When I nonchalantly stated to someone that there’s a link between RSE/”LGBTQ+” ideology and the Zionist genocide in Gaza, I understandably received some strange looks. Such a bold statement sounds conspiratorial at best, but they are inextricably linked.
Let’s look at the five ways they are connected.
Both are products of Western supremacy, which sees their norms as universal
West has reigned supreme
Whichever way you choose to describe the powers that shape the world, as the West or the global North, this geographical descriptor is founded upon certain underlying assumptions.
It encapsulates more than economic supremacy, it is about the belief that the West has ideologically prevailed.
One of the key claims is that the ascendancy of the West marks the end of history — a brazen claim made by the political scientist Francis Fukuyama in his bestselling book, The End of History and the Last Man.
Fukuyama argued that the fall of the Soviet Union, the greatest flag bearer of communism, was the de facto victory and supremacy of Western liberal democracy. Although his claim received some push-back — from the likes of Samuel P. Huntington in his book Clash of Civilisations and the Remaking of the World Order — his view did resonate in a world celebrating the collapse of communism.
Huntington was not so keen to accept that the West had reigned supreme and warned that the next ideological challenge would come from Islam. Yet, the differences between the two were minor.
Both of them, as well as other Western scholars, were in agreement: that the West’s ideological supremacy represented the West’s ideological supremacy.
It represents civilisation.
International community supports Israeli genocide
When Israel declared that its “9/11” required a swift response — vengeance to save face — the governments of Western nations declared that they backed Israel’s “right to defence”.
They boldly declared that the international community stood with Israel.
Yet, the “international community” merely represents nations in Europe and North America, with a couple of Asian-led nations whose economic interests are reliant upon the US. The bottom line is that the Western-aligned nations believe they have a monopoly on being the flag-bearers of civilisation.
It is as though they left overt colonialism whilst embodying its supremacist foundations.
How many mass death events are commemorated in the West? Besides the Holocaust, the two world wars, 9/11 also comes to mind… how many tragedies are even acknowledged by these same governments where the victims were the wrong side of pale?
That’s why the loss of life on the Palestinian side has always been a statistic, whilst on the Israeli occupier side, it is accompanied by human stories.
Many in the West can speak the name of at least one of those killed on 7th October. How many Palestinian victims gunned down by IOF (Israeli Occupation Forces) snipers or eviscerated by bombs from on high are remembered beyond the passing mention in a temporary news story.
The preceding sentence does not even deserve a question mark, because it’s sadly a fact illustrating the savagery of modern Western supremacy.
This fight is a civilisational struggle
Many are framing the current genocide as a civilisational struggle between the forces of civilisation and those who choose barbarity. This is exactly how 9/11 was framed.
The constant refrain of Western politicians saying,
“They kill us because they hate our freedom.”
Although this simplistic argument never made sense, it still seeks to normalise and achieve widespread backing for the “War on Terror” within the American public.
It’s interesting that in the last fortnight, Osama bin Laden’s Letter to America has gone viral and many people are viewing its contents within the lens of the Zionist genocide in Gaza and the tacit backing of its Western government enablers.
It was shared so widely on TikTok that it was banned, and the Guardian newspaper removed its translation, even though it had hosted it for the past 21 years!
“LGBTQ+” narrative is founded on universal struggle for sexual freedom
But how does this issue fit in with “LGBTQ+” indoctrination in schools?
The very foundation of the “LGBTQ+” narrative originates from a “White” Eurocentric-driven understanding of human beings which the lobby seeks to foist on the world. The entire struggle for “gay” rights is centred within a “White” Eurocentric experience.
Yet, they expect their history and struggles, not only to be acknowledged by others, but that it should be the only history that matters.
The “LGBTQ+” community takes a narrow set of values centred within a small part of the world and universalises them. That is why the intolerance by much of the “LGBTQ+” community to any opposing viewpoints becomes entirely clear. There is no room for dissent, when the right of a man to have a sexual relationship with another man is not about individual choice, or live and let live.
