFL receivedhigh accolades from Trade and IndustrySecretary, Patricia Hewitt who said atthe launch; "Ministers, as well as theLabour Party, need to have a muchfuller and richer dialogue with theMuslim community in our country andthe creation of this new organization isa major step forward." Muslim MPsMuhammad Sarwar and KhalidMahmood have also given their fullbacking to the creation of the pressuregroup urging Muslim youth toparticipate within mainstream politics.

The Labour party has been quick to tryand build bridges with the Muslimcommunity, which has been bothangered and dismayed at the stancetaken by the government in the recentIraq conflict. This has led to manyMuslims becoming disillusioned withthe western political process andwestern capitalist political parties.

The creation of such groups aims atrenewing the faith of the Muslims inwestern politics by encouragingMuslims to make their voices heard andto seek certain partial interests within

the capitalist system. The Muslims whoadvocate the creation of such groupsimagine that they will be able toinfluence the policy decisions of thegovernment.

History has proven time after time thatcapitalist governments, like that inBritain, are ultimately driven bymaterial interests, above all else. Eventhe integration of minority groups intothe mainstream is seen in this respect.The interests and sentiments of itsminority Muslim group or even themajority of the population will bedisregarded when necessary, asillustrated in the recent Iraq conflict.The outcome of groups like MFL is thatthe Muslims integrate into the capitalistpolitical system, driven by partialinterests like Halal food in schools,while turning a blind eye to thecolonialist nature of capitalistgovernments. These outcomes willfurther subjugate the Muslim countrieswhile spelling disaster for Muslimsresiding in the UK.

Ibrahim Karir

NEW GLOSSY MAGAZINE- AMERICA'S LATEST WEAPONAGAINST THE MUSLIMS IN THEMIDDLE EAST

Not content with their unjustifiableinvasion and killing of innocentMuslims in Iraq, the Americanadministration, headed by PresidentBush, has launched a new "IntellectualWar" against the Muslims in the MiddleEast in the form of a magazine. Themagazine, printed in the Arabiclanguage and called "Hi Magazine" hasrecently been sold across the MiddleEast and has specifically targeted theMuslim youth in the region.

The first issue of the magazine,published by the State Department,contained articles on Jazz music, sandboarding, Arabic poetry in the US andyoga. Ironically, there is also a sectionon relationships entitled; "MakingMarriage Work", which seems all themore amusing given the fact that at least43% of all marriages in the US end indivorce according to statistics publishedby leading US newspaper USATODAY. There is also an article on"Life in American Universities", whichhas interviews with Muslim Studentsenjoying the so-called "Freedom ofthought", which the US allegedly has tooffer.

The American administration claims themagazine is designed to show a positiveimage of America and highlight thesimilarities between the youth in

New

s


America and the youth in the Muslimlands. To further aid this cause all thearticles in the magazine have beenwritten by Arab Americans inWashington and stringers in the MiddleEast.

The magazine is just part of a broadermedia attack on the Muslims in theregion. In a speech to the SouthernCentre for International Studies inAtlanta the director of the WhiteHouse's Office of GlobalCommunications, Tucker Eskew, citedplans to spend $62m developing anArabic language television network,which, along with the magazine willserve as a two pronged attack on theMuslim youth.

In light of the growing anti-Americanfervour in all of the Muslim lands, thesemoves are aimed at improving theAmerican image in the Middle-East,which is dear to America only for itsresources and strategic location. Whatis more dangerous, however, is that thistool also promotes western values andkufr concepts. The pen is used here inconjunction with the sword as it has forcenturies to attack Islam and its values.

This time the Americans are not makingany secrets about their true intentions.Mr. Eskew admitted; "We're fighting awar of ideas as much as a war onterror".

Mohammed Tahir Malik

THE (UN)PATRIOT(IC) ACT

A new argument rages on in America asthe Justice Department investigates andcompiles allegations of abuse of its self-defined civil rights and liberties. Theseallegations are related to an Act whichapparently contradicts the USConstitution by allowing the secretmonitoring and arrest of individuals.Worst affected have been the Muslimsin this homeland aspect of the US war-on-terror. America has shown itself tobe a police state with increased policeand FBI presence in institutions such asuniversities.

On October 25, 2001, about a monthafter the WTC bombings, congresspassed the Patriot Act. This act, whichwas passed without any debate orhearing, allows for the searching and/orseizing of any information from anyindividual without proof of a probablecause. Not only does this act relinquishany semblance of due process, but italso violates the First, Fourth, Fifth,Sixth and Eighth Amendments.

Following September 11th, manyMuslim citizens of the United Stateshave been made to feel apologetic fortheir beliefs. Due to propaganda, manyAmerican kafir have begun to lookupon their Muslim neighbours asterrorists. Now, without any reason, orany proof they can be treated like thecriminals people think they are. Theirprivacy can be totally violated if theFBI thinks they are connected to somekind of terrorism. Because of the stigmaalready attached to Muslims after thebombings, it is easy to see how one onlyhas to have an Islamic name or be aMuslim youth perusing a science degreeat a university, let alone take an interestin speaking out against thehomogenisation of the Muslim Ummahinto 'modern Islam', to be reprimandedunder this new act. For those who dospeak out, simply by exercising thenation's ‘constitutional right’, of whichthey are citizens, they become suspect.

The selective nature of freedom ofspeech provides a continuing source ofamazement. When the Constitution ofthe United States was first written, itdifferentiated between men, women andslaves. Only white men were entitled toits rights. This was later amended, butapparently it has not been put intopractice. Otherwise, how could onejustify that for Christian or a Jew tocriticise an aspect of government isacceptable, but that for a Muslim, it isan issue of national security?

Kosser Mohammed

SADDAMS DEAD SONS - AREPRIEVE FOR THE OCCUPIERS?

With daily attacks against USoccupying troops in Iraq, a cover-upunder way in both Washington andLondon over the case to go to war andthe continued failure to find anyWeapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq -the killing of Saddam Hussain's twosons, Uday and Qusay may have givena break away from the pressures anddilemmas faced by Bush and Blair.

On Wednesday after a lengthy gunbattle in an affluent suburb of thenorthern city of Mosul, Americantroops bombed the building which

Saddam Hussain's sons had been hidingin since the collapse of the regime.

After no less than three failed attemptsto storm the building by the infamous101st Airborne division, the US troopsresorted to bombing the building byApache helicopter fire before stormingthe building again to find the deadbodies of Uday and Qusay on thesecond floor along with their henchmenand affiliates.

In a supposed effort to inform the Iraqipeople that Saddam's sons had indeedbeen killed, the US civilianadministration ordered the publicationof the photos of the two dead mendespite some concerns from theirmilitary. Colonel Dan Smith, a retiredmilitary intelligence officer, said; "Weobjected to the showing of bodies ofAmerican servicemen. It's ironic thatwe turn around and display dead folksnow." Ironic it is that when pictures ofthe bodies of British soldiers killed inBasra were aired by Al-Jazeera, the USand British administrations condemnedthese outright, citing Genevaconventions, and barred the relaying ofthat footage on their own news stationsin London and Washington. Howeverin this case, and throughout the war,they gloat over gory images beamedhome from reporters on the"Liberation" of Iraq in an effort to allaythe fears of the British and Americanpeople that they were losing the war.

Throughout the war, Iraqi prisonerswere paraded for the cameras, deadbodies were shown on the highway intoBaghdad and many more images wereaired of human suffering being inflictedon the Muslims.

The double standards and selectiveapplication of international conventionsin America's so-called "War againstTerrorism" becomes apparent here as inthe past - one can only expect the samein the future as the nature of Capitalismis based on hypocrisy.

Majad Hussain

COMMON CIVIL LAW FOR ALLINDIANS

The Indian Supreme Court hasrecommended that the civil legal codebe made equal for all citizens, such thatall civil issues like marriage, divorceand inheritance be subject to singlenational laws. Presently, the Indianconstitution allows members ofdifferent faiths to follow their ownreligious laws, but under the new law allcitizens, including Muslims, will besubject to Hindu or secular laws.

According to the Supreme Court; "acommon civil code will help the causeof national integration by removing thecontradictions based on ideologies."This type of law has long been pushedfor by the ruling fundamentalist BJP.Restriction of religious actioncontradicts India's "secular" and"democratic" status, which is meant toguarantee the freedom to practice one'sfaith or tradition.

Earlier in the year, contradiction inIndia's constitution was apparent whenthe Gujarat State passed a law thateffectively prevents Hindus fromconverting to other faiths, namelyIslam. Some other states have alsopassed the law, in which prospectivereligious converters require statepermission before abandoning theHindu faith for another.

The laws being passed in India areclearly to hinder the masses of Hindusfrom abandoning the beliefs andtraditions of their forefathers. Byforcing Muslims to live by kufr laws, itis hoped that they will become lessattached to Islamic values and laws, andstart adopting the Hindu or secularvalues that are being propagated. Thiscall for integration into kufr societies isnot restricted to India, but rather mirrorsthe calls for integration all throughoutthe non-Muslim world. The concepts of"British Muslims", "EuropeanMuslims", "Indian Muslims" and"multiculturalism" are all but styles theWest has adopted in hope of integratingMuslims into non-Muslim societies.

In contrast to the treatment of religiousminorities in "democratic" or secularcountries like India, which theoreticallyallow the practices of other faiths, thenon-Muslim minorities or Dhimmis ofthe Islamic State were guaranteedreligious rights. They were allowed topractice their faiths, none were forciblyconverted and civil issues such asmarriage and divorce were subject toone's own religious laws. Evidence ofthis can be seen in the fact that aftercenturies of Muslim rule, churches andtemples still stand in lands such as Iraqand India; in contrast, just decades ofnon-Muslim rule has resulted inmosques such as theBabri Masjid inAyodhya to bedismantled andthousands of Muslimsto be persecuted orkilled.

Suhel Ahmed

New

s


ABID MU STA FA

WMD ROCKS LONDONAND WASHINGTON


Aday after receiving rapturous applausefrom both houses of the US congress, theBlair government was shocked to learn

of the sudden death of Dr David Kelly - a UKgovernment arms expert. Dr Kelly was a seniorarms advisor to the Ministry of Defence (MoD)and was thrust into the public limelight duringthe hearing on the dubious Iraq dossiers,conducted by the UK Foreign Affairs SelectCommittee. Dr Kelly's presentation before theSelect Committee was no accident, but a productof conscientious planning between DowningStreet and the MoD. The purpose was toundermine the claims made by Andrew Gilliganof the BBC, who accused the government ofmanipulating intelligence in the dossiers topersuade the British public that military actionwas warranted against Iraq. Immediatelyafterwards, the government came in for strongcriticism, as it stood accused of concoctingdiversions away from the main aspect of theinquiry i.e. whether intelligence on Iraqi WMDwas fabricated by the British government.Labour member Andrew Mackinlay of the SelectCommittee asserted that Dr Kelly had been usedto divert MPs from their inquiry. He asked:"Have you ever felt like the fall guy? You have

been set up haven't you?" Neither has the BBCescaped criticism after its admission that Dr.Kelly was the only source behind its allegationsagainst the government. But one thing is forcertain; the long running dispute between theBBC and Labour government has attracted muchdomestic and international criticism over theclaims made by America and Britain over Iraq'sability to both possess and deploy WMD.

The fact of the matter is that Britain has a longstanding tradition of inviting world criticism overits foreign policy ventures, especially where theyinvolve her so called 'trusted' ally America. Thiscan be clearly seen in her attitudes towards Iraq.

Ever since America announced her intention tochange the regime in Iraq, Britain workedtirelessly to prevent it from happening. Herefforts to avoid a war with Iraq becameabundantly clear when Blair managed toconvince George Bush of the need to seek UNapproval for waging war on Iraq. By persuadingAmerica to opt for the UN route, Britain was ableto delay the war for six months. During thisperiod, she mobilised public opinion, politicians,church leaders, leading societal figures and

numerous organisations to oppose the waragainst Iraq. Despite her best efforts at rallyingdomestic and world public opinion against thewar, she could not prevent America fromattacking Iraq.

In the end, she was forced to join America andattack Iraq without UN approval. She did this inorder to preserve her interests in the region, fullyaware that if America was allowed to go alone,American companies would seize Iraq's oilwealth. By participating in the war, Britainensured that her companies would be in anadvantageous position to share in some of thespoils. Soon after the collapse of the Baathistregime, America and Britain moved swiftly tosecure the oil of Iraq. Oil contracts worth billionswere cancelled with Russia, France and Chinaand placed in the hands of the occupying powersBritain and America.

However, Britain was not satisfied with thisstatus quo and feared that America with hersuperior military strength would eventually bringthe whole region under her control. She is alsoapprehensive of the present US administrationwhich is dominated by neo-conservatives. The


wmd rocks london and washington

neo-conservative's agenda calls for US foreignpolicy to work outside the framework ofinternational law and treaties. For the past fiftyyears, a corner stone of British foreign policy hasbeen to use international law to secure herinterests by limiting rival powers to interfere inher affairs.

In light of these realities, Britain workscontinuously to undermine America and herinfluence in the region. Britain realises thatAmerica is deeply unpopular in the world andthat world opinion is still doubtful of Americanmotives for attacking Iraq. Armed with thisknowledge, Britain intensified her efforts todiscredit the motives for going to war with Iraqi.e. the threat posed by Iraqi WMD to the securityof the world. Her aim behind this campaign isnot only to discredit America's intelligenceservices, but also to damage the reputation of theBush administration which used a host ofintelligence reports to justify its war against Iraq.

To accomplish this aim, Britain mobilised itsmedia, politicians, secret intelligence agenciesand all the organs of government. By carefullyorchestrating a conflict between the media(especially the BBC) and the Labourgovernment, Britain was able to conceal her aim.For instance on Thursday 10th of July, the BritishPrime Minister's official spokesman said that itwas Mr. Blair who was the authentic voice at thetop of government. "He is absolutely confidentthat we will find evidence not only of weapons ofmass destruction programmes but concreteevidence of the product of those programmes aswell." This statement was contradicted by theBBC political editor Andrew Marr who said that"very senior sources" in Whitehall had virtuallyruled out the possibility of finding weapons inIraq. The dispute between the BBC and theLabour government still continues today.However, to most observers it appears as adomestic dispute and they are unable to

comprehend the full extent of the damage causedto American interests in Iraq or the setback toAmerican plans to change the regimes of Syriaand Iran in the near future.

