The favoured Muslims

In the last week we've seen yet again the blurring of the lines between Islam and terrorism, not it has to be said by Muslims themselves. But those that want to play this game can just as easily be tarred by association as many Muslims are. At the Cambridge University conference a few weeks ago where Tony Blair spoke (and set the programme depending on who you believe), Shaikh Ali Goma from Egypt was a chief guest as a example of moderation from the Muslim world.

Shortly before the Grand Mufti travelled he'd issued advice that there may be blessings in the Prophet's (peace be upon him) urine. I'm not a scholar, but I can imagine if some had wanted to demonise him, there would be plenty of opportunity. And others found evidence not disimilar to what Shaikh Qaradawi is pilloried for. I also see that Shaikh Goma allows Muslims to sell alcohol and pork in the West. An example of enlightened moderation and integration some would say. But it is only because he sees the West as dar-ul-harb (house of war).

Remember the hype surrounding this conference. Plus the now customary leaks of an MCB snub. Tony Blair opened the conference, he asked David Cameron to close it, thereby ensuring Blair opened and closed it. Cameron hit out at "Muslim consciousness". While others ponder whether to use the word "extremist" or "radical", the Tory leader simply believes thinking like a Muslim is a problem. At least he's being somewhat upfront about it unlike others.

Leaving aside the rights and wrongs for a moment, getting Muslims to stop thinking like Muslims isn't practical. Even if it was, it does not solve the global problem that we are facing. In the debate about the impact of foreign policy something of a national consensus has been arrived at in the last couple of weeks. Even hardened New Labourites will accept that Iraq has "exacerbated" the threat we face, but that some Al-Qaeda inspired terrorists would be doing their thing anyway. The numbers of potential terrorists has increased as a result of the war, but there would have been some whatever happened.

In other words if it weren't for Iraq we'd still be in the situation of the 1990s when you had the likes of Hassan Butt crying for jihad but not doing anything about it. And now the self-same foreign policy hawks look to the Muslim community to sort it out. Just like Hassan Butt, Ed Hussain and their ilk were out of control a few years ago, even if we knew now who they had trained up to replace them, no amount of nice fireside chats from moderate imams is going to dissuade them.

In fact Butt can't do anything about it, knowing the mindset, knowing the people, then how is anyone else in the Muslim community going to do it? Ed has flipped from wanting to establish a global caliphate top down to wanting to see the Muslim world bombed by the West. He claims he follows traditional Islam espoused by the likes of Hamza Yusuf and Nuh Keller. However, there is no appreciable difference between them and the "Islamists" he condemns. They certainly have "Muslim conciousness".

The MCB has been replaced at government meetings by those called sufis, or the followers of "traditional Islam". I don't know what that's achieved other than a new set of faces, a shift in personnel. They say and do the same things (the Sufi Muslim Council is a separate issue to this). I've probed into what different the different agendas could be. The only semi-response I've had is that sufis concentrate less on the ummah. I don't believe that, and maybe readers could educate me.

Maybe those in the favoured circle are choosing to keep quiet because they are favoured - currently. But let's not have anyone pretending that anything has changed. The perpetual attempt from media and political circles to shape the Muslim community is ultimately purposeless and diversionary. Putting people into the terrorist camp because they have (non-violent) religious and political views you don't share is not on.

Comments

[joe90]

I just thought I would let you know Osama,
the always readable Craig Murray gives you a mention -
Terrorist Attack on Glasgow Asians - No Media Coverage
blog entry for 12 July 2007

And Islamophobia Watch has spotted this -
Scotland's nationalist-Muslim embrace'
11 July 2007

You have been singled out for special treatment by a raving racist liar - well done Osama mate, you are obviously doing everything right!

By the way,
the racist attacking you makes some kind of claim to be an 'academic' and uses racist dross from a well-known racist blog as evidence against you!

Who knows, I might even read the rest of this steaming pile of mince!

all the best!

[Sunny]

The MCB has been replaced at government meetings by those called sufis, or the followers of "traditional Islam".

Is your point then that the government should not have any favoured Muslims, and talk to a broad range of groups... or that it should only talk to Muslims favoured by yourself?

Or could you define a criteria by which they can engage with all parts of the various Muslim communities?

[Sunny]

Even hardened New Labourites will accept that Iraq has "exacerbated" the threat we face, but that some Al-Qaeda inspired terrorists would be doing their thing anyway. The numbers of potential terrorists has increased as a result of the war, but there would have been some whatever happened.