Unless you wave the “LGBTQ+” flag, you are barbaric and uncivilised.
You’re with us or against us
A few years ago, I was on a BBC Radio 4 programme about the Relationships and Sex Education issue. I was up against the Chief Executive of Humanists UK.
I sought, amidst the clear differences between us, to strike a conciliatory tone to at least get him to acknowledge that the imposition of “LGBTQ+” values on children who disagreed was illiberal.
He refused to acknowledge this and, to my surprise, he went further. He declared that there’s no meeting in the middle. Either we accept their values or, well there’s no alternative besides being the oppressor.
We will liberate you sexually
During the Zionist killing spree in Gaza, an IOF soldier held two flags aloft in Gaza.
The first one was the rainbow flag with the slogan, “In the name of love” in English and Arabic. And the second, an Israeli flag with the rainbow colours above and below it.
The post appeared on X, formerly Twitter, with the message,
“Under Hamas, being gay means death… To Gaza’s hidden LGBTQ+ community: STAY HOPEFUL of a future where you can live and love free of Hamas.” [1]
There's no greater symbolism of western-centrism or white supremacy, which fuels Israel's mass murder, purposefully ignores genocide but centres 'gay' rights as the pinnacle of 'civilisation'. The right to sex trumps the right to life. These people are deluded. https://t.co/M8217neG88
— Yusuf Patel (@YusufPatel81056) November 13, 2023
This post typifies the Western mind, which is all consumed with First World problems.
Whilst the average man, woman, and child in Gaza is struggling to survive Israeli gunfire or access water and food, he is consumed with the fulfilment of sexual desires.
Of course, the irony being Israeli bombs don’t discriminate based upon how someone identifies sexually. This truly exemplifies the colonialist mindset overly obsessed with civilising the savages.
Fight for sexual rights is a universal human rights struggle
At a recent National Demonstration for Palestine in London, I happened to see Peter Tatchell.
He styles himself as a human rights activist but is a long-standing gay rights activist.
At the demo, he argued with stewards and police to be allowed to stand at the first row. When refused, he was indignant.
The placard he carried, amidst the genocide in Palestine, uttered the slogan,
“Armistice now! End Israel’s occupation! End Hamas’s sexist, homophobic, anti-human rights dictatorship!”
It seems Tatchell was more angered by Hamas’ “homophobia” than he was Israel’s genocide!
Connection between Zionist and “LGBTQ+” mindsets
The same neo-colonialist mindset that drove the Western supremacist wars in Afghanistan and Iraq — and that which nurtures and sustains the Zionist project in the Middle East — is the same mindset that drives the “LGBTQ+” lobby to impose its norms on children in schools.
There is simply no room for alternative viewpoints because those who hold them are just driven by hate.
That is why we must acknowledge that this is not a small difference of opinion but a neocolonial project. Whilst Israel has physically occupied land and taken life, the “LGBTQ+” lobby has occupied minds, but both of them police what we are expected to think and how we are meant to act!
This can be disempowering, unless in both situations we are clear on what we believe, why we believe it, and the narratives which naturally flow from our purpose in life.
Understanding narratives is key to our response, lest we become unwitting participants in entrenching false narratives
There are several narratives that underpin the Zionist and “LGBTQ+” narratives.
Sometimes, we can inadvertently entrench these narrative positions, therefore it’s important to understand them from the outset.
Repetitive false narratives (i.e. lies) masquerade as truths
Post-7th October, one of the greatest narratives spread by the Zionist propaganda machine has been to assert that the clock started on 7th October.
Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005, it was no longer occupied; it was the responsibility of Hamas to develop Gaza; they chose wars, Israel chose peace; the resistance to occupation is terrorism, Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East, which gives equal rights to citizens, both Jewish and Arab.