The tussle between the BBC and the Labourgovernment has had a dramatic affect instimulating the American media and the

politicians to wake up from their slumber and askserious questions about the Bush administration'smotives for going to with Iraq. "It ought to be thesubject of careful scrutiny... with regard to what(President Bush) knew, what actions were taken,what statements were correct and which oneswere incorrect," Senate Minority Leader TomDaschle said. Congressman Dick Gephardt - whois seeking the Democratic nomination for the USPresidency in 2004 said, "President Bush'sfactual lapse in his State of the Union addresscannot be simply dismissed as an intelligencefailure."

Last month, the pressure intensified and resultedin George Bush and his administration concedingthat the evidence about Iraq purchasing uraniumfrom Niger was inaccurate. Ari Fleischer said,"Given the fact that the report on the yellow cakedid not turn out to be accurate, that is reflectiveof the President's broader statement." Also, thehead of the CIA, George Tenet, was forced toissue an apology for the CIA's failure to checkclaims that Iraq had bought uranium from Niger.He may well become America's first casualty ofthe WMD saga.

The Bush administration has tried in vain todivert the WMD issue by making the case thatAl-Qaeda's link to Iraq was the prime motive."The coalition did not act in Iraq because we haddiscovered dramatic new evidence of Iraq'spursuit of weapons of mass destruction. We actedbecause we saw the evidence in a dramatic newlight - through the prism of our experience on9/11," Rumsfeld said. This reason and others put

forward by the administration have failed to stemdomestic and international criticism.

The whole incident is far from over. As long asWMD are not found in Iraq and Tony Blair andhis Foreign Secretary continue to pursue theclaim that weapons of mass destruction will befound, albeit weapons programmes as they nowprefer to call it, then the pressure will continue tomount on the Bush administration. It will bepressured into explaining its motives for going towar with Iraq. Addressing the commons, Blairsaid, "For me, the jury is not out". Later headded: "The reason why I believe that theintelligence we put before people last Septemberis correct is that the alternative thesis is that,having spent years obstructing the inspectors,having finally in December 1998 driven them outof the country because they could not do theirwork any more, he then voluntarily decided todestroy all his programmes but not tell anyoneabout it. That strikes me as inherentlyimplausible." To add fuel to the fire, it wasreported by The Independent on the 13th of Julythat the British government circulated adocument amongst foreign leaders whichadvocated the use of force against rogue states.The timing of its release only emphasises theresolve of the government to raise morequestions then answers about the real motives forgoing to war with Iraq.

It is expected that the issue of WMD willcontinue to dog both the British and Americangovernments in the run up to the next elections. In the case of the British government, its stanceon the WMD issue has immensely weakened itscredibility. The failure of the parliamentaryinquiry to arrive at an independent decision hasprompted politicians from all sides of thepolitical spectrum to demand a public inquiry.Robin Cook, the former Foreign Secretary, whoquit the Cabinet over Iraq, said: "It is time thatthe Government came clean and published theextra evidence they claim proves there was auranium deal." Michael Ancram, ShadowForeign Secretary, said: "We believe that anindependent judicial inquiry is the most sensibleway of establishing the facts." MenziesCampbell, Liberal Democrat Foreign Affairsspokesman, said: "Day by day the case for anindependent scrutiny of the lead up to the waragainst Iraq becomes irresistible. Only fulldisclosure can restore the reputation of thisGovernment." This has led to some Labour MPs

It is expected that the issue of WMD will continue to dog both the

British and American governments in the run up to the next elections.

In the case of the British government, its stance on the WMD issue has

immensely weakened its credibility.


wmd rocks london and washington

expressing a total lack of trust in Tony Blair'sleadership and has resulted in calls for hisresignation. Labour MP Brian Donohoe toldBBC Radio Scotland: "If I don't see the evidencethat's overwhelming in terms of the weapons ofmass destruction having been there, I'm not goingto call, but I do believe that the position of thePrime Minister in these circumstances isuntenable and that he would have to resign."

To make matters worse, the death of Dr Kelly andgrowing calls to extend the scope of the inquiryto cover the reason for going to war with Iraq areadding to the government's predicament. This isbecause the government realises that anindependent judicial inquiry exploring the reasonfor going to war with Iraq will be extremelydamaging and will unravel a catalogue of lies anddeceit. Worse still, the inquiry may last the tenureof Blair's rule and gradually stifle all attempts towin the next general election. In other words it islike opening up a fresh wound which slowlydrains the life of its victim. Nevertheless it isdifficult to see how the government can resistcalls for an independent judicial inquiry into theWMD affair.

There are three factors, which make it almostimpossible. Firstly, Dr Kelly's death has spurreda new public momentum to get to the bottom ofthe WMD issue, which will be hard to ignore.Secondly, Blair's admission before US congressthat weapons may never be found has given freshammunition to his critics - both inside andoutside the Labour Party. Addressing theAmerican Congress, Blair said, "If we are wrong,we will have destroyed a threat that is at leastresponsible for human carnage and suffering.That is something I am confident history willforgive." Commenting on Blair's statement in theGuardian, Sir Malcolm Rifkind, former UKDefence Secretary, said, "This attempt at moralblackmail will not do. The issue is not whetherthe world is a better place without SaddamHussein. Of course it is... but there is no intentionof the British government to support wars inorder to get rid of them (dictators)." Thirdly, in anunprecedented move the White House releasedintelligence information underpinning theevidence used in Bush's State of the Unionaddress. The move comes as the White Housetries to shift the blame on the British governmentfor suspect intelligence. The move is designed to

force Tony Blair to reveal his intelligence sourcebehind the Niger claim. Democrat Ed Markey,while welcoming Prime Minister Blair at thejoint session of congress said, "The Americanpublic needs to know the truth. You hold thekey". In the light of these factors, it is extremelyunlikely that the Blair government will continueto refuse a public inquiry into the WMD matter.Another worrying development for the Blairgovernment is that some pro Labour supportersalready sense that Blair's days in office arenumbered and have begun to vilify him. Theowner of the New Statesman, George Robinson(a former treasury minister) has produced ascathing attack on Blair in his magazine. Themagazine portrays Tony Blair as a psychopathand psychotic. It also says the chancellor GordonBrown would be a bigger vote-winner than thePrime Minister because Mr Blair "has lost somuch public trust over the Iraq war". Internalconflicts aside, those outside the Labour party areechoing similar sentiments. The electorate andthe wealthy capitalists who control the media areincreasingly losing faith in the Blair government.A poll conducted by Sky News in the aftermathof Dr Kelly's death forecasts that 65% of theviewers want Blair to resign over the affair.

These developments will further destabilise theBlair government - both in the eyes of his partyand the electorate. Unless Tony Blair can bridgethe credibility gap between the government andhis party, between the party and the electorateand is careful not to alienate the wealthycapitalists, it is unlikely that Labour led by Blairwill win the next election. In a recent speech toparliamentary Labour party members, Tony Blairwarned that the party must not self destructthrough divisions.

The case of the Bush administration is quitedifferent, as the WMD issue has not impacted thepolitical medium or affected the American peoplein the manner it has done in Britain. Many peoplein America still believe that WMD werediscovered during the war. Another factor whichhas limited the exposure of the issue is that thewealthy capitalists, the Jewish lobby and otherpowerful interest groups are fully supportive ofBush. Their combined influence over the media,government institutions and their ability tomuzzle anti-war campaigners has shielded Bushfrom much criticism. With his recent trip to

Africa, he has also won the backing of thepharmaceutical industry and the black vote.Unless events take a dramatic turn, it is unlikelythis issue will significantly affect Bush's electioncampaign. Already he has raised more money tofinance his re-election campaign then all theDemocrat challengers put together. Nonetheless,Bush will not escape from the issue unscathed. Itwill leave a lasting blemish on his administration.In future, Bush will find it difficult to convincethe world of the threat posed by WMD whenattempting to justify regime change in othercountries, notably Syria and Iran.

In conclusion, Britain will continue to use theissue of WMD to inflict maximum damage on thecredibility of the Bush administration and itsability to use intelligence to justify new conflicts,even if this means that the Blair government mustbe sacrificed in the process.z

‘ISLAMOPHOBIA’THE PRODUCT OF A CLASH OF CIVILISATIONS

WALEE D GU BAR A


"You shall certainly be tried and tested in yourwealth and properties and in your personal selves,and you shall certainly hear much that will grieveyou from those who received the Scripture beforeyou (Jews and Christians) and from those whoascribe partners to Allah, but if you perseverepatiently, and become Al-Muttaqoon then verily, thatwill be a determining factor in all affairs, and that isfrom the great matters, (which you must hold on withall your efforts)." [TMQ Ale-Imran: 186]

Today we face an important test that will determinethe future of Muslims in this country and howMuslims are perceived by others in Western society.In the post September 11th era, one can find morethan ever, that there is a trial of Islam and unlikemost trials where the defendant is innocent untilproven otherwise, the verdict of guilty has alreadybeen passed and Muslims have since then beeneager to present the defence of their Deen.

Muslims are accused of being terrorists, violent,backward, oppressive towards women, ignorant anduncivilised, barbaric, inferior and unable to engagein productive debate; a rigid people caught in theirancient ways that are incapable of producing apositive contribution to the changing face ofhumanity.

Without doubt in today's climate, to be a Muslim inBritain or elsewhere in the West is to be undersuspicion with every move monitored andscrutinised. It is to be under threat and at thereceiving end of prejudice, discrimination, andalienation as well as being open to verbal abuse andphysical attack.

In the last two years there has been an alarming risein 'Islamophobia', with many incidents of anti-Muslim prejudice being widely documented byNGOs. In total there have been 674 reported casesand many others that have not been officiallyreported out of fear of reprisal, including threeallegations of anti-Muslim motivated rapes. In allthe cases documented, 51% fell under the categoryof serious and violent crimes, 28% under thecategory of verbal and written abuse, 16% werepsychological pressure and harassment, 3% underthe category of discrimination and 2%miscellaneous. Some of the incidents reportedincluded the following:

1. Muslim adults and children were attackedphysically and verbally. They were pelted with fruitand vegetables, hit with umbrellas at bus stops,punched, spat at and publicly doused with alcohol.

2. In Manchester a 20-year-old Muslim woman wasbattered about the head and body by a young whiteman, with a hammer on a crowded tram.

3. A woman in Swindon was hospitalised after beingbeaten with a metal baseball bat because she woreKhimaar (headscarf).

4. In Glasgow, a 20-year-old female student wasassaulted with a bottle whilst on a bus by a man whocalled her a "Muslim bas***d."

5. Two Cambridge University students had theirheadscarves ripped off, in broad daylight outside apolice station.

6. Saba Zaman, who in July 2001 had her scarfpulled off and two of her ribs broken in Tooting,London, was stopped and searched by the policethree times in as little as two weeks.

7. A woman and her children were chased into theirhome in Swansea by up to eight men who calledthem terrorists and then threatened to bomb theirhouse. Foyzul Bari age 47, a businessman, said hereturned home to find his family "shocked andshaken" by the incident.

8. A girl aged seven at a West London primaryschool, was told by dinner ladies that Muslims werekillers.

9. There was an attempted arson on a Muslimnursery in Surrey whilst the children and theirteachers were still inside.

10. Dog excrement and fireworks were pushedthrough the letterboxes of Muslims and bricks were


thrown through their windows.

11.In West London shortly after September 11th, anAfghan taxi driver Hamidullah Gharwal, wasattacked and left paralysed from the neck down bythree passengers in his cab.

12. Mosques and Asian-run businesses around thecountry were vandalised.

13. Nine pigs' heads were dumped outside a mosquein Exeter. Many mosques were said to have notreported attacks because of the fear of reprisals.

14. Muslim graves have been desecrated.

Certainly the above incidents are a rude awakeningfor the Muslims amongst us buoyant with their pridein British citizenship, nationality and identity.Through the attacks and discrimination that ensuedon the street level, in the media and through theinstitutionalised 'Islamophobia' displayed by the UKgovernment the message was clear; Islam is theenemy and you are a Muslim. For whilst all of thevictims in these incidents have had nothing to dowith the attacks on September 11th, they have beennonetheless painted with the same brush andtargeted mercilessly.

Today the trend continues. During the colonial waron Iraq, attacks against Muslims increased again. Ina council estate in Wrexham, 200 men with metalbars, knives and petrol bombs began to attackKurdish asylum seekers calling them terrorists, withone man severely hospitalised as a result. InPortsmouth, an Iraqi woman was subjected to abuse,firstly by being threatened and then attacked by twowhite men with baseball bats, for wearing Khimaar(headscarf) and then having her home vandalised bypelting with bricks. In June of this year, Awais Alamaged 45 from Walthamstow and a father of three,was beaten to death by two white men because herefused to accept their racist and anti-Muslimremarks.

Despite these violent attacks and the environment ofthreat and intimidation that Muslims are currentlyfacing, the media irresponsibly as ever continues tofuel 'Islamophobia' through its unabated attack onIslam

'ISLAMOPHOBIA' IN THE MEDIA

Over the years we have read numerous popular pressarticles attacking Islamic customs and culture. Forexample:

"You can be British without speaking English orbeing Christian or being white, but neverthelessBritain is basically English-speaking, Christian andwhite, and if one starts to think that it might becomebasically Urdu-speaking and Muslim and brown,one gets frightened and angry … because of ourobstinate refusal to have enough babies, WesternEuropean civilisation will start to die at the pointwhen it could have been revived with new blood.Then the hooded hordes will win, and the Koran will

be taught, as Gibbon famously imagined, in theschools of Oxford." [Charles Moore: "Time for aMore Liberal and 'Racist' Immigration Policy," TheSpectator, 19 October 1991]

In an article published in The People entitled,"Slaughtering goats, burning books mutilatingteenagers…and still they want me to respect theirMuslim ways," Carol Sarler writes, "With thewishy-washy excuse that 'it's their culture', we aresupposed to tolerate idiots slaughtering goats onstreets in Kensington, groups of idiots burningbooks on streets in Bradford and wealthy biggergroups building mosques on streets everywhere."

And whilst not content with their anti-Muslimremarks alone, some even went as far as to state thatit is justifiable. The Daily Telegraph's PeregrineWorsthorne in an article entitled "I Believe inIslamophobia" (1 March 1997) wrote: "To worryabout contemporary Islam is not mad. It would bemad to do otherwise."

