Well, well, well. For someone like Maajid who was so concerned about accurate accounts because of the expenses scandel. I quote:

I’ve been asked to be very brief so I will say this theoretically at least on this subject that I am about to say. Nadeen and Jacky can agree and that is that the expenses scandal was indefensible. But moving forward I think that I dont want to see the sort of Britain where if anyone saw Yes Prime Minister where Civil Servants, middle to senior ranking civil servants are paid higher than legislators. Currently there are Civil Servants working from our Home Office earning 80 to 100 or 120 thousand and MPs who are beginning in Parliament who are earning 64 thousand so they are earning double the legislators. We are going to make cut backs, let’s make cut backs on the pen pushers in the Civil Service that don’t do very much other than take Holidays all the time. I have to deal with them on a regular basis and I would say that legislators do deserve a bit of slack. Now I know this isn’t necessarily that popular. What I would say we want to attract the best talent when it comes to legislation and currently we are not doing so…”

Surely, for such an idealised position it would make sense that you have your accounts up to scratch, and with that hefty budget that you have, it would make sense that you have a good accountant employed to make things transparent. It seems as though they are having a bit of trouble. From this blogspot we have this:

Henry Jackson Society and Policy Exchange both made their respective filings with plenty of time to spare, well done to both organisations (particularly H’S'JS which continues to report a surplus on doubled turnover). The Quilliam Foundation remains overdue on its 2007/8 accounts, which were due on 20 Sept. The civil penalty has now gone up from £150 to £375. The directors are also, in principle, criminally liable. Filing accounts on time is an important duty, and it is not a particularly onerous requirement for a minimally competent organisation; this is particularly important as the Quilliam Foundation has never filed a set of accounts (it was set up in November 2007 and so got 6 months grace to file its first annual accounts, for the period to March 09). Every single other thinktank I have surveyed manages to meet its Companies House or Charities Commission obligations, apart from EISCA and Quilliam. QF’s Companies House return is due on the 18th of December and frankly my hopes are not high for that either

Here is the source of this information

Interestingly, note the other two Company Houses that are quite good with their accounts

This week’s offender: The Quilliam Foundation, company limited by guarantee, number 06432342, accounts due 20 Sept – no accounts have yet been filed ever by the QF which was founded in November 2007, although they have produced an Annual Report for 2008/9.

Up and coming: Policy Exchange (Companies House return) and Henry Jackson Society (accounts for y/e Dec 31 2008, Charities Commission), both due at the end of this month.

Well done to the Centre for Social Cohesion and Muslim Association of Britain who are both completely up to date on their filings

Now,  now since that tiff with Douglas Murray you shouldn’t really let this happen. Look, even an Islamist think tank has better accounts!

Let us though emphasis that we are not making any accusations of impropriety here (maybe it is just a lack of organisation), but it would be nice to see what the accounts will reveal. If this is a case of mistaken identity then I am happy to retract this, just in case we have another Quilliam Foundation that was set up at the time noted.

Update-  With a “wave of the magic wand”  Presto! The accounts are up! Remember because the QF is a CLG and more particularly becaue they are to a large extent funded by the Government we can hold the accounts to further public scrutiny if we wish. Inshallah they will be available over the next week or so. Note the date of the submission for the annual report was changed. In other words, this could have been a mistake by Company House or it could be becaue of a penalty fine and a readjustment of the date.

