The terrorism monkey is off the MCB's back

Ruth Kelly, the Communities Minister, recently announced that £5m of funding would be allocated to fighting extremism. It would be directed at local projects, which was interpreted as another slap for the MCB. In an Observer article last week, other groups were mentioned positively such as the "Muslim British Forum", which is presumably meant to be the British Muslim Forum.

The mistake hasn't been seized upon, but betrays the desperate groping at the centre of government for something resembling a strategy. I don't think the MCB should be overly concerned at being looked over. Rather, many have argued for ages that there is nothing more that the organisation can do with respect to the terror threat. Plausibly, all that can be asked for is to renounce the killing of innocents and say it has no place in Islam (which they have done), and to call for people to cooperate with the police and security services (which they have done).

But still, there is a call for some more unspecified nebulous action on the part of the MCB. So this sidelining of the organisation should come with a sigh of relief. A while from now everyone will find that the MBF or BMF can't do much more than the MCB could.

I'd also like to say a few words about the debate between Sunny Hundal and Inayat Bunglawala on Comment is Free. Hundal tried to push Bunglawala on what he should be doing about combating violent extremism. You can judge for yourself how it went - I guess it depends on how important you view the Iraq war and foreign policy as being with respect to the threat on the country.

But my observation is the contradiction in Hundal's philosophy. Just last November he launched the New Generation Network, much of which I actually agree with, even if I don't see it as quite the panacea to our problems that others do. It hit out at the strategy of successive governments in talking to "self-appointed community leaders". For too long these gate keepers had been relied upon to sort out their communities in a throwback to the colonial era. Minority groups should be seen as lobby groups, not representatives of millions of people. 

Oddly, none of this applies for Sunny when it comes to Muslims and terrorism.

Comments

[Sunny]

*sigh*
So much misunderstanding, I really don't know how to explain myself better sometimes.

Oddly, none of this applies for Sunny when it comes to Muslims and terrorism.

It applies to all groups. What I'm talking about here is the willingness (or actually the unwillingness) of so-called community leaders to take on and argue against the religious extremists within their midst.
I'll say one thing for MPAC, at least they openly challenge people such as Hizb ut-Tahrir.
The rest of you seem to be too scared.

[Osama]

HT, HT, HT... It's your answer to everything! Man you're obsessed. Just a reminder - you were discussing violent extremism with Inayat, so let's sidestep your usual diversionary tactic.

I'm actually surprised at your response. I've exposed what appears to be quite a serious contradiction in your philosophy, but I did expect a better reply from you than the one you've offered. So let 's try again, If you believe that religious groups e.g. MCB shouldn't be seen as representatives of all their co-religionists, why do you ask them to sort out their communities with regard to violent extremism?

[Utbah]

Osama you honestly believe he is going to answer you with honesty and not use his diversion tactics?

At Sunny, if you look at MPACUK, the reason why the take on HT is because their (HT) stance is counter productive.

Also Osama, Yeah what's Sunny obsession with HT. Does he honestly believe all the problems in the Muslim Community are by HT?

Let, me tell you something even though I disagree with HT they do a god damn good job of getting the Muslim youth off drugs and crime. That's for sure.

[aineliva]

Forget the brownie points, forget the internicine male rivalry and jockeying for position and attention - the question truly is, when will the issue of extremists in our midst be discussed?

Anything else is a "diversionary tactic", which you all here seem to be engaging in very well so far.....

[joe90]

Anything else is a "diversionary tactic", which you all here seem to be engaging in very well so far.....

- said like a true man, which you claim you're not.

Claiming you aren't like the others, you're different, is also a ruggedly aggressive macho posturing tactic.

Also, so is telling people off for being wrong, implying of course, that you are right. Very mano e mano individualist.

How all very chest-beating baboonish behaviour from the allegedly wilting wall-flower - another male stereo-type I'm afraid, as well.

So is being unoriginal, expressing oneself as a part of a common herd mentality, afraid of standing out too much on your own - something no-one could accuse Osama of, or the many commenteers on his weblog!

[Mustafa Arif]

Another reason why this is good for the MCB is that independence from the government (perceived as well as actual) is much more important for long-term institution-building in the Muslim community.

[Sunny]

You want a better response Osama?

Here you go:
http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/1072

[Osama]

Sunny, I really can't see how you can accuse Inayat of ducking your questions when you so wilfully ignore mine. I've stated it twice now. I take it you have no answer. The hole in your NGN malarkey is glaring.

