some1
05-21-2000, 10:05 AM
Perhaps the most alarming and unbearable factor for any ardent, committed Muslim, especially the young, is the lack of adherence to the teachings of Islam in Muslim countries where perversion, corruption, and falsehood are rampant. Marxism and secularism are being propagated openly and publicly. The contemporary "crusaders" plan and act to in filtrate everywhere without fear. The media, in addition to clubs and "heaters, spreads obscenities and misconduct. Half-naked, drunken women roam the streets tempting and provoking; drinking alcohol is legally available and common. Every aspect of distraction or sensual entertainment in the form of obscene literature, songs, plays, films, and pornographic material is being designed to corrupt and to deepen ignorance of Islam and to hamper faith.
In addition, the committed Muslim observes daily that the legislation-which is supposed to embody the beliefs and values of the Ummah in the forms of laws upholding its morals and punish those who transgressendorses all that is forbidden by Shariah and advocates corruption, because existing legislation does not derive from divine guidance but from secular philosophies. No wonder, then, that it sanctions as lawful what Allah (SWT) has prohibited and prohibits what He has made permissible. It also neglects obligations ordained by Allah (SWT) and renders the specific punishments assigned to prohibited deeds by Allah (SWT) or the Prophet (.SA'AS) inoperative. Moreover, the young witness daily the deviation of most of the rulers of Muslim countries-those who were entrusted with this responsibility. They unashamedly make friends with the enemies of Allah (SWT) and show hostility and enmity towards those who fear Him and who endeavor to call for the divine truth; the former enjoy the rulers favoritism and protection, the latter their wrath and oppression. Islam is seldom mentioned, except on national and "religious' occasions to deceive and beguile the masses
Furthermore, the young constantly witness clear social injustices and great disparity between the poor and the rich, between those who can hardly exist and those who waste millions on gambling and women; they see mansions which cost millions but are only occasionally- if ever-used while millions of Muslims remain unsheltered; they hear of fortunes smuggled abroad to be kept in secret foreign accounts, while millions of Muslims are content with the little that is still denied them, those who can hardly feed their children or buy medicine for the sick and old. Yet, if those who usurp oil revenues, or those who have benefited from the policy of economic cooperation with the West, or the agents of big international companies, donated but a portion of the wealth thrown away on gambling or on women, it would relieve a great deal of poverty as well as feed and shelter tens of thousands. Countless riches and public funds are being usurped in broad daylight; bribery and favoritism aredeeply rooted. Those who commit these thefts always escape justice. but those who commit relatively insignificant misdeeds are harshly and severely punished. Such injustice has created bitter feelings of envy, hatred, and malice between the various sectors of the community. The advocates of destructive ideologies exploit these feelings of bitterness to kindle the fire of class struggle and social hatred, and manage to create an atmosphere where their imported alien ideologies can be accepted as alternatives In that atmosphere the advocates of such ideologies find a large number of people willing to listen to them, not because of a rational acceptance of their ideas but as a reaction to and hatred for prevailing conditions.
There is nothing enigmatic about the root cause of this tragic condition. Islam, as a way of life, with all its comprehensiveness, vision, justice, and balance is almost absent from the scene, a stranger in its homeland. It has been removed from public life, from the economic and public affairs of the state, from legislation and from international relations, and has been cornered in a private relationship between the individual and his Lord-a situation akin to that of Christianity during the period of its decadence. Islam has been made a din without Shariah, a religion without a state, a Qurian without authority.
Islam has been made to suffer the consequences of a past alien to its own history and to its Ummah. The history of the Catholic church in the West was rampant with disasters and negative attitudes in which the church aligned itself with despotism, with unjust monarchs and feudal lords against the helpless masses. It initiated the Inquisition, which persecuted and tortured men of knowledge and new ideas; scholars and scientists were burnt alive; ignorance and aggression were forced on societies in the name of religion, i.e., of Christianity. It is no wonder then that the masses revolted against it and sought to liberate themselves. There is no reason, however, that Islam should bear the consequences of this black and alien history, only to be banished from any influential place in legislation and in guidance of the Ummah and to be confined to the conscience of the people or to the mosque-a tongue-tied "mosque" which is always under secret service surveillance. Even there, Islam is not allowed to command the common good and forbid that which is evil and undesirable.
