Home
Gallery
Search
Register
Log in
About Us & RulesReform Muslims Stand Up To Take On the Ideology of Islamism
Page 1 of 1
Reform Muslims Stand Up To Take On the Ideology of Islamism
by Guest Sat Mar 26, 2016 10:13 am
By Maajid Nawaz
We are in the midst of a Muslim Reform – do not miss the wood for the trees.
The tragic attacks in Brussels this week mark the arrival of the global jihadist insurgency to Europe. The deaths of over 34 people in coordinated attacks in the heart of Europe’s capital had me pondering how we got here, and how far we have yet to go.
This month of March marks ten years since my release as an Islamist political prisoner from Egypt’s Mazra Tora prison. To stave off madness in solitary confinement, I used to organize races between pebbles that I flicked across the floor of my cell, naming them Freddy-Fred and Johnny-John. My cell had no lights, no toilet and no sheets for the first four months. In those early days, among the concrete and cockroaches, I found solace in the one item I was allowed to keep with me, a pocket-sized version of the Qur’an. I eventually memorized half of it under the light of the moon as it shone through the bars of the skylight and into my cell. The echo of my voice in that cell as I chanted the passages remains with me till this day. As does the same pocket-sized Qur’an, which I preserve with mixed feelings as a keepsake.
It is surreal to think back now and consider how dogmatic and intellectually inflexible I had become by the age of my arrest as an Islamist at 24. My rage stares out, piercing the lens of the prison guard who snapped this mugshot that I eventually smuggled out of prison with me. Our defiance of the World Order was on display for all to see as we marched in and out of that Cairo court raising slogans against our torturers as loudly as we could muster. There we were, a vanguard, calling for the return of a “Caliphate” that we would eventually denounce when ISIS declared one 12 years later. Over those next five years in jail my hardened immaturity softened, as I experienced the contradictions of life in a setting akin to Orwell’s Animal Farm, but for jihadists. There, as far back as 2002 I witnessed conversations among cellmates about how slavery would be reinstituted under our caliphate, and how the world would come to be conquered through jihad. I eventually became convinced that if we Islamists achieved what we had been romanticizing, we would come to destroy everything beautiful around us. But this process was slow and, well, a process. Even as news broke of our release in March 2006 and I began conducting interviews, I still had a great deal of that residual anger and ideological dogma stuck inside me. A BBC HardTalk interview from that year is perhaps one of the best examples of my former Islamist double-speak.
And my fiery speech at an anti-Israel rally outside the US embassy in London organized on ‘al-Quds day’ – serving as the death throes of my waning Islamism – remains a lingering reminder of just how far I have allowed my mind to wonder from those heady days when I was ever so certain of the good and the bad. Since then I have travelled twice to Israel as part of a British Parliamentary delegation, and have pulled back from much of my previous rhetoric, carefully crafting a more balanced perspective on the Israel-Palestine conflict, and much else. Eventually, my dogma gave way to my humanity. I could no longer maintain the facade of looking down on people like Amnesty activist John Cornwall who had become my pen pal while I was in prison, writing to me of life’s everyday wonders, while my fellow inmates dreamed of nothing but caliphal conquest. On 2 May 2007, I sent out an email to an audience of Islamists, Jihadists and Muslim “Community gatekeepers”; some who received this email back then will recognize the text:
Maajid al-Saleemi wrote:
In the name of God the Compassionate, the Merciful
Assalaamu alaykum,
I have deemed it necessary to announce that, after serving in Hizb-ut-Tahrir for 12 years and since I was 17 years old, I have decided to leave the party and resign my membership effective immediately.
I humbly request that I do not discuss the reasons for my decision at this moment in time, and ask that I be left to complete my much delayed final examinations.
Forgive me for any offence caused.
Maajid Nawaz
But I didn’t stop there. Needing to take responsibility for my role in creating division among our communities, I announced on the national flagship BBC Newsnight that I would now dedicate myself to challenging the divisive Islamist rhetoric that I had previously been prepared to die for. My first public talk to Muslims was met with incredulity. You’re calling for secularism? Many in the packed hall asked me aghast, after I had summarized my position. How long ago it now seems that in 2007 the British Muslim activist scene found it controversial to speak of secularism so openly. My first attempt at engaging Muslims in writing on these themes came in the form of a blog in which the comments section has faithfully captured the general mind set of British Muslim activism in 2007. My first national column for London’s Sunday Times, and my first New York Times profile came later, and by January 2008 we had announced the founding of Quilliam as the world’s first counter-extremism organisation, a course that would set me firmly upon the path of challenging Islamism while promoting a liberal, democratic and pluralistic reform of Islam today. As I reflect in the ashes of this horrific attack in Brussels, I see that over the course of these last ten years much has changed among Muslims in the West.
Quite clearly, I changed.
But so has the Western Muslim scene. People often ask me whether this has been a change for better or worse.