[Yakoub Islam]

I have to confess, whenever I step into the arena of these debates, I quickly find myself getting annoyed and resorting to the kind of language I regret, which effectively lowers me to the level of those provoking me. What I would like is a little solidarity and it's the voices I perceive as being opportunistically divisive that boil my blood. Take a look round the world, sisters and brothers! We are the new bogey men!! The Muslim far-right have a voice and they want to stir it up. Nobody else is taking any notice of them - so why are we?

[Sunny]

So let 's try again, If you believe that religious groups e.g. MCB shouldn't be seen as representatives of all their co-religionists, why do you ask them to sort out their communities with regard to violent extremism?

Osama it would help if you read my article properly.

Maybe I can quote it for you:
It is obvious that directly tackling violent extremism is not something the MCB can do - they don’t have the capacity, willingness nor ability. They can only highlight and discuss issues and yet even here so much double-speak is used to render any conversation useless.

More than just tackling violent extremism however, taking on the arguments and ideals of such racists is a vital part of furthering social cohesion. But why should any sane Jew, Hindu or Sikh group take the MCB seriously if they make no effort to distance themselves from such groups?

I've stated this repeatedly... there are several issues at stake here:

1) Representation. Here, I'd just like to see a multitude of voices being represented and heard, including the MCB.

2) Violent extremism. Here, I recognise Iraq has a huge impact, but all I'm asking for is a recognition and discussion of other factors. By the way, it couldn't have escaped your notice that plenty of British Muslims also feel just blaming foreign policy is a cop-out. I've linked that. Would love to hear your dissection of their arguments.

3) Community cohesion. I'd like to see 'community leaders' be more willing to take on religious extremists within those communities. And here also I have a record that goes across the board.... I've repeatedly criticised the Hindu Forum and their attempts to malign Muslims and get some money... repeatedly ponted out the Sikh Federation's dodgy friends and other such activities.

I have no problems challenging religious groups I disagree with, in the name of community cohesion.
Let me put it this way... ever wonder why so many Sikh, Hindu and Jewish groups find it so difficult to stand on a platform with the MCB or MAB? They don't have issues with Muslim groups in general, just the ones they see as dishonest, and with links to groups they would not like to be associated with.

I've pointed this out before and I'll point it out again. You can build an alliance with the far-left and be best friends with Respect if you want to challenge the attack on Muslim civil liberties and demonisation of Muslims.
But you won't have a real impact unless Muslims can build broader alliances with other groups too. And yet... you keep making excuses... and then you wonder why it carries on.
Sad really.

[junglecitizen]

"By the way, it couldn't have escaped your notice that plenty of British Muslims also feel just blaming foreign policy is a cop-out."

This seems to be, at the root of it, the classic cause/justification confusion again...

When people cite Iraq as a cause of violent extremism, they are (99% of the time) not saying that the situation in Iraq means violent extremism is OK. They are stating the fact that it appears to motivate terrorists. Without the anger generated by recent anti-terror/foreign policy, violent extremism would clearly have had little or no appeal to the vast majority of its current adherents.

By describing this as a 'cop-out' you appear to be implying that it is being used as a dishonest smokescreen to hide the true cause of the problem - presumably something that British Muslims themselves are doing, collectively.

This is simply not the case. Neither British Muslims in general, nor any mainstream groups like the MCB, have made any attempt to provoke violence, or even to advocate suspicion or hostile attitudes to non-Muslims.

I see the mainstream press every day advocating suspicion and hostile attitudes toward Muslims. If the MCB routinely published largely fabricated stories about 'Christians' threatening to 'ban Eid', together with editorials demanding that 'Christians' must do more to crack down on George Bush or face the consequences, then there might be a case to answer.

Of course there are processes through which violent extremism spreads, such as propaganda - but it is driven by the same root cause. Attempting to solve the problem by cracking down on 'propaganda' while refusing to even consider Iraq (etc) is like attempting to solve Britain's drug problem by shooting people using drugs while heavily subsidising their sale.

The Muslim community does not have its own internal police force or censorship bureau to control extremism. Community leaders can and should attempt to reduce violent extremism as far as their influence goes - but this does not mean that they (or Muslims in general) should be attacked for 'causing' terrorism if their efforts fail.

[Lithcol]

The sad fact that many muslims do not face up to is that the majority of people in this country do not give a fig about their beliefs. Indeed when they ask for special dispensations because of their beliefs most people react with a rye smile and mutter how quaint. The same attitude goes for the beliefs of evangelical Christianity.

