False Equations

In the recent days a well known Islamophobe joined the Social Media’s mass medium of Twitter. This has been welcomed by the so called man of science and reason, Richard Dawkins, who no longer promotes either the science or involves himself in a reasoned debate. Instead his mission in life seems to be to acquire funding from suspect funders and then to distribute those funds to groups and individuals actively promoting Islamophobia. Why wouldn’t Richard Dawkins welcome Ayaan H Ali to Twitter, the medium he has exploited to make inflammatory and hateful sometimes racial statements. The 140 characters limit is also an excuse to not to make a reasoned argument. He also supports anonymous troll accounts which are overtly and crudely racist and Islamophobic but he calls them satirical.

The other person who welcomed Ayaan is Maajid Nawaz, a PPC for the Liberal Democrats and the Chair of Quilliam foundation. He responded to the tweet by Sam Harris, encouraging people to follow her and Maajid quickly obliged. Maajid also endorsed Ayaan H Ali’s article in the Wall Street Journal and the forthcoming book. Some people believe that Ayaan H Ali already had an account under the name of Secular African. This account had Islamophobic, hate and racist agenda. It openly promoted hate of Muslims and especially of Arabs and supported Israel, especially during the attack on Gaza, when it relayed IDF propaganda. No wonder she has voiced her desire to convert to Judaism. This account also incited Hindus against Muslims, during the Indian election, and supported Narender Modi with a desire to get him to follow back.

Ayaan H Ali has been criticised for her comments that incite violence against Muslims and support suppression of their rights in Europe and North America. This criticism hasn’t just come from Muslims, but Atheiests and Academics alike. In light of the above mentioned, her desires to convert to Judaism is understandable. This, however, conflates with her stated position of being an atheist. We, however, shouldn’t be surprised as other New Atheists like Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins, have also shown soft spot for Judaism, Christianity and Israel.  While Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris may have a chance of being accepted in the Jewish state, Ayaan H Ali, however has no chance of being accepted. She should look at the racist attitudes of Israelis towards African Jews and immigrants and the recent comments by Bibi Netanyahu in the Israeli elections.

In her article in the Wall Street Journal Ayaan H Ali promotes her book and gives the impression that she is arguing about the reformation in Islam. She claims that the Christianity and Judaism had already gone through this process of reformation and that it has only brought good to the humanity. About the Christian and Jewish reformation in Europe she says:

“because their faiths went through a long, meaningful process of Reformation and Enlightenment, the vast majority of Jews and Christians have come to dismiss religious scripture that urges intolerance or violence”

She also says that

Their religious beliefs exist in an uneasy tension with modernity—the complex of economic, cultural and political innovations that not only reshaped the Western world but also dramatically transformed the developing world as the West exported it. The rational, secular and individualistic values of modernity are fundamentally corrosive of traditional societies, especially hierarchies based on gender, age and inherited status.

The reformation is something Maajid Nawaz has also been talking about. He also wants a debate in the Muslim communities and argues for a British Islam. However, most of his debates have been with the New Atheist community and he ends up agreeing with them. He promotes Quilliam’s Osama Hasan as a scholar who even issued a Fatwa on the issue of British Muslims going to help or fight in the Syria conflict. If anything, this tactic has backfired as the number going there have increased not decreased. It seems that most of these travelers were neither religious nor previously known for extreme or violent behavior. This undermines his claims of Islamism and ideology being behind this trend.

Anyway coming back to the issue at hand, has the reformation really stopped the violence and is it the driver behind the modernity. The history suggests that there is little evidence in support of such claims. While it did bring some periods of stability and peace, in the long run it caused more death and destruction then any time before. It replaced religious fervor with nationalistic jingoism and superiority politics. The debate about reformation was really about the power of the established church and personal and nationalistic views of the ruling classes. There were some sincere reformists like the German reformist, Martin Luther of the protestant movement, his views were rejected by the English king who wanted his own reform and head the Church.     

As far as the violence and religious intolerance is concerned, the reformation did not stop the Spanish inquisition, which lasted for nearly 440 years. It seems that non violence and religious intolerance only applied to the various factions of Christianity not the Muslims or Jews, who were forced to convert to Christianity.  Those who didn’t convert were killed or expelled. That is just one example of religious violence and religious intolerance that has continued after the reformation.  

This intolerance and violence continued during the colonialism era, which subjugated people of other religion, race and colour. This was fully supported by the Church and sometimes even the scientific community. The reformation did not stop the slavery of Africans and all the brutality which came with the trade or stopped transportation of Indians to other continents. It did not stop the brutal treatment and genocides of the indigenous people of Americas or the Australia.

