"When Mohammed Sidique Khan, Shehzad Tanweer, Hasib Hussain and Germaine Lindsay carried out the terrorist attack, they succeeded in bringing the pure name of Islam into disrepute and instantly dissolved the efforts of a Muslim community that had worked tirelessly to show that Islam and terrorism/ extremism were mutually exclusive terms."
- The Muslim Weekly, "Five Years On: 7/7 Remembered"
“Ye who are conscious of God – If a fasiq [untrustworthy violent person] comes to you with alarming news, make sure you verify their word, lest you afflict people out of your ignorance, and regret your actions” – Holy Qu’ran, 49:6
Why would The Muslim Weekly slander four young men who have for all intents and purposes been proven innocent by the research of Nick Kollerstrom (Terror on the Tube: Beyond the Veil of 7/7) and Muad'dib (7/7 Ripple Effect)? Why would the Weekly's editors take the word of a fasiq - the criminals who have murdered millions of Muslims in wars of aggression using false-flag ops like 9/11 as a pretext - without verifying the matter?
John Leonard, editor of Progressive Press, called our attention to this problem.
Kevin Barrett (editor, Muslims for 9/11 Truth website) responds:
Someone should tell them that Islam means submission to God, not submission to the lies of shayateen (satans).
David Livingstone (of Surrendering Islam) adds:
The problem is love of Dunia (material world). We naively assume that most Muslims here in the West are devoted to Islam. They are to an extent, but mostly they are here for the material benefits, and have constructed an edifice of excuses to claim otherwise. And that is the problem, and that is why they don't see the contradiction (or hypocrisy?) of their actions.
For example, many years back, I challenged a Muslim who was a good acquaintance of myself and a number of other converts. This was a very active brother in the community, very knowledgeable, and always at the mosque. I asked him why he came to Canada, and he said, "for Dawah". I laughed. I said, "come on?!". My convert friends were shocked that I would challenge him this way. He said, "no, really". I said it again, "come on?!" It really seemed absurd that he would think I would fall for that.
Then he finally conceded. "Yes, brother, you are right, I came here for Dunia." He's just one example, but how many others are like him?
They actually all naively thought they would come here and everything would be peachy, and as a bonus, they would attract Westerners to Islam. This is a result of their excuses. Dawah doesn't work like this. It doesn't happen with millions of self-appointed Muslim missionaries flocking here to do the work.
They are not here to spread Islam. Or, they are only willing to spread the kind of Islam that will not place in jeopardy their ability to participate materially in this society.
So in whichever way they are challenged to apologize for Islam, they'll do it. They don't want to see the bigger picture. They can't even imagine it. Muslims tend to be proud. They assumed they would impress. So this oppression all comes as a great shock.
They don't remember the verse in the Qur'an which warns them, "... And they will never cease fighting you until they turn you back from your religion if they can."
They don't want to challenge this society, they want to be a part of it.
They should be working to reform this society, but how can they when they have lost touch with the meaning of Islam in the first place? How is wearing hijab and growing a beard, and eating and drinking with their right hand going to solve the endemic problems of the West? They should be highlighting how Islam has the answer for many of the injustices that plague the modern world, beginning with the impoverishment of the Third World by the World Bank.
But they don't even realize that social justice issues are the very basis of Islam. They've completely lost tough with that. So in preaching their deviated version of Islam here in the West, they are doing more harm than good.