And of mankind are some who take (for worship) others besides Allah as rivals (to Allah). They love them as they love Allah. But those who believe, love Allah more (than anything else).
The Noble Qur’an: Surah 2, Ayah 165
We are all thoroughly lucky that committing shirk ul-akbar isn’t a guaranteed way to become non-Muslim. However, it does bestow one with an extended reservation for a toasty place in Hellfire.
As such, I have cautiously elected to describe some of those in the British Parliament as our brothers, on the assumption that they are still Muslims, inshaAllah.
Let us consider a few points of fact. I don’t generally agree with the politics of the Sinn Fein, but Gerry Adams and Martin McGuiness - both non-Muslim - have to date never sworn allegiance to the Queen. They have very publicly refused to do so. Our brothers, however, have been unable to show the same restraint, despite the obvious shirk required.
These brothers stood as candidates for Parliament in the last general election, and were voted into office by naïve Muslims on the assumption that these four individuals would represent the views of Muslim community. While complete representation of such a diverse group may always be arduous, there are some views that are common amongst the population that our brothers claim to represent.
All four Muslim MPs recently voted for the proposed anti-terror legislation. That is, they voted to make it an offence to “glorify” terrorism, to be involved in “acts preparatory to terrorism”, to indirectly incite terrorism and to be involved in giving or receiving terror training. They also all voted to extend the period of detention without charge.
George Galloway, the dirty socialist who champions himself as a supporter of the Muslims - previously appearing on the Islam Channel saying “Assalamu “˜alaikum” - was too busy to attend Parliament and vote on the one bill that is most pointedly aimed at his Muslim constituents. Such a busy man…
Sadiq Khan certainly has one of the hallmarks of New Labour. Rather than publicly state his position on the full legislation, he used spin and instead focussed on his disagreement with the 90 day period of internment. Wait a minute, brother, what you mean is that you voted to lock up Muslims for 28 days, right?
As an MP he theoretically could have tabled an amendment opposing changing the current 14 day period of custody. But no… 28 days sounded better to him. He has shown that it is inherently impossible for Muslim MPs to serve both masters. They are actively choosing between the legal system of Allah and that of Britain. Let us not forget that they are all members of the Labour Party, and hence have been screened and selected for “acceptable” opinions. Rather than as Muslim representatives, a better way to view them is as MPs who just happen to be Muslim.
It is pathetic: The Muslim community in Britain is being bitten from the same hole twice. In a sad attempt to gain our rights, people are hoodwinked into turning to this system of traitors. Our brothers have shown that they fear Tony Blair more than they fear Allah. They have bartered their akhirah for precious little gain in this life, to the detriment of everyone else.
November 30th, 2005 at 6:29 am
Here is a link to the legislation:
Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005
Below is the tenuous justification given for a 90 day pre-charge detention by the Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police:
Letter from the Metropolitan Police to the Home Secretary
November 30th, 2005 at 8:14 pm
I can’t believe all four MPs did that! How can they even claim to represent us? I feel truly disgusted and betrayed.
You know I met a brother on a stall outside Regents Park Masjid once and he told me that all the MPs and rulers have all become non-Muslim because Allah says:
“And whosoever does not rule by what Allah has revealed, they are the Kafiroon (disbelievers).” [Qur'an 5:45]
You said in another post that Allah can be ridiculously CLEAR in the Arabic language when He SWT wants to be… I think that verse sounds pretty blatant to me… but I’m sure I’ve missed something coz you said that they are still our brothers.
Saffy x
November 30th, 2005 at 8:31 pm
SubhanAllah.
You are absolutely right about that ayat, and it isn’t the only time that Allah is very clear about that topic.
I’ve been giving these brothers the benefit of the doubt (70 excuses), assuming that they don’t understand, rather than that they have decided to ignore Allah. It is better to be thick than arrogant.
December 1st, 2005 at 2:14 pm
I think there is a Tafseer of this ayat in Ibn Kathir that explains that if one abandons Allah `s rulings by conviction then he is a Kaafir but if one abandons Allah`s ruling by laziness, then he is a Fasiq (open sinner). Actually in the same surah (Al Maidah, the Table spread with food), Allah (swt) says that “whosoever does not rule by what Allah has revealed, they are the Zaalimoon” and anotehr ayat, it mentions Faasiqoon
AND Allah (swt) knows best.
