Here’s WHO’s Really Behind the Global Manmade Health Crisis

Here’s WHO’s Really Behind the Global Manmade Health Crisis

Posted on June 12, 2020 by State of the Nation

by Dr. Mark Sircus
June 01, 2020 from DrSircus Website

What is the true nature of the WHO (World Health Organization)?

Are they merchants of death or servers of life and health?

Is Trump being dangerous and short-sighted in cutting all funding (400 million) to them or is he being a brave leader willing to stand up to a savage organization?

Trump claimed that China has “total control” over the WHO organization of 194 member states.

He said China had pressured the WHO to “mislead the world” over the origins of the pandemic, which he described as the “Wuhan virus.”

The World Health Organization and the CDC initially
advised against wearing masks, saying there was little
evidence that it would help prevent people from getting sick.

Just recently, the media had to rescue the leader of the WHO with a grand snow job…

Amazing the amount of flowers they needed to cover up something they certainly do not want us to know…

Tedros Adhanom is renowned for his warmth and a tendency to call everyone from colleagues to world leaders ‘brother’ or ‘sister’.

He is an incredibly smart, open, honest, science-based man.

He is a man of great principle, and his calm but firm, courageous leadership of WHO during this terrible COVID-19 pandemic is exactly what the world needs right now,” tweeted Laura Hammond, a University of London professor.

Must be something wrong with him…

In all my 67 years never heard anyone talked about like this. For me he is a mainstream hit man for the medical industrial empire, a medical Hitler who has no problem taking apart the world with lock-downs of the human race.

All for good reason and with a smile, right?

The WHO represents the heart of the pharmaceutical world.

They along with the CDC and the FDA have been lording over all our lives for decades without complaint from the public.

On a medical level its already a one world government.

The president of the WHO has been confronted for being a front man for the Chinese and is one of the reasons they are losing American funding.

The tragedy of the global lock-down (take-down) will be remembered for a thousand years.

It will mark the beginning of a world convulsion.

It’s going to be bad, a nightmare, a horror movie.

But to too many politicians its a delight to express their hard authoritarian inner beings.

“China’s cover up of the Wuhan virus allowed the disease to spread all over the world, instigating a global pandemic that has caused more than 100,000 American lives,” President Trump said.

Remember, the WHO had high praise for the Chinese response, which was then copied around much of the world, all with the WHO’s blessing.

Killing People with Misinformation

“Members of Congress, on both sides of the aisle, have consistently worked to fully fund the World Health Organization, in keeping with a long, proud, bipartisan tradition of U.S. leadership in global public health.

Congressional leaders have also spoken out in favor of U.S. cooperation with WHO to help respond to the unprecedented crisis we face with COVID-19.”

Hydroxychloroquine has about 90 Percent
chance of helping COVID-19 Patients.
Association of American Physicians and Surgeons

National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Anthony Fauci said that hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) is not an effective treatment for the coronavirus, based on the available data.

A few years ago the British medical journal, The Lancet, published a paper touting the safety of HCQ

But this was before HCQ with zinc was found effective if used earlier enough against Covid-19.

Covid-19 turned HCQ’s effectiveness into a big problem.

One has to understand that there can be no treatment for the coronavirus until an approved vaccine makes its appearance.

They cannot let an inexpensive generic drug free everyone from lock-down.

Any treatment that works would gut the plan for a profitable mandatory vaccine.

The press, of course, is happy for the controversy and confusion.

They love to divide enjoying the conflict of everything…

Now a new Lancet study was essential for Big Pharma to prevent the spread of the HCQ treatment and awareness of its safety and effectiveness.

As soon as it appeared, it was used to close down the World Health Organization’s clinical trial of hydoxychloroquine in coronavirus patients citing safety concerns.

“The intent is to bury HCQ as a low cost effective treatment and to put in its place a high cost alternative whether effective or not, and to supplement this enhancement of profits with mass vaccination which might do us more harm than the virus itself.

Big Pharma could care less. The only value it knows is profit,” writes Paul Craig Roberts.

Dr. Vladimir Zelenko‘s medical team in New York used simple cocktail of three cheap, proven, widely available drugs to successfully treat at least 500 patients with the coronavirus in the early going of the pandemic.

“He used an out-patient treatment combining the common anti-malarial drug hydroxy-chloroquine with the popular antibotic azithromycin (known as Z-Pak) and zinc sulfate.”

He has been 100 percent at saving all his patients lives…

Dr. Stephen Smith, founder of the Smith Center for Infectious Diseases and Urban Health in East Orange, New Jersey, talked about the remarkable results he is seeing in his coronavirus patients using a combination of hydroxychloroquine and the antibiotic azithromycin,

marks the “beginning of the end” of the COVID-19 pandemic…

Dr. Smith also said not a single patient he has been treating with the combination over a five-day period has had to be placed on a ‘ventilator.’

“It’s a game-changer. It’s an absolute game-changer,” he said.

“I think this is the beginning of the end of the pandemic. I’m very serious,” said Smith, whose facility is in the New York metropolitan area, the U.S. hotspot for the coronavirus outbreak.

The criminal leaders of the lockdown madness that has overtaken the world are against humanity resolving the coronavirus through either natural or pharmaceutical means.

Personally I am for using natural treatments but sometimes modern medicine has something of value to offer.

The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) is one of the most trusted medical organizations in the world.

The ‘WHO’, ‘CDC’ and the ‘FDA’ are the last to be trusted in my books…

Hydroxychloroqine – a cheap, widely-prescribed anti-malaria drug which was deemed safe for decades until it showed efficacy treating coronavirus – needs to be made,

“widely available and promoted immediately for physicians to prescribe,” according to Yale epidemiologist Dr. Harvey Risch.

Harvey Risch notes that the combination of hydroxychloroquine with the antibiotic azithromycin (AZ),

“has been widely misrepresented in both clinical reports and public media,” and that “five studies, including two controlled clinical trials, have demonstrated significant major outpatient treatment efficacy.”

