The murderous act of US Army Major Nidal Hasan has put the American Muslim community in the spotlight again, for all the wrong reasons. This single insane act will have repercussions far beyond US borders, Muslims in the West  will now be viewed with more suspicion and a potential fifth column.

As we saw in the aftermath of 9/11, the initial horror turns to anger and then looking for people to blame. The latest bogey man of the West, the scholar of hate, happens to be Imam Anwar al-Awlaki. He fits the caricature perfectly, a dark-skinned, turbaned and long bearded Arab. Just when messages from Usama bin Ladin are becoming infrequent and obscure, up pops Anwar al-Awlaki (coincidentally also an ethnic Yemeni) to fill this void, rather convenient one might suspect?

Anwar al-Awlaki’s statement (see end) in praise of Major Nidal Hasan, calling him a ‘hero’, and calling Muslims who condemned the action as ‘traitors’ – is as fanatical as it is puzzling. I share the concern of other Muslim bloggers, and readily confess that I have some doubts whether these are actually the statements of the the same Anwar al-Awlaki that many Muslims admired.

Is this the same Anwar al-Awlaki who condemned 9/11, gave an interview only weeks after it, which epitomised mainstream Muslim opinion (especially on the understanding of Jihad)? Is this the same Anwar al-Awlaki who on discovering that Dr Tariq Ramadan was visiting his mosque, invited him to lead the prayer? This new Anwar al-Awlaki is unrecognisable to every British Muslim organisation which invited him to give lectures in the past.

The usual suspects, the right-wing think tanks and press, are now having a field day trying to ‘expose‘ the individuals and organisations that have spoken positively about Al-Awlaki in the past or have given him a platform. This sordid McCarthyite witch-hunt of proving guilt by past association is nothing but double standards.

Do we hold the Conservative Party responsible for the later xenophobic views of Enoch Powell? Or do we [correctly] say that, the Enoch Powell the Conservatives knew was a Cabinet Minister who once recruited health and transport workers from the Caribbean? Should we hold the people who voted for Tony Blair in 1997 responsible for his later lies to support his war-mongering? Who could have imagined that the decent guy that was once Tony Blair, hero of the Kosovars, would turn into a war criminal – responsible for the death of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan?

So why do we judge Muslims and their organisations so harshly, when it comes to past links to people who later turn out to be a nightmare? By those standards, shouldn’t Douglas Murray be labelled a proponent of totalitarianismfor associating with the likes Ed Husain? Murray and his Centre for Social Cohesion (CSC) should think twice before sullying the good names of people and organisations for past associations with individuals, whose future actions they cannot possibly be responsible for.

I can perhaps only comment on Islamic Forum of Europe (IFE) and Azad Ali (a blogger here), leaders of IFE and Azad Ali are both shocked and horrified that Anwar al-Awlaki could make such comments. I’m pretty certain other organisations that previously hosted him, would be equally petrified. Azad Ali released this statement in response to The Times newspaper querying his previous blog statements:

“My article talking about Mr Awlaki was specifically referring to his lectures on Companions of the Prophet and other similar lectures. I am not aware of his comments regarding Major Nidal Hasan other than the text you sent below. If these comments are indeed Mr Awlaki’s then I reject them and disassociate myself from them completely.”

The sentiments expressed in Al-Awlaki’s statement are the bread and butter of the Al-Qa’eda narrative, and totally rejected by mainstream Muslims and ‘Islamic Movement’ organisations. This is not only true of Muslim organisations in the West, but also the likes of Muslim Brotherhood (Egypt) and Hamas, who fought and arrested Al-Qa’eda sympathisers in Gaza. The statement could just as easily have been made by Usama bin Ladin or another Al-Qa’eda fanatic.

The most puzzling thing is, Anwar al-Awlaki’s statement is in total contradiction to his known opinions from previous interviews and lectures.

This was the same man who said of 9/11: “There is no way that the people who did this could be Muslim, and if they claim to be Muslim, then they have perverted their religion.”

And of scholars: “I’ll tell you the way that [the perpetrators] justify them. That does not mean that scholars of the Muslim world approve…Now the reason why this is not accepted at all by Muslim scholars, is, first of all, that civilian people most of the time have nothing to do with what their governments are doing. Second, many of the scholars don’t really see America as a direct enemy…”

On Al-Qa’eda and Usama bin Laden: “My worry is that because of this conflict, the views of Osama bin Laden will become appealing to some of the population of the Muslim world…So Osama bin Laden, who was considered to be an extremist, radical in his views, could end up becoming mainstream. That’s a very frightening thing…”

This was the Anwar al-Awlaki that many English speaking Muslims admired and invited to give lectures - a charismatic, funny, articulate, knowledgeable and yes, was a balanced scholar: “People will find all different ways to justify their political views based on religion. In terms of interpreting Islamic law, there is a conservative view and a liberal view, and both are accepted to a certain extent. Obviously there are extremes that are outside of the circle.”