My answer is, rather confusingly: both. Consider what has happened to the debate within Western Muslim communities. Openly liberal, reforming Muslims have become far less defensive, and much more vocal and visible, since those earlier, darker years during the heyday of Bush’s War on Terror decade. Reform theologians such as Quilliam’s Dr Usama Hasan have been at the forefront, convening global initiatives to reconcile Islam and science, culminating this week in the Istanbul Declaration on reconciling Muslims with the scientific method. Across the world, Ex-Muslims and liberal, reforming Muslims are more openly claiming their right to challenge taboos within our own communities, and public discourse is ever so slowly catching up with the fact that being a conservative Muslim is not the only way to be a Muslim. Media are realizing that just because Islamist sympathizers shout the loudest, this doesn’t mean they should be heeded any more than anyone else, if at all. But here’s the bad news. Arab democrats and reformers’ biggest success to date, has also been their biggest failure. The Arab Uprisings were not sparked by Islamists – they initially caught them and everyone else totally off guard – but by democrats. For a brief period, for just a few months, it was suddenly chic to be an Arab democrat in a Kufiyyeh scarf calling for change.
And then the despots took their revenge.
Human Rights fare worse now under Egypt’s military ruler Sisi, than when Mubarak imprisoned us. Syria speaks for itself.
Those positive shifts in the community have also not gone unnoticed among Islamists, and conservative Muslims. Each grouping is feeling the heat of reasserted enlightenment values by Reform Muslims, and has doubled-down, retreating further into their entrenched positions while targeting nascent liberal Muslim activists as a way to further establish their legitimacy.
Source: The Daily Beast
https://richarddawkins.net/2016/03/reform-Muslims-stand-up-to-take-on-the-ideology-of-islamism/
Huge respect for the man, who is not afraid to stand up and recognize the problems within Islam, to then tackle them, that brings cohesion between Muslims and Non-Muslims alike. More Muslims need to join with him, to help eradicate extremism
We are in the midst of a Muslim Reform – do not miss the wood for the trees.
The tragic attacks in Brussels this week mark the arrival of the global jihadist insurgency to Europe. The deaths of over 34 people in coordinated attacks in the heart of Europe’s capital had me pondering how we got here, and how far we have yet to go.
This month of March marks ten years since my release as an Islamist political prisoner from Egypt’s Mazra Tora prison. To stave off madness in solitary confinement, I used to organize races between pebbles that I flicked across the floor of my cell, naming them Freddy-Fred and Johnny-John. My cell had no lights, no toilet and no sheets for the first four months. In those early days, among the concrete and cockroaches, I found solace in the one item I was allowed to keep with me, a pocket-sized version of the Qur’an. I eventually memorized half of it under the light of the moon as it shone through the bars of the skylight and into my cell. The echo of my voice in that cell as I chanted the passages remains with me till this day. As does the same pocket-sized Qur’an, which I preserve with mixed feelings as a keepsake.
It is surreal to think back now and consider how dogmatic and intellectually inflexible I had become by the age of my arrest as an Islamist at 24. My rage stares out, piercing the lens of the prison guard who snapped this mugshot that I eventually smuggled out of prison with me. Our defiance of the World Order was on display for all to see as we marched in and out of that Cairo court raising slogans against our torturers as loudly as we could muster. There we were, a vanguard, calling for the return of a “Caliphate” that we would eventually denounce when ISIS declared one 12 years later. Over those next five years in jail my hardened immaturity softened, as I experienced the contradictions of life in a setting akin to Orwell’s Animal Farm, but for jihadists. There, as far back as 2002 I witnessed conversations among cellmates about how slavery would be reinstituted under our caliphate, and how the world would come to be conquered through jihad. I eventually became convinced that if we Islamists achieved what we had been romanticizing, we would come to destroy everything beautiful around us. But this process was slow and, well, a process. Even as news broke of our release in March 2006 and I began conducting interviews, I still had a great deal of that residual anger and ideological dogma stuck inside me. A BBC HardTalk interview from that year is perhaps one of the best examples of my former Islamist double-speak.
And my fiery speech at an anti-Israel rally outside the US embassy in London organized on ‘al-Quds day’ – serving as the death throes of my waning Islamism – remains a lingering reminder of just how far I have allowed my mind to wonder from those heady days when I was ever so certain of the good and the bad. Since then I have travelled twice to Israel as part of a British Parliamentary delegation, and have pulled back from much of my previous rhetoric, carefully crafting a more balanced perspective on the Israel-Palestine conflict, and much else. Eventually, my dogma gave way to my humanity. I could no longer maintain the facade of looking down on people like Amnesty activist John Cornwall who had become my pen pal while I was in prison, writing to me of life’s everyday wonders, while my fellow inmates dreamed of nothing but caliphal conquest. On 2 May 2007, I sent out an email to an audience of Islamists, Jihadists and Muslim “Community gatekeepers”; some who received this email back then will recognize the text:
Maajid al-Saleemi wrote:
In the name of God the Compassionate, the Merciful
Assalaamu alaykum,
I have deemed it necessary to announce that, after serving in Hizb-ut-Tahrir for 12 years and since I was 17 years old, I have decided to leave the party and resign my membership effective immediately.
I humbly request that I do not discuss the reasons for my decision at this moment in time, and ask that I be left to complete my much delayed final examinations.
Forgive me for any offence caused.