The problem can basically be attributed to the imposition on Muslim Societies of secularism-an alien trend which is at odds with all that is Islamic Secularism teaches the separation between religion and the state, legislation and authority-a concept unknown throughout the history of the Muslim Ummah. Islam and the Shariah were always the source of 'ibadah, of legislation, public transaction, traditions, and ethics. True, there were a few cases in which the rulers and their subjects deviated from the right path, but there was not a single incident in which Shariah was neglected in settling disputes or differences between opposing parties. Even the most despotic rulers, such as al Hajjaj ibn Yusuf, did not have the impudence to reject a verdict based on the Qur'an and Sunnah. This distinction is important, because there is a tremendous difference between deviating from Shariah for personal ends, envy, negligence, anger, etc., and denying its superiority over other systems; for Shariah should overrule everyone and everybody by virture of its nature and capacity as embodying. Allah's word and judgment "Do they seek after a judgement of [the days of] ignorance? But who, for a people whose faith is assured, can give better judgment than Allah?"
No wonder then that the conscience of this generation of young Muslims-confronted with this state of affairs-is shocked to find that non-Muslim countries adapt their lives in accordance with their ideologies, philosophies, or concepts about faith, existence, God, and man; yet the Muslim alone is coerced to undergo a conflict between his beliefs and his reality, between his din and his society. In this respect, I wrote Secularism may be accepted in a Christian society but it can never enjoy a general acceptance in an Islamic society. Christianity is devoid of a shari'ah or a comprehensive system of life to which its adherents should be committed. The New Testament itself divides life into two parts one for God, or religion, the other for Caesar, or the state "Render unto Caesar things which belong to Caesar, and render unto God things which belong to God" (Mathew 2221). As such, a Christian could accept secularism without any qualms of conscience. Furthermore, Westerners, especially Christians, have good reasons to prefer a secular regime to a religious one. Their experience with religious regimes"-as they knew them- meant the rule of the clergy, the despotic authority of the Church, and the resulting decrees of excommunication and the deeds of forgiveness, i.e., letters of indulgence.
For Muslim societies, the acceptance of secularism means something totally different; i.e., as Islam is a comprehensive system of worship ('ibadah) and legislation (Shari'ah), the acceptance of secularism means abandonment of Shari'ah, a denial of the divine guidance and a rejection of Allah's in junctions; It is indeed a false claim that Shariah is not proper to the requirements of the present age. The acceptance of a legislation formulated by humans means a preference of the humane' limited knowledge and experiences to the divine guidance "Say! Do you know better than Allah?".
For this reason, the call for secularism among Muslims is atheism and a rejection of Islam. Its acceptance as a basis for rule in place of Shariah is downright riddah. The silence of the masses in the Muslim world about this deviation has been a major transgression and a clear-cut instance of disobedience which have produced a sense of guilt, remorse, and inward resentment, all of which have generated discontent, insecurity, and hatred among committed Muslims because such deviation lacks legality. Secularism is compatible with the Western concept of God which maintains that after God had created the world, He left it to look after itself. In this sense, God's relationship with the world is like that of a watchmaker with a watch he makes it then leaves it to function without any need for him. This concept is inherited from Greek philosophy, especially that of Aristotle who argued that God neither controls nor knows anything about the world. This is a helpless God as described by Will Durant. There is no wonder that such a God leaves people to look after their own affairs. How can He legislate for them when He is ignorant of their affairs? This concept is totally different from that of Muslims. We Muslims believe that Allah (SWT) is the sole Creator and Sustainer of the Worlds. One Who " . .takes account of every single thing" that He is omnipotent and omniscient; that His mercy and bounties encompasses everyone and suffice for all. In that capacity, Allah (SWT) revealed His divine guidance to humanity, made certain things permissible and others prohibited, commanded people observe His injunctions and to judge according to them. If they do not do so, then they commit kufr, aggression, and transgression.
