 Respective viewers around the world, thank you for joining us for another episode of current events. As always, I'm your host Ali Jassim. The world has been shocked by the horrific attacks unleashed in Paris by supporters of Daesh or ISIS. The attacks, which claimed the lives of at least 130 civilians, were carried out on a Friday night in order to maximize casualties. All available information at this point shows that the attackers were EU nationals. This incredible loss of life has whipped up a firestorm of questions and controversies around the globe, and mainly in the EU and North America. Among them, we have seen some countries moving to further impede the flow of refugees from Syria and Iraq, a series of violent backlashes against innocent Muslims and an intense debate concerning what form the international response to the threat of ISIS will take. In the US, those individuals vying for the Republican presidential candidacy wasted no time in appealing to the lowest instincts of nationalism, racism, and xenophobia, calling for the US to haul acceptance of Syrian refugees. One of the leading candidates has gone so far as to call for the closure of mosques and for a national system to be established to track and identify all American Muslims. Some other candidates appear to be following his lead, if only in Muslim bashing in less and hateful policy proposals. Meanwhile, in the US and around the world, there has been a spike in anti-Muslim hate crimes, particularly targeting Islamic centers and most disturbingly women. In Canada, a Muslim woman was attacked, beaten, and robbed outside her children's elementary school. And in another area of the country, a mosque was burned. Gunfire has been reported at a number of Islamic centers in the US as well as bomb threats. A Scottish Muslim couple was savagely attacked by a mob of 15 attackers when closing the restaurant at night. A Muslim woman of France was attacked with a box cutter and a pregnant Muslim woman with a child and a stroller was assaulted in California. These are just a handful of a much larger number of similar incidences. Still another critical question, however, is this. The attacks in Paris came immediately upon the heels of a similar massacre of civilians by ISIS in Lebanon. Yet when Lebanon was attacked, there was no outpouring of sympathy from across the globe. No one changing their avatars on social media, no outrage, and no world leaders discussing how to step up the fight against ISIS. Indeed, on the same day and on the following day, ISIS killed scores of civilians in Baghdad with car and suicide bombers. Actually, attacks of this nature by Wahhabi terrorists have been near weekly occurrence for years in Iraq, having been flowing since 2003. This is in addition to more than half a million civilian Iraqis that died as a result of foreign invasion of their country. Also, just days before the Paris attack, a number of Shia civilians were brutally murdered by ISIS in Afghanistan, including a nine-year-old girl who was beheaded because of her religion. It was only when a major European city was attacked that much of the world suddenly seemed to care. Some have excused this kind of skewed coverage by the media and others as a result of the fact that attacks like this are not normal in Paris. The reality, however, is that they are not normal in Lebanon either. Thus, we find that one of the most disturbing questions to come from this tragedy is, do some innocent lives matter more than others? Has the Orientalist's world view of the Middle Easterner as the other truly bent the public consciousness and conscious for that matter such that it can no longer recognize the slaughter of civilians in the region as particularly important or worthy of intervention? Here to discuss this and other issues is my guest, Sheikh Fayyad Jaafar. I hope you are doing well. Welcome to the show. Sheikh, what do you make of both the media coverage and the public response to the terror attacks in Paris? Do some lives appear to matter more than others? Which ones and why? Also, what message does this uneven response send to those suffering from daily atrocities by ISIS and similar organizations? I think that without a doubt, unfortunately, the media narrative suggests that some lives matter more than others. That's not to say that any sort of tragedy taking place anywhere in the world, be it in Iraq, or be it in Lebanon, or be it in Afghanistan, or be it to a Muslim, or be it to a Shia, is more important, for instance, than a death in any sort of European nation, for instance. We, and against injustice and oppression, anywhere in the world, wherever it may be. And if everyone took the same stand, sincerely took that same stand, then we would see a lot of equality taking place, especially in terms of media coverage. As you mentioned in the introductions, the tragedy that took place in Paris caught a great deal of media coverage, and it should have. There's absolutely no doubt the fact that a city which is not prone to violence, one of the larger cities in the world, a tourist destination, and so on and so forth, and a tragedy taking place like that, it deserves