A phrase routinely attributed to Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels,
“Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth.” [2]
Whether something is true or not is of little importance, what matters is how often that lie dominates the airwaves, such that people believe it.
We’ve seen this post-7th October.
Israeli propagandists immediately talked of women being raped, children beheaded and placed in ovens, such that leaders of countries repeated these lines without asking for evidence.
Another talking point that Israel has used for many years is they are justified in targeting civilian positions because Hamas uses civilians as human shields.
When Israel targets schools, hospitals, or UN buildings, Palestinian civilian casualties are explained away as “collateral damage”. Their own civilians are unjustifiably killed whilst Palestinian deaths — Goyim Amalek (non-Jews and/or those who opposed the Israelites according to Jewish tradition) — are the result of a proportionate response that is the fault of Hamas.
David the extremist, Goliath the victim
This entire propaganda battle is founded on a simplistic notion of Israel as the victim and the resistance to occupation as the oppressors.
This is akin to presenting David as the extremist and Goliath as the victim.
Who has the firepower, the resources, media backing, and governments on their side, including the Arab leaders who are de facto supporters of Israel?
It is laughable to cast the Israelis as victims and the oppressed as aggressors, but that is what they are aiming to portray.
“Why do you support Hamas?”
That is why an alternative key question posed to speakers sympathetic to the victims of Israeli genocide is,
“Do you condemn Hamas?”
The one who refuses to answer will not get very far and will be asked again and again until they are labelled a Hamas apologist.
Meanwhile, pro-Israel supporters are never asked to condemn Israeli terrorism, as state terror is acceptable terror.
But it is a betrayal to condemn those who have suffered 75 years of occupation, forced displacement, indiscriminate killing, and cross-generational refugee status for seeking a justice denied to them for so long.
At the very least, those who are asked this question need to focus on occupation and not the responses to it, including the right under international law for those suffering occupation to resist occupation.
There are lots of people who see through the many false narrative lies of the Zionist propaganda machine, it is not the intention of the author to present an exhaustive list of narrative responses. Rather, the scope of this article speaks to the importance of responding to narratives without falling into the well-laden traps that we will encounter.
When the aggressor wears the garb of the victim
The Zionist lobby and the “LGBTQ+” lobby both position their communities as victims, even when they are the aggressors.
The impact isn’t the same in both cases; the “LGBTQ+” lobby does not kill people into believing their fairytales, but they do exert enormous pressure on people to accept their narratives and they’re very quick to label people.
Being “gay” is a fixed characteristic, not an identity
“LGBTQ+” narratives are founded upon some basic assertions that run contrary to the reality that feelings/desires/behaviour are not fixed notions but temporary, changeable, and changing.
When most Muslims say John is “gay”, they mean he engages in a same-sex sexual relationship. When most people say, John is “gay”, they mean that John has discovered a latent, discrete characteristic that defines who he really is.
This “thing” is not changeable like the colour of one’s skin or how tall someone is. So, it follows that if someone has this “thing” — termed “sexuality” or “sexual orientation” — then it is unjust to think negatively about that inborn characteristic.
Just like racism is wrong, so, too, is assessing a same-sex sexual relationship as negative or morally wrong.
When we use terms such as “gay”, “homosexual”, and “lesbian” amongst many others popularised by the “LGBTQ+” lobby, we are accepting that people have a core identity that is unchangeable and unchanging.
It’s true, you can’t move from being “homosexual” to “heterosexual”
The drive to ban “conversion therapy” is founded upon this very idea.
Why should someone who has discovered their innate “sexuality” be told they can or should change. It’s impossible to change from being “homosexual” to “heterosexual”.
Well, that is true, because both are made-up 19th century labels that see who someone is attracted to as an “identity” rather than a choice. But the point is, there is no objective evidence for “identity” as unchanging and unchangeable characteristics in a person.
Tell me when you chose to be “heterosexual”
I remember watching a short vox pop video that has been shown to children in some schools.
