Transcription
Religion can't be separated from war. There is no war without a religious cause. But let me start with Pete Hegsev praying for Armageddon. He's got kafir tattooed in Arabic on his arm.
So the evangelicals see themselves as an extension for the crusades, for elite western leaders, people who are in power. When they deal with the Islamic world, they do not deal with it as humans, as a civilization, as people who are worthy of rights. No, it's the rest. You're just animals.
In Trump's rhetoric, when he asked a few days ago, he was asked about bombing Iran's infrastructure and he said very simply, "We are just this war, this Iran war." Some people portray it as the Epistine war. Segregation is biblical. Everyone should be militarized in this nation. We are the Christian Taliban. This is all quotations from pastors and from activists. So these you see these patches with the crusades on them on the Navy Seal, on the US Army force, even the scopes of the snipers.
Do you make a distinction between good Christianity and malign Christianity? You know, this sort of evangelical, pro-Israel, pro-Zionist Christianity.
Assalamu alaykum and welcome to the Thinking Muslim. Thank you for having me. It's an honor. Thank you, brother. And it's really an honor to have you on the podcast. Now, today we're going to be talking about, I think, a really important topic because I think so many people are discussing the religious roots of the current administration. And I know you argue, and I've watched your Arabic interview on the JIS podcast, which was fantastic, where you talked about how the language and approach of the current administration, the Trump administration in the United States, reflects deeply on a civilizational approach to Islam and Muslims. And actually, it's not unique to Trump, but so many of the American administrations previously have this sort of aversion, this problem with Islam, and it comes from this civilizational root. So I want to talk a little bit about that. But let me start with Pete Hegsev, the self-styled minister or secretary of state for war, the secretary of defense of the United States. Um, I mean, every time we hear him speak, we think that he's executing a new crusade. I mean, this is a guy who evokes Christian biblical language every time, you know, he speaks. Often he talks about the prayers that he and the administration hold before going to war with Iran, for example, before executing a particular episode in Iran. Um, I feel that there is this Christian, almost a malign Christian undertone to this current administration, and Pete Hegsev, I think he exemplifies that. I, if I remember right, he's got Kufker tattooed in Arabic on his arm from probably his army days. So I want to start with this particular man. Is he peculiar to the American sort of foreign policy makeup, or does he reflect something greater than just sort of this exaggerated or slightly strange individual?
So Pete Hegsev, as a person, if you look to his history, his personal history, and you will notice that he's a person of failure, actually. So he had two divorces. He had sexual misconduct in his military days. He worked in some places where for unethical wrongdoings, he was expelled. He had this court where he had to settle the case with a woman for an alleged rape with $50,000, as I can recall. And he was a hater of Trump, actually. He was attacking Trump day and night, and then he changed his positions. As a personal life, he's not that important. But what really matters is that if we look at Pete Hegsev as the tip of the iceberg, that's when things get interesting. So underneath this iceberg is the whole mountain of the evangelical movement, of the far-right movement in the West, especially in America. And you will see that his book, "The American Crusade," published in 2020 or 2022, is exemplary of how the evangelical movement deals with Muslims, looks at Muslims. You know, for Pete Hegsev, in his book, a good Muslim is only the Muslim that changes his name. He does not name himself in Arabic names or in Muslim names. He subordinates totally to American values. He does not do any kind of showing. He does not show any public Islam, public Muslim rituals, public Muslim sayings. He is a totally American citizen. That's a good Muslim for Pete Hegsev.
Now, if we look at Pete Hegsev as the tip of the iceberg, as I have recalled, if we look at him, then things get interesting, and we can understand why did someone like this go to the Pentagon, makes a weekly ceremony, you know, he was in the White House two months ago, in February, and he made this group prayer, "Everyone should say Hallelujah, say Amen, and we pray for Trump." And we see Marroio drawing the cross. Yeah. What's happening here? It's interesting, and thank you for having this conversation. I think it's very important in this time. Yeah.
So, so with Pete Hegsev, your argument is that, you know, he, in a way, exemplifies something bigger. And I noticed that you talk a lot about language and, um, in particular, you argue that Donald Trump, you have Gallant, the Defense Minister in Israel, Meline Albright, former Secretary of State under Bill Clinton, that they consistently use language to dehumanize Muslims. And so there's a thread, there's a connection between these very disparate individuals who look like, politically, they belong to the left, the right, some are foreigners, but yet when it comes to the way in which they articulate their position on Muslims, there's an immense similarity. Is this best understood within a framework of civilizational rupture or difference between the West on the one side and Islam on the other?
I would borrow Niall Ferguson's book, "The West and the Rest." So for many Westerners, elite Westerners, people who are in power, when they deal with the Islamic world, they do not deal with it as humans, as a civilization, as people who are worthy of rights. No, it's the rest. So what's this rest? They are just, Allah honor you and the listeners, you're just animals. As Trump said, as Madeleine Albright said, in Albright in 1996, she was the UN ambassador for the US. She was asked about killing, or the death of 500,000 children in Iraq because of the embargo and the sanctions. And she said, "It's totally the price is totally worth it." And this has happened as well in Netanyahu's rhetoric, in Trump's rhetoric, when he asked a few days ago, he was asked about bombing Iran's infrastructure, and he said very simply, "They are just animals." Why is there a pattern in which, over 20 years, whether left or right, you see the very same dehumanization? I would argue that Islamophobia in the West is not an exception, it's not a malady that needs to be cured. I believe that, or I argue that Islamophobia is an industry. It has its networks. And this is, by the way, the title of the book published nine years ago, 2017, called "The Islamophobia Industry."