Respect for strange beliefs and that such beliefs should influence public policy died a long time ago in this country. Witness the debacle of the catholic protestations against the homosexual adoption policy.

Why do many people associate Islam with violence and terrorism? Just look around the world. The imminent demise of the struggling secular democracy in Bangladesh is a model of how islamofascists operate. You can’t blame UK or US policy for what is going on there.

Many Christians are appalled by the treatment meted out by muslim majority countries to their non-muslim brethren. Indeed the treatment of minority muslim beliefs is disgusting.

Osama your talk of a Muslim community is as relevant as talking about a Christianity community. The diversity and animosity in these communities is what they both share. Europe had its turf wars sometime ago with widespread death and destruction.

Fortunately we now have secular states. Hopefully muslim majority countries will evolve and recognize that religious authority is always divisive and should never be the basis of good governance..
You appear to have it in for Sunny. My understanding is that Sunny is a modernist. He may or not be a Muslim, however it seems to me that he is not interested in Islamizing modernity such as the likes of Tariq Ramadan. Indeed, he seems rather alarmed at the prospect.

Believe what you want, but don’t wear it on your sleeve and don’t expect automatic respect for your views from others. Above all do not use violence or the implicit threat of violence if your views are challenged. But then you wouldn’t would you. Both Islam and Christianity profess to be religions of peace, unfortunately their respective histories tell a different story. The malign influence of Christianity on the lives of ordinary mortals was defeated, hopefully a similar fate awaits Islam in the near future.

[Sunny]

Of course there are processes through which violent extremism spreads, such as propaganda - but it is driven by the same root cause.

My point however is that propaganda has been around way before Iraq.... and the networks have simply used it to gain more followers. I've been following HuT and Al-Muhajiroun for over a decade now, since they started publishing posters calling for a Khilafah in Britain; since they intimidated my friends at uni; and since they called for their friends to "rise up" against western imperialism.

Iraq hasn't changed their rhetoric, it is simply a new cause for them to recruit more people.

The point I'm trying to make is about social / community cohesion and building broad alliances.
I've challenged Islamophobia in the media plenty of times. I've written in the MEdia Guardian plenty of times saying that the mainstream media need to listen more to Muslim voices and reflect their thoughts otherwise they'll lose that audience.

But I draw the line at forming alliances with racist/anti-semitic groups. And I point out when other organisations, who are supposedly championing community cohesion, do the same.

Now Osama, can you kindly address my point?

[Osama]

Sunny, I was actually going to let your feeble response lie. I know you wouldn't understand that because you're the type of graceless person that agrees five responses with Inayat on CiF but then adds a sixth in the comments section and his own blog. Classy.

You have answered my query regarding the contradiction in your thinking by saying that you like challenging religious groups! We know that, but you have added that even if they did this to your liking, it wouldn't make a lot of difference to the overall situation.

Now you try again to change the subject. However, we cannot move on that easily. You think through your NGN initiative that these religious groups should be seen just as lobby groups, and not leaders and gatekeepers of their communities. If they are just lobby groups, I would have thought that means they talk to the govt, the media, and other civic institutions. It's not the job of a lobby group to be taking on nutters who others may frame in the same grouping as them. It would be helpful if you could elucidate exactly what needs to be done (is it a few press releases you want?) and exactly how this slots in with NGN.

Lithcol: Osama your talk of a Muslim community is as relevant as talking about a Christianity community. The diversity and animosity in these communities is what they both share. Europe had its turf wars sometime ago with widespread death and destruction.

Fortunately we now have secular states.

What do you think of the term "international community"? So Europe's widespread death and destruction in WW2 was due to religion and now everything's ok because it's secular. That is historical revisionism on a preposterous scale.

[Sunny]

because you're the type of graceless person that agrees five responses with Inayat on CiF but then adds a sixth in the comments section and his own blog. Classy.

I'm not sure if you're trying to have a rational debate Osama or score cheap points. The CIF editor said we could continue the conversation in the comments.

and exactly how this slots in with NGN.

Let me ask you a question then. Do you think its important to challenge Islamophobic and racist discourse, even if that discourse itself is not illegal?

[johnmellor77]

As spokesman for the MAB in Scotland, do you think Muslims should co-operate with the police and security services Osama? Do you still stand by the comments you made in Dundee?

http://www.thecourier.co.uk/output/2006/11/08/newsstory8943089t0.asp

[Osama]

Sunny, I raised points in this piece above, which you yourself chose to come and respond to. We can have a rational debate, but you're choosing not to engage with the point, but labour on with bluster.