Ed is at it again with another face saving article after that debacle with the Guardian. Maybe Ed you should employ Max Clifford and  adopt a poor orphaned child from the West Bank. Awww, wouldn’t that be sweet. The tabloid newspapers with headlines like “Ed saves Orphaned Child from Extremist Mindset!” Actually that would be a more like a broad sheet heading. Oh well. I am sure Clifford can get you in the Daily Telegraph. Of course after that Ed may pass on the emails, the telephone numbers and all the details of the “extremist” relatives to the relevant authorities !  Anyway, the crux of the piece is that Melanie (with stabs at Douglas Murray here and there) has views that are rather strange.  What in the world is new about this ?! Is this some new kind of revelation ? Fair enough, Douglas hurt your feelings and you want to get back at him. Also, it seems that you have to make some “grassroot” progression with the Muslims after your irresponsible statements made headline news (well page 4 or so ). Ed, surely, you must realise that you are Ed Hussain! Do you really think that the Quilliam Foundation has to worry about support among the Muslims. You are a “think tank” remember? You are not after that kind of support. I mean, you had “nice” things to say about grassroot support in your initial meetings (Remember?). Well, let us be honest, I can reasonablly assume that you have hardly any! So Ed, calm down, do not worry. You do not need to write pieces like this because previous stunts have virtually ruined any hope of a come back.  The weight is off your shoulder. Ed it also makes you look rather silly as well. I mean you attack Douglas Murray, but, yet, according to Douglas I quote

“…., I recruited him to work with me (through Civitas, the organisation that originally hosted the Centre for Social Cohesion). He liked my views and I had great hopes for him to become a source for real reform. This gave him the time and financial freedom to set up QF”

So, Ed did you not think of Douglas’s views then? Did he overnight become some raving Islamophobe ? I mean you approached Civitas  for Allah’s sake! Don’t you remember that the institute has authors like Dr David Coleman, who was an advisor to Migration Watch. One of the booklets, authored by the same person says that benefits of migration are, and I quote

“rather difficult to specify beyond a wider range of ethnic restaurants for the middle classes and new kinds of pop music”.

This think thank then helps the formation of the Centre of Social Cohesion. By the way, that quote is from 2004 and we can get many more interesting facts about Civitas.  Seriously Ed, this is a joke. This reminds me of your initial “naivety” about the Iraq war. You stop supporting it because civilians started to get killed. Oh yeah, American soldiers stopped picking up cigarette stubs up as well.  “Shock and horror” again.  American military intervention leads to civilian death. I know, why don’t you write a piece about that now on CiF section in the Guardian.

Of course, you have to put in a few sound bites about Israel, but this is rich coming from the likes of the Quilliam Foundation. During the Gaza conflict ( and I really do love this quote) Maajid said, and I repeat ad nauseum, that and I quote

Israel does not have an active policy of deliberately capturing children to murder them, or even deliberately murdering civilians for that matter

Yeah, Israel only accidently kills civilians. After all, Michael Gove, your knight in shinning armor has this to say about such  a terrorist state. I quote

…I am staggered that people should equate a democracy struggling to preserve human rights in the face of terrorist assault with the apartheid regime

I mean you have objections to Muslims even calling Israel a Zionist state or entity! 

So let us summarise this. You want authorities to be informed, in a draconian manner, about Islamists because of beliefs that are orthodox in Islam, you have a Director in the Quilliam Foundation who thinks that Israel never deliberately targets civilians, you object to Israel being called a Zionist State or entity, you think that the support for the Caliphate, and the Sharia is alien to Islam, you think that the modern application of the Hudud is barbaric and outdated, you have an academically shoddy differentiation between Islamism and Islam, you have further problems with Muslim immigration to this country (too many immigrants generally!) , you do not like Tablighi Jama ( I mean, of all the groups you can target), you think that the Deobandi school provides the “mood music” for the Taliban,  you want an overthrow of any Muslim Government that even implements aspects of the Islamic Penal Code (catch my breath) and…. you where initially recruited (according to Douglas Murray) with the help of Douglas Murray by Civitas  etc etc…. but, hey, at least you debated Ayan Hirsi Ali (with divine help according to Usama Hassan)  and have a dislike for Douglas Murray and Melanie Philips. Ed, I have  changed my mind. You are my “saviour” . Now this is a Monty Python sketch!