It’s Almost Against the Law to be Against Vaccines

What this is all about will get your legs cut off on social media as well as on Google.

The back side of the pandemic is vaccines. It is about what Robert Kennedy Jr, describes as a criminally corrupt industry…

In his interview with Patrick Bet-David, Kennedy describes what lies have been forced on the public to cover up the corruption and he shows that the truth is the opposite of what we have been told.

For example, Kennedy says his research shows:

1.You are more apt to contract a disease from a vaccinated person than one who is not vaccinated!

2.Vaccines kill more people than the diseases do!

3.Vaccines are insanely profitable to the companies that make them, but that is peanuts compared to the profits from selling drugs and devices to treat illnesses the vaccines create!

The business model of the pharmaceutical industry is not to make people well, but to treat their symptoms and keep them sick so they will be customers for life…!


We are trusting people and organizations to lead the world into a viral driven hell.

The death rates are much lower than advertised and treatments are much better than the no treatment hail Mary of health care officials. It’s a set up, a scam of the worst kind imaginable.

The last thing he wants the world to see is that modern medicine is a killing machine that is being allowed to destroy the world’s economy and people’s lives.

Saying the pandemic is a scam is not to say the virus does not exist and that people are not dying.

However, “Flatten the Curve – Destroy the World” is a fitting motto to describe the WHO’s guidance through the early days of this pandemic.

“It is difficult to identify circumstances in the past half-century when large-scale quarantine has been effectively used in the control of any disease.

The negative consequences of large-scale quarantine are so extreme,

forced confinement of sick people with the well; complete restriction of movement of large populations. Difficulty in getting critical supplies, medicines, and food to people inside the quarantine zone,

…that this mitigation measure should be eliminated from serious consideration,” wrote Donald A. Henderson (1928-2016), who was a great physician who is credited with smallpox eradication.

We need, a vision of an honest medical system that serves rather than destroys people’s lives…


Last Updated on Tuesday, 16 June 2020 11:57 




In October 2019, a group of 15 business people, government officials, and health experts gathered around a table in New York to plan out the global response to a worldwide outbreak of a never-before-seen — and completely fictional — coronavirus.

It was a training exercise with disturbing similarities, in retrospect, to 2019-nCoV — the Chinese virus that has swiftly gone global this month.

Three and a half hours later, the group finished the simulation exercise — and despite their best efforts, they couldn’t prevent the hypothetical coronavirus from killing 65 million people.

The fictional coronavirus at the center of the Event 201 simulation — a collaboration between the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, the World Economic Forum, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation — was called CAPS, and it started with pigs in Brazil before spreading to farmers, not unlike how 2019-nCoV reportedly began with animals before spreading to people.

In the simulation, CAPS infected people all across the globe within six months, and by the 18-month mark, it had killed 65 million people and triggered a global financial crisis.

The “players” in the Event 201 simulation included health experts from the United Nations and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, as well as several academics and representatives from private companies. In other words, they were the same types of people likely to plan the world’s response to a real-life coronavirus pandemic.

That makes the exercise’s devastating outcome particularly troubling. But according to Event 201’s organizers, the purpose of the simulation wasn’t to stir up fear. Instead, they hoped it would serve as a learning experience, highlighting both the potential impact of a pandemic as well as current gaps in our preparedness for one.

To that end, after the simulation ended, they created a list of seven actions that leaders in both the public and private sectors could take now to prepare for a scenario like Event 201.

The troubling implication remains, though, that if 2019-nCoV reaches the pandemic level, it might already be too late to prevent the millions of deaths predicted by Event 201.


The Stupidity of ‘Rewriting’ the Quran

Authorities in China want to ‘rewrite the Qur’ān’ to fit socialist ‘values’.[1] In other news, the Egyptian coup regime that has executed thousands of pro-democracy activists wants to create a ‘renewed Islamic discourse’ to address ‘extremism’.[2] Hindu extremist groups in India, whose supporters are typically seen glued to bats and Molotov grenades, want to ban the Qur’ān.[3] And the list goes on.

The irony of some of the most extreme and callous people today to try to ‘ban’ or ‘reform’ what predates their long-expired ancestry is only one side of the story. Some in the capitalist west have even gloated at the news. For many, it is not about China rewriting the Qur’ān as much as just having it deformed into anything else. Few in the West openly support changing the words. But calls to somehow change its traditional interpretation to make it more congruent with state power or today’s modern philosophies are becoming all too common.

‘Rewriting the Qur’ān’ to what exactly?  

The Chinese authorities want to ‘reform’ the Qur’ān to suit their ‘socialist values’. Do they mean Confucianism, Taoism, Buddhism, or a social hierarchy built on the mythical dragon and worm? What exactly does this mean? Will their injunctions and ‘verses’ sanction the Communist Party’s ideologies? Mass detention centres for the cultural genocide of millions of Uyghur Muslims, including banning beards, name-changing, force-feeding, digital surveillance, forced consumption of pork and alcohol, forced marriages, and separating parents from their children?[4]

Perhaps for others, Qur’ānic ‘reform’ was not supposed to take this disproportionate twist. It is simply to align it with the modern political sensibilities of the hyper-liberalised world; what’s the fuss?

Well, here lies a bigger dilemma. The whole point of ‘liberalism’ is derestriction and hectic individualism. ‘Free thinking’ is, after all, a reaction to form and imposition, hence its countless manifestations – maybe as many as its thinkers. ‘Lack of form’ cannot beget form, let alone to ‘reform’. It is trivial. Reform would need to follow someone’s choices and inclinations, but whose choices? If it is those of the committees commissioned to make the changes, their choices would exclude millions of others of human ‘deities’, privileged with their own free thinking.

This is an idiosyncratic rewrite, modernised to fit the current day philosophies. But why must we agree with that, however it is defined, if it can ever be defined? Will it lean towards anarcho-capitalism, classical liberalism, liberal feminism, modern, syncretic, or traditionalist liberalism? Or communism, Marxism, Leninism, or further developments into socialism? But which application: the Cuban, Russian, Swedish, or Chinese? A basic reading into the endless and divergent array of political and economic philosophies produces one conclusion: those wanting to rewrite the Qur’ān are either patently stupid – thinking the only manifestation of thought is their secular thought – or personally dislike Islām’s ideology about as much as its adherents personally dislike theirs.