Maajid Nawaz
But I didn’t stop there. Needing to take responsibility for my role in creating division among our communities, I announced on the national flagship BBC Newsnight that I would now dedicate myself to challenging the divisive Islamist rhetoric that I had previously been prepared to die for. My first public talk to Muslims was met with incredulity. You’re calling for secularism? Many in the packed hall asked me aghast, after I had summarized my position. How long ago it now seems that in 2007 the British Muslim activist scene found it controversial to speak of secularism so openly. My first attempt at engaging Muslims in writing on these themes came in the form of a blog in which the comments section has faithfully captured the general mind set of British Muslim activism in 2007. My first national column for London’s Sunday Times, and my first New York Times profile came later, and by January 2008 we had announced the founding of Quilliam as the world’s first counter-extremism organisation, a course that would set me firmly upon the path of challenging Islamism while promoting a liberal, democratic and pluralistic reform of Islam today. As I reflect in the ashes of this horrific attack in Brussels, I see that over the course of these last ten years much has changed among Muslims in the West.
Quite clearly, I changed.
But so has the Western Muslim scene. People often ask me whether this has been a change for better or worse.
My answer is, rather confusingly: both. Consider what has happened to the debate within Western Muslim communities. Openly liberal, reforming Muslims have become far less defensive, and much more vocal and visible, since those earlier, darker years during the heyday of Bush’s War on Terror decade. Reform theologians such as Quilliam’s Dr Usama Hasan have been at the forefront, convening global initiatives to reconcile Islam and science, culminating this week in the Istanbul Declaration on reconciling Muslims with the scientific method. Across the world, Ex-Muslims and liberal, reforming Muslims are more openly claiming their right to challenge taboos within our own communities, and public discourse is ever so slowly catching up with the fact that being a conservative Muslim is not the only way to be a Muslim. Media are realizing that just because Islamist sympathizers shout the loudest, this doesn’t mean they should be heeded any more than anyone else, if at all. But here’s the bad news. Arab democrats and reformers’ biggest success to date, has also been their biggest failure. The Arab Uprisings were not sparked by Islamists – they initially caught them and everyone else totally off guard – but by democrats. For a brief period, for just a few months, it was suddenly chic to be an Arab democrat in a Kufiyyeh scarf calling for change.
And then the despots took their revenge.
Human Rights fare worse now under Egypt’s military ruler Sisi, than when Mubarak imprisoned us. Syria speaks for itself.
Those positive shifts in the community have also not gone unnoticed among Islamists, and conservative Muslims. Each grouping is feeling the heat of reasserted enlightenment values by Reform Muslims, and has doubled-down, retreating further into their entrenched positions while targeting nascent liberal Muslim activists as a way to further establish their legitimacy.
Source: The Daily Beast
https://richarddawkins.net/2016/03/reform-Muslims-stand-up-to-take-on-the-ideology-of-islamism/
Huge respect for the man, who is not afraid to stand up and recognize the problems within Islam, to then tackle them, that brings cohesion between Muslims and Non-Muslims alike. More Muslims need to join with him, to help eradicate extremism
Guest- Guest
Re: Reform Muslims Stand Up To Take On the Ideology of Islamism
by Guest Sat Mar 26, 2016 1:34 pm
Since when is having a good time wrong in religion
A Lap dance and this is what Zack comes back with to tackling extremism in Islam
I suppose Zack has never done anything wrong or been a perfect Muslim, not that I think enjoying a lap dance is in anyway wrong
Also
Nawaz said that the filmed event took place during his stag night prior to his wedding;[ he also questioned the timing of the CCTV footage, taken at the Charlie's Angels strip club in East London in July 2014, being leaked so close to the 2015 election. The publicising of the CCTV footage led to death threats against Nawaz by ISIS extremists. Nawaz apologised for causing offence to fellow Muslims, but defended himself against accusations of hypocrisy: "I never describe myself as a representative of Muslims in media, and speak as a liberal, who happens to be a non-devout Muslim, with a unique experience and insight into Islamist extremism.
All you can debate and not the points is to Try to deligitimize people
Guess who else perfected that methodology to a tea?
That says it all about how you do nothing to combat extremism in Islam
Good on him for going out having fun and not trying to groom and rape women like other Muslims
A Lap dance and this is what Zack comes back with to tackling extremism in Islam
I suppose Zack has never done anything wrong or been a perfect Muslim, not that I think enjoying a lap dance is in anyway wrong
Also
Nawaz said that the filmed event took place during his stag night prior to his wedding;[ he also questioned the timing of the CCTV footage, taken at the Charlie's Angels strip club in East London in July 2014, being leaked so close to the 2015 election. The publicising of the CCTV footage led to death threats against Nawaz by ISIS extremists. Nawaz apologised for causing offence to fellow Muslims, but defended himself against accusations of hypocrisy: "I never describe myself as a representative of Muslims in media, and speak as a liberal, who happens to be a non-devout Muslim, with a unique experience and insight into Islamist extremism.
All you can debate and not the points is to Try to deligitimize people
Guess who else perfected that methodology to a tea?
That says it all about how you do nothing to combat extremism in Islam
Good on him for going out having fun and not trying to groom and rape women like other Muslims
Guest- Guest
Re: Reform Muslims Stand Up To Take On the Ideology of Islamism
by Guest Sat Mar 26, 2016 2:28 pm
Those closet to him?
Really
Seems like you and others have done again what I just said
You try to deligitimise
Did you again take on his points?
