Dan Burmawi - The Truth About Islam, Israel, and Palestine - World Ablaze with George Fontes

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:09):
All right, and now we are kicking off, So I'm
excited to have you here, Dan BERMOUI did I say
that correctly?

Speaker 2 (00:19):
Yep?

Speaker 1 (00:19):
Okay, great. Came across a few of your posts on
X is how I found out about you. Then I
saw your videos, and then I saw that you had
this Project Excess. Project ex It's an organization that you formed,
and this is what I was really interested in. So
I see what you had pinned on social media where

(00:41):
you state I left two religions Islam and Palestine. I
am a convert twice over and once from Islam to Christianity,
once from Palestine to Truth. And then you go on
to say a lot more you rejected Islam at eighteen
and etc. So I want to know more about your

(01:03):
experience with Islam, and also you know more about your organization,
this Project X and what it is you actually do.
And then I have other questions down the road as
we dive into this deeper. But let's start with your experience.
Is what led you to reject Islam? What about Islam?
Did you find out or discover that it was not

(01:24):
an actual religion but actually just more of a political
movement or basically a way to gather people to gain
control of the areas. What it really seems like it is.

Speaker 2 (01:36):
Well, thank you George for having me. I'm excited about this. Well, basically,
I'm asked this question all the time about how I
left Islam, why I left Islam, And I can give
you one thousand different answers because it depends on how
you approach the question. Do you want to approach it

(01:58):
theologically talking about the relationship with God? What is salvation?
How is how Islam doesn't offer any a spiritual transformation
or relationship or reconciliation with God. Or we can do
it from a social perspective. How Islam, I would say,

(02:24):
create a slavery mentality. You're not a free Your relationship
with God is based on fear, obedience for the sake
of obedience, and how that and creating dictatorships. That's why

(02:45):
in the Islamic world you cannot have secularism or free
societies because the imagination of the people cannot comprehend free
It's always about dictatorship, the authority. The concept of authority
itself in Islam is dissorted. So my experience with Islam

(03:13):
is really simple. When I was eighteen years old, I
made the decision that I wanted to commit myself to
serve allan serve Islam and defend the profhet Muhammad. After
the Danish cartoonist controversy in two thousand and six, and

(03:35):
I was moved or I was captured emotionally by what
happened on the streets of the Arab woard as a
response to the drawings of the profit of Islam. But
after a year of practicing Islam with full devotion, I

(03:59):
realized that I was hidden toward and did and drove.
There was nothing that is Them could offer me spiritually
at all. Then, of course I realized by reading the
Islamic history that I was looking at a warlord and

(04:24):
a theology of enslavement. It was an expansionist political ideology,
that's it. And I converted to Christianity after reading the
New Tastament. Had to leave my country because they couldn't
practice my new faith in a country where ninety nine

(04:47):
percent of the population are our followers of one religion,
one sect of the religion actually, and in a culture
that demands conformity. And that's it.

Speaker 1 (05:02):
What So let's let's uh, let's rewind a bit and
and dive a little bit into what you said here.
I want to understand. So what what about Islam is
based on authoritarianism or in creating dictators? Where where is
it that that is found in Islam itself?

Speaker 2 (05:25):
Listen, I'm working on my book. I'm going to talk
about my book. But of course I was writing about Yeah.
Today was writing about how the Catholic Church didn't need
a sacred text in order to justify violence during the Inquisitions,
It only needed a sacred institution. That sacred institution found

(05:53):
a high demand for salvation. We human beings, We need
to be saved, whether we are believers non believers. Suffering
in this world urged us to find a way to
get saved, whether temporal relief in this world or eternal relief.

(06:13):
So what happened during that time that justified violence? Even
though the biblical text doesn't justify violence at all. The
Church as an authority attached salvation to defending God and
justified violence to protect the Church. So even the Catholic

(06:39):
Church without a text was able to do it. Imagine
Islam with hundreds of texts in the sacred Quran and
in the sacred Hadith. What Islam is capable of now.
Many of the Islami topologists try to who argue that,

(07:01):
you know, the interpretations are not true. We have different interpretations.
They try to refer to mysticism or metaphorical language. I
don't care about all of that at this point. It's
really irrespective of what they think. The damage has already happened,

(07:22):
and that damage, to explain it to our audience, is
the fourteen centuries of vioumes using the Sacred Text and
the role model of Muhammad that is irreversible. So you

(07:45):
ask me what in Islam constitute this, I would say
simply this. It's a combination of searching for salvation, the characters,
the characteristics of God as a brutal dictator himself threatening

(08:09):
you with hell fire, grave torture if you don't obey him,
and framing non Muslims into enemies.

Speaker 3 (08:21):
Of Allah, and the role model of Muhammad leading or
authorizing eighty six battles, ordering assassinations against the centers and.

Speaker 2 (08:35):
Poets who criticize him. Even for criticizing Muhammad, you get
your head chopped off. And that's an history tale establishing
the rule of Allah. So of course I can't go
now and give you a lest two verses Sura nine,
verse five, Sura nine, verse twenty eight nine, verse forty two.

(08:59):
I can't give you like a list of Hadid sayings
of Muhammad. Doesn't matter, it's not how it's like you
you can Fredrick Knintzsche said that there is no meaning,
it's only interpretation. And I can give you a verse,

(09:19):
and that verse has its own horizon, and you also
have your horizon. And there is a fusion of horizons
when you read it. What is the horizon of the
Islamic world? It is a horizon shaped by centuries of

(09:40):
practical theology of conquest, subjugation of non Muslims. If human
non Muslims as second class citizens, they don't have value.
The value is determined by your religious affiligation and your obedience.
It's not a universal value like we have in the

(10:00):
Western civilization. So when you have a God like that,
and that vision of God form your imagination, you end
up manifesting that image into the world. You cannot function

(10:25):
with a secular regime because you don't comprehend that kind
of governance. You get a cognitive dostenance because you believe
that authority is tyrannical. It's brutal, and then you end
up with a system that has individual rights, has blind justice.

(10:50):
It doesn't work like that. It's like there's discrimination all
the way, everywhere in the character of God himself. I
hope this explains to you why the argument, the whole
argument is about you don't get this meaning, the interpretation.
It doesn't matter, all of it. It doesn't reatly matter.

(11:12):
We're talking about deeper truth here.

Speaker 1 (11:15):
Yeah, that's always the rebuttal. That's always you don't get
the meaning because you're not reading it in the actual
language or from the Arabic perspective. You're looking at it
through a Western lens, so you don't understand, right, Oh yeah, absolutely, Yeah,
that's always the rebuttal. But you can see the repeated

(11:35):
behavior throughout the centuries, over and over and over. And
then there are those who say that even if you
can read the language and you can interpret it from there.
And that's the other thing I've noticed, and I don't
know if I'm wrong on this, but it seems that
with Islam there is no room for interpretation. It's a
literal reading of what the word is, and that's what

(11:58):
it's supposed to be. Is that correct assessment.

Speaker 2 (12:03):
I'll go beyond that. I will say this, there is
no interpretation at all in Islam. There is only one
interpretation superior to everything else, and that is Muhammad himself.
It's like you can't have a thousand different books about
interpretation of the Qur'an and the meanings and the events,

(12:26):
and that it doesn't matter. It's like you have Muhammad
as the ceiling. He's the ultimate authority on that sacred scripture.
You want to understand God, look at Muhammad. He is
the incarnation of God in the imagination of Muslims. Even
though Islam claims not to be politicistic religion, but it

(12:50):
is actually in practicality, and it's a practical side. It
is a politicistic religion because Muhammad is almost equal to God.
Without Muhammad, you cannot be saved. Without Muhammad, you don't
have you are not accepted by Allah. So Muhammad is

(13:11):
perceived by Muslims as central figure two, not only the
tangible side of their religion, but the spiritual side. Even so,
why I say that it doesn't matter what interpretation you
look at, because at the end of the day, we

(13:32):
have the story of Muhammad shaping what do you believe
about God and about others. So he is the interpretation.

Speaker 1 (13:41):
Yeah, so they're they're literally within the scriptures putting Mohammad.
It seems to be above God himself, is what it
sounds like. And they don't really acknowledge Jesus or do they?
Is there anything in there? Because the scripts of Islam
did come after it wasn't before. You know, there's even

(14:02):
evidence of mosques built on top of older temples that
that way pre date Islam, absolutely pre date Islam. So
I gotta ask you this though, because is there a
different version? Okay? So Muslims correct me if I'm wrong.

(14:23):
Are they not defined as people who practice Islam or
worship the God according to the Qoran or basically Muhammad?
Is that is that true? Is that? Is that the
definition of what a Muslim is? Yeah?

Speaker 2 (14:37):
A Muslim who believes that Mohammed is the messenger of
the creator of the universe.

Speaker 1 (14:43):
Okay, So with that being said, what's the difference between
someone who practices Islam who's not supposed to deviate or
have any interpretation, and that person who is considered an
extreme Islamist? Is there a difference? Do people progress? Because
we always hear stories how in some Middle Eastern countries
or even cities whatever, that they're kind of getting away

(15:06):
from Islam a bit or being a little more progressive
in their views. So I don't know if this is
true or not, but is there really a difference? Is
there an extreme Islamist versus someone who practices Islam or
is it all the same?

Speaker 2 (15:20):
No, there is no difference at all between Muslim and
an Islamist. That is not a made up terms. The
Muslim is a made up term. It was embraced by
the Western government after nine to eleven in order to
be able to contain or combat the Islamic terrorist groups

(15:43):
without having to go against one point five billion Muslims.
So they said, okay, we're going to differentiate between the
so called radical groups and the rest of the Muslims.

Speaker 1 (15:57):
So then the average Muslim believes exactly what we hear
about people who are considered extreme Islamist. Every everything that's
not the East or or according to Muhamma's teaching, has
to go, has to be converted or death to all infidels.

Speaker 2 (16:14):
That correct, every single Muslim in the world has to
believe what eyes this beliefs in order to be a truthful,
authentic Muslim.

Speaker 1 (16:25):
So then how is it that we can accept that
any Muslim could be integrated into any culture.

Speaker 2 (16:30):
Then they have to get rid of Islam. They have
to push is on to the back. And that's that's
the problem, because the path of salvation in Islam is
obedience to Allah. You have to adhere to all the
commandments of Allah, or there is a very shortcut. You

(16:51):
had martyrdom. You die in the path of Allah. So
here's the thing. The majority, the extreme majority of Muslims,
they don't practice through Islam because Islam is impractical, it's inconvenient.
They cannot reconcile it with their reality, so they ignore it.
They simply live as if it doesn't exist. But at

(17:17):
the same time, they cannot condemn it because they know
that this is the reali Islam. So they always justify
it hamas you know, performing you had. They have to
find a justification. Oh, it's resistance, Oh it's you know,
they are oppressed Isis. They would be like Isis was

(17:43):
created by the United States of America, by the Western imperialists.
By the way, so anyway, it doesn't it doesn't matter.
It's like they will find a way not to condemn it.
Because they know they cannot condemn. If they condemn isis
they condemned Muhammad. I challenge one point eight billion Muslims

(18:05):
living in the world today to give me one single
act that ISAs dead that Muhammad didn't one.