Outside the realm of Islām (or monotheistic religion altogether), society’s secularists have dealt countless blows to one another over the ages imposing their own secular ideology. Theirs is best suited to govern the world and is the polar opposite to their other secular opponents. If the Qur’ān is ‘reformed’ to suit one ideology, it becomes irrelevant for another. If it is ‘banned’ altogether, would that even help the secular world to settle on the best system without theorising across the ‘right’ and ‘left’ political spectrum?

The world wars in the 20th century and the deaths of around 100 million people is testament to inordinate levels of disharmony in secular political thought. Isn’t trying to synchronise the Qur’ān with either of the ideologies that spurred that magnitude of ‘intolerance’ exactly what would make it intolerant?

In fact, it follows that no two irreligious ideologies have ever agreed on their single main contention with the Qur’ān. This is the clearest proof of the objectivity of the Qur’ān and the subjectivity of its detractors! In other words, if you think the Qur’ān clearly needs changing, first work out what is clearly right, convince us it is clearly right, before telling us what is clearly wrong! In fact, some anti-religious thought, such as Dawkins, holds that it only takes overcoming a taboo for anything to be right, even eating dead human flesh.[5]

The Qur’ān asserts, proves, and challenges others to disprove that it is the unequivocal truth from the Divine, whilst the counter theories of individual secularist (or atheist) thinkers are, at best, different to one another. And two counter ideologies cannot simultaneously be the best:

What you are promised is certainly true. The Judgement will certainly take place! By Heaven with its oscillating orbits. You certainly have differing beliefs. Averted from it is he who is averted.[6]

Separating the ‘Sheikhs’ from the ‘Shakes’

The Qur’ān will simply not be changed. Neither its word, not its intended interpretation. Besides Allāh’s promised divine protection, history testifies to this reality. The Mongols, for instance, wreaked havoc in the Muslim world. Their assault sought nothing less than the total extermination of Islām, and maybe even the world. They were the largest contiguous empire the world has ever seen. They invaded some 16% of the earth, massacred inordinate numbers, and decimated a vast amount of literature. The Muslims’ epochal battle of Ain Jalut was the first time the Mongol advance was permanently halted, and the Muslim Mamluks salvaged the Western world from the Mongolians’ attempt at world domination. But the point is that if Genghis Khan failed to eradicate Islām or the Qur’ān, then Xi Jinping definitely will fail in the same venture.

As nervous as it makes some, there are in fact countless benefits from the attacks against the Qur’ān. For conciseness, let us just take one example. The nature of the Qur’ān is such that the more you study it, the more it convinces and overwhelms. This is ironic because so far as its social code is concerned, the typical criticisms are around its penal code, rights afforded to men and women, and the institution and regulation of Jihad under its state. Out of the entire Qur’ān, these issues end up being studied the most by Muslims on the receiving end of criticism which, in turn, presents to them the compelling acumen behind that jurisdiction. In other words, Muslims have become experts and are particularly equipped to deal with issues at least one strand of secularist thought has raised as contentious.

Recently, I was moved by a verse about legal retribution for a murderer after reading into its Tafsīr. This is partly thanks to the Islamophobic narrative that cannot get enough of repeating the same criticisms and hearing the same answers. The criticism has to do with the Qur’ān endorsing capital punishment for the killer as retribution. In such circumstances, the authority to punish lies squarely with the victim’s family. During the verse’s discourse, however, Allāh emphatically appeals to Ukhuwwah (brotherhood) to encourage amnesty:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا كُتِبَ عَلَيْكُمُ الْقِصَاصُ فِي الْقَتْلَى ۖ الْحُرُّ بِالْحُرِّ وَالْعَبْدُ بِالْعَبْدِ وَالْأُنثَىٰ بِالْأُنثَىٰ ۚ فَمَنْ عُفِيَ لَهُ مِنْ أَخِيهِ شَيْءٌ فَاتِّبَاعٌ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ وَأَدَاءٌ إِلَيْهِ بِإِحْسَانٍ

You who have Īmān! Retaliation is prescribed for you in the case of people killed: free man for free man, slave for slave, female for female. But if someone is absolved by his brother (pardoned from retaliation), blood-money should be claimed with correctness and paid with good will.[7]

In the most heart-rending reminder of Allāh’s mercy, seamlessly weaved into a ‘legal verse’, the murderer of your relative is referred to, not as a ‘murderer’, assailant or enemy, but your sibling. If one were to open the Magna Carta, or any social or legal code in the world, would it, in elucidating punishment, momentarily move off the technical and legal discourse to touchingly appeal to the status of the killer as a sibling? Does the narrative of your human rights even give way to amnesty for the sake of indispensable reward in another world?

Yes, attacks against the Qur’ān have shaken some of the doubtful ‘shakes’ among us off the fence. ‘Shakes’, however, should never think that their doubts will take them into a universe of philosophical certainties. The difference is that Islām would have provided confident answers, had they asked, whilst the alternative secularist plethoric ocean of questions the shaker ends up in wouldn’t. After all, a philosophy that cannot answer the question of why we exist will clearly fail to provide a convincing narrative on how we should exist!

But more importantly, these attacks have also created ‘Sheikhs’ who are not sitting on the fence. A new breed and calibre of certain Muslims (with yaqīn, intellectual certainty), which is refreshing. If it were not for the unrelenting attack on Islām they would have remained ordinary, like a drop in the ocean. Maybe they would not have studied the Qur’ān’s nuances, subtleties, and profound sciences, nor would they have grasped some of its endless beauty nor shared them with others. And if certainty is pervading our hearts concerning the ‘contentious’ verses in particular, how then of the others?

Let us thank Allāh for the contentment and delight of Islām, and ask Him to guide humanity to His Light.