No
It seems its many Muslims as seen here that are the real problem to tackling extremism and go after thos who want to do something
That speaks volumes to the extent of the problem we face in this country
I could of course go after the writer of this article, but why would I need to as people can check for themselves what a regressive he is who does nothing to stop Anti-Muslim hatred by defending against criticism of islam
Really
Seems like you and others have done again what I just said
You try to deligitimise
Did you again take on his points?
No
It seems its many Muslims as seen here that are the real problem to tackling extremism and go after thos who want to do something
That speaks volumes to the extent of the problem we face in this country
I could of course go after the writer of this article, but why would I need to as people can check for themselves what a regressive he is who does nothing to stop Anti-Muslim hatred by defending against criticism of islam
Guest- Guest
Re: Reform Muslims Stand Up To Take On the Ideology of Islamism
by Guest Sat Mar 26, 2016 2:30 pm
In defence of Maajid Nawaz
Tala Knight
Is Nathan Lean calling Nawaz a closet radical or a Westernised lapdog? He can’t possibly be both.
In Saudi Arabia, the ‘mutaween’ serve as a police force ‘for the prevention of immorality and vice.’ Orwell’s 1984 had the ‘Thought Police.’ Sadly, Islamist extremists are yet unable to call on the services of a similar group to control against blasphemy, so honorary members of the Regressive Left step up to do so.
Nothing is wrong with speaking against anti-Muslim-hatred, but by tearing down moderate Muslim activists, the Regressive Left takes the wrong approach. In the name of multi-culturalism, they indirectly aid and abet the Islamist propaganda campaign by seeking to delegitimise those that stand against extremist ideology.
A most deadly form of political correctness, the Regressive Left perpetually shoots itself in the foot.
“For many of the Regressive Left, the only authentic Muslim is a bearded Kalashnikov-wielding, grievance shouting victim. Anyone who deviates from such a stereotype is a ‘native informant’ said Amir Pasbakhsh of Unsafe Space.
In a recent apparition, pseudo-journalist Nathan Lean, a researcher at the Saudi-funded Prince Al-Waleed Bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding, launched an ad hominem attack against former Islamist and prominent anti-extremist advocate, Maajid Nawaz.
Founder of the UK’s leading counter extremism policy think tank, The Quilliam Foundation, Nawaz describes his personal, transformative journey in his best-selling autobiography, ‘Radical.’
Calling into question Nawaz’s motives for turning from radical Islam to anti-extremist research and advocacy, Lean’s piece for the New Republic makes three errors: It relies on an imbalance of incredible, pro-Islamist sources.
It employs a sneaky style of seeding suspicion through unreasonable means, then attempting to rationalise them. Finally, it faults the product of Nawaz’s work for its own strengths, such as sparking dialogue among individuals of a variety of political and religious beliefs.
Those quoted who question Nawaz’s genuine conversion from Islamism to activism include a cast of characters with strong allegiances to Islamism – and nobody else.
Every source in the piece is or was an Islamist fundamentalist with plenty of interest in discrediting anti-jihadist activists. Lean tastelessly exploits the emotions of an Islamist older brother against the sibling who broke away – petty family drama.
Incorporating sources with controversial opinions is expected, but balancing these voices with experts from other ideological viewpoints and backgrounds is irresponsible.
Second, and reminiscent of tabloid journalism, Lean falls into a pattern of throwing out accusations, then stating his suspicions are insufficient in order to appear rational.
After a tirade with regard to Mr. Nawaz’s motivations to turn from radicalism, Lean admits that it is ‘impossible to know with certainty what compelled Nawaz to leave Hizb ut-Tahrir and espouse his current agenda’, then continues to berate his subject.
The article examines the sum of Nawaz’s associations, picks out the most glaringly offensive, name drops them shamelessly without explanation, then adds, “He’s not guilty by association.” This ploy to come off as judicious is weak. Lean might as well be arguing, “Don’t trust Tweolde Egziabher. He once used a toilet next to Donald Trump.”
Finally, the piece perverts the strengths of a successful, non-politically affiliated, secular research organisation in order to reflect poorly on its leader.
There is nothing shady about accepting funding from a government for work delivered, from paying consultancy fees to guest activists and speakers, or participating in events and debates with public figures of differing viewpoints.
Successful policy advisers, and more broadly human beings, must often work with people they do not support and allow for dialogue among individuals with diverse viewpoints.
In fact, these issues can bring disagreeing parties to the same table, as evidenced by numerous bi-partisan security legislation in the United States, when the American Congress seems to agree on nothing else. Nobody wants to see their neighbours killed in violent acts of terror, and people become willing to work together.
Lean’s argument boils down to faulting Nawaz for being charismatic, founding a successful counter extremism research think tank, and working effectively across the political spectrum. It simultaneously questions the conviction of Nawaz’s conversion from radical Islam while accusing him of being too Western, or in Lean’s Twitter feed, ‘a lapdog’.
To be clear, Mr. Lean, are you calling Nawaz a closet radical or a Westernised lapdog? He can’t possibly be both.
Curious what Maajid Nawaz really believes, or how he turned from radical Islam to found the UK’s leading counter extremism research organization? Pick up a copy of his memoir, ‘Radical.’ There are 378 pages describing Mr. Nawaz’s journey from a Pakistani minority community in the UK, to Egypt and back.
Countering extremism is about debunking myths and discrediting radical ideology. By casting a shadow of doubt on the most compelling voices against extremist ideology, members of the Regressive Left such as Lean are allowing ISIS to play the same game.
