Voting ... the Greater of the Two Evils

The Shirk of Voting to Man-Made Law

Indeed all praise is due to Allaah (swt) alone. We praise Him and we seek
His forgiveness. Whomsoever Allaah (swt) guides, none can misguide. And
Whomsoever, Allaah (swt) misguides, none can guide.

I bear witness that there is none worthy of worship except Allaah and I bear
witness that the Messenger Muhammad (saw) was the last and final Messenger
of Allaah (saw).

To Proceed.

Unfortunately for the Muslims in the West (who are living in the heartlands
of the Kufr and the Shirk), election season is upon us, with voting for the
European Parliament, the Mayor of London and the local UK elections taking
place on the 10th of June. I say unfortunately because for the real Muslim
Muwaahid (true monotheists) this is a time of great pain and sadness as they
see how the kuffaar usurp one of the most important Names and Attributes of
Allaah (swt), that of al-Hakam al-Adl (the Divine Just Ruler), and direct it
to themselves. However, the greater pain is caused because the people who
call themselves by Muslims names and attribute themselves to the Muslim
Ummah (falsely), saying that they care for its concerns, participate in
these events, choosing, canvassing and even arguing with their Muslim
brethren about which Kaafir (disbeliever) they should give their vote to so
that they may take office and thereby rule and judge by Kufr (non-Islam).

Initially, those involved in such activities, being Secularists and involved
in all manners of haraam such as selling alcohol, not fulfilling their
duties etc, did not care what Islam said on this matter. Rather they became
MPs and Ministers for their own pleasures and benefits. The likes of other
secularists such as the apostate (murtadd) Lord Ahmed Khanzir, the
ex-Scottish MP Mr Muhammad Sarwar and Baroness Uddin all attained their
positions through canvassing the so-called Muslim vote, claiming that they
would represent the Muslim viewpoint when they gained their seats. However,
their damn lies, false promises and anti-Islamic, pro-Kufr (disbelief)
policies were manifest for all to see in particular when the labour
backbenchers rebelled against Tony Blair in the build up to the war on Iraq
yet not a single voice of dissent came from these so-called
integrated-Muslims within his party! Maybe these Muslim parliamentarians
judged there silence to be of a "lesser evil" than their speaking out
against the terrorist Blair regime.

Regrettably, of recent has surfaced a more manifest attack against the
Islamic 'Aqeedah and the Tawheed (oneness) of Allaah (swt), in that
so-called Muslims and their groupings (like Islamic Awakening (formerly
known as Azzam publications) and Al-Muntada) are now calling other Muslims
to vote for and choose Kufaar (disbelievers) to come into power, citing
examples such as the story of Yusuf (as) and the principles of the "lesser
of two evils" to further their cases whilst trying to cloak their actions of
Shirk by wearing the negligee of Islamic Shariah in an attempt to look and
appear legitimate in the eyes of the Muslims.

This short article hopes to present some of the Islamic evidences dealing
with the issue of voting and whether the Muslims residing in the UK or
elsewhere are allowed to participate in such activities.

The Purpose of Mankind
Before one deals with the secondary matters of mankind's actions, one must
remember the very purpose why mankind has been created. By knowing our
purpose, we will become cognisant of our cause and what our actions should
be. Allaah (swt) has said,

"I have not created the jinns and men but to worship Me." [EMQ 51:56]

Allaah (swt) has also said,

"To every community we have sent an apostle saying: worship Allaah, and Keep
away from all other deities" [An-Nahl:36]

From these two ayah and their tafaseer, it becomes evident that the only
purpose Allaah (swt) created us was for His worship and the pinnacle of
worship is to declare belief in the Tawheed (oneness) of Allaah (swt) in His
Names, Actions and Attributes and disbelief and rejection of all other forms
of gods and laws. Therefore as Muslims we must direct our prayers, our du'a
(supplications), our tawaaf (circuits of the kaa'ba), our siyaam (fasting),
in fact all of our actions to Allaah (swt) alone as that is our purpose of
creation. Ruling and judging also comes under the jurisdiction of actions
which should be performed for Allaah's (swt) sake alone as Allaah (swt) has
said,

"Verily the absolute right of legislating is for none but Allaah (swt)" [EMQ
12:40]

