Do Better, Non-Muslims | Article 6 Campaign

I mean, do better non Muslims, honestly. You know? Do better. But, I mean, that confusion just confirms the Quran, really. For whom?

Because you know. They rejected the truth when it came to them and it has left them in a state of confusion, and that's what we see. They're so confused. So what happened today, we collaborated with a non Muslim activist. Right?

A leftist, you know, progressive, anti establishment, know, social justice type, anti imperialist and so on, who volunteered to host and to help put together the website for the article six campaign. And we didn't have any issue collaborating with him despite knowing that he's agnostic, that he's secular and so on. Because this is an issue, you know, to the campaign to invoke article six against The United States to have The US expelled from the United Nations. So this was an effort that we agreed upon. We believe in it and he believes in it.

So no problem working together on something like that. There's no problem. Just like if we want to remove something that's dangerous, from the road and a non Muslim comes along who wants to help us to remove that obstacle, then sure. We can cooperate in what's good. That's our position.

That's always been a Muslim position. Like I've said before, we can work with them. We can work with non Muslims. That's never an issue for us. But ultimately it's them who have an issue working with us, they have a problem working with us, it's really like they can't help themselves.

I mean our Islam does not prevent us, our faith, our imam does not prevent us, it doesn't interfere with us working with anyone on something that's good, on something that's beneficial, but their interferes with them working with us. This happens so often it's entirely predictable. This man took exception to my opinion on Aaron Bushnell, something completely unrelated to the article six campaign. He didn't like that I don't see Aaron Bushnell as a heroic martyr who's driven by virtuous, you know, a virtuous desire for justice and he didn't like that I said that Bushnell appeared to be a victim of his society and his, his country's criminal history, and a victim of a traumatizing sense of white guilt, as well as by what seemed to me a deeply entrenched mythology of the white savior complex. Now I've already talked about Bushnell in another video so I'm not gonna rehash all of that now, but obviously, that man had many other healthy alternatives besides setting himself on fire.

I mean just resign from your post with the military, disclose whatever information you allegedly have about American troops being in Gaza, and become you know another Edward Snowden or Scott Ritter or any other whistleblower type figure that you have out there. But he didn't do that. He did an extreme self punishing act which indicates to me severe psychological pressure caused by some kind of unbearable guilt and a desire for absolution, all of which are contextualized by his society, by his culture, and the history of America, which is a highly racialized society, a society that's also deeply entangled in Christian theology. He didn't want to just, confront or expose the crimes of his country, he wanted to disavow and disassociate himself from those crimes. And I think again, because of the whole cultural and religious and racial context of The United States, the only way that he could satisfy that need, was through a spectacle of self sacrifice through self immolation.

So I said it would have been better for him if he wanted to disavow the sickness of his society, it would have been better for him to take Shahada instead, and I stand by that. Embracing Islam is the purest and most perfect disavowal. The purest and most perfect disassociation from Western crimes that anyone could ever achieve. Because it's not only a disavowal and a disassociation from the crimes themselves, but from the ideologies and from the mentality that drove those crimes in the first place. It's the only thing that can actually cure you of the sickness that's embedded in the DNA of Western so called civilization.

And this is very clear because you see, this activist, this anti imperialist leftist activist who thinks that he is cured of that sickness actually manifested that sickness today. Because he disagreed with my take on Aaron Bushnell, he wants to drop the article six campaign, and he wants to stop hosting the website, and he told us, to find someone else. And he specifically objected to what he called me bringing religion into it with regards to Aaron Bushnell. I know this is something I get all the time, I get that a lot. Why do you have to bring religion into it?

You know? But do you see what that statement is really saying? It's insisting on a non religious framing of discussion. It's imposing, an atheistic or agnostic framework for discourse. When you talk about Aaron Bushnell from a secular, humanist standpoint, I don't say, why do you have to bring secular humanism into it?

I'm sorry, but your framework is not everyone's default framework. Me, as a Muslim, looking at an issue as a Muslim, from a Muslim perspective, is no less valid than you looking at an issue from your secular agnostic perspective. You're just assuming, that your perspective is unbiased and unideological, but that's obviously not true. So what you're saying is why do you have to bring a way of looking at something into it that is not identical to my way of looking at something? And going further, what this what this man is actually saying is, if you don't look at things exactly the same way that I do and operate according to my framework, then I will no longer cooperate with you.

Even in something that we agree on, blackmailing me now, ideologically extorting me, either stop discussing things even amongst yourselves according to a framework other than my framework or else I will not help you in doing something that I know and agree is good and just. Look at that. Saying basically, I'm not going to support the, campaign to invoke article six even though I agree with it because you do not adopt my way of thinking on a completely unrelated topic. That would be like me saying no, can't work with you on, article six because you eat pork. Like if a Muslim wanted to remove something harmful from the road, he would be motivated to do so by Islam because this is from iman.