This is the point that most people, including the intelligence services have been making. Just because the word "exacerbated" was added to intelligence briefings, people such as Inayat Bunglwala and yourself seem to have interpreted it as saying that without the Iraq war we'd be living in a great, socially cohesive society.

So the question is then, do you accept the point you've above in this comment?

[Sunny]

c'mon Osama, I'm looking forward to your replies.

[joe90]

Tony Blair, the butcher of Baghdad and Beruit tried to claim that terrorism existed before his illegal attack on Iraq and therefore attacking Iraq was just an excuse of terrorists to do what they were going to do anyway.

Mind you, regardless of any evidence, Tony Blair was going to attack, butcher and maim millions of innocent defenceless people in Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon and Occupied Palestine - no matter what. A cold-blooded mass-murderer on a truly awsome scale!

The fact is Sunny, that the British government won't even take advice from the Joint Intelligence Committee, so what chance has anybody else got of trying to give them advice ?

As for the causes of terrorism (I think this is one of your queries). Well, we could always start with trying to prevent our own democratically accountable governments from carrying out western war crimes and crimes against humanity, in our name with our taxpayers' money - crimes such as
- the illegal occupoation of Palestine (the West bank and Gaza)
- illegitimate anti-democratic totalitarian Arab dictatorships
- stop undermining and destroying democracies in West and South-West Asia
- stop stealing their stupedous wealth (ie oil) and exporting it into western bank accounts
- stop creating and funding 'al quaeda' type organisations, which western governments continue to do

If western leaders are sincere about preventing terrorism then they could always stop supporting illegitimate Arab dictatorships, and also stop destroying democracies in West and South West Asia - as they are busily doing, by undermining the recent democractic elections in Occupied Palestine, as well as Iraq and Iran for instance, where we in the west installed puppet dictators becuase the people of these countries wouldn't follow orders.

Remember Sunny - we destoyed Iraqi (1963) and Iranian (1953) democracy and put the brutal thugs of Saddan Hussein and the Shah of Iran in power instead, or have you forgeotten already?

Also we could stop creating terrorist organisations such as Al Quaeda - or have you forgotten already that Al Quaeda is actually a rogue CIA unit?

Recent 'CIA-Al Quaeda' type terrorist units include -
ABC News Exclusive: The Secret War Against Iran
The Blotter: ABC News Exclusive
03 April 2007

This terrorist unit have been formed to carry out terrorist atrocities against Iran operating from' Al Quaeda' territory.
More info on it here -
What If Iran Had Invaded Mexico?
Putting the Iran Crisis in Context
by Noam Chomsky
posted to ZMag.org
05 April 2007

Also the recent clashes in north Lebanon -
U.S. & Lebanon
by Seymour Hersh
posted to ZNet.org
25 May 2007

Where hard-line Muslim Jihadis are funded and supported by the hardline Global Jihadis in Washington.

I hope this answers your question about non-Iraqi invasion sources of terrorism in the world Sunny, which sources are mostly western war crimes and straightforward western support for terrorism.

[joe90]

Here are two blog articles posted at Lenin's Tomb just recently, which have a bearing on the 'non-Iraqi Invasion' causes of terrorism -

1958
15 July 2007
Britain's Iraqi puppet regime was overthrown 49 years ago today. Background here.

And -
Another one bites the dust
16 July 2007
...the US is attempting to break the emergence of what it calls 'The Shi'ite Crescent'. How does it do so? By funding several Sunni jihadist outfits - oh, and guess who we're told they've got links to?

[Sunny]

I'll wait for Osama thanks Joe, to see whether he agrees with what's actually written.

[joe90]

Why what's the matter Sunny,
don't you agree with me, if you don't then why not ?

What is it I've written that doesn't answer your question, or have I read your question wrong?

Sunny what does this mean then -
I'll wait for Osama thanks Joe, to see whether he agrees with what's actually written.

Just so as there is no confusion Sunny -
what is it exactly, that's been written that you want a reply to, seeing as how my reply doesn't meet your strange personal requirements ?

Does the truth differ depending on who says it?

[Osama]

Sunny, sorry I don't get as much time for blogging as I used to. Just manage to spew the posts out from time to time, and it is difficult to engage properly in comments.

WRT to who the govt engages with, I wasn't making a wider point about who they should do this with. I've said what I've wanted to say above.

WRT to the point about Iraq, to put it another way, yes if there had been no Iraq war, there would still be those who hated the West. As a result of the war though, their numbers have increased, as has their resolve and motivation.

These people that rabble roused against the West were doing so through the 1990s. What brought physical attacks like 7/7 and the Glasgow Airport one into fruition now? I don't think anyone's answered that.