One of the funny examples, when Barack Obama was elected or was a candidate in the 2008 elections, the evangelicals, the far-right religious far-right in America, wanted to portray Barack Obama as someone who is hostile to American values. So they said that this was one of their pastor's speeches. There is this hadith, this is the pastor's speech. There is this hadith that the hour, the judgment day, won't arrive, won't come, won't happen in dunya, in the world, unless the sun rises from the West. So this pastor said, this is a hadith, this is a scripture in the Muslim world. And now look at Barack Obama's campaign slogan, it's "A son," and that's how we can interpret this hadith. He is the son of the West. So he will destroy civilization and destroy Western values.
So when you look at the Islamophobia industry, you will notice that there are elite interests, there are power structures that are keen on preserving this hostility towards Islam. Whether you are left, whether you are right, it's there, and it's politically active. You know, for example, one of the examples mentioned in the book, this Lebanese activist who works as an advisor for one of the lobbyist groups, the far-right lobbyist groups, and their annual income is almost $500,000. So when someone like this comes, no, no, no. He just doesn't know Islam. You know, we need to recognize, to know, to do dawa to him. This is not about dawa. This is about people who know Islam well, and they battle Islam, not because they are ignorant of Islam, but they know Islam, and they know that Islam challenges the power, challenges the influence, challenges their elite structures. And this war, this Iran war, some people portray it, portray it as the Epistine war. So Netanyahu is provoking, blackmailing Trump with Epistine files, and that's why he's waging a war against Iran. So what I'm saying is this, the monetization of the other, or the dehumanization of the Muslim world, it's an industry. Industry. There is this book by the French academic called Fabra, "The Manufacturer of the Enemy." Enemy. It's Arabic, it's its Arabic translation, put aside the title, "How to Kill with a Clear Conscience." So for the Israelis and for the far-right to support the genocide and the killing of babies and the killing of innocent people in the Middle Eastern world, they need to dehumanize us so that they can go on with their killings, go on with their genocide with no consequences, moral consequences, at least.
And I suppose your point is that that dehumanization comes from a deeper civilizational infrastructure that exists and that's embedded within Western elites, in particular, if not Western societies. But I want to pick up on a point you make there about left and right, because of course, I don't know, Muslims who live in the West may find that sometimes the left are far more acceptable, or they accept Muslims greater than say the right accepts Muslims. And so by definition, the right, especially today, Pete Hegsev, Donald Trump, you know, these are right-wingers, you know, they belong to an evangelical trend within American society that does have this sort of animus towards Islam. But, you know, the left wing is far more open and liberal and, you know, sometimes progressive. But from your answer there, your argument is that there is no real difference between the left and right when it comes to sort of an enmity towards Muslims and Islam. I mean, explain that, please.
When we talk about the West dealing with the rest, it's different when we talk about the West's internal policies. There are internal policies differences between the left and the right in tax, in arms, in policies regarding healthcare, etc. But when it comes to the Islamic world and the Middle Eastern region, to be specific, I would argue that the left is no more different than the right. And for two examples, two very clear examples. The first is Biden. So Genocide Biden, or Genocide Joe, unconditionally supported the genocide of Gaza. And he's a Democrat, a leftist, a progressive, whatever he's called. Before him, previously, from 2008 to 2016, Barack Obama was presented in some academic or some intellectual circles as the progressive president, as the innocent president who was, you know, helping America to stand for its humanistic values. Well, Barack Obama, according to a book called "The Assassination Complex," published in 2016, he is the one who encouraged the drone attacks on the Muslim world. Hundreds of people, civilians, children, women were killed because of his drone program. Barack Obama had witnessed two wars in Gaza, and he did nothing. Barack Obama is the one who bombed several incidents. There was, um, several incidents where American bombs were dropped on Libya, on Yemen, on Somalia, in Syria, in Iraq, and innocent hundreds of innocent people were killed. So that's what Obama is doing. And for example, you may say, okay, but this is, you know, political, this is military stuff, this is fighting the extremist, etc. Well, Barack Obama witnessed two military coups in the region and he did nothing. You know, if not giving the green light to the generals of the military generals of the country. So when I talk about Obama, I'm not talking about a normal leftist. No, he is the peak of the left. You know, he's the best example of the Democrats. And I would say, when it comes to the Middle East region, there is no any core difference. There are some policy differences, how they treat us, how they do these policies, how they implement some policies, but the same view is always there: the West and the rest.
