WELCOME TO TRADITIONAL ISLAMISM

You know I am now just laughing at the whole thing now. They have given up on resorting to Islamic sources. The Quran and the Hadith Qata’aan beyond a shadow of doubt make it forbidden for a Non Muslim to have leadership over the Muslims at the very least when the Caliphate is concerned. In fact the hadith are Muttawatir. Yet here we have Maajid after he insulted the Huduud telling us that Islam dehumanises the non-Muslims and women for not allowing them to be leaders, or at least Caliphs. This obviously applies to Muslim countries  !

Here is the link

http://www.thedohadebates.com/debates/player.asp?d=46&res=hi

I quote from the 26th minute of the debate.( By the way he had the usual insults towards the beloved Hudud of the Sharia before that. )

“Those who believe that woman is not human enough to be able to lead a state have dehumanised the woman, Those who believe that a non Muslim is not human enough to lead a state have dehumanised a non- Muslim…”

Now we must remember by their loose standards of Ijtihaad as well,even on their weakest position, they believe that it is possible and consistent to believe that the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) forbade us from having Non Muslim leaders in our lands today.

In other words it is possible and consistent to believe that our Prophet believed that non Muslims and women are not human enough to do certain actions. In fact our Prophet dehumanised them. We can believe that premise and still be Muslim according to Maajid Nawaz.

If he believes that the above premise is impossible then he has accused the consensus of the Muslim scholarship to this day of Kufr!

Which one is it Maajid?

Thank you David T (and by the way, thank you for giving a further kiss of death to the Quilliamites by calling them your “friends”, if it is possible to flog a dead horse)  for giving us this interesting piece of information. We knew it anyway and it is an obvious stunt with political undertones. I quote from the Harry’s Place Blog

It is a lie to say that they have little influence: last week they co-ordinated the letter condemning anti-semitic attacks signed by pretty much every prominent non-Islamist cleric in the United Kingdom.

Now this is referring to this letter

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jan/16/islam-synagogue-arson-gaza-antisemitism/print

Now, of course I do condemn any attacks against the Jewish population in this country. This goes without saying. My concern is with the political naivety of the scholars that signed a document that was at least partially orchestrated by Ed and his side kick Maajid! What were they thinking? Do they not realise that this is a stunt to show that they are engaging with main stream Muslims ? 

My other main concern is this. Where is the background of far higher criticism against the slaughter in Gaza? Where are these Shiekhs? Do they just criticise behind the scenes? It should be proportional. We can have a letter like this without the involvement of Ed and his goons and we can also have a letter condemning the Israeli attacks in Gaza. That would be far more appropriate. Don’t you think?

Would they have done the same thing if the BNP came to them with some good words ? Clearly political intent must be taken into consideration.

An endorsement for ed from the wonderfully balanced Harry’s Place blog – amongst the juicist lines -

“Here’s the bottom line. I may disagree with Ed Husain: but I will not see a friend and an ally being hung out to dry like this.”

Ahhh. A “friend” and “ally” of this blog – which by the way has been praised by Mad Mel, and they are open supporters of the Euston manisfesto.

I think this line “Have a look at those who have jumped on Ed and Quilliam” is soooo ironic – if we do take a look at those who “have jumped on Ed and Quilliam” to ride this lame donkey in an attempt to get the “native informant” to parrot the government line (and a look at who supports them is much quicker than trying to identify all those against them), outside of a handful of “progressive post-modern Muslims” we are left with Michael Gove, Douglas Murray, David Greene of Civitas, the Foreign Office, Jemima Khan and …  Harry’s place blog.

We await the long awaited seal of approval from Regev.

From The Daily Satire

Ex-Islamists counter media accusations of impropriety

 Following media disclosures of funding of £1 million from the British tax payer, Director of the Pickthall Foundation, the world’s most expensive counter-extremism think tank, Ted Hassan, and his side kick Manjit issued a joint statement. ‘Manjit and I are outraged by the accusation that we have squandered our budget for 2008/2009. We are a think tank. We think alot about many things. That takes alot of time and energy. Moreover, one cannot simply fight extremism on a low budget. I mean we have to look good, dress smart and spend a fortune on gym fees – I mean we are representing Britain out there in the world. We know our offices are pricey – but heh – they aren’t Park Lane or anything.”

‘Manjit and I have travelled to Syria, the United States, Pakistan, the United States, Denmark, the United States, Egypt, and the United States. We also visited Luton. Many of our trips were organised and funded by US based organisations. We are not at liberty to say how much this has cost us.’