Back then, Islamophobic attitudes were more or lesscentred around themes and prejudices of Islam beinginferior and uncivilised, and Muslims being ravingbarbaric lunatics who like to make animals sufferand behave like "demented yoyos bobbing theirheads up and down on a prayer mat" as described byThe People newspaper.

Today however, after 9/11 the fears instilled in thepublic about Muslims in the press are moredisturbing and the resulting prejudices morefrightening. It is no longer only about fear of culturaldifferences and customs that we are now labelled as"terrorists," in the minds of many and a threat to thefabric of Western society which must be stopped.

More recently, the BBC drama series "Spooks"depicted a Mosque in Birmingham as home to aterrorist cell, recruiting children to commit terroristattacks in British schools and playgrounds; theconsequence of which was further attacks onmosques and Muslims.

The Daily Telegraph, under the heading, "A religionthat sanctions violence" depicted Islam as a majorthreat to peace. The Daily Express's Carol Sarlerwrote in reference to the Quran: "Now as far as I amconcerned, this is no more than a bloodthirsty littlebook that is firmly rooted where it should havestayed - in the times and values of the early seventhcentury when it was written." She further went on tosay in reference to the advocates of"Multiculturalism": "…they seek allowance forcultures other than the indigenous to be accepted intheir entirety - and the bottom line is that when it

comes to Islam, the acceptance is something aliberal cannot properly offer…We are not allowed topick and choose: love the food and pinch the kohlbut reject the beaten wives, hate the suppression ofwomen and find repugnant the Halal butchery."

On the 22nd October 2002, the Evening Standard'sBrian Sewell wrote in an article under the heading"A noose around the globe", "The fact remains thatIslam has always been militant; the urge to conquerand convert began with the great imperial thrust ofMohammed himself…And what will Islam gain? Itwill secure the old certainties of poverty, disease, thesuffocating conformism compelled by the beatings,amputations and hideous executions of Shari'ahlaw."

INSTITUTIONALISED 'ISLAMOPHOBIA'

Such attitudes would not have been tolerated hadthey been about Jews or Sikhs. Newspaper editorswould think twice before printing anythingconsidered even mildly discriminatory towards

them, for these are minorities protected by the law.Unlike Muslims, each is considered to be an ethnicgroup and a "race" and therefore protected by theRace Relations Act 1976.

Today even the BNP (British National Party),realising the blatant gap in the law has changed itsracist rhetoric, as it now has a much more appealingmessage to the masses, a more saleable product,enabling it to win seats in local councils and gain afoothold into local politics. "Islam out of Britain," isits recent campaign for which it has set up an"Ethnic Liaison Committee" to allow anti-Muslimelements from the Sikh and Hindu communities toparticipate.

The discrimination against Islam and Muslims hasresulted in a person being able to print, distributeand openly call for the killing of all Muslims andthen admitting it openly, as with the case of JamesSinclair, a 31 year-old fork-lift truck driver fromPeterborough. His leaflets urged people to find, beatand kill Muslims as well as burn mosques. For thishe was sentenced to only 82 days in prison. Inaddition to this the Judge had the audacity to state,"there is no evidence any violence was provoked bythese leaflets" to justify the light sentence, whilstironically the same legal system sentenced SheikhFaisal to nine years imprisonment under some littleknown Victorian law.

Muslim teenagers can get prison sentences of 4-9years for rioting in reaction to racist provocation andattacks, whilst rioters in Belfast are given fines andsentences as lenient as 6 months for throwing petrol

‘islamophobia’ - the product of a clash of civilisations

The anti-Muslim prejudice that Muslims are subjected to is nothingmore than a manifestation of this clash of civilisations between Islamand Western Capitalism.


bombs at the police.

The UK government continued to hark on aboutSaddam's oppression of the Kurds as justification forinvading and colonising another independent statewhilst it placed Kurdish asylum seekers includingwomen and children in detention centres, which arein essence Category 2 prisons, accusing them of"slumming."

Tony Blair claims to be sensitive to Muslimconcerns about the war on Iraq and yet MohsinKhan, 24, a reservist RAF pilot, who refused to fightin the war and says as a Muslim he cannot fightother Muslims, was arrested and charged with being"absent without leave."

The UK Home Secretary David Blunkett boastsabout "multiculturalism" and then calls politicalIslam "intolerance in the guise of culturaldifference."

'ISLAMOPHOBIA', CAPITALISM ANDISLAM

Certainly this dread and hatred of Islam shouldcome as no surprise, as this is an Ummah caught ina struggle from day one to make Islam a beacon forhumanity to follow. As a result, over the centuries,Muslims have been both feared and detested bysome, as much as they have been welcomed andloved by others, for the Sunnah of the Earth is thattruth and falsehood will continue to clash untilfalsehood is no more.

"Nay, We fling the truth against the falsehood(disbelief), so it destroys it, and behold, it(falsehood) is vanished" [TMQ Al-Anbiyah: 18]

The anti-Muslim prejudice that Muslims aresubjected to is nothing more than a manifestation ofthis clash of civilisations between Islam and WesternCapitalism. It began with the Crusades, which led tothe colonisation of Muslim lands, to the destructionof the great Khilafah and the establishment ofdespotic rulers chosen by those who considerMuslims as the enemy, to suppress the Deen. Todayit is expressed through the West's so called "war onterror".

It is no coincidence that the demonising of Muslimsbegan just as the threat of Communism began torecede, for Islam remains to be the only ideologicalchallenge left to confront Capitalism. The "redmenace" of Communism is no more and Islam iswhat threatens this decadent ideology and by allaccounts this Deen is a formidable enemy. WilliClaes, former Secretary General of NATO, oncesaid:

"Muslim fundamentalism is at least as dangerous asCommunism once was. Please do not underestimatethis risk…at the conclusion of this age it is a serious

threat, because it represents terrorism, religiousfanaticism and exploitation of social and economicjustice." [A TV interview reported by Inter PressService 18 February 1995]

And hence Muslims will continue to live underintimidation in the West because of this. They willexperience prejudice and alienation despite thereassurances given by the British government and itspraise of Islam as a great religion. Indeed this iswithin itself a policy of the "carrot and the stick."The carrot of Muslim Lords and MPs and the stickthat if you reject Western politics you are anextremist and fundamentalist who will be open toattack by right wing extremists. The carrot of newrules to allow Muslim male police officers to wearturbans and women officers to wear Hijab with theiruniforms and the stick of the Anti-Terrorism, Crimeand Security Act of 2001 where Muslims can bearrested and detained without evidence or charge.The carrot of 'Halal mortgages', more mosques,Islamic schools and the stick of Islamophobic mediainstitutions that depict mosques and schools asterrorist breeding grounds resulting in violentattacks against them and hence a fear by mosquecommittees to discuss political Islam and theUmmah's affairs.

Carrot and stick, checks and balances until Muslimssever themselves away from the global Ummah.Until they consider themselves British beforeMuslim, until they accept the Western politics andreject the Islamic politics, until they integrate fullyinto British society, until they assimilate and disposeof Islam from their life's affairs as one disposes ofthe old, dirty and tattered clothes.

"Never will the Jews nor the Christians be pleasedwith you till you follow their religion. Say: "Verily,the Guidance of Allah that is the (only) Guidance.And if you were to follow their (Jews and Christians)desires after what you have received of Knowledge(i.e. the Qur'an), then you would have against Allahneither any Wali (protector or guardian) nor anyhelper" [TMQ Al-Baqarah: 120]

Muslims must be engaging not defensive, they mustbe initiating not reactive. Muslims must challengethese prejudices and stereotypes since that is theonly way that non-Muslims around can ever seeIslam in a different light.

Muslims must enlighten themselves with the Islamicculture, broaden their knowledge about Islam andinstil pride in the youth with it. Let them know ofIslamic history, the greatness of the Islamic way oflife, the glory under the Khilafah and the pivotalcontributions to science and humanity. Muslims

must share these treasures with Muslims and non-Muslims alike.

Muslims must also familiarise themselves with theexploitative and decadent Capitalism so that theycan refute it and challenge its falsehood. They mustshow its colonialist foreign policy and oppression ofothers and destroy it intellectually.

Treat the womenfolk as Allah (swt) ordered, withkindness and compassion. Honour them, treasurethem, protect them for they are the "vessels ofvalue" that tomorrow's generation nourishes ontoday. Let the Kafir learn from Muslims how womenare honoured and respected in contrast to how theyare treated in Western society today as sex objects,abandoned single mothers and battered wives wheretoday in Britain according to senior Metropolitanpolice officers, there are around 35,000 cases ofdomestic violence per month, while most incidentsgo unreported.

Indeed, now more than ever in these perilous timesall Muslims must be ambassadors of Islam. Theyshould not fear reprisals or intimidation, aggressionor discrimination, when threatened with beingstripped of citizenship or racist backlashes by theadvocates of integration. Remember Allah's (swt)words:

"Is not Allah Sufficient for His slave? Yet they try tofrighten you with those besides Him" [TMQ Az-Zumar: 36].

Peregrine Worsthorne in the early 1990s said, "Islamwas once a great civilisation worthy of being arguedwith. But now it has degenerated into a primitiveenemy fit only to be sensitively subjugated."

He is half right and now it is up to Muslims to proveonce again through their efforts, by intensifying theDa'wah and working for the return of Islam and there-establishment of the Islamic State. That of suretyit remains the greatest of civilisations and the onlycivilisation able to solve humanity's affairs, managesociety and bring peace and prosperity to thisDunya. z

‘islamophobia’ - the product of a clash of civilisations


The shocking images of the medieval styletreatment carried out on the Muslim POWssince their capture by the USA in

Afghanistan and their transportation to CampDelta, Guantanamo Bay in Cuba has shocked thewhole world. For the past 18 months, over 600prisoners of war (POWs) have been held inappalling conditions under the US militaryauthorities. Among the prisoners are two Muslimsfrom Britain, Feroz Abbasi and Moazzam Begg, afather of four children.

The oppression of the POWs by US personnelstarted when they were first transferred toGuantanamo Bay and has continued ever since.They were initially brought over in US cargoplanes with their hands bound behind their backs,blind folded and ear muffed to prevent talking orlistening to others. Upon arrival the USgovernment deliberately released pictures of thePOWs in bright orange jumpsuits to add to theirhumiliation and send a message to the world ofhow the US intended to treat these captives.

Since then it has emerged that the detainees havebeen held in cells of no more than 2 x 3 metres inlength, restricted to 30 minutes of outdoorexercise a week, denied any contact with legalrepresentation or with their families. Manycaptives have had their beards forcibly removed.Other POWs have complained that they havebeen refused the right to offer their daily prayersand have had their food 'spiked' with alcohol.

President Bush recently gave the go ahead for thefirst six of the captives to be forwarded for trialunder a military tribunal held in secret, with theoption of pleading guilty to their alleged crimesand receiving a 20 year sentence or pleadinginnocence and being liable to the death penalty if

found guilty. Those not forwarded for trial will beheld indefinitely.

WESTERN ABUSE OF POWs

Western treatment of POWs and civiliansthroughout the world shows a grim record oftorture, killings, and oppression. During WorldWar II, Allied troops held thousands of Japaneseand German POWs in appalling conditions. TheAmericans alone had over 500 POW camps andcaptives were widely mistreated and abused toextract intelligence information by whatevermeans necessary. Moreover, American citizens ofJapanese and German origin were routinelyrounded up, detained and imprisoned in largeinternment camps. More recent examples includethe treatment inflicted by US troops in numerousatrocities against POWs and the civilianpopulation in Vietnam. There were a number ofinfamous massacres such as on the Nogunrivillage in the Korean War and the My Laimassacre where civilians, women and childrenwere initially captured by US forces, interrogatedand finally shot and their villages burnt anddestroyed.

In the US war against Afghanistan in 2001, 800POWs comprising of Afghan civilians, Talibanconscripts and alleged Al-Qaeda members, atQala-i-Janghi fort near Mazar-i-Sharif, werebrutally killed by a combination of US SpecialForces, CIA personnel and Northern Alliancetroops. The POWs were kept in caged rooms withlittle ventilation or provision for a number ofdays. The US authorities used investigators tointerrogate the POWs and then subjected them tobombs from warplanes and helicopter gunshipswhich resulted in many deaths.

ONLY POWs FROM WESTERNCOUNTRIES SHOULD BE TREATEDWELL

By contrast, Western POWs are expected to begiven the full rights and protection under the rulesof international law such as the GenevaConvention. The US made a big issue of thealleged mistreatment of American troops capturedin Iraq and claimed that the portrayal of UScaptives on Iraqi TV violated their rights asPOWs.

A recent ruling in the US courts has upheld aclaim by 17 POWs and their families that they aredue compensation for the torture and injuriesinflicted upon them by Iraqi forces in the firstGulf War. The judge has awarded settlement of$1bn and US legislation permits the money to betaken from frozen Iraqi assets.

Similarly, the US has made attempts at protectingits own troops from the threat of legal actionthrough its exemption from the InternationalCriminal Court (ICC). Through bribes,intimidation and 'get out clauses' with othercountries it has managed to secure pledges so that

muslims and the office dilemmas

THE WEST TREATS ITS POWSLIKE IT TREATS THE REST OF

THE WORLDZubair Hussaini


"And they give food inspite of their love for it tothe poor, the orphan and the captives saying: Wefeed you seeking Allah's countenance only. Wewish for no reward, nor thanks from you" [TMQAl-Insan: 8-9].

Islam obliges that POWs are well looked after andnot harmed or abused in any way. During thetime of the Prophet (saw) captives were lookedafter well, and they were provided withprovisions and clothing if they had none. ImamAbu Yusuf states that prisoners must be fed andwell treated until a decision is reached regardingthem. Indeed, after the battle of Badr the Muslimssoldiers fed the POWs from Quraysh bread whilstthey limited themselves to dates.

A further example can be seen in the manner inwhich Al-Hurmuzan, the famous Persiancommander, was treated as a POW. Al-Hurmuzanhad been a staunch enemy of Islam fightingagainst the Muslims in the conquests of Iraq andreneging on numerous peace treaties with theKhilafah State. Upon his capture he was broughtbefore Umar bin Al Khattab (ra) who asked ofhim: "Why did you not respect your pledges ofpeace?" Al-Hurmuzan replied "I am afraid youwill kill me before I tell you" and gasping like onefaint with thirst he begged for some water. "Giveit and let him drink in peace," retorted Umar (ra)."Nay," said Al Hurmuzan trembling, "I fear todrink, lest someone slays me unawares."