And Allaah (swt) says,

"It is unlawful for the Believers male or female if Allaah and His Messenger
decree a command to have any choice but to abide with it and whosoever
disobeys Allaah or his Messenger went astray in plain misguidance" [EMQ
33:36]

Ruling and Judging by other than Allaah's Law
However, the matter of ruling and judging by other than what Allaah (swt)
has revealed is greater than simply one of disobedience in a single action.
Rather Allaah (swt) has likened it to following another God besides Allaah
(swt) i.e. Shirk (the association of partners with Allaah). Allaah (swt) has
said,

'They imitate the sayings of the disbelievers, Allaah (swt)'s curse be on
them, how they are deluded away from the truth; They took their Rabbis and
their Monks to be their Lords and Legislators besides Allaah (swt) and took
the Messiah, the son of Mary, while they were commanded to worship, obey and
follow none but one God/Allaah; none has the right to be worshipped or
followed and to legislate but he, praise and glory be to him from having the
partners they associate with him.' [EMQ 9:30-31]

Although we know that the Jews and Christians do not prostrate, nor bow down
to their priests or rabbis, they followed them and agreed with them when
matters that Allaah (swt) had declared forbidden, they would declare
allowed; and matters declared allowed, their priests would declare
forbidden. In fact the above ayah was revealed in the following
circumstances. It has been reported by Hudhayfah in Ahmad, Tirmidhi and Ibn
Jareer that the Messenger Muhammad (saw) was reciting the above verse and
Udayy (ra) said to Him (saw),

'Oh Rasool Allaah, they do not worship the Rabbis and the Monks' To which He
(saw) replied: 'The Rabbis and Monks make that which is lawful unlawful and
that which is unlawful lawful and they i.e. the people, follow them, and by
doing so they worship them'

Allaah (swt) and the Prophet (saw) therefore considered that as making them
lords and gods besides Allaah (swt), because the obedience (taa'ah) in
legislation is worship, and must not be for any one except Allaah (swt).

In addition, Allaah (swt) says in another explicit verse that obeying any
man-made system knowingly with consent for its source, different to Allaah
(swt) is an act of apostasy. For Allaah (swt) says,

'Eat not, Oh believers, of that meat on which Allaah (swt)'s name has not
been pronounced at the time of slaughtering the animal, for surely it is
Fisq (a sin and disobedience of Allaah) and certainly the evil do inspire
their friends to dispute with you and if you were to obey them by making a
dead (un-slaughtered) animal lawful and eating it, then you would indeed be
Mushrikoun (polytheists)' [EMQ 6:121]

As for the circumstances of this verse, it has been reported in Al-Haakim
upon the authority of Ibn Abbas (ra) that this verse was addressing Muslims
when a group of Mushriks were debating with them on the issue of
legislating. The Mushriks said: 'You call the sheep upon which the name of
Allaah has not been mentioned; dead, who is the one who killed her?' The
Muslims said, 'Allaah' So they replied, 'So what Allaah has killed or
slaughtered by a golden knife is haraam and what you have slaughtered with a
metal knife is halaal?' To which Allaah (swt) revealed the above ayah.

The above ayah and its circumstances are quite explicit in its distinction
between committing a haraam action and actually following the kuffaar when
they rule against Allaah's (swt) pronouncement on any matter. Committing any
prohibited deed results in Ithm or sin which will be accounted for on the
Day of Judgment. However, when Allaah (swt) has declared a particular matter
haraam or prohibited, if one where to obey and follow those who disregard
the ruling and say that it is allowed, then by doing this action it
constitutes commiting Shirk (associating partners with Allaah) and one
becomes a Mushrik. As Allaah (swt) says, "and if you were to obey them by
making a dead (un-slaughtered) animal lawful and eating it, then you would
indeed be Mushrikoun." Shirk being the gravest of sins since Allaah (swt)
has said about this,

"Allaah (swt) does not forgive Shirk (making partners with Allaah (swt)) but
He (swt) forgives what is less than that to whomever His (swt) wills." [EMQ
4:40]

In another manifest ayah in the Qur'an Allaah (swt) says,

'Or have they partners with Allaah, who have legislated for them what Allaah
(swt) has not decreed and had it not been for a decisive word the matter
would have been judged between them and verily for the Polytheists and
wrongdoers there is a painful torment' [EMQ 42:21]