Assalamu alaykum. This is me, Mktar, CEO of Beethulme. The people of Lebanon have witnessed a devastating civil war, a horrifying port explosion, crippling economic decline, and now they're under intense attack. In the span of a few weeks, over 1 million people have been displaced and more than 1,000 have been killed. An already impoverished population is struggling to survive. Overburdened hospitals are struggling to respond. In their own words, the people of Lebanon feel helpless. But hope is not lost. In times of crisis, we must unite to help those who are suffering. In times of darkness, our compassion can shine through. Beethulme has been on the ground in Lebanon mobilizing aid such as food assistance, clean water, emergency response services, and medical support through our mobile health clinics. But more needs to be done. If you could help even one person get the food, medicine, and hope they need during their most difficult time, would you? Your generosity can make a difference in Lebanon and around the world. Turn your compassion into hope. Please visit beethulme.us/thinkingmuslim to donate now.
Would you go as far as to say that the crusades never ended when it comes to Western foreign policy and the Muslim world?
Well, Pete Hegsev, the one who we mentioned in the beginning of the episode, his title of his book was "The American Crusade." So the evangelicals see themselves as an extension of the crusades. We do not say it's not, they themselves see themselves as an extension of the crusades. So we, for example, we have this, there is a book called "No Snowflake for Avalanche." He's a former military officer, US military officer, and he observes how in every military base, in every American military base inside the US or abroad, there is this office called Officers Union or Officers Christian United, something like that. So what this office presents or offers is the militarization of religion inside the US Army. So they take normal people, they teach them the Bible, they teach them how the Bible makes you a good soldier, how the enemies are bad, how the enemies are, you know, as mentioned in the Torah. And their Torah, and this biblical study makes you a holy warrior. So these, you see these patches with the crusades on them on the Navy Seal, on the US Army force, even the scopes of the snipers and the weapons, they print on them biblical verses. So, you know, imagine when you point at them, when you point at someone who you are killing, a Muslim who you are killing, and you see the verse. This religious component of killing the Muslim is very relevant in this case. So what I would argue is that they themselves see the western military actions in the Middle East as an extension of the crusades. I would argue that. Yeah.
Right. And how do we know that? Like, you know, there may be an argument to say that, you know, what really is at play here is a different type of culture towards the Muslim world. The Muslim world today possesses extreme amounts of wealth and oil, and you know, we have great resources. We're strategically in a really important position. The crusades was this enmity of ode. A lot has changed in the West since then, you know, enlightenment and various other ideological trends that have sort of removed the religious element. I suppose a point that many leftists would make is that the enmity at this moment we see towards Iran, towards Muslim countries, is more strategic. It's more about power. It's more about resources, rather than about a deeper enmity towards Islam. How would you balance out those factors?
This is a very good question. And subhan Allah, before we look at the West to analyze this question, we can look at the biography of the Prophet Muhammad, sallallahu alaihi wasallam, first. So, for example, when we look at the battles of the Prophet Muhammad, sallallahu alaihi wasallam, we don't see this purely solely religious factor at play in the battles. We see economic factors in the battles, we see political factors, we see even securing trade routes, for example. I will give three examples. For the Battle of Badr, in the second year of Hijra. So when even when I was a child, when we were talking about Badr, Badr has strategic economic factors at play, securing the trade routes of Al-Madinah, of Yathrib at that time, making way for the Muslims to go to Levant to do some trade there. And, yeah, I mean, making Muslims as an economic power. So that's what happened. Is there a religious factor? Of course, there's a religious factor. It's always there. But the economic factors and the political factors build up on this religious force or on this religious factor.
So, for example, this is after the Battle of Uhud, in the third year of Hijra, the second day of the, you know, what happened in Uhud is that Muslims had a defeat in some way or another. The next day, Prophet Muhammad, sallallahu alaihi wasallam, ordered all of the people who went to Uhud to go out on another military expedition. And people were asking, why should we do that? Prophet Muhammad, sallallahu alaihi wasallam, said that so we should follow him. And no battle occurred in Uhud, only the army went and Quraysh saw them, but no clash happened. So what happened there? We studied in the battles of the Prophet Muhammad, sallallahu alaihi wasallam, that this was a strategic balance of terror, if we can call it one way or another. So Quraysh, when they saw the defeat of the Muslims, they thought that now, okay, they are weak, they are fragile, we can attack them in Madinah now. So, no, Prophet Muhammad, sallallahu alaihi wasallam, organized the army, went on, even their wounds weren't healed yet, and they went on an expedition just to show that we are still here, we are strong, and we are capable of defending and even attacking the enemy. What was this, religious or political or military? It's religion building up upon, and economic factors are building upon this factor.
Another example is Khaybar. Khaybar happened after the Battle of Uhud, happened after the agreement on the seventh or the eighth year of the, the Khaybar happened in the sixth year. So what happened is that Khaybar was the center of conspiracy of the people of the book, of the Jews in Madinah at that time, and it was time to wage a war against them. They had several, they made several conspiracies against the Madinah society. So what happened is that there were economic gains. None, we cannot describe how much the economic gains were from that war. And even said that our stomachs were not full of dates except after Khaybar, to signify how much the farms were there. So was this a religious war or an economic war? It never is. It's non-separable. So religion plays this cohesive factor between political factors, economic factors, strategic factors, and the unifying thread, the basis, the core of all of this is religion.