media coverage. But it deserves equal media coverage, and that would happen in Baghdad, and that would happen in Lebanon in regards to what happened in Afghanistan on a daily basis, or in Pakistan, or so on and so forth. And without a doubt, I think that the most tragic part, as you referred to also in your discussions, is the fact that those who are constantly victim to the onslaught in these developing nations, in these developing countries, in these war-torn regions, they feel that the world doesn't care about them. And that is partially true, unfortunately. The world is giving a perception that they are worth less than European blood, for instance, or so on and so forth. I recall, for instance, a narration from Amir al-Mu'mineen, or a story that says that one day when Amir al-Mu'mineen Mamadi al-Islam was the leader of the Islamic world in Kufa, the news had come to him that a anklet bracelet, a Christian woman in Kufa, when the news came to Amal al-Islam, he told those around them, he said that I would not be surprised if a believer died upon hearing this news. The tragedies in his mind and in his heart of a bracelet being stolen, I mean, not a Muslim woman was so tragic that he would understand if someone died from it. We need to follow with the head and bake, we need to uphold these values, and in fact the world, the world entirely has to uphold these values. When the smallest tragedy takes place, we need to be in uproar, we need to be vocal about it, and we as Muslims, and we as followers of the head and bake, every time we see any sort of oppression, we should be there to condemn it, no doubt about it. We should be there to raise the point of it. Well, like we said that, I mean, unfortunately, the now and now he has suggested that some deaths are more worthy than others, and this is something that extremely, extremely tragic. Yeah, although the attackers have been characterized as religious extremists, emerging information portrays them as individuals who are layabouts, heavily into drugs or even some owned bars. The family of one of the attackers even described the news of his death as a relief. What does this say about the perpetrators of this terrible crime as well as their actual motivations? Remember that this is the hardest thing to explain, because oftentimes what we understand from these terrorist organizations is that they have a very misinterpreted version of the religion itself, or this is often what we hear. But in reality, we see that their practices are completely un-Islamic, irreligious, and ungodly, across all religious bounds. And then when you go and you hear the news that their alcoholics, and their delusion drugs, and their family are happy that they're no longer alive because of the burden that they placed on them, this raises a lot of questions. And it's very, very confusing for anyone on the outside to understand exactly what is going on. Some suggest that perhaps that these extremist terrorist groups are able to capture and marginalize youths very quickly. And certainly that's a possibility when whenever someone is confused in regards to his identity, in regards to his ideology, and has gone so far away from their cultural, from their religion, or from morality, that perhaps would be the easiest time to pick them up and brainwash them to believe in something else. And we find this is very common, for instance, amongst all cults. The Nazis in Germany did it, you know, after World War I. After World War I, for instance, we know that Germany and the nation, these people were extremely marginalized. So the Nazis, they capitalized on that when they rose to power. They started going and telling the whole entire nation, and the youth of the nation, look, no one cares about us. We are a big abuse. And in order to get them to respond, you know, how often when they're backs against the wall, you turn out to be very, very aggressive. So perhaps a very similar case over here, where these, you know, young men and women were, you know, confused about their identity. They had lost all morality. And perhaps these terrorist groups and institutions, they found this as a, you know, right thinking for them. They can go and approach these people and begin their methods of brainwashing and bringing them towards, you know, this type of ideology. We apologize to the dear viewers for the low quality of the video due to the poor internet connection. Now going back to our topic, what about the fact that the attackers have to date all been identified as EU nationals? I think that this part, this question is extremely worrying. And why is that? That is because the biggest takeaway from the fact that they're all EU nationals is that this ideology of extreme, this ideology of immorality and the violence and the name of God and the name of the root of Islam and the name of the Quran and the name of the Prophet, sallallahu alayhi wa alayhi wa sallam, is prominent everywhere across the world. I'm sitting over here, you know, expecting you from, in New York, I can guarantee you that this ideology is present. And it is present in Paris, as it is present in London, as it is publicly present in