From what I take from the NGN you believe that people and groups should be seen as citizens and not overarching representatives for their communities, either to speak for them positively or to answer for whatever nutters might be doing. Racism for example is not a problem just for black people but for us all. I agree with that. My point is your real approach is contrary to NGN.

John, FYI following the events in Nov 2006 Tayside Police do no longer knock on people's doors because they happen to be Muslim and engage in the kind of behaviour that people were complaining about. I've also had meetings with others senior in the force as well as govt and the activities of the SBCCU as they were then were not legitimate, and as I said, no longer take place. You and I have been through the semantics before and couldn't come to agreement. The facts on the ground speak for themselves. You can sit at your computer terminal and split hairs while the rest of us get on and do something.

[johnmellor77]

As spokesman for the MAB in Scotland, do you think Muslims should co-operate with the police and security services Osama? Do you still stand by the comments you made in Dundee?

[Osama]

Well I'm not spokesman for MAB any longer, but in the absence of any context to your renewed line of questioning, I'll humour you and say I don't see why I would change anything I've said on this previously.

[Sunny]

My point is your real approach is contrary to NGN.

Osama, what is my 'real approach'? I'm sorry but you haven't made that clear... and how is that contrary to NGN's aims?

Do you mean this?
It's not the job of a lobby group to be taking on nutters who others may frame in the same grouping as them.

Is that something that goes contrary to NGN? How so?

Also, you didn't answer my question:
Do you think its important to challenge Islamophobic and racist discourse, even if that discourse itself is not illegal?

If you do believe its important to challenge racism, who do you think should do it? Or... should 'community organisations' not be doing it?

[johnmellor77]

Osama, that's just another weaselly non-answer.

[joe90]

Strange that I keep hearing echos of Weimar-Nazi Germany -

- professionals being undermined and attacked by government ministers, not for any crimes or conduct unbecoming, but for being of a certain ethnicity such as Jewish of Muslim -

- and now questions about co-operating with the police and security services are being asked?

I suppose, co-operating with Hitler's security apparatus or Stalin's would've been ok - after all, they were only there to help us everyone amd make sure they were all safe and well, and had nothing to do with context.

The context, inm this case here being, jmellor's usual hopeless attempts to mis-represent what people have actually said - he wants people to express an opinion on statements they themselves have never actually made and even deny saying them -
- but if Racist Murdoch and his anti-journalists have gone to all the trouble of making up lies about people they don't like and then printed it in tomorrows chip-papers, well then, it must be true !

http://www.guardian.co.uk/terrorism/story/0,,2027077,00.html>1,166 anti-terror arrests net 40 convictions
Gurandian
05 Mar 2007

Plus some innocent people shot, as well as others subjected to torture rape, some murdered whilst in custody - being ferried through Scottish airports en route between various American chambers of horror where British security personnel have been present during tortue sessions. Not to mention no habeaus corpus for some people in Belmarsh Prison in England!

Co-operate or you'll be next!

[joe90]

Co-operate
or the British government will do this to you -
http://www.islamophobia-watch.com/islamophobia-watch/2007/4/4/four-years-in-guantnamo-the-man-who-said-no-to-mi5.html>Four years in Guantánamo – the man who said no to MI5
04 April 2007

It's good to know I pay the wages of British civil servants who wouldn't look out of place in Hitler's Gestapo -
- I've often wondered what qualifications and training do American and British torturers need and get, for their stressful and important work?

"Vee vere only following orderz!"

[johnmellor77]

Osama, why do you wheel out the gimp when you can't be bothered answering questions?

Do you think Muslims should co-operate with the police and security services?

Do you still stand by the comments you made in Dundee where you said Muslims should resist and defy the SBCCU?

[Osama]

The way you view Joe is pretty much the way I see you John. If you've got a point to make, feel free.

Sunny, it's an interesting point you've raised which I've put some thought to. My point is that it's wrong to ask just Muslim groups to weed out terrorism. As you've alluded to, it's not wrong to ask Muslims on the same basis others are engaged in this. The societal debate however is not like this - it's as if Muslim orgs have a silver bullet solution but can't be bothered implementing it. Your CiF debate contributed to this. I do find it strange that you acknowledge that there is not much the MCB and others can do. What's the point of useless hot air then? Do we all not have other business to attend to?