Yasir Qadhi: testosterone-filled teenage cheerleaders

Daily chitchat.

Moderators: Moderators, Junior Moderators

Forum rules
This General Forum is for general discussions from daily chitchat to more serious discussions among Somalinet Forums members. Please do not use it as your Personal Message center (PM). If you want to contact a particular person or a group of people, please use the PM feature. If you want to contact the moderators, pls PM them. If you insist leaving a public message for the mods or other members, it will be deleted.
union
SomaliNet Super
SomaliNet Super
Posts: 9071
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2009 8:02 pm

Yasir Qadhi: testosterone-filled teenage cheerleaders

Post by union »

Yasir Qadhi, a well known alim, who was educated in the prestigious Islamic seminary in al-Madīnah al-Munawwarah (Islamic University of Madinah) and the top ranked secular university, Yale University, has properly exposed the terrorist online warrior scumbags as nothing but "testosterone-filled teenage cheerleaders". :lol: :lol: :lol:

http://muslimmatters.org/2010/10/18/yas ... lim-youth/
“Why is it that a few militant clerics are so popular among some American Muslims?” I was asked by an academic at a recent luncheon.

“After all, besides being so extreme in their message, don’t most of them lack the scholarly credentials of the many mainstream clerics who oppose their militancy?”

The questioner was a highly educated person – someone who had a deep understanding of Islamic theology. He also understood quite well the existence of significant variations in the interpretation and understanding of religious texts. He was one of those who had no problem looking past the right-wing Islamophobic rhetoric of Fox News and Robert Spencer et al., yet was still confused as to why second-generation American and British Muslims would find a message of extremism and militancy so appealing.

He correctly pointed out that the clerics espousing militancy were not only in the minority, but were also not as well-trained in the classical sciences as were clerics belonging to the opposing camp. Why then, were their voices so influential?

This academic at the luncheon was not the only one struggling with the question. A recent congressional hearing also tackled this same issue. And of course, this was not the first time that I myself had to confront this very question. It was especially driven home after someone with whom I had only briefly interacted – Umar Farouk AbdulMutallab, the now infamous ‘underwear bomber’ – turned radical and tried to blow up innocent men, women and children.

Umar’s transformation provides an excellent case-study that can and should be studied further to shed light on the question of radicalism, and this short essay makes a first, humble attempt at doing just that.

I remember Umar as a shy introvert who attended an intensive retreat, the “IlmSummit” sponsored by Al-Maghrib Institute in Houston, TX, in the summer of 2008. I was among ten instructors at that retreat.

Umar was in fact so quiet and shy that I almost felt obliged to engage him in small talk, asking him mundane questions about where he lived and what he was studying. And that was about the extent of my interaction with him. Never once did he raise his hand in class to ask a question, or seek any advice, or share any concerns, or confront me on any subject.

It appears that the lack of communication or socializing was not limited to the two of us. Rather, it seems that other students at the retreat had the same experience; they didn’t remember anything significant about him except his nonchalant, quiet presence.

In fact, my encounter with him had been so brief and dull, that when I saw his pictures being paraded on every website and news magazine cover in December of 2009, I didn’t even recognize him until someone alerted me via email that this was the same Umar who had been at the AlMaghrib retreat. Never in my wildest dreams could I have imagined that someone as shy and socially introverted as Umar would have attempted to blow up a plane by stuffing his underwear with explosives!

So, what happened?

From news accounts and our own documentation, we know that the AlMaghrib retreat was his last AlMaghrib course or seminar. We also know that he left England for a Middle Eastern country (where he remained for a few months), and eventually made his way to Yemen, where he interacted with an American-born cleric whose vision of Islam was completely at odds with our own. It was this cleric who apparently inspired him to open a new chapter in his life, and who brainwashed this 19-year old introvert into believing that murdering two hundred innocent people, including many women and children (some of them even fellow Muslims), would somehow bring him closer to his Lord and earn him reward on Judgment Day.

Why did Umar AbdulMutallab, a college-educated young man with a bright future ahead of him, reject the authority and guidance of authentic orthodox Islam, and allow himself to be lured into performing such destructive and naïve act – in the process destroying his own life and possibly that of many others? After all, hadn’t he interacted with us (instructors and students of knowledge) and lived with us for two full weeks? Hadn’t he observed our level of scholarship, our academic grasp of the religion, and our emphatic opposition to irrational and counterproductive militancy?

Umar might have been a social introvert, but he was clearly not unintelligent. What was it in the message of this Yemeni-American that had caused him to ignore the message and methodology of the many teachers that he interacted with at the AlMaghrib retreat?

Some of what you are about to read might not be ground-breaking, but other points that I mention will raise a few eyebrows and perhaps even anger some. That is to be expected, and I do not expect everyone to agree with everything that I write. The point of this article (as is typically my main intention when writing such pieces) is to jump-start the discussion, and to allow for frank dialogue among all parties.

Let’s get to the answer then. It is not rocket science, nor does it require expertise in human psychology. Rather, it is quite simple. There is an external factor, and an internal factor, and when these two factors are coupled together, the result is fertile breeding ground for extremist ideas.

