This is a cross post from The Islamic Far-Right in Britain
The ’village’ is to run from August 24th-27th at York’s very charming Thorpe Underwood Estate. Punters are invited to “spend a few days with internationally renowned speakers as they discuss important issues that face the Muslims.”
Before taking a look at the confirmed speakers lets look at Islamic Network.
Founded in 1999, IN is an East London-based charity and dawah organisation. They have organised seminars and conferences at venues such as Regent’s Park Mosque, London Muslim Centre and Muslim World League, universities such as Queen Mary-Mile End and more recently, a venue that many will be familiar with, the Grand Connaught Rooms.
IN’s January conference ‘Resurrection:Rejoice or Regret’ (held at the Grand Connaught Rooms) faced opposition from anti-extremism campaigners, though on this occasion the venue decided to allow the event to proceed.
Past events have included a decent slice of the far-Right: Suhaib Hasan, Bilal Philips, Abu Abdissalam and Haitham al-Haddad to name a few. It was during an IN seminar at Regent’s Park Mosque that Haddad championed the punishment of stoning.
IN’s online dawah includes rulings from some big-hitters like former Imam of the Grand Mosque of Mecca, Abdullah bin Muhammad bin Humaid and the genius behind IslamQA, Muhammad Sâlih al-Munajjid. As you would expect, many of these articles are full of horrible, intolerant shite directed at non-Muslims, homosexuals, women, apostates and of course those tossers the sorcerers. There’s plenty of rulings in there calling for extreme punishments and the death penalty for some poor bugger. Have a read here.
On to the speakers booked for the event.
Khan spoke at IN’s conference ‘Resurrection:Rejoice or Regret’ earlier this year. This is what he had to say:
“That is the reality of the sharia. That is the reality of Islamic law, that it has come to supersede, to override all other ways of life. It is a faith that one should not begin to turn aside, a faith which is a dominant faith.
What is a good life that the Western world is trying to perceive upon us? That the so-called sharia is barbaric. The so-called sharia is medieval. The so-called sharia does not fit into the twenty-first century. The so-called sharia is no longer applicable today, it’s a dream, it’s an imagination that once previously used to exist, it will never come back ever again. These are the slogans and the perceptions which have begun to infiltrate our minds and our hearts that even the average Muslim begins to think that how will the sharia be dominant once again?…If we’re supposed to be Muslims we’re supposed to be dominant.”
Errr…no thanks. Lets stick to a healthy, tolerant society where followers of all religions are seen as equals and where no one religion has the right to demand others follow its laws. Khan has repeated his message of Islamic supremacy in other speeches:
“The shariah teaches you to gain your rights. To live under the banner of al Islam. That is the biggest thorn at the moment in our dawah…How should the law of Allah (SAW) be implemented? That’s the biggest debate that exists amongst us because many of us in our hearts are calling the dawah more than our nation, that can the hudood of Allah be implemented in the twenty-first century? Is it possible? Is it really applicable in Western society today, that the shariah will come? Will it come? People of sunnah say that will it come? How will it come?…he is the one who sent his messenger with wudah with guidance and the right deen to prevail over all other ways of life. If you don’t believe that in your heart, you already lost. You have already lost. If you don’t believe that in your heart that Islam is going to be victorious, Islam will always be victorious. People will not be victorious…the word of Allah (SAW) will always be supreme”.
In another talk he claims all Muslims share his vision:
“We believe as much in sharia as any other individual. Those stigmas that you find, you know that we don’t believe in the sharia, we don’t want the sharia to rise, we don’t want people to be governed by the sharia etc, that’s just a myth. Every single Muslim is an activist in trying to re-awaken, re-ignite the people to live by the sharia, to accommodate the sharia, to understand the sharia. That’s what we all agree at the end of the day.”
Khan’s unpleasant views on non-Muslims, women, homosexuals and stoning will already be known to most people reading this I guess.
Hakeem is on board with Khan when it comes to implementing their take on Islamic law throughout the world, even in the most unlikeliest of places:
“You ask for shariah anywhere, because this is the law of Allah the almighty. So we have to agree on this point. Is it wrong to call for shariah in Israel? No, because this is the law of Allah and should be applied and implemented everywhere in the world.”