‘We are currently following a lead on one leading extremist convert who has Jamacan roots. As a result Manjit and I are about to embark on a ‘research’ trip of Jamaca and four other Carribean Islands. And for those cynics out there who think this is a reaction to bad publicity: actually we bought our tickets months ago, so there.’

‘We employ a staff of 18 fine men and women, who write an article a week for us. Some of our work has even been publsihed in the Sun. So who says this think tank doesnt have an output!”

Today’s Times news article is well worth a read for an insight into one of the modern day forms of prostitution.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article5549138.ece

“However, the critical government minister said that the foundation was receiving so much public money because it was perceived to be toeing the government line. “Ed and Quilliam have very little support in the mainstream Muslim community,” the minister said. “They have much more enemies than friends. But he’s loved by some ministers, which is why his organisation is having so much money thrown at it. And the Government knows that if you want a Muslim to say pro-government things, then Quilliam is the answer.”"

I also love this section

Mr Husain and Mr Nawaz, the organisation’s directors, are believed to be receiving salaries of about £85,000 each a year. The foundation refused to discuss individual earnings.

The figure above does not include other “earning” as well from books etc… I wonder what the total salary is?  Poor Rashad does he earn just as much?  While everyone already knows that Ed and his cohort of Government Escorts have almost non-existant support in the Muslim community, the article makes it clear that they are hardly popular amongst their clients too.

I found this post going around really funny. Obviously a mock on the defeated mentality of Usama Hassan.  Enjoy!

And now for thought for the day with Dr Usman Hussain who is a Quantam Physicist and Imam…sorry, he prefers the title Muslim vicar. Dr Hussain:

Good Morning, Peace be on you all, Shalom, Namaste and may the Force be with you all.

I am a passionate believer in healthy living. In particular, what we eat is so important for us. Jamie Oliver – with his healthy food for schools campaign is an example for us all. His campaign is the biggest jihad of the modern day.

Many of us don’t take our health seriously enough. In particular the Muslim community is overweight and eats excessively. Most of in Ramadhan with unhealthy fried food – samosas, pakoras etc. I mean what’s wrong with salad and other healthy things. Many of my non Muslim friends are vegetarian and eat organic, so why cant Muslims.

But Muslims are not just backward in the way they eat greasy smelly curried foods. They are also too fussy about what is ‘halal’ and ‘haram’ food. This is a real problem. Firstly, they think of petty issues like food, when in fact they don’t apply these labels to other matters…wife beating for example. Secondly, they fundamentally misunderstand Islamic jurisprudence.

I have lived in Britain yet studied Islam in the Muslim world and as such I am a product of east and west - a sort of Chicken Tikka Massala. Hence, I understand what my god real intends for us to eat. Muslims take the Quran too literally. They say, God says eat of the things he has provided for us, but then makes an exception for the pig.

However it is a simplistic understanding that takes such verses literally and then denies people the right to eat all pork products.

It is true my god forbade pig. But what is a pig. It is a live mammal. Once killed and carved by a butcher, it is called pork – not pig! So you see, it is no alive therefore no longer forbidden. My god only intended that we not eat LIVE pigs.

The pork is used to make ham, bacon, blackpudding and other delicious foods. So you see, these too are allowed, because they are also not pig.

Moreover, this is further supported by not one, but two juristic principles. The first is called sharra man qablina – the laws of previous religions (conservative jurists take only Judaism and Christianity, but liberal ones allow ANY religious law that predates Islam). The second is durrura – or necessity. In our modern age the biggest jihad is that Muslims fit in. When in Rome …etc.

There will be some who disagree with my message, but they need to won over, defeated, marginalised or shot.

And that was thought for the day with the Reverand Usman Hussein

I found this post on this site

http://forum.mpacuk.org/showthread.php?p=597892#post597892

I think it is very good, so enjoy!

James Brandon, was previously the deputy-director of the notoriously anti-Islamic “Centre for Social Cohesion”. He now works for the equally notorious right-wing anti-Shariah secularist sell-outs of the Quilliam Foundation:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/james-brandon

Interestingly, look what they said about MPAC:

Think tank: Muslim group spokesman praised terror: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satelli…cle%2FShowFull

Anthony Glees and Centre For Social Cohesion at it again:” http://mpacuk.org/content/view/4850/102/

See the centre for social cohesion’s press release against MPAC: http://www.socialcohesion.co.uk/files/1230051171_1.pdf
and :

http://www.socialcohesion.co.uk/blog/2007/05/enough-and-mpac.html

See Other criticism of the centre for social cohesion:

Social Cohesion: Except Muslims: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf…/religion.race

See this article against the Centre by The Institue of Race Relations:

How are thinktanks shaping the political agenda on Muslims in Britain? : http://www.irr.org.uk/2008/september/ak000003.html

“The focus on campuses was repeated in a 2008 report by the Centre for Social Cohesion (CSC). Islam on Campus by John Thorne and Hannah Stuart claimed that involvement in university Islamic Societies tends to encourage extremism.[18] In response, Wes Streeting, president of the National Union of Students, argued that the survey on which the report was based asked Muslim students ‘vague and misleading questions, and their answers were then misinterpreted’.[19] The CSC is a project of the right-wing thinktank Civitas, which before 7/7 published a number of reports describing immigration as damaging to British life. Since the CSC was established in 2007, it has focused on what it regards as the threat to cohesion represented by British Muslim communities. Its neoconservative director Douglas Murray has stated that ‘conditions for Muslims in Europe must be made harder across the board’ and has called for a bar on immigration from Muslim countries.[20] The CSC’s reports reflect this agenda.”

Douglas Murray is the director of the centre for social cohesion, and in his speech ‘What are we to do about Islam?’, speech to the Racist Pim Fortuyn Memorial Conference on Europe and Islam, The Hague, February 2006, he said conditions for all muslims should be made harder.

n 2005 he published a defence of neoconservatism, Neoconservatism: Why We Need It. He was dubbed as “the right’s answer to Michael Moore”

Of course James Brandon claims that he had disagreements with Douglas Murray because Mr Murray failed to differentiate between Islamism and Islam. Unfortunately James Brandon this does not work. If you are working with the definition provided by the Quilliam Foundation then you are really going to have difficulty separating Islam from Islamism. You would have to really engage in historical revisionism of the radical kind that would probably fail as an A-Level essay . It is great to throw around politically loaded terms but do they have any reality? I think not, more constructs of certain people of ideological concerns. Anyway I shall leave you with a wonderful quote of Douglas Murray. I quote, he was concerned about the

“violence, intimidation and thuggery of Islam”

Ok James Brandon left this Centre but only for pragmatic reasons (What in the hell was he doing in the first place associating with such people?! ).  If we deconstruct James Brandon, he is saying this, I have a problem with Islam but I want to say it in a nice way.

Life is messy James Brandon, people have learnt to deal with each other despite extreme differences. Being a Muslim with a love for the Sharia is not a barrier to genuine engagement and there is no evidence (well Iwould like to see an academic paper that shows a causal link between orthodox Islam and terrorism) that it is a necessary deterministic vehicle for terrorism.  It is amazing how certain people shout out “Realpolitik” when it suits them for national interests and in a flash become “ideological”  when they need to as well.

Do you remember Ed apparently making a “U-turn” when he wrote this piece?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jan/11/israel-palestine-islam

He was quite angry with the Government supposedly and he was going to give them a piece of his mind! Yeah, right Ed! In fact he was sending text messages all around to Muslims telling them that he was supporting this cause. The whole thing was an obvious stunt as Maajid, Usama and Shiraz Maher clearly showed! In fact what did Ed do? Well, I have confirmed what happened at the meeting with the Foreign Minister and it is as described by this article from Azad Ali

http://blog.islamicforumeurope.com/?p=139#more-139

I shall paste the relevant section. I quote

I heard that in the meeting with the Foreign Secretary (Monday 12 Jan 09), Haras Rafiq, Majid Nawaz, Ed Husain were falling over themselves to let David Miliband know that they believed the government has done more than enough and is happy with the government’s efforts so far. In fact they felt that the issue wasn’t what the government had been doing, rather the issue has been one of communication! Yep, that’s right, the government’s failure was that it did not communicate its effort efficiently to the Muslim masses! (Can hear the ring and see the £ signs in their eyes!)

 

That is right, Ed was angry about the way the government was communicating the sacrifices they made to the Palestinian people! It is obvious that Ed and Maajid at the meeting wanted to out do other participants to gain further funding and to push their treachous careers even further.

In special Knesset session on IDF operation in Gaza, Arab MKs attack Israeli leadership. Foreign Minister Livni: Hamas doesn’t distinguish between Jews and Arabs, and neither should we

Its hard work trying to market the Zionists, especially when your own ministers contradict the message you are sending out

Majid Nawaz, assistant to Zionist Propaganda Minister Mark Regev

There is, however, one crucial difference that slices through this debate like a hot knife through butter. Israel does not have an active policy of deliberately capturing children to murder them, or even deliberately murdering civilians for that matter.