Devout and committed young Muslims daily witness all these evil abominable, and un-Islamic practices, but do not know how to confront them. They cannot change things by physical force or by voicing their concern and opinion. The only way for them is to condemn these practices in their hearts, though this is the least manifestation of iman. But this internal tumult cannot be suppressed forever, and must eventually explode.
In addition to all this, the Muslim world and all that Muslims hold sacrosanct are under attack. Various non-Islamic powers-Zionist, Christian, Marxist, pagan and so on, which forget their fundamental differences and join forces in an open-or coven-campaign against any signs of an Islamic revival or any form of an Islamic movement or state. For this reason, all non-Islamic issues find material and moral support from the East anthe West. But Islamic issues find no real or practical support from this or that camp. Allah (SWT) has referred to such in His book "The unbelievers are protectors, one of another".
It is impossible for a Muslim to observe with silence and indifference the tragic mishaps that beset his Ummah, (or to watch his brothers in Islam being slaughtered like animals, or convened to Christianity, or misled into falsehood and ignorance). What about Muslim brotherhood and the solidarity of Muslims? A Muslim must believe in the brotherhood of Muslims. He should be proud of belonging to the best Ummah that has ever evolved for mankind. Furthermore, he must believe that Muslims, irrespective of their nationalities or language, are one Ummah in which the person who is least in rank is responsible for all and where all join together in solidarity against the enemy, and accept the Prophet's hadith that "he who does not concern himself with the affairs of Muslims is not a Muslim". Daily news brings to the concerned Muslim reports of the sufferings of his fellow Muslims in Palestine, Lebanon, Afghanistan, the Philippines, Eritrea, Somalia, Cyprus, India or other places where either an oppressed Muslim minority or a subjugated Muslim majority exist. In addition, the young observe with indignation that such happenings do not elicit any adequate response from the governments of other Muslim countries. Instead they are completely indifferent to the persecution of fellow Muslims and they either impose a blackout on such news or, even worse, side with the enemies of Islam. The concern of Muslim rulers is for their parochial, regional, national, or racial interests, or loyalty to certain foreign powers rather than loyalty to Allah (SWT), His Prophet (.SA'AS), His din, His Ummah and its cause.
Muslim youth are also aware that all of these negative attitudes towards Islamic causes-locally and internationally-are initiated by foreign forces, and carried out by some Muslim rulers who act are mere puppets manipulated by Zionist, Christian, or atheist powers. These forces initiate a sense of fear in the hearts of these rulers about an Islamic revolt, convince them of a potential danger, and incite them to crush the Islamic groups or movement-they always fall into the trap!
One of the main issues that has created frustration and resentment in the minds and hearts of the young Muslims during the last two decades is the 1967 Six-Day War between Arabs and Israel-a major catastrophe whose impact was intentionally minimized when those responsible for it, as well as their accomplices, called it "the set-back" insted of "defeat". The young Muslims in Arab countries were brought up with the conviction that Israel was a parasite, an alien to the area, created by aggression and usurpation, and that the liberation of Muslim land from this foreign body was a national and religious obligation; that Israel had no right to occupy a land that did not belong to it. The late Haj Amin al HusaynI (RA), muff' of Palestine, said in this regard "Palestine is not a country without a people to accept a homeless people!" However, after the catastrophic defeat of the Arab regimes in 1967, politics in the Arab world took a new turn whose main objective became "the reparation of the effects of the aggression," i.e., recognition of the existence of Israel. In fact, this means that the 1967 Israeli aggression has legalized the previous ones. If that is so, then what was the reason for the 1949, 1956, and 1967 wars? Why did the Arab regimes not agree to recognize Israel from the beginning and relieve the Ummah of the tragic consequences of these wars? This was followed by the "initiative" of the so called "peaceful solution" and peace treaties. But such an endeavor was disappointing and frustrating to the aspirations of Muslim youth. The authorities in Egypt tried to justify these on military and political, local as well as international, considerations. But all this was a severe shock to the hopes and the aspirations of Muslim youth. The shock was augmented by the fact that all of the major powers supported the illegal existence of Israel although the rights of the Arabs and Muslims were obvious. This led to the inevitable conclusion- supported by authentic evidence-especially among the youth, that a contemporary "crusade" assuming a new form is being waged against Islam. These feelings greatly influenced the Muslim youth who sensed that the old crusading spirit still motivated a large number of Western politicians and leaders who view the whole Islamic world, as well as any Islamic movement, with inherited hatred accumulated through centuries of struggle with the Muslim Ummah.