Walhamdu lillāhi rabbil ‘ālamīn.





[6] Al-Qur’ān 59:5-9

[7] Al-Qur’ān 2:178

China’s Concentration Camps: Uyghur Muslims

 Data leak sheds light on how China ‘brainwashes’ Uyghur Muslims

Leaked documents from China’s Communist Party expose the brainwashing taking place inside high-security internment camps for Muslims in the country’s tightly controlled Xinjiang region.

The so-called China Cables were obtained by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ), a US-based donor-funded reporting outlet, and shared with 17 media partners for publication on Sunday.

The documents lift the lid on conditions for about a million members of the Muslim Uyghur community in the far western region who are thought to be detained without trial and forced to undergo indoctrination.

China’s government has repeatedly said the camps offer voluntary education and training to help stamp out so-called “Islamic extremism”. Beijing’s envoy to the UK told the BBC, one of the ICIJ’s media partners, that the documents were fake news.

The files “include a classified list of guidelines” approved by top Chinese officials for running camps and a “massive data collection and analysis system that uses artificial intelligence” to help round up suspect Xinjiang residents, said ICIJ reporter Bethany Allen-Ebrahimian.

“The system is able to amass vast amounts of intimate personal data through warrantless manual searches, facial recognition cameras, and other means to identify candidates for detention, flagging for investigation hundreds of thousands merely for using certain popular mobile phone apps,” wrote Allen-Ebrahimian.

“The documents detail explicit directives to arrest Uyghurs with foreign citizenship and to track Xinjiang Uyghurs living abroad, some of whom have been deported back to China by authoritarian governments.”

Earlier this month, another trove of Chinese government documents leaked to the New York Times daily revealed details about Beijing’s fears over religious extremism and its wholesale crackdown on Uyghurs.

This latest revelation is not new and forms part of a wide scale systemic repression and persecution of Uyghur Muslims. Several human rights organisations and experts have raised concerns surrounding the Chinese government’s actions against the minority community.

According to UN experts and activists, China is holding over one million people, particularly Uyghur Muslims, in detention centres. However, China describes these camps as “re-education camps” aiming to “stamp out ‘extremism’ and give [Uyghur Muslims] new skills.”

The Uyghur Muslims that are not detained and thrown into concentration camps and are instead faced with scrutiny from the security forces. This includes but is not limited to armed checkpoints, ID cards and facial recognition cameras.

China is said to have also deployed over a million spies to closely monitor the activity of Uyghur Muslims. According to a Communist party officer, the spies visit Uyghur households and during their visits they work, eat, and frequently share a bed with their “hosts”.

Speaking on condition of anonymity, the officer who oversees between 70 to 80 Uyghur families, Yengisar county said, “They stay with their paired relatives day and night”.

He added that “normally one or two people sleep in one bed, and if the weather is cold, three people sleep together”.

China’s ‘Xinjiang’ region is home to some 10 million Uyghurs. The Turkic Muslim group, which accounts for roughly 45% of ‘Xinjiang’s’ total population, has long accused the Chinese authorities of political, economic, and cultural discrimination.

Over the last two years, China has subjected the region to increasingly draconian restrictions, including banning men from growing beards and women from wearing veils. The country has also introduced, what many observers see as, the world’s most extensive electronic surveillance program, according to reports in The Wall Street Journal.

Meanwhile, as least one million people – roughly 7% of Xinjiang’s Muslim population – have been incarcerated in an ever-expanding network of “political re-education” camps, according to both US and UN officials.

May Allāh (subḥānahu wa taʿālā) free all of our brothers and sisters from oppression, forgive our shortcomings and give us the tawfīq to get to work. Āmīn.

Read Also:

China’s Concentration Camps: What Can We Do?



[1] AA



Muslims studying at universities in China are worse than swines. Before taking umbrage at this most appropriate designation for such scum, reflect on the following statement of Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam):
“He who imparts knowledge (of the Deen) to an unfit person is like one who garlands khanaazeer (swines) with diamonds, pearls and gold.”

Students who do not naturally and Islamically qualify for higher Islamic Knowledge have been likened to ‘swines’ in the Hadith. Thus, innumerable students who are pursuing even the Knowledge of Qur’aan and Hadith at even the Deeni Madaaris come within the purview of this Hadith in which they are depicted as khanaazeer. On the basis of this Hadith and on other Shar’i factors, those Muslims who are pursuing secular knowledge at Chinese universities are worse than khanaazeer. They cannot honestly and justifiably plead ignorance of the atrocities which the communist authorities of China are committing against the Uighur Muslims as well as other Muslim minorities. Some of these evils and atrocities are mentioned in these pages. How is it possible for Muslims to pursue secular education at the universities of the swine-eaters? Only those who are worse than swines are capable of displaying total insensivity and lack of Islamic brotherhood as demanded by Imaan. The Muslim students themselves lack the freedom to practice publicly even the lukewarm, diluted type of Islam which is the trademark of secular students who pursue education at these educational brothels. They are not free to perform Salaat in Jamaat openly. Their adherence to Islam is extremely slack and low key. Despite such indignities and swinery of the Chinese authorities, these students spinelessly accept the humiliation and ignore the suppression of their Uighur Muslim brethren. If they do have valid Imaan, they will not seek admission in Chinese universities. In fact, according to the Shariah it is haraam to pursue university education at any university any where in the world. A number of articles has been published on this topic. Imaan demands that Muslim students abandon the universities of the Swines and return to their respective countries.

al-haq bulletin 60

China’s Concentration Camps: What Can We Do?

It was just a week ago when news outlets, including Islam21C, [1] reported on a joint letter signed by 22 UN ambassadors condemning China for their abhorrent treatment of Uyghur Muslims. They collectively stated:

“We call also on China to refrain from the arbitrary detention and restrictions on freedom of movement of Uighurs, and other Muslim and minority communities in Xinjiang.” [2]

Whilst such statements are perhaps lacking in any tangible consequence, they are still welcome and at least continue to apply some pressure on China to halt its attempts to ethnically cleanse our Uyghur brothers and sisters in the East Turkestan region.