The reformation and enlightenment did not prevent the world WWI or WWII or the genocide of the Jews in Europe. The Jews in Europe had experienced massacres and expulsion throughout the reformation and enlightened period. The only safe place they ever had was in the Muslim communities in and outside of Europe. The wars against communism were also tinged with the religious zealot as wars against the unbelievers who had closed churches. The same rhetoric was applied to support Afghans against Russia and which formed the basis for establishing the Mujaheddin army which later turned into Taliban and Al-Qaida.

History tells us that in the newly independent countries, after breaking the shackles of colonialism, from Algeria to Yemen, enlightened, secular and socialism leaning leaders emerged. However, one by one those leaders were got rid of. These leaders were undermined by the west by overtures to the military and by supporting religious parties, saying to them socialism conflicted with Islam and religion. Leaders such as Nasser, Bhutto, Sukarno to name few. Lets look at Pakistan, which gets special mention in Ayaan H Ali's article and probably the book. In 1960's and seventies Zulifqar Ali Bhutto established a political party which overtly said in its manifesto that Islam is our religion and Socialism is our politics. The party won by landslide in open and fair elections. During the elections and the party rule, US and other western countries supported the religious parties. Their was a queue of western ambassadors, lead by US,  to visit his the humble residence of Jamat Islami scholar and leader Mowdudi. Bhutto was replaced with a Military ruler, who did introduce some Islamic law.  
  

Lets not forget the war, which in the absence of proof of sated reason, can only be described as a war motivated by religious beliefs of Tony Blair and George Bush. The other recent examples are the Apartheid in South Africa and the current occupation and siege of Palestine by Israel and her apartheid and racist systems. Even the Prime Minister of Israel made openly racist comments to scare his fellow Jews and to get votes. Netanyahu and his administration is known for making anti Muslim and anti Arab statements to justify their wars on Gaza. These attitudes of intolerance, racism and religious hatred are inherited from their homeland of enlightened Europe and the North America. I sometimes wonder if today’s Jewish community is being used by the Zionists, be that Jews/ cultural Jews, atheists or Christians to cause havoc in the Muslim countries.

In Europe these Zionists of all kind are building alliances with the neo-cons and neo-Nazis against the minorities and the Muslim communities of Europe and the North America as well as against Russia. This has created the atmosphere of fear and uncertainty in the migrant and Muslim communities. However, I remain fearful that if the history is to repeat itself the Jewish community will be as much of a target as the other minorities and Muslims. This fear is based on the perceptions, as pointed out by Trevor Phillips, of Jews being rich and powerful. Such myths had previously resulted in massacres and genocide in Europe.  The most intolerant of Muslims are the New Atheists also known as the new Humanists and secularists. They suppose to be the enlightened and reasoned ones but most of their rhetoric is neither reasoned nor enlightened. 

Ayaan H Ali’s article gives an idea about her forthcoming book. She claims that she is not against all Muslims and hope that Muslims will reform the religion themselves. She, like the President of the United States, wants to keep all options on the table to confront Islam/ Muslims. This includes the option of force, in other words option of violence which is not very tolerant, reformed or enlightened. Other new Atheists, like Sam Harris, also hold the same views.

The reality of the reformation is that all Christian sects agreed on the divinity, Christ and Bible being untouchable. In other words the foundations of the Christianity remained out of bounds of the reformists. The same applies to the claimed Judaism reformation. However, Ayaan want to attack the core foundations of Islam by attacking the Prophet (pbuh). Without whom there would be no Islam and Muslims today. Anyone who is attacking the core foundations of a religion is not sincere about discussion dialogue or considered reform but purveyor of doom and violence.

The other crazy thing she has come up with is the ‘Madina Muslims’ and ‘Mecca Muslims’. She claims that the Mecca Muslims are more peaceful than the Madina Muslims. The reasons she gives for this is that the Madina Muslims were involved in wars while the Mecca Muslims were peaceful. This shows her total ignorance of the beginnings of the Islam and the life of the prophet (pbuh). She seems to have swallowed the scripts provided to her by the Islamophobe Industry. The facts are as below:

The Prophet (pbuh) emigrated to Madina, due to the violence and threats to him by the idol worshippers of Mecca. He was invited by the Muslims of Madina and other Muslims who had migrated on his advice. When the idol worshipers plotted to assassinate him, he also migrated to Madina. When the leaders of the idol worshippers learnt of the failure of assassination attempt they felt humiliated. They then attacked Madina in their attempt to assassinate the Prophet (pbuh). They attacked Madina on several occasions but every time they failed. This does not fit her description of peaceful and non aggressive people.  