Perhaps modern society is simply fed up with heroes. We reject stories of triumph over adversity because we are afraid to face our own demons, and modern culture no longer requires us to do so.
We would rather tear down others than risk the pain and disappointment of aiming for higher ground ourselves. But for those willing to be inspired, Nawaz’s story is the real deal.
After all, Maajid Nawaz is just like any of us — an individual ‘who yearned for a platform of empowerment’, in Lean’s own words.
Nawaz’s work has helped thousands find positive alternatives to violent extremism.
He is able to empower others because in seeking empowerment himself, he was not afraid to try, to err and, ultimately, to find his platform.
Tala Knight is an independent researcher
http://leftfootforward.org/2016/01/in-defence-of-maajid-nawaz/
Tala Knight
Is Nathan Lean calling Nawaz a closet radical or a Westernised lapdog? He can’t possibly be both.
In Saudi Arabia, the ‘mutaween’ serve as a police force ‘for the prevention of immorality and vice.’ Orwell’s 1984 had the ‘Thought Police.’ Sadly, Islamist extremists are yet unable to call on the services of a similar group to control against blasphemy, so honorary members of the Regressive Left step up to do so.
Nothing is wrong with speaking against anti-Muslim-hatred, but by tearing down moderate Muslim activists, the Regressive Left takes the wrong approach. In the name of multi-culturalism, they indirectly aid and abet the Islamist propaganda campaign by seeking to delegitimise those that stand against extremist ideology.
A most deadly form of political correctness, the Regressive Left perpetually shoots itself in the foot.
“For many of the Regressive Left, the only authentic Muslim is a bearded Kalashnikov-wielding, grievance shouting victim. Anyone who deviates from such a stereotype is a ‘native informant’ said Amir Pasbakhsh of Unsafe Space.
In a recent apparition, pseudo-journalist Nathan Lean, a researcher at the Saudi-funded Prince Al-Waleed Bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding, launched an ad hominem attack against former Islamist and prominent anti-extremist advocate, Maajid Nawaz.
Founder of the UK’s leading counter extremism policy think tank, The Quilliam Foundation, Nawaz describes his personal, transformative journey in his best-selling autobiography, ‘Radical.’
Calling into question Nawaz’s motives for turning from radical Islam to anti-extremist research and advocacy, Lean’s piece for the New Republic makes three errors: It relies on an imbalance of incredible, pro-Islamist sources.
It employs a sneaky style of seeding suspicion through unreasonable means, then attempting to rationalise them. Finally, it faults the product of Nawaz’s work for its own strengths, such as sparking dialogue among individuals of a variety of political and religious beliefs.
Those quoted who question Nawaz’s genuine conversion from Islamism to activism include a cast of characters with strong allegiances to Islamism – and nobody else.
Every source in the piece is or was an Islamist fundamentalist with plenty of interest in discrediting anti-jihadist activists. Lean tastelessly exploits the emotions of an Islamist older brother against the sibling who broke away – petty family drama.
Incorporating sources with controversial opinions is expected, but balancing these voices with experts from other ideological viewpoints and backgrounds is irresponsible.
Second, and reminiscent of tabloid journalism, Lean falls into a pattern of throwing out accusations, then stating his suspicions are insufficient in order to appear rational.
After a tirade with regard to Mr. Nawaz’s motivations to turn from radicalism, Lean admits that it is ‘impossible to know with certainty what compelled Nawaz to leave Hizb ut-Tahrir and espouse his current agenda’, then continues to berate his subject.
The article examines the sum of Nawaz’s associations, picks out the most glaringly offensive, name drops them shamelessly without explanation, then adds, “He’s not guilty by association.” This ploy to come off as judicious is weak. Lean might as well be arguing, “Don’t trust Tweolde Egziabher. He once used a toilet next to Donald Trump.”
Finally, the piece perverts the strengths of a successful, non-politically affiliated, secular research organisation in order to reflect poorly on its leader.
There is nothing shady about accepting funding from a government for work delivered, from paying consultancy fees to guest activists and speakers, or participating in events and debates with public figures of differing viewpoints.
Successful policy advisers, and more broadly human beings, must often work with people they do not support and allow for dialogue among individuals with diverse viewpoints.
In fact, these issues can bring disagreeing parties to the same table, as evidenced by numerous bi-partisan security legislation in the United States, when the American Congress seems to agree on nothing else. Nobody wants to see their neighbours killed in violent acts of terror, and people become willing to work together.
Lean’s argument boils down to faulting Nawaz for being charismatic, founding a successful counter extremism research think tank, and working effectively across the political spectrum. It simultaneously questions the conviction of Nawaz’s conversion from radical Islam while accusing him of being too Western, or in Lean’s Twitter feed, ‘a lapdog’.
To be clear, Mr. Lean, are you calling Nawaz a closet radical or a Westernised lapdog? He can’t possibly be both.
Curious what Maajid Nawaz really believes, or how he turned from radical Islam to found the UK’s leading counter extremism research organization? Pick up a copy of his memoir, ‘Radical.’ There are 378 pages describing Mr. Nawaz’s journey from a Pakistani minority community in the UK, to Egypt and back.