Many Muslim intellectuals, however, very much doubted the reality of this Western crusading spirit, claiming that national interests are paramount and are usually the sole motives for the West when taking a political or a military decision or action. But recent and current circumstances have clearly demonstrated to these optimists that they have been wrong and that the crusading spirit is still alive. I am not speaking of Generals Allenby or Gourand but of our own contemporaries Why does the West support Israel to exist on Muslim land? Why does the United States challenge the whole world by vetoing every United Nations resolution that condemns Israel? Why does it support Ethiopiathough a Marxist country for many years-against Eritrea? Why is there a blackout on all Muslim causes, yet a great deal of fuss is made about far lesser incidents, i.e. the hijacking of an airplane? Why is the Muslim blood cheaper than that of others? There seems to be no explanation for this other than the existence of a devilish alliance of Zionist, Christian, and atheist powers for a vicious and united campaign against Islam and Muslims.
In the opinion of devout young Muslims, all the rulers of the Arab and Muslim countries are mere "pieces on a chessboard" and puppets in the hands of the secret powers which rule the world. They see military coups d'etat and major political changes in the Muslim world as mere maneuvers by foreign powers to bring to office persons who are incapable of managing anything, but are made to appear as heroes. There may be some exaggeration in all this, but on the whole, the suspicions of the young are partly well-founded and supported by many events and incidents which strongly establish the conviction that the rulers are accomplices in a devilish strategy which seeks to nip the Islamic reawakening in the bud. The youth strongly believe that these rulers only appear to be true national leaders concerned for their people and their religion, while in reality they are no more than paid agents serving the enemies of the Ummah.
In addition, the committed Muslim observes daily that the legislation-which is supposed to embody the beliefs and values of the Ummah in the forms of laws upholding its morals and punish those who transgressendorses all that is forbidden by Shariah and advocates corruption, because existing legislation does not derive from divine guidance but from secular philosophies. No wonder, then, that it sanctions as lawful what Allah (SWT) has prohibited and prohibits what He has made permissible. It also neglects obligations ordained by Allah (SWT) and renders the specific punishments assigned to prohibited deeds by Allah (SWT) or the Prophet (.SA'AS) inoperative. Moreover, the young witness daily the deviation of most of the rulers of Muslim countries-those who were entrusted with this responsibility. They unashamedly make friends with the enemies of Allah (SWT) and show hostility and enmity towards those who fear Him and who endeavor to call for the divine truth; the former enjoy the rulers favoritism and protection, the latter their wrath and oppression. Islam is seldom mentioned, except on national and "religious' occasions to deceive and beguile the masses
Furthermore, the young constantly witness clear social injustices and great disparity between the poor and the rich, between those who can hardly exist and those who waste millions on gambling and women; they see mansions which cost millions but are only occasionally- if ever-used while millions of Muslims remain unsheltered; they hear of fortunes smuggled abroad to be kept in secret foreign accounts, while millions of Muslims are content with the little that is still denied them, those who can hardly feed their children or buy medicine for the sick and old. Yet, if those who usurp oil revenues, or those who have benefited from the policy of economic cooperation with the West, or the agents of big international companies, donated but a portion of the wealth thrown away on gambling or on women, it would relieve a great deal of poverty as well as feed and shelter tens of thousands. Countless riches and public funds are being usurped in broad daylight; bribery and favoritism aredeeply rooted. Those who commit these thefts always escape justice. but those who commit relatively insignificant misdeeds are harshly and severely punished. Such injustice has created bitter feelings of envy, hatred, and malice between the various sectors of the community. The advocates of destructive ideologies exploit these feelings of bitterness to kindle the fire of class struggle and social hatred, and manage to create an atmosphere where their imported alien ideologies can be accepted as alternatives In that atmosphere the advocates of such ideologies find a large number of people willing to listen to them, not because of a rational acceptance of their ideas but as a reaction to and hatred for prevailing conditions.