A man with a mic in his hand roams a city, I think it may be London; he asks a “simple” question to passers-by,
“When did you decide to be heterosexual?”
The passers-by are taken aback. No-one knows how to answer.
Most people reply with either stunned silence or else say,
“I never chose to be ‘heterosexual’, this is who I am.”
The point being made in rather an unsubtle way is no-one chooses their “sexuality”. It is something you are born with.
The very nature of human beings and their basic biology, that has been acknowledged since the beginning of time, is that men and women fit together, that is why the norm has always been that a male and female become attracted to each other, engage in a sexual relationship, and then raise a family.
The human species grows, families develop, and society is better for it.
Today’s “LGBTQ+”-driven society and the Zionist state will be seen by tomorrow’s as morally bankrupt civilisations
But the sexual revolution turned this simple biological reality on its head.
It decoupled sexual relationships from procreation and announced that morality must be defined by people, not God. These two revolutionary changes facilitated the rise of the “LGBTQ+” movement.
If individual sexual freedom and not procreation was the key driver for relationships, and the pill facilitated promiscuous relations that didn’t lead to pregnancy (which benefitted men), and if God should no longer set moral rules for people, then why shouldn’t there be a sexual free-for-all in which people should set the parameters for their own sexual enjoyment.
We are living with the fallout of this revolution to this day.
If individuals do not have agency over who they are attracted to, then people cannot be blamed for whoever they “fall in love with”, as surely “love is love”. Feelings should define everything and the state should exist to facilitate whatever types of relationships people want, the only instance in which the law should intervene is to ensure that relationships are consensual.
Besides this, people should be allowed to marry or not, have a sexual relationship with whomsoever they desire, for whatever length of time, with however many people, in whatever arrangement.
We live in an age in which feelings have been accorded a divine-like status, they must be acted upon, otherwise it leads to misery.
In a hyper-sexualised world, this is understandable but when societies look back in 100 years, they will view these morally regressive attitudes in a similar way to how people view the actions of Israel now and in the future: a morally bankrupt civilisation that revelled in its perceived superiority.
The reality is feelings are temporary, desires do not need to be acted upon, and behaviour can be changed.
This is both in agreement with reality and Islam.
Identity labels
The labels that underpin the “LGBTQ+” movement do not accord with reality. They have no truth beyond the significance people place upon these labels.
People can choose to live their lives however they want and identify themselves with any label they so choose but, when people are told they have to acknowledge them and believe they are real, this is oppressive.
When Israel demands the world accept they have the right to a land that was inhabited by people — a people who were forcibly ethnically cleansed in a calculated plan that was designed and enacted by death squads — then we have to question the foundation of that narrative.
Similarly, we must understand the “LGBTQ+” narratives at their roots. This includes the claim that people are born in the wrong body, and that a feeling that is temporary should be given permanence, especially in vulnerable children.
Those opposing these narratives are frequently labelled anti-Semitic for challenging Israel and homophobic for opposing the “LGBTQ+” lobby’s insistence that our children should receive their propaganda messages in schools.
We must resist in numbers so that we aren’t singled out.
Alliances are important but must be based on agreed issue, principle, and Islamic measure
The issue of Palestine has brought about discussions about alliances.
Many people who aren’t Muslim have bravely stood up in support of Palestine and are calling for a ceasefire.
Alliances are important within a framework of our principles
The numbers of people demonstrating across the world is positive and welcomed, but there must be signs of caution.
When I attended the marches in London, I saw Muslims holding up signs from socialist parties calling for a “Socialist Intifada”.
Now, alliances are important but it brings up issues and concerns for us.
Muslims are driven by Islam to support the Muslims of Palestine because Masjid al-Aqsa is the first Qibla from which the Prophet ﷺ ascended to the Heavens on the Night Journey (al-Isrāʾ wa-l Miʿrāj). It is also a land opened by ‘Umar ibn al-Khattāb, a waqf (endowment) that can never be handed over.