The external factor is an almost total absence of voices from within mainstream Islam (of all varieties: Sufis, Salafis, Deobandis, etc.) that speak to and address the concerns and issues that resonate with the Muslims most prone to extremism. When the only voices that address issues of concern are the voices of radical militant jihadis, it is only natural that young and impressionable minds will gravitate to these voices. From the perspective of these disaffected youth, since the mainstream clerics aren’t discussing relevant issues, or involved in the discourses that concern them, how then can they be turned to for guidance?

The internal factor is a very warped understanding of Islamic texts and doctrines, and a romanticized view of Islamic history. It is only with such a skewed and idealistic vision that a Muslim can allow radical voices to bypass simple common sense and a pure Islamic heart, filtering all the way to his inner psyche.

Let us discuss both of these issues in more detail:

The External Factor

The issues and concerns that are fogging the minds of many Muslims (and all those who turn to radicalism) center around the present state of the Ummah, and in particular the political and social struggles that many Muslims around the world are facing. These struggles are significantly complicated (directly or indirectly) by policies put into place by our own American government (and, to a lesser extent, other Western countries). Before 9/11, most of the grievances were solely linked to the Palestinian question, and it was for this reason that radicalization and militant tendencies during that time-frame amongst Western Muslims were almost non-existent (it is not a coincidence that all those who planned and aided in the 9/11 attacks were foreigners).

Post 9/11, our government reacted in ways that has added infinitely more fuel to the fire of extremism (and hence, the rise in radicalism amongst our own Western youth). From the illegal invasion of Iraq to the foolish military endeavors in Afghanistan, from Abu Ghraib to Guantanamo, from Aafia Siddiqui to Ali al-Timimi, from the “War on Terror” to the “Patriot Act,” it became easier to convince an impressionable mind into accepting the “West versus Islam” paradigm (as if these two entities can be surgically and neatly delineated, separated and defined).

And instead of such incidents abating with time, every few days a new headline in some newspaper conveys yet another story “proving” the false paradigm: an American drone missile strike kills a few dozen anonymous, faceless tribe-members in Pakistan, or ever-expanding Israeli settlements steal more land from Palestinians, or a new torture scandal involving Muslim prisoners is leaked, or another military scandal involving the killing of innocent Muslim civilians is exposed. These incidents are a direct or indirect result of either our own American military operations, or our tax-supported military aid, or our turning a blind eye to specific actions of our allies via the use of our veto power in the UN Security Council.

As if such misguided foreign action was not sufficient to enrage a proud young Muslim man, he must also face the constant media onslaught that seeks to portray him and his faith as inherently evil and dangerous. He hears of his friends and families or other Muslims being routinely harassed, humiliated and intimidated at airports and border-crossings, and “randomly” selected for additional screening and questioning. Of course, he too has his own first-hand discriminatory experiences.

His faith attacked on national airwaves, his religiosity treated with suspicion, his co-religionists around the world killed, and his activist brothers and sisters in Western lands jailed, it is no surprise that our young and impressionable Muslim teenager struggles to make sense of all of this.

He wants someone to defend his faith and speak up on behalf of the oppressed. He wishes to hear fiery and angry rhetoric, charging the “free and democratic” nations with hypocrisy, double standards, and the flouting of human rights. It is obvious to him that his government is primarily concerned with acquisition of oil and the control of natural resources, even if that results in the loss of Muslim blood. He clearly sees our politicians pandering more to the interests of corporate sponsors and special-interest donors than to the interests of their own fellow citizens. So, naturally, as a lay-Muslim, he looks to the scholars of his religion, seeking to find solace in angry tirades and verbal lashings against our politicians, leaders, media pundits, and law enforcement agencies who are, in his view, the root cause of all of this anger and terror in the first place.

Instead, all he hears at his local mosque, assuming he is fortunate enough to live in an area where the Imam speaks English, are khutbahs that have no political relevance whatsoever. Finding nothing of significance at a local level, he then looks to more influential scholars: famous national clerics and da`ees, staple invitees to any major Islamic conference. Alas, all he hears them do is to regularly criticize his side: the victims in his eyes. Those who stand up to defend the innocent and fight against the real terrorists – from his perspective – are described as “Muslim terrorists.” Instead of supporting the cause of the weak and oppressed, these clerics side with the oppressors, routinely dissociating themselves from their own, giving spectacle fatwas against violence even as they ignore state-sponsored terrorism and what he perceives as the “greater violence.”

Over time, as acts of violence and terror increase in Muslims lands, and as local scholars only increase in their denunciation of “Muslim extremism,” this young man becomes even more disillusioned with these clerics. In his eyes, these Western scholars, no matter how popular among the masses, are nothing more than sell-outs: government-appeasing servile acquiescing cowards who are more concerned about their own safety and popularity than the safety and comfort of their persecuted brothers and sisters around the world.

“Enough of criticizing us! Who speaks up to defend them?” he demands. “Where is the condemnation of our own Western nations, our own policies and our own governments, when they engage in acts of violence, drone bombings, mass-killings, torture, secret renditions and sham trials? Why is such activity not described as terrorism – is it not also targeting the innocent? Or is ‘terrorism’ only when a Muslim commits such acts?”