Maajid was on BBC Radio 4 Any Questions on Friday evening. He had some wonderful advice for us. I quote:

I’ve been asked to be very brief so I will say this theoretically at least on this subject that I am about to say. Nadeen and Jacky can agree and that is that the expense’s scandal was indefensible. But moving forward I think that I dont want to see the sort of Britain where if anyone saw Yes Prime Minister where Civil Servants, middle to senior ranking civil servants are paid higher than legislators. Currently there are Civil Servants working from our Home Office earning 80 to 100 or 120 thousand and MPs who are beginning in Parliament are earning 64 thousand so they are earning double the legislators. We are going to make cut backs, let’s make cut backs on the pen pushers in the Civil Service that don’t do very much other than take Holidays all the time. I have to deal with them on a regular basis and I would say that legislators do deserve a bit of slack. Now I know this isnt necessarily that popular. What I would say we want to attract the best talent when it comes to legislation and currently we are not doing so…”

 Is this some kind of sick irony Maajid ? Please tell us how plush offices next to the British Museum are essential for tackling terrorism ? Couldn’t you find a cheaper place? Let me guess, you are going to budget hotels when you travel around the world right? I assume it is all Economy Class right? At least the Quilliam Foundation has never used Chauffeur driven cars. Right? I assume that you and Ed are going to get cut backs on your salaries ? Right? The Civil Servants in the Home Office are just a bunch of pen pushers that take holidays while the Quilliam Foundation goes out of its way to save Tax payers money. I bet!

Let us also reflect on the humility of Maajid. A question came up about an all woman list and affirmative discrimination. Leave aside the tan trum  when he was not listened to,  the highlight of this was and I quote Maajid’s claim to fame. 

“…I don’t believe in positive discrimination, I don’t believe in affirmative action as it is otherwise known. I think that just as patronising as it would be for example for me to be where I am, if  for example if I was selected in anything just because I happen to be of a different skin colour or Muslim, I rather be where I am because of my, hopefully, my eloquence my being very articulate making my points, my intelligence and not because of my skin colour….”

I assume,Maajid, that you have been selected by the Government because of your eloquence, articulate nature, your intelligence, your smart suits, and your Bond like ways in avoiding “assassination” attempts (i.e. the “evil” Tayyib). Oh it is not because you are a traitor and a sell out and I promise it isn’t because of your  grasp of Islamic law as we well know on this site.  It must be your exquisite charm and your beautiful way with words

Isnt it amazing that the criticisms that he applies to others apply far more aptly to him!

Ohhh, I am in stitches. Daggers are out for the Quilliam Foundation, and it is only going to get worse. I promise you. It is obvious that Douglas Murray was just waiting for the right moment to get the knife out after the behind scenes tiff between him and the QF. James Brandon had an epiphany and left to join the QF as well. It seems, he thought that the QF propaganda was true after all. Islamism is not Islam. Was that an eureka moment on par with Einstein’s discovery of the special theory of relativity?  Yeah, sure! Anyway, poor Douglas Murray felt rather betrayed and angry afterwards so he waited and waited (allow me some poetic license). He knew Ed would provide the moment and he sure did.  Maajid in his obtuse double-speak (I agree Murray) just made it worse. You couldn’t make up his insults if you tried!

First, let us deal with the obvious confession on behalf of Douglas Murray. I quote:

Around the time Ed Husain came to public notice, I recruited him to work with me (through Civitas, the organisation that originally hosted the Centre for Social Cohesion). He liked my views and I had great hopes for him to become a source for real reform. This gave him the time and financial freedom to set up QF.

Ha ha ha, thanks Douglas, we knew of the close relation, at least initially, as well. Still, as you are well aware, this confession is a blessing for the “Islamists”. I mean, this Ed fellow, might as well have had Ayan Hirsi Ali recruiting him and help set up the Quilliam Foundation. It just amazes me that the so called “rift” later was because of the extreme views of Douglas Murray on Islam. As Douglas Murray said, why wait so long? Didn’t Ed know of his views earlier on? Rather naive. Maybe it was a gradual process. In my eyes, Ed was getting on his high horse and stepping on the feet of everyone that helped him.  Rashad after his tiff with the Quilliam Foundation( i.e. Ed) is rumoured to have gone to  the other side as well, or so he thought he could. He is not that bright, poor fellow, so I doubt that he will get far.