Toronto, everywhere in the world, in major cities, in communities in the last last, this ideology is prominent everywhere. Now, this is the worry that today we have this great tragedy that took place for a couple of weeks, but we have this great tragedy that took place in Paris, all of them being EU nationals, that they were receiving this sort of, you know, advice and they're receiving this sort of encouragement from, you know, hate preachers and from violent religious, you know, in the name of religion leaders, probably in their minds, in their universities, preaching them this nonsense. And what is worrisome is that tomorrow this could happen in any part of the world, you know. It could happen right here in New York. It could happen in Toronto. It could happen anywhere. And it's something extremely worrisome. And I think that, you know, the Western communities understand that us Muslims, especially us followers that have made the shifts, we're more worried than they are, perhaps, because the first people that they're going to attack perhaps lost to us, because we often stand against their ideology and their ideologies, we believe that, you know, we deserve to be killed, you know, as, so the biggest takeaway from the fact that every one of these criminals or EU nationalities is the fact that this ideology is present and it has to be something that individually, collectively, communally, you know, on a government basis, it has to be eradicated from its very roots. And we know that that very root comes from the financements and the educational institutions that established, you know, for instance in Saudi Arabia. And there has to be a greater emphasis on Western nations, common Western nations, like Great Britain, like the United States, to cut off their ties with the nation like that. Because what we'll be seeing is not only, you know, an importing of wealth in regards to the Islamic Center and university organizations, but more than that these hate preachers who are coming, these leaders, and thus the ideology filters into mass, into families, you know, into the workplace, into community, and it becomes something extremely difficult to eradicate once it's so prominent. Thus the root has to be attacked, and that has to be, you know, by means of countering this propaganda that is coming from Saudi Arabia. Sheikh Ja'far, we have seen a lot of Muslims fall into the condemnation game, in other words, saying, I am a Muslim and I condemn this. Although this is somewhat understandable, is it not also potentially counterproductive? Does it give credence to the idea of Muslim collective guilt, while at the same time, serious Islamophobes will just respond by saying, if you condemn Paris, then it's just because you're not a real Muslim? In regards to condemnation, I think it's a bit of a tricky conendrum that Muslims in the West have been put in these days. If we condemn, oftentimes we become guilty by association. If I say, for instance, that I condemn the attacks on Paris, or I condemn the attacks in Lebanon, or I condemn attack X or Y, or immediately there'll be a group of people will come forth and state you're guilty because, I'm sorry, you're condemning because you're guilty by association with these individuals. And if I don't condemn, another group will come forth and state, look, you're not condemning, that means that you're condoning. And that puts us in a big, big dilemma in this part of the world. We have to learn how to be politically correct without any doubt. So I think that one of the better methods perhaps would be, for instance, to come forth and to state as individuals and speaking with our colleagues at work, when we're at college and we're in universities, when we're with our friends and so on and so forth, that you condemn these types of attacks on an individual basis. But as an organizational or as an institutional basis, I think we need to hold off on the kind, I mean, this is a personal reflection from what I have seen, that what happens is if a major Islamic center, for instance, or a major Islamic body, they go ahead and they condemn, everyone will jump on their case, getting, look at this major body in front of the media, they're condemning these atrocities, they're taking place because they're guilty by association. In the same way, for instance, I would not openly condemn someone else's child for their bad behavior in public, but I would speak out against my own child. So what we have to do is learn how to be very strategic in regards to our methodologies of condemnation. And what that requires is, and we need to really be ready for this, is the fact that us as individuals and this community, whenever we see violence, whenever we see injustice, be it to Muslims, be it a committed by, you know, so-called Muslims, be it to want to follow what's ahead of date or not, we have to go out and stand against that injustice. We have to stand with the truth, wherever truth is, and we stand against injustice, wherever injustice is. And once we start doing this, once we start doing this openly, publicly, by means of social networking, from an organizational standpoint, and from an individual