Clearly Ayaan H Ali’s narrative does not fit the facts. By her logic the people and tribes of Mecca, who tried to assassinate the Prophet (pbuh) and attacked Madina on several occasions were docile and pacifists. The fact is that before they embraced Islam, the Meccan Tribes were aggressive warriors. They became peaceful and devout because of Islam not despite of Islam. The people of Madina were always peaceful and provided sanctuary to the migrants including the Prophet (pbuh). Today there is no difference between Muslims of Mecca and the Muslims of Madina. Like 1.6 billion Muslims of the world of all colours, races and nationality, they all try to practice their faith peacefully.

Ayaan H Ali, in her piece for WSJ, states that the Christians and Jewish communities of Madina were told that they could retain their faith if they paid a special tax. She alleges that all others were told either to convert or die. This is a pure fiction. The tax applied to all non Muslim communities. The fact is that the initial attacks by Meccans on Madina did not affect the others as Muslim numbers were low and could easily be targeted. However, as Muslim numbers grew, due to the conversions, the attacks started to affect all communities. However, as only Muslims were defending against these attacks and Meccans had started to approach other groups to spy and collaborate, there was need both for funds and to counter these tricks. Therefore, non Muslims were asked to pay a tax as contribution to the cost of defending and as a declaration of loyalty.     

Ayaan H Ali's, like many other, is trying to rewrite the history of Islam and create another label to divide Muslims. She says that she was raised as a Meccan Muslim. Her hostility towards Islam and Muslims and her rhetoric of inciting wars and violence belittles her own argument and factitious and facile theory.     

  

                                                    

9/11 and Other Anniversaries

Another anniversary of the 9/11 has passed with another President of the US using the occasion to declare another war. The terminology and the rhetoric of evil, barbaric, genocidal, etc is also back. There is no change in the belief of exceptionalism of the America and the Americans in particular and the west in general. It seems no lessons have been learnt from the tragic events of the 9/11 and the actions prior to and after the event.

Like most people my day on 9/11 began as normal, a bus journey followed by train ride and a walk to work. As usual I had a scone and cup of tea for breakfast at my desk. Just before I was to go out for a sandwich a colleague approached me and said that he had heard the news on the radio that a plane had crashed into one of the high rise buildings of the World Trade Centre. We were both anxious about the safety of the passengers and the people in the building. That was just the start and as the second plane hit the second tower we started to wonder if this was accidental or deliberate act. When towers fell we were aghast like everyone else in the world. Everyone was saying that they didn’t expect towers to crumble the way they did.

Whatever the motives of the people who allegedly carried out the attacks, it has had a lasting effect on all but especially the lives of Muslims settled in the West and the Muslim in the world at large.

While we don’t know the motives of the alleged hijackers what we know from the information available is that the majority were from Saudi Arabia and all were Arabs. There is no evidence that they had visited Afghanistan or Pakistan. They were students who had studied in the Europe and had freely visited US. They were from well off backgrounds and there were no signs of any disaffection from society. Furthermore, there were no signs of any abnormal affiliation with so called extremism. Everything points to a political motive not the alleged religious extremism.

It is often said that the attack on the twin towers was an unprovoked attack. Furthermore, it’s claimed that it is more to do with religion than politics. I don’t see this in these simplistic terms.

Because the West continues to blame Muslims and their religion, Let us look at the Muslim world before 9/11 and what had happened in years preceding. The US and the West had interfered in the internal affairs of many countries and supported the suppression of people by unelected dictators. They had used countries like Pakistan and Iraq to fight proxy wars without caring about the effects of such wars on the ordinary people. No consideration is given to the lasting effects of wars on the population in terms of social, economic and the loss of life.

In Afghanistan, during the proxy war between Russia and US 1979-1989, an estimated 1,500,000 civilians plus 100,000 fighters were killed. Furthermore, around 3 million Afghan civilians were wounded, most of them children. Also 7 million Afghans had been displaced of which 5 million refugees are hosted by Pakistan to this day.

This proxy war also set the precedent of using religion, private funding and the use of foreign fighters / Mujahidin, sponsored by US and Saudi Arabia.  

Afghanistan historically had been closer to the USSR than the US. USSR had heavily invested in Afghanistan during the 70’s, building Kabul University, civil infrastructure, power plants and local schools. They also established universities in other provinces. In contrast when the proxy war ended in 1989, the US and their allies left Afghanistan in the hands of warring warlords. There was no development or rebuilding. The foreign fighters were not encouraged to go back to their countries. There was no help for them to go back and readjust to normal life. The void was filled by the Taliban who had come out of the religious madrassas (A form of basic schooling) in the refugee camps, only form of education available to the refugees..  