"Your life is safe," said Umar (ra), "until you havedrunk the water." Al-Hurmuzan, believing that hehad got the assurance from Umar that he waslooking for, poured the water on the ground.Umar (ra) ordered another cup of water to bebrought, but Al-Hurmuzan said he was no longerin need of water. "I wanted not water," he said,"but safety and now you have given it to me."Eventually, Umar (ra) had to yield and honour hiscommitment of protection. Al-Hurmuzanwitnessing the justice of the Muslims, laterembraced Islam and lived in Madinah for manyyears.

The Islamic ruling on captives is that the Khalifahis given a choice between releasing the prisonersand demanding a ransom. Allah (swt) says,

"When you meet those who disbelieve, strike thenecks until when you have inflicted severeslaughter upon them then bind strongly thefetters. Then afterwards either the release or theransom until the war lays down its burdens"[TMQ Muhammad: 4]

In the battle of Hunayn, all 6000 prisoners wereset free upon capture by the Muslim army.Alternatively, various kinds of ransom andcompensation were demanded by the Muslims inexchange for the prisoners such as teachingMuslims to read or write calligraphy, money ingold and silver and also spears and ammunition.At the battle of Badr the Prophet Muhammad(saw) ransomed the 73 captives to the Quraysh ata ratio of 2:1.

The rules of fighting in Islam give clear guidancefor the mujahideen and Islam prohibits the killingof non-combatants.

Abu Dawud narrated from Anas that theMessenger of Allah (saw) said,

"Go forth in the name of Allah, with the helpof Allah and on the creed of the Messenger ofAllah. Do not kill a perishing old man, a childor a woman and do not betray. Gather togetheryour booties and be righteous as Allah lovesthe righteous."

Muslims in Britain must not be intimidated byWestern propaganda or infatuated by theCapitalist way of life. Rather, we should take thisopportunity to expose the lies of the West in theconduct of their foreign policy and expose theprinciples their degenerate ideology is builtupon.z

US personnel will never be tried under the ICC orany foreign court for any crimes US soldiers andcitizens may have committed abroad.

It is abundantly clear that the West shows noshame in the hypocrisy and double standards thatit uses when treating POWs. Non-Western nationsare expected to fulfil the rights of Western POWsand treat them in a favourable and just manner.However, no such protection is afforded to POWsand civilians when the perpetrators of the crimeare Western states and military personnel.

Moreover, Western states are quick to use theirpolitical might to manipulate any existinginternational treaties and conventions by findinglegal loopholes. For example, the US governmenthas repeatedly claimed that the POWs held inGuantanamo Bay are not POWs but "unlawfulcombatants" that are not subject to the rules andnorms of the Geneva Convention. In reality ofcourse, such euphemisms exist only to allow theUS to treat its captives in any way it feels fit.Furthermore, the selection of Guantanamo Bayhas been made as it sits outside conventionaljurisdiction of any other courts thus allowing theUS to detain captives for as long as they like inappalling conditions with the opportunity to findthe "verdict" of their own choosing.

What allows the US and other Western states towilfully flout their own standards and laws suchas the Geneva Convention is that their ownforeign policy interests drive Capitalist nations.Western states are primarily concerned to furthertheir foreign influence and dominationparticularly within the Muslim world. Humanrights and international law are only a tool to useagainst the weaker nations so that they becomecompliant to the Western agenda. Capitalistnations give no allowance or credence to ethical,moral or humanitarian considerations such as thetreatment of POWs. Therefore, the US brutalityin its treatment of the captives in GuantanamoBay is clearly meant to elicit information from thePOWs to aid the West's fight in the "war onterror" and send a message to the Muslim Ummahof American strength and might.

ISLAM'S TREATMENT OF POWs

By clear contrast, the Islamic ideology lays downclear guidelines on the rules of fighting and thetreatment of captives, civilians and POWs. TheKhalifah is responsible for war policy and thetreatment of POWs within the rules of Islam. Hewould be accountable before the Ummah andAllah (swt) for his actions in such matters. This isunlike the Western regimes where junior officersor commanders usually have to take the blame,whilst government officials absolve themselves ofall responsibility.

the west treats its POWs like it treats the rest of the world

DEMOCRACY BY THE IRON FIST

AZA R HU SSA IN


INTRODUCTION

At a time when the whole basis of theinvasion of Iraq is being questioned due tothe absence of any WMD (weapons of

mass destruction) being found, many people havebegun to question not only the legitimacy of war,but also the lies and deceit used to justify the warin Iraq. The Americans aim to impose democracyon the people of Iraq by force with the promise ofa better way of life. Some Muslims have acceptedthis plan with open arms, whilst the majority rejecttheir presence and their conspiracies to install apuppet government. These events have raisedquestions in the minds of the Muslims, not onlyabout the compatibility of Islam and democracy,but also about the way in which a systemsupposedly based on the free will of a people isforced upon them despite their rejection of it.

THE CURRENT REALITY IN IRAQ

The US, upon removing the regime of SaddamHussein, expected to be welcomed with open armsby the Iraqi people. To their shock, this has notbeen the case, and they have been left looking intothe barrel of a gun, waiting to shoot. There hasbeen no jubilant reception of the troops, thoughdoctored images by the Western media haveattempted to portray otherwise. For the Iraqipeople, basic personal security, civil services andsound administration are virtually non-existent.Overall, the military campaign continues, andAmerican soldiers are being killed, while life forthe Iraqis has deteriorated.

Surveying the reality in Iraq, it becomes quiteevident that the occupying US forces have donevery little to bolster their image amongst the localpopulation. By raiding Iraqi homes in search ofweapons and suspects, the US forces are trampling

on a particularly important Muslim sensibility: thesanctity of the home. US troops have been raidinghomes in search of members of Saddam Hussein'stoppled regime and illegal weapons since the fall ofBaghdad. The raids have become much morefrequent in recent weeks. Iraqis complain the raidsexpose women to soldiers when they are notproperly dressed, thus raising questions of honouras well as terrifying children. They say the soldiersforce doors open rather than use keys on offer, gothrough personal belongings and humiliate the menin front of their families by cuffing their hands andordering them to lie face down on the ground.Some Iraqis have been stripped naked and forcedto run in the streets. Others have had their moneystolen and possessions taken by the invaders.

In their conceited arrogance, it becomes apparentthat the US officials did not develop any real post-war plans, because they believed the Iraqis wouldwelcome US troops with open arms, andWashington could then install a favoured regime inplace. Today, US forces face instability in Iraq,

where they are losing soldiers almost daily toescalating guerrilla attacks. The financial burden ofoccupation is exploding to almost $4 billion amonth, and withdrawal appears many years away. On the ground, this translates into more adversityfor American troops. On 10th July in Iraq,insurgents killed two more soldiers, and an Iraqipolice contingent demanded that the Americanswho trained them leave the police station. Hoursafter the attack, President Bush said that the UnitedStates would not be deterred from its mission inIraq despite the persistent security threat posed byIraqi insurgents. Such is the scale of attacks againstthe occupiers that the US military has handedresponsibility of policing the Iraqi town of Fallujahto the Iraqis. Iraqi police and the US appointedmayor requested the move, saying it could helpreduce anti-American attacks. Fallujah has beenthe scene of many ambushes against US troops andIraqi officers have complained of being caught inthe crossfire. A backlash against the US presence inthe town 50 kilometres west of Baghdad intensifiedafter US soldiers shot and killed at least 15demonstrators in April.

In recent weeks there have been increasing reportsof Iraqi men, women and even children beingdragged from their homes at night by Americanpatrols, or snatched off the streets and taken,hooded and manacled, to prison camps around thecapital. Children as young as 11 are claimed to beamong those locked up for 24 hours a day in roomswith no light, or held in overcrowded tents intemperatures approaching 50 centigrade (122F).

On the edge of Baghdad International Airport, USmilitary commanders have built a tent city thathuman rights groups are comparing to thedetention camp at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba. TheAmericans have also set up another detention campin the grounds of the notorious Abu Ghraib prison,


west of Baghdad. Many thousands of Iraqis weretaken there during the Saddam years and neverseen again. Such behaviour merely fuels thegrowing hostility between local people and thesoldiers.

Elizabeth Hodgkin, of Amnesty International, whohas a bulging case file of arrests, said: "I cannotbelieve the Americans are so stupid and insensitiveas to behave like this after all the trouble they havehad over Guantanamo Bay. They must treat theirdetainees humanely and let them have visits fromfamily and lawyers."

US troops are edgy and angry as ambushes andcasualties rise. Eighty-five US soldiers have diedsince President Bush declared a cessation ofhostilities on 1st May. They are struggling tomaintain morale because the growing number ofsniping, bombings and attacks by rocket-propelledgrenades are making them nervous and resentful.The longer this goes on, the more difficult it willbecome for the US to install a stable puppet regimeto look after their interests in the region.

"I'm more scared now than when we went to war,"said 1st Sgt. Benjamin Moore of the Army'sworkhorse 3rd Infantry Division that led the assaulton Baghdad. "At least then you had your linesdrawn, you knew where you stood, where theenemy was. But now you don't know who the badguy is. It's hard to trust the Iraqis."

CHALLENGE FACING THE US

The challenge facing the United States is notmerely how to introduce "democracy" to Iraq buthow to bring about a liberal, constitutionaldemocracy - a popular government that alsoprotects the rule of law and basic rights. If there isanything that democracy experts agree on, it is thatyou can't easily manufacture the conditions forliberal democracy. No quick fix replaces the hardwork of building trust in laws, establishing checksand balances, encouraging civil debate and so on.Recent attempts to impose democracy in countriessuch as Cambodia, Bosnia and Angola have faileddismally.

One model for transforming Iraq is America's postWorld War II occupation of Japan and the resultingdemocracy that emerged. There it is argued, the USentered the country as alien and anti-democratic asany Middle Eastern dictatorship. However, the USmilitarily imposed a liberal constitution andbrought the public around to democracy almostovernight, chiefly by encouraging and supervisingelections.

Efforts to democratise a country require more thanmodern liberal ideas; they require a class of peoplewho embrace those ideas and make them effective.Had a sophisticated modern bureaucratic class notbeen on hand to accept and implement democraticreforms, the American occupation of Japan would

not have succeeded. To be sure, excessivebureaucracy can suffocate democratic liberty, butmodern bureaucracies are generally democratisingforces. They embody intrinsically modern,democratic ideas - where the government office isdistinct from the individual who holds it, forexample, and that rules apply to all with equalforce. They blow apart traditional social relations,relations that are often powerful barriers todemocratic reform, by centralising authority andpower in a national government. This, however, isa naïve view because those who share the resultingculture are in contradiction to western culture andvalues. They will not be susceptible to embracingthe western viewpoint in life; therefore, theanalogy is incorrect.

The influence of so-called fundamentalist Islam inthe Arab world reflects a culture deeplyinhospitable to democratic and liberal principles.In a recent "National Interest'' article, AdamGarfinkle explains that, whereas democracy assertsthat political authority lies with society, that themajority rules and those citizens are equal beforethe law, Arab societies vest political authority inthe Qur'an, rest decision-making on consensus andunderstand law and authority as essentiallyhierarchical. They lack such essential culturalpreconditions for democracy as the idea of a loyalopposition or the rule of law or the separation ofchurch and state. It is no surprise that not one ArabMuslim country qualifies as "free" in FreedomHouse's annual survey, and that a disproportionatenumber of Arab regimes qualify in the "worst ofthe worst" category, the least free and leastdemocratic on earth.

There are many problems with the democratisationapproach but the most serious of these concerns isits great difficulty with regards to itsimplementation. Muslim, particularly Arab,political cultures are simply not so malleable thatwithin a generation or two they can be transformedinto liberal democracies. There are few genuinedemocracies in the Muslim world and none in theArab world. This is no coincidence. In differentdegrees, Muslim societies lack three prerequisitesfor democracy; the belief that the source ofpolitical authority is intrinsic to society, a conceptof majority rule, and the acceptance of all citizens'equality before the law. Without the first, the ideaof pluralism, and the legitimacy of a "loyalopposition", cannot exist. Without the second, theidea of elections as a means to form a governmentis incomprehensible. Without the third, a polity(organised government) can be neither free norliberal, as these terms are understood in the West.The incompatibility of the Islamic values withWestern is because of its fundamental basis (thecreed). This will mean that the Americans will haveto force democracy upon the Iraqi people with aniron fist. Ironically, what worries the West anddrives their fear is what would happen ifdemocracy were used to establish Islam. That iswhy Donald Rumsfeld made it quite clear that they

would represent the political and democraticaspirations of the people of Iraq, but not politicalIslam. Muslims of Iraq will never be able toproperly implement the system of Islam underdemocracy.

How ridiculous and disgusting it is that thecolonialist democratic countries like America andBritain boast and brag of democratic values andhuman rights, yet at the same time they trample allover the humanitarian and ethical values. 'Humanrights', especially those of Muslims, hold littlevalue. Thus, Palestine, Bosnia, Kosovo, Chechnya,Afghanistan and today, Iraq, are a slap in the faceto them, as these regions highlight the contempt fortheir own laws that they claim to uphold. Theirbehaviour exposes the extent of their deceit.

DEMOCRACY: A SYSTEM OF KUFRWHICH CONTRADICTS ISLAM

The Muslims in Iraq cannot accept democracy as itcontradicts their belief and gives sovereignty toman. Only Allah (swt) is sovereign and is allowedto legislate. So how can the Muslims of Iraq accepta system that is loyal to its US masters and servesthe interest of the colonialists as well as allowingman to be God?

Democracy is established on the basis ofsovereignty. Democracy is for the people and thepeople are the source of authority. It emanatedfrom the creed of separating religion from life, andconsequently separating religion from the state.Democracy is the rule of the majority, and theselection of rulers and the members of parliamentare decided by the majority of voters. All decisionsin democracy are taken by the majority vote.Democracy advocates the general freedoms, whichare freedom of belief, opinion, ownership andpersonal freedom. These freedoms must beprovided to every individual citizen, so that he canexercise his sovereignty and direct it by himself.