Countering extremism is about debunking myths and discrediting radical ideology. By casting a shadow of doubt on the most compelling voices against extremist ideology, members of the Regressive Left such as Lean are allowing ISIS to play the same game.
Perhaps modern society is simply fed up with heroes. We reject stories of triumph over adversity because we are afraid to face our own demons, and modern culture no longer requires us to do so.
We would rather tear down others than risk the pain and disappointment of aiming for higher ground ourselves. But for those willing to be inspired, Nawaz’s story is the real deal.
After all, Maajid Nawaz is just like any of us — an individual ‘who yearned for a platform of empowerment’, in Lean’s own words.
Nawaz’s work has helped thousands find positive alternatives to violent extremism.
He is able to empower others because in seeking empowerment himself, he was not afraid to try, to err and, ultimately, to find his platform.
Tala Knight is an independent researcher
http://leftfootforward.org/2016/01/in-defence-of-maajid-nawaz/
Guest- Guest
Re: Reform Muslims Stand Up To Take On the Ideology of Islamism
by Guest Sat Mar 26, 2016 2:39 pm
lol again more unfounded accusations trying to deligitimise groups
Also it claims about the Isreael pro-lobby just proves this piece i another antisemitism conspiracy load of bull
You should read your article first Zack
So why have none been charged with an hate crimes Zack
Whoops
Again no response to the points in the first article
Which leads my suspicions to be correct about you
Also it claims about the Isreael pro-lobby just proves this piece i another antisemitism conspiracy load of bull
You should read your article first Zack
So why have none been charged with an hate crimes Zack
Whoops
Again no response to the points in the first article
Which leads my suspicions to be correct about you
Guest- Guest
Re: Reform Muslims Stand Up To Take On the Ideology of Islamism
by Guest Sat Mar 26, 2016 2:47 pm
The New Racists: David Miller, Hilary Aked, Kevin MacDonald?
From his office at the University of Bath, David Miller, an academic and writer, researches organizations and activists that he believes, in his words, work to "distort public debate and undermine democracy." The results of this research, done with the help of his students and assembled into detailed profiles of the shadowy figures behind this lobbying, are published across a number of websites run by Miller, including PowerBase and SpinWatch.
A visitor to these websites will quickly note one particular constant: it would seem that a significant number of Miller's profiles focus on Jews and Muslims who are working to fight extremism and terrorism. Counter-terrorism groups, "neocons" and various political organizations are all accused of belonging to a "covert propaganda operation" for various Jewish organizations. Even Tony Blair, Miller argues, is in league with a sinister "international network" of Israeli settlers and American "Islamophobes."
As one blogger notes, any of Miller's "fellow academics" who do not present strong convictions against Israel, are "smeared... as neocons." Shiraz Maher, a counter-terrorism expert, has written: "Despite the 'close to ten thousand' entries on SpinProfiles [another Miller project] you will find nothing on [Islamist pressure] groups. ... The problem is with SpinProfile's apparent obsession with 'Jewish power' or, if you will, 'the Jewish lobby'."
At a recent conference organized by Miller, American academic Deepa Kumar denouncedMuslims working to combat extremism and terrorism within their communities as "native informants." And as the journalist Nick Cohen observed: "For the religious [Islamic] right and the political and academic left, a liberal Muslim is their trussed-up version of the enemy, the alien, the 'other'."
Another David Miller site, Neocon Europe (now defunct), published the works of Kevin MacDonald, a prominent white supremacist who claims that Jews control the media and politicians to "transform the country to serve their interests." In a list entitled, "characteristics of Jewish intellectual movements," MacDonald has claimed that Jews "form a cohesive, mutually reinforcing core" that has "access to prestigious and mainstream media sources, partly as a result of Jewish influence on the media."
Other conspiracy theories promoted on Miller's websites include those of Miller's colleague, Idrees Ahmed, who claims that the Darfur crisis has been prolonged by a powerful Jewish lobby.
According to Standpoint Magazine, in 2009, David Miller appeared to provide accommodation for Joel Kovel, an anti-Jewish American academic who has written that, "The Holocaust has been repressed from history and converted into moral capital to cover and justify whatever the Jewish people would do in the way of domination themselves, whether this be the pell-mell immersion in American bourgeois life or the policies of Israel." David Miller and his network also seem to work with Muslim Brotherhood operatives. In 2009, Miller secured taxpayer funding to run a project examining British Islam in collaboration with Osama Saeed, a Muslim Brotherhood activist. Saeed was previously the spokesperson for the Muslim Association of Britain, the main organization for the Muslim Brotherhood in Britain. In 2005, Saeed called for the re-establishment of the Islamic caliphate; and in 2006, Saeedexpressed praise for the late Al Qaeda leader Anwar Al-Awlaki.
Miller's protégés include Hilary Aked, a blogger with a seemingly strong interest in British Jewish groups. It would seem Aked apparently believes that a hidden Jewish network is responsible for the "Islamophobia industry," and that there is a distinct "overlap between Islamophobia and Zionism." She also describes moderate Muslims as "native informants."