standpoint, what I think that we'll see is that the narrative will slowly begin to shift and slowly will begin to change, where people begin to realize that, look, these people are not only condemning them when violence takes place in their own community, but they're condemners of the justice of everyone. Once we start doing that, then we can start going ahead and playing this game of stating, look, we're not guilty by association. But until we get there, a bit of a dilemma, like I mentioned, and we have to learn how to take our poison, learn, you know, in regards to our circumstances, how to do why, when we should condemn and when we shouldn't. And it would be unfair for me, you know, for me, for instance, you don't like to speak much on exactly how to do that, because everyone understands their community and their, you know, the potential in that particular media, state, city, wherever they're in, and see exactly what is the best method. So we have to be very, very careful, note that. Now, some have said that the goal of such attacks by ISIS in the West are to eliminate the gray zone between Muslims and the rest of the population, as well as their respective governments. In other words, they are designed to galvanize both Muslims and the populations in which they live in, in order to force them to take sides against one another. Ideally, with the Muslims being so alienated that they have nowhere to turn but ISIS. What do you make of this hypothesis? Do you see it as a valid one? Or do you think there is a different overriding motive? Perhaps the goal by organizations like ISIS, like Daesh, and these other terrorist organizations is to eventually long-term create this type of narrative which separates, you know, the weak Muslims, you know, perhaps in their terminology from everyone else. But I also think it's a little bit farfetched because in reality Muslims have been living in the West for decades, you know, maybe centuries, you know, in some parts of Europe, in some parts of the United States and, you know, in Canada perhaps even. And to suggest that overnight they're going to go ahead and, you know, realize that ISIS are the real Muslims and they need to go and support that particular vision as opposed to this one, it seems a little bit farfetched to be honest with you. Now I'm not putting it past the fact that these organizations themselves desire to create this picture where they're able to separate, you know, stout and devout Muslims as opposed to those who are not. But I think that that, you know, if that is their intention, it has to be something extremely long-term. Muslims have been living here for a really, really long time, meaning in the West, in the United States and in Europe and so on and so forth. And they have made themselves very comfortable over here. They're part of the communities, they're part of the culture and they're still able to practice their religion, you know, very openly and they've been able to do so for decades. I think that that is a little bit of a stretch to suggest that their motive is to overnight galvanize Muslims, like you said, and create this great zone or great population between, you know, the devout and those who are not. The argument has been made that often groups who engage in terrorist acts, even when cloaked in religion, have underlying legitimate political objections. For instance, we may see this with groups like the RIA or Hamas. Does the same hold true for ISIS? Why or why not? That's a tough question because I really don't know and I don't think anyone really knows what their political agenda is. You mentioned the IRA and you mentioned Hamas and they have their own political battles that they're fighting within their own nation. When they come to an institution like ISIS, like Daesh, they call themselves, they call themselves Donut and Islam, you know, the Islamic State in Iraq and in Syria. So they're not segregated to a particular country or particular nation, but they believe that their battle is universal. That's really questions their political aspirations. What do I mean the fact that these, this particular group, they are, they consist of people from across the world, as we know. There are people from Chechnya, there are people from Bosnia, there are people from Sudan and they're, you know, across West Africa and East Africa and across nations from the Middle East. We know that Europeans and Americans are going to this organization. What exactly do they want to establish? What exactly, you know, are they fighting against other than creating massive bloodshed and ruining families and communities and nations? It's really, really tough to say. If they had a sort of a structure where it was able to go ahead and understand what their agenda was and what their methodology was in doing this, perhaps it would have been eradicated already. But I think that's part of what makes them so dangerous, the fact that there is no structure, the fact that, you know, for lack of a better word, there are a bunch of bandits, you know, running across, you know, nations and communities and destroying them. So when we, you know, try to, when we try to