Don’t stroll into Hakeem’s ‘Islamic State’ blaspheming. When asked what would happen to a Jew or Christian talking against the prophet he gave this response:
“If this was done in a proper Muslim state, the Muslim ruler has to after consulting with the Islamic judge execute them after they are tried and convicted in a court of Islamic law.”
Ouch. But then he’s not a big fan of the koofs, not even when they’re dead. Can you wash the bodies of dead kuffar?
“No, this is not permissible as it would be a kind of honoring them.”
Yeah, cheers. Don’t try to walk like them dopey koof kids either:
“Nowdays I as a Muslim, I have my identity. I go up I don’t come down. When I wear these shackles and be cool, and when I walk I walk like a gorilla, my hands reach my knees and I think that I’m cool, no I’m not cool. I am imitating a kafir. Am I a kafir? I’m Muslim. I’m proud to be a Muslim. Wearing these shackles and wearing these necklaces and bracelets or an earing, I’ve seen Muslims wearing a cross. What is this? ‘It’s cool. I don’t believe in it but it’s cool, it looks nice.’ So people go down the slope of following the kuffar until they become like them.”
Hakeem has lots more lovely things to say about non-Muslims and the usual people who this mob take a dislike to (thumbs ups are to child marriage, FGM and slavery) but here’s a few corkers on women for now:
Q: “Can i refuse to have intimate relations with my husband if he drinks alcohol?”
A: “A woman must not refuse her husband even if he drinks alcohol because this is a major sin. And it’s a sin upon himself but this does not call for her to refuse having intimate relations with him because this is his right.”
Get back indoors you silly tart:
Imagine I have a wife and she says ‘Listen, I’m not obliged by law, by Islam to cook for you, to iron your thobes or to take care of the house – this is not my obligation’ then I can do the same and I say ‘OK Islam does not oblige me to give you a monthly salary or to take you down to a restaurant every now and then or to make you go and shop for clothes to fill you cupboards or wardrobes or whatever. I’m not obliged by Islam and it is my right to prevent you from going out the whole year. Why should you go out? Stay in the home. I don’t give you any permission to leave.’
‘I’m not your prisoner’
‘I know you’re not my prisoner but this is the right I have….so stay home, don’t cook, don’t clean but don’t do anything except with my permission as Islam told you.”
“A nice, and obedient and righteous wife would always be pleasant to look at. So when you go home you won’t find your wife with her hair untidy, doing the afro maybe, and with her teeth yellow with food in it, and with smells of onion and garlic coming out of her, and with her voice coming from the depth of her throat saying (affects deep voice) ‘How are you honey?’ This is not the thing you want to have home.”
Since getting caught out in Undercover Mosque, Usamah is a lot more careful with the language he uses in his speeches. Most people will be aware of his comments on non-Muslims that were shown in Dispatches’ documentary so here’s one digging out lesbians, koofs and giving a nod to Hizb ut-Tahrir’s activities:
“You go outside of our masjid on Green Lane, you make a right, on the corner of Green Lane and Coventry Road the non-Muslims put up a big poster giving dawah to Lesbianism, only a few metres away from our masjid. And I have to say this, I was in Luton recently and the brothers from Hizb ut-Tahrir, who I don’t agree with their understanding of Islam and their way of establishing the Khilafah, in Luton those brothers from Hizb ut-Tahrir they go around late at night, they get a ladder, they get up on top of the billboards and they paint the naked ladies all black until all you see is her eyes and it’s like she has a jilbab on….So some of the brothers took from that sunnah and did the same thing here but without the artistry of the Luton people….Muslims we should make a point about issues like this. Those kuffar should hear our opinions about issues like this. We should have enough organisation, enough leadership to let those people know that this is not tolerated in our communities.”
On taking non-Muslim women as concubines:
“The second type of zina is the zina in which the Muslim today is saying that these kuffar women are what our right hands posess, they’re from our right hand posessions. No doubt ikhwan, the right hand possession, the ‘milk al-yamin‘ is from the religion but it is not being practiced today correctly.