Aked is published at the online publication, Electronic Intifada, where she writes about "pro-Israel" infiltration of the media, and that pro-Israel conferences are part of a secretive "transnational Islamophobia industry." Electronic Intifada is a prominent pro-Hamas publication, whose founder, Ali Abunimah, hasdescribed Palestinian leaders who talk with Israel as "collaborators," and claims that, "supporting Zionism is not atonement for the Holocaust, but its continuation in spirit." Aked has also frequently written for Al Araby Al Jadeed, a Qatari-funded media group that isaccused by Egyptian newspapers of being a Muslim Brotherhood front group. Al Araby's editor-in-chief, Wael Qandil, is described by the Arab newspaper Al Arabiya as a prominent supporterof the Muslim Brotherhood.
To fund his apparent obsession with the "propaganda" ostensibly spread by Jews and anti-Islamist Muslims, Miller has received grants from the Economic and Social Research Council, a body funded by the British government. In 2012, Miller received £400,000 ($614,000 USD) from the Council. Miller's projects have also received funding from a number of Islamist groups tied to the Muslim Brotherhood and the terror group, Hamas, including:
It would seem that in the minds of David Miller, Kevin MacDonald and Hilary Aked, a mysterious Jewish cabal is responsible for all the world's ills. Jewish money is supposedly the nexus between "Islamophobia," Western colonialism, terrorism and violent foreign policy.
That such views find a platform in academia -- and any funding by governments -- is, and probably should be, seriously troubling. Anti-Jewish tropes have been the foundation of conspiracy theories for centuries. The ideas of Miller, MacDonald and Aked are not new, but they remain racist, xenophobic and false.
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/6677/david-miller-hilary-aked-kevin-macdonald
- It would seem as if in the minds of David Miller, Kevin MacDonald and Hilary Aked, a mysterious Jewish cabal is responsible for all the world's ills.
- Even Tony Blair, Miller argues, is in league with a sinister "international network" of Israeli settlers and American "Islamophobes."
- "A liberal Muslim is their trussed-up version of the enemy, the alien, the 'other'." — Nick Cohen, journalist.
- Hilary Aked describes moderate Muslims as "native informants." It also would seem she apparently believes that a hidden Jewish network is responsible for the "Islamophobia industry." She has frequently written for a Qatari-funded media group that is accused by Egyptian newspapers of being a Muslim Brotherhood front group.
- Electronic Intifada is a prominent pro-Hamas publication, whose founder, Ali Abunimah, describes Palestinian leaders who talk with Israel as "collaborators."
- To fund his apparent obsession with the "propaganda" ostensibly spread by Jews and anti-Islamist Muslims, Miller has received grants from the Economic and Social Research Council, a body funded by the British government. In 2012, Miller received £400,000 from the Council, as well as grants from groups affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas.
From his office at the University of Bath, David Miller, an academic and writer, researches organizations and activists that he believes, in his words, work to "distort public debate and undermine democracy." The results of this research, done with the help of his students and assembled into detailed profiles of the shadowy figures behind this lobbying, are published across a number of websites run by Miller, including PowerBase and SpinWatch.
A visitor to these websites will quickly note one particular constant: it would seem that a significant number of Miller's profiles focus on Jews and Muslims who are working to fight extremism and terrorism. Counter-terrorism groups, "neocons" and various political organizations are all accused of belonging to a "covert propaganda operation" for various Jewish organizations. Even Tony Blair, Miller argues, is in league with a sinister "international network" of Israeli settlers and American "Islamophobes."
As one blogger notes, any of Miller's "fellow academics" who do not present strong convictions against Israel, are "smeared... as neocons." Shiraz Maher, a counter-terrorism expert, has written: "Despite the 'close to ten thousand' entries on SpinProfiles [another Miller project] you will find nothing on [Islamist pressure] groups. ... The problem is with SpinProfile's apparent obsession with 'Jewish power' or, if you will, 'the Jewish lobby'."
At a recent conference organized by Miller, American academic Deepa Kumar denouncedMuslims working to combat extremism and terrorism within their communities as "native informants." And as the journalist Nick Cohen observed: "For the religious [Islamic] right and the political and academic left, a liberal Muslim is their trussed-up version of the enemy, the alien, the 'other'."
Another David Miller site, Neocon Europe (now defunct), published the works of Kevin MacDonald, a prominent white supremacist who claims that Jews control the media and politicians to "transform the country to serve their interests." In a list entitled, "characteristics of Jewish intellectual movements," MacDonald has claimed that Jews "form a cohesive, mutually reinforcing core" that has "access to prestigious and mainstream media sources, partly as a result of Jewish influence on the media."
Other conspiracy theories promoted on Miller's websites include those of Miller's colleague, Idrees Ahmed, who claims that the Darfur crisis has been prolonged by a powerful Jewish lobby.
According to Standpoint Magazine, in 2009, David Miller appeared to provide accommodation for Joel Kovel, an anti-Jewish American academic who has written that, "The Holocaust has been repressed from history and converted into moral capital to cover and justify whatever the Jewish people would do in the way of domination themselves, whether this be the pell-mell immersion in American bourgeois life or the policies of Israel." David Miller and his network also seem to work with Muslim Brotherhood operatives. In 2009, Miller secured taxpayer funding to run a project examining British Islam in collaboration with Osama Saeed, a Muslim Brotherhood activist. Saeed was previously the spokesperson for the Muslim Association of Britain, the main organization for the Muslim Brotherhood in Britain. In 2005, Saeed called for the re-establishment of the Islamic caliphate; and in 2006, Saeedexpressed praise for the late Al Qaeda leader Anwar Al-Awlaki.