You see, Douglas Murray this is what you get when you deal with careerists and opportunists. This is what you get when you deal with the “ex-Islamist” industry. A lot of it is for the money. Now the scary part comes along. Yes, we have a common position with Mr Murray! I mean the so called clarification of the Quilliam Foundation was just appalling. They could not retract Ed’s statement. What do you do? Really, how in the world will a statement like this and I quote:

“A government initiative backed by millions of pounds. It’s got access to tens of thousands of people’s emails, phone numbers, etc etc. Isn’t the government going to use it? Of course it is. And it should use it.”

be intended for Islamists that support terrorism ?! It just baffles me. Leaving aside the other issue of “extremism” and its broad understanding by the Quilliam Foundation, this really sounds like a more encompassing process. Are we to believe that there are tens of thousands of suspected extremists out there ready to jump onto the bandwagon of terrorism? What does this statement mean? Where did Ed get this figure from? Ahh, I know…. it is the statistical brilliance of the Quilliam Think Tank. Yeah we see that a lot in their social research!

Douglas Murray calls the Quilliam Foundation illiberal, extreme and confesses to help set it up. It just does not get better than that – whatever his motives may be!

“You are a  pro-extremist, pro Islamist-Wahabite, pro-Kharajite,  guilt driven, reverse racist, liberal do-gooder of a  bugger! “

So there! I bet you didnt see that coming.

I bet you couldn’t say this 10 times,

“… pro-extremist, paralysed guilt-driven reverse-racism brigade”

 Yeah, only the best from the Quilliam Foundation. Maajid, you are supposed to come to the rescue of Ed and not come across as another confused ”lunatic”! Doesn’t your Foundation have any proof readers ? Spend some money please! 

But, really Maajid,  insulting  their bowel habits, even their mothers can be tolerable but certain people are “pushed” when you call them a

“pro-extremist, paralysed guilt-driven reverse racism brigade”

I bet this is the first thing the Quilliam Staff Sergent shouts out during the “reprogramming sessions” of “new ex-Islamist recruits”

What “bravado” and “originality” .  Actually this piece smacks of a lack of originality. Do you know how many times I have heard Neo Con outfits shout out ”racism” every time somebody criticised the difficulties of “democracy” in Iraq and Afghanistan  ? We are guilty of a “colonial mindset” and even “reverse racism” if we criticise the difficulty of imposing “democracy” on a nation that has been ravished! “Are you telling us that Arabs cannot have secular democracy?Bigot!”. Hmm, the argument seems a bit weak. Anyway, I will get back to that. First let us deal with some funny bits from Maajid’s article

Quilliam has a strong track record on human rights issues

Sure, did Maajid consider the human rights of the Palestinians when he whitewashed the Israeli establishment of war crimes ? I quote

Israel does not have an active policy of deliberately capturing children to murder them, or even deliberately murdering civilians for that matter

Or, how about the support for Michael Gove in such a wonderful way. I quote

Michael has defended Islam and Muslims at places that are beyond the remit for most British Muslims. He is a vociferous critic of Islamism, not Islam

Hold on, arent we talking about a man who describes a terrorist state like Israel of going

“… out of its way to honour sites and traditions sacred to other faiths”

Oh, and do we remember this rant from Michael Gove?

…I am staggered that people should equate a democracy struggling to preserve human rights in the face of terrorist assault with the apartheid regime

Ok, strictly speaking, this is a guilt by association but one wonders. For a foundation that has a good track record on “human rights”, wouldn’t you reconsider your relationship with a person that describes a terrorist state like Israel in such a way? You even say that he defends Muslims! Yep, double standards! Ideological use of “human rights” I say.

