Charles Moore explains Islamism

“There is a strong strand in the current state of Islam which sees the religion as a political project. This creed, often called ‘Islamism’, holds that no society is legitimate unless it imposes sharia – the law of God. There is no doctrine of tolerance, and a complete rejection of secular or Christian rule.”

Daily Telegraph, 14 March 2009

Which only goes to show that, when it comes to Islam, you can write whatever ignorant nonsense you like and still get it published in the right-wing press.

See also ENGAGE, 13 March 2009

Boris capitulates to Evening Standard witch-hunt of Azad Ali (now there’s a surprise)

Boris+Johnson+yawningBoris Johnson today said he would cut funding to a Muslim advisory body that works with the police following a row over its links with a controversial blogger.

The London mayor’s pledge to halt money to the Muslim Safety Forum came after the Evening Standard yesterday revealed the organisation had received City Hall funding worth £30,000 under his watch, despite the fact that one of its founding members is Azad Ali.

Earlier this year, Ali made headlines when he was suspended from his civil service job at the Treasury over a blog attack on the government’s policy towards “the Zionist terrorist state of Israel”.

Johnson – who as London mayor has a duty to promote good community relations in the capital – said further funding to the MSF would be discontinued.

The organisation was set up following 9/11 and works closely with the Metropolitan police and other forces across the country on improving community relations.

“The mayor is very concerned to discover that taxpayers’ money has gone to this organisation,” Johnson’s office said. “The commitment was made by the previous mayor and the agreement was in place before the election. The mayor has ensured that no further payments will be made when the outstanding agreement is concluded.”

Guardian, 13 March 2009


Great work there, Boris. You’ve removed funding from an organisation that played a significant role in promoting good community relations in London. Still, that’s a small price to pay for retaining the political support of the Evening Standard, isn’t it?

Ibrahim Moussawi to be admitted to UK – a victory for common sense over Hazel Blears

The government is poised to allow Ibrahim Moussawi, media relations officer of Hizbollah, into the UK – despite the opposition of the cabinet minister responsible for social cohesion.

The JC has learned that the Communities Secretary, Hazel Blears, is fighting a lone battle within Whitehall to prevent Mr Moussawi’s admission to speak at a conference at London University’s School of Oriental and African Studies on March 23.

No other Cabinet minister has, the JC understands, sided with Ms Blears, and the Hizbollah propagandist is to be granted a visa.

Jewish Chronicle, 12 March 2009

Continue reading

Witch-hunt of Azad Ali continues, courtesy of Andrew Gilligan

Andrew Gilligan 2Mayor Boris Johnson has given at least £30,000 of taxpayers’ money to an organisation co-controlled by an Islamist “extremist”, the Standard can reveal.

Azad Ali praises a spiritual leader of al Qaeda on his blog, denies the Mumbai attacks were “terrorism” and quotes, apparently approvingly, a statement advocating the killing of British troops in Iraq. He also criticises those Muslims who “tell people that Islam is a religion of peace”. He describes non-Muslims as “sinners” and says Muslims should “hate [non-Muslims’] disbelieving actions”.

Mr Ali is the founding chairman, and current treasurer, of the Muslim Safety Forum, a group that has received at least £30,000 from City Hall since Mr Johnson’s election last May. He is also one of the Forum’s two directors and its nominated contact for the Charity Commission.

The Forum’s website says it was set up to challenge the “unfair focus on the Muslim community when it came to policing activities and enforcement of anti-terror policing legislation”. It holds regular meetings with the police.

Mr Ali was suspended from his job as a civil servant in January after some of his views came to the attention of his employers.

However, City Hall payment lists seen by the Standard show that in the same month, his organisation received the latest of its £10,000 quarterly payments from the GLA. It also received £10,000 in July and October last year, as well as at least £70,000 under the previous Mayor, Ken Livingstone. Its annual general meeting, in July, was addressed by Mr Johnson’s deputy mayor, Richard Barnes.

Evening Standard, 12 March 2009


Gilligan also refers to an exchange between Azad Ali and “Sid”, a blogger who posts at Pickled Politics, where he acts as Little Mr Echo to the demented David Toube of Harry’s Place.