The most important element of democracy is that itmakes the human, rather than the Creator,legislator. This is only logical for those who call forthe detachment of religion from life, because thisdetachment means the transferral of legislativerights from the Creator to the human being. But theMuslim is not allowed to make his own legislationbecause we have been given the Qur'an and theSunnah of the Prophet (saw) that we must followand implement in our lives.

For Muslims to adopt democracy means todisbelieve in all - may Allah (swt) forbid - thedecisive and conclusive evidences, among whichare many Qur'anic verses which oblige them tofollow the law of Allah (swt) and to reject anyother law. Moreover, these verses consider anyonewho does not follow or implement the law of Allah(swt) as a kafir, a zalim or a fasiq:

democracy by the iron fist


"… And those who do not rule by whatever Allahhas revealed are non-believers (Kafiroon)" [TMQAl-Ma'idah: 44].

"… And those who do not rule by whatever Allahhas revealed are oppressors (zalimoon)" [TMQ Al-Ma'idah: 45].

"… And those who do not rule by whatever Allahhas revealed are transgressors (fasiqoon)" [TMQAl-Ma'idah: 47].

Thus, whoever does not rule by whatever Allah(swt) has revealed, denying His right to legislate,as is the case with those who believe in democracy,is a kafir according to the explicit words of theQur'an. By rejecting Allah's (swt) command, manis rejecting those decisive verses, and denying aconclusive text makes a person a kafir as theMuslim Fuqaha' agreed unanimously.

The kafiroon and their agents who rule the Muslimcountries, as well as all those who call fordemocracy, whether they be individuals ormovements, realise that the basis for democracy isthe rejection of the laws of Allah (swt) by puttingman in the place of the Creator. For this reason,they do not present democracy from thisperspective, but instead claim that democracymeans people ruling themselves by themselves,with equality and justice prevailing among thepeople with the accountability of the ruler beingguaranteed. Although democracy explicitly impliesthe rejection of the laws of Allah (swt) andfollowing the law of His creation, the advocates ofdemocracy intentionally avoid addressing the issueof rejecting the law of Allah (swt).

The kafir want the Muslims to adopt their thoughts,systems and kufr laws and implement them insteadof Islam; thus, they stray away from Islam andbecome under their control. Allah (swt) warned usof this in the Qur'an when He (swt) said:

"Never will the Jews and Christians be pleasedwith you (O Muhammad) till you follow theirreligion. Say: verily, the guidance of Allah that isthe only guidance. And if you (O Muhammad) wereto follow their (Jews and Christians) desires afterwhat you have received of the knowledge, thenwould have against Allah neither any Wali(protector) nor any help" [TMQ Al-Baqarah: 120]

Also Allah (swt) said:

"Whatever the Messenger brought to you take it,and whatever he forbade you, leave it" [TMQ Al-Hashr: 7]

Democracy for Iraq will mean forcing the Iraqipeople to accept a US controlled regime. This willbe no better than the dictatorship of SaddamHussein. The West uses the cover of bringingdemocracy to colonise the Muslim and ThirdWorld countries to secure their interests.

It is clear from the above that the Western culture,values and viewpoints about life and democracy allcontradict with Islam and its rules. They are kufrthoughts, culture, systems and laws. It is due toignorance or deception that some claim thatdemocracy is from Islam or that it is Shura.

Shura is to voice one's opinion in the mubah (orpermissible) issues, while democracy encompassesevery issue. Democracy is the legislation ofconstitutions, systems and laws, which man makesfrom his own mind and which he legislatesaccording to the benefit that his mind perceives,rather than divine revelation. Thus, democracy isabsolutely forbidden.

ONLY THE ISLAMIC KHILAFAH CANUNITE THE MUSLIMS AND TAKE CAREOF THEIR AFFAIRS

The Islamic State is established on the IslamicAqeedah. It is not allowed by the Shari'ah to beseparated from that in any way whatsoever. Sowhen the Messenger of Allah (saw) established theState in Madinah on the basis of the IslamicAqeedah, the verses of law had not yet beenrevealed. He made the Shahada, "There is no deityworthy of worship except Allah and Muhammad isthe Messenger of Allah", the basis of the Muslim'slife. Through it, Islam obliged Muslims to maintainthe Islamic Aqeedah as a permanent basis for theState. Islam ordered them to raise arms and fightagainst the appearance of flagrant kufr (kufr bu'ah)in the State. The Messenger of Allah (saw) wasasked about the tyrant rulers: "Should we not thenresist them?" He (saw) said:

"No, as long as they continue to establish prayeramong you." i.e. as long as they rule by Islam.

The remaining pillars upon which the Islamic wayof life is built have the Shahada as their foundation.They follow the same principle. Theirimplementation must be taken from Islam. Each ofthem remains suspended in part while the IslamicState is not existent, as they depend upon the State

for their full implementation. It is unacceptable toleave any of these pillars of Islam in this state. Ourworship to Allah (swt) is incomplete without theirfull application.

Islam is the only system that can bring unity andcalm to all Muslims of Iraq, whether they are Sunnior Shi'a. After decades of oppression and miserythe people of Iraq will only respect a ruler whogoverns them by Islam and provides safety andsecurity, thereby removing the US influence fromthe region and building a State which has weaponsto protect against its enemies and ward off thedesigns of the kafir.

Allah (swt) has promised the Muslims that Islamwill be victorious over kufr. We need to believe inthis and work in earnest to make the word of Allah(swt) the highest by bringing back the righteousKhilafah which will act as the guardian over theMuslims and look after their affairs according toIslam. Inshallah, it can then dominate the globe andbring the justice and beauty of Islam to Muslimsand non-Muslims alike.

The kafir nations such as America and Britainclearly harbour a vile hatred for Islam andMuslims. Allah (swt) has warned us of this whenHe (swt) said:

"O you who believe! Take not into intimacy thoseoutside your ranks. They will not fail to corruptyou. They only desire your ruin. Rank hatred hasalready appeared from their mouths. What theirhearts conceal is far worse. We have made plain toyou the signs if you have wisdom" [TMQ Ale-Imran: 118]

CONCLUSION

Three points become apparent from the abovediscussion. Firstly, the Iraqis are not welcoming theoccupying British and American troops; rather theresistance against the occupation is gatheringmomentum. Secondly, any forcing of democracyby the fist upon the Iraqi people can never succeedbecause democracy contradicts our belief and hasno place in Islam. Finally, only the IslamicKhilafah can unite the Muslim Ummah and bringsafety and security to the world. Therefore, weshould be devoting our time, money and lives towork for this righteous cause and bring back Islamas a system by removing these kufr regimes andreplacing them with the Islamic State. z

democracy by the iron fist


This summer billboards across the countryherald the arrival of the latest drivel fromthe Hollywood production line, the feature

film "2fast 2furious". Essentially, the filmglorifies car crime yet the youth will gaze inadmiration as their screen heroes tear aroundcorners at breakneck speed, while performingdangerous stunts in the hottest sports cars.

Amongst some of the Muslim youth, we find analmost cult-like following of the fast and furiouslifestyle. Friday nights are spent "cruising"around the neighbourhood with the roof down andrap music blaring to the extent that it shakes thecar. Many a pointless journey is conducted upand down the same road in a somewhat bizarreritual. This street racing and dangerous driving isa desperate attempt to be "cool". For many of theyouth, a fast car means independence and an

opportunity to emulate the rich and famous. Manywill compete with friends to have the biggest andmeanest engine and ownership of such a car isviewed as a coming of age.

A fast car complete with the latest accessories:sub-woofer speakers, tinted windows and steelalloys deliver status and respect amongst peers.Unfortunately, there are other accessories whichcome as standard but are not advertised by the carcompanies; namely greed and pride (takkabur).The Muslim elders are not immune to theseconcepts of pride and arrogance either and wefind similar behaviour in the community withrespect being granted to those with expensivecars, such as a Mercedes S class or BMW 5 series.

As a result the car is viewed as a means tocommand respect and flaunt wealth. These

concepts of arrogance and pride stem fromindividualism and are a repercussion of thecapitalist creed. It is common for an individual inthe West to spend his entire life attempting tokeep up appearances. People will cast enviouslooks at their neighbours who have the latestsports car gleaming in the driveway, much to thejoy of the owner.

The fast car has fast become symbolic of successin Western society and the lack of such acommodity is associated with failure in life aswell as leaving one open to ridicule from hissocial peers. The type of car an individual driveshas even gone as far as defining what strata ofsociety he can associate with or even belong. Afew years ago, if people were seen driving aSkoda or a Lada it would be difficult for them tosever the disdain of such a thing from their

SO YOU WANT TO DRIVEA FERRARI?

FAISAL CHAU DHARY

youth should be encouraged to compete in thegood deeds and the pursuit of Allah's (swt)pleasure. The role models for the Muslim youthshould be the Sahabah (ra) and not film stars inFerraris.

It is narrated that Imam Ali (ra) was once amongsta group of the Companions who said to him; "OCommander of the faithful, we have never seen aman who is more virtuous, more learned, morecompanionable, friendly, and God-fearing than'Abd Allah ibn Masood." Ali said; "I beg you byAllah, is this true from your hearts?" They said;"Yes." Ali said; "O Allah, I testify in front of youthat I say about him like what they said and more.He read the Qur'an and did what is lawful in it andavoided what is forbidden. He wasknowledgeable in religion and scholarly inSunnah."

It must be understood that the Sahabah (ra) andearly generations will not become the referencepoint until the basis of this capitalist society isexposed and its fallacy made apparent. Living inthe West provides the Muslims with many tests -the distractions are numerous and the Muslimsmust always be weary that they do not becomecomplacent or greedy.

Hence, respect in Islam is granted based on taqwaand possession of the Islamic Personality; it isthese qualities that the Sahabah (ra) wouldcompete upon, not material wealth.z


so you want to drive a ferrari?

character. Image conscious youth would singlethem out in the road and mock at them.

With such an intense pressure to appearsomething great before others the ideals ofWestern life will become numerous. Hence, thefastest and most fashionable car does not remainso for long, and soon after, a new image will theone revered on the streets.

Clever advertising is beamed out through theWestern media to tempt people to desirerecognition and glorification in theneighbourhood. Recently, Toyota advertisementsshowed people lying to others, claiming that theToyota was their car. One car advertisementboldly states; "The car might get you more respectthan you think". Many rap stars have incorporatedexpensive cars into their music videos and includesemi-naked, scantily clad women sprawled overthe car.

In the mind of the people especially the youth,this creates a desire to purchase these vehicles torecreate what the West deems to be the glamourlifestyle of women chasing you and peopleidolising you for your image. In addition to this,for those who are not old enough to drive, they aregroomed from an early age as fast cars arecommon in computer games, granting them anopportunity to live out their fantasies andmoonlight as get-away drivers for the Mob.

This need to play out ones' fantasies and competeamongst peers for the most respected image is anatural consequence of a capitalist society basedon benefit and individualism.

Islam does not prevent man from progressingmaterially and earning money. It is narrated thatmany of the Sahabah (ra) such as Uthman ibnAffan (ra) were wealthy. It is reported that AbuHanifah (ra) saw one of his companions wearinga poor garment, so he ordered him to wait untilthe assembly had departed. He told him; "Lift theprayer mat and take what is under it." The manlifted it and there were 1000 dirhams under it. Hetold him; "Take these dirhams and change yourstate with them." The man replied that he waswealthy and did not need the money. Abu Hanifahsaid; "Have you not heard the hadith,

"Allah loves the trace of his blessing to appear

on His servant?" For this reason you mustchange your state so that your friend is notgrieved by you."

It is worth mentioning at this stage that Islam alsodoes not prohibit the ownership of vehicles totransport people, whether they are "flashy" andexpensive or not. After all, the car is a materialobject and is not specific to any civilisation and soit is not forbidden. However, the car can be usedfor different means, either to take the children tothe masjid or to drive around the streets in anattempt to attract attention and envy.

In Islam, the concepts of pride and arrogance areshunned and indeed prohibited because theycontradict the Islamic personality. On theauthority of Abdullah ibn Masood, who said;"The Holy Prophet (saw) said;

'One who has the slightest bit of arrogance inhis heart, will not be able to enter paradise.One of the companions said, 'O Messenger ofAllah! Some people like nice clothes and shoes.'The Holy Prophet said, 'Allah is Elegant andBeautiful, and He likes elegance and beauty.Arrogance is rejecting faith and consideringothers lower than yourself.'" [Muslim]

Therefore, as the hadith demonstrates, arrogancedoes not necessarily stem from material wealthbut rather from the concepts that the individualcarries. It is possible for the Muslim to earnmoney until he is wealthy yet remain humble andin possession of the Islamic personality. However,if the purpose behind accruing wealth and drivingan expensive car is to achieve status amongstpeople, this will inevitably lead to arrogance andpride. The Sahabah (ra) used to fear excessivepraise. Abu Bakr (ra) said; "O Allah, you knowme better than myself. And I know myself betterthan what they think of me! Pardon my sins anddo not call me to account because of their unduepraises."

Muslims in the West should shun these capitalistvalues and seek to promote their own values. The

The youth should be encouraged to compete in the good deeds and thepursuit of Allah's (swt) pleasure. The role models for the Muslim youthshould be the Sahabah (ra) and not film stars in Ferraris.


In the UK, suicide is the second highest killer ofmen under the age of 24 each year, second onlyto death resulting from road traffic accidents.

70% of recorded suicides (between 4000 - 6000) arelinked to depression. Depression has been referredto as the 'common cold of psychiatry', with anestimated one in five people affected by it at somepoint in their life and more than 2.9 million peoplein the UK are diagnosed sufferers at any one time.

Depression is recognised as a medical condition thatrequires treatment and is one of the commonestconditions seen by the family doctor, with theaverage GP seeing one clinically depressed patientduring each surgery session. Some of the commonsymptoms of depression include lack of motivation,sleep disturbances, weight gain or loss and change inappetite.

It affects people from all walks of life, including therich and famous. Famous people, who haveprofessed to suffering from it, include Vincent VanGogh and Abraham Lincoln. Sufferers that are morerecent include high profile celebrity figures such asRuby Wax, Mariah Carey, Stephen Fry, StanCollymore and Paul Gascoigne.