Let us not forget the ongoing impact of this war on Pakistan, economic, political and social. Before the Afghan war Pakistan’s elected Prime Minister, Zulifqar Ali Bhutto had started to distance Pakistan from the West by leaving SEATO (an equivalent treaty to NATO in the Asia) and the Common Wealth. He looked towards East and the Middle East. He had laid the foundation for a movement of united Muslim block with economic and political power. He was instrumental in the use of oil power of the Middle Eastern OPEC to resolve the outstanding disputes in the Middle East between Israel and the neighbouring countries. Furthermore, he supported the idea of punishing the US and other Western powers for their military support of Israel and their failure to resolve the Palestine issue. This resulted in the 1973 stoppage of the oil supply to the US. This forced West to arrange the evacuation of Israeli forces from the Sinai and promise to facilitate return of the Golan Heights to Syria 

Soon West resorted to the old tactics of divide and rule and find ways to remove obstacle. Bhutto had said that the “white elephant” was after him for not cooperating with them. The white elephant had a long memory and soon engineered the removal of Bhutto from his elected position. The military dictator who removed Bhutto not only supported the US’s proxy war in the Afghanistan, he divided the nation. He fuelled the communal politics in the country and sowed the seeds of sectarian violence. He also experimented with Saudi and Taliban style government in Pakistan. The Middle Eastern Unity was fractured by the peace treaty between Egypt and Israel.       

The Iran/ Iraq war which began on 22^nd September 1980, may have started as a dispute between the two countries but  by 1982 US openly came to support Iraq. The US support to Iraq came in the form of technological, intelligence, the sale of chemical and biological warfare technology and satellite intelligence. No objections were raised at the use of such chemical and biological weapons by Iraq during this war. By the time the war ended, in 1988, there were between 1,000,000 and 1,500,000 casualties on both sides. Furthermore, the economies of both countries had suffered an approximately $1,000 billion loss. No wonder Iraq invaded Kuwait to make up for the losses. We know that US ambassador had given a nod to this invasion but it seems that Kuwait’s wealth had a bigger allure and soon US switched sides, which lead to the first Iraq war.

The first Iraq war in 1991 was seen as humiliation of the Iraqi people and massacre of its armed forces described as Turkey shoot, only added to the frustration of Middle Eastern population. The Saudi population was unhappy about the use of their territory to attack Iraq. Their anger got worse when US forces were allowed to station at a base in the Kingdom. While the war was over in days, what followed had a profound effect on the populations of the Middle East. While the people had little objections to the dismantling of the chemical weaponry, they objected to the crippling sanctions which had reduced the oil rich modern developing society to a poor third world country.

The sanctions are nothing but a modern version of the medieval siege of people to force them surrender. This siege of Iraq caused deaths of 5000,000 children from malnutrition and curable diseases.  

Then came Bosnia conflict, from 1992-95, which resulted in loss of life of a minimum of 2,000,000 including 12,000 children. Deaths include victims of genocide and massacres as well as starvation and exposure to the elements due to living in hiding.  At least 50,000 Muslim women were the victims of organised campaign of rape. Mass graves are still being discovered and this year remains of 284 victims have been discovered and 10,000 people are still missing. The conflict forced 2,200,000 to flee their homes. There was resistance to Muslims being given refuge in the West. Suggestions were made to ship them to Pakistan and the Middle East but eventually they were allowed in.

The Bosnian conflict had a profound effect on the young Muslims living in the West including students. They saw how the West was treating the European Muslims and they wanted to help. The Second and third generation Muslims who were trying to find their identity, found a cause they could relate to and in the process found their identity. They became active in raising funds, visited Bosnia and helped refugees to settle in the West.

Then there is the ongoing plight of the Palestinians who have now lived under occupation for more than 60 years. Israel has massacred Palestinians, not only in Palestine but in the refugee camps in other countries. Anniversary of one such massacre has just passed. This massacre also happened in September in 1982, in the camps of Sabra and shatila, Lebanon.  In just 3 days, from 9/16-18 appr. 3,500 men women and children were massacred by Israel. Israeli forces were lead by Aerial Sharon, who was never brought to Justice for the inhumane war crimes. Instead he held ministerial posts and became Israeli Prime Minister. He was welcomed with open arms in the US. This is just one example of the most heinous monstrosities committed against the Palestinians by Israel supported by the West in general and the US in particular.  Despite continuous suppression of Palestinian and other minorities in Israel and medieval style siege of Gaza, there are no sanctions against Israel.