There is nothing enigmatic about the root cause of this tragic condition. Islam, as a way of life, with all its comprehensiveness, vision, justice, and balance is almost absent from the scene, a stranger in its homeland. It has been removed from public life, from the economic and public affairs of the state, from legislation and from international relations, and has been cornered in a private relationship between the individual and his Lord-a situation akin to that of Christianity during the period of its decadence. Islam has been made a din without Shariah, a religion without a state, a Qurian without authority.
Islam has been made to suffer the consequences of a past alien to its own history and to its Ummah. The history of the Catholic church in the West was rampant with disasters and negative attitudes in which the church aligned itself with despotism, with unjust monarchs and feudal lords against the helpless masses. It initiated the Inquisition, which persecuted and tortured men of knowledge and new ideas; scholars and scientists were burnt alive; ignorance and aggression were forced on societies in the name of religion, i.e., of Christianity. It is no wonder then that the masses revolted against it and sought to liberate themselves. There is no reason, however, that Islam should bear the consequences of this black and alien history, only to be banished from any influential place in legislation and in guidance of the Ummah and to be confined to the conscience of the people or to the mosque-a tongue-tied "mosque" which is always under secret service surveillance. Even there, Islam is not allowed to command the common good and forbid that which is evil and undesirable.
The problem can basically be attributed to the imposition on Muslim Societies of secularism-an alien trend which is at odds with all that is Islamic Secularism teaches the separation between religion and the state, legislation and authority-a concept unknown throughout the history of the Muslim Ummah. Islam and the Shariah were always the source of 'ibadah, of legislation, public transaction, traditions, and ethics. True, there were a few cases in which the rulers and their subjects deviated from the right path, but there was not a single incident in which Shariah was neglected in settling disputes or differences between opposing parties. Even the most despotic rulers, such as al Hajjaj ibn Yusuf, did not have the impudence to reject a verdict based on the Qur'an and Sunnah. This distinction is important, because there is a tremendous difference between deviating from Shariah for personal ends, envy, negligence, anger, etc., and denying its superiority over other systems; for Shariah should overrule everyone and everybody by virture of its nature and capacity as embodying. Allah's word and judgment "Do they seek after a judgement of [the days of] ignorance? But who, for a people whose faith is assured, can give better judgment than Allah?"
No wonder then that the conscience of this generation of young Muslims-confronted with this state of affairs-is shocked to find that non-Muslim countries adapt their lives in accordance with their ideologies, philosophies, or concepts about faith, existence, God, and man; yet the Muslim alone is coerced to undergo a conflict between his beliefs and his reality, between his din and his society. In this respect, I wrote Secularism may be accepted in a Christian society but it can never enjoy a general acceptance in an Islamic society. Christianity is devoid of a shari'ah or a comprehensive system of life to which its adherents should be committed. The New Testament itself divides life into two parts one for God, or religion, the other for Caesar, or the state "Render unto Caesar things which belong to Caesar, and render unto God things which belong to God" (Mathew 2221). As such, a Christian could accept secularism without any qualms of conscience. Furthermore, Westerners, especially Christians, have good reasons to prefer a secular regime to a religious one. Their experience with religious regimes"-as they knew them- meant the rule of the clergy, the despotic authority of the Church, and the resulting decrees of excommunication and the deeds of forgiveness, i.e., letters of indulgence.