Research conducted by the World HealthOrganisation (WHO) has highlighted the prevalenceof depression in modern Western society. Researchhas concluded that of the ten most importantdisorders in developed countries (i.e. Westernsocieties) depression was at number one. In respectof lost years due to premature death, depression wassecond only to cardiovascular diseases. It is furtherestimated that by the year 2020 depression will besecond to chronic heart disease as an internationalhealth burden.

The prevalence of depression in Western societies iswidespread and research shows a growth, year onyear in the number of cases diagnosed, treated andeven those culminating in suicide. However, what isless clear is why this is such a wide scale problem inBritain and in Western society in general and thefailure of modern medicine to curb its effects.

A clear understanding of the intellectual needs of thehuman being is required and only then can theanswer to why Western civilisation has generatedsuch instability within its population be sought.

DEPRESSION - A FRUIT OF CAPITALISM

A deep and enlightened study of the human beingwill unravel that the human being is far more thanjust a materialistic animal driven by the soleobjective to maximise the material pleasures of thislife. It will uncover that striving to satisfy the needsthrough experiencing pleasures, such as acquiringwealth and status, are all but a shallowunderstanding of the human existence.

In fact the epicentre of the problem lies in the realitythat the above principles are the ones by which the

capitalist ideology defines for man his purpose inlife, his motivations, his goals and the means bywhich to achieve them. In addition to this theideology of Capitalism, upon which all Westernsocieties are built, is based upon the separation ofreligion from life i.e. secularism. This basisadvocates that the critical questions about the originof life and the world where man lives and what manwill experience after death, are irrelevant to man'slife and it is not necessary to offer an answer forthem.

Furthermore, it distracts man from pursuingsatisfactory answers to these questions by temptinghim to follow his desires and live to satisfy hisneeds. So much so that descriptions for Western lifesuch as "eat drink and be merry for tomorrow youdie" or "live for today" or "you only live once" haveall become common in explaining the motivation ofWestern society. Multiple obsessions, such as themass following of football teams and other sports,DIY addicts, Hollywood and the pub culture are rife.These are all symptoms of a society driven to enjoylife, as if there was nothing more to it than thepursuit of pleasure.

If one were to study the intellectual needs of thehuman being it would become evident that thosequestions, which Capitalism ignored and divertedfrom the attention of man, are without doubt themost important questions in the life of any humanbeing. Whenever man faces a calamity whereby hecannot understand why such a problem has afflictedhim, only the intellectual answers to the questionsabout the origin of life and the role of the Creatorwill equip him to endure the course of his suffering.These answers agree with his nature and will

DEPRESSIONAN EPIDEMIC OF WESTERN SOCIETY

A SIF DAWO OD A ND NA DE EM ASLA M


prevent him from straying into confusion, bitternessand misery.

For example, commonly used descriptions toprovide an answer for bereavements such as "hisnumber was up", "when your time comes" or"everyone's got to go sometime" are offered asconsoling remarks to try to accept the death.However, for the one suffering the death of a lovedone these shallow words offer little comfort and itwill lead to misery as he tries to comprehend whydeath has occurred and why it has affected him andwhy he did not take measures that could haveprevented it.

Similarly, Capitalism offers no intellectual supportto those who suffer the problems of financial ruin,divorce or failure in their careers or business.

Furthermore, Capitalism's answer to the goal in lifebeing the pursuit of pleasure is such a shallowdeception of the reality of man's existence that in thecourse of people's lives in Western society everyperson at some stage will question this basis.

This anxiety is often known as the mid-life crisiswhen people realise that they basically do the samething day after day, week after week and year afteryear and all they achieve is getting older, and nearerto death. This realisation that their life constitutesworking every day, shopping and chores at theweekend, two weeks summer holiday abroad andChristmas when they overindulge, leads to a senseof failure in life and an almost wasted existence. Itbegins to provoke thought in what is actuallyachieved by living just to put on weight and buy abigger car and second house.

However, unfortunately, as Capitalism offers nosolution to this, often what happens is people sidestep the cause of their depression and attempt to re-structure their lives in a blind search to fill their voidin life.

It is apparent from the above issues that Capitalismis an ideology that contradicts the nature of thehuman being and fails to prepare him intellectuallyfor the journey of life. Furthermore, an insight intothe way Islam brings complete tranquillity to thehuman being and prepares him completely toproceed through the challenges of life willdemonstrate how Capitalism is not only inadequate,but in fact a danger for the human race.

ISLAM - THE SAVIOUR OF MANKIND

An understanding of the intellectual basis of Islamreveals how it equips the human being to endure allcalamities and be aware of the correct goal in life sohe would feel achievement, joy, success and peace,even if his needs were not satisfied. Moreover, itwould expose the danger which capitalism posesand how its intellectually deviant basis is leading tothe abnormal epidemic of depression and isprogressing to the complete malfunction of thehuman being.

Islam offers an intellectual basis, which is built on acertain conviction in the Creator Allah (swt), bycontemplating on His (swt) creation such as the skyand sea and the miracle of His (swt) revelation, theHoly Qur'an. Such conviction never leads theMuslim to be confused, when he considers thenature of his existence but rather it gives himcertainty in the truth of Islam. The confusion, miseryand illness of thought suffered by Western societysuch as "if God existed he wouldn't do this or that","no one really knows if God exists" or "God iswhoever you want him to be" can never exist inthose who believe in Islam.

Allah (swt) says in the Qur'an;

"Will they not look at the camels, how they arecreated! And the heaven, how it is raised! And theMountains, how they are set up1 And the earth, howit is spread!" [TMQ Al-Ghashiyah: 17-20]

When faced with calamity, the Muslim would feelpain or sorrow, as would any human being.However, it would not ordinarily push him towardsthe depths of despair or depression. This is becauseIslam has lifted the burden of material failure in thislife from the Muslim. The understanding of Qadaa'(fate), Rizq (sustenance) and Ajal (lifespan) givesolace to the Muslim that wealth, health, life, familyand those calamities that occurred from outside hiscontrol are all from Allah (swt) and Allah (swt) willnot account him in these issues. So if Allah (swt)was to reduce or remove any of these provisions,then the Muslim would accept this with patience andunderstand that this is from his Lord (swt).

Allah (swt) says in Surah Saba:

"Prophet, say to them, My Lord gives abundantly towhomever of His servants He wills and sparingly towhom He wills. What ever you spend, Hereplenishes it by other provisions; He is the best ofproviders." [TMQ Saba: 39]

Allah (swt) says in surah Ash-Shura:

"Allah is very kind to His servants; He giveswhatever He pleases to whom He wills; He is the All- powerful, the Almighty." [TMQ Ash-Shura: 19]

In addition, Allah (swt) informs us in surah al-A'raf:

"To every people is a term appointed. When theirterm is reached, not an hour can they delay it, nor(by an hour) can they advance it (in anticipation)."[TMQ Al-A'raf: 34]

Therefore, Islam equips the Muslim to never fallinto despair or depression when calamity strikeshim, but to understand that this is something thatAllah (swt) controls and man cannot influence.Furthermore, these calamities act as a reminder forman to review his actions and to ensure he maintainshimself on the path of obedience to Islam, asopposed to driving him to confusion.

Allah (swt) says:

"Do they not see that they are tried every year, onceor twice? Yet they turn not in repentance, and theytake no heed." [TMQ At-Taubah: 126]

Islam gave the correct objective in life when it madeadherence to Allah's (swt) law and His (swt) worshipthe objective in life, and He (swt) has informed us inthe Qur'an that we would be tried on the Day ofJudgement regarding our adherence to his laws.Islam has never neglected the needs of man andobliged him to work to secure them but it nevermade them the goal in life, as this is equivalent tothe existence of animals.

Hence, the beauty of Islam has bought tranquillity toall believers, as Islam agrees with man's nature, itgives an intellectual conviction with proofs and itdoes not penalise man on failure in areas he cannotcontrol. It gives him tranquillity and happinessthrough the realisation that regardless of whathappens in life, as long as he is obedient to theHukm Shar'i then he is succeeding in his life'sobjective.

CONCLUSION

Depression is just one of the illnesses of thecapitalist ideology and is one of the many miseriesthat this corrupt way of life is imposing upon theworld. Western civilisation will continue to spiraldown these diseases in their society and attempts tocorrect or reverse them will never succeedcompletely, as the essence of the problem lies in thevery foundation of their thought.

Islam is the only saviour, to rescue the sufferingpeople of the West and bring to them peace andtranquillity, after their misery and despair. z

depression - an epidemic of western society


In early July, at least 50 people were killed anddozens injured in an attack on a mosque inthe southwestern Pakistani city of Quetta.

This act of sectarian violence was believed to bebetween different Islamic 'sects'. The perpetratorsof the crime were not captured and nor were theyidentified. Some claims suggest that it was thework of the Indian Secret Service attempting todestabilise Pakistan, while other fingers pointedto groups such as Lashkar-al-Jhangvi.

Atrocities such as this are often a result of certainMuslims, through an emotional mindset, passingTakfir (a call of disbelief) on others on theslightest difference of opinion. Justifications areused which are wildly inaccurate, such as theclaim that some believe Ali (ra) to be godincarnate, which even Shia reject as an act ofKufr. Or some of them base it on certain hadiththat the Ummah will be divided into 73 sects.

The Messenger (saw) said;

"The Jews were divided among themselvesinto seventy one or seventy two sects, and theChristians were divided among themselvesinto seventy one or seventy two sects. And MyUmmah will be divided among itself intoseventy three sects." Abu Dawood, at-Tirmidhi,al-Hakim and Ahmad among several others,reported this Hadith. At-Tirmidhi said;"Hadeethun Hassanun Sahih".

In another variation, Imam Ahmad recorded thatAbu Àmir Àbdullah bin Luhay said; "Weperformed Hajj with Muàwiyah bin Abi Sufyan.When we arrived at Makkah, he stood up afterpraying Dhuhr and said; 'The Messenger of Allah(saw) said;

'The People of the Two Scriptures divided intoseventy-two sects. This Ummah will divideinto seventy-three sects, all in the Fire exceptone, that is, the Jamaàh. Some of my Ummahwill be guided by desire, like one who isinfected by rabies; no vein or joint will besaved from these desires.''"

This hadith was also narrated by Abu Dawood

(2/503), Ahmad (4/102) and al-Haakim (1/128)among others, with similar wording but with thefollowing addition; "Seventy two in hell fire andone in the Jannah: that is the 'Jamaàh.'" Somescholars, such as ash-Shawkani and al-Kawtharimistakenly said that this addition is weak. IbnHazm wrongly said that it was fabricated.

It is important that Muslims understand thishonourable hadith in the correct context. Thus,with the help of Allah (swt), a detailedpresentation of the meaning of the hadith, itshistorical manifestations, and its impact on theway Muslims view each other will be given. Thishadith has been used by certain people todisparage others; so some who follow the Ijtihadof Sheikh Mohammad bin Abdul Wahhabconsider those who do not, as being of the sectsthat will enter the hell fire. Some who followedthe Shafi'i school said this about the HanafiSchool and Hanafi about the Shafi'i and so on.Some Sunnis said the same for the Shia, and viceversa.

The hadith mentions the word "Firqah"; thisword is a lafz mushtaraq, or homonym. It is aword, which has many meanings. Allah (swt)mentions this word in different contexts in theQuran;

DIVISIONINTO 73 SECTS

ASIF KHA N

"Nor should the Believers all go forth together: ifa contingent (firqah) from every expedition(taifah) remained behind, they could devotethemselves to studies in religion, and admonishthe people when they return to them, - that thusthey (may learn) to guard themselves (againstevil)" [TMQ At-Taubah: 122]

Here, the word firqah is used to mean group orexpedition.

"There is among them a section (firqah) whodistort the Book with their tongues: (As theyread) you would think it is a part of the Book, butit is no part of the Book; and they say, "That isfrom Allah," but it is not from Allah. It is they whotell a lie against Allah, and (well) they know it!"[TMQ Ale-Imran: 78]

Here again the word firqah is used, but in thiscontext, it is something that is condemned, forthe action they carried out was distorting therevelation.

So the context will indicate what the meaning isof the word being used.

With respect to the hadith, Allah's Messenger(saw) explains to us how the Jews were dividedinto seventy-one sects or firqah, and theChristians were similarly divided into seventy-two firqah. Then he (saw) states that this Ummahwill divide into seventy-three sects and that allbut the one who follows what he (saw) and hiscompanions followed will be in hell.

Thus, stating the division among the MuslimUmmah amid the Jews and Christians is meant asa condemnation of this act. The questions thattherefore arise are, in which areas did the Jewsand Christians disagree and how did theirdisagreement lead to the formation of a firqah orsect? The Qur'an al-Kareem, ordered us not todivide as the Jews and Christians did. Thus, it isimportant to understand in what it was that theydiffered.

a) They disagreed over their Messengers. Allahthe Supreme says;

"And We had given Musa the Book and followedhim by Messengers. And We gave Isa the son ofMaryam the clear signs and supported him withRoohul Qudus (Jibra'eel). Is it that when ever aMessenger came to you with a matter that you donot like, you turned with arrogance, calling someliars and killing others?" [TMQ Al-Baqarah: 87]

And He (swt) says;

"And We gave Isa the son of Maryam the Clearsigns. But they disagreed, some of them believedand some disbelieved" [TMQ Al-Baqarah: 253]

b) They also disagreed on their Book. Allah theSupreme says;

"The people of the Book did not disagree except,out of mutual jealousy, after knowledge had cometo them" [TMQ Ale-Imran: 19]

c) They divided between themselves, callingeach other kafir. Allah the Supreme says;

"And the Jews claimed that the Christians are onnothing, and the Christians claimed that the Jewsare on nothing, while reciting the Book. Thosewho have no certain knowledge said as they did.Allah will be the Judge between them on the Dayof Judgement in that which they disagreed on."[TMQ Al-Baqarah: 113]

Upon studying the areas in which they disagreed,one finds that they disagreed in the fundamentalsof their Deen. They disagreed on their Prophets,the Day of Judgement, the Unity of Allah,resurrection, heaven and hell, etc. These aredisagreements on the foundations of belief. SinceAllah (swt) and His Messenger (saw) ordered usnot to divide as the People of the Book did, thenwe are to avoid that area which theirdisagreement occurred in. This means thatdisagreement on the fundamentals of the Deen iscondemned. To explain the above mentioned further, theTafseer of the ayah;

"And hold tight to the rope of Allah and dividenot," [TMQ Ale-Imran: 103], needs to be lookedinto. Allah (swt) orders the Muslims to hold tightand not let go of the rope of Allah (swt) and notto divide.