However, according to his own definition, he has now clearly stepped outside the circle, and to see him now apparently espousing the same Al-Qa’eda narrative that he previously comprehensively condemned is profoundly disturbing. And it doesn’t help to have the likes of Douglas Murray’s CSC conducting a witch-hunt in the middle of this difficult period.

No doubt greater personal and emotional turmoil has engulfed the friends and family of Major Nidal Hasan. They too are surely asking how the man they knew, could possibly be responsible for the heinous crime? There are many theories ranging from mental instability, second-hand trauma, radicalised by the wars, and others - in all probability the truth may be somewhere in between. But the reality is we don’t actually know (yet). Whatever the reason, the actions are wrong and unjustifiable, after investigation he should either be treated in a mental hospital or tried as a criminal.

Perhaps the reasons for Major Hasan’s action is unclear, but the apparent transformation of Anwar al-Awlaki is a well trodden path.

People with alleged radical views are sent to prison, tortured and then we express shock that the individual is often mentally unstable and detests the people and regimes responsible for it. What did we expect? That they would be grateful for the experience? Perhaps this is the reason why the US has barred Al-Awlaki from entry? And the same reason why it refuses to allow the innocent Uighur Muslims (Guantanamo bay prisoners) sanctuary on US soil – people who have been locked up for years and tortured mentally and physically are unlikely to be the best of guests!

Having said that, even if Al-Awlaki feels he has nothing to lose, “I am in blood stepped in so far that should I wade no more, Returning were as tedious as go o’er”(Macbeth, Shakespeare) - prison does not maketh the man! What was wrong Islamicly before prison, doesn’t suddenly become right after.

Of course, the reverse can also happen. An Egyptian prison has apparently caused Maajid Nawaz (Quilliam Foundation) to reject some fundamentals of the Islamic faith. All is not lost however, there are also positive examples of people who have remained true to their original purpose despite great injustice, prison and torture. Another Anwar (Ibrahim of Malaysia), remained a man committed to the same cause of justice. When Dr Ibrahim visited London, he quoted Shakespeare when referring to his imprisonment: “What’s done cannot be undone”, (Macbeth).

Muslims in the West, are hoping that somehow the statement purported to be by Anwar al-Awlaki isn’t really him at all. It isn’t totally unknown for agents provocateurs to cause mischief, hoping to discredit causes (in Algeria, the GIA was heavily infiltrated by the security services to discredit ‘Islamists’). However, if it does turn out to be really him, ie he releases a video making similar comments - the comprehensive response and refutation by Omar Muzaffar of Al-Awlaki’s simplistic arguments should suffice.

As usual, ordinary Muslims who previously bought his scholarly lecture series on the Companions of the Prophet, Life of the Caliph Umar and other DVDs, etc, will now be (wrongly) seen as extreme. Guilt by association lives on, that is the sad fact.

———————————–

As Anwar al-Awlaki’s blog is now down, the full text below is for reference only:

“Nidal Hassan is a hero. He is a man of conscience who could not bear living the contradiction of being a Muslim and serving in an army that is fighting against his own people. This is a contradiction that many Muslims brush aside and just pretend that it doesn’t exist. Any decent Muslim cannot live, understanding properly his duties towards his Creator and his fellow Muslims, and yet serve as a US soldier. The US is leading the war against terrorism which in reality is a war against Islam. Its army is directly invading two Muslim countries and indirectly occupying the rest through its stooges.

“Nidal opened fire on soldiers who were on their way to be deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan. How can there be any dispute about the virtue of what he has done? In fact the only way a Muslim could Islamically justify serving as a soldier in the US army is if his intention is to follow the footsteps of men like Nidal.

“The heroic act of brother Nidal also shows the dilemma of the Muslim American community. Increasingly they are being cornered into taking stances that would either make them betray Islam or betray their nation. Many amongst them are choosing the former. The Muslim organizations in America came out in a pitiful chorus condemning Nidal’s operation.

“The fact that fighting against the US army is an Islamic duty today cannot be disputed. No scholar with a grain of Islamic knowledge can defy the clear cut proofs that Muslims today have the right -rather the duty- to fight against American tyranny. Nidal has killed soldiers who were about to be deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan in order to kill Muslims. The American Muslims who condemned his actions have committed treason against the Muslim Ummah and have fallen into hypocrisy.

“Allah(swt) says: Give tidings to the hypocrites that there is for them a painful punishment – Those who take disbelievers as allies instead of the believers. Do they seek with them honor [through power]? But indeed, honor belongs to Allah entirely. (al-Nisa 136-137)

“The inconsistency of being a Muslim today and living in America and the West in general reveals the wisdom behind the opinions that call for migration from the West. It is becoming more and more difficult to hold on to Islam in an environment that is becoming more hostile towards Muslims.

“May Allah grant our brother Nidal patience, perseverance and steadfastness and we ask Allah to accept from him his great heroic act. Ameen”