Our motivations are different. Our connection to this land and its people is qualitatively different because we are tied to them by īmān. We are a body, they are a part of that body; their pain is our pain. This is not an issue that facilitates a greater socialist awakening of fighting the colonialists or precipitating a Marxist revolution.
We must be clearer about why alliances are important, the parameters within which alliances are acceptable, and our own red lines. We must educate Muslims about our aspirations for Palestine beyond the immediate call for a ceasefire. A ceasefire provides temporary solace from Israeli aggression in the short term, but it does not solve the root causes of occupation.
What is Left when our principles are far from Right?
Whilst the left is supportive of us on Palestine, they will undoubtedly be opposed to us on “LGBTQ+” indoctrination.
But even from the perspective of the Ummah, many of the left were very supportive of Assad’s killing spree in Syria and are sceptical of the claim to a genocide in East Turkestan.
The right may align with us on social issues to do with the family or “LGBTQ+” or sex education in schools, but they have a visceral hatred of Muslims.
In recent days, a US State Department veteran was captured haranguing a street vendor in anti-Islamic language, including glorifying the killing of Palestinian children.
People were shocked that an Obama administration aide showed feelings you would expect from the right-wing, not a Democrat.
But the reality is the left are not free from anti-Muslim sentiment, it’s just that many of them are better at hiding it.
Obama administration official caught spouting vile anti-Muslim hate. Why is anyone surprised by this? Maybe because it's no longer hidden behind closed doors and in speech which belies their supremacism. https://t.co/2TaZRflQkL
— Yusuf Patel (@YusufPatel81056) November 22, 2023
We can form alliances on issues that we agree on, and upon which the Sharīʿah recognises as ma’rūf (good) and munkar (evil). We shouldn’t go all in, be that to the left or the right.
We must follow the straight path, one which defines temporary alliances without accepting the wider ideological goals of either the left or the right.
We should have our own rules for engagement.
How the news cycle positively or negatively shapes our activity
When we see graphic images of bombs raining down on Gaza, we undoubtedly feel the realness of the situation.
But how far does the existence or absence of news headlines drive us to activity or inactivity?
Gaza has been under blockade since 2005. It has been described as the world’s largest open-air prison, policed by Zionists on one side and Egypt on the other.
This current invasion is the fourth major attack on Gaza since 2005. In between, there have been many deaths caused by bombings by IOF soldiers firing across the border.
Israel’s policy of “mowing the grass” effectively requires cross-border skirmishes, bombing, and even incursions in order to show it is still in control.
There have been four major operations since 2005.
- 2008 — Operation Cast Lead
- 2012 — Operation Pillar of Defense
- 2014 — Operation Protective Edge
- 2023 — Operation Swords of Iron (ongoing attack).
Should media dictate our priorities?
It is understandable that certain flashpoints will heighten awareness and increase activity, but how far do headlines lead the choice of which issues to address?
The land of Palestine is important, it is one of the enduring casualties of 20th century imperialism, but so is Indian occupation of Kashmir, and the genocide of the Uyghurs of East Turkestan by China in recent years.
Afghanistan is facing economic crisis, whilst Pakistan is forcibly returning Afghan refugees back to Afghanistan, some of whom have spent decades irking out a living there and establishing roots. Meanwhile, in India, Muslims are being persecuted by Hindutva mobs, and the future of the 1.2 million Rohingya refugees who fled Myanmar amidst an impending genocide are being asked to return to the very land from which they were driven out.
Even though the cameras periodically focus on Israeli aggression, the reality is there is a constant state of war. The brutality of the IOF hardly makes it into mainstream news unless there’s a flashpoint.
Don’t get me wrong, the global awakening for Palestine is a good sign for this Ummah, but when the dust settles, will we forget Palestine, drop boycotts, and forget searching for long-term solutions?
The answer cannot be “No”.
Should headlines dictate how vocal or silent we are?