examine them and take a look at what exactly are their political objections, do they have any? I don't know, because they're obviously not very vocal about that other than the fact that, you know, they're trying and they're attempting to wage a crusade against, you know, those who do not assimilate or those who do not believe in the same ideology as they do. So I think that it is more about power, it's more about spreading their belief system than any sort of political objectives. Sheikh, many ordinary Muslims living in the West continue to be fearful or public backlash against them, including hate crimes. How should Muslims living in the West respond to this crisis? Allah, Subhanahu Wa Ta'ala says in the Holy Qur'an, and call people to the way of your Lord by means of wisdoms and beautiful words and debate them or respond to them with more beauty. Now we go ahead and we take a look at this person. Allah, Subhanahu Wa Ta'ala first he says, Be wise, be smart, know your time, know your place, know the situation that you're dealing with. And I think we as Muslims in the West need to take this advice from Allah, Subhanahu Wa Ta'ala, in light of the hate crimes and the propaganda that we as individuals and as we as communities are dealing with these days. Meaning that, again, for me to come over here and make a blanket statement and advise all Muslims in the West, for instance, in regards to how to deal with hate crimes would be unjust. And families might be going through certain parts of the world. Thus, we need to be smart in terms of the way that we respond and in the way that we counter these particular initiatives by means of hate crimes. One of those means oftentimes amongst the most common forms of hate crimes, for instance, is if someone is riding a bus or on the train or walking in the shopping center and someone says something to them, for instance, by their appearance or by a woman, they would recognize a Muslim woman from wearing a hijab for instance. What at that time is to, you know, judge the situation and determine whether responding to them would be the better would be the better option for keeping silent and ignoring the situation completely. In regards to things like physical abuse, for instance, we have to report them to law enforcement and the authorities. We cannot into our hands, into our own hands. Like I said, I can do the best way is to judge the situation and the environment according to the best of your abilities, meaning be vigilant, be smart. No one to speak and no one to keep silent. We go back, we continue with these verses of the Quran. And bring people to the way of your Lord by wisdom and by beautiful words. Sometimes if someone insults you in public, for instance, and many people are around, imagine if we respond by, you know, a nice word, a compliment. It might get the opposing party's blood boiling, but what it does is it kind of shifts the idea, like I said mentioned earlier, it kind of shifts the narrative and people around you might be seeing, look at this individual, look at this Muslim man, look at this Muslim woman, look at this Muslim youth, the way that they're responding with this type of etiquette, you know, that demonstrates who is on the right and who is on the wrong. So like I said, we have to judge the situation and determine it on a case-to-case study as opposed to making generalizations in regards to something as sensitive as hate crimes. No doubt about that. Now, many have used the attacks as a way to justify turning back refugees, most of who are fleeing the same kinds of people as the ones who carried out the slaughter in Paris. What do you say to individuals who are sympathetic to this kind of thinking? This is obviously caught up a lot of controversy and steam in Western media for the last maybe, you know, more than a month now. And there is absolutely no evidence at all that refugees coming to Western nations are the cause of such violent crimes in comparison with natives. Today, for instance, we see that violence takes place, or for instance, the issue of gun violence in the United States is extremely, extremely high. We unfortunately are hearing about cases, you know, on the media. It seems like every other day about another shooting taking place in a university or in a school or in a, you know, hospital or God knows where. And they're not Muslims, nor are they refugees. Oftentimes, there are people with their own agendas who are trying to forward their ideology. Now, to suggest that we should refuse all refugees on the basis of one to make generalizations is extremely absurd at any level. Never make any generalization about anyone, about any community, about any culture. We know, for instance, that a lot of these Western nations, they proud, they private themselves on bringing immigration or escaping religious persecution. The United States, like I said, I'm living over here coming to you from New York. We see that New York city, for instance, Manhattan, Queens, these boroughs are known for the immigrant populations in the 30s and in the 40s and the 50s and in the 60s. The number of immigrants were entering, and even, you know, even