'The rope of Allah'

Ibn Masood (ra), Ali bin Abi Talib (ra), and AbuSaeed Al-Kuddrri (ra) said it is the Qur'an. Otherssaid it is the Deen of Allah (swt). Others likeIbnul Mubaarak said it is the Jama'ah.

'And divide not'

At-Tabari said; "…and do not disperse awayfrom the Deen of Allah and His covenant whichhe took from you in His Book: that you should betogether in obeying Him and His Messenger(saw)."

Ibn Katheer said; "He ordered them to stay in theJamaàh and not to divide."

Al-Qurtubi said; "Do not divide as the Jews andthe Christians in their Deen…and it could meando not separate based on your desires andinterests."

Therefore, the disagreement that Muslims are notallowed to have is in the fundamentals of theirDeen, not in its branches. This is due to severalreasons:

a) The texts that condemn the disagreement orderthe Muslims not to disagree like the People of theBook who disagreed in the fundamentals aspreviously explained.

b) The Sunnah of the Messenger (saw) permitteddisagreements in the branches or Furoo`.

c) The disagreement that existed among theSahabah were in the Furoo', not in the Usul


division into 73 sects

(foundations of the Deen). No condemnation wasmade about such disagreements in the Furoo'.

d) The followers of the Companions (Tabi'een),the generation that followed them, and thescholars of the Salaf (predecessors) accepted thedisagreement in the Furoo' but not in the Usul ud-Deen (foundations of the Deen).

So, for example, Ash-Shafi'i (ra) states in hisbook Ar-Risalah; "Disagreement is of two types:One that is Haram and the other is not.Everything that Allah established by the definiteproof (Hujjah) in His book or clearly stated byHis Prophet is Haram to disagree over by the onewho knows of it. As for that which can beunderstood differently or by analogy, since thetext can bare it…there is room for [disagreement]unlike in the clearly stated."

Ibn Taymiyah (ra) in his book al-Fatawa al-Kubra, Vol. 20, p.256 stated; "Then it [the texts]are divided to: that which is definite in its dalalah(meaning). Its definiteness is established in itschain [of narrators] (Sanad) as well as in itscontents (Mata), where we are sure that Allah'sMessenger (saw) said it and meant that meaning.The other which is indefinite in its dalalah(meaning). As for the first, it must be believed inand acted according to. This is indisputableamong the scholars in general. The scholarsmight disagree however in some news whethertheir chains are definite (Qat'i) or not andwhether their meaning is definite or not. Anexample of such disagreement is with regard tothe news transmitted by the one (KhabarulWahid) that is accepted by the Ummah or the onethat the Ummah has agreed to act upon."

So the subject that the hadith discusses is not thedifferences, which arise from interpretation ofthe texts, which are preponderant in meaning, butit is condemning those firqah (sects) that havediffered in the foundations of the Deen. Indeed,the Sahabah (ra) had disagreed in matters, whichwere related to the branches of the Deen, but theyremained united on the foundations of the Deen.Subsequently, the great Mujtahideen of Islamdiffered on many aspects of the Deen, but theywere again in the branches. So the "firqah" whichare punished in hell fire, are not those groupswhich have these legitimate differences.Therefore, those who follow a particularMadhab, such as the Shafi'i, Hanafi, Hanbali,Maliki or even those who follow the schools ofthought from the Shia like the Ja'fari or Zaidi, arenot labelled with disbelief.

Rather, those sects that are mentioned in thehadith are those who have left the fold of Islam

Messenger of Allah (saw) taught us,

"The Muslim is a brother of another Muslim,he doesn't oppress him, neither does he handhim over to the enemy, he doesn't disappointhim, nor does he humiliate him."

Allah (swt) states;

"It is He who has called you Muslim." [TMQ Al-Hajj: 78]

Any disagreement which exists, is somethingwhich can be referred to the divine texts,

"…and if you differ in anything refer it back toAllah and His Messenger…" [TMQ An-Nisa: 59]

Indeed, it is clear for those who take notice, thatthe Kuffar have gathered against us and havethrown us all into one bracket and are not goingto let a day pass without the spilling of Muslimblood. In spite of the fact that the Kuffar are splitin accordance with their benefits, they cometogether in the war against Islam, and compete intheir enmity against it. So should we not gatheragainst them, bonding around Islam, notartificially splitting ourselves into Sunni and Shiaand various Madhabs?

"The Unbelievers are protectors, one of another:Unless ye do this, (protect each other byestablishing the Khilafah), there would beturmoil and oppression on earth, and greatmischief." [TMQ Al-A'raf: 73] z


such as the Qadiani, who claimed Prophethoodafter Muhammad (saw), or those Alawi, whoclaim Ali (ra) to be god incarnate (may Allahprotect us from such deviation), or those whodeny the punishment in the Ahkirah, etc. Anygroup that contradicts the definite text of theQur'an, falls outside the fold of Islam.

The Hanafi scholar, Ibn Abideen stated this fact;"There is no doubt in the disbelief (kufr) of thosethat falsely accuse Sayyida Aisha (ra) of adultery,deny the companionship of Sayyidina Abu Bakr(ra), believe that Sayyidina Ali (ra) was God orthat the angel Jibril mistakenly descended withthe revelation (wahy) on the Messenger of Allah(saw), etc. which is apparent kufr and contrary tothe teachings of the Qur'an." [Radd al-Muhtar,4/453].

Ibn Abidin continues; "It is difficult to make ageneral statement and judge all the Shia to benon-believers, as the scholars have agreed on thedeviation and defection of the deviated sects."

Even the Shia scholar of the Qur'an, AllamaMuhammad Hussein Tabatabai, writes in his veryfamous exegesis, Tafseer-ul-Meezan, 12thedition, page 109, published in Iran, regardingthe completeness of the Qur'an; "The Qur'an,which Almighty Allah descended on ProphetMuhammad (saw), is protected from anychange."

Unfortunately, the ignorance and bigotry ofcertain groups has led to the passing of Takfir,which had affected the Jews and Christians. It isa way of thinking which regards one's ownopinion and views in matters within the Deen asunquestionably right, and any belief or opinionopposed to or differing from them asunreasonable or wicked.

The Muslim Ummah is one. The Qur'an found inthe mosques, throughout the world, whether inKarachi, Tehran, Cairo, Madinah, or Algiers isone. Allah (swt) states;

"Verily, this brotherhood of yours is a singlebrotherhood, and I am your Lord and Cherisher:therefore serve Me (and no other)" [TMQ Al-Anbiyah: 92]

The Shia are part of this noble Ummah; they areMuslim and brotherly love needs to existbetween all the Muslims. Indeed the Muslim is abrother of another Muslim, whether he is Shia,Sunni or whatever authority he imitates orwhichever Mujtahid he follows. This is how the

division into 73 sects


The role of women in politics has generallybeen downplayed throughout history. In350 BCE, Aristotle, in his treatise

"Politics", excluded women along with childrenand slaves from his definition of a citizen. Thisprevented her from having a say in governmentand ruling. Later generations came to defend thedecision to exclude women on the grounds thatthey were not suited to the task because of thedifferences between the male and femaleintellect, women's physical strength and inabilityto maintain their attention.

After centuries of oppression and struggle to gainthe same respect, dignity and basic rights whichhad come all too easily for men, the tide for thewoman seems to have turned. In the twentiethcentury Western world, the historical values ofmale chauvinism have been challenged.Sometimes, women have been consideredpolitical equals of men, and in some exceptionalcases, a few women have even surpassed thelevel of achievement of their male counterparts.But despite such changes in recent thinking, theidea of women engaging in politics continues tobe a matter that raises much debate in the Westand particularly in the Muslim world, whichoften bears the brunt of criticism in itsinequitable regard towards women.

Indeed the political status of women in Islam is inmany quarters still perceived to be on a par withthe 'Dark Ages' of European history. Muslimwomen are assumed to be strictly in thebackground of the political milieu, having littleto say and even less to offer. Whilst the Westpurports to have completed the process ofintegration of women into political life bychampioning democracy and the advancement ofwomen's causes, it attacks the Islamic world forits "oppression of women." In reaction to this,many Muslim women, inspired by the apparentprogress made by her Western counterparts, arebecoming increasingly vociferous in their call toparticipate in the political process. But whatneeds to be scrutinised is the legitimacy of theWest's achievement. Have the women in the Westtruly been liberated? Does Islam really oppresswomen by not giving them a political voice?

THE LEGACY OF THE SUFFRAGETTEMOVEMENT

The political landscape of Britain today, withrespect to the role of women, was shaped throughvigorous campaigns that began with the demand

for women's voting rights. In 1867 John StuartMill initiated the first of many debates inParliament to install rights that had been deniedto women from centuries before. The 1900s sawthe formation of the Women's Social & PoliticalUnion and the Suffragette movement, the latter ofwhich became famous for its extreme measures,such as engaging in hunger strikes and similaractivities that often led to imprisonment. In 1918,women over the age of thirty were given the rightto vote and by 1928 the voting age for womenwas reduced to 21 years, the same as for the men.

The West claims that through democracy anddecades of struggle, it has achieved freedom,sexual liberation, equality of the sexes andwomen's rights. However, in reality, the strugglesof women like the Suffragettes continue eventoday. Eighty-five years after women weregranted the right to vote there is still a long wayto go until true 'equality' is reached.

Whilst the aforementioned successes for womenmay exist on paper, the West is still very much amasculine domain. A report produced by theUnited Nations Development Fund for Women(Unifem), showed that women accounted foronly about 14% of members of parliamentworldwide in 2002. Further breakdown revealsthe following:

THE ROLE OF WOMEN INPOLITICS

NA ZIA JALA LI


In the last general election in Britain, the countryactually saw the number of women MPs fall forthe first time to 118 (out of a total of over 650).In the House of Lords there are currently 112women out of a total of 652 temporal members ofLords. When put in historical context, thesefigures are even more revealing. In the entirehistory of British politics there has only everbeen one female Prime Minister, MargaretThatcher; and, in the last 80 years there havebeen approximately 4,500 MPs at Westminster ofwhich only around 240 have been women(approximately 5%). These facts provide aglaring indication that the democratic world ofpolitics is in fact far from being an institution thatobserves the equality of the sexes.

POLITICS IN THE MUSLIM WORLD

When we look to the Muslim world, the situationfor women in the arena of politics is no better. Inthe same report by Unifem, it was found that anumber of Gulf Arab states neither gave thewomen the right to sit in parliament, nor evenpermitted them the right to cast a vote. The Westargues that the lack of advancement for womenin the Muslim states is a result of theimplementation of Islam and the lack ofdemocracy in these countries. Muslims livingboth in the West and the Muslim world havebegun to accept such rhetoric as fact. Theirevaluation that democracy has all the solutions tothe problems of the world is arrived at by thesimplistic observation of how rich and materiallyprogressive Western societies have become,without consideration to the numerouscontradictions and social inequalities that are rifewithin them.

In an attempt by the West to integrate the

Muslims into Western society and accept itsvalues, it actively encourages Muslim men andwomen to participate in its political affairs.Facility is made for the establishment ofrepresentative Muslim bodies and individualswho purport to act on behalf of the Muslimcommunity by lobbying the government usingthe democratic process. Muslim women too areencouraged to have a political voice, the likes ofwhich is otherwise denied to those who reside inMuslim states abroad, where they are subject tothe sexual discrimination that has come tocharacterise such countries. A token gesture ofthis sentiment is the appointment of the US/UKled CPA (Coalition Provisional Authority) inIraq, which has just appointed 3 women out of 25members in its Iraq Governing Council.

Contrary to what is asserted in the West, Islamand the Ahkam Shari'ah are not beingimplemented anywhere across the Muslim worldtoday. Instead, what we see is a semblance ofdemocracy (or man made law), or democracyfused with a distorted Islam, both of which arekufr. For example, Benazir Bhutto came intopower in Pakistan in 1987 and proceeded to bringdemocracy into this Muslim land saying, "Iwould like to be remembered for overturning amilitary dictatorship and heralding a world ofdemocracy in Pakistan, for bringing in changeswhich could not be reversed which included anindependent press and the move towards freemarkets…"

Similarly, if one were to examine every Muslimcountry today, one would find that kufr man-made laws have been implemented, which servenothing other than to enslave, humiliate andoppress men, women and children.

In light of the characteristics of the politicsdescribed above, it comes as no surprise thatmany Muslims find it unpalatable that somethingas pure as Islam could have any association withpolitics; hence the maxim, 'don't mix politics andreligion'. This perception is understandable afterone refers to accounts of political history acrossthe different ages and considers the consequencesof man made laws and their rich legacy ofcorruption. Allah (swt) says:

"And whosoever does not rule by what Allah hasrevealed such are the oppressors"[TMQ Al-Maidah: 45].

Although the orientalists may have painted agrim picture of Islamic political history, objectivestudy shows that after Islam was revealed theface of politics was transformed forever. Whenbefore, primitive warring factions dominated thepolitical arena in Arabia, Islam brought a systemunlike any other, which was revealed by Allah(swt) and was free of the corruption and selfishmotives of man-made law. It was a system thatproduced Muslim politicians whose role was oneof looking after the affairs of people inaccordance with the laws of Allah (swt), eachaware that they were accountable before Him(swt) for their actions.