I remember an incident that still remains vividly in my mind to this day, it exemplifies the point.
In March 2019, 51 Muslims were gunned down and killed and another 40 were injured in two masājid in Christchurch, New Zealand.
On the morning of Friday, 15 March 2019, I’d just heard about the massacre as I was preparing to go to work. I was delivering an RSE workshop at a South London masjid after work, so I sent a poster that morning to my WhatsApp broadcast list.
I received a response from a Muslim on my list,
“I can’t believe this is the only post you consider important to share this morning. Shameful infact [sic].”
I had to re-look at the post I’d sent in case I sent an inappropriate message but, in his eyes, because I hadn’t mentioned the Christchurch massacre and I had dared to advertise a workshop that had been planned for weeks, I was somehow betraying the Ummah.
I asked him why he hadn’t ever asked why I did not accompany my general posts about RSE with Zionist or Hindutva violence, because the news headlines coming out of Christchurch were so shocking he felt that anyone failing to mention how horrific this massacre 11,000 miles away was, ought to feel ashamed.
The day after attending the largest Palestine protest in the UK, I attended an important event organised by Uyghur Muslims detailing the genocide in East Turkestan. The numbers attending and showing support did not reach the numbers this issue deserves. [3]
We do need to ask ourselves how much we are led by media portrayals of violence, because in the absence of graphic images of death and destruction, those areas of the world that call out to the Ummah can easily be ignored.
The same can be said about the RSE issue.
We are an incredibly young population, with an incredibly large number of our future Ummah in state schools. Our children’s values are being shaped every single day and far too many schools are indoctrinating children with biased perspectives on “LGBTQ+”.
Far too many parents remain silent, and schools rely upon that passive attitude to shape our children with their biased ideological perspectives.
When RSE was in the news, we saw a burst of energy. But now the issue is out of sight, it is more often than not, out of mind.
We need to shape the news, not be led by it.
There is much good in the Ummah
There are times when you feel great pride in the Ummah of Muhammad ﷺ.
This is one of those times.
Alhamdulillāh, the Ummah of the Prophet ﷺ has shown glimpses of the īmān that builds hope.
This is not to say that things are perfect, but it shows that this Ummah, given sufficient direction, is a force to be reckoned with.
Both parents and children doing their part
Around the country, there are hundreds of parents contributing to positively shaping what they’re teaching in schools within the bounds of the law. They are educating schools about the need to educate children, not indoctrinate them.
We also witness children standing up for their brothers and sisters in Gaza, they are fearless and brave.
Earlier this year, we witnessed Muslim children stand up to Khakan Qureshi when he made claims about what he believed the Qur’ān does or does not say about the permissibility of same-sex sexual relationships.
In that sense, young Muslims are certainly leading the way.
Yes, there is still a lot of work that needs to be done but we’re moving in the right direction, as long as we recognise that no change is possible without the help of Allah (subḥānahu wa ta’āla) and that to Him we must turn for help, to ask for strength, courage, and steadfastness.
Action points
-
Different narratives are playing out over Palestine and 'LGBTQ+', so we must be grounded in our own narratives to ensure we don’t fall into traps.
-
Be clear that alliances are not absolute, they are joint actions on issues we agree upon. We must not permanently align with the left or right.
-
Share this article with friends and family so that the benefit may be multiplied.
Also read
- Uyghurs say, “Palestine is our cause”
- Israel is engaged in colonial genocide of Palestine
- We must fight for transparency from primary schools
- Calling out atrocity propaganda to end Palestinian genocide
- Over 110 Rohingya given jail terms after seeking to flee refugee camps
- “Kashmir becoming another Palestine” as India issues residency to non-Kashmiris
Source: Islam21c
Notes
[1] https://twitter.com/leekern13/status/1723807905835585996
[2] https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20161026-how-liars-create-the-illusion-of-truth
[3] https://www.islam21c.com/campaigns/uyghurs-say-palestine-our-cause/