Let us get back to Maajid’s argument (a rehash of standard Neo Con vomit!). I quote

Such a patronising and frankly dangerous attitude advocating that Muslims are to be somehow held to lesser standards than the rest of our society due to some guilt-driven colonial complex is guilty of the very colonialism it attempts to reject. It is inverse racism to hold Muslims to lesser standards. It is the colonial mentality that led to poor “natives” being deemed less able to comprehend modern civilisational standards. Muslims may, in general, hail from less-affluent areas of the UK, but that is not because they are Muslims. It has to do with other socioeconomic factors. Their white working-class counterparts suffer from similar problems and some are expressing these frustrations through similarly extreme reactions. One standard should apply to all.

I get it. If innocent Muslims feel that being reported on, harassed, and spied on is bit too much and others agree, then that is a “guilt driven colonial complex”. Oh, just to be accurate, they are “defending” the “ordinary Muslims” and are against “Islamists”. Note in the whole article there is an underlying premise. Islamic orthodoxy and it’s beliefs (those “literal texts” that are “Islamist” )  are to be treated in the same way as the racism of the BNP! If you find, the analogy problematic then, well, that is double standards. No it is not. The premise is rejected in the first place! Maybe, Maajid didn’t finish his lessons on logic with the “eye opening” “scholars” in Prison.

Well, well, well, it does seem that Ed is a liability. Maajid back from Mexico, was rather cross with Ed being not so nice with “liberal do gooders”. “Ed, you need to be careful with what you say” Maajid said, “Now I have to clear up this mess. Thank God, I am Director you are a “Co-Director”! “ This is of course how I imagine the build up to this so called “clarification” by the Quilliam Foundation on this shocking statement of Ed.  I quote

“….therefore a teacher at a University here in London or a person working at Tescos in Shropshire wherever they encounter people who articulate extremist views that provide the mood music to which suicide bombers dance should not only be challenged in a civic way but handed over and alerted to local authorities”

Notice what is apparently saying. We hand over and alert the local authorities those people who hold Islamic extremist views that provides the “mood music” to violent extremists. They are not just to be challenged. This seems to me to refer to those that the Quilliam Foundation defines as extremists. These are those who believe in a Sharia, a Caliphate, a united Muslim Ummah, those who believe in “moral suspension”, those who believe in a “literalist reading of the text” and so on and so on. This was clearly defined by the school kit that they provided. Now if the teachers, and the local community workers have this information what are they going to do it with it? They are, of course, going to report those that they spot with these views so that they can be “deprogrammed”. They are going to report them to the authorities in Prevent! In other words this pathetic statement of the Quilliam Foundation, in my eyes, is just a twist of words, to get the Quilliam Foundation out of a mess that even Alexander Hitchens was angry about! Now, that says something. Let us look more closely at what they are actually saying here

1-There are those extremists who endorse terrorism abroad and here. This would mean those who support Hamas in this country according to them. I quote

 We believe that it is morally right for any individual, Muslim or non-Muslim, to alert the authorities about the activities and views of extremists of all stripes —be they far-right or Islamist — who condone, encourage or facilitate terrorism in Britain or abroad.

2-Then there are those like me who believe in the other aspects i.e the Sharia and the Caliphate. Of course, these views are held by the consensus of Sunni Muslim scholarship. What do they actually say? Well, they try to play it down a bit here. I quote

At the same time, if and when Prevent practitioners encounter Islamist extremists during the course of their work, they should not feel that, as a result of their involvement with Prevent, they cannot approach the relevant authorities with their concerns

Note, what they actually say. They should not feel it a concern to report these people to the authorities. Note that that term “Islamist extremist” is not conditioned here! In other words we are saying the same thing! lol! Ed really said this anyway and I quote again.

“….therefore a teacher at a University here in London or a person working at Tescos in Shropshire wherever they encounter people who articulate extremist views that provide the mood music to which suicide bombers dance should not only be challenged in a civic way but handed over and alerted to local authorities”

This has been happening on the Prevent programme anyway as the IRR report shows. I love the ususal “Right wing” gloss. It is an aberrent scenario, like Guantanemo right? Clearly the IRR report does not show that! It is happening over a cross section of areas.