Sid (as usual, taking his line from a piece by Toube) has a post on Gilligan’s article at Pickled Politics today, where he summarises Azad Ali’s position as follows: “After all, Britain is of the Dar al Harb (‘Land of War’) which is why here, anything goes.”

In fact, if you read what Azad Ali actually wrote at Between the Lines, the Islamic Forum of Europe blog, you’ll find that he was arguing precisely the opposite. His point was that violent resistance is legitimate only in Muslim countries that are under foreign occupation, not elsewhere.

He quoted a statement by Abdullah Azzam’s wife that her husband “was against attacks outside the battlefield. The enemy had to be clear and known and you didn’t leave the battlefield to attack elsewhere”. He also quoted Abdullah Azzam’s son saying that his father “always warned people to stay away from the extremists, he even put it in his will. What is happening today with Al-Qaeda is not his way.”

In another post, replying to a series of ranting attacks on him by Toube at Harry’s Place, Azad Ali repeated the latter point: “The fact that Abdullah Azzam rejected Osama and his ideas seems to have completely escaped David T’s mind.”

And Andrew Gilligan’s mind too. When Gilligan writes that “Mr Ali wrote in praise of Abdullah Azzam, Osama bin Laden’s key mentor”, in order to suggest to the reader that Azad Ali is a supporter of Al Qaida, he too is attributing to Azad a view that is the exact opposite of the one he actually holds.

Gilligan at least has the sense to use weasel words that avoid making an explicit accusation against Azad Ali. Writing in today’s Daily Mail, however, Richard Littlejohn has no hesitation in describing Azad as “a prominent al Qaeda cheerleader” – providing excellent grounds for legal action against the Daily Mail, I would say. Hopefully, Azad Ali is on the phone to Carter-Ruck even as we speak.

Gilligan also misrepresents Azad Ali’s position on the Mumbai massacre, implying that he refused to issue an outright condemnation of this atrocity. What Azad in fact objected to was Melanie Phillips’ piece on Mumbai which attempted to identify terrorism with Islamism. His objections were understandable – since, as we have seen, Azad Ali embraces a form of Islamism that rejects terrorism.

He quoted Phillips as writing: “The Islamists want to murder as many Americans, Brits, Hindus and Jews as possible. That is because they are waging all-out war against civilisation.” Azad commented: “Job done for Mel, from ‘terrorists’ or more precisely the criminals that committed the atrocities we have now moved quite far along the ‘conveyor belt’ and we can now comfortably blame the ‘Islamists’!”

In the subsequent discussion with “Sid”, Azad Ali repeatedly made this point: “Mad Mel is wrong to use the word Islamist to describe these people, as she uses the same word to describe those that are non violent or commit acts of murder. She is deliberately conflating the two with this term….”

Sid’s refusal to accept this point stemmed from the fact that he shares Mad Mel’s aim of misrepresenting all Islamists as extremists and potential terrorists. In Phillips’ case this is motivated by her right-wing Zionist politics. In Sid’s case it arises from the fact that he is an opponent of the Bangladeshi political party Jamaat-e-Islami, with which the Islamic Forum of Europe is associated.

Rather than address the actual role that JI-associated activists play in Britain, and particularly London’s East End, in countering the appeal of terrorist groupuscules or of sectarian movements like Hizb ut-Tahrir, Phillips and Sid want to distort the situation in pursuit of their own positions on the politics of Israel or Bangladesh.

The fact that this leads to witch-hunts against individuals, undermines mainstream Muslim organisations that are combating terrorism and assists in the demonisation of the entire Muslim community is something they’re both evidently happy to live with.

‘No to Sharia’ flop

No to Sharia rally 2

Photos are now appearing on the internet of the Worker Communist Party of Iran’s “No Sharia” demonstration in Trafalgar Square on Saturday (the one above is courtesy of Yusuf Smith). As some of us predicted, it proved to be even smaller than the laughable “March for Free Expression” back in 2006. Whatever happened to the “mass demonstration” that Ruth Gledhill – no doubt briefed by the WPI – was anticipating?

I ask you, if this poor showing represents the forces that Enlightenment secularism is able to rally to its cause, how long can it be before Western civilisation succumbs to the tidal wave of Islamo-fascism?