Speaker 1 (18:15):
So reality is not all Muslims are really true Muslims. Then,
I mean there's a lot of people.

Speaker 2 (18:18):
That know they have to come up with a new
name for their religion. That's religion that has Unfortunately, even
though we're saying they're not true Muslims, but their epistemological
reality is Islamic. That what informs their knowledge of the

(18:39):
word is Islamic, even though if they don't practice it.
So that's another danger, dangerous thing, and that's what I'm
trying to challenge. I'm trying to educate the West about Islam.
But at the same time they want to challenge Muslims
to rethink is that it sales. It's like, you can

(19:00):
not really wait, wait until Islam takes over the word
so that you can practice Islam because other other than that,
there's no way to practice it. You will go to jail.

Speaker 1 (19:10):
So so anybody who is considered Muslim, because Muslim obviously
always kind of like, at least in the West, we
we use the word to refer to a people, correct,
And so it seems like there's no way to separate
those who are just not religious people, right, they're a
bit more secular in their views, but they're still classified
as a Muslim or someone who practices them. So it

(19:32):
seems like there's no way for them to escape it
is that? Is that a truth?

Speaker 2 (19:37):
That's that's true, But we need we need to be
careful because not all Muslims who identify with Islam wake
up in the morning plotting against the rest of the world.
It doesn't work like that.

Speaker 1 (19:51):
Yeah, I mean, that's kind of my point I guess
I'm trying to make is how do we count for
those individuals versus you know, the literal.

Speaker 2 (19:59):
First of all, we need tounderstand that the majority of
Muslims which are who migrate to the West, they're coming
for a better future, for better opportunities, for the freedom.
But they would always align themselves with Islam whenever the
opportunity allows. However, they don't. They're not a threat by themselves,

(20:25):
except if they are radicalized or if they are pulled
into more authentic radical version of Islam. Through different Islamic
movements in the West. Now again you're asking me have
very difficult questions. I don't know how to answer it
because I don't want to. I want to be fair

(20:47):
to the majority of Muslims out there. But at the
same time, I can't really think of a way because
the line between identifying with Islam and not practicing it
and becoming a true Muslim is very thin. It's one

(21:08):
prayer away, one epiphany away, one decision to be committed.
So that's the danger. But I don't want to spread fear.
I don't want people to start because this is this
is wrong. I'm not saying be fearful of Muslims, all Muslims.

(21:31):
That's not true. No, the majority of Muslims again, they
are not practicing Islam, true Islam.

Speaker 1 (21:38):
But unfortunately I understand that that's not what my intention
is either. I'm trying to understand because this is the
way I look at it. It's like everybody says the
Western world is Christian, but not everybody is religious or
practice is Christianity. Everyone's a Catholic, but they only practice
Catholicism on Sunday and the rest of the week. They
are just a bunch of jerks. So that's what I'm
trying to get at. Like I think, I think people

(21:59):
throw a blanket over people that are considered Muslim. But
in reality, in today's world, I mean, we hear the news,
we hear the leaks that come out that not everybody
who lives in those regions actually believes in that particular religion,
but they have no way out. They're just they're stuck
in the culture born.

Speaker 2 (22:17):
Yeah, it's different than being Christians or a Jew or anything.

Speaker 1 (22:20):
That's what I'm trying to say. I'm not trying to Islam.

Speaker 2 (22:23):
Yeah, I'm not trying to understand what's going on here.

Speaker 1 (22:25):
Sure, I was.

Speaker 2 (22:26):
Watching the TV show and a Jewish person mitt his
dad and he told them, Hey, dad, I became a
Jewel for Christ. And his dad said like things like that.
It's like he didn't care for that. He didn't kill him,

(22:49):
he didn't. There was like a past a few seconds.
That's it. Okay, you're jew for Christ. Who cares? You're
converted to Christianity. It doesn't matter. Now if you're a
Christian and you tell your parents I'm converting to Scientology,
maybe they're gonna have a conversation. With you. I don't know,

(23:10):
but they're not gonna threaten to kill you. In Islam,
it's different. Identifying with Islam means that Allah is your god,
Mohammed is your prophet, is your book. You see the
word from an Islamic clans. But it's not necessary that

(23:32):
you practice everything in Islam because you can't. Simply you
can't practice it. There are too many elements in Islam
that are dormant that you cannot practice anymore. Now, can
you leave Islam and like, be fine, nobody's gonna touch you.

(23:54):
It's unlikely because again, Islam doesn't give you that room.
You are either in or out. If you're out, then
you are the enemy of Allah. It's not an intellectual struggle.
It's not a whistling with ideas. No, it's affiliation to

(24:19):
the tribe, to the nation, to the Umba. So that's
why as long as you are inside the borders of
the Umba, the nation, that danger is real. You can't.
The majority of Muslims go to most only on Friday,

(24:40):
just like Christians go on Sunday, but the difference is Christianity.
It gives you a framework to deal with the word.
Islam doesn't give you only a framework. Islam interferes with
every single detail, with every single detail. So that is
the difference between Islam and Christianity is that Christianity is

(25:03):
a private faith. It is something that informs how you
see the Word, of course, but it's most about spirituality,
about salvation, about metaphysical reality. However, Islam interject itself into

(25:25):
every single detail of your life, and it comes attached
with violence. Your identity itself is connected to Islam. If
I ask you, George, what are you? You might say,
I'm American, I'm a man, I'm a father, I'm a Christian. Right,
It's like christian comes number four. But if you ask

(25:48):
a Muslim what are you, I'm a Muslim, that's number one.
That what defines your identity. So that's why being none
proud practicing Muslim doesn't equate not a practicing Christian. It's
it's not like that not a practicing Muslim is still

(26:10):
a Muslim. So I hope that makes sense.

Speaker 1 (26:14):
No, I understand what you're saying, But it also leads
leads to this, like, how are we not supposed to
fear the conquest that is inherent in a practice of
phil on that how are we not supposed to fear
those because here's the deal. If you're if you're born
into a culture to where you're encapsulated and captured and
you have no way out, and when you want to

(26:35):
get out, you're in fear of dying, right, And so
even if you come to the West, people still will
label you as a Muslim, so you still can't get out,
it seems so.

Speaker 2 (26:44):
And the list it's easier. People in the West wants
to leave us them, they leave, They take advantage of
the freedom here. But unfortunately Muslims in the West, they
become more radical, more devout to Islam because now they
are living beyond the behind the enemy lines, the enemies
of all law, of course, and obedience to Islam becomes allegiance.

Speaker 1 (27:10):
Right, right, But now we're talking about someone who takes
it from the extreme view, right, try to live live.

Speaker 2 (27:15):
No, no, no, it's not extreme view. This is like
the view of all.

Speaker 1 (27:18):
It's just there's no such thing as extreme.

Speaker 2 (27:21):
No, no, no, this is like the view if you are
living in a non Islamic land, then you are living
behind the enemy lines. Yes, it's like I can look
into the eyes of every single Muslim in the world
who confessed Islam as his religion, and tell him this,

(27:42):
a non Islamic land is an enemy land. You cannot
say otherwise because it's it's engraved in your in your imagination,
in your understanding of the word, that there is an
Islamic plan and non Islamic plan. That's it.

Speaker 1 (28:02):
I get it, I do understand that. But the question still,
how are we supposed to be accepting of these people
looking for a better life if in the end there
they all want death to the West. Apparently they all
want to change the West. They all want to They
all want to live under the banner of whence or
from from hence they came, right, They want to continue

(28:24):
that lifestyle no matter where they go. So what's the
point of migrating for a better life if you're just
going to go backwards once you capture that land, you're
just going to revert back from whence you came.

Speaker 2 (28:34):
Yeah, that's where law and order comes into a place.
All people want to don't want to stop on the
red light. They want to keep driving, but they stop
because there are consequences. It doesn't matter if a group

(28:54):
of people wants to take over the word, as long
as they don't have the means to do it. You
have people who are Nazis in America. You have people
who are still dreaming of the Confederacy and slavery. So
they're not able to do it. Why because their ideology

(29:18):
has been exposed and they don't have the means to
enforce them. The same thing should be done to Muslims.
Muslims are not going anywhere. You cannot get rid of them.
They are people, they have rights, They are free to
worship whatever they want, to believe whatever they want. But
you need to make sure that this ideology is not

(29:44):
rebranded as peaceful ideology because you will let it slip
through the cracks and reshape your society. You need to
you need to diagnosis. You need to say, oh, hold
on a second, this is a dangerous ideology. If you
don't say that, you are risking the future of the

(30:08):
worstern civilization because you want to be tolerant.

Speaker 1 (30:12):
Yeah, I know, I understand.

Speaker 2 (30:13):
You just say the truth. Islam is a political ideology
that has a religious aspect to it, and Islam wants
to take over the word. And Muslims, because they identify
with Islam, they don't have a choice whether they go
with this vision or they leave Islam. And it's not

(30:37):
easy to leave your religion. So, my dear Muslims, since
your religion wants to take over the world, we're going
to make sure that it doesn't.

Speaker 1 (30:50):
Right. But so so let me say something here, and
I am I am not against anything you're say about it.
I'm just trying to understand because it's it seems like
it's it gets very fuzzy when we're trying to define.
You know, how do we respect the person who wants
to not live under the rule of Islam, you know
what I mean? And those that know that they can't

(31:12):
because they're stuck in it. Now, what you said earlier was, well,
yes there are people. They have a right to do
whatever they want, worship, et cetera. But it's not true
of a Nazi. Once we know someone's a Nazi, it's over.
We don't allow them to practice it if we know
that they've find rhymes are done so out come. We
can't apply that same principle to the people who practice Islam.

(31:35):
Why are we not allowed to Nazis?

Speaker 2 (31:39):
They believe in that ideology and they live among others,
no understood, but they don't practice it. Of course they
don't practice it. The same thing. What I'm saying is
Muslims cannot practice Islam in the West. What I mean
by that, the Islam that entails taking over the world,

(32:03):
which they call political Islam in the West, which I
call Islam, should be categorized or recognized as a political ambition,
political ideology and banned. You cannot you cannot preach about
it in mosques. You cannot use the religion freedom a

(32:30):
second Amendment, sorry, the first Amendment, freedom of speech and
freedom for religion to preach about Jihand it's like you
need to really dig deeper. You cannot take Islam as
a monolothic entity. It's a religion. It's not a religion.
We can divide. The private faith aspect of Islam allowed

(32:56):
in the West, but everything else should be and should
be recognized as a political ideology that you can believe in.
But it cannot practice. As simple as that. It also
comes down to this. I know that people sometimes when
I say this, they think, oh, Dan, THEU radical. It's
not going to happen, my dear friends. There is no

(33:20):
other way. Whether you strip the religious label from Islam
or Islam is going to take over your civilization. Period.
There's no other way. If a Muslim wants to practice
a prayer, fasting all the rituals, that is a private

(33:43):
and personal and spiritual fine, that's religion. But everything else,
everything else, that's trying to convert people through deception. That
is another political strategy in Islam. It's like why Muslims

(34:06):
are allowed to have wooths everywhere and Western cities, but
Christians get killed in is them countries for preaching gospel.
Why so, like you need to address this because you
just you just.