December 2nd, 2005 at 2:21 pm
“it is inherently impossible for Muslim MPs to serve both masters. They are actively choosing between the legal system of Allah and that of Britain”
What worries me here is the idea that you cannot be a Muslim and and be a part of this society. I am not Muslim, although hold no contempt for, or fear of any man because of his religion. Could you help me understand what you are suggesting?
Is it that you will never follow the laws of this country or feel allegiance towards it?
That might sound perfectly alright to you, it doesn’t to me.
I feel that as a shared society we all need to come together, our lives are inextricably linked, like it or not.
Take this as a response to just the part I have quoted here, please.
The post as a whole would require a much wider response from myself, I know, especially as I did NOT agree with the 90 day bill.
It’s interesting you mention Sinn Fein.
Those terrorists still on the run in Northern Ireland, Catholic or Protestant, are to be given a reprieve. Guaranteed freedom just as Bliar attempted to take the freedom from any SUSPECTED (as opposed to the KNOWN Irish terrorists) Muslim.
December 3rd, 2005 at 6:35 am
Phu:
Thanks for your comment. My statement was not meant to indicate that a Muslim cannot be part British society (or any society). In fact it is a religious obligation on me and every other Muslim.
I would even go as far as to say that all British MPs are necessarily members of British society, and that specifically the Muslim MPs are ostensibly a part of the Ummah (the worldwide body of Muslims).
My statement was specifically about service to a master.
I am quite willing to follow the laws of this country, or any other country assuming that it does not offend my principles as a Muslim. For example, if it becomes unlawful under British law to pray 5 times a day, I would be forced to challenge the law or to leave Britain.
Even if one was to consider religion as a source of “morals”, this would be the case for everyone. It is not OK for soldiers to “just follow orders”, like in the holocaust, when the orders contravene the moral actions expected of a human being.
For Muslims, the source of our “moral” code is Islam.
I fully agree that we live in a shared society. This is a plain statement of fact, as is the fact that we are linked. There is nothing in Islam that contradicts this idea; indeed it is part and parcel of our understanding of the will of God.
Let me give two simple examples of this complex topic: I am sinful if my neighbours - 7 houses on either side - are hungry while I have food. It makes no difference what their religion is, or whether they happen to be on one side of a national border or not. I am linked to them, and they to me, and I have an Islamic duty towards them.
Example 2: If I see a woman being attacked (sexually, for example) and there is a chance that I can stop the attack, Islam dictates that I MUST help her. I must do what I can to stop the assault, even if it results in my own death. I’m not going to pretend that it would be an easy decision to make, but I believe that any practicing Muslim would make it, inshaAllah.
In short: Muslims MUST be a part of society, and cannot adopt on destructive ideas like “individualism”.
Now, as for becoming an MP: All Muslims are forbidden from believing in secularism. Islam has a legal system - the Shariah. As Muslims we know this to come from the Creator, and as such it has to take precedence over all other systems.
When an MP is involved in legislation, he or she is frequently involved in making individual laws that oppose Islam. Take the example of deciding the age of consent for homosexual sex (as actually happened in Britain). The vote was about whether it was to be 18 or 16 years of age. It is not permissible for a Muslim to take either decision - they are both haram.
More significantly, the process of legislation itself is reserved for Allah. You can see examples of the evidence for this idea in the comments above, though a more in-depth discussion is necessary to really understand it.
Muslims are REQUIRED to be politicians (as you might have guessed from the title of this Blog), but that does not mean becoming an MP. There are plenty of politicians, both Muslim and non-Muslim, who do not “take office”.
I’d love to hear your ideas on the rest of this post. The example you brought at the end of your comment is fantastic!
December 3rd, 2005 at 7:12 am
This example helped me to better understand the principle being discussed:
Let us imagine that Tony Blair woke up tomorrow and decided to make the following offer (haha!): “We’ll go through a book of Islamic laws, and vote on all of them, one by one”.
Now even if every law was voted for, we would still not have an Islamic system. The fact that we had a say in which laws were accepted would make this system unislamic. The shariah is designed to be implemented completely and it “is not for a believer, man or woman, when Allah and His Messenger have decreed a matter that they should have any option in their decision.” [Qur'an 33:36]
(See my previous post about Machiavelli)
December 3rd, 2005 at 2:16 pm
Hi Phu and Shaykh rattle ‘n’ roll.