Alas, the token condemnation against foreign policy that does occasionally come from the mouths of these “mainstream” clerics is too shallow for his liking, too weak to satiate his own anger, too lost in the convoluted language and footnotes of their larger message. He is always reminded of the words of Malcolm X and the distinction that Malcolm drew between the “house Negro” and the “field Negro” and he cannot help but feel that these mainstream scholars are far too entrenched with the powers-that-be to stand up against them.

Not hearing anything from his local or national scholars in the physical world around him, he scours the virtual world instead, looking on the net for voices that will speak to his concerns and address his anger. And in this virtual world, he stumbles across chat-rooms and forums where, for the first time, he finds people who see the world his way. These people, aided by the anonymity of the internet and empowered by the false bravado that only a fake alias can give, finally make our young man feel home, and that he was right all along in his assessment.

It is on these forums that he finds people who list nothing but the political faults of the Western world. It is on these forums where little children pretend to be brave men who can take on the “big bad wolf.” And it is on these forums that he is introduced to “clerics who speak the truth” and “fear none amongst men,” of legendary giants that even America fears and will do anything to silence (even if that means sending squads of assassins to murder one of their own citizens without trial). Whereas previously he had trouble finding anyone who would voice his view of the world, here, all the voices on these forums seem to be echoing the same message, spoken from the mouths of militants and circulated online by their testosterone-filled teenage cheerleaders.

And in this worldview espoused by these militants, our young man finds great comfort and solace. According to the militants, every fault in the whole world emanates not from within, but from without. The Muslims are never to blame for anything. It is always the “West,” and in particular “Amrika”.

Local persecution of scholars in Muslim lands? “Amrika,” because they were the ones who propped up the kings, presidents and emirs in the Muslim world in the first place. Bombings that kill innocent Muslims in the streets of Baghdad, or the mosques of Karachi, or the shrines of Najaf? “Amrika,” through the use of false-flag operations conducted by American agents, or as a result of the wider chaos originally caused by once again, “Amrika.” The awful state of the economy in Muslim lands? You guessed it, “Amrika,” via the use of loans that the American-controlled IMF gave out and the economic policies that America put in place.

It is a comforting vision, especially for a young teenager: a simple and self-serving view that reclaims the honor of his faith while laying blame on the feet of others. “It’s not our fault at all! We are always oppressed, always victimized, it’s all America’s fault,” he says to himself over and over again. And on the forums that he frequents, the constant interactions with twenty other kids from around the world, some writing secretly from their parent’s basement, some from their own “Star-Wars” posters-lined bedrooms, this chatter begins to sound like the representative voice of the entire Muslim world.

This young “victim” does not realize that the “victim-mentality” is not a motif of the Quran, nor do we find it ever verbalized in the seerah of our beloved Prophet. It is not a dignified mentality, and even if there are elements of truth in some portions of it, such an attitude does not befit a believer who believes in an All-Mighty Being who Hears and Sees all. Our Prophet sallallahu alehi wasalam suffered more at the hands of his detractors than any Muslim in our time, yet he maintained a moral dignity and an internal courage that would put to shame the entire paradigm of victim-mentality that these radicals espouse.

The Internal Factors

With regards to the internal factors, it is not likely that a mind well-grounded in authentic texts and traditions will gravitate towards acts of terrorism. Thus, it is no coincidence that one will be hard-pressed to find senior clerics, of any theological persuasion, who justify flying planes into building or strapping bombs onto one’s body in order to blow up innocent civilians.

A radical’s mind could only have been exposed to cherry-picked religious texts along with their misinterpretations; typically verses from Surah al-Anfal and Surah al-Tawba (both of which were revealed in specific historic situations very different from our own). Such a mind is only versed in Prophetic traditions of a military nature, sheered of their context and shown in isolation from many other traditions that would help paint a more nuanced view.

However, these are not the only verses and ahadith (the Prophetic traditions) pertaining to the topic of jihad. Many other verses, especially those that seem to conflict with their warped understanding of Surah al-Anfal and Tawba, are simply dismissed as belonging to the “Makkan” phase of revelation. Many Prophetic traditions which would show that military action is not the only way to fight for the truth are simply bypassed or ignored. For every evidence that they quote, there is an almost surreal attempt to isolate that one verse or hadith from the entire corpus of Islamic texts and law. For these militants, it is as if each verse they cherry-pick was actually revealed for their immediate benefit. For them, it is as if every hadith that they quote was stated by the Prophet directly to them and in support of their world-view. Only a mind completely bereft from the necessary hermeneutical tools of usul al-fiqh (the procedure of deriving laws) and maqasid al-Shariah (understanding the goals of Islamic Law) can be so shallow.

With regards to doctrines, a simplistic, black-and-white understanding of wala wa-l-bara is propagated by the extremists; one that the intellectually-challenged (of the ilk of George W. Bush) would have absolutely no difficulty understanding. “You’re either with us or against us,” both Bush and Awlaki pontificate.