It is a fact that the milk al-yamin should not be an issue that we have a problem with...So because we are apologetic about our religion and what Allah has revealed Muslims want to deny the presence and the concept and the permissibility of the right hand possession – a man can have a concubine in Islam when Islam is being practiced correctly. And for every man that’s in this masjid right now, he can have, that one man, this many concubines in addition to his four wives. That’s the religion of al-Islam.”
Usamah unlikely to be a fan of the Muslim Marriage Contract:
“From those examples of zina is the Muslim man or woman who agreed to go down to the register’s office and to get married with the kuffar, and they don’t get married with the Muslims…This is zina. Even though that marriage is recognised in this country, that is zina in the religion of Islam…The register’s office, or other than that, is not permissible…the girl has to have a wali…And there has to be two just witnesses from amongst the Muslims, not from the kuffar…Would you people choose to change what is worse, or what is better for what is worse? You leave the religion and take the way of those people. So it is not permissible for the Muslim to only get married with those kuffar. It’s not permissible. He has to get married with the Muslims first and if he doesn’t go to the kuffar it is acceptable.”
Or inter-faith marriage:
“To marry the Sikh, to marry the Hindu, to marry anyone who is an atheist is not permissible in the religion of al-Islam.”
“If you find, and you’re satisfied that those believing women who make hijra to you, if they are believing women, then do not return them back to the kuffar. Those women are not halal for those kuffar and those kuffar men are not halal for our women.”
Green’s speech at an IN seminar held at Regent’s Park Mosque laid into non-Muslims, telling the audience that many scholars consider living in the lands of non-Muslims a big no-no:
“Here we need to concentrate on our immediate problem and that is kuffar, we’re surrounded by them. We shouldn’t infact, many ulama, many ulama they said that it’s not permissible to live in this land, it is not allowed to be in the land of the kuffar. As one brother described it ‘the lion’s den’, this is the lion’s den. Brothers and sisters this England is where all this kufr of the Western world started from, the industrial revolution, the great British Empire. From here, the lion’s den. Why do we come here as Muslims? Is it even allowed for us to do that? To leave the lands of Islam, the lands where the mosque is everywhere, the lands where people all of them are fasting, the lands where even if there are children on the street they’ll learn something about Islam…one of the only reasons that it is permissible to dwell and to live in the land of the kuffar is to call them to Islam.”
Green confirms this to be the most authentic position in another speech:
“If you look at the various evidences, which we’re not gonna go into them all tonight, but if you look at the various evidences that the scholars bring forth it would seem that the strongest evidence is that it is not permitted for the Muslim to stay and remain and to live permanently in the land of the non-Muslims”
On Jews and Christians:
“…open Bukhari you will find the hadith that if you find the Jew or a Christian walking down the street, push them to the side. It is well-known from what Umar ibn al-Khattab and the khulafa ar rashidin used to implement, that the Jew and Christian was not allowed to ride on a horse when the Muslim is riding on a horse. They would have to walk. Allah he said in the Quran about the jizya that you, that fight the people of the book, Allah (SWT) said, it’s in the Quran, fight the people of the book and those who do not believe that what Allah has made lawful as lawful and what Allah has made unlawful as lawful, until they pay the jizya and feel themselves subdued. The purpose of the jizya is to make the Jew and the Christian know that they are inferior and subjugated to Islam, OK? In the Muslim state, although the Jew and Christian is free to practice their religion, this is allowed, but they can not display their cross and even in the time of Umar they were not allowed to re-construct or construct new churches”
“If a nine year old girl has reached puberty and is mature then what is the problem?”
The reason I liked this response (above) is because it answers a question with a question…My traditional response is to mention the same point about maturity. What is important here is not some random age, but the state of physical and mental maturity.”
Short story –
Sufis, man-made law and gays = rubbish.
Stoning, obedient women and the Taliban = winner.
A bit of a favourite at IN, Abdissalam shares Green’s view on living with non-Muslims. Again, this is from an IN seminar at Regent’s Park Mosque:
“There’s no reason to be in this country except for dawah Muslims.”