Speaker 1 (34:24):
So let me point this way. Let me go back
to what I was trying to say. Okay, the world
over can absolutely justify that Nazi bad, but they will
not say Islam bad. I guess that's what I was saying.
I'm going to simplify what I was saying, but that's
what I was trying to say, was that everyone could
recognize someone who's who considers themselves a Nazi as bad
right away. We don't want that person. But when it

(34:46):
comes to Islam, everyone's afraid to identify it for what
it really is. And if we and you know this,
you're gonna you know a lot more to me. But
if you look at the history. I mean literally, Mohammad
not too long after he started gaining control, he wanted
to expand his empire. It had nothing to do with
with converting to a certain religion. He wanted to expand
the empire, just like the Romans did, and he wanted

(35:08):
to do more. He wanted to he wanted to go out.
There was nine nine nine Muslim conquests, right, and then
we can talk about the inquisitions and whatnot, but those
were in response to the Muslim conquests, absolutely worse.

Speaker 2 (35:21):
An evidence, historical evidence. The Patriarch of Jerusalem sent the
letter to the Patriarch of Antakia h during the cheet
of Jerusalem Muslims, where the Muslim troops were about to
enter Jerusalem, and that's where he said, the Arab gangs

(35:42):
are asking us to pay the jisia or they will
enter the city. The patriarch did not mention they are
asking us to convert to Islam. So this is an
evidence that it was a conquest of a political expansion.
It was, but of course it used religion in order

(36:06):
to expand. But going back to your point, it's like, yes,
the Nazi is a bad it's a bad person. But
you cannot say all Muslims are bad. No, not all Nazis.
Nazis are bad because you're born. If you're born into
a Nazi family, it's not necessary that you believe or

(36:31):
you want to practice it. So we say Nazism is bad,
not the people, because we don't know. Every person has
their own virgin, their own journey, their own understanding. We
don't attack people, we attack the ideology itself. I don't
care because you can't. You could be a Muslim, but

(36:55):
your world of view is shaped by different circumstances, different
You get the point.

Speaker 1 (37:00):
It's like I cannot understand, but I can't.

Speaker 2 (37:02):
I can't at all say that Muslims are bad or
Muslims wants to take over the world, or I never
I would say that. You would never hear me accuse
Muslims themselves. Just second place. I just said that the
ideology itself condition its followers to be afraid, to be

(37:24):
terrified of not obeying Allah if us two otherwise they
will be considered upper state. So the ideology is dangerous
and Muslims are the victims of this ideology. So I
would what do you want me to do? I can

(37:45):
vet immigrants, ideological vetting. I can do a lot of
things on the scirity level, but when it comes to
real life, we have two billions Muslims. I cannot say
that all of them are threats or because it's not practical,
I will I will be like, it's I don't know

(38:10):
what to say. You can't do that, it's just simply wrong.
But we can say Islam itself, the ideology is bad
and if we don't admit that, then we are risking
our future, the future of our children. And we cannot

(38:31):
let Muslims, by the way, enforce Islamophobia on the rest
of the world and protecting Islam from scrutiny. There's no
there's no such a thing as a xamophobia, some manufactured
term to protect the religion. Hatred toward a group of

(38:53):
people is different than criticizing their religion. You can criticize
the Christianity, Judaism. You can say whatever you want about
Moses or Jesus or the Pole or nobody's gonna kill you.
We want the same thing. We want to be able
and to be free to criticize Mohammad, to criticize the Quran,

(39:17):
to tell the truth, our truth. What do we see
to be truth about Islam. But Muslims as individuals, as people, absolutely,
any hatred toward them just for the sake of hatred
itself or in cycling of violence is wrong must be condemned,

(39:40):
and we must never tolerate that. My mother is a
still Muslim. But the ideology itself, there's you cannot protect
the ideology because you don't want to be to seem racist,
and Muslim Islam is not a race, so you cannot
really be RACI against Islam. Connecting Islam to race to

(40:06):
brown immigrants, suppressed group of people is a radical left
product that was designed to advance their ideology of the
oppressed oppressor, a view. So yeah, I think there is

(40:27):
a thin line between a Muslim and Islam, but we
should not cross that line. However, we shouldn't let Muslims
prevent us from criticizing Islam. That fusion of Islam and
Muslims must be oblerated. We cannot tolerat it. Otherwise Islam

(40:49):
well infiltrate through Muslims without you realizing it. You need
to separate the ideology from the people and protect yourself
from it.

Speaker 1 (41:01):
Yeah, So that's that's basically what I'm trying to get
at and I'm trying to ask. It's like, I don't
think anybody agree. Anybody's going to agree with attacking a
person just for existing, Okay. But on the other hand,
many people are defined by what they identify with or practice,

(41:21):
like a job. The problem with Islam is you can't
leave Islam like you leave a job. You don't punch
in eight to five or nine to five and then
go home and all of a sudden you're a different person. No,
You're defined as that person twenty four to seven. That's
the problem. So how do we separate a bad ideology
from a person who's just trying to live again?

Speaker 2 (41:44):
You just have laws in the land to protect you
from whatever that ideology and things.

Speaker 1 (41:51):
Similar what's going on in Italy and whatnot these other
European nations lately, where there's like, okay, now you can't
wear the headdress, you can you can't do certain things
anymore that are part of your religion. I mean, is
that is that a way forward and suppressing some of that.

Speaker 2 (42:10):
I wouldn't prioritize the job or the nepob or the
hallal food. I don't care about that.

Speaker 1 (42:17):
No, No, I was just using example, I will.

Speaker 2 (42:20):
I will tell you what I care about. What I
care about is after realizing that Islam is a political ideology,
then I should see all the Islamic entities as a
potential threat. So I have to monitor fundings to all

(42:41):
Islamic charities, all Isamic profits. I have to assume that
true Islam, which entails the political ideology, is being preached
at mosques at schools. So the government, in order to
act within the framework of the law, needs to first

(43:07):
find a way to do this. It's like, it's like,
because of the freedom religion, you cannot control the speech
at mosques. Right, you cannot monitor all fundings to nonprofits.
Is not nonprofits because you will be accused of a
zomophobia and hatred and bigotry. But the law must be enforced, right,

(43:32):
there must be a way to give the government the
power to do that. Just imagine, for the sake of
the argument, that Pablois turned his cake empire into a religion.

(43:54):
I wrote about this one. And according to the United
States laws, they are free to worship the God of powder,
and they are able to recruit believers and to practice
the religion of using the drug is the United States

(44:17):
government going to let that happen. No, because even if
Pabloskobar ended up with recognized religion, they will tell him, listen,
you can't worship the god of powder, but that powder

(44:38):
is illegal. So we are not going to let it.
We're not going to confuse it with the religious part
of your movement. We're going to seize it. We're going
to punish people for using it or trading so the

(44:59):
same things. I'm sorry, I'm using radical examples, but that's
that reality we're dealing with jihad is.

Speaker 1 (45:06):
But I don't think these are radical examples because then
you keep bringing up, you know, freedom of religion, freedom
of speech. But even within that framework, there is a
way to suppress the spread of hate speech, right, and
we can consider most of what is being practiced in
the Quran as hate speech because anybody who is not
considered a Muslim is considered what are they called an infidel?

(45:29):
Is that correct or what? And they must what convert
or die? That's that's the message. So then what then
is that not a way forward in doing so? So
what I'm seeing is the way the way it is
being spread into the West is because exactly like you're
like you said, nobody wants to be called a racist

(45:49):
and islamophobe. We all want to be accepting. But in
my opinion, look, if cultures don't mix, that's just what
it is. There's we don't all always have to meld together.
We don't. I mean, how many Westerners are moving to
the Middle East to set up shop and start a
new life.

Speaker 2 (46:10):
Many are moving, many are moving to Dubai, right, exactly.

Speaker 1 (46:14):
Right, But it's not it's not the same. It's not
the same as what we're seeing on the other side
of it.

Speaker 2 (46:23):
Absolutely, But I have to say this the United it
is being used by all Muslims around the world to
argue that you see Islam as capable of building a civilization.
But that's not true because all everything Dubai you present
as important, the laws, the values, economy.

Speaker 1 (46:49):
Everything, everything about Dubai is all about money. Everything that
is important.

Speaker 2 (46:53):
That's the most important thing. That's all it is, system everything,
So you cannot claim it is as make anyway.

Speaker 1 (47:02):
It's It's the same reason China turned to capitalism. Yeah,
you know, cour system was failing. That's exactly what Dubai
is all it all it is, that's that whole thing
was just an economic movement.

Speaker 2 (47:13):
So again, as the point clear, you need to differentiate
between a private faith that doesn't have a social catastrophic
consequences and hate speech or not only hit speech, but
a political strategy, war strategy that targeting the West. You

(47:40):
cannot consider it to be part of that private faith.
You need to differentiate between the two. That's but the
problem is when they tried to differentiate, they ended up
with Islamism and Islam. They said, Islamism doesn't is not
connected to the sacred text of Islam. It's a political
movement emerged in the mid twentieth century in the Middle East. Ah,

(48:01):
that is disasters. Because no, we need to differentiate between
two outcomes of the same text, a political outcome of
the same exact text of Islam and a spiritual ritual
practices also the outcome of the same text. The political

(48:27):
side is not separate. It is not It was not
the result of Western imperialism. It was not the product
of political movement that hijack the label Muslim or Islam. No,

(48:48):
not true. It is the product of Islam itself, its
sacred text, the life and actions and sayings of Muhammad,
and the historical the reality of Islam.

Speaker 1 (49:03):
Well, everything you're saying is a lot that I have
been saying what you just said. By the way, I
get criticized, But the reality is I did a dive
into the history, like where where does this extreme terrorism
come from? Everybody always blames the US for it, and
it predates It goes all the way back to the
mid to late sixteen hundred CE. I don't even know

(49:25):
if pronounce this right, the Hotajiats, right or the hotiji
and they were the people that were known to practice
its extreme terrorism against their own people, other Muslims. They
didn't care about the West back then, and they did
this all the way through about I think we're Yeah, well,
like I said, I can't pronounce it.

Speaker 2 (49:42):
No is used by Muslims to exonerate Islam. They say,
right invented Muhammad invented understood.

Speaker 1 (49:55):
But what I was, what I was researching, was that
the first acknowledgement of terrorism on record in history.

Speaker 2 (50:02):
War They see them as a very and I don't
know it.

Speaker 1 (50:05):
Goes before that. But you know, it's it's crazy that
to think that everybody, everybody believes America created, it created
this terrorist like mind, it goes, it goes back over,
like you said, almost fourteen hundred years in.