However, what was most striking about the joint statement, was the absence of a single Muslim-majority country as a signatory. Nations across Europe and as far as Canada, Australia, and Japan, signed the letter, but there was a deafening silence from the Muslim world. Not anymore though.

On Friday evening, a new letter was published; this time it was signed by 37 states, including a number of Muslim countries such as Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Pakistan, along with the likes of Myanmar and Russia. But rather than adding to the condemnation of blatant human rights abuses, these nations instead wrote in support of China, somewhat echoing statements of Chinese propaganda:

“We commend China’s remarkable achievements in the field of human rights.” [3]
“Faced with the grave challenge of terrorism and extremism, China has undertaken a series of counter-terrorism and deradicalisation measures in Xinjiang, including setting up vocational education and training centres. Now safety and security has returned to Xinjiang.” [4]

Further signatories of this shocking letter included Qatar, Kuwait, and the tyrannical Assad regime. Considering the other signatories, the only surprising fact was that no one signed on behalf of Egypt’s coup dictator, Abdel-Fattah el-Sisi!

The shock and focus of the Muslim world switched from the silence of their so-called leaders to witnessing their explicit support for the severe oppression of fellow believers. In a well-known ḥadīth, the Prophet (sall Allāhu ʿalayhi wa sallam) said:

“Whosoever of you sees an evil, let him change it with his hand; and if he is not able to do so, then [let him change it] with his tongue; and if he is not able to do so, then with his heart — and that is the weakest of faith.” [5]

We may wonder; if this is the weakest form of faith, what then is the active support of such evil?

A Recent Timeline of Worsening Abuse
China’s treatment of the Uyghur population of East Turkestan has been making occasional headlines for a number of years, albeit with limited attention from the mainstream media. The 12-million-strong population in the resource-rich region of East Turkestan have faced a series of measures over the years under the guise of ‘fighting terrorism’. Starting with reports of Muslims being prevented from fasting and the banning of the ḥijāb and growing of beards, [6] measures widened around 2016 to 2017 to restrictions on naming of children with Muslim names, [7] banning the Qur’ān and prayer mats, [8] and limiting travel for Ḥajj.[9]

Yet, with the exception of Turkey quietly raising concerns, [10] Muslim nations remained silent, as did the world at large.

It was only in 2018 when reports emerged of large numbers of Muslims being forcibly taken into detention centres in the region, that the UN and certain nations started to raise concerns. In April 2018, one US diplomat estimated that somewhere between tens and hundreds of thousands of Uyghur Muslims had been locked up in these centres. [11] Very little information was offered on what occurs in these prisons, which China refers to as ‘voluntary re-education camps’.

Furthermore, the crackdown reportedly widened to extreme digital surveillance, force-feeding of pork and alcohol, [12] and even forcing Muslim women to marry ethnic Han Chinese men.

Fast-forward to today – less than 18 months later – and it is said that more than 4.4 million Uyghurs are being held. That is more than 1 in every 3 Muslims in the region! [13] A recent BBC report also detailed how children are being separated from their parents, with no contact allowed at all. [14] It reported that China has spent $1.2 billion on upgrading school facilities to accommodate these removed children, who now face a similar fate to their parents in concentration camps.

The situation is described by China expert, Adrian Zenz, as “cultural genocide” [14]:

“I think the evidence for systematically keeping parents and children apart is a clear indication that Xinjiang’s government is attempting to raise a new generation cut off from original roots, religious beliefs and their own language.”

“I believe the evidence points to what we must call cultural genocide.” [14]

As prominent journalist CJ Werlemen put it, we are witness to the “largest industrial scale persecution of a religious minority since the Holocaust” [15] and we find Muslim leaders, at best, staying silent, and at worst, speaking in support of such persecution!

Perhaps it is not that surprising in some cases, given that the Saudi Crown Prince has praised the measures in the past, saying “Saudi Arabia respects and supports it [persecution of the Uyghurs under the pretext of fighting terrorism] and is willing to strengthen cooperation with China” [16] whilst the United Arab Emirates was alleged to have deported an Uyghur mu’addhin at random, amongst others, seeking to please the Chinese. [17]

Why is the Muslim World so Silent?
The abysmal silence of Muslim political leadership has previously been explained by Lukman Harees in an article: China is a key trade partner to almost every Muslim country – to the extent that turning against China would probably result in severe damage to their economies. Furthermore, it is a sad reality that many of our leaders are known for their lack of Islamic principles – i.e. their own corruption and their abuse of the rights of Allāh (subḥānahu wa taʿālā) and His creation – so they are hardly likely to throw stones from their glasshouses.

Muslims around the world yearn and pray for a time when our response would be like that of the story of the Muslim woman and Caliph al-Muʿtaṣim, in 837 CE. In this well-known historical event, one of our sisters was attacked by a group of Romans whilst in their land, and she was locked up unjustly. She cried out to the Muslim ruler at the time, al-Muʿtaṣim, who was thousands of miles away. But her call was heard by a passer-by, who rushed to make this incident known to the Caliph.

Upon hearing what had happened, the response was immediate. Al-Muʿtaṣim said:

“A report has reached me that one Muslim sister was attacked in a Roman city. I swear by God, I will send an army that is so big that when it reaches them, it [the tail end of the army] is still leaving our base. And tell me the strongest city of these Romans and I will send the army to that city.”

The army, led by al-Muʿtaṣim himself, swiftly defeated the oppressors in their most fortified land, ʿAmūriyyah, and rescued the woman. [18]

This incident highlights the sanctity and honour of a fellow believer and shows how oppression against even one sister was dealt with – under true Islamic leadership. Indeed, paying to free captives is from amongst the categories of zakāt, [19] showing just how significant eradicating such oppression is in our dīn. Imām Mālik mentioned:

“It is obligatory for the people to ransom those taken as prisoners of war, even if doing so consumes all their property.” [20]

Read More: Why the Muslim World is Silent Over China’s Repression of Uyghurs

What Can We Do Today?
Recalling an incident from our rich Islamic history is all well and good, and it shows us what we are sadly missing – especially when contrasted against many of the puppet regimes in place today. But the natural question is, what can we do about this injustice?