Apart from the above there are other conflicts where Muslims face suppression, oppression, murder and rape. They include Kashmir, Philippine, China, Burma, Sri Lanka but find no support from the West. On the other hand Muslim countries are forced to relinquish territory e.g. East Timor, South Sudan. Since the 9/11 rise in Islamophobia and attacks on Muslims and mosques has made life difficult in the West. The term terrorist has lost its original meaning and now every country is using it to suppress political opponents, freedom fighters, insurgents and more. Apart from the West, where its used to curtail freedoms and justify draconian legislation, prime example are Palestinian and Kashmiri resistance.    

If there is anybody who has benefited from the tragedy of 9/11 it is Israel. This has been stated by none other than the Likud leader and the current Prime Minister of Israel. Netanyahu is of course right and its evident from the actions of Israel. Israel has, grabbed more and more land from the Palestinians, build more settlements, killed more civilians, demolished more Palestinian homes, waged wars on PA and Gaza, scuppered all attempts to reach a peace deal, etc. More importantly Israel has developed an Islamophobic narrative and spread it through alliances. These alliances include the normal suspects like AIPAC and new alliances with the neo-Nazi, nationalist, racist, atheist and neocon groups in the US and the West. While spreading hate of Muslims and Islam, Israel has openly promoted Judaism and used the first Testament to recruit Christians on her side. Israel has declared itself as a Jewish state that mean all new laws are influenced by the Jewish Law which is used to apply the two tier Judicial system.

While spreading lies about the Mosques, Israel has successfully used Synagogues in the West to recruit young men to enlist in its armed forces. These young men are radicalised in Israel and sent back to spread the hate and intimidate the dissenting voices in the Jewish community. We are already seeing the effects of this on the streets of Britain in form of attack on George Galloway MP and intimidation of a Rabbi in Manchester .      

Tony Blair often speaks about the Kosovo conflict and how he saved Muslims from ethnic cleansing and possible genocide. He was fully aware of the resistance in the Europe to Muslim refugees from Bosnia. He acted in self preservation and wallowed in the popularity he received in the bargain.

Coming back to 9/11 and its aftermath, I don’t think I need to talk about the occupation of Iraq or Afghanistan, Guantanamo Bay, Human rights abuses, war crimes, torture and loss of over 1,000,000 lives. I don’t need to mention millions of refugees and its impact on the region. I don’t need to highlight the emergence of sectarian, communal and divisive politics and conflicts. I don’t need to remind people about the creation of failed state in Libya and economic impact on the neighbouring African nations. I don’t need to state the rise and fall of the Arab Spring and Democracy and the military coup in Egypt. Syria is an ongoing problem for the last 3 years with a death toll nearing 200,000 and millions of refugees and now another conflict in Iraq.   

I don’t even want to question the flimsy and false evidence used to wage wars in the Afghanistan and Iraq. You all know about the false evidence used to invade Iraq but generally believe that Afghanistan was responsible because it hosted former friend of the US Osama bin Laden. Question is whether any evidence exists of his involvement. All we know is that the crime was pinned on him on the flimsy line in a conversation in a wedding video. The line was “we didn’t expect the towers to fall”. As I said at the beginning that everyone was asking the same question. The media spent a great deal of time in analysing and speculating about the same question.

Finally, on the basis of the list of suspects provided by the US and the evidence pointing to the political motives of the alleged perpetrators. The evidence also suggests that, neither Afghanistan nor Iraq had anything to do with 9/11. Why then both countries were attacked, invaded and  occupied. It is clear that US acted in own interest to make an example but not because they were guilty but because taking action against the Saudi Arabia and its citizens, was not in her interest. Instead both Saudi Arabia and the US had worked jointly in Afghanistan and were aware of the devastation they had left behind. Saudi Arabia and possibly Israel persuaded US and the West about the danger of perceived influence of Osama Bin Laden in the Muslim world. This was then used to attack and occupation. However, they didn’t expect this adventure to turn into a nightmare. Attack on Iraq was also part of the strategy to protect allies Saudi Arabia and Israel.  

It seems to me that diplomacy and negotiations are dead and every dispute is resolved by threat or actual use of force. Even so called alliances of the willing are created by threats like, "you are with us against us". There are no thinking political leaders and we and the politicians are being lead by the mainly incompetent media with their own interests. Everyday more and more people are falling victim to this policy which says I will let my fist do the talking. Everyday more children, women, men are being killed and everyday is an anniversary of the increasing number of victims of the new reality.       