Speaker 2 (50:21):
The sixties that left the radical left. They wanted to
blame America for everything, especially with the war in Vietnam
and the emergence of new ideological or a new a

(50:43):
new school thought that is connected to postmodernism, relativism, and
post colonialism. It's like America is an imperialist power system.
America got here to this greatness as a result of
colonialism and imperialism and uh abuse of power. And when

(51:09):
the when Communism died by the fall of the Wall
of Berlin, they needed something else, a structure to lean
against with their ideology. So they found Islam. So Islam
actually is the alternative that the communist Lenianist found in

(51:35):
order not to give up their ideology. It's as simple
as that, because Islam has the same characteristics of some
of the character characteristics of communism. So they found an alternative,
if alternative, and through Islam, they can't keep attacking the West.
They can't keep attacking America capitalism. So they had to

(51:57):
say in order to justify why zame terrorism or exeneratism
from terrorism, to say it is a Western invention. It's
America is responsible for creating America is responsible for ISAAS
and this is UH a two folded win if I'm

(52:22):
saying it correctly. They they get to blame the West,
which serves their agenda, and at the same time it
UH empowered their alliance, alliance with Islam. So yeah, it
goes You can read that. There's a book by David Howartz,

(52:49):
the founder of Howard's Freedom Center. It's called The Anholy Alliance.
You can read about all of this in that book.

Speaker 1 (52:56):
Yeah, I've heard about that book. I haven't read it,
but I've heard it about it. And a lot of
people don't realize that even Afghanistan at one point was
a communist nation. They were Iran was on Yeah, in
Iran too at a time was communists were going down
that road. So I guess a lot of people attribute
rorism to the US because of our involvement, but we're

(53:18):
the intent was to stop the spread of communism, not
create terrorist organizations, so which is what we did not do.
I mean, terrorist organizations were already there. They just got
the backing and funding to expand and continue what they
wanted to do on a much larger scale. And as
you said, the West then became an enemy. It was
now the focus. It gave them a mission, right, a focus.

Speaker 2 (53:42):
So and I have a lot of message to the
isolationist who wants to America not to interfere anything.

Speaker 1 (53:49):
What's your thoughts on that? I was wondering how you
fel you came about that.

Speaker 2 (53:53):
You can be You can't. You can't claim the word
leadership and isolate yourself. It's ridiculous. If you want to yourself,
just give up leadership. But with that, with with that,
give up prosperity and the best economy in the world.
And it'sous. It's like you cannot reap the benefits of

(54:15):
being the most powerful nation in the history of humanity,
and at the same time you want to isolate yourself.
You know, we need to focus on America, that a council,
You need to focus on our streets are smell like pest.
It doesn't matter. It's like you have to look at
both internally and externally because you're the world leader.

Speaker 1 (54:37):
Right, the US is still seen as a leader. But
you know then you have other leaders that don't want
the US to be the leader. They don't want them
to be in the leader or intervene. So it's like
there's a price for not being a leader.

Speaker 2 (54:51):
Right. But but what you're saying.

Speaker 1 (54:55):
On one side, I agree with what you're saying. I
understand what you're saying. But on the end of the
world is trying to get away from the US being
the major power in the world right now, or at
least the lead as far as the paradynamic is concerned.
Which so I don't I don't believe the US should
stop it.

Speaker 2 (55:12):
I don't think I don't think it's gonna happen. I
don't think that at least at least not in the
next century. I'll tell you why being the world leader.
It is not about economy. It's not about China and
its factories and uh, the labor numbers. It's about the

(55:38):
architecture of your morality. It's about your values. It's about freedom.
America is great because it has these values at the
root of its identity. America became rich because it has
these values. America became rich because it's great. It doesn't

(56:01):
become great because it's rich. So people get it backward.
It's like, you know, we are red, so we are
leading the word. No, you're you're leading the word because
they're great. You became rich out of that greatness. Are
these values at risk? Yes? Are they abolished? No, we

(56:24):
are still enjoying the freedom that no other nation on
earth has. Just look at the UK, for example. It's
a dictatorship. It's like if you tweet, if you post
something on Facebook, you go to jail in China. Oh
my goodness, you cannot even compare that. It's like, listen,

(56:48):
there are elements for greatness in China, it doesn't have
any of these elements. Freedom is at the center of
being a great leader, and America is still the land
of the free. So my message to the isolation is like,

(57:10):
can don't even think about it. The moment you think
you can isolate yourself, you are giving up your morality
or moral responsibility. And if you give up your moral responsibility,
you're giving up your values which made you great.

Speaker 1 (57:32):
Right, everything you said is true. Right, I agree with
everything you said. But the sentiment of isolationism by some people,
if you're talking about people in the United States, by
the way, is not so much not wanting to be
a free world or even offer freedom to people. The

(57:54):
sentiment comes from those here that don't want to keep
spending our tax dollars funding wars, and that's what people
are concerned with. A lot of people are wondering, like,
why do we always have to get involved? Why can't
you handle your own bullshit? Basically, why can't you handle
your own fight that? And I'm not saying I agree
with that, I'm just I've just explained.

Speaker 2 (58:15):
To you what you're the big brother.

Speaker 1 (58:17):
Yeah, where that's coming from.

Speaker 2 (58:19):
Yeah, but you're as the big brother, you have to
be there, present, ready to be responsible, to lead, to
provide wisdom and guidance and sometimes through strength. I will
give you an example, the catastrophe that we're witnessing today
in Syria. I believe it is that natural outcome of

(58:46):
that American Americans desire two indoors. Look what we have
to do America. So it's okay if we takes down
and this way we weaken Iran and we get trade

(59:06):
of fast of all law supply line, and at the
same time we deliver Syria to this Jedic group. We
can contain it. We can control it. This way, we
don't have to, you know, prolong the war and we will,
we will, we will contain it. It's manageable. So this

(59:29):
way we are not spending money in the Middle East. Now,
look what's happening. There is no such thing as shortcut
to peace. That you had this regime in Syria, even
as they are trying to gain international recognition, they couldn't

(59:51):
behave themselves. It's like they couldn't for a few months
until the word accept them. They massacred all whites and
there today they're backing the Jews. Now, if America didn't
make decisions, decision and they kept an asset, because there's
no other way to rule Muslims, unfortunately in the Islamic word,

(01:00:15):
except through the religious government or the dictatorship, there's no
other way. If you kept that assid you had to
fight Iran. Well, maybe you had, you will have a
longer war, but you will make sure that you had
this are not ruling one of the most strategic important

(01:00:37):
nations in the Middle East. So there's a price for
trying to end the wars.

Speaker 1 (01:00:46):
Yeah, but.

Speaker 2 (01:00:48):
By okay.

Speaker 1 (01:00:49):
So the argument is we need perpetual war to keep
it from getting out of hand like before, to keep
from becoming a bigger war. And at the same time,
it's as if it's being said that you know, we
can't afford for the for the for the US to
not exist and get involved in everybody's everybody's America.

Speaker 2 (01:01:13):
If the United States is going to keep doing that
the same thing over and or over again, that is stupidity.
They cannot expect different results, right, So what what is
the solution?

Speaker 1 (01:01:28):
Then?

Speaker 2 (01:01:29):
Look at what happened in Afghanistan. America spent two point
two point four trillion dollars, lost thousands of soldiers, and
with the exit, the shameful exit that it's like the
historical shameful exit of the of the United States from Afghanistan.

(01:01:50):
No one is going to forget that. Ever, So what happened?
What went wrong there? I'll tell you what went wrong.
America went to Afghanistan thinking of the same scenario of Japan, Germany,
South Korea. You know, nations want to be built, nations
seek prosperity and freedom, and they will stretch their hand

(01:02:13):
to us and they will help let us help them rebuild.
That misconception, that assumption that every single body in the
world is similar and they think like us is disasters.
They did not understand that the ideology in Afghanistan and

(01:02:34):
the ideology in Iraq doesn't care for prosperity and rebuilding
in the future, it cares for something else, and that
is destruction, death, expansionism. So they completely ignored the ideological reality,
the theological reality of Afghanistan, and they ended up paying

(01:03:00):
two point fortrillion dollars, losing thousands of soldiers, and leaving
behind them a more destructed country, a more destroyed country
than the one they entered. So instead of American organizations
funded by the government going to Cabal University teaching about transsexualism,

(01:03:27):
they should have done something else. They should have tried
to dismantle the theological structure that shape the reality of
these people in order to focus on the future, not
on death and war and struggle. So if America wants

(01:03:51):
to keep doing what America is doing now, or what
has America been doing for the past twenty thirty years,
then yeah, I support that. Don't interfere position, why bother.
But America has to do it in a different way.

(01:04:12):
It's like, instead of replacing the Wilaya project in the
Middle East, the Wilaya is the Shia Iranian vision of governance,
instead of replacing it with that Sunny Caliphate, you keep
fighting the Sunny Caliphate and the shiaha and in both

(01:04:35):
of them, but keep alternating between both only gives you
a cease fire. That's it. You will keep ping ponging
between fighting the Shiah and then fighting the Sun every
twenty years you have you're sick and tired of the
Sun jihadism. Let's go to the Shiah Wilaya project. You're

(01:04:59):
set because them. It doesn't work that that way. You
have to to identify that roots of this conflict, why
this keep happening. You need to use your leverage, your
power and economy and the strength of your economy to

(01:05:23):
force Arab leaders and Islamic leaders to not to do
reformation in education on their own. You need experts to
reform that curriculums in the other world. You need to

(01:05:43):
overhaul the religious speech in the other board. You need
to weaken that ideologically grip of Islam in order to
achieve a long lasting piece. But jumping between she and
on the same terrorism, different things, different labels is going

(01:06:06):
to waste your resources and you will never be able
to achieve peace.

Speaker 1 (01:06:13):
Okay, So there's there's a lot. There's a lot to
unpack on what you said. So let's let's just get
back to Afghanistan first time. Wherever there was why who
was our enemy in the beginning? Russia? Really communism. That
was the reason we even got involved. Now, there's a
lot of conspiracy theorists that always say, well, no, there's
other nefarious reasons America ever got involved in the milities.
It was to basically rob Steele and plunder all the resources.

(01:06:37):
A lot of people argue that side of it, but
really realistically, we were there because we were trying to
stop the spread of communism. Two thousand and one ish
we went back for what Okay, the war on terror?
Right now, we can argue whether or not nine to
eleven was a hoax and it was done by our
own government. A lot of people believe that. Let the
let the conspiracy theorists chase that rap, but the reality

(01:07:00):
is the war on terror. Now what you're what you're
saying is hear me out. Now we as a nation,
let's say, the reason we were there was to abolish Cherism,
abolish Teleman, abolish al Kadom. Right, we want to get
rid of them. We wanted to, let's say, give freedom

(01:07:20):
to the people who, from our point of view, did
not want to live under the rule of terror. Okay,
So now now, now we now we achieved abolishing that
for as long as it did anyway, right, it wasn't forever,
you know, it rose again. But let's just let's just
stay on on what I'm going to say here. Yeah, okay.
So now that that's gone and there's the opportunity for

(01:07:42):
the people to finally step up and accept that they
may even have an opportunity of freedom, they chose not
to or were they still afraid to do so because
they were still in fear of the remnants of what
might be left from these terrorist organizations. So what what
what the problem we're and everything you're saying in the
solution that that that you're proposing. I understand what you're saying,

(01:08:05):
But it's almost like America has to go over there,
take all the land over rule it, eradicate their way
of thinking, and try to make them a different people.
That's not going to happen. And when we're talking about
colonizers earlier, when we're talking about colonizers earlier, the biggest
colonizers were never the United States, it was the British.
They're the ones who went in and took over the

(01:08:27):
Middle East, yiares Ago and ran it. They ran out
of money and resources, and that is why the US
was asked to step in and help the British. But
that's what happened way back then. So what what is this?
What is the solution? Afghanistan?