We are an ummah of 1.6 billion, from various backgrounds and various levels of religious adherence. But regardless of how ‘practising’ one is of their religion, it is safe to say that almost every single one of those 1.6 billion will witness the suffering of our brothers and sisters in East Turkestan and feel pain in their hearts, just as we do when we see suffering elsewhere in the world. This is brotherhood and sisterhood, on top of natural human instinct and empathy.

As mentioned in the ḥadīth further above, when we are faced with an act of evil, the best thing one can do is seek to change it with their hands – within one’s ability – and failing that, speak against the crime.

Some of the actions available to almost every Muslim, certainly in the Western world, include:

I. Trying our best to avoid Chinese goods. The consumer power of 1.6 billion Muslims should not be underestimated, and even if a small portion of these boycotted Chinese goods (to the extent possible), the impact will be felt. A large number of Muslims support the BDS campaign against Zionist occupation; why can this not be extended to China for their crimes.

Recently, CJ Werleman has led this call, acknowledging that whilst there may be Chinese presence in almost every product, there are still specific corporations that are vital to the Chinese economy, such as from Huawei, Vivo, Lenovo, ZTE, Anker, Haier, and others from the technology sector. He details other sectors and well-known, easily-avoidable brands that could be targeted. More can be found here.

II. Speaking out frequently and raising awareness on the plight of our brothers and sisters in East Turkestan. One should never underestimate the power of speaking out against evil. China, for such a large and seemingly powerful nation, is incredibly sensitive to criticism. This can be clearly seen from the way they have responded to reports about Uyghur treatment, starting with blanket denials, to speaking of “voluntary re-education camps”, and now taking the desperate step of inviting foreign diplomats and journalists to visit the centres themselves.

Those foreign visitors the sites face the awkwardness of seeing blatant staged events, and scripted interviews, that are so obviously done out of force, that it ends up being even more damning on China – as recently reported by the BBC when they said:

“This was China’s narrative in the mouths of people selected for us, and for whom any cross-examination might pose a serious risk.” [21]

Another example is China’s response to the original critical statement last week. Within days, a counter statement had been prepared and signed by their 37 friends and desperate partners, that has been noted to be almost verbatim matching the Chinese script. [4]

III. Following on from the above, we, as Muslims, must continue to work towards empowering our own voices and media narratives rather than having to rely on others who may lack transparency and are highly selective in what they choose to show outrage over.

For example, one might notice that we have 22 mainly-Western nations, leading calls for justice in China. In fact Western media, such as the BBC, have recently been doing a commendable job of raising awareness of the plight of the Uyghurs as well.

But whilst their stance on this particular matter is praiseworthy in spirit; it is, of course, only done due to seeing the likes of China and Russia as unfriendly or inferior nations. One can easily contrast their reaction to this matter against their reaction to the crimes of Zionist occupiers, both on a state and a media level.

If there was genuine concern for justice, there would be uniformity in their condemnation for any oppression, and concerted efforts to eradicate Islamophobia and any other discrimination wherever it is found – including within the ranks of the Tory leadership.

The narrative of Muslims, by being based on the true justice of the Sharīʿah, should be powerful enough to push others towards greater transparency and consistency; which would in turn result in a fairer media and far more public pressure to end oppression in all of its forms.

IV. Raising awareness of the harmful nature of so-called ‘counter-extremism’ policies that are Islamophobic in nature and promoted by state actors and their cheerleaders. Across Europe and the USA, we see many policies and programmes such as ‘Prevent’ that are baseless in their approach and place entire communities under suspicion. The reality is these programmes, in their nature, are no different to China’s approach to the Uyghurs.

Yes, they may be on completely different scales, but they share the underlying and fundamental principle of looking at Muslims with suspicion and treating religious practice as a ‘conveyor-belt to terrorism’. It is the same narrative, just that one is carried out by liberal democracies and one by a secretive Communist state.

V. The above four steps can only make a big impact through the unity of Muslims; working together towards greater good. Our differences should never prevent achieving greater good – and it is something we should be striving for. Furthermore, such cooperation will only empower Muslims and ultimately make them less reliant on others, and perhaps one day end the perceived need to be subservient to corrupt nations.

Alongside this, we must also work towards reducing our dependence on unjust regimes, be they China or the USA. This means strengthening transparency, democracy, and accountability in public and civil society institutions in Muslim-majority countries to bring them closer to the ideals they once lived by before they were dismantled and pillaged by colonisers. We each have a part to play, be it as a dāʿī, a parent, a politician, an entrepreneur, a civil servant, an aid worker; the reawakening, revival, and strengthening of the ummah requires everyone to do their part.

VI. Making duʿā’ for our ummah and never despairing. One should never underestimate the power of duʿā’, and one should certainly never lose hope in the mercy of Allāh (subḥānahu wa taʿālā). He is Most-Wise, and He is Most-Just.

These six steps may not seem like game-changers that will immediately fix the problem or free the Muslims of China and elsewhere from oppression in the way al-Muʿtaṣim freed the oppressed woman, but we are not judged by Allāh (subḥānahu wa taʿālā) on the outcome of our actions – as He says in Sūrat al-Aʿrāf:

وَإِذۡ قَالَتۡ أُمَّةٌ۬ مِّنۡہُمۡ لِمَ تَعِظُونَ قَوۡمًا‌ۙ ٱللَّهُ مُهۡلِكُهُمۡ أَوۡ مُعَذِّبُہُمۡ عَذَابً۬ا شَدِيدً۬ا‌ۖ قَالُواْ مَعۡذِرَةً إِلَىٰ رَبِّكُمۡ وَلَعَلَّهُمۡ يَتَّقُونَ

“And when a community among them said, ‘Why do you advise a people whom Allāh is [about] to destroy or punish with a severe punishment?’, they said ‘to be absolved before your Lord.’ And perhaps they may fear Him.” [22]

Hence witnessing change should not be our primary focus – the key is to take action, with sincerity and according to our ability – as this is what we will be judged upon.