Yet, the real world that we live in is not as black and white as these Manichean camps would like it to be. A clear and simple argument can be made that on each and every issue, we should stand with the truth, regardless of which side that truth is on. And it is not uncommon that this truth is not on one side, but somewhere in between.

In the context of the very verses that many militants use to justify their black-and-white understandings of wala wa-l-bara, one verse (8:72) specifically mentions that even if Muslims under attack ask for help, and reach out to you based on religious loyalties, you are not obliged to help them if that help will compromise your political alliances. Extrapolating from this, one can state that while American Muslims are with the Palestinians, Iraqis and Kashmiris in wanting freedom, safety and security for them, at the same time we cannot help them militarily if that help will compromise our own safety and the safety of our families and communities, or if such help would contradict our political alliances. We can still help our suffering brethren in many other ways – for example, by educating our fellow countrymen regarding the dismal plight of these people and how our own government has been, many times, complicit in perpetuating or even causing such predicaments.

The point that I am stressing here is that a more nuanced and pragmatic reading of the Quran can also just as easily be done – but it takes more wisdom, foresight and moral courage than many of these testosterone-filled youth are willing to undertake (and for the record, I firmly believe that one of the best ways to de-radicalize these young men is to help them get married early and encourage them to have kids, and I mean this in all seriousness).

Muslims need to understand that anyone who approaches the Quran and Sunnah with preconceived notions, wishing to find justification for certain theological or legal opinions, can almost always do so. If one wishes to speak to the texts rather than allow the texts to speak to him, then only his imagination will be a limit to the opinion that he seeks to derive.

With regards to our Islamic history and heritage, our overzealous youngster is told of a few romanticized legends – of how a woman cried out for the Caliph Mutasim to come rescue her from the clutches of the enemy, or how Umar b. al-Khattab could not rest even if only one Muslim was in trouble, or how Salah al-Din al-Ayyubi almost single-handedly raised up an army to liberate Jerusalem from the clutches of the evil Crusaders.

But this youngster never actually reads a book of Muslim history himself. If he did, he would find a very different story – a very human one. Yes, there is no doubt that there were times in our past when noble men achieved gallant feats and ordinary people faced almost impossible challenges, yet came out as heroes in the end. But, as with any human history, these examples are more the exceptions than the rule.

Politically speaking, the Muslims suffered from as much intrigue, internal backstabbing, civil wars, bureaucratic inefficiencies, secret dealings, internecine warfare, bribery and corruption as just about any other culture and civilization. Were this youngster to read further, he would discover the almost constant insurrections that the Umayyads had to face from various Muslim insurgents, the political intrigues and the civil wars fought multiple times within the Abbasids, the alliances that the Taifa Rulers of Andalus regularly formed with Christian princes against fellow Muslims in order to retain power, the rivalries and fratricide of the Ottoman Sultans, and many, many, many more such sordid facts – facts that are not taught in Islamic Sunday school.

Most of the armies that were harnessed and prepared in our fourteen centuries of Islamic history were actually gathered to fight other Muslims for political or material gain, and not to fight the “inglorious infidel.” Muslim societies of classical and medieval times struggled with many of the same issues that their modern counterparts do (albeit to different levels), of societal corruption and moral decay and religious indifference. If there were even prostitutes in the holy city of Madinah during the Prophetic era (as our source books clearly mention), does one believe that later societies would somehow be better than our “pious predecessors?”

What a thorough reading of our history shows us is that our societies and peoples were not angels, but simply humans. Yes, there was much good as well, and there is no denying that having a Caliphate that ruled according to Islamic law led to a society of greater Islamic accomplishments than what can be obtained in our times. But by the same token, because we live in an age devoid of a Caliphate, the good that does occur in our era is of a different type, and the endeavors and struggles of our times will inevitably form its own legends and heroes for future generations.

It is immature and dangerous to over-glorify our past. By painting an imaginary and overly-romanticized picture of an Islamic epoch, it is easier for misguided clerics to convince energetic but naïve youngsters to reclaim and resuscitate such a fantasy, no matter what the cost might be.

I have no doubt that Umar AbdulMutallab saw a level of academic excellence at AlMaghrib that he would be hard-pressed to find anywhere else in the Western world. I also have no doubt that he was highly impressed with the scholastic content of our seminars. However, in the end, what was important to him was not what he saw, but what he didn’t see. And what he didn’t see was an exposition and condemnation of the role our own countries play in spreading terror around the world. What he didn’t see were explicit solutions being offered in light of the current situation of the Ummah.

In other words, what he didn’t hear was a discourse regarding the current political and social ills that he felt so passionately about, and a frank dialogue about the Islamic method for correcting such ills.

And in that vacuum, where neither AlMaghrib nor other mainstream voices had anything substantive to offer, the voices of radical extremism proved to be the only bait dangling in front of his eyes. For him, there never was a competition between Orthodox Islam and militancy; there never was an “either-or” choice to be made because these two visions of Islam – from his perspective – were completely independent of one another. Each one discussed different topics and each was active in a different arena. So convinced was he by that message of radicalism that he was willing to give up his life for it, not realizing that living one’s life for the sake of God is far more difficult than committing suicide for His sake (as if the latter can ever truly be for the sake of God!).