Speaker 2 (01:08:39):
Was? Was?

Speaker 1 (01:08:40):
It was a huge it was it was a big debacle. Right.
The way we pulled out was stupid. It never should
have happened that way ever, And I'm not disagreeing with you.
But what I'm hearing from you, and what I'm trying
to understand is how is it moral for us to
go and take over a people and try it to
convert them to become some with.

Speaker 2 (01:09:00):
That soggesting that at all, I'm just saying viitualizing American
power in order to make a difference. For example, Egypt,
I believe their US eight is sure, if it's one
point seven billion or three billions something like that, I'm
not sure. Anyway we can find out if the United

(01:09:21):
States ask Egypt like, yeah, I want to give you
one point seven billion dollars or given them to you anyway,
but can we talk about your curriculums and schools, what
you're teaching your children. It's like it's a legitimate ask

(01:09:42):
because you want to protect your international interest in national security.
So you need to make sure that even in the Wahity,
another iman in the Wahiti is not graduating from Egyptian schools.
So does America do that? Absolutely enough. They don't care
about that at all. They only care about integrating diversity.

(01:10:08):
You're into the curriculums and talking about homosexuality and who
cares about that?

Speaker 1 (01:10:14):
True? But those things did come later. So what about
before all of that was was the movement? We were
still giving money an aid to many countries in the
Middle East, and I guess you know, based on what
you're saying, as we weren't holding these countries accountables, like sure,
you want the money, you need the funding, but we
don't believe in the way that you're running things. We don't.
We don't believe and in the basis of what your

(01:10:35):
culture is built on. That's I mean that that that
that is we're then on the danger of becoming an
authoritarian government trying to take over the world. It's like
imposing a.

Speaker 2 (01:10:47):
Lot of giving you money. Listen, I'm giving you money,
a lot of money. And by the way, it's not
only the one point seven billion dollars that the Egyptian
government gives. I can't. I don't have the number. Now
I'm going to research it them not here, but I
believe it's tens or hundreds of billions of dollars every
year that goes to Egypt and through the nonprofit organizations

(01:11:12):
from the American money from American organization. Now America can
use that for the good of the people. It's not
being tyrannical authoritarian. That's not true. I just want to
make sure. Listen, my friend, I want to help you,
but please let me just take a look what's going
on here. Okay, your second class, I'm sorry, you're the

(01:11:38):
Book of Religion of the Yeah, the Book of Religion
in the second year at school is teaching that the
companion of Muhammed Abbaida beheaded his own father because he
was an infidel. Can we just remove that? For God's sake.
You cannot keep this and keep getting one hundred billion

(01:11:59):
dollar year from me. So I'm not throwing some imaginary,
imaginary impossible asks or requests. I'm not asking the United
States government to be a territorian or colonialist. I'm just
asking very simply, you need to recognize, Okay, the Islamic

(01:12:20):
countries and the Isamic governments. They have to appease the
fundamentals in their nations, and of course this is what happens.
I'm not making this up. If you have a president
or a king in the other world. In order to

(01:12:41):
prevent them Muslims who are fundamentalists, who are very religious,
from interfering with politics, they give them authority over everything
in the country except politics. So they ask them, don't
interfere with politics, but go and do whatever you want
with the education. They deliver the education department to them

(01:13:06):
and to their idelos. Now, can the United States of
America do make a difference using its power, utilizing its resources. Absolutely.
The fact that US is not doing it is because
the US administration, one after the other, is surrounding themselves

(01:13:28):
with idiots, with eggheads in academia who don't understand Islam
at all, or who believe that Islam is the peaceful religion,
but you know there are different interpretations, or leftists who
believe Islam is them tourism is the result of imperialism,

(01:13:51):
or Muslims who would never admit that Islam is a problem.
So I wrote an article about this. They said, the
councilors of collapse. I called them the counselors of collapse.
They are the councilors who are not giving a true
council to the lawmaker, and the result is wasted resources,

(01:14:18):
trillions and trillions of dollars American lives. And we are
we haven't moved even a step. We're still at the
same square.

Speaker 1 (01:14:31):
So as far as as far as money goes, I
don't know the exactly amount in Egypt either, but I've
done a lot of research on that in previous episodes.
I can just tell you that if you combine territories
and countries, we every year the US funds over two
hundred and forty territories and countries combined period and the
number I do know is, for example, like with Israel,
three point two billion every year regardless. Now, the argument

(01:14:54):
has always been with some of these funds that a
lot of that's supposed to come back to purchase military
aid or supply et cetera, maybe even food. But it's
not just that minimum amount that we send every country.
There's always more to that. Like you said, so I
get what you're saying. It's like you want, you want
this support, but for US to support you traditional support

(01:15:14):
this view. So you got to make an adjustment if
you want to continue to get that money.

Speaker 2 (01:15:18):
Right.

Speaker 1 (01:15:19):
So, so I understand it, and it's it's not it's
not a bad idea. I get your idea. But we're
also on the it's it could. It's a slippery slope
to where we can be on on a downward spiral
of becoming that nation of you know, beyond superpower. Literally
just always dangling the carrot over another country's head and saying,

(01:15:39):
if you're not us, you have to do it. Help you.

Speaker 2 (01:15:42):
Sometimes you have to do it. Sometimes you have to
realize that.

Speaker 1 (01:15:46):
So should every country be like the United States? What
do you mean in terms of how how the United
States lives? It's uh, well, not even that in terms
of their freedom or democracy, et cetera. Is that what
you believe?

Speaker 2 (01:16:01):
Okay, let me ask you this. Do you believe that
freedom is making your life better?

Speaker 1 (01:16:08):
Of course it is. I mean that's not even a question.

Speaker 2 (01:16:10):
The question is, okay, is it a universal need? I
believe it is. Okay, So you are not imposing your
way on lot of life on others. You are delivering
a gift. It's more important than food. Freedom is as

(01:16:35):
necessary as the air We breathe. So if the United
States is fighting to make people live freely, it is
a moral obligation, as moral as helping people during a famine.
So this is not in position of a life is time.

(01:16:58):
That is a lie and people who repeat such things
are liars. Do they want to enjoy the freedom that
the US is offering them, the freedom which is the
result of centuries of a struggle philosophical, ideological They enjoy it,

(01:17:19):
but of course they want to keep it to themselves.
They don't want to give it to other people because
it would be a position that is ridiculous. It's like,
if you see evil, you change that evil. And there
is an universal definition of evil, and that is slavery
of people. It's like when you when you're enslaved people,

(01:17:41):
that is evil. Everybody agrees to that. It's not a
relative thing. People are not going to disagree on the
definition of freedom. It's like, am I respecting your personal agency?
Do you have the power to make your own own
decisions and determine your future? If you're not, If you

(01:18:07):
are being imprisoned for saying your opinion, if you are
oppressed for writing a book or changing your religion or
having certain views, then you're not afree, and that for
me is as bad as being starving to death. So

(01:18:30):
I completely disagree with this framing.

Speaker 1 (01:18:35):
You could disagree absolutely, but not with you. No, no, no, no. Look,
this whole conversation is just turned into a very philosophical
conversation in general. I mean we're not we're not coming
up with defined solutions because we can't impose the solutions
right now. I mean we want to, but we can't.
Freedom is a gift, agreed, But then it also goes
back to the statement of how Muslims live in which

(01:18:57):
it's built on the foundation of a religion where freedom
is not inherently part of their culture. So if we
want to be philosophical, sure, let's let's inject freedom into
your culture, which means what abolishing your culture and way
of life, you are no longer who you are. That's
what I'm getting at now. It doesn't mean it doesn't
mean that I don't agree with you. Everybody should live free.

(01:19:18):
Everyone should live free, and everybody has a different culture,
like we don't all see things and do things the
same way, because it all comes down to geography. What
you deal with defines who you are really what's around you.
And I understand that. But when we're talking about example
again going back to Islam, Islam, as as you had
stated and as it is written, it is not a

(01:19:41):
basis of freedom. It's not built on freedom. It's based
on it's based on subjugation. It's based on control. And
if we wanted to change that, okay, And if you
have a culture, for example, that is defined by that
religion and that is the basis for the culture itself,
then you'd have to bolish the culture to move forward

(01:20:03):
and be free.

Speaker 2 (01:20:06):
Uh. Not the people.

Speaker 1 (01:20:08):
I'm saying that, I'm not saying about people.

Speaker 2 (01:20:11):
Listen again to the moral obligation obligation thing. Somebody is
starving to death and you have the power to feed them,
then you don't care. You don't truly care about culture
and culture relativism. You don't care about If somebody is
trying to commit suicide, you jump and you help them.

Speaker 1 (01:20:31):
I agree.

Speaker 2 (01:20:32):
So when suicide and starvation to death becomes cultural difference,
that is dangerous. It's not a cultural difference. It if
somebody is attributing their suicidal way of life to religion,

(01:20:56):
you don't let them do that. I can't imagine the
US government interfearing and forcing the Jamestown people and arresting
all of them before they killed themselves. It's like, it
wasn't that a religion, So as as America, I gonna say, oh,

(01:21:18):
we're not going to force the real fly from them.

Speaker 1 (01:21:21):
Right, Okay, I understand where you're trying to go with this,
But the reality is it all leads back to what
we're trying to say earlier, what you were alluding to,
without putting too fine a point on it, for Muslims
to move forward as a people is almost abolished.

Speaker 2 (01:21:37):
Unfortunately, that's the only way now abolished or recreated, recreated.
It's like you can create another version.

Speaker 1 (01:21:49):
You know, updated this with the modern world. Basically, it's
like you, we can't do it.

Speaker 2 (01:21:55):
I believe it's doable. What we need is UH enforcement
and education system and a system that controlled the religious speech,
and with that, with the globalization and social media today,

(01:22:17):
I think this is what I call the mission of
Project X, my organization, desanctifying the sacred, that the religion
that keeps giving UH violence and hatred and aggression and slavery.

(01:22:39):
So what do I mean by desanctifying. Desanctifying is I'm
not afraid anymore of this, of criticizing this, of not
believing this. I can identify as a Muslim, but I
don't truly care for what Mohammad did or didn't to

(01:23:00):
what he said, you know what I mean. It's like
I need the zem Court to achieve this intellectual or
mental state where I don't need to leave Islam in
order to embrace universal values. How do I do that?
These sanctify Islam in the mind of Muslims. I don't

(01:23:22):
want to do Islam. I don't want to abolish Islam completely,
just de sanctify it. Okay, we already in the Quran
Mohammad marriage is not in law. That's ridiculous. I'm not
gonna defend Mohammed, but you know I'm a Muslim. That's
that's I want Muslims to reach this.