So you are now so you now as a non Muslim, motivated to remove something harmful from the road because of your maybe secular humanist values, but you won't help me do it because my motivation is religious. So actually your desire is to change my belief, to dictate my belief, to get me to abandon my framework. Actually that takes priority for you, more so than removing an obstacle from the road. You would rather leave an a dangerous obstacle in the road than tolerate my beliefs. My beliefs are more offensive to you than something harmful in the road, even though my beliefs teach me to remove something harmful from the road, you know.

But you can't stand for me, to have those beliefs. If I say I'm removing this thing because of Islam, you would rather walk away and leave an object in the path of people, even though supposedly your beliefs also teach you to remove it. You see the hypocrisy? You're an anti imperialist, anti fascist activist until it comes to working against imperialism with people who are motivated to do so by Islam. We have to be motivated by western secular values.

We have to fight imperialism on the basis of the values of the imperialists. And like I said, Bushnell has nothing to do with the Article six campaign. So you want to impose, western secular values on us even in matters that have nothing to do with the thing that we're cooperating on. This is imperialist and colonialist in and of itself. That's imperialist thinking.

Meanwhile, no one is imposing anything on you. No one is asking you why do you bring atheism and secularism into it on a subject that's completely unrelated to what we're working on together. Now we knew that this person was a non Muslim and he knew that we're Muslims. I'm not telling him to adopt an Islamic framework for understanding Aaron Bushnell or anything else. Otherwise, we will not work together on Article six.

But that's exactly what he's doing, you know. You have to only talk about Aaron Bushnell in the framework of secular humanism or atheism or what have you, or else I will not support Article six even though I know it's right. Look at this hypocrisy. The anti western imperialism evaporates if it's faced with a non western thinking and non western values. And then it literally becomes western imperialism.

Think like us or we won't work with you. You see that's what I'm saying. You can't cure yourself from this sickness. Leftism won't do it, progressivism won't do it, you know. No ideology will cure you, will cure what ails you.

No matter how leftist or anarchist or rebellious or anti imperialist or anti fascist you think you are, you still have the bug. You're still confused. You're confused about what you really believe, especially if you want to believe that you are against Western crimes while you still retain the thinking, the mentality, and the mindset that caused those crimes. And you will, continue to have that mindset if you're not a Muslim. This is just objective observable reality.

Lived experience if you will. I mean of course there are varying degrees of this. I mean we do have some, good non Muslims who are volunteering with Middle Nation and they are able, to focus on their areas, on our areas of common interest. And not be drawn into conflict over Dean or how we frame things as as Muslims. Our understanding of matters that are unrelated to what we work together about, what we work together on, generally are from the global South.

So they don't have that colonizer mentality, that aggressive conquering element in their character, you know. This as I've said is is among the distinctive aspects of Western Kufr, you know. The aggression, the supremacism, the violence, the domineering tyrannical tendencies. These are characteristics of Westerners. And no, even if you declare your opposition to these tendencies you'll still manifest them.

Why do you bring religion into it? Because you bring kufr into it and unlike when we bring religion into it, the kufr that you bring into it disrupts working together. It disrupts working for a common goal. Our bringing Islam into it, into any sort of an effort doesn't impose anything on you. Islam enjoins us to be tolerant and to respect beliefs even when we disagree.

But your doesn't allow you to disagree without trying to coerce, trying to compel, or trying to force capitulation. That's the difference. See us bringing Islam into it, us bringing religion into it keeps it tolerant, it keeps it fair, it keeps it, reasonable. It keeps it focused on what we're there for. But when you bring your kufr into it, you start worrying about how we talk to each other, and wanting to dictate to us how we're even supposed to understand things amongst ourselves.

And you want me to take down, for example, you want me to take down the video that I made on Aaron Bushnell because you disagree with it. And if I don't, then you're not gonna work on something that you agree with, which is article six. How does that make any sense? How do you justify that to yourself in terms of your own so called beliefs and principles? What it means is that your actual principle is tyranny.

What you actually believe in is tyranny. You have to believe what I believe. You must believe as I believe and discuss everything, and believe everything within my framework. Everything. Not even just the things that we work together on.

Even things that have nothing to do with me. I wanna make sure that you're still following the way that I think. That's what your kufra brings into it. But we're not even allowed to ask you why do you bring your kufr into it. You get to ask us why we bring religion into it when us bringing religion into it is what helps to prevent this kind of thing from happening because our religion teaches us to be tolerant.

Our religion teaches us to respect other people's beliefs even when we disagree. But your teaches you the opposite. It teaches you that no one is supposed to disagree with you, and if they disagree with you on anything then you can't work with them on anything. And still you think that your values are better than ours.