Excellent comments. I just want to add something:
Phu asked: “Is it that you will never follow the laws of this country or feel allegiance towards it?”
When someone from Britain goes on holiday to another country they abide by those laws because British Secular values encourage it. Their allegience does not temporarily shift from Britain to Spain or Jordon for a week or so whilst they spend their holiday there. Rather, their allegience remains with Britain and it is this allegience that induces them to respect the law of the country that they are in.
This is the same for Muslims. A true Muslim can never have allegience to any Law other than the Law of Allah. But it is the Shariah that encourages, no obliges, a Muslim to obey and respect the law of the land he/she resides in as long as it does not contravene Islam (as shaykh rattle ‘n’ roll explained above).
It is my allegience to Shariah that requires me to never be isolationist. A Muslim must interact with the society he/she is in. However, there are limitations to this. One of them is that legislation must be left solely for Allah.
This is why the Government should not be concerned with Muslims who only have allegience to Islam because these Muslims are the ones that will interact the most and try to be a service to the host country they live in.
It is incorrect to think that the only way Muslims can have a positive impact on British Society is by adopting its values or joining the political paths laid out by Government. What concerns me is that this intolerant and somewhat dogmatic view that Blair (and some non-Muslims) seem to have is what is driving the Muslims away from having any fruitful relationships with Britain at all.
December 5th, 2005 at 10:34 am
Thanks for the considered responses, I think you’ve helped me understand this issue that much more, and I wholeheartedly appreciate what you’re both saying.
“It is incorrect to think that the only way Muslims can have a positive impact on British Society is by adopting its values or joining the political paths laid out by Government.”
I would think this is a common problem, many non-Muslims will never hear ideas like those here, and that ignorance mixed with the unfortunately prejudiced nature of the majority don’t paint a pretty picture.
“I am sinful if my neighbours - 7 houses on either side - are hungry while I have food. It makes no difference what their religion is, or whether they happen to be on one side of a national border or not. I am linked to them, and they to me, and I have an Islamic duty towards them.”
shaykh: if only everyone thought like that.
Off point but your comment here reminded me of something I read today, that the UK is accepting more debt money FROM Nigeria than it is giving to all African countries put together.
hardly love thy neighbour…
Incidentally, are the four MPs who voted for the ninety day legislation the only Muslims in parliament?
December 5th, 2005 at 7:12 pm
House of Parliament
Mohammed Sarwar (Labour MP)
Khalid Mahmood (Labour MP)
Sadiq Khan (Labour MP)
Shahid Malik (Labour MP)
House of “Lords”
“Lord” Nazir Ahmed (Labour Peer)
Baroness Uddin (Labour Peer) [has a blog on blogger.com]
“Lord” Amirali Alibhai Bhatia (Crossbench peer)
“Lord” Adam Hafejee Patel (Crossbench peer)
Baroness Kishwer Faulkner (Lib Dem peer)
December 10th, 2005 at 6:06 pm
Hi Brothers and Sisters,
I met some sisters on the march today and they said I could drop by your blog, I hope that’s ok with you?
Sadik Khan is the MP for the area in which I live, so I was sorry to read he is not upholding his obligations.
Please feel free to drop by my blog anytime and comment as you wish.
I realise we may have differences but as I truly believe we are all brothers and sisters and what hurts one of us hurts us all I think we may have more in common than first appears.
December 15th, 2005 at 4:25 pm
Mother Damnable that’s very kind of you to have spared some timeto visit this blog. You do understand where all our views and lifestyle come from. I hope by visiting this blog you would have a very different outlook about Islam and it’s true followers.
People like Sadik Khan just claim to be a part of the Ummah (Muslim brotherhood- which trancends all geographical boundaries and racial backgrounds to unite the muslims into a single body)but when their testing time comes they very conveniently forgo their Islamic principles. We need to free our society from such traitors by exposing their treachery.
I visited your blog it is quite colorful and helps us see the soft side of yours though you have chosen quite an unpleasant name for yourself!!!lol!
December 16th, 2005 at 2:35 pm
Fariah, who is Sadiq Khan?