In the end, the Quilliam Foundation had to twist things but Ed the twit mucked things up. An absolute retraction would have been problematic it seems.

Actually it is a decent publication from the Institute of Race Relations. Have a read.

http://www.irr.org.uk/2009/october/ak000036.html

I do not think they are fond of the Quilliam Foundation but, hey, it is an “Islamist-Leftie-Liberal do gooder” conspiracy! Ha Ha!

It just makes us wonder about this whole “Prevent” mess. I mean, what more can you say to discredit your own scheme ? Is Ed an Islamist double agent ?  It makes you think though. Is the Government really concerned about “Muslim voices” when it supports a foundation that encourages lecturers, school teachers, community workers, and even your own neighbour to “report” you to the “right authorities” if you believe in the Sharia, a “literalist” reading of Islamic texts, and a Caliphate. We cannot forget th disdain for the state of Israel. Heaven forbid, that you call it a Zionist State (Ed does not like calling it such a name) or even attend a meeting on Gaza! Let us see Ed’s wonderful advice

“….therefore a teacher at a University here in London or a person working at Tescos in Shropshire wherever they encounter people who articulate extremist views that provide the mood music to which suicide bombers dance should not only be challenged in a civic way but handed over and alerted to local authorities”

I emphasis the definition of extremism that Quilliam wants to portray is very problematic because it includes de facto orthodox Sunni Islam ! This includes the Deobandi Imams in this country as well. They are the school of the Taliban as Ed likes to portray. In effect this means that any religious Muslim  should be handed over because he or she will almost always have some of these beliefs! ( I mean , how is that going to happen lol!) and alerted to the local authorities.  More interestingly, this could be used by those in the “prevent” strategy to target others that they feel would threaten them. It has happened as well.  After all it is not difficult to get any Imam or Preacher saying things that would fall into this definition. We have clearly shown this with preachers and Imams that are involved with the Radical Middle Way project (Radical Middle Way beware!) . By the way, Rashad,  this would include Imam Ahmad Reza Khan (watch out for a new article on this one. I found this one a bit funny so I am bothering in this case. )  

Maajid there have been rumours going around about the  infighting between you and Ed. I think you should speak to him. He is going to ruin your “credentials”(what a joke!) with the Muslim community. Ed tries to portray himself as an “academic” and you may disagree. He clearly can be called a whole host of other things though.

We have an Eid present ! A ,so called, think tank that has over and over again emphasised the fact that it is not a grass root organisation has all of a sudden come up with “advice” for our mosques! I am just baffled. We know very well that virtually all the mosques in this country are hostile, or just do not care about this foundation, so why are they wasting their time? It is obvious. This is just another propaganda stunt. The Government funds them and they pretend that they are “engaging” with the Muslims. When they are shown to have no influence (or virtually none) they come with the excuse “we are a think tank and not a grass root organisation” . Let us look at the latest “advice” that wants to save us from the BNP. Point 3 is typical of the Quilliam propaganda. I quote

..refuse platforms to Islamist and extremist Muslim groups who bolster the message of the far-right.

Who are these Islamists? Well the document tells us. They are HT, the Ikhwan, Jamat-e-Islami, and those who support “Saudi Wahabism”. Why are they are all a problem though ? Many “Saudi Wahabi” groups are ,rather, “apolitical”. Well it seems that “politics” is not just an issue but also a “literalist” reading of the texts and “communal separatism”. We must remember that they have the same problem with the “Deobandi” school which is the “school of the Taliban”. Also, we know what they mean by “politicisation of Islam”. Beliefs that are held by virtually all the Ulema in the Mosques are included i.e. belief in a Sharia and the Caliphate! Do we really think that this is going to have virtually any influence in the Mosques? Hey, at least the letter can be used as scrap paper to help organise the next “Islamist” study circle. Oh yeah, three months down the line let us see how many mosques take up this advice!