What will you prepare for your answer before Allāh (subḥānahu wa taʿālā)?
May Allāh (subḥānahu wa taʿālā) free all of our brothers and sisters from oppression, forgive our shortcomings and give us the tawfīq to get to work. Āmīn.







[5] Saḥīḥ Muslim














[19] Al-Qur’ān 9:60

[20] Fiqh al-Sunnah, Volume 3


[22] Al-Qur’ān 7:164


Muslim Leaders Are Betraying the Uighurs


Empty streets. Sprawling encampments in the desert nearby, spoken of in hushed whispers. That’s what a modern terror regime looks like.

More than 1 million Muslim Uighurs in the Xinjiang region of China, their native land, are believed to have been interned in so-called reeducation camps by the Chinese authorities. The number may be as high as 2 or 3 million—out of a population of 11 million. Trapped along with them are Kazakhs, Kyrgyz, and Uzbeks, other Muslim minorities, though in smaller numbers. The Uighurs still on the outside are living in one of the world’s most pervasive and heavy-handed surveillance regimes, in which the camps are just one form of containment and punishment. Uighurs live in constant fear of arbitrary detention and can expect swift retribution for any expression of Turkic or Muslim identity—to the absurd extent that giving your child a traditional Muslim name is illegal.

Yet when Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the self-styled defender of Muslims worldwide, visited China last week, state media reported that he said all the people in Xinjiang were “living happily” there, thanks to China’s general upward economic trajectory. Erdogan’s attitude is all too typical of the approach taken by the world’s most prominent Muslim leaders toward the Uighurs.

Erdogan’s buddy-buddy act with Chinese President Xi Jinping came despite a proclamation by the Turkish Foreign Ministry in February. “It is no longer a secret that more than one million Uighur Turks incurring arbitrary arrests are subjected to torture and political brainwashing in internment camps and prisons. Uighurs who are not detained in these camps are under heavy pressure,” the statement read. The ministry insisted that Turkey had raised the issue with Beijing.

Beijing reacted forcefully to the gesture, and Ankara folded without hesitation. Erdogan’s priority is now reviving historical links and “strengthening cooperation” between Turkey and China, as Turkey is bidding for a key role in Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative.

Any road or rail channel between China and Turkey would have to go through Xinjiang, the westernmost part of China, so, in Ankara’s view, a shared faith, history, and kinship with the Turkic Uighurs should not get in the way of China’s handling of the local population. Ordinary Turks are strong supporters of Uighur rights, but Erdogan has a country to run—and he will not get sentimental about the issue. Muslim solidarity is a good campaign slogan and good international public relations, but that seems about as far as it goes for Turkey and others.

Pakistan, just across the border from Xinjiang, emerged as a country in 1947 specifically to be a place of refuge for Muslims. Since then, the country’s political, military, and religious leaders have taken it upon themselves to champion Islam and defend Muslims wherever they may be. Pakistan is, after all, the only Muslim nuclear state, so, by at least one measure, it has the most powerful military and the greatest capacity to intervene on behalf of oppressed Muslims anywhere.

Except, perhaps, if those Muslims live in China. Some go as far as describing Pakistan as a client state of China. Regardless, in an otherwise hugely fractured country and society, there is one thing everyone from military intelligence to radical preachers to politicians agree on: Chinese investment is vital for the country’s development and perhaps necessary even just to have enough economic activity to sustain the state and its massive army. That’s why there has been silence out of Islamabad—and why Prime Minister Imran Khan pretended not to even know about the issue when asked. Pakistani men married to Uighur women have seen their spouses disappear into the camps but received no aid from their government. China has been running a vehement propaganda campaign on the issue, spearheaded from its embassy—and spying on Uighurs in Pakistan itself.

That’s why there has been silence out of Islamabad—and why Prime Minister Imran Khan pretended not to even know about the issue when asked.

Nor can Uighurs expect much sympathy from their other Turkic Muslim neighbors across the border in Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, or any of the other Central Asian republics. They may share the religion of Islam, and even a common ethnic and cultural history, but all the governments in the region are looking to curry favor with Beijing as China is building its Belt and Road westward.

On the one hand, there are the hard geopolitical realities of having a landlocked country dependent on powerful neighbors for trade. On the other, there is the local governments’ predilection to lock up their own citizens. These countries hardly have the moral standing to censure China, even if they had the capacity to do so. Diplomatic pressure behind the scenes, coupled with public outcry in their home countries, has ensured the release of Uzbeks, Kazakhs, and others from the camps—but that sympathy doesn’t extend to Uighurs themselves.

What about the Muslim world’s most prominent spokespeople? Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt are far away from China and not as dependent on its goodwill as its neighbors. They proclaim themselves leaders of the Muslim world and guardians of the global ummah, expected to come to the aid of oppressed Muslim people. They are certainly quick to rattle sabers, issue fatwas, and call jihads in other instances of slights against the faithful—most prominently regarding the Palestinians but also in Kashmir and Myanmar.

But they say nothing about the Uighurs. Despite having its security and trade guaranteed by the United States, and claiming global leadership on Muslim matters worldwide in its role as Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, Saudi Arabia has absolutely nothing to say about the Uighurs.

Iran styles itself as a neo-Rashidun state—fashioned in the same way as the first of the four caliphates after the death of the Prophet Muhammad. And just like the first caliphate it believes in the process of carving up a role for itself as the dominant regional power in the Middle East. But if China has to lock up an entire Muslim population in lands once deeply influenced by the Persian Empire, Tehran is hardly going to argue.

Egypt, the great cultural home of Arabic Islam, has taken this one step further: It has gone as far as detaining and deporting Uighurs back to China at the behest of Beijing.

Advocacy of Islam and of Muslim togetherness and solidarity is the claimed moral basis of each of these countries, as each harks back to a historical time when it was the center of the Muslim world. Today, each and every one of them is supplicant to China—even if there is no need.