Moreover we know very well that Allaah (swt) says:

'And He made none share in his decision or rule' [EMQ 18:26]

It is well known in Islam that any law different to the law of Allaah (swt)
is Taaghout and Allaah (swt) rejects us to even refer to Taaghout,

'Have you seen those who claim that they believe in that which has been sent
down to you and that which has been sent down before you and they wish to go
for judgement in their dispute to the Taaghout i.e. false Judges etc. while
they have been ordered to reject them but Shaytaan wishes to lead them far
astray' [EMQ 4:60]

In addition, Allaah (swt) has ordered us to reject the Kufr openly and
declare our enmity towards it (bara'a) as did the Prophet Ibraheem (as) when
he (as) said,

"We are through with you and those you worship other than Allaah. We reject
you. Enmity and hatred have come between you and us for ever, unless you
believe in Allaah the One." [EMQ 60:4].

The Nature of Democracy
It has become well established amongst the people what the nature of
Democracy is and from where it has been derived from. We will touch briefly
on this matter simply for completion. The word democracy is of Greek
construct, emanating from two root words, Demos and cracy. Demos being the
Greek word for "people" and cracy being the word for "ruling" or
"legislation." Consequently, the complete reading means, "the rule of the
people". In fact amongst the callers towards this thought we hear the oft
repeated phrase, "Democracy is the rule of the people, by the people, for
the people." Consequently, the sovereignty in democracy is for the people
and their desires (hawaa).

If the people deem by majority opinion that alcohol should be permitted (in
society) and is actually a good thing then this would be accepted as law
(qanoon). In addition if people deem that prostitution, gambling,
paedophilia, killing Muslims (as in the illegal wars on Afghanistan and
Iraq) , homosexuality etc. is beneficial for the people, then through the
process of majority voting, these and other motions would be accepted and
implemented as law, such that the people can judge and live by them. The
question we need to ask is this allowed in Islam? Allaah (swt) has said
quite clearly,

"Judge between them by what has been revealed by Allaah, and do not follow
their whims and desires, and beware of them lest they lead you away from the
guidance sent down to you by God." [EMQ 5:49]

And we have mentioned numerous clear-cut, non disputable evidences before
citing that the law is only for Allaah (swt) and that Allaah (swt) is the
Supreme Legislator (Al-Musharri). How then can Islam be compatible with
Democracy? How then can one engage in the process of voting or choosing an
MP within such a system? A system that disregards the commandments of Allaah
(swt); a system that performs istihlaal (making halaal what Allaah (swt) has
declared haraam), changing the orders of Allaah (swt); Democracy is a system
(nizaam) that says to Allaah (swt) "Our majority judgement is better and
more wiser than what You (the Creator of man life and the universe) have
sent to us in your Qur'an and in the Sunnah of Your Prophet (saw)."

Allaah (swt) also orders us to refer to the Deen of Islam solely in all our
matters and not the law of the people,

"And if you have a dispute in any matter then refer it to Allaah (swt) and
the Messenger (saw), if you believe in Allaah (swt) and the Last Day. This
is better for you and the best of settlements." [EMQ 4:59]

As for those so-called Muslim MPs residing within the parliament and their
defence that they only wish to present the Islamic opinion on the matter
whilst in the setting of making law and legislating, we say to them, fear
Allaah (swt), and keep your lies and deceptive poison to yourself. In fact
Allaah (swt) has ordered the Muslims to leave any place where people mock
His ayah (verses). He (swt) has said,

"And it has already been revealed to you in the Book (this Qur'an) that when
you hear the Verses of Allaah being denied and mocked at, then sit not with
them, until they engage in a talk other than that; (but if you stayed with
them) certainly in that case you would be like them. Surely, Allaah will
collect the hypocrites and disbelievers all together in Hell." [EMQ 4:140]

Is it not a mockery to the Deen of Islam when people gather together and
comment over the Hukm (ruling) of Allaah (swt)? Is it not a mockery to the
Deen when people decide to make pornography legal? Is it not mockery when
people gather together to decide that the age of consent of Homosexuality
should be decreased from 18 years to 16? Is it not mockery when so-called
Muslims arbitrate to the Kufr man-made law in his own discussion whilst
neglecting the law of Allaah? Indeed this is all mockery to the Deen, to
Allaah and to his Messenger (saws).