By allowing radicals to speak on behalf of the voiceless, we who remained silent simply lost the battle for the hearts and minds of people such as Umar.

If we truly wish to fight radical ideas amongst our youth – if we wish to persuade them away from rash measures drawn from raw emotions, and to persuade them to act upon wisdom and perform real acts of courage – then the first step that we will have to take is to become more vocal about the grievances that drive young men to acts of desperation. We will need to be frank about the role that our governments play in ruining the freedoms and happiness that specific societies around the world deserve. And after discussing these woes, we will need to educate our youth about the proper way forward in solving them: away from foolish and un-Islamic militancy, and towards education, political activism and other positive channels.

Those who choose to take on this task will have much to worry about for themselves. They will have to brave the attention and subsequent fury of a fear-mongering media empire that loves to demonize any who dares disagree with its own romantic notion of a lost American utopia. These individuals will have to put their trust in Allah as they fight legal and political battles against their own governments and law enforcement agencies, as they themselves are wiretapped, monitored, harassed, baited and perhaps even jailed merely because they state the obvious: that it is our own country’s domestic and foreign policies that are the greatest source of the anger and resentment fueling radicalism.

It is an awkward position to be in; for some, it appears to be a hopeless battle. How can one simultaneously fight against a powerful government, a pervasive and sensationalist-prone media, and a group of overzealous rash youth who are already predisposed to reject your message because they view you as being a part of the establishment (while, ironically, the ‘establishment’ never ceases to view you as part of the radicals)?

But there really is no other alternative. We need to protect our religion for our children after us, and we need to preserve what we can of the freedoms this country still offers us. And while I am skeptical that America will ever revert to its innocent pre-9/11 state of affairs; still, despite all that has occurred to change this country, America remains far better than any European equivalent, and we need to appreciate and cherish this fact even as we struggle to balance our loyalties between the requirements of our faith and those that are increasingly being imposed upon us by our country.

The journey ahead of us is long and difficult, and the task is well beyond simply acknowledging the root cause of anger. Real and tangible solutions must be offered, and we must assess the pros and cons of any step that we undertake. This is but one step, and many more arduous miles lie ahead. But even the journey of a thousand miles must begin with one step.

To be continued…

Knowing the typical Alshiskabab supporting punk on here, they'll probably not even read what he has to say and respond with their trademark ignorance. :roll:
User avatar
Talo alle udaa
SomaliNet Heavyweight
SomaliNet Heavyweight
Posts: 2739
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2009 4:03 pm
Location: Evaluating the African mind

Re: Yasir Qadhi: testosterone-filled teenage cheerleaders

Post by Talo alle udaa »

I am assuming you lack any testosterone then?
User avatar
Berke
SomaliNet Heavyweight
SomaliNet Heavyweight
Posts: 1499
Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2006 10:40 pm
Location: Saluda al campeón

Re: Yasir Qadhi: testosterone-filled teenage cheerleaders

Post by Berke »

I will reply to your topic.
union
SomaliNet Super
SomaliNet Super
Posts: 9071
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2009 8:02 pm

Re: Yasir Qadhi: testosterone-filled teenage cheerleaders

Post by union »

Talo alle udaa wrote:I am assuming you lack any testosterone then?
Not as much as you and your fellow terrorist sympathizers lack brains and maturity. :up:
grandpakhalif
SomaliNet Super
SomaliNet Super
Posts: 30687
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 10:32 am
Location: Darul Kufr
Contact:

Re: Yasir Qadhi: testosterone-filled teenage cheerleaders

Post by grandpakhalif »

I just read this article and I concluded that this man is proposing 'a wishy washy', watered down version of Islam. There are some countries which have legitimate causes and not all resistances are terrorists
User avatar
Talo alle udaa
SomaliNet Heavyweight
SomaliNet Heavyweight
Posts: 2739
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2009 4:03 pm
Location: Evaluating the African mind

Re: Yasir Qadhi: testosterone-filled teenage cheerleaders

Post by Talo alle udaa »

The following is a comment left on muslimmatters blog in response to an article by Yasir Qadhi entitled: 'The Lure of Radicalism and Extremism Amongst Muslim Youth' which can be read in full here

by Brother Ibn Abdullah may Allah preserve and protect him

As-Salamu’alaikum:

Sheikh Yasir Qadhi’s article is very well articulated, however, it creates more questions than answers. What is very positive about the article is that he eloquently describes how many Muslims feel today, showing that at least for the record, he is “in the loop”, and is aware of what is happening to Muslims here, and abroad. No one can honestly accuse him of being oblivious about the state of affairs for Muslims. However, the problem that Sheikh Yasir faces is that there is a clear conflict of interest at hand. Yasir Qadhi is a U.S. born, American citizen, living in the US, and completing his Ph.D. at Yale. The fact of the matter is, there is only so much he can criticize the US. Sheikh Yasir may not be able to openly admit this, but we Muslims here nonetheless have to recognize this obvious fact, and therefore must take anything Sheikh Yasir says about the type of legitimate Islamic response that the Muslims should have towards the blatant injustice the Ummah is facing, with more than just a grain of salt. We Muslims must understand, that regardless of what age we live in, the fitnah of the taghoot is enormous, as ALLAH shows us in the Qur’an with the example of Fir’aun. This was also witnessed at the time of Imam Ahmad, when he was tortured by the Khalifah (not the President/Prime Minister/Czar/Emperor/Chancellor, but the Khalifah) of his time over the issue of the Divine nature of the Qur’an. While many scholars existed at his time, Imam Ahmad was in the extreme minority who spoke out, unapologetically, unequivocally, for the truth. If this is the fitnah of the rulers from amongst the Muslims, then what of the ones from the kuffar? To put it in layman terms, it’s easy to criticize the Boston Red Sox when one is in Yankee Stadium. To criticize the Boston Red Sox when one is at Fenway Park is another matter.