Update:  Under the headline “One Law for All Campaign against Sharia Law in Britain’s International Women’s Day was a resounding success” Maryam Namazie of the WPI reports:

“Nearly 600 people joined the One Law for All anti-racist rally against Sharia and religious-based laws in Britain and elsewhere and in defence of citizenship and universal rights in Trafalgar Square and marched towards Red Lion Square in London.”

Nearly 600 people? Looking at the picture above, you can only conclude that 500 of them must have been hiding behind Nelson’s Column.

Douglas Murray joins the witch-hunt of Ibrahim Moussawi

douglas_murrayCampaigners from the Centre for Social Cohesion have pledged to seek an arrest warrant for Dr Ibrahim Moussawi, an Islamic extremist, who is due to visit Britain this March.

The think-tank said the Home Office would be “beyond hypocrisy” if it allowed Dr Ibrahim Moussawi into Britain just weeks after barring Geert Wilders, the Dutch politician, because of his alleged anti-Muslim views. Dr Moussawi is a spokesman for the Lebanese-based militant group Hizbollah, the military arm of which is banned in Britain as a terrorist organisation.

Douglas Murray, director of the CSC, has written to Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary, warning her that he will instruct lawyers to seek an arrest warrant for Dr Moussawi if he is allowed into the country. The think-tank has already sought advice from barrister Paul Diamond, an expert in religious affairs law, on using war crimes legislation and a legal precedent from 2004 to seek, independently, an arrest warrant from a magistrate.

Mr Murray said: “This is the deepest hypocrisy, in fact, it is worse than hypocrisy on behalf of the British government. The government clearly do not have a grip on this. Britain is still a place where terrorists and terrorist supporters can come to incite and recruit.”

Dr Moussawi is due to address a conference at the University of London’s School of Oriental and African Studies, on March 25, on the subject of political Islam.

In its letter to Ms Smith, the Centre for Social Cohesion said: “It is the position of the Home Office that individuals are banned from entry in the United Kingdom if ‘they stir up tension and provoke violence to others’. Dr Moussawi would threaten community harmony and clearly breach this condition. If Dr Moussawi arrives in the UK we will instruct counsel to seek a warrant for his arrest.”

Sunday Telegraph, 8 March 2009


Well, Douglas Murray would know all about threatening community harmony, wouldn’t he? This is the man who in 2006 told the Pim Fortuyn Memorial Conference in the Netherlands:

“It is late in the day, but Europe still has time to turn around the demographic time-bomb which will soon see a number of our largest cities fall to Muslim majorities. It has to. All immigration into Europe from Muslim countries must stop…. Conditions for Muslims in Europe must be made harder across the board: Europe must look like a less attractive proposition.”

If Ibrahim Moussawi was intending to visit the UK to make a similar speech directed against the Jewish community (“conditions for Jews in Europe must be made harder across the board”) it would be quite right to ban him. But of course he’s not.

Hundreds expected at anti-sharia demo in London

“One Law for All, the group that campaigns against the adoption of Islamic law or sharia in the UK, is planning a mass demonstration in the centre of London tomorrow, Saturday.”

Ruth Gledhill gives a plug to the latest stupid initiative from the sectarians of the Worker Communist Party of Iran. Well, we shall see how “mass” this demonstration proves to be. Who knows, perhaps Trafalgar Square will be filled with secularists protesting against religious courts.

No, hang on, against Islamic religious courts. The One Law for All website calls for the abolition of “all religious-based tribunals” – but attacks only “Sharia courts”. The Beth Din courts that have operated within the Jewish community for centuries don’t even rate a mention.

What would you say about a campaign against “all religious-based tribunals” that concentrated exclusively on attacking Jewish religious courts? You’d say the organisers of that campaign were antisemites themselves or at least irresponsible idiots whose actions served to encourage antisemitism. Wouldn’t you?

Call to organise against the WPI ‘One Law’ campaign

Over at Indigo Jo Blogs Yusuf Smith calls for Muslims to protest against the anti-Sharia demonstration in Trafalgar Square this Saturday – a stunt organised by the Worker Communist Party of Iran. Personally, I think there’s just as good a case for communists to protest against it, given that the sectarian idiocies committed by the nutters of the WPI are a total embarrassment to any real Marxist. The question is – is it really worth organising against an event which in all probability will make the tiny March for Free Expression of 2006, in which the WPI shared a platform with hard-right racists, look like a mass mobilisation?