Religion does not, you know, exist as some academics or some people imagine in a vacuum. It's something that is purely abstract, outside of history, and people call for these Platonic ideals, and it's not like that. Religion is at play in everyday life. And Prophet Muhammad, sallallahu alaihi wasallam, even when Aisha was asked what was his morals, what is his ethics, she answered, "His ethics were the Quran." So the Quran exemplified in Muhammad, sallallahu alaihi wasallam, in his life, in his ethics, in what he was doing with people. This is what made religion a cohesive factor. And this is why in the Islamic jurisprudence, we don't talk about wars as a strategic and as a militant side only. We talk about the spoils of war. There are several, numerous jurisprudences on what is haram, what is halal, what is the, what should we do with this, what in this war? And this is economic. So is this economic or religious? It's always integrated. Religion can't be separated from war. There is no war without a religious cause. And there is no war, or yeah, in very rare cases, there is this purely abstract religious forces at play in war. It's always a combination of all these factors.
Now, how much then is religion a cohesive force in the West? I mean, you know, religiosity is in decline. Um, you know, since the Enlightenment, we've had sort of a period of secularism where religion was structurally removed from state affairs. In some European societies now, especially if you go to the Nordic states, but even in Britain, where I come from, religion is year on year just declining as a personal phenomenon in one's personal life. You know, the amount of people who are either atheist or agnostic year on year increases in France, for example, in Sweden, in many of these places. So religion is in decline, possibly in the West. So how much can people like Donald Trump or Pete Hegsev or others who may want to instrumentalize religion, how much can they really do that to a populace that are losing religious fervor?
This is a good question. Um, and we can relate it to what I said earlier, that Pete Hegsev and this Donald Trump phenomenon, what's happening there, it's only the tip of the iceberg. So what is happening is that during the maybe 50 years, the last 50 years, the religious right, especially in the US, I will talk solely on the US landscape, the religious right was on the rise. So, yeah, I will give you some examples, or one example. Let's take one example. For example, there was this program called Teen Mania. So what is this Teen Mania? It was a program in the '90s where an evangelist, called John, something, don't recall his name, he made three steps to militarize the Christian youth or the American youth in general. So firstly, he made huge concerts called "Acquire the Fire," huge concerts, fire plays, you know, stadiums, and 60 events per year. And this requires a lot of funding. At the end of each event, when people are done with playing and this intense emotion and this happiness, he would bring down a cross, a white cross. "Now let's repent to Jesus. We have to surrender to the Savior, etc., etc." And people would cry, people would sigh. And he would then, in the next step, "Okay, so everyone, if you repent now, go to that booth and sign for an expedition, a missionary expedition." We are talking about children who are 12, 13, 14 years old. So he would send them to Bolivia, he would send them to him or her to Bolivia, to Brazil, to Argentina, to Africa, where he could preach about Jesus and make people believe in Jesus and the Savior, etc. This is for two months in the summer. After he goes back, he tells them, "Okay, now you have done this summer program. It's time for a whole new education. So go to the academy we have established in Texas." I don't recall its name, unfortunately. So this is a university for three or four years where you get totally militarized. You are a militarized Christian defender of the West. So you do military training, you go to boot camps, you have this scripture teachings, scripture rehearsals, ceremonies, prayers, and you become a soldier for Jesus. Of course, all of this is funneled to the, when it comes to the Middle East, to Christian Zionism, where, for example, CUFI, Christians United for Israel, sends people to Israel for journeys and historic and touristic visits. You know, this is where Jesus will come. This is where Moses happened. This is where the New Testament was revealed. Together, this is where John was. And so you have this touristic journeys to Israel. You have what is called the rhetoric. Their rhetoric, those young people, when they grow up, the rhetoric becomes very, very extreme. And if you look at the rhetoric of those extremists in the far-right in the Western far-right, you will say that simply they are the jihadists of the West. And I have some quotations here. So, for example, some of them say, "To hell with democracy. I stand with Jesus Christ. I don't want everyone to vote. Only 10% of people should vote. I don't follow the US state. I follow the Bible. Every authority outside the kingdom of Jesus is an illegal authority, even if it's the US government. God comes first, then our country second. Emancipation is non-biblical." This is as far as the 1980s and 1990s, people are saying that segregation is biblical. Everyone should be militarized in this nation. This is all quotations from pastors and from activists. "We are the Christian Taliban." This is some of their sayings. There have been two nations created to glorify God: Israel and the US. And I will bless whoever blesses Israel. You know this famous quotation. Those people, the far-right, no, they are not a margin of society. Now they are considered a quarter to a third of the voting block in the US. They have boot camps, summer camps, sessions, workouts, they have everything. And it's kind of sad to see some Muslims who do not know anything about this far-right, you know, and they see Pete Hegsev as an exception. No, he's a lunatic, and he will leave the cabinet soon, and that's it. No, no, no. Even if Trump, even if Netanyahu, even if Pete Hegsev, all of these people are dead today, the movement of the far-right, the religious far-right of Israel and the US is gaining momentum. I even have this quotation. I read this quotation a few days ago where someone said, "We have more religion now than we had in US history in the past 100 years." So religion is coming back. And whenever religion, for the far-right, and for the far-right, by the way, many of the far-right people see that there is no hope of reforming the American institutions. You know, the establishment is very firm, it's unbreakable. So what we should do is that we make our own education system Christian, biblical, evangelical, and we should send our children there. So I saw some of their workshops and sessions, children as young as 7, 8, 9 years old, they go to these schools. They are taught that the Israeli people are better than us Christians. We should help them. And they change, you know, some 50 cents or 25 cents or one US dollar, they put them in this box and they say, "Donate to Israel. Donate to the Christians in Israel. Donate to the Jews. Jews are the chosen people of God. Blessed is he who blesses them, and cursed is he who curses them." And when we talk about religion, we cannot neglect the Armageddon creed, the Armageddon. There is this documentary, of course, there are a lot of books, but documentaries are a bit easy to watch, called "Praying for Armageddon," how the Christian right is mobilizing people through convincing them that the end of days will happen soon, and for Jesus to come back, we should support Israel unconditionally. So what about the evangelicals in Bahim? What about the Christians? No, no, it's they are not seen. For the Christian right, they are not seen. So I would argue that no, religion is present. It's wrong. And, yeah, unfortunately, I am sad to say that, but we should learn something or two from them. Yeah.