When Sheikh Yasir says:

“..these Western scholars, no matter how popular among the masses, are nothing more than sell-outs: government-appeasing servile acquiescing cowards who are more concerned about their own safety and popularity than the safety and comfort of their persecuted brothers and sisters around the world. ”


What he needs to understand is that these “Western scholars” have none to blame but themselves for this perception. Take just recently in the month of Ramadan, when the tragic flood hit the Muslim country of Pakistan causing much catastrophe to our brothers and sisters with respect to their homes, and their lives, to which many organizations around the world pointed out that the global response (especially those of the Muslim nations) was luke warm at best, many Western Imams went to Auschwitz recognizing the tragedy of the holocaust, an historic event that is well over 60 years old which Muslims played no role in whatsoever in, and has been exploited by the enemies of Islam to persecute our Brothers and Sisters in Palestine:

=
If one argues that the events occurred simultaneously (give or take), and therefore the participants were unaware of the events in Pakistan at that time, did these very Imams, and leaders, ever issue a joint statement condemning the US crimes against the Muslims of Iraq, whether it is about the present war taking place right now, or with respect to the genocide of Muslim children that took place PRE-9/11 during the Clinton Administration?
*URL REMOVED*


Did they issue a joint statement condemning the atrocities committed by the US soldiers in Abu Ghraib/Bagram/Guantanamo Bay?

*URL REMOVED*
These Imams are conspicuously silent. These blatant contradictions that Muslims see today simply cannot be ignored, and the actions of our leaders must be questioned. In the information age we live in, our Ummah is much more aware then they give us credit for. We are an Ummah that takes a middle ground, and does not go into extremes. If Sheikh Yasir is willing to engage a taghoot (whose army is directly responsible for killing, and raping Muslims, while plundering Muslim wealth, in an effort to further weaken the Ummah), as he himself did:

http://muslimmatters.org/2009/02/04/to- ... -question/

Then Sheikh Yasir should also find the moral courage to engage the very Muslim leaders whose qualifications he questions (just for the record, the credentials of Sheikh Anwar Al-Awlaki are quite comparable, if not superior to Sheikh Yasir’s himself):

http://mirror.robert-marquardt.com/cryp ... 8-0812.htm

Sheikh Yasir had a golden opportunity when this exchange occurred between Sheikh Tawfique Choudhry and Sheikh Anwar Al-Awlaki only recently:

http://muslimmatters.org/2009/02/09/mus ... terrorism/

However, Sheikh Yasir avoided involvement. Interestingly enough, Sheikh Yasir, rather than speaking out against Sheikh Anwar, mildly critique’s Sheikh Tawfique’s position in one of the comments. Nothing against Sheikh Anwar.

More over, Ayman Al-Zawahiri, not too long ago, had an open town hall meeting, where people were allowed to submit their questions online for him to answer. Why didn’t Sheikh Yasir engage Ayman Al-Zawahiri with the issues he is raising here? The issue here is not whether you agree with either Anwar Al-Awlaki, or Ayman Al-Zawahiri, but simply extending the same courtesy to fellow Muslims that you would to the taghoot. If you truly are more knowledgeable than those who are engaged in fighting the kuffar on the front lines, then you as a person of knowledge have an obligation to teach these concepts (the concepts of jihad, wala wal-bara, establishment of khilafah, etc). You as a person of knowledge cannot simply criticize from the sidelines. Our brothers and sisters who are fighting, and defending themselves are indeed human, and will make mistakes. This is a fact. However, our duty first and foremost, is to make excuses for them, defend their honour, support them, and if possible, educate them. If our leaders lack the courage, and the fortitude to engage the enemy head on, then they have an obligation, and a moral duty to not belittle the efforts of those, that do have the courage and the fortitude. As the kuffar say in defending the actions of their barbaric, savage, minions, “support our troops”, so should we. In addition, while Sheikh Yasir indeed has some exemplary credentials with respect to his Islamic education, we must also be aware that he neither has put his life at risk on any battlefield defending the Muslim lands nor to ensure that the banner of Islam is the highest, nor spent any time in prison at the hands of a tyrant like many great Islamic scholars, past and present. Of all people, Sheikh Yasir should understand this point, as he is a signatory to the Pledge of Mutual Respect and Cooperation:
---*URL REMOVED SEE SECOND POST*---
The other problem that Sheikh Yasir, and other Imams/leaders of the west must understand is that while they repeatedly argue that it is haram to kill innocent civilians, women, and children in combat (a very strong, legitimate, fiqh opinion), they must understand that it is precisely that: an opinion. The rules of combat of today have significantly changed, and contrary to what Sheikh Yasir said above, some of the greatest Islamic scholars of our time have APPROVED the killing of innocent women, and children during these times:



I by no means am defending the above opinion, but the fact remains that when a great scholar of our time makes such a strong, and explicit statement (a scholar whom Sheikh Yasir respects highly), then it is up to people like Sheikh Yasir to either acknowledge this opinion, or provide a scholarly refutation showing why such an opinion is flawed. The other problem that the Imams have on this subject, is that they not only are against killing innocent civilians, but they are also against the killing of soldiers as well (see Fort Hood). If a Muslim of german nationality, was in the Nazi army got up and shot several Nazi soldiers who were either preparing for battle, or returning from battle, such a Muslim would be viewed as a contemporary hero. Why is the Fort Hood incident any different? Is defending jewish lives a greater priority in Islam, then defending Muslim? The message that these Imams and scholars are giving is simply, regardless of whether the kuffar are killing, or raping you, or your families, you may not fight back, because it is haram. What is apparent by this, is that the allegiance of the scholars, and the Imams to the US, and it’s army, is greater than it’s allegiance to the Muslims in other parts of the world. Is this not what is apparent? What other, possible conclusion can be drawn from the above statements from our leaders? Where are the same statements condemning the killing of innocents by the US, and allied forces? Where are these video releases on youtube? Do the kuffar have carte blanche? This is also extremism.

Moreover, it is also very condescending to dismiss legitimate grievances of Muslims around the world who feel the one responsible is “Amrika”. If the implication of this argument of Sheikh Yasir is that we Muslims are being punished by ALLAH for our many, MANY sins, and neglect of our duties to ALLAH, then he is absolutely correct. That being said, this issue is something we should always be preoccupied with, whether at times of injustice or at ease. No Muslim can ever, ever be complacent about his/her duties to ALLAH. If one was to ask Abu Bakr, or Umar (May ALLAH be pleased with both of them), or any other Sahabi about the need for improvement in their efforts, they would be the first to acknowledge that they are falling short. So this should, by no means, be an excuse to allow us to ignore the responsibilities we have towards our brethren around the world. If one is simply dismissing the crimes committed by “Amrika” because they sincerely don’t believe that this is a war on Islam, nor a clash of civilizations, then how do we reconcile this opinion, with these blatant statements by US politicians?

“Terrorists’ ultimate aim is to establish a caliphate (Khilafah) covering a region from Spain, across North Africa, through the Middle East and South Asia, all the way to Indonesia -and it wouldn’t stop there,” Sydney Morning Herald, US VP Richard Bruce “****” Cheney 1428-2-24 H
———————————————————–
” If we enhance the recruiting of this jihadist cause, there will be an attempt to re-establish the caliphate
(Khilafah),… the caliphate (Khilafah) that twice has gone all the way across the Pyrenees, up to the gates of
Vienna… I am concerned that it will be difficult for Europe to stand and that you will have a re-established
caliphate (Khilafah) sitting on 58 percent of the world’s oil.” US Lieutenant General William G. Boyk at Manna
Church for the graduation ceremony of Fayetteville Christian School in North Carolina US 1428-4-9 H
———————————————————–
“They see Iraq as the center of a new caliphate (Khilafah), from which they can stir extremism and violence
throughout the region” New York Times, US VP Richard Bruce “****” Cheney 1428-4-25 H
———————————————————–
“This caliphate (Khilafah) would be a totalitarian Islamic empire encompassing all current and former Muslim
lands, stretching from Europe to North Africa, the Middle East and Southeast Asia… They hope to establish a
violent political utopia across the Middle East, which they call caliphate (Khilafah), where all would be ruled
according to their hateful ideology.” George Walker Bush 1427-8-12 H
———————————————————–
” Iraq’s future will either embolden terrorists and expand their reach and ability to re-establish a caliphate
(Khilafah), or it will deal them a crippling blow ” New York Times reported about the statement of US
Undersecretary of Defense Eric S. Edelman speaking at Council on Foreign Relations 1426-12-11 H
———————————————————–
” They want to reestablish the Supreme Caliphate (Khilafah) . It’s in every writing that you ever want to look at it…
their goal is to start in Iraq, expand their Islamic caliphate (Khilafah) throughout the Middle East to Europe, and
ultimately across the entire world. ” US Lieutenant General Raymond T. Odierno, assistant to the chairman of the
joint chiefs of staff given talk at American Enterprise Institute 1426-12-18 H
———————————————————–
” They talk about wanting to re-establish what you could refer to as the seventh-century caliphate (Khilafah),…
governed by Sharia law, the most rigid interpretation of the Koran.” US VP Richard Bruce “****” Cheney at
Lake Elmo, Minnesota 1425-8-15 H
———————————————————–
“Do you really want to live in… a Stone Age Islamic caliphate (Khilafah) with no rights, no economy and no
future? I am confident the answer will be no.” The Independent, James Philip Rubin, was assistant US secretary