A Westerner himself, Abdissalam won’t have anyone dressing like his fellow countrymen:
“…if the dress is not specific to the kuffar but they just wear it, there is no problem in wearing this garment on the condition that one does not intend to imitate the kuffar by wearing them. So in this latter case (where the garment is not exclusively worn by the kuffar) it would depend on the person’s intention. If two people are wearing the exact same garment, one could be sinning while the other is not, such as a person who wears a baseball cap: if he intends to imitate the kuffar (e.g. the ‘Westerners’) by this then he is sinning; if not, then he isn’t.”
In a talk taken from Islamic Network’s TV show he says that Muslims who do not pray will be in for it:
“And we know in Islam there is no such thing as secularism in the way that people understand that word today. In other words Islam is not a religion where one separates religion from the state.”
“And in an Islamic State of course there would be, there were historically, these laws were enforced, so if a person doesn’t pray it’s not just a personal thing that, you know, the person doesn’t pray, just leave them to it as it is in the secular world. Rather in an Islamic State, if a Muslim, not a non-Muslim, but if a Muslim doesn’t pray there would be some kind of punishment attached to that because it is actually something that is, it’s part of Islamic law.”
The man who thought it would be a good idea to respond to Usama Hasan’s views on evolution by quoting a fatwa stating that any Muslim teaching evolution, and therefore an apostate, would be executed in an Islamic State.
“The call to evolution is a call to kufr and apostasy from Islam.
Ibn al-Uthaymeen in particular, he was asked this question about a teacher who comes into the classroom and teaches evolution. He said that not only this person, who is in a position of a teacher at school, should be expelled, but even outside of school he should be monitored in terms of his activities and his contacts to make sure he is not misguiding others. And he should be stopped by any means necessary even if it means his execution.
Upon that Ibn al-Uthaymeen was asked ‘do you mean that it is permissible to execute him?’. Ibn al-Uthaymeen says ‘Yes, if there is absolutely no other way of stopping this person except execution, then this person should be executed because he is an apostate and apostates are executed.”
Silly sausages caught mocking the Prophet Muhammad or any part of the religion should be topped:
“Anybody who mocks Allah or his messenger or anyone or any aspect of religion which is known from the deen, by necessity is a kaffir and a murtad and is subject to execution because the prophet said ‘execute the one who changes his religion.’
Advocating punishments for leaving Islam and pre-marital sex:
“…in order to establish and protect religion, the Shariah obliges the society to establish the various acts of worship in isolation as well as congregation, just as it sanctions the punishment for apostasy, or Jihad in defence of the faith; in order to preserve life, the Shariah sanctions the right of retribution (Qisas), prohibits suicide and calls for the aversion of any harm that may lead to the loss of human life; in order to preserve dignity and lineage, the Shariah legislates marriage, forbids fornication and sanctions the Hudud punishment for it; in order to preserve wealth, the Shariah legalises trade while prohibiting usury, and forbids the destruction and usurpation of wealth, and sanctions the Hadd punishment for theft; and in order to preserve the intellect, the Shariah forbids all intoxicants and sanctions the Hadd punishment for consuming alcohol.
As reported on Harry’s Place, Tzortzis’s main beef is with liberal secular democracy. The solution is to establish an Islamic State in which freedom of speech (and freedom) is rejected:
“We as Muslims reject the idea of freedom of speech, and even the idea of freedom. We see under the Khilafa (caliphate), when people used to engage in a positive way, this idea of freedom was redundant, it was unnecessary, because the society understood under the education system of the Khilafa state, and under the political framework of Islam, that people must engage with each other in a positive and productive way to produce results, as the Qur’an says, to get to know one another.”
Homosexuality is a crime punishable by the state:
“Islam has viewed the public expression of homosexuality as a crime and as a result has placed a mechanism in which to protect its vision for society.
Some people object to Islam making the public expression of homosexuality a criminal act. This is subjective and only strikes a chord amongst those who cannot escape the social constructs in their own societies.
…those who claim that making homosexuality a criminal act is wrong are totally inconsistent as they would have to objectively show that it is wrong – however they can not do that because, as discussed, that would mean they would have to believe in God – in any case, God says its wrong.”
A question that needs to be asked – where’s Haddad?