I mean, do you make a distinction between, um, good Christianity and malign Christianity? You know, this sort of evangelical, pro-Israel, pro-Zionist Christianity. I mean, you know, you've got, on the American right, you've got, you know, podcasters Candace Owens and, you know, Tucker Carlson and others who would say, "Look, we're Christians, but we are anti-genocide." And it seems like that movement of Christianity is growing. I mean, it may not be the majority at this stage, but it's still growing. And the idea is that Christianity does not permit the wholesale killing of school children in Iran, like as they did and didn't care for. Like, do you make that distinction? Like, how do you see that featuring in your understanding of this sort of crusader spirit?
Yes, I totally agree that we cannot deal with it as one block. Even historically, for example, the Catholics were most of the time, if not all of the time, not supporting of this Zionist state or Zionist movement, or before it was a state. Some of the Protestants, some Lutherans, some Protestants themselves until now, they are not agreeing with what the evangelicals say. But the problem is, evangelicals have a very huge influence. From the Scofield Bible, in the beginning of this 20th century until now, we're talking billions. For example, I was saying, I was seeing one conference for CUFI, for Christians United for. The microphone was being replaced to people. You know, these talks, one minute, I will donate $5 million. I will donate $10 million. I will, what are these numbers? And they are all channeled to Israel. Of course, this is not the exclusive representative of Christianity. It's not, and it should not be. But unfortunately, they have the power. They have the money. The elite interests are reconciling with them. That's why Pete Hegsev, even Tucker Carlson, for a long time, he was anti-Trump, and then he became pro-Trump, and then he became again anti-Trump. Trump himself said in 2018, in a White House dinner to some evangelicals in front of him, "I have helped you a lot, and I was expecting more of you." And people like, "Yes, yes, we are doing more." In the 2018, the Jerusalem embassy of the US, when it was transferred to, to his embassy, the president of CUFI was there. And when we talk about CUFI and when we talk about other lobbyists, we are talking hundreds of millions of dollars. One pastor, I don't remember his name, he's well-known in the evangelical movement, his net worth is $800 million. So whatever. I don't think any of the Catholics or the black Protestants or other Protestant groups, no one has this kind of power, unfortunately.
And there's a conversation that you had previously about the use of liberation language. You know, the West tends to look at the Muslim world as being a part of the world that needs liberating. And you know, we saw that very clearly on Iran very recently, but we can go back to Napoleon. We can go back to sort of a number of leaders in recent history. And there seems to be this moral duty to reshape society, like build on that. Where does that come from? And why does that exist?
You know, when you go to history, you find a pattern since the 18th century, the colonization period until now. So you mentioned Napoleon when he came to Egypt in 1798. He said to Egyptians, and this was mentioned in Al-Jabarti's book, a historian's book, he's a well-known historian. He said, "We are not here to combat Islam. We are not here to fight with Muslims. We are here to free you from the oppressors." The same rhetoric was used in 1830 in the Algerian colonization by the French. The same rhetoric was used in Kleber's colonization, a book in Kleber was the leader of the British colonization of Egypt. He has a book called "Modern Egypt." He was demeaning Egyptians, even the Catholics of Egypt. And he said, "We are not here to fight Islam. We are here to combat the oppressors of these people." This was also mentioned in the 1920s, in what is called Gord, now Gerald. In the words of his lieutenant, George Catroux, viewed his mission as a Christian soldier who sought to free the people of Syria and Lebanon from the oppressors. The same thing was called by Netanyahu in 2024 when he was in an American podcast with two young people. He said, "We are waging a war against Hamas to free the people of Gaza, free the women of Gaza from oppression." This was also said by Trump in 2026, I think last month. "We are not fighting the Iranian people. We are freeing them from the oppressors." Now, interestingly enough, brother Jalal, the same thing was said by Abu Jahl in the time of the Prophet Muhammad, sallallahu alaihi wasallam, before the Battle of Badr. You know, Muslims said, and the Quraysh, the Meccan society was polytheistic. So they knew Allah, and you know, they kind of hated to fight with people who said, "Okay, we are polytheists, they are monotheists, but things shouldn't get to this point." So Abu Jahl said, "We are not fighting Allah. We are fighting those people who oppress and do some things wrong." So it's the same rhetoric, holding what we can call the Orientalist view, the Orientalist worldview. And this is, as we mentioned before, it's not about Democrats, Republicans, Tea Party, Labor Party, Republican Party. It's a Western view, the West and the rest. And that's why in 2025, an American far-right activist published a book called "Defenders of the West." Okay? And he was talking about the Crusades, the heroes of the Crusades. And in the very first page, you would expect an introduction that talks about the history. He doesn't talk about anything. The very first words of the book are, "Why Christians should..." the evangelical should combat Islam? Because in his view, they say he brought the entire Surah Al-Ikhlas. "Allah is one." And you know, the Surah. This is the reason he says that we should fight him, we should fight Islam. Why? Because they are monotheists. It's not new. It's the same rhetoric, it's the same creed, it's the same doctrine. When you go to the West, when they deal with the Muslims, when they deal with the Muslim, you will notice the pattern.