Speaker 1 (01:23:40):
Uh, it's progressing as as a people, as a culture,
really is what it is.

Speaker 2 (01:23:44):
How do you do that by ing the truth right Muslims,
not by protecting Islam and by saying Islam is the
religion of peace? Yeah, you don't do you don't You
don't help Muslims. You are keeping them locked in.

Speaker 1 (01:23:59):
Yeah, I I everything you're saying, I understand, and look,
this is a conversation I can aff for I think
two thousand hours or more easily. Let's let's let's talk
about your Project ACT because I did want to get
to that you brought it up a little bit. Can
you please explain what it's about and what you're doing
to help educate people about Islam, because I know that

(01:24:23):
I was going through it like you do. You have
some videos, you you do a lot of articles and blogs,
you write books, and you have a new one that
you're written that's coming out or you're working on. So
can you please go go over Project acts a little
bit more for us?

Speaker 2 (01:24:38):
Project adds is the result of the response I witnessed
after October seven, the response in the West, the sympathizing
with the tourists and that tack that tax from the

(01:24:59):
one democratic state that is fighting a war on behalf
of the rest of the free world. The misunderstanding of
the nature of the conflict with Islam. It's a civilizational war.
It is not resistance, it is not social justice. So

(01:25:23):
Project X is simply an attempt to educate the West
about the nature of the threat Islam poses to the
future of the Wiston civilization and at the same time
to challenge Muslims to desanctify the sacred history, sacred text.
We do that through producing knowledge, analysis, media production, and

(01:25:53):
our end goal is also to influence the lawmaker in
order to protect the Western values, because if Islam is
given the power of legislation, you are jeopardizing the entire system.

(01:26:15):
It's going to collapse. So Project ACCESS still at the beginning.
I have received support from friends who believe in what
Project X is doing. We have board members, we have
a five h one ceed three, but we are still

(01:26:36):
at the beginning. We're trying to raise funds so that
we can produce more content, do more advocacy and lobbying.
And I believe this is going to be big because
the way people are looking at this is shifting. For
a certain period of time they were like, oh, yeah,

(01:26:58):
it's somemophobia. You know, I don't want to get there.
But now people are coming to realize, no, this is
real threat, This is real thing. We need we need
to look. You need to stare in the eyes of
the threat and tackle it. You cannot just keep ignoring it.

(01:27:20):
So people can get to understand what I'm doing by
reading my content on x Dan Burmoui and go to
the to the ob site project dash e x dot org.
They can subscribe to support the work or they can

(01:27:44):
donate two project eggs and hopefully on October seven, my
book is going to be released about Islam is real,
the conflict, the Western civilization, the future of the West,
reformation in Islam, What to do, what not to do?
It will be like it will give people an idea

(01:28:05):
about what we're doing. But I think it's going to
be something big in the future because, as I said,
the threat is growing and people are waking up.

Speaker 1 (01:28:16):
How is your organization right now given this, because you're
still in the building stages, right, How are you reaching
people right now? How is your message getting to the
people at the moment? What avenues are you taking to
get in front of people? And are are you doing
speeches and speaking events? You know?

Speaker 2 (01:28:35):
Are you talking about yeah, yeah, some speeches, interviews, podcasts
like this one. Mainly I write, I try to comment,
I provide. I provide commentary on a world event that's
connected to Islam to the West. I try to provide
commentary whenever there's something misunderstood or people don't connect the dots,

(01:28:59):
and there's reception was phenomenal. In almost six months, we
got more than seventy millions of views for our content
and sixty thousand followers on x alone, and people are

(01:29:22):
resonating with the content and with the fresh perspective and
the unique analysis that project that is providing.

Speaker 1 (01:29:34):
How many of those supporters do you think are people
who are labeled as Muslim themselves?

Speaker 2 (01:29:44):
Supporter?

Speaker 1 (01:29:45):
Yeah, supporting what you're doing, because we spoke earlier, and
you know there's people that don't necessarily align with it,
but they're born into it, and you know they're just
stuck in that cycle. Do you think you're getting any
support from those type of thing?

Speaker 2 (01:29:59):
I believe I at support. I get a lot of
support from x Muslims or I get messages. I actually
have a lot of these private messages from Muslims who
still identify as Muslim, but they're not a Muslims. So
I wouldn't I doubt that I have support from Muslims

(01:30:22):
because as I say the Dame, there's.

Speaker 1 (01:30:25):
Yeah, I guess I meant extra people who were not
wanting to.

Speaker 2 (01:30:28):
Be You can't you can't identify as a Muslim and
tunnel rate or entertain criticism.

Speaker 1 (01:30:36):
I understand, I understand you said that earlier. What I was,
what I was getting at, is a person who we
call a Muslim, right like I'm a Westerner, look at
you and I say you're a Muslim.

Speaker 2 (01:30:45):
It doesn't mean that persons, at least ten percent of
my supporters, my followers are Muslims who will no more
cusa as their religion or what informs their word view.

Speaker 1 (01:31:03):
I mean, that's that's that's good, honestly, for everything is
going to do to educate.

Speaker 2 (01:31:09):
Millions of Muslims are leaving Islam every year, trust me, millions.
I'm not exaggerating. I have been involved.

Speaker 1 (01:31:16):
I've heard that being said. I don't know the real numbers,
but I mean that's that's hand. Yeah, that is that
a result of just people realizing that, you know, they're
being stuck in the past and under an authoritarian way
of life.

Speaker 2 (01:31:32):
The Internet, the Internet has given them.

Speaker 1 (01:31:35):
A chance to well right. It opened them up to
the modern worlds.

Speaker 2 (01:31:38):
To see different narratives. Evangelism, the church assumed a lot
of work and there's some word. I have been involved
in Christian ministry for fifteen years. I have seen thousands
and thousands leaving Islam. But the problem is for creation

(01:32:00):
like birth rates.

Speaker 1 (01:32:02):
I literally just talked about that with my the guest
I just had literally yesterday. We just talked about this.
Why why don't you go ahead and elaborate on that.

Speaker 2 (01:32:15):
In the West, when you plan to have a child,
you plan for their future. You calculate how much is
it going to cost you and your partner, and you
end up with one or two, except if you're wealthy

(01:32:35):
or middle class American conservative who cares about big families.
But in general in Europe, in the West, we have
the numbers are crazy down. In order to sustain the numbers,
the rate of birth or the birth rate, and the

(01:33:00):
West should be two point eight. What we have to
do is two point one or two point two. The
Islamic country, it's different. Some Islamic countries are being affected
by again the globalizations life demands, but they don't think

(01:33:25):
the same way the Westerners do. So they look at
it as a blessing from the Lord, of course, just
like today Christians look at it. But God is going
to provide so and it's a commandment by from the
prophet Muhammad failed the earth because I want to boost

(01:33:48):
in you on the day of in the in the
latter they but in Somalia the birth rate is six
point nine. In other zomic countries, I can I wrote
a piece about this, four point five, five point two,
crazy numbers. But what is scary is when you look

(01:34:12):
at the birth rate in Europe and you compare the
indigenous people and Muslim immigrants, you see the trend and
the pattern and what's going to happen in the next
ten to twenty thirty years from now. It's very predictable,
very easy to predict, very clear. You don't really have

(01:34:35):
to be smart to realize that Europe is lost beyond redemption,
there's no way to get your back. But there's still
hope for then as States of America, and that's why
I'm genuinely concerned about the future of those civilization.

Speaker 1 (01:34:56):
So yeah, it's a great replacement, just I mean just
through pro creation. Really, before we and I want to
talk a little bit more, but I want to get
your thoughts on Palestine, Israel and the history thereof a
lot of people. A lot of people think that Palestine

(01:35:20):
was always a nation, and it was always a region
that referred to many different tribes and people within a
certain area. But there's a lot of revisionist history going
on and people cherry picking, you know, photos and articles
and throughout the timeline to try to justify what Palestine
really is now. October seventh even brought that up quite

(01:35:43):
a bit already multiple times. We didn't really get too
deep into it. So to me, it's important, and I
talked to other people that are in the Intel community,
so I get other information about what's going on and
how this is. You know, what's happening there. But the
reality is the war started with Hamas. It was a
terrorist organization that has control of a people. The problem

(01:36:05):
with the area of Gaza is everyone is captured. They
really can't leave. So can you give a little more
insight from your perspective, someone who really has a lot
more knowledge of the region than I do, as to
what is really happening there and who is to blame
because everyone is anti Semitic, anti Israel right now, Israel

(01:36:25):
starving everybody, killing the children, bombing indiscriminately, and I just
want to get your point of view on the situation.

Speaker 2 (01:36:33):
As a Jordanian an Arab former Muslim, I can tell
you that Israel has been fighting a defensive war since
the creation of the state of Israel. Palestine was manufactured

(01:36:56):
in order to serve the ambitions of Islam, the Muslim Brotherhood.
They wanted to combat the cultural impact of the British
and the French mandate in the region. They didn't like
the modernity that the British broke to the region, so

(01:37:20):
they had to come up with a cause to clock
their ambition without threatening the newly introduced nation state that
has already formed in the region. So they didn't want
to challenge the new states or to be seen as

(01:37:43):
a threat, but at the same time called for the
re establishment of that caliphate. To understand that Arab Israeli conflict,
you need to understand that in nineteen twenty four, for
the first time in Islamic history, found themselves without a caliphate,
without an Islamic Empire, and with the introduction of the

(01:38:08):
nation state concept to the region, the Islamic Empire was fragmented.
And this was a theological rupture. It was not only
a political project. It has consequences, and those consequences is

(01:38:31):
the erasure of the rule of Allah from earth. The
Islamic states represent the rule of full law and if
we don't have Islamic states, we don't have Allah, it's
not there. So what happens that by the end of

(01:38:51):
the nineteenth century, the Ottoman Empire, which is the Islamic Caliphate,
was weakened by Europe by different elements external and journal
and Arabs who also were persecuted by the Ottomans. They
were neglected so that the Ottomans were not representing the

(01:39:13):
true Caliphate, the true Islamic Caliphate. So Sharifa sen Benali
of Mecca, he is the descendant of Prophet Muhammad. He
conspired with other entities in order to relocate the Caliphate,
not to destroy the Calivate. They wanted to relocate it,

(01:39:33):
that's it. They wanted it to remain Islamic. Just changed
the center from Istanbul to Mecca. And based on that
they had the agreement with the British so that the
Arabs would fight alongside the British against the Ottomans, but
in return they would get their state, their caliphate. The

(01:39:56):
British betrayed the Arabs, they fragmented the calend fate, they
introduced the national state concept was that colonial conspiracy. No,
it was the natural trajectory of history, the word was
moving forward from empires in.

Speaker 1 (01:40:19):
Nations, spres and tribes to nations.