Quilliam Foundation calls for ban on HT meeting

Quilliam FoundationA government-funded group has called on police and council bosses to ban a public meeting which is being held in Queens Park on Tuesday night.

The Hizb ut-Tahrir political party has scheduled a public meeting at 7.30pm at Queens Park Community Centre, in Westbourne Road, about a perceived bias by Western governments against Muslims. The meeting is entitled “The Campaign To Destroy Islam”. Hizb ut-Tahrir’s website says the group wants to unite all Muslim nations in a unitary Islamic state, or “caliphate”, headed by an elected caliph. This would be established using political methods.

But the Quilliam Foundation, a Government-funded think tank, has described the group as “extremists”. James Brandon, spokesman for the Quilliam Foundation, said: “Hizb ut-Tahrir is one of the more extreme British Islamic groups. The Government has considered banning it in the past. It has got a confrontational, aggressive agenda. The agenda is to radicalise Muslims to take over the world.”

Mr Brandon said his group had contacted Bedfordshire Police, Bedford Borough Council and Queens Park Community Centre to try to have the meeting cancelled.

Bedford Today, 3 March 2009


Yes, that’s the same Quilliam Foundation who defended Geert Wilders’ right to speak at a meeting in the UK, on the grounds that banning him offended the principle of free speech. Maajid Nawaz stated piously:

“Banning Geert Wilders from the UK is not the solution. Just as the ideas of non-violent Islamist groups like Hizb ut-Tahrir should be tackled through debate and argument, so should those of Wilders and others. Freedom of speech should be protected – so long as people do not use this freedom to call for violence against others.”

So, at least we know what a load of nonsense that was. The reality is that the Quilliam Foundation opposes freedom of expression for Islamist sectarians but defends it for far-right racists.

British First Party leader denies race hate charges

Kevin QuinnThe leader of the British First Party set up a stall with the Union flag and launched a tirade of offensive racist abuse, a court heard. Kevin Quinn, 44, was charged with a religiously aggravated public order offence, after police were called to the shopping precinct in St Andrews Road, South Oxhey, on December 1, 2007.

Witnesses told St Albans Crown Court how they were offended by the racist and foul language used by Quinn with the aid of a megaphone. The first of the prosecution witnesses, Valerie Gay, was on the way to work in Woolworths when she saw the demonstration with a man on a megaphone and people handing out leaflets.

Asked by Isabel Delamere, for the prosecution, what she noticed first, Mrs Gay said: “It was the bad language being used to be honest. He was going on about a young lass that went to Sudan and he was using F and B words saying it was unfair she should be executed for naming a Teddy Bear Mohamed.” She added: “He was saying it was unfair she went out there to teach those retards and for that she was being executed.”

Mrs Gay said Quinn “definitely” used the word retard as it hit hard because she has a family member that is disabled. “He said we should execute the f****** Bs in this country and send them back home and before much longer it won’t be our country. I was shocked. I couldn’t understand why people have to be so racist. I believe in letting people lead their own lives,” she said.

The owner of an electrical store in the precinct, Ken Shah, who fled Uganda 30 years ago, heard a man shouting that Tony Blair should be called Tony Mohamed, the court heard. Mr Shah said: “They were shouting about Tony Blair should be Tony Mohamed because of all the immigrants coming in, and what is wrong with this country and about immigration and schools full of immigrant children.”

Quinn of Ousland Road, Queens Park, Bedford, denies intending to cause harassment, alarm or distress and using insulting words or behaviour, motivated by hostility towards members of a religious group.

The trial continues.

Watford Observer, 3 March 2009


You’ll note, by the way, that contrary to the Watford Observer headline Quinn has in fact been charged with religiously aggravated harassment and not with incitement to racial hatred – a much more serious offence which carries a sentence of up to seven years in prison – as he undoubtedly would have been if his abuse had been directed against the Jewish rather than the Muslim community. The reason is that Muslims are legally defined as a multi-ethnic faith group and so, unlike Jews or Sikhs, are not covered by the racial hatred law.

Nor is Quinn being charged with incitement to religious hatred. The reason is that the religious hatred bill was sabotaged by the “Lester amendment” which rendered the Racial and Religious Hatred Act almost completely useless when it comes to prosecuting far-right racists like Quinn who direct their hatred against the Muslim community.