And so there's no break. I mean, you know, the crusades that were fought many centuries ago, and today's Western leaders who fight Muslims in Muslim countries and who enable Israel to commit its horrific genocide, you see this as just part of the same trajectory.
Yes. And sometimes we call it the rope of... sometimes it loosens, sometimes it strengthens, but it's always this, the Orientalist view, through the Crusades, through the colonization period, through the modern period. It's always this Orientalist views. We should liberate Muslims. We should civilize the region. We should help the... You know, Oprah Winfrey in 2001, and Oprah is a leftist, progressive Democrat, she was presented as the hallmark of the American progressive movement. In 2001, to justify the American crusade on Afghanistan, as Bush called it, the American crusade, to justify the crusade on Afghanistan, she brought this American woman, this Afghani woman. She was a civil rights activist in Afghanistan, and she flew to America. She was wearing this burqa, and they went to one of the public places in New York. Oprah stood and she held the mic, "We are here to liberate the woman. We are here to civilize this Afghani woman." And she removed the burqa, and everyone was cheering and claiming, "Yay! You are a leftist, and you should deal with things with a different perspective." As again, when it comes to the Muslim world, it's the West versus the rest.
Yeah, that's really interesting. So Israel, I mean, how do we understand the importance of Israel in this sort of relationship between the West and the Muslim world? Um, like, is there a theological... you know, we've talked about the sort of the religious overlap between the evangelicals and Zionists, right? So we've had shows on this before. But how much is the story of Israel sort of rooted within this hatred towards, or this dislike, or this aversion towards Islam?
If we see it as an advanced military base for US interests in the region, we will understand everything. So, for example, when we saw the videos in this genocide, where several Israeli soldiers were always saying the... So in the Torah perspective, are those people who were staying in the Israel land or in the Palestinian land, and they had to be wiped out completely. All women, all children, all men, all people, they have to be completely eradicated from the region. So that's what was happening in the rhetoric in Gaza. The Israeli soldiers were having this perspective on Gaza people. And you know, we have the soldiers who were the Kupa, and they detonate the building. Ah, this is for this is what will happen with... Why did Netanyahu in November 2023 have this address to soldiers where he said, and I quote, "You are all a continuation of the language, the lineage of heroes who were fearless and never retreated. Joshua bin Nun, King David, Bar Kochba. They wielded the sword of protection for the eternal survival of Israel, and you are following in their footsteps." So this is a religious rhetoric used in Israel. And of course, this is evidence, and we don't need to bring evidence for that.
Interestingly enough, there was a report by, I think, Haaretz in 2025, where they compared between Ben-Gurion, who is presented as a leftist in Israel, and Benjamin Netanyahu's public speeches. So they said that the Torah quotations in speeches by Ben-Gurion were 80%. So 80% of Ben-Gurion's speeches, the secular, the leftist, etc., were 80%, while Netanyahu was only 58%. And there were several other quotations. Now, understanding this makes us understand this rule of religion. This makes us consider the dangerous threat of Israeli society now to the region. And there was another poll in 2025 that said that 93% of believers in Israeli society believe in the necessity of wiping out... the 93% of religious people in Israel see that Palestinians and all who support them should be wiped out completely from the region. Now, for someone who doesn't understand or undermines the role of religion in Israel or in the political landscape in general, he would say, "No, those are fanatics. Those are people who are extremists." And they are. But in the same way, we should deal with them, not ignore them. Because ignoring the fact that this entity, this state, wants everyone in the region to subordinate to it, ignoring this fact will make you subordinate it. You know, when someone marches to you with a sword, and you are still waiting. No, you should consider how should I defend myself. Like, unfortunately, some people are more, are more, we say, more king than the king himself, you know. So they have this... No, we should look at things in an objective manner, not a subjective manner. And objectively, religion is playing a main role in Israel, as well as the US evangelical movement.
Can I ask you about the Amalekite idea? I mean, you know, we've now seen Israeli leaders, Netanyahu, use this sort of incendiary language to dehumanize Palestinians and ultimately to commit their genocide. And of course, you know, Donald Trump echoed that when he called Iranians animals. So we see that across the board in Western society. But often you hear propagandists from the West who look to Muslims who supposedly use Quranic verses to do something quite similar. So can I ask you, just on the record, we have a lot of non-Muslim viewers to our program. Do you have any equivalent in Islam? You know, they may have this Amalekite idea where, you know, where they can dehumanize Palestinians and Muslims in general. Like, what's a Muslim perspective on non-Muslims from a Quranic perspective, from a Hadith perspective? How do we approach living with and ultimately being close to or not close to the non-Muslims we interact with?