For Muslim societies, the acceptance of secularism means something totally different; i.e., as Islam is a comprehensive system of worship ('ibadah) and legislation (Shari'ah), the acceptance of secularism means abandonment of Shari'ah, a denial of the divine guidance and a rejection of Allah's in junctions; It is indeed a false claim that Shariah is not proper to the requirements of the present age. The acceptance of a legislation formulated by humans means a preference of the humane' limited knowledge and experiences to the divine guidance "Say! Do you know better than Allah?".
For this reason, the call for secularism among Muslims is atheism and a rejection of Islam. Its acceptance as a basis for rule in place of Shariah is downright riddah. The silence of the masses in the Muslim world about this deviation has been a major transgression and a clear-cut instance of disobedience which have produced a sense of guilt, remorse, and inward resentment, all of which have generated discontent, insecurity, and hatred among committed Muslims because such deviation lacks legality. Secularism is compatible with the Western concept of God which maintains that after God had created the world, He left it to look after itself. In this sense, God's relationship with the world is like that of a watchmaker with a watch he makes it then leaves it to function without any need for him. This concept is inherited from Greek philosophy, especially that of Aristotle who argued that God neither controls nor knows anything about the world. This is a helpless God as described by Will Durant. There is no wonder that such a God leaves people to look after their own affairs. How can He legislate for them when He is ignorant of their affairs? This concept is totally different from that of Muslims. We Muslims believe that Allah (SWT) is the sole Creator and Sustainer of the Worlds. One Who " . .takes account of every single thing" that He is omnipotent and omniscient; that His mercy and bounties encompasses everyone and suffice for all. In that capacity, Allah (SWT) revealed His divine guidance to humanity, made certain things permissible and others prohibited, commanded people observe His injunctions and to judge according to them. If they do not do so, then they commit kufr, aggression, and transgression.
Devout and committed young Muslims daily witness all these evil abominable, and un-Islamic practices, but do not know how to confront them. They cannot change things by physical force or by voicing their concern and opinion. The only way for them is to condemn these practices in their hearts, though this is the least manifestation of iman. But this internal tumult cannot be suppressed forever, and must eventually explode.
In addition to all this, the Muslim world and all that Muslims hold sacrosanct are under attack. Various non-Islamic powers-Zionist, Christian, Marxist, pagan and so on, which forget their fundamental differences and join forces in an open-or coven-campaign against any signs of an Islamic revival or any form of an Islamic movement or state. For this reason, all non-Islamic issues find material and moral support from the East anthe West. But Islamic issues find no real or practical support from this or that camp. Allah (SWT) has referred to such in His book "The unbelievers are protectors, one of another".
It is impossible for a Muslim to observe with silence and indifference the tragic mishaps that beset his Ummah, (or to watch his brothers in Islam being slaughtered like animals, or convened to Christianity, or misled into falsehood and ignorance). What about Muslim brotherhood and the solidarity of Muslims? A Muslim must believe in the brotherhood of Muslims. He should be proud of belonging to the best Ummah that has ever evolved for mankind. Furthermore, he must believe that Muslims, irrespective of their nationalities or language, are one Ummah in which the person who is least in rank is responsible for all and where all join together in solidarity against the enemy, and accept the Prophet's hadith that "he who does not concern himself with the affairs of Muslims is not a Muslim". Daily news brings to the concerned Muslim reports of the sufferings of his fellow Muslims in Palestine, Lebanon, Afghanistan, the Philippines, Eritrea, Somalia, Cyprus, India or other places where either an oppressed Muslim minority or a subjugated Muslim majority exist. In addition, the young observe with indignation that such happenings do not elicit any adequate response from the governments of other Muslim countries. Instead they are completely indifferent to the persecution of fellow Muslims and they either impose a blackout on such news or, even worse, side with the enemies of Islam. The concern of Muslim rulers is for their parochial, regional, national, or racial interests, or loyalty to certain foreign powers rather than loyalty to Allah (SWT), His Prophet (.SA'AS), His din, His Ummah and its cause.