ROLE OF MUSLIM WOMEN IN ISLAMICPOLITICS

Islam advanced as a political system which, forthe first time in the history of man, commandedthe involvement of not just men, but also women,to the action of commanding the ma'ruf (good)and forbidding the munkar (evil). This is theutmost of political actions. Women were thuspermitted, indeed obliged, to account the ruler,call for the implementation of Islam and work toestablish the deen of Allah (swt) on earth by wayof the intellectual and political struggle. Like anyman, she had to concern herself with the affairsof the Ummah. Allah (swt) says:

"The believers, men and women, are protectingfriends (Awliya) of one another; they enjoin thema'ruf (that which Allah commands) and forbidpeople from munkar (that which Allah prohibits);they perform Salat, and give the Zakat, and obeyAllah and his Messenger. Allah will have mercy

the role of women in politics

COUNTRIES SHARE OF SEATS IN PARLIAMENT 2002

Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Norway,Germany, Argentina, Costa Rica,South Africa, Mozambique

30%- (Target achieved)

Rwanda 25.7%

Uganda 24.7%

UK 17.9%

US 12%

France 11.8%

Japan 10%


on them. Surely Allah is All-mighty, All wise"[TMQ At-Taubah: 71]

Islam came with the Shari'ah commandments,which it obliged on the man and the woman.When it clarified the Shari'ah rules (AhkamShari'ah) which treat the actions of each of them,it did not give the issue of equality any attentionnor did it give it the slightest consideration.Rather it viewed that there was a specificproblem which required a solution. So, it treatedit in its capacity as a specific problem regardlessof whether it was a problem pertaining to a manor a woman. Thus, the solution was for the actionof a human, for the problem-incident, and not forthe man or woman. Therefore, the question ofequality or the lack of equality between the manand woman is not the subject of discussion. Thisexpression is not present in the Islamiclegislation.

Hence, equality between men and women is notan issue for discussion, nor is it an issue whichforms a subject in the Islamic social system. Thewoman being equal to the man, or, the man being

equal to the woman is not a significant matterwhich has influence over the societal life and noris it a problem which is likely to occur in theIslamic life. It is but a phrase which is only foundin the West. None from amongst the Muslimsholds this view except those imitating the West,which has violated the woman's natural rights inher capacity as a human. Hence, she called forthe restitution of these rights.

Islam commanded the Muslim woman, as itcommanded the man, to be concerned with theaffairs of the Ummah. She is permitted andencouraged to partake in political life so long asthis does not compromise her primary role as awife and mother. In Islam it is an obligation for awoman to carry the Da'wah and account the ruler.

However, the contribution of the woman is notexactly the same as that of the man. In the sphere

of politics, a woman is not permitted to holdpositions of ruling such as Khalifah, his Mu'awin(assistant), Wali (governor), 'Amil (Mayor) orany other activity categorised as ruling. This is inview of a hadith narrated by Abu Bakrah thatwhen the news reached the Messenger (saw) thatthe people of Persia had appointed the daughterof Chosroes as queen over them he (saw) said,

"People who appoint a women to run theaffairs shall never succeed."

It should not be assumed that a woman isprevented from leadership because she is in someway inferior or incapable of carrying out thisrole. Rather, the Islamic evidences specificallyprohibit this function for her, and Allah (swt)knows best. As a result of ahkam such as these,there is no question in Islam of men and womenbeing at odds with each other, engaged in someform of historical battle for power and prestige.Unlike the example of the West, where womenare put in direct competition with men in a male-

dominated environment, in Islam both their rolescomplement one another, so that they can work inunison for the pursuit of the pleasure of theirCreator, Allah (swt). He (swt) says:

"Do not long for the favours by which Allah hasmade some of you excel others. Men shall have ashare of what they have earned, and women willhave a share of what they have earned. Do notenvy each other, but ask Allah to give you of Hisbounty. Allah has knowledge of all things" [TMQAl-Nissa: 32].

Women, however, are granted to partake in anypolitical role outside of ruling, such asappointment in government to civil service whereshe is considered an employee, or in areas likejudiciary in the position of judge where sheexercises her own verdict according to her viewof the evidence presented in a court of law. Shemay also be a member of the Majlis al-Ummahwhich, unlike a Western parliament, is notconsidered a ruling structure but rather a bodythat accounts the ruler on his implementation ofIslam, monitors him and expresses itsdisapproval when it perceives that he is notfulfilling his duties with regards to the affairs ofthe Ummah.

While in the West women had to struggle evenuntil the twentieth century to gain the right tovote for a leader, Islam gave her this right some1400 years ago. Not only was she permitted, butshe was expected to give her bay'ah (allegiance)to the Khalifah, alongside the men.

MUSLIM WOMEN OF THE PAST INISLAMIC POLITICS

After the birth of Islam, women were engaged inpolitics as never before. It was now their duty tocarry the call of the Da'wah and to enjoin thema'ruf (good) and forbid the munkar (evil) withinsociety. So it began with some of the Sahabiyyat(ra), who found themselves in positions whereeven the Messenger of Allah (saw) sought advicefrom them on political matters.

Umm Salamah (ra), one of the wives of theProphet (saw), was consulted by him at the timeof the Treaty of Hudaybiyah. She advised him insuch a way as to defuse the tensions that hadarisen amongst the Sahabah (ra), who weredisappointed at the thought of engaging in peacewith a people who had oppressed them so bitterlyin the past. This was a demonstration of her greatpolitical insight and wisdom.

The political rights of women in Islam includedthe authority to give a treaty to a non-combatantfrom a non-Muslim attacking force. When theMessenger (saw) came to Makkah, Umm Hanibint Abi Talib, afforded protection to certainrelatives of hers. She went to the Messenger(saw) complaining that despite her promise ofprotection, her brother Ali bin Abi Talib (ra),wanted to execute two of these men because theywere known for harming the Muslims andfighting against them. Thus, we observe thatUmm Hani bint Abi Talib performed a significant


After the birth of Islam, women were engaged in politics as neverbefore. It was now their duty to carry the call of the Da'wah and toenjoin the ma'ruf (good) and forbid the munkar (evil) within society.


political action by granting asylum to these men.

Although women have not been permitted to takeon a role of leadership, we still saw women in thepast active within the State in other permittedareas. It has been reported from Umar ibn al-Khattab (ra) that he appointed al-Shifa, a womanfrom his folk, as a market judge, who wasempowered to pass judgement on violations ofthe public right.

Ensuring the State's adherence to the Shari'ah,and accounting any deviation, is an importantresponsibility for women just as much as men. Afamous example of this was when a womanaccounted the Khalifah Umar ibn al-Khattab (ra)after his sermon in the mosque where hesuggested a limit on the amount that could beasked for dowry. Once the khutbah ended, awoman stood up and asked, "Who are you toplace a limit on what Allah (swt) and hisMessenger (saw) have not placed a limit upon?"Umar realised his mistake and replied, "Thewoman is right and Umar is wrong." This showshow the women of that time understood theShari'ah and were not afraid to raise mattersdirectly with the Khalifah in public.

PRACTICAL POLITICS OFCONTEMPORARY MUSLIM WOMEN

The Ummah of the blessed Messenger (saw) isfacing a test whereby the Islamic State is absentfrom life. The once united Ummah of theMessenger (saw) has been torn to pieces andscattered across the face of the earth. In theabsence of the State, she has no honour, nopolitical voice and she is oppressed by amultitude of leaders who answer to the beck andcall of the West, embroiled in its game of dirtypolitics. However, the absence of the State andthe prohibition of implementing man-made lawdoes not mean that Muslims are absolved fromany role in politics. Rather, the duty has fallenupon all Muslims, men and women, to unite andwork to re-establish Allah's (swt) Deen by way ofa political struggle; for a political problem canonly be resolved through a political solution.

Working as a collective group or party has beenordered by Allah (swt):

"Let there arise from amongst you a group thatcalls to the Khayr (Islam), enjoins that which isma'ruf (right) and forbids that which is munkar(wrong), and they are the ones who have attainedsuccess." [TMQ Ale-Imran: 104]

Such work necessitates that Muslims arepolitically aware and not naïve about the worldaround them. It has thus become an obligation forevery Muslim man and woman to rise in thiscrucial moment in time, and join such politicalmovements and participate in their work ofaccounting and removing the rulers thatsubjugate our lands.

For women, their role in politics requires them tobe active in the circles in which they live. Theymust call their families, old friends, new friends,acquaintances and the like to join in the politicalstruggle in the name of Allah (swt). It isincumbent for every husband to encourage hiswife, and every wife to encourage her husband,in this noble cause. Every mother must embracethis great responsibility and inculcate herchildren with strong Islamic concepts, producinga new generation of politically aware and activeDa'wah carriers.

CONCLUSION

Unlike many other ideologies or civilisations,Islam, from its very beginning, recognised thepolitical rights and duties of women. Politics inIslam is not the taking of man-made systems suchas freedom and democracy and giving them an'Islamic flavour'. The view of Islam, for bothsexes in politics, is one of total submission to thewill of Allah (swt), not of the subjugation ofwomen to the will of men. Both are ordered topray, fast, pay the Zakat, carry the Da'wah andspread the word of Allah (swt). All Muslims,regardless of gender, must look to Islam inworking to resolve their political problems. Forthis, there is promise of a great reward from Allah(swt), Inshallah.

"The Muslim men and the Muslim women, thebelieving men and the believing women, thedevout men and the devout women and thetruthful men and truthful women, the enduringmen and the enduring women, the humble menand the humble women, the charitable men andcharitable women, the fasting men and thefasting women, the chaste men and the chastewomen, and the men and women who engagemuch in Allah's praise-for them Allah hasprepared forgiveness and a great reward" [TMQAl-Azhab: 35] z


Since September 11, Muslims living in the Westhave come under increasing scrutiny and theirfuture in Western societies has been a subject of

much debate. The centrepiece of this newfoundenquiry is whether Muslims can be successfullyaccommodated in Western secular societies. Often,Western commentators cite that unless Muslims fullyaccept Western values they will pose a constant threatto their secular way of life. Opponents argue thatMuslims can be integrated into mainstream society aslong as they adopt secular values in societal andpolitical matters. They stress that Muslims cancontinue to practice their religion provided it does notinterfere in political matters. Some Muslims havegone a step further and argued that there is nocontradiction between Islam and Western secularism.However, the vast majority do not subscribe to thisview and nor do they outwardly express it - for themthe issue is far from black or white and more complexthan meets the eye.

The complexity lies in the Muslim psyche. Muslimsin the West are torn between two different types ofloyalties. On the one hand they are expected tomaintain loyalty to the Western secular state and onthe other hand they believe in Islam, which is acomprehensive Deen that encompasses all aspects oflife. Often there is conflict between these twodisparate views leading to an identity crisis i.e. "am IBritish or am I a Muslim?" In other words, Muslimsin the West live in a constant state of anxiety and areunable to reconcile the feelings that arise from thesedivided loyalties. For instance, Muslim youth areeager to play for the English cricket team but despisethe UK's role in the recent war on Iraq. Parents, whoinsist that their daughters wear the Islamic dress whenattending Mosques to learn the Quran, see nothingwrong in their daughters wearing non-Islamic dress to

go to school in order to further their education. TheMuslim grocer, who prays five times a day, attendsthe mosque regularly and gives Sadaqah, but is notashamed to sell alcohol.

There are numerous examples which are commonlyfound in the Muslim community and make the samepoint i.e. The identity of Muslims is confused andthey are unable to determine which basis - Islamic orBritish/Western - should be the sole reference pointfor their identity, values and vision.

At the heart of the confusion is the inability ofMuslims to convert their pure Islamic sentiments intoIslamic thoughts. The linkage of their IslamicAqeedah to contemporary matters has also beenvariable and this has led to inconsistencies inbehaviour. The sole reason behind this is thatMuslims are content to analyse these Islamicsentiments through the prism of Western thoughts,without realising that this process would perpetuatethe confusion and prolong the identity crisis. Forexample, since the early nineties, Muslims in theWest have strongly identified themselves with theplight of the Muslims of Palestine, Kashmir, Iraq andthe Balkans - the deeply rooted Islamic concept ofUmmah evoked in them the feeling of solidarity withtheir fellow Muslim brethren and motivated them totake action.

But unfortunately this Islamic sentiment wassquandered each time it was connected with theWestern concepts of seeking UN support andinternational law. They did this even though they fullyrealised that the UN was controlled by the sameWestern states that were responsible for the appallingsituation of these Muslims. However, this did notdeter them from calling upon the UN to intervene andon each occasion Muslims in the West were severely

betrayed by Western governments. This betrayal didnot serve to deter Muslims from repeating the viciouscycle which still continues today.

Similarly, by participating in the non-Islamic politicalsystems the Muslims were able, to a degree, tofacilitate the process of building mosques andMuslim schools but they were also willing to acceptthe restrictions that a secular state applied on theseinstitutions. These include the curbing of Islamicactivities in the mosque which fall outside the secularframework, the willingness to promote the agenda ofBritish political parties within the mosques and theacceptance of the national curriculum within Muslimschools even though it is designed to producepersonalities based upon the Capitalist Aqeedah andviewpoint on life, and not the Islamic Aqeedah and itsviewpoint on life. In all of these issues, Muslims inthe West still struggle to solve these problemsbecause the underlying issue of identity has not beenresolved. Housing, economics, men-womenrelationships, mosques and schooling are just a few ofthe problems that afflict Muslims in the West as theygrapple with the identity dilemma.

After September 11 there was great hope thatMuslims in the West would be able to deal with theidentity dilemma since for the first time they couldopenly witness the fallacy of prominent Westernthoughts like human rights, freedom, democracy,pluralism, etc. practiced by states such as Britain andAmerica. This should have naturally led them toabandon these Western thoughts and sever the linkbetween these thoughts and their pure Islamicsentiments and Aqeedah. Regrettably, this has yet totranspire and Muslims in Western countries stillremain in a form of confusion and suffer from anidentity dilemma.

Unless the Muslims discard the Western thoughts anduse their pure Islamic Aqeedah and sentiments toarrive at the correct Islamic thoughts they will neverbe able to escape from this identity dilemma. Westerngovernments are aware of this and continuously seekto undermine these pure Islamic sentiments byconnecting them to Western thoughts under the guiseof terms like 'integration', 'British Muslim' and othersimilar slogans. They realise the power of the Islamiccreed and thoughts and how it forms the backbone ofthe Islamic identity.

The question is: when will the defining moment comewhen Muslims in the West realise this and mould theiridentity, values and vision solely on the Islamicideology? z


Please address your letters and questions to theEditorial Team, either by email or post at thefollowing addresses:

email: [email protected]

or write to:Khilafah MagazineSuite 298, 56 Gloucester RoadLondon, SW7 4UB

BPublished by

Khilafah Publications

THE DILEMMA OF MUSLIMIDENTITY IN THE WEST

ABID MUSTA FA AN D A HMAD JA SSAT

Date post:	24-Mar-2016
Category:	Documents
Upload:	kaskaa-kaakas
View:	231 times
Download:	3 times

Khilafah Magazine August 2003

Documents