You're reminding me of what we called in Islamic history. So the Khawarij are these people who are very devout in worshiping and in doing Salat, in doing Zakat. And the Prophet Muhammad, sorry, like extreme in their... Exactly. And they are very, I don't know, far religious, not far-right, there was no right and left at that time. So, are there people who always misinterpret scriptures, exploit some scriptures to perform some crimes? Of course, it has been in the history of Islam, and it always will be. Uh, even we are not talking about only non-Muslims, which is something that is not my area of expertise. There are lots of people who can talk about it better than me. But for example, those who are kind of the extremes, as you said, they killed the Sahabah, the companions of the Prophet Muhammad, sallallahu alaihi wasallam, in the name of Allah. So there's this called, and he was battling with, and asking him, "Why are you fighting us?" And he told him some things. So he said, he said, he said to him a verse, told him a verse from the Quran, meaning that the most delusional people are those who perform good acts while they are, who are performing bad acts while they are thinking that they are doing good acts. Ali replied, "This is you and this is me." So who could say that to the fourth Caliph, to the cousin of the Prophet Muhammad, sallallahu alaihi wasallam, to something that is unimaginable or unimaginable? But it has been said, and he used these scriptures. Some of the, even made some of the, told some Sahabah, some companions of the Prophet, that they, one of the heads of the companions of the Prophet said to them, "Why do they split from the companions of the Prophet and had their own group?" He said, "Because you do not abide by Allah's laws." And they mentioned some ayat. And he told them, "You are misunderstanding it." And they went back with him. So this kind of misunderstanding the scriptures, exploiting them for political or economic reasons, or or it's always there. I think there are better people than me who told, who will, who can, yeah, tell us how Muslims should treat people. And Muslims have treated people in the 14th, in the 14th, 14th centuries of Islam as normal people. You know, there was no tensions, there was no grand battles, there was no... It's organic. It's natural. When the West came, when the West came and had this minority group who he supported and who he made elite in the post-colonial period, that's when problems really started to happen.
Yet, it is fair to say that in the Quran, we do talk about the enmity that some from within the other religious groups or the unbelievers show towards Islam. And sometimes we forget that. Like, how do we just explain that to me? Like, what is the context within which we talk about this sort of enmity, perpetual enmity?
That exists, uh, you know, between the unbelievers, or at least some people from within, and the unbelievers and and Muslims.
I would argue that when we deal with many of the scriptures of the Quran regarding the battles, the wars, how should we deal with the with the uh, with the people of the book, it's always, it's sometimes referring to the people of the book as a political entity who is waging war against Islam. That's when really things should be interpreted in this frame. So, for example, there's this famous ayah. So he who has not fought Muslims, done anything wrong, you should do B is like good doing and justice. Uh, and there are several cases in Islam where Christians and Jews who are, you know, holding positions of power, advisories to some people, even in my line of of interest, in my research interest, I read for many, one of the most famous um physicians in the Arab world, he was a Christian or a Jew, I don't remember. So it's normal again, it's it's organic. But when it comes to the elite, it's a totally different subject. So, for example, this elite subject, this elite term is used in the Quran, al- malah. Okay. So when we talk about the meal, the first thing we notice about the meal is that it began with Noah, with Noah, peace be upon him.
And what is interesting is that Noah is the first prophet to the to to humanity because in that period, as narrated in in Albkari, people became polytheists. So there was this community of polytheists who opposed the dwa of Islam, or the dwa of monotheism. That's when al- Malika was mentioned. So al was mentioned in Noah, in Alam, in Musam, inbi Muhammad, prophet Muhammad sallallahu alaihi wasallam, it was mentioned in the Quran. So prophet Muhammad, one of the interesting scriptures, when the battle of bad was ended, prophet Muhammad sallallahu alaihi wasallam was going back to the Medina. So when people, the Muslim people in Medina received the the uh, the army, he said, what did you do? To one of the companions said to one other. So one companion, you know, he was happy, he was excited, and he said, we were fighting those old bold people in Quray. Prophet Muhammad sallallahu alaihi wasallam corrected him. He said, oh brother, those were the elite of the Quraysh people. So, Prophet Muhammad sallallahu alaihi wasallam understands that these elite Quraysh who have their interests, who have, and those of course are are mentioned in the books and others, they had their interests. And that's why many, many scriptures we have from from from Bkari and and and others, we have the elite of the Quran know that this prophet is sent from Allah. He's the messenger of Allah, but they oppose him. So it's not a matter, no, they don't know Islam. No, they know Islam and they know that it conflicts with their interests. And that's why they they they have this enmity, this hostility towards Islam because it object. For example, this Epistine people, you know, this Epistine elite, when you come to them, and you know, there has to be a system of fairness and justice, of course, and he will not embrace you. He will, of course, offer you nothing other than hostility. But I think this is what happening in in the Quran in many ayas. And I will conclude by mentioning one ayah in in peace be upon him, people, he said, and does your religion, this monotheistic religion, does Islam orders you that we won't worship our father's idols, or we won't do in our money what we desire? So they understand that this da, this monotheistic religion has strains. There is commands, there is halal, is haram, and people hate, or most of the people don't like when someone says this is halal, this is haram, this is good, this is bad, this is morally right, this is morally wrong. Most of the people don't like that. And they understand that e h, this opposes their desire to do whatever they want in their life.