To top it all off, even the (ironically named) Organisation of Islamic Cooperation is keeping silent on the Uighurs. Cooperation is all well and good, but as things stand, for all these countries and their leaders, cooperation which China is more valuable than cooperation along religious lines.

In the Middle East, even the countries that can rely on the United States for protection and trade look to China to include them in the Belt and Road trade network. The hard fact of the matter is that all the land-bound routes on the Belt and Road go through Xinjiang. So nobody wants there to be any instability in the region that might hinder trade—to say nothing of the downsides of upsetting Beijing on the issue.

Emerging Muslim-majority countries outside the Middle East—such as Malaysia and especially Indonesia, a country firmly on an upward economic trajectory and a country with the largest Muslim population, respectively, and both natural allies of the United States in their shared efforts to contain China in Southeast Asia—have perhaps the most latitude and incentive to speak out for the Uighurs. After all, the less trade traffic goes through Xinjiang, the more has to go through waters controlled by them. But even they have succumbed to Beijing’s checkbook. While the oppositions in both countries have sometimes spoken out on behalf of the Uighurs, that may well disappear should they get into government.

This position may be pragmatic. But it stands in stark contrast with the Muslim world’s response to actual and even just claimed injustices against Muslims committed by Western countries or Israel.

Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians in the occupied territories is terrible and by now an overt process of ethnic cleansing. But Palestinians are not detained in reeducation camps and are not subject to the same degree of relentless surveillance and cultural erasure. The Uighurs in Xinjiang have it worse. Yet no ayatollah or imam is calling for China to be wiped off the face of the Earth.

Western countries waging dumb culture wars around hijabs and burkas is of acute concern when it comes to how safe, welcome, and free Muslims feel to practice their faith. Similarly concerning is the increased Islamophobia and occasionally violent tensions between Muslim and other communities in the United States and elsewhere in the West.

Yet the so-called “infidels” and “crusaders” have been much more forthright and explicit in their concerns for the safety of the Uighurs, even though many of them have just as much to gain from trade and good relations with China as the so-called “defenders of the faith.” Even when they recognize that they have little power and influence over Chinese policy in Xinjiang, and that making a principled stand is practically futile, many Western leaders have nonetheless spoken up—although there are also shameful exceptions, such as New Zealand. They act not on the basis of shared faith but of shared humanity.

There is no doubt that if Turkey, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and all the rest had nothing to gain from China, there would have been several jihads called against Beijing by now. Calling for wars against nonbelievers who oppress Muslims is one of history’s most reliable way to popularity for any Muslim leader.

But when Beijing wants to be your friend, Muslim solidarity becomes just an inconvenient anachronism. For all the discourse in the Muslim world that Western governments are morally corrupt and hypocritical about human rights—and the West certainly has grave lapses in its commitment to universal values—Muslim governments barely even try to pretend that religious solidarity requires them to speak out for their fellow Uighur Muslims. Nor do they offer safe refuge for those in need.

Yet the supreme irony is that Donald Trump’s administration has been the most robust in its censure of Beijing over its treatment of the Uighurs. Let that sink in. The administration of a man who called for the “total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States” has shown more moral fiber and human solidarity with the Uighurs of Xinjiang than every single major leader of a Muslim country anywhere in the world.

The United States had a lot less to lose doing that, for sure—and the general turn against China may also have contributed. And when even an American administration that is instinctively hostile to Muslims has been moved to speak out for the Uighurs on humanitarian grounds, it exposes the hollow echo of the Muslim world’s incessant, empty mantras of Muslim solidarity.


The Deeni and Imaani conditions of Muslims in the U.K. are incrementally deteriorating. The U.K. authorities as well as numerous among the kuffaar public are implementing policies and measures of repression against Muslims in line with the repression in China against the Uighur Muslims. Although the methodology of the U.K.’s repression is at this stage much less than its Chinese counterpart, it (the U.K.) has adopted the self-same anti-Islam policy in terms of which the Soviet Union had brutally committed genocide, wiping out whole Muslim populations in the Muslim states which it had annexed to its satanic empire.
The difference in the U.K. is that the devilish Britishers have introduced their anti-Islam policy under the guise of ‘British Values’. Overtly and deceptively, it is peddling the idea of peaceful transition from faith to Satanism in so far as Muslims are concerned. In terms of this satanic policy, any Islamic teaching or belief which is in conflict with its satanic values, is criminalized and Muslims are increasingly being harassed in the public domain.
Muslims are constrained to accept intermingling of sexes, abandonment of Hijaab, adoption of the devil’s interfaith concept, introduction of Christmas trees in the Musaajid, etc., etc. Different ways are being implemented by the evil U.K. authorities to compel compliance with ‘British Values’.
In view of the worsening position which threatens to eliminate the Imaan of the new generations of Muslims, and in view of impending repressive measures which the government will incrementally be introducing such as depicted in the Chinese scenario, Hijrat (Migration) has become Waajib.
Those Muslims who are by the means to migrate, should leave the evil country. Those who are unable to make Hijrat, should make dua and the necessary endeavours to migrate as and when this becomes possible. The plot in Britain and Europe is to exterminate Islam. The satanic conspiracy to wipe out Islam is camouflaged under the guise of British and European values.
Numerous cases of harassment of Muslims in the various public sectors are regularly reported. In the U.K. and Europe the profile of a ‘terrorist’ is a man dressed Islamically, a beard, attending Musjid five times daily, abstention from liquor and the like. A woman in Hijaab is also deemed a ‘terrorist’.
It is also necessary to remind Muslims that the current satanic attitude of the U.K. authorities is in reality the backlash of Muslim indifference and Muslim rebellion against Allah Ta’ala and the Deen. In other words, it is the unfolding of Allah’s Athaab which has been initiated on a lesser scale as a prelude to the greater chastisement. In this regard Allah Ta’ala says in the Qur’aan Majeed:
“Most certainly We shall let them taste of the lesser punishment, not the greater punishment, for perhaps they may (heed) and return to (the fold of the Deen.)”