Muslim youth are also aware that all of these negative attitudes towards Islamic causes-locally and internationally-are initiated by foreign forces, and carried out by some Muslim rulers who act are mere puppets manipulated by Zionist, Christian, or atheist powers. These forces initiate a sense of fear in the hearts of these rulers about an Islamic revolt, convince them of a potential danger, and incite them to crush the Islamic groups or movement-they always fall into the trap!
One of the main issues that has created frustration and resentment in the minds and hearts of the young Muslims during the last two decades is the 1967 Six-Day War between Arabs and Israel-a major catastrophe whose impact was intentionally minimized when those responsible for it, as well as their accomplices, called it "the set-back" insted of "defeat". The young Muslims in Arab countries were brought up with the conviction that Israel was a parasite, an alien to the area, created by aggression and usurpation, and that the liberation of Muslim land from this foreign body was a national and religious obligation; that Israel had no right to occupy a land that did not belong to it. The late Haj Amin al HusaynI (RA), muff' of Palestine, said in this regard "Palestine is not a country without a people to accept a homeless people!" However, after the catastrophic defeat of the Arab regimes in 1967, politics in the Arab world took a new turn whose main objective became "the reparation of the effects of the aggression," i.e., recognition of the existence of Israel. In fact, this means that the 1967 Israeli aggression has legalized the previous ones. If that is so, then what was the reason for the 1949, 1956, and 1967 wars? Why did the Arab regimes not agree to recognize Israel from the beginning and relieve the Ummah of the tragic consequences of these wars? This was followed by the "initiative" of the so called "peaceful solution" and peace treaties. But such an endeavor was disappointing and frustrating to the aspirations of Muslim youth. The authorities in Egypt tried to justify these on military and political, local as well as international, considerations. But all this was a severe shock to the hopes and the aspirations of Muslim youth. The shock was augmented by the fact that all of the major powers supported the illegal existence of Israel although the rights of the Arabs and Muslims were obvious. This led to the inevitable conclusion- supported by authentic evidence-especially among the youth, that a contemporary "crusade" assuming a new form is being waged against Islam. These feelings greatly influenced the Muslim youth who sensed that the old crusading spirit still motivated a large number of Western politicians and leaders who view the whole Islamic world, as well as any Islamic movement, with inherited hatred accumulated through centuries of struggle with the Muslim Ummah.
Many Muslim intellectuals, however, very much doubted the reality of this Western crusading spirit, claiming that national interests are paramount and are usually the sole motives for the West when taking a political or a military decision or action. But recent and current circumstances have clearly demonstrated to these optimists that they have been wrong and that the crusading spirit is still alive. I am not speaking of Generals Allenby or Gourand but of our own contemporaries Why does the West support Israel to exist on Muslim land? Why does the United States challenge the whole world by vetoing every United Nations resolution that condemns Israel? Why does it support Ethiopiathough a Marxist country for many years-against Eritrea? Why is there a blackout on all Muslim causes, yet a great deal of fuss is made about far lesser incidents, i.e. the hijacking of an airplane? Why is the Muslim blood cheaper than that of others? There seems to be no explanation for this other than the existence of a devilish alliance of Zionist, Christian, and atheist powers for a vicious and united campaign against Islam and Muslims.
In the opinion of devout young Muslims, all the rulers of the Arab and Muslim countries are mere "pieces on a chessboard" and puppets in the hands of the secret powers which rule the world. They see military coups d'etat and major political changes in the Muslim world as mere maneuvers by foreign powers to bring to office persons who are incapable of managing anything, but are made to appear as heroes. There may be some exaggeration in all this, but on the whole, the suspicions of the young are partly well-founded and supported by many events and incidents which strongly establish the conviction that the rulers are accomplices in a devilish strategy which seeks to nip the Islamic reawakening in the bud. The youth strongly believe that these rulers only appear to be true national leaders concerned for their people and their religion, while in reality they are no more than paid agents serving the enemies of the Ummah.