In order for Sheikh Yasir to credibly, and legitimately address these concerns, grievances, and actions of our youth today, he needs to answer the many questions raised above, and others. Our Imams and leaders need to be held accountable, and need to spend a lot of time in self-reflection, and self-criticism, as it is on their watch, that these events are occurring. To simply suggest that one way to end “radicalization” in our youth is to get them married, and have children, is extremely patronizing, as if to suggest that the primary reason for this “problem” is sexual frustration in our young men, or that marriage is a convenient distraction from the problems of the world today. Marriage definitely should be encouraged in our youth to avoid zina, and other haram activities. However, to use marriage as a solution to end the “radical” behaviour in our youth is just plain wrong. Many of the brothers who are engaged in fighting the enemy on the front lines today (and ironically, many of the Toronto18, and Faisal Shahzad), were or are married, and have children. In addition, the Prophet SAW in a beautiful hadith spoke on this matter, WARNING the Ummah about this:

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Children are the cause of grief, cowardice, ignorance and miserliness.” (Reported by al-Tabaraani in al-Kabeer, 24/241; Saheeh al-Jaami’, 1990). When he said that they are the cause of miserliness, he meant that if a man wants to spend for the sake of Allaah, the Shaytaan reminds him of his children, so he thinks, “My children deserve the money, I will leave it for them when I die, so he is miserly in the sense that he refrains from spending it for the sake of Allaah. When he said that children are the cause of cowardliness, he meant that when a man wants to fight in jihaad for the sake of Allaah, the Shaytaan comes to him and says, “You will be killed and will die, and your children will become orphans, lost and alone,” so he stays home and does not go out for jihaad. When he said that children are the cause of ignorance, he meant that they distract a father from seeking knowledge and trying to acquire learning by attending gatherings and reading books. When he said that children are the cause of grief, he meant that when a child gets sick, the parent feels grief; if the child asks for something that the father cannot provide, this grieves the father; and if the child grows up and rebels against his father, this is a cause of ongoing grief and distress. (Weakness of Faith By Sheikh Saalih Al-Munajjid).

To argue that marriage, and having children is a way for our youth to avoid “radical” behaviour is to indirectly echo the very attacks the kuffar have spewed against the concept of jihad and the rewards for the martyrs. A more legitimate solution to ending radical behaviour in our youth, would be to simply ban the use of TV, Internet, and newspapers. These are the primary media that our youth learn of the injustices, and atrocities that are happening to the Ummah, and to sensor the sources of this information would definitely be a way to prevent radical behaviour. This idea is not far fetched, as this tactic was employed in medieval times by the vatican to keep christians ignorant of their own scripture, and by adolf hitler through book burnings. Or, our scholars, and Imam’s should stop teaching about brother/sisterhood altogether, and promote nationalism. This would also help curb radical behaviour, and make Muslims more endearing to the leaders of the world today. (sarcasm intended).

We as Muslims must recognize that Sheikh Yasir is a person of knowledge. However, like great Muslim scholars of the past, he is still human, and therefore prone to error. Our emotions should never interfere with the validity of an Imam’s opinion. Sheikh Yasir has made made many errors before, and will continue to do so. However, it is not up to him to decide when he is correct, and when he is not. Rather, it is the contemporary Imam’s, scholars, and student’s of knowledge to point this out. It is my du’a that Sheikh Yasir take the time to read this, and addresses these issues in either the comments section as a follow up to this post, or in his sequel to the above article. If he chooses to ignore these points, or if this post is removed by the moderators, then unfortunately, Sheikh Yasir will be guilty of the very thing they accuse the scholars, imams, and leaders of jihad today, and that is issuing empty rhetoric, in an attempt to pursue selfish, personal goals. If Sheikh Yasir is simply unable to answer these questions with answers that contain justice, and integrity, then he should simply refuse to comment at all on these matters, as the Prophet SAW said, “Let him who believes in Allah and the Last Day either speak good or keep silent…” (Bukhari)
User avatar
Talo alle udaa
SomaliNet Heavyweight
SomaliNet Heavyweight
Posts: 2739
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2009 4:03 pm
Location: Evaluating the African mind

Re: Yasir Qadhi: testosterone-filled teenage cheerleaders

Post by Talo alle udaa »

A number of URL were removed from the above post in order to meet the requirement of 5 URLS per post.

Here is a full link to the article

posting.php?mode=reply&f=18&t=257549
LobsterUnit
SomaliNet Super
SomaliNet Super
Posts: 10442
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 2:19 pm
Location: singapore

Re: Yasir Qadhi: testosterone-filled teenage cheerleaders

Post by LobsterUnit »

Yasiq Qadhi is waffling endlessly as usual. He offers no solution to the problem he is addressing. A waste of time reading this article!
Advo
SomaliNet Super
SomaliNet Super
Posts: 27096
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2008 4:11 am
Location: ever green state

Re: Yasir Qadhi: testosterone-filled teenage cheerleaders

Post by Advo »

Yo man that nigga wasted my time on some real gucci ish.
Locked
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Return to “General - General Discussions”