"..(but if you stayed with them whilst they mocked Allaah) certainly in that
case you would be like them." [EMQ 4:140]

In fact the Ulema of the Deen of Islam, those committed to Tawheed and
following the manhaj (method) of the As-Salaf us-Saalih have declared
participating in such a process is Shirk Akbar the greatest form of Shirk
that takes one outside the fold of Islam. As for the Ulema of the Sultaan
(state), the Ulema of the Dirham and the Dinaar, they believe that selling
the Deen for a few thousand pounds or for a car or for an "Islamic centre"
is more important than what Allaah (swt) says, then what more can be said,
except fear Allaah (swt) and await your seat in the fire. As for those who
follow these 'everything-goes' fataawa, citing difference of opinion in
their justification we remind you of what Allaah (swt) has said,

"When those who were followed will disclaim those who followed them, and
seeing the torment, all ties between them shall be severed, And the
followers will say, "Could we live but once again we would leave them as
they have abandoned us now" Allaah will show them thus their deeds, and fill
them with remorse, but never shall they find release from the Fire"[EMQ
2:166-167].

The Arguments of the Deviants
Despite the clarity of the message of Islam, all of the evidences listed
above, and the numerous books and leaflets on the matter of democracy, we
still find the Muslims canvassing others to vote, in particular to certain
individuals who apparently seem to have some care for the issues which are
affecting the Muslims. Unfortunately, even some scholars (like Saleh
Al-Munajjid of Saudi Arabia, Haitham Haddad of Al-Muntada and Abu Eesa
Niamatullah of Islamic Awakening) have fallen into this trap, willingly or
unwilling, and are encouraging Muslims to vote for one Najas-Kaafir (dirty
kaafir) or another to come into power, legislate (which is the Right of
Allaah (swt) alone) by Kufr and conduct treaties on the Muslim's behalf!!!
Despite the fact that in all their articles they state that voting is the
exclusive right of Allaah (swt) and that it is haraam to vote for a kaafir
normally, to defend their position they cite the need to be "wise",
understand the deep and complex reality we are living in (fiqh al-waaqiah)
and to try and derive as much benefit (masalih) and prevent as much harm
(diraar) as we can.

I say, Al-Hamdulilah that Allaah (swt) has risen your type of people when
Umar bin al-Khattab (ra) was not around! Do you not know the story of the
Munaafiq who had a dispute with a Jew regarding the harvest of the fruits
from a tree? When he came to Umar bin al-Khattab (ra) for judgment
disregarding the judgement of Allaah (swt) and his messenger, he was killed
without remorse.

"And who ever seeks a way other than submission to God (i.e. Islam), it will
not be accepted from him, and he will be a loser in the world to come." [EMQ
3:85]

The main argument that these ilk-of scholars cite is the "Lesser of two
evils" and the principal that the Shari'ah was revealed, "For Muslims to
derive all benefits and prevent all harms." The fact that these principals
are found quoted by some great Islamic authorities is not the point of
contention. The truth of the matter is that these scholars misuse their
application. For example, they say that in Shari'ah if one were found all
alone in the desert and without food, the Shar'iah permit's the Muslim to
eat from unslaughtered meat to save one's life. Unslaughtered meat being
obviously normally haraam (prohibited). Then they cite the lesser of two
evils, the greater evil being to die, and the lesser one to live albeit by
eating unslaughtered meat. Somehow, from this example they draw the parallel
that we have to vote for a Kaafir in the Kufr system we are residing in
because of 'lesser of two evils'. Firstly, the issue of being stranded in
the desert at risk of losing one's life and eating the haraam meat is one of
life and death and necessity (duroorah). And even in this situation the
Muslim can only eat enough meat such that he is able to recover from his
ills. What is said of the one who then having sufficed his basic organic
needs, he then were to go ahead and feast on the unslaughtered meat (such as
Pork) such that he began to enjoy it and such that he begins to invite other
Muslims to feast with him!!! Obviously it would be said that he is misusing
the lesser of two evils, and by doing so, he is committing an evil! As
regards to applying this principal to voting and committing Shirk there is
no parallel or analogy (qiyas). Who is threatening to kill us if we do not
vote? If we do or do not vote we still will live after the 10th of June 2004
(bi'ithnillaah) or any other date? So where are the two evils such that one
can chose the lesser? There is only the action to vote which is haraam or
evil, and the other choice not to vote, which is obligatory.