earlier than that in the late 1800s, that is what built this city and that's what built this nation in reality. We have to take a look at the bigger picture and see what these refugees are running away from. They're escaping religious persecution, and we, nations in the West, they pride themselves on democracy and pride themselves on being an open source of peace and tranquility for anyone going through difficulties in other parts of the world. Now, how can we let people who are escaping this type of persecution, you know, be slaughtered on the streets while we, you know, a safe country to remain closed, you know, keep our doors closed towards them. This is something that we need to contemplate and need to be careful about. And like I said, there is no evidence to suggest that, you know, refugees entering into this country are more violent than anyone else, for instance. There are screening processes that take place to determine whether these refugees should be admitted to the country, the background checks being done. I, you know, I don't know the details of what exactly there are, but there are measures that are being taken before they, you know, are allowed to enter this country. We're not allowing anyone to enter, you know, into these nations without any sort of questioning, for instance. If there's any imminent threat, for instance, obviously, you know, we would be the first one to oppose, you know, their entrance. But if there's a family running away from difficult, running away from persecution, you know, women, widows and orphans, then, you know, we need to demonstrate ourselves as the greater, as a nation that supports the greater. Sheikh, one of the goals of the terrorists was simply to instill fear and paranoia in Western societies and to cause them to turn on themselves. Have they not already won? If that is one of their goals, then there have been absolutely successful in doing so. Unfortunately, Islamophobia, xenophobia in the Western nations is at an all-time high for Muslims to go out and walk in the streets. It's very, very difficult for a, you know, normal, you know, American as well, you know, they are fearful about what potentially may happen tomorrow. And like you also referred to in your introduction that, you know, political candidates in the upcoming election in the United States, you know, this year 2016, they are banking on this and they're priding themselves on the fact that people are fearful right now and people are very, very sensitive. So unfortunately, if that is one of, if that was truly one of their goals, then they have been victorious in that. And we need to be among those who respond to that, meaning all Westerners and all Americans, all human beings, respond to the fact that, you know, Muslims are not people to fear and these do not speak for religion, do not speak for our religion, do not speak for our etiquette and so on. And lastly, another long-term goal of ISIS seems to have been to draw the West into increasing military action against them in Syria and Iraq. To some extent, a military response by Western nations seems to play into their goals. On the other hand, there seems to be little question that there must be some military response to them in some fashion or another. Is there a solution to this conundrum? Again, like I said, these terrorist organizations have put the world in a very, very difficult place. If that was their intention again, then they have been, you know, riding high. Perhaps the best method would be, of course, no nation wants intervention from outside countries, which could potentially lead to more destruction and lead to more violence in places like Iraq and like Syria, where ISIS is very prominent. Thus, the best method would be to perhaps allow the nations and the leaders of the nations to go ahead and attack them full steam and to potentially receive support from their allies in regards to breaking down this ideology. And like I mentioned earlier, the ideology itself comes from a nation like Saudi Arabia and support from nations like Qatar, for instance. And what has to be done is that we Muslims in the West have to do our very best to put media pressure, to put political pressure on leaders and on influential people who have the ability to shift this narrative, like I said, and break down ties with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, for instance. It is a very scary situation and it's very problematic times that we are dealing with because no one ever likes to see any sort of military intervention anywhere in the world. So what has to be done at the very least is, like we said, to try our very best to put pressure so that the route is cut off from these type of organizations from continuing to commit and perform the violence that they've been doing so now for a really, really long time. Thank you so much. May Allah have mercy on the souls of all the martyrs around the world and eradicate the enemies of Islam wherever they may be. Brothers and sisters, this concludes today's current events. We hope to see you next time. We thank you to your viewers for watching and we hope to see you next time on current events.