Speaker 2 (01:40:22):
So the British were not plotting against Islam or against
the Arabs. They just realized that decentralization of authority and
power is the way to go forward. And that's what
happened in Europe after that Wastphilia Treaty and the creation
of the national states in Europe, every single empire was divided.

(01:40:44):
So from an Islamic perspective, that was not a progress.
That was a war against the faith, against religion. So instantly,
and the Zami movement formed that was called the Moslim

(01:41:08):
Brotherhood in nineteen twenty eight as a response to that
and called to re establish the caliphate. Was everywhere Muslims
couldn't imagine their sales without caliphate. Now, the region that

(01:41:28):
where we have today Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Jordan, in Israel,
it was part of the Islamic Empire for thirteenth centuries.
Never ever, there was during the Islamic history a nation state.
There was no nation of state. It was like all

(01:41:49):
just part of the Caliphate. There was never a state
called Palestine at all. There was never called a state
called Jordan. It just names for geographical spots. Syria, Lebanon.
It's the name of a geographical place. It doesn't represent

(01:42:11):
the state, a nation, ethnicity, nothing. What happened is when
the British introduced the nation state concept, Lebanon formed as
a nation state. Christians in Lebanon worked with the French
with General Guru and they had a state Syrian Syrians.

(01:42:33):
They the French wanted to divide Syria into five different states,
but the different Syrian movements they united and eventually we
ended up with one nation. It's called Syria. The Iraq
the Iraqi people did the same with the British. Jordan

(01:42:55):
it was giving to the son of Sefersen was betrayed
by the British and Jordan became a nation and Israel
where the Jews were living because the Jews in nineteen
or nine, forty years before the creation of the State
of Israel, they built Tel Aviv city, for example, they

(01:43:17):
had institutions, they built schools. They the lie that they
migrated to the land after the Holocaust or during the
Holocaust running away from persecution.

Speaker 1 (01:43:28):
Yeah, they were always part of that area.

Speaker 2 (01:43:30):
They were running away from Pope Ancient tribal people, but
that it doesn't mean anything, because at the end of
the day, Christians in Lebanon ended up with the state.
The Jews in Israel ended up with the states, and
they vote for their independence against the British, the same
way that the Venice vote against the French. So every

(01:43:51):
other country was allowed to have a state except Israel,
except the Jewish people. Anyway, there was no Pedestina at all.
Palestine was the name of that geographical place, and everybody
inside that region was called Palestinian. The Jews were called Palestinian.

(01:44:12):
We have Palestinian posts. It became Jerusalem Post. Later the
Palestinian Airway, Yeah, the Palestinian Flight Company or something like that.
It's a Jewish it was founded by the Jews. Palestinian schools,
they were established by Jews. So when you read on

(01:44:34):
the coin the word Palestine and they use it and say,
you see Palestine was there. The British did that because
it's a it's a colonial name. It was used by
the Romans, or it was the Romans give it that name,
but the British just used that name. But it doesn't

(01:44:55):
it didn't mean anything. There was no Palestinian president. There
was no Palestinian. There, there was no nation state in
the regions. To claim that there was a state is ridiculous.

Speaker 1 (01:45:12):
Why do people not want to accept this history because
I went down this rabbit hole and a lot of
everything you said, I I have researched and read myself
and somebody had to dig for Because again there's a
lot of revision's history out there right now.

Speaker 2 (01:45:25):
And in the case of the Arabs also migrate to
the Jewish areas. Actually there are different reports. Actually there's
a chapter about this conflict in my book where I
explain all of this. Arabs migrate to the Jewish areas
because of prosperity that they brought with them from Europe. Agriculture, development,

(01:45:46):
wages were higher in the Jewish areas. The whole Palestinian
identity was hijacked, manufactured and hijacked by Arabs because there
was no way to claim the land without having some

(01:46:10):
roots and the roots and actually there's a confusion. There
are confused at the times, like we are the Cannonites,
we are the Jews who lived here and converted to Uslam.
They keep trying to manufacture this identity. But anyway, I
want people to go look up the Arab Federation nineteen

(01:46:36):
fifty eight flag. In nineteen fifty eight, Jordan and Iraq
they joined together and a union, and they had a
flag for that union. It is the Palaestinian flag. But
that union didn't last for except a few months, and
then it was dismantled, and the Palestinians picked up the

(01:46:57):
same flag and they use it and they say this
is the standing of life. It's ridiculous anyway. Anyway, Yeah,
there were Arabs living in the land, I'm not denying that,
but that doesn't constitute a state there. It's like a
group of people were living in that land. And that

(01:47:20):
Israeli independence declaration, if you read it today, it still
has these words, we invite Arabs to come and coexist
with us and build this nation together. It's written in
the Declaration of Independence. But the following day after this declaration,

(01:47:41):
five Arab countries attacked Israel nineteen four eight after rejecting
that United Nations proposals.

Speaker 1 (01:47:51):
So what's the what is the what is the why
is there such a hate for the nation of Israel? Okay,
that's one question. The other one is what do you
say to those who blame everything on the Zionists. Okay,
many people believe that everything that's going on right now

(01:48:11):
with Gaza Palestine is because seventy some odd years ago
or whatever that these Jewish people who weren't even in
the region, were in Europe came over to displace people
and kick them out their homes. It's it's a skewed
view of the actual history of what really happened. But
you know, as someone who's not from the area, and

(01:48:32):
when I try to talk about these things, I get
dismissed or people tell me that I don't understand what
I'm talking about. Even though you can research and read
everything you could. You could you could read what led
to it. You could read how the Ottoman Empire and
the people who consider themselves Palestina today actually sided with
the Ottoman Empire to help get rid of the Jewish
people from the land and expel them so that they
can take it over. Where else were they going to go?

(01:48:54):
And I have a thing that I that I always
go to. It's it's like people will then make the argument,
while they were conquered, No, they weren't conquered. You know
why they never accepted defeat. They always had a plan
to come back those who are conquered, the ones who
accepted their defeat, accepted the fact that, oh, well, I
guess we're different people now and now we're going to
have to give in. But the Jewish people never did.

(01:49:16):
So can you expand on that and also explain, you know,
the fallacy and what people try to identify as Zionism
being at the root of this situation in this.

Speaker 2 (01:49:28):
Conflict, Well, the Jews are hated for too many different reasons,
and among these reasons as the fact that the Jews
survived two thousand years of persecution and the resilience and

(01:49:56):
they were able to rebuild after everything. So unfortunately, we
have this tendency to want greatness and glory for only ourselves.
If somebody else is successful, yeah we might be happy

(01:50:19):
for him, but we want it for ourselves. So unfortunately,
people might say they can't say whatever they want, but
this is reality. There's some kind of envy there. Jews
are successful after the Holocaust, their representation and every single

(01:50:44):
industry or progress, they're everywhere. So there's one of the reasons.
Another reason is the radical left is has its ideology
belt on grievance and victimhood and Israel defies that ideology

(01:51:04):
destroys it. Israel is not built on victim pod as
well as built on resilience, and so again they don't
like that. They don't like the fact that Israel has
survived everything and it's disciple, and not only that, it's powerful,
it's becoming one of the most powerful states in the worlds.

(01:51:27):
And you have religious hatred of course in Islam that
was inherited by Muslims, in the Secret Scripture and in
the history itself. So there are too many reasons. I
can like list a lot of them, but none of
them are is legit or right. It's all based in

(01:51:53):
false perceptions and the Zionism. To accuse Zionist movement of
atrocities and to be the reason behind is ridiculous because
the Zionist movement started as a response to persecution.

Speaker 1 (01:52:13):
It was not.

Speaker 2 (01:52:15):
Established as a biblical apocalyptical movement that wanted to bring
the Jews back to Israel. And no, it was a
response to what was happening to the Jews in Eastern
Europe and in Russia. And that's why the pioneers of
the Sience movement didn't care about where this Jewish state

(01:52:39):
would be they just wanted a state because they wanted
self determination. And that's why Ugunda was proposed by Theodore
Hertzel to the Zionist Council at the beginning. So the
Zion's movement is simply defined as the right of the

(01:52:59):
Jews people to self determination because the Jews have tried
everything to assimilate, to coexist two never worked, never worked.
So they realized, Okay, we're done, we need our state,
we need to govern ourselves. That that's it. And that

(01:53:21):
Zionist movement is trying to protect that state of Israel.
And that's that's a pack a path is controlling America.
They don't care about controlling America. And I'm not I'm
not funded by any Zionist movement or a pact and

(01:53:44):
not I actually applied for a job at a pack
and they deny, they rejected me. So, but what they're
clear about their mission. We want to keep the Congress
pro Israel. Why because we want to protect the state
of Israel, which exists in an ocean of enemies. So

(01:54:05):
the Zionist movement is not trying to control the word
and designists are not trying to expand You idiots, The
Israel for the past seventy seven years. Gave up land
that legally acquired after defending their country against enemies. They

(01:54:27):
gave up Sinai, they gave up southern Lebanon, they gave
up the Gaza. That is the most. It's like the
failure of the Zionist project is praise. It is astonishing.
It's like they've failed in their expansionist project. It's like, no,

(01:54:50):
it's rightly the designs movement just wants to predict raduates people.
So we need to understand this alliance between the radical movement,
radical left movement and Islam. I had to say this.
They don't care about Islam. They don't care about Palistine,
they don't care about Muslims, they don't care about children,

(01:55:11):
they don't care about women. They care about any tool
that could be utilized to attack the Western word, the
Western civilization, capitalism, because in their blood.

Speaker 1 (01:55:29):
There is this.

Speaker 2 (01:55:32):
It's a virus that makes them see that the Western system,
the power systems in the West, are responsible for not
creating their utopia. They're the obstacles. They want to create
a utopia and by taking the West they could achieve that.

(01:55:56):
And Islam and Palestine is only utilized to achieve that.
So what we are experiencing today is not only anti Semitism.
If we only reduce it to anti simitism, we missed
the point. It's not. It's anti Western, anti America, ntire freedom, liberty, capitalism,

(01:56:16):
individual rights. So that's how we must see what's going
on today.

Speaker 1 (01:56:23):
Right in the Zionist movement absolutely correctly said it was.
It was both a response to twofold to me, was
a response to their treatment and a persecution in Europe. Also, uh,
it was it was a long standing need to get
back to their land, which they were displaced for. You know,

(01:56:44):
that's why they ended up in Europe in the first place.
So that the narrative that you know, they're wrong for
wanting their land back, that they never actually gave up
or forgot about, to me, has always been ridiculous and correct.

Speaker 2 (01:57:01):
I mean, I want to I want one thing to
your point going back to the land, it was actually
if you look at your circle records prior to nineteen seventeen,
before the Sixpico Agreement which divided the Stomach Empire into

(01:57:24):
nation states, before that was revealed, it was actually leaked
by the Polshevists. They revealed it. It was a secret treaty,
but anyway, before it was revealed, no circle records of
any projection, any resistance from Muslims to the migration of

(01:57:47):
the Jews to the land, except in eighteen eighty one.
The Ottomans resisted that. Not because they didn't want the
Jews to return back to their land, no, no, but
because they were terrified of national movements. There was a
national movement being formed in Greece, and they were afraid

(01:58:09):
of national movements to start erupting everywhere in the Ottoman Empire.
So they didn't want the Jews to return to Palestine
because they didn't want them to form a national movement
and that movement would be contagious to Arabs, to different nations.