You Can't Judge a Book by Its Cover But....

You Can Judge a Person by the Company they Keep

I was away for couple of months and returned back home to UK towards the end of May. As I landed at the airport I could feel the change in the air. My first clue was the change of attitude of the UKBA staff at the airport. I was with a wheelchair bound person, therefore we were the last to leave the plane. When we got to the passport control I expected it to be empty but there was crowd still waiting. They were mainly relatives who had come to visit their families or retired who had come on a tourist visa. Some like us had returned after visiting family abroad. The staff which is normally friendly and professional were more harsh and unfriendly. There was a translator present, probably to help with UKBA questions. However, he was not standing by the officers but had been told to stand away and was only called after humiliating remarks about people not being able to speak/ understand English. This is clearly not a great advertisement for the Great Britain.  

I later learnt that I had missed the UKIP victory in the local and European Elections. Furthermore, UK media, especially the BBC, had been giving disproportionate amount of time to the UKIP and Nigel Farage and the racist and anti immigrant rhetoric. While Nigel Farage mainly talks about the European Union and the policy of freedom of movement, the real victims of his rhetoric are the settled non European communities. This is reinforced by our colour blind media, who doesn’t differentiate between European and non Europeans. Whenever, there is discussion about immigration, they always show clips showing long settled Asian communities.

Then came the so called “Trojan Horse” story giving media another chance to target the minority communities, not only in Birmingham but nationally. What I found interesting was that the Chairman Maajid Nawaz and Quilliam Foundation were getting exclusive air time on issues affecting the Muslim communities. Often it seems that Quilliam and Chairman Nawaz are mainly there to reinforce the government, media  and Henry Jackson Society line. There seems to be no room for the alternative point of view. In the recent conflict in Gaza the BBC insisted on having Israeli voice. At times it seemed that Mark Ragev worked for the BBC and other media, repeating the same lies without question. However, BBC doesn't apply the same principal of proportionality when it comes to the issues related to the minority communities in the Uk.  

• The question is that why Chair Nawaz, a prospective Parliamentary canditate for the Liberal Democrats, gets so much air time. We know when it comes to the Muslim and Asian immigrant communities, BBC and other media are in breach of their own code of conduct of impartiality and fair reporting. This is made worse by exclusively employing Quilliam and Chairman Nawaz to speak on issues affecting the Muslim and Pakistani communities. Furthermore by giving Chairman Nawaz air time, who is a prospective parliamentary candidate for the Liberal Democrats, BBC is probably in breach of the electoral rules.

Chairman Nawaz is neither a member of the government nor a spokes person for the Liberal democrats. He should either resign from the Quilliam Foundation or step down as the Prospective Parliamentary candidate. He neither speaks for the Muslim community nor does he represent their views. His and the Quilliam Foundation views are are more reflective of their supporter organisations like Henry Jackson Society, British Humanist (Atheist) Society and the Neocon- Gatestone Institute. The Liberal Democrats must also decide whether his views reflect the views of the Liberal Democrats. They were quick to punish David Ward for his support for Palestine but have failed to take action against Chairman Nawaz for his support for Israel and attacks on the Palestinian resistance movements. He showed no sympathy for the victims of indiscriminate and targeted bombings in Gaza. He probably agrees with Douglas Murray, who described vast number of people who protested in London, as anti-Semites.  

By the way Chairman Maajid Nawaz has been on a VIP trip to Israel while Palestinian Americans and Palestinian Britons are refused visas to visit their homeland.

It is no accident that Chairman Nawaz and the Quilliam Foundation got free reign in the media. They had a little help from his friends including David Aaronovitch, Ian Dale, Nicky Campbell, Nick Cohen, etc. and of course the Atheists, Humanists and Ex Muslims. These people have been hounding the few voices in the media and the social media including Mehdi Hasan, Mo Ansar, Salma Yaqub and Mo Shafiq. While this clique had been after these prominent Muslims for some time, they needed a brown face to front their agenda. When they saw Chairman Nawaz under pressure, after his ill judged remarks to change the wording of Quran, during the Tommy Robinson affair, they offered him help and a protocol which he gladly accepted. They however, wanted to judge his "liberal and secularist" credentials, which was tested during the cartoon affair in January.      

I want to understand that how a cartoon, which had been around for several years, suddenly became a symbol of freedom of speech. Was it really about freedom of speech and liberalism or there was a sinister agenda. It seems to me the whole thing was staged through the BBC programme the Big question and a deliberate provocation. The host of the programme, Nicky Campbell is often found involved in Islamophobic activity on twitter. He likes to quote, out of context, translated passages from Islamic text. Its not that he is a scholar of Islam, he is just reading from the selected texts, supplied by a cell in Israel. Such texts are often used by the anti Muslim organisations. I have asked him and Tommy Robinson to tell me where I can buy a copy of the books they quote from but to date I have had no response.   