Zionist Foreign Secretary Livni, talking about targeting of civilians said

They don’t make a distinction, and neither should we

As Al-Jazeera English noted

Additionally, numerous flippant remarks by senior Israeli politicians and generals, including Tzipi Livni, the foreign minister, refusing to make a distinction between civilian people and institutions and fighters – “Hamas doesn’t … and neither should we” is how Livni puts it – are rightly being seen as admissions of war crimes.

Never mind eh mark nawaz, i mean majid regev, sorry nawaz

Sources have leaked to us Usama Hassan’s grand plan to stabalise the Muslim world. Are you ready for it?

Now some of my thoughts (feedback, please):
 
1. We need to unequivocally condemn both suicide bombings or rocket attacks against civilians (vigilante terrorism of Al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, Tamil Tigers, etc.) as well as all the state-terrorism against civilian populations unfortunately perpetrated and supported by the governments and militaries of many countries around the world over the last century and more, including Muslim ones (the US, UK, Israel, Egypt, Pakistan, India, Australia, South Africa, Algeria, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Turkey, France, Syria, Sri Lanka, Russia, Sudan and other states spring to mind, inc. in Africa and Central & South America.  The list is very long!)
 
2. No ifs, no buts – the fatwas legitimising vigilante suicidal terrorism and/or state terrorism are juristically and theologically flawed and immoral.  The jurists and pseudo-jurists who issued them must recant.
 
3. The Muslim world has to recognise Israel, as in the Saudi peace plan, 1967 borders, roughly.  It is a bitter pill to swallow for many Palestinians and Muslims, but bitter pills often cure us, and there is no use crying over spilt milk after 40 and 60 years.  Jerusalem should be a city of peace for all three Abrahamic faiths to worship at their respective sites.  There is plenty of precedence for this:
 
a- During the Crusades, the Muslims often made peace with Christians on inferior terms when the latter were stronger.  Saladin-liberated Jerusalem was even handed back to the Crusaders after negotiation for a while a few decades after the famous liberation of 1187, a little-known irony of history.  Pragmatic politics: no Messianic-Armageddon false hopes or self-fulfilling prophecies of mutual destruction.
 
b- In response to the anticipated defiance of “we can’t give up an inch of Muslim land,” that would mean that we start talking about Occupied Spain & Portugal, Occupied Greece & Eastern Europe, Occupied India etc. and cling to the false dream of “liberating” all such lands.  Clearly, such madness is untenable.
 
4. The fundamentalists and extremists who oppose 1-3 must be marginalised and defeated or won over, rather than be allowed to pose as the mainstream.  Hardline attitudes across the Muslim world on 1-3 have been partly responsible for the recurring catastrophes, of which the Gaza massacre is only the latest.
 
5. Anti-semitic rhetoric and violence must end now.  Anti-Israeli rhetoric must end once peace is achieved.  We must honour our neighbours, once all sides cease being neighbours from hell.
 
6. Muslims must support the Movement for the Abolition of War (http://www.abolishwar.org.uk/).  Perhaps the one of the greatest Jihads of our times is to campaign for the end of war and military jihad, since the nature of modern warfare makes it nigh-impossible to observe the exalted ethics of the latter.
 
Any thoughts?
was-salam,
Usama

What I particularly like is the last point i.e. point 6. According to Usama Hassan if Muslims use weaponary in this modern age even in a defensive manner then it is forbidden in Islam. Yep you have it, Jihad has been abrogated in modern times because its rules of warfare make it defunct! This is rich since he resorts to pragmatism in point 4! I quote again

In response to the anticipated defiance of “we can’t give up an inch of Muslim land,” that would mean that we start talking about Occupied Spain & Portugal, Occupied Greece & Eastern Europe, Occupied India etc. and cling to the false dream of “liberating” all such lands.  Clearly, such madness is untenable.

So absolute pacifism (this is where my key objection lies, among other things ) on the behalf of Muslism is  a real dream whereas liberating one’s land from the occupation of Israel is a “false dream” because the Palestinians cannot fight to defend their mothers, sisters and children from murder! I mean, imagine this scenario. An Israeli battalion gathers some civilians into a house to bomb it. Some resistence fighters see this, but surrender to the battalion because Jihad is forbidden in Islam! Oh yeah, Usama Hassan is asking for feedback so please be gentle when you give advice.

Are you sure Usama you are not the Shiekh al Islam of Israel?

NB-In fact on this “fatwa” of Usama Hassan all the armies in the Muslim  should be dismantled!