(01:58:30):
So that's the reason why the Ottomans stopped the migration
of Jews or resisted it to Panastan. But we don't
have any circle records of Muslims or Arabs.

Speaker 1 (01:58:42):
I tell you why because okay, sorry, go ahead, no,
this is like the.

Speaker 2 (01:58:47):
Point is why there is no resistance because the caliphate
was in the place. When the caliphate is in place,
the assumption is we don't care if the Jews returned
to the land, they will be subjugated. To the Islamic cruel,
they will live and during the Islamic cruel. The problem

(01:59:09):
is when the Jews wanted sovereignty. It's not about their existence.
If Benjamin Natinio today convert to Islam the Palestinian the
whole Pastinian conflict will end to.

Speaker 1 (01:59:24):
Be in a second.

Speaker 2 (01:59:25):
It will be done immediately.

Speaker 1 (01:59:28):
So so to back up really quick, that's a good
point you just made, actually, But to back up really quick.
You know, before the Ottoman Empire came in, the people
of Israel, or the Jewish people were already there, right,
they were driven out by the Ottoman Empire. It was
it was live under our rule or leave that that.
That's what happened before the Ottoman Empire got there. When

(01:59:51):
once they got there they drove them out. It's like,
you live under our rule, you live how you live
under our subjugation, or you're out of here.

Speaker 2 (01:59:58):
Right, the Jews kept a connection to the land. Since
their connection to the land never ceased at a certain point.
They could be like a few hundreds of people at
a certain point would be a thousand, doesn't matter. They
kept the connection.

Speaker 1 (02:00:17):
Yes, yes, agreed.

Speaker 2 (02:00:18):
Wait, it's not about it.

Speaker 1 (02:00:21):
That's the history.

Speaker 2 (02:00:23):
Nine percent of them migrated in the twentieth century. That
doesn't change the fact that they had as much right
as everybody else in the region to form a state
because there were a group of people living on a
geographical geographical spot, and everybody was starting a state, So

(02:00:46):
why not the Jews who were persistent on the fact
that they had to rule themselves. They don't want to
be ruled by someone else. And if they accepted an
Islamic rule, there would be no no problem at all.
There would have been no problem.

Speaker 1 (02:01:02):
It's like, okay, if they converted today, all these wars
would end, and then what it would be It would
it would absolutely be a newfound focus by everyone who
is under the rule of Islam to now focus on
the rest of the world and take the rest of
the world over.

Speaker 2 (02:01:18):
People forget all the arguments they have made since the
beginning about identity and heritage and land. They forget everything.
I A'll go away if be being a not inao tonight,
convert to Islam. I'm not talking about all these regular people. No, No,
just the ruler, the king of the land, who rules
the land. If he converts to Islam, people in Syria, Iraq, Jordan, Egypt,

(02:01:44):
Juria would be offering the Jewish people lands, not the
Jewish people Latino, they would be offering him lands like
come and take more, doesn't They don't care about land.
It's not about land, never been about the land. It's
it's a manufactured lie.

Speaker 1 (02:02:02):
That's interesting and it's it's crazy because if you look
at geographically like Israel, the nation state is such a
small sliver of land compared to the rest of the
Arab world, It really is. Do you believe that what's
going on with the conflict right now?

Speaker 2 (02:02:17):
Though?

Speaker 1 (02:02:17):
Is is Israel really doing everything they're saying to the
people of Palestine or living in what's considered Palestine today?
Are they indiscriminately bombing, are they starving people? Are are
they killing innocence indiscriminately? Or is that a lot of
manufactured lies and propaganda.

Speaker 2 (02:02:36):
So I believe that October seven happened on Iranian orders
to sabotage the Saudi Israeli the stokes. I'm one hundred
percent certain of that, because a Saudi Israeli peace treaty

(02:02:57):
would have meant that the excuse of Iran to be
in the region is Vanish. It's like, if Saudi is
making peace with Israel and the Palestinian conflict is coming
to an end, then why Iran has any reason to

(02:03:22):
stay in Lebanon in Syria and Iraq in Yemen. So
they had to tell that the peace stokes between Israel
and Sagaria. Now their retaliation of Israel. And this is
an important point. The retaliation of Israel is not the
reason why Israel is being accused of genocide and all

(02:03:47):
the accusations that we see to be you know why,
because on October seven people we are protesting on the
streets of London and New York in different cities against Israel.
Even though Israel did not tell and even as I
remember yea, even the Jews, the Jewish people were still
burying their the bodies, looking for the bodies, trying to

(02:04:10):
identify them bodies.

Speaker 1 (02:04:11):
Are right, they were already protesting as Israel. They didn't
even do anything. Yet they didn't even retaliate.

Speaker 2 (02:04:15):
Yeah, it's uh, it's not true that israelis being an
accused of a genocide because of what happened after over
seven No, it's being accused of genocide because it serves
the narrative that different movements and the Holly Alliance in
the West h embraces it's their narrative. Now, when we

(02:04:43):
talk about the retaliation scale, I want you to imagine
if but A said was leading this war in Gaza
on the same scale that we have seen in Syria
between twenty eleven and two thousand twenty four, and you're

(02:05:08):
take into consideration the size of the land, the size
of Syria and the size of Gaza, and the number
of populations, the death rate would be or the number
of casualties would be. I have calculated that. I think
it's one point two millions. So if Israel retaliated or

(02:05:30):
responded on the scale of the Acid, we should have
more than one point two casualties in Gaza. But we
have according to the Ministry of Health hamas Minister of Weld,
you have fifty to sixty thousand. Okay, now in the

(02:05:51):
sixty thousands, how many people in Gaza died naturally since
October seven, two years? How many natural death we have?
I think we have zero. It's all blame. So when
God decides that somebody's life has ended, all let's blame

(02:06:15):
isray for it. It's God, it's nature it's age. If
somebody dying dies in a car accident, it doesn't matter.
It's like the bucket that has all that death, and
it's number one, number two. How many a mass first
died according to the Israeli reports, probably twenty five thou

(02:06:41):
So how many civilians Innoctan civilians really died in guests.
I'm gonna assume it's ten thousands. Okay, it's a huge number, heartbreaking.
But here's the thing. Israel is in a moral dilemma.

(02:07:06):
What Israel is going to do? If Israel let Hamas
stay live, regroup, another October seven is gonna happen. And
people don't understand what October seven represents in that imagination
of the Jewish people.

Speaker 1 (02:07:24):
It is.

Speaker 2 (02:07:29):
It is the Holocaust, a mini Holocaust. It is something
that no non Jews can understand. Are you a Jew?
Have you? Are you? Has your life been shaped by
that event? No? So you don't understand October seven. I

(02:07:51):
don't understand October seven and how the Jews see it.
It was reminder that the possibility of another course is there,
and there's a promise never again. So the scale of
retaliation should be understood through this lens, through the lens

(02:08:16):
of survival of a nation that has been under the
threat of destruction and eradication for a very long time.
So I don't believe that retaliation of Israel Astorks over
seven was disproportionate. I think it was restrained, very very restrained,

(02:08:45):
and very calculated. Israel tried to avoid civilian casualties. I
believe this from the depth of my heart. And Israel
is being held to higher standards than every other country,

(02:09:08):
every other group. It's like, no Israeli soldier is allowed
to joke with another soldier as they are fighting. These
are baryters. If there is a five seconds video of
to Israeli soldiers making a joke or misbehaving, that is

(02:09:32):
condemnation against Israel. It's ridiculous when you have mothers taking
a pride in installing the suicide bomb vest on their children,
and you condemn Israel for an Israeli soldier wearing a

(02:09:53):
bra as they fight in Gaza. It's just kidding, playing
the rounds. That morel the humanization of Israel what it's
so yeah, I again, trust me, Georgie. I'm not saying
any of these things because I'm paid by anyone. I

(02:10:19):
am honest and authentic as a former Muslim, as an
Arab Jordanian who lived among Palestinians for years. This is
how I see this conflict, and this is how I
see Israel. Israel is the only state today in the
Middle East that is trying to protect the Drews. You

(02:10:42):
could say that they have national interests, of course, who doesn't,
But nevertheless, Israel is protecting the drus from a massacre,
from being sold in the slave market of the Islamic state.
While Turkey is watching, Rock is watching, Jordan is watching,
Egypt is watching. You know, I think I remember it,

(02:11:03):
Saudi Arabia, Nobury is coming to the rescue of the drums.
And people have the audacity to criticize Israel and condemn Israel.
This nation that have that has helped the Christians in
Lebanon and Voto alongside them against the terrorists of the PLO.

(02:11:29):
Israel is the only country that is really caring for
the minorities in the Middle East, trying to save them
from Islamic barbarism. Yet the word is condemning Israel. So
you have that.

Speaker 1 (02:11:48):
Oh well, I think with that we should probably wrap
it up. You're talking about a lot, a lot of
different things that are very relevant. Great conversation. Thank you
very much. Before you go, though, please tell everybody more
about where they can find your title of your book,
et cetera. Go ahead and let everybody know about that place.

Speaker 2 (02:12:09):
I haven't decided on a title yet, but it's going
to be about Islam, Israel, and the future of the West.
So it's going to cover a lot of topics. It's
going to talk about that, how Islam is a political ideology.
Why it's not going to be another book about information
that you could find in a thousand other books. No,

(02:12:32):
it's going to be unique analysis, fresh perspective into the
Arab Israeli conflict. Why Islam is incompatible with the West,
Why Islam is the threat is a threat to the West.
Also that today a Christian alliance that should save the West,

(02:12:55):
I would say, And the Abrahamic religion, Why Islam is
not an Abrahamic relgig gen and reformation Islam? Is it possible?
How to respond to this threat? How to understand the
geopolitics of the Middle East in life of all these
So the book is going to be available for pre

(02:13:17):
order on September seventh, and the release date is October seven,
an a truly date for obvious reasons. Of course, you
can find me on www dot project ex dot org.

(02:13:37):
If you go to this website, that's my substat I
encourage you to subscribe to receive my articles to your
inbox and follow me on x. You also find the
link on my subset page. Thank you so much, George.

Speaker 1 (02:13:53):
Oh, thank you for your time. I enjoyed this and
I will stay in touch with you. It's very informative
and I do have a big interest into the history
of the region and what is going on there. So again,
I know I pushed back a little bit. I was
just trying to get the conversation to go in other
directions so we can hear more perspective, which was really

(02:14:14):
great and I appreciate it.

Speaker 2 (02:14:15):
I do.

Speaker 1 (02:14:16):
I appreciate you

All Episodes

Dan Burmawi - The Truth About Islam, Israel, and Palestine

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

Stuff You Should Know

The Joe Rogan Experience

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Dan Burmawi - The Truth About Islam, Israel, and Palestine