At the same time, we can see that the "lesser evil" is based on an arrogant
certainty about the consequences of the choice of the lesser evil winning or
working out as one might have hoped. In fact, those Muslims who voted for
Clinton in the U.S. elections as the lesser evil in 1992, Tony Blair in 1997
and Bush Jnr in 2000 found that all three of them have acted quite
differently once in power than those politically naïve Muslims could have
ever imagined! As well, the "lesser evil" concept (applied wrongly) weakens
the Muslims belief in Islam as a complete and comprehensive Deen with
solutions to all of mankind's problems (wherever we are on this earth). If
the Muslims consistently feel obliged to vote for candidates in whom they do
not believe and this principle is continually used to justify further
integration into Kufr society, many Muslims will end up feeling that Islam
does not have all the solutions to man's problems- if every time Muslims
adopt the Kufr solution! Some may even reject the Deen completely, having
integrated into Kufr completely. Another common feature of those so-called
Muslims who do opt for the 'lesser evil' and vote in Kufr elections is that
often this 'lesser evil' is not regarded as an evil but as a correct
alternative. By these practices being present in the Kufr societies in the
West, it has to some Muslims gained a sense of legitimacy - perhaps there
may even be Muslims who think of their choice as meritorious. A sign of this
acceptance is that these evils are mentioned openly and discussed without
any hesitancy in some quarters. If a person is facing any criminal charge,
for example theft or fraud, he would not flaunt it in public. However we
find these evils mentioned so openly and discussed without any hesitancy
amongst those so-called Muslims in charge of the Kufr political parties and
Masjid commitees. We find these 'lesser evils' mentioned so openly, one
wonders if it is even regarded as wrong. The lesser evils of today were the
major evils of yesterday and so on and so forth until we eventually lose all
of our Islamic thoughts concepts and ideas and become a true "British"
Mozlem. One shudders when one thinks what the lesser evils of tomorrow would
be. As Muslims, we are so fortunate that our Sharî'ah has been perfected and
protected. Let us not legitimise our evils as the West has done. If we are
unable to uphold the standard that Islam set, we should regretfully
acknowledge our shortcomings as such and not regard our wrongs as acceptable
or even waajib (obligatory) as some deviated scholars have claimed.

Secondly, with regards to the issue of Shari'ah being for the benefit of
Muslims, do they forget that the Shar'iah is what has been revealed to the
Prophet (saw) via the Qur'an or his acitons, sayings and consent i.e. the
Sunnah and not by what their own mind, 'Aqel or Hawaa says. Have they not
heard the ayah in the Qur'an when Allaah (swt) says,

"Maybe you dislike something and this is actually of benefit for you. And
maybe you would like something and it is actually an evil for you. Allah
(swt) alone knows and you do not know (however much 'Aql or wisdom you may
profess to have)" [EMQ 2:216]

And Allaah (swt) says about those who take their own opinions, judgement and
desires above the commandment of Allaah (swt),

"Do you not see those who take their own Hawaa (desires) as gods?" [EMQ
45:23]

There is no place in the Shar'iah of Islam for one to decide a matter once
Allaah (swt) has decreed it.

"It is not for any believer, man or woman, when Allaah and His Messenger
have decreed a matter, to have any choice in the affair. Whosoever disobeys
Allaah and His Messenger has gone astray into manifest error." [EMQ 33:36]

In fact the argument of benefits and interest has been refuted by Allah
(swt) Himself when He said,

"Say: if your fathers, your sons, your brothers, your wives, your tribes,
your wealth that you have gained, your business that you fear decline, your
homes where you live - are dearer to you than Allah (swt) and the Messenger
and Jihad in the way of Allah, wait till the torment of Allah reaches you"
[EMQ 9:24]

In the above ayah, Allah (swt) is enumerating all things that are of benefit
to a Muslim, from their own lives, wealth to their business and their
families. Allah (swt) has said that if these are dearer to us that Allah,
His Messenger and Jihad in His way, then wait till Allah's decree in the way
of punishment is upon us. It is well known that the Prophet (saw) has said
in an explicit hadith,

"What I have forbidden to you, avoid; what I have ordered you [to do], do as
much of it as you can." [Bukhari, Muslim]

Allah (swt) did not allow the excuse of all these much greater "tangible
benefits" and interests to be used to neglect the obligatory deeds like
jihad and we know that we have been ordered in these duties to do as much as
we can. However, with regards to the Haraam deeds, we have been ordered to
leave it completely. How then can one use the arguments of benefits?