Coming back to the cartoons and why I think the whole thing was staged. I want you to consider the following twitter conversation, on 3^rd February 2014, between Chris Moos (one of the t-shirt wearers), Nicky Campbell and LSS (Lawyers' Secular Society) :

Chris Moos to Nicky Campbell:

Hi @NickyAACampbell could you please clarify that u were aware we were wearing @JandMo t-shirts #bbcbq and, consented to us uncovering them?

LSS to Nicky Campbell

Nicky, LSS is also hoping you can clarify this asap, Thank you @ChrisMoos_ @NickyAACampbell @JandMo

Nicky Campbell response to the above

@LawSecSos @ChrisMoos_ @JandMo have Dmd Chris

In light of the above and on the balance of probabilities, I would say that the whole thing was staged.

Now you decide whether or not Chairman Maajid Nawaz also had an advance notice of the planned spectacle and whether his act of tweeting the cartoon was deliberate. Before you decide one more thing to consider, Chris Moos and his accomplice, who wore the cartoon bearing t-shirts, are both members of the humanist society and so is Chairman Nawaz.Furthermore, Chair Nawz is still following him on twitter.

Following are some of the statements and claims Chairman Maajid Nawaz has made:

·         He was not radicalised in any mosque and in fact he was forcefully removed from outside a mosque for distributing HT leaflets;

·         He joined HT in search of identity (due to severe racial harassment) and for the Political reasons (due to situation in Bosnia);

·         He had a prominent role in HT

·         He is fluent in Arabic

·         After the cartoon affair he claimed that he did it for Salmaan Taseer and Malala Yousufzai

·         He set up an organisation called Khudi in Pakistan

The question is if he knows that radicalisation doesn’t take place in mosques, why doesn’t he confront those who say it does?

If he joined HT in search of identity and for political reasons then why doesn’t he give benefit of doubt to the young people of today, who may be going through the same struggle. Why does he dismiss them as Islamists and extremists? Why does he say that situation in Gaza, Palestine, Syria, Iraq, Egypt etc. is not relevant?

His claims about his role in HT and his claims about fluency in Arabic language were exposed as lies by a young atheist called Layla Murad. 

His claims that he had tweeted cartoons for Salmaan Taseer and Malala is nothing but exploitation of his Pakistani heritage. The supporters of Salmaan Taseer and Malala don’t want anything to do with him.

As far as the establishment of “Khudi” is concerned, it was a back door revival of the failed organisation called "Laltain" and "Roshani", which were sponsored by Richard Dawkins. In any case, Khudi severed links with him after the cartoon affair.

Now consider, what his new friends and sponsors say about him:

• In a Richmond Forum organised debate Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who had nothing intellectual to contribute apart from attacking Quran and the prophet, she liked the “evolution Chairman Maajid Nawaz had gone through;

Another atheist, Taslima Nasreen tweeted (tweet now deleted on Maajid Nawaz’s request:

• It was nice to meet fellow Pakistani atheist Maajid Nawaz (It was only when others latched on to the tweet, Chairman Nawaz asked her to delete the tweet and stated that he had decided not to disassociate himself from Islam). Her next tweet doesn't clarify the situation but leaves it open to interpretation. She tweeted:

@auddin76 , @MaajidNawaz is probably a progressive Muslim, not an atheist. Thought he is as everyone is atheist in world humanist congress.



Whether or not Maajid is a Muslim is not the issue, it is his evolution which Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Taslima Nasreen are fan of that exposes his insincerity and hypocrisy. He says that he want to work from within to reinterpret Islam but he will not do the same to counter the Islamophobia and the hate preaching from his friends. I must admit I was a fan of Chairman Nawaz but as his “evolution”, language and ideology became closer to people like Tony Robinson and Douglas Murray, I became suspicious of his motives. 

The sad thing is that Chairman Nawaz and his colleagues do not understand the agenda of their new found friends. They don't see the effects of Islamophobia, hate speach and racism, all rolled into one strategy of his new chums, that causes severe damage to the community relations. As a man who claims to be a victim of brutal racial harassment, chairman Nawaz seem to be blind to the fuelling of hatred on a larger scale. He doesn't see the stereotypes he is promoting with a limited knowledge. He doesn't know that Pakistani Muslims are a minority in the South Asians living in the UK but this fuelling of hatred against brown Muslims effects all brown people, be it Hindu, Sikh, Christians, etc.