Maybe one final question for you then, Ismile. I mean, it seems like this crusading spirit is on the increase in the West. It's not in in the decline. I mean, yes, one portion of it is the right wing, but the right wing are on the rise across Europe. Uh, okay. Victor Orban recently just lost an election in in Hungary, which is a good thing. Uh, but you know, across Europe, you're seeing the rise in Britain, where I come from, you're seeing the rise of the right, and potentially even, you know, the next election could lead to the win of of one particular right-wing group. In in France, I was in France just last weekend, and there is a a really heavy conversation amongst Muslims at the National Front, who for a long time were always, you know, second in in presidential elections, and may actually win the elections. And the National Front has a very deeply Islamophobic, ic, anti-Islam rhetoric, uh, to it. And of course, in America, as you quite rightly described today, that, you know, there is an increase in that sort of aversion and hatred and enmity that exists amongst the elites, and that's permeating throughout, uh, throughout the um, uh, the Western societies. And like, you know, I come from the West, I live in, I live in Britain. How do Muslims seriously tackle this rise of religious fervor, uh, that you talk about today? Like, what, what can we sensibly do to address, uh, these concerns?
And this is another episode. This is a very big question. Uh, and I can conclude with with two remarks. Um, the first one is that we can learn something, just as I said earlier, we can learn something or two. Um, the Pger University, Prager University is a YouTube channel. Um, well-known YouTube channel among activists. Uh, it offers some educational material. This channel was eventually evolved into a whole not university, but an educ educational platform. It offers sessions, workshops, uh, tours, uh, and it even has, according to it, there is no confirmation, 4 million parents and educators who subscribe to its kids new letter newsletters. So you're talking about a very big impact on the American society. Um, in 2016, it was the peak of, you know, anti- Prager University. Okay. Prager University in 2025, in June 2025, was endorsed by Trump in the White House. He accepted it. He supported it. And of course, this gave it a huge momentum in its platforms. Regal University teaches about Islam and says that there is no moderate Muslim. All of them are radical. All of them are extremist. All of them are jihadists, etc. Interestingly, in one month, University could collect from donors, individual donors, not institutional, individual, $480,000. Imagine this number. I don't know the exact number, but this educational donation for religious purpose, you know, because many of the of the donations for the Islamic world, they say, go to the poor, feed them, go to the orphans, feed them, humanitarian, humanitarian aid. This is good. This is this is ordered. And this has a very large, very large. But the humanitarian aid itself is strategically non-beneficial. Yeah, because you will provide food, provide food, provide food until when? So when will we build the characters of these people, the the minds of these people, the hearts of these people? So this is one call, and I I can from this humble position, I can call to to to Muslims in the West, donations to the Muslim initiatives in this educational sense. Brother Jalal, we strive to find one educational platform for children. We strive. If you go to the American society, hundreds, hundreds, and the Israeli society as well, hundreds of religious schools. You can go to this, you can do this. If one Muslim made a religious school in in the region of the Middle East, they are persecuted, they are arrested. Yeah, we know, we know the circumstances. But this is one one message we can deliver in this in this uh podcast.
And the other is that brothers and sisters, do not wait something, do not wait for something for the West when it comes to the rest. So, for example, Biden, Joe Biden, genocide Joe, in 201, 19, as I can recall, you know, um, 2019, there was no October 7th, there was no Hamas, there was no, etc. Mhm. He called that one of his top priorities in his presidential period will be fighting the radical Islam of in Turkey. So whether it's or which is for for many of the Westerns, or the Western elites, was an example of the moderate Islam, whether it's or duhan, it's hams, it's Iran, it's x, it's y, it's zed, it's always Islam when it becomes a political project, it's a problem for the West. So, okay, there are several benefits from the left, you know, uh, some people, uh, make coalitions, make some presidential electional coalitions. But when it comes to the West and and the rest, I'm not waiting for some for anything to change. As as I mentioned, I think the same orientalist view that started in the 12th century from the crusades to the colonial period to to the present days, when it comes to the West to deal with the rest, it's always the security of the is the big decree decreed, which is no one is allowed in the region to own any nuclear weapons, except is when it comes to this, there is no left and right. There is West and there is the Middle East.
Is it's really been a fascinating conversation. Thank you for your time today. Thank you for having me, and I hope may Allah accept our deeds and accept from the viewers what they have listened. Asalam alalayikum. Now you've reached the end of this show, and the fact that you've stayed until the very end tells me that you truly believe in our work. Please consider making a one-off donation or becoming a member by visiting thinkingmuslim.com/membership. Now, your contributions give you exclusive behind-the-scenes access and the ability to ask questions to our guests and monthly calls with myself, my team, and our guests like Sami Hamdi, and keep us in your duas.