With regards to the benefits they believe they will bring and the harms they
may prevent they list them as follows; to prevent the BNP from coming into
power, to prevent the aggressive war policies which kill innocent Muslims
around the world, to promote those Kuffar who believe in truth who will give
a good image for Islam e.g. the Respect Party of the Baa'thist and long-time
Saddam Hussein admirer George Galloway etc. These are the classic arguments
of those who have already decided to participate in a non Islamic system. In
order to justify their actions, they will cite benefit for Islam and Muslims
as a legitimate evidence to partake in a non-Islamic system. If we were to
examine the general (aam) and detailed (khaas) evidences we find that
benefit is defined as that thing or action for which detailed evidences
exist that permit us to benefit from it. Hence benefit (maslaha) is defined
by Islam, not by our own weak and limited mind.

Firstly, when was the Kufr of George Galloway and his "Respect Party"
(respect the homosexual, respect the lesbian, respect the pornographer,
respect the sale of alcohol, respect the gambling, respect the freemixing
etc.) worse or even better than the Kufr of the BNP? Did Allah (swt) not
teach us about the types of people this Kuffar (including Jews and
Christians), the Munafiq and the Muslim / Mu'min to which one of these
belongs George Galloway? The answer, as George affirmed himself on TalkSport
is that he is a kaafir and that he is not going to become Muslim. Allah
(swt) warns the Muslims from taking these people are awliyaa (friends,
protectors, supporters, people in charge over you),

"O you who believe! do not take for intimate friends from among others than
your own people; they do not fall short of inflicting loss upon you; they
love what distresses you; vehement hatred has already appeared from out of
their mouths, and what their breasts conceal is greater still; indeed, We
have made the communications clear to you, if you will understand. Lo! you
are they who will love them while they do not love you, and you believe in
the Book (in) the whole of it; and when they meet you they say: We believe,
and when they are alone, they bite the ends of their fingers in rage against
you. Say: Die in your rage; surely Allah knows what is in the breasts." [EMQ
3:118-119]

Allah (swt) also says,

"O you who believe! do not take for guardians those who take your religion
for a mockery and a joke, from among those who were given the Book before
you and the unbelievers; and be careful of (your duty to) Allah if you are
believers." [EMQ 5:57]

And in another place in the Qur'an,

"You will see many of them befriending those who disbelieve; certainly evil
is that which their souls have sent before for them, that Allah became
displeased with them and in chastisement shall they abide. And had they
believed in Allah and the prophet and what was revealed to him, they would
not have taken them for friends but! most of them are transgressors." [EMQ
5:80-81]

Allah (swt) has clearly and explicitly forbidden the Muslim from ever
allying to the Kuffar, seeking their help or allowing them in authority over
us. So how then can we go out and canvass for them? Will George Galloway
rule by the Shari'ah or he will rule by his own desires and by Kufr? The
answer is that he will rule by kufr. How then can one justify choosing him
to come into power.

Regarding the BNP, apparently these scholars using their ration come to the
conclusion that if the Muslims do not vote in these European elections, then
the BNP will come into power! Unfortunately for them, the history of the
Muslims testifies otherwise - the Muslims have been in the UK for the past
forty to fifty years; never have they had the need, nor did the scholars say
that we have to vote up until now. How come the BNP have stayed out? Why
suddenly this year the BNP may gain support and have a landslide victory and
become the ruling party?! Who are the famous political commentators that
profess this view anyway? Or is this view simply professed by scholars, who
when they were taught aaspects of Shari'ah in Saudi Arabia or Syria, were
taught along with that, "There is no politics in Islam"; consequently, these
scholars preached this to the Muslims. However, when their own personal
interests were as stake, suddently there is politics in Islam, but not of
the type that Muhammad (saw) preached, rather the type that the Kuffar
(disbelievers) preach - that of freedom, democracy, secularism etc.