The atmosphere of fear created by these, mainly South based organisations and individuals, affects disadvantaged communities of all backgrounds in the country. It causes divisions in those disadvantaged white and migrant communities and gives rise to the ugly racism and Islamophobia. The result, people are abused attacked, children are bullied, women are subjected to molestation. People are threatened and are forced to install secure fences, cctv cameras for the safety of their children, Homes, businesses and places of worship are attacked. 

In light of the perceived increase in the extremism, I recently posed a question on twitter about the achievements of the Quilliam Foundation and Chair Nawaz. The only answer I received was from Jeremy Duns. He said:

I will name 3: exposing Mo Ansar, Ibrahim Hewit, Adnan Rashid   

I was surprised at the answer which made no sense as I did not see the relevance to the question posed. Chair Nawaz claims that the Quilliam Foundation is an Anti Extremism organisation. I am not familiar with all the names but understand none of them have been associated with any extremist activity. They are all articulate, intelligant and self assured people who expose Islamophobia. If they have no link to extremism then what the expose was all about. Jeremy Duns then sent me link to his website and an article he had written about Mo Ansar. During the of writing this, I also found articles by Ian Dale and Nick Cohen and it became clear that the Quilliam Foundation can't claim credit for the work of others. 

I am not familiar with Jeremy Duns's work but his profile says he is a writer of fictions but he is trying his hand to write non fiction. If his article, regarding Mo, is anything to go by, he be better of sticking to the non fiction. There is nothing in any of the articles about Mo which suggests that he has done anything wrong, apart from speaking up on the issues affecting the Muslim community. Nobody is questioning his intelligence or self assured assertiveness. The only thing they question is that how Mo rose to such prominence position in the Muslim community and in the media. It seems that these people can't stand that a man from the North, not educated at any prestigous institute and a Muslim broke through the fences.

• Ian Dale's gripe is that Mo Ansar made a complaint against him for his behaviour towards an old Imam. We know how he treats old men, we have seen him on live TV  wrestling an old man who came into the shot during a book promotion shoot.   

• Nick Cohen's writings are about supporting neocons and opposing liberal left. In particular he is angry with the liberal left for supporting Muslims against Islamophobia. He is an ardent supporter of Israel. He is also friends with many of the BBC's producers and editors.
• Nicky Campbell is a presenter with a gift of gab, he needs that as he has no qualifications. He was often involved in arguments with Mo Ansar mainly on twitter. He holds strong anti Muslim views and am surprised he is allowed to host programmes like the BBC's Big Question where he broadcasts his personal prejudices.

Coming back to the Chairman Nawaz and the Quilliam Foundation, I am astonished and amazed at the naivety of the government to use an organisation which has zero percent support in the Muslim community. I am less surprised at the BBC using Quilliam and Chairman Nawaz on issues related to the Muslim community. Their bias is abundantly clear to the public who demonstrated in their 1000's outside the BBC, during the Gaza conflict. Furthermore, you can not expect better from the organisation, which employs bigots like Jeremy Clarkson and Islamophobes like Nicky Campbell.

Due to the company he keeps and the view he holds, I have no hesitation in calling the Chairman Nawaz an Islamophobe. He follows people like Maryam Namazie, Tarek Fatah, Ex Muslims and other Islamophobes, who are alaways looking for negative stories in Muslim countries/ communities. Some of such stories are found to be untrue but are never withdrawn. They, including Quilliam associates, share and tweet these stories. He, increasingly reminds me of “Jaffar”, a character from the cartoon film Aladdin, who’s ambition seems to be power and gold and he would do anything to achieve his ambitions.   

  

Update 01/09/2014

On Sunday Maajid Nawa was busy publicising so called "British Fatwa" and bigging up his colleague Dr Usama Hasan as Islamic Scholar. Usama Hasan has no qualifications, apart from ability to translante Arabic into English, to qualify him as an Islamic scholar. How is this different from individual Taliban Imams issuing fatwas in Afghanistan. 

It seems that as more and more people are questioning Quilliam's claims of countering extremism and are seeking prooof and they in desparation are doing anything to get headlines. Unfortunately, these headlines raise more questions.

Its time for the Quilliam to come clean and explain, reasons for their failure to connect to the Muslim population of Britain, especially the younger generation. Could it be that they only rely on promotion of negative images of Muslims and Islam and perpetuate stereo types.

Whatever the reasons it is clear that Quilliam has failed to make an impact on the British Muslim population and the wider public.