The fact of the matter is, the more the British public see the Muslims
occupying positions such as in parliament, on television and this concept of
multi-culturalism takes hold, the more the support for the BNP will rise.
The more visible and part of the fabric so-called muslims become, the more
the resentment will grow from the indigenous population. So where now is the
argument of those claiming to propagate the concept of preventing harm?
Besides, the BNP up until now have had no political might nor power and have
not really caused any harm upon the Muslims; whereas the Conservatives and
the Labour party have been in power during the bombing of Muslims in Iraq -
the first and second Gulf Wars and during the time of the biting sanctions
when millions of Muslims in Iraq were killed, and currently when the launch
of the war against Islam announced its first victims with relation to the
thousands killed in Afghanistan. Is this not harm to the Muslims? Is it
really worth selling your deen and your brothers abroad so that you can
safeguard your measly salaries, and plots of land where you build your
places of worship?

With regards to preventing the aggressive foreign policy; well this is a
simple fantasy in those people's minds and shows how bereft their
understanding is in relation to the British and European parliamentary
sytems. What can Mr Galloway do in the mesely European Union? Europe had no
role to play vis a vis the war in Iraq and its opinion has been vetoed, in
fact disregarded many a time by both Mr Blair and Mr Bush. So what benefit
can Mr Galloway bring the Muslims? In fact he is only going to bring benefit
to himself by furthering his fame and fortune on the back of Muslims
apostacises. As Allah (swt) has warned,

"They desire that you should disbelieve as they have disbelieved, so that
you might be (all) alike; therefore take not from among them friends..."
[EMQ 4:89]

We find that these shallow and false political arguments and deceptive
analyses are more often than not put forward as a primary source of evidence
by the likes of MPAC and the MCB's of this world (both of which are Kufr
political parties) who with the open support of the British government
(morally and financially) are trying their level best to deceive the Muslim
Ummah into voting by provoking their survival instinct and their need for
security. This shameless call for a perceived interest or some hidden
political agenda by committing the Muslim vote is prohibited in Islam
categorically for Allaah (swt) says:

"Say: Allaah never commands what is shameful: do you say of Allaah what you
know not" [EMQ 7:28]

A Final word!

Therefore, voting for any political party that is going to work within a
democratic framework and voting for or against legislation in a parliament
regardless of the apparent benefits is at best Haraam, and at worst an act
of Kufr and Shirk, taking one outside the fold of Islam. Voting for a
secular party in the Western systems, regardless of a noble goal and the
correctness of the intention, is something that contradicts the foundations
of what it means to be a Muslim and without a shadow of a doubt is something
that is prohibited.

Oh Muslim! Oh you to whom Allaah (swt) has given might with Islam!
The call of integration (e.g. voting) is a call for further subjugation of
the will of the Muslims. It is a concerted effort by the enemies of Allaah
(swt) to drive the Muslims to integrate into British society and to instil
into Muslims the values of Secularism, as manifested by the Labour and
Conservative parties as well as the Respect party, The Green party amongst
others. This drive towards secularising the Muslims has already led to many
Muslims suffering the consequences of Freedom. Don't you look and see the
dire consequences in which Muslims have adopted the lifestyles and values
they have found around them? Muslim youth (our future) have become submerged
into the Kufr culture around them. Rampant fornication, adultery and even
homosexuality have found their way into the Muslim community. Muslim elders
have found themselves abandoned and neglected, whereas it was previously
thought that the 'old folks home' was an abode for the Kuffaar. New figures
from the home office indicate otherwise. Do we as an Ummah want to continue
to go down this road?

As Muslims, we must strengthen our own defences against this Kufr onslaught
by immersing ourselves in the vast Islamic culture, actively seeking out the
Haqq (the truth), and not being satisfied to just imitate our so-called
community leaders when they openly go against that which is known from Islam
by necessity. At the same time, we need to stand together with the followers
of Ahl Al Sunnah Wa'L Jamaah, wherever they are, in order to act as a
pressure group, in the absence of the Islamic Khilafah State. We must enjoin
the good and forbid the evil in society, stand up for Islam and Muslims,
wherever they are, and strengthen our links with our Muslim brothers
overseas, to maintain the "one-nation" concept. May Allah make this easy for
us.

Ameen
Abu Osama & Dr Abu Ziyaad