Miller's protégés include Hilary Aked, a blogger with a seemingly strong interest in British Jewish groups. It would seem Aked apparently believes that a hidden Jewish network is responsible for the "Islamophobia industry," and that there is a distinct "overlap between Islamophobia and Zionism." She also describes moderate Muslims as "native informants."
 Deepa Kumar (left) and Hilary Aked (right) condemn moderate Muslims as "native informants." |
To fund his apparent obsession with the "propaganda" ostensibly spread by Jews and anti-Islamist Muslims, Miller has received grants from the Economic and Social Research Council, a body funded by the British government. In 2012, Miller received £400,000 ($614,000 USD) from the Council. Miller's projects have also received funding from a number of Islamist groups tied to the Muslim Brotherhood and the terror group, Hamas, including:
- £2000 from Interpal, a British charity closely linked to Hamas. Interpal's leaders regularly attend Hamas rallies and ceremonies in the Gaza strip. Interpal trustee Essam Yusuf even participated in a song that praised Hamas's terrorist activities and its "martyrs." Another Interpal trustee, Ibrahim Hewitt, has written of a "so-called Holocaust," andclaims: "The Jews cannot be entrusted with the sanctity and security of this Holy Land."
- £10,000 from Friends of Al Aqsa, an organization founded by Ismail Patel, who told a crowd in 2009 that, "Hamas is no terrorist organization. The reason they hate Hamas is because they refuse to be subjugated, occupied by the Israeli state, and we salute Hamas for standing up to Israel."Friends of Al Aqsa has published writings of prominent anti-Semites, including the Palestinian journalist Khalid Amayreh, whose submission claimed that Jews control America, and that the Iraq war "was conceived in and planned by Israel through the mostly Jewish neocons in Washington."
- A total of £15,000 from the Cordoba Foundation, a lobbying group led by senior Muslim Brotherhood official, Anas Al-Tikriti. Prime Minister David Cameron has described the Cordoba Foundation as a "political front for the Muslim Brotherhood."
- £5000 from Middle East Monitor, a Muslim Brotherhood online publication. Its editor,Daud Abdullah, was a signatory to the Istanbul Declaration, a document that, according to The Guardian, called for attacks on British troops and Jewish communities.
In 2011, Middle East Monitor brought the Hamas activist Raed Saleh to speak in Britain. Saleh has claimed (falsely) that 4000 Jews skipped work at the World Trade Center on 9/11 and that those who killed the "Martyr, Sheikh Osama Bin Laden" had "sold their consciences to Satan." David Miller seems, in fact, to be a vocal supporter of Raed Saleh, and spoke in defence of Saleh at a court deportation hearing.
It would seem that in the minds of David Miller, Kevin MacDonald and Hilary Aked, a mysterious Jewish cabal is responsible for all the world's ills. Jewish money is supposedly the nexus between "Islamophobia," Western colonialism, terrorism and violent foreign policy.
That such views find a platform in academia -- and any funding by governments -- is, and probably should be, seriously troubling. Anti-Jewish tropes have been the foundation of conspiracy theories for centuries. The ideas of Miller, MacDonald and Aked are not new, but they remain racist, xenophobic and false.
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/6677/david-miller-hilary-aked-kevin-macdonald
Last edited by Didge on Sat Mar 26, 2016 2:48 pm; edited 1 time in total
Guest- Guest
Re: Reform Muslims Stand Up To Take On the Ideology of Islamism
by Guest Sat Mar 26, 2016 2:51 pm
Fuzzy Zack wrote:The reason why he's has zero Muslim following is because we all know he's a money hungry, fame whore who is being used by the neoconservatives to forward their agenda and more importantly, placate people like youself.
Then why does he have Muslims vote for him?
You see every time you lie based off someone you have never even met and yet you take your que from extremists and leftist regressive
Now either talk about the points because at the moment all you have done is spam the thread
One thing is for sure you have zero respect
You need to get your head out of the cloud and stop buying into Muslim narratives of hate and conspiracies, as it shows you are very naive and easily led
Guest- Guest
Re: Reform Muslims Stand Up To Take On the Ideology of Islamism
by Guest Sat Mar 26, 2016 3:06 pm
Fuzzy Zack wrote:Didge wrote:
Then why does he have Muslims vote for him?
You see every time you lie based off someone you have never even met and yet you take your que from extremists and leftist regressive
Now either talk about the points because at the moment all you have done is spam the thread
One thing is for sure you have zero respect
You need to get your head out of the cloud and stop buying into Muslim narratives of hate and conspiracies, as it shows you are very naive and easily led
Which Muslims voted for him?
You are bluntly lying, hoping nobody will check.
Maajid Nawaz, the former extremist who came under fire from many British Muslims last year for tweeting an image of the Prophet Muhammad, identifies publicly as a “moderate Muslim”, there is little evidence in his campaign literature of reaching out specifically to Muslim voters either.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/husseinkesvani/is-the-british-Muslim-vote-actually-a-thing#.njDb36On3
Is that your evidence?
Did he receive votes as a Liberal MP
Again those who claim anger over his tweet shows the extensive problems with Literal Muslims in this country, as why did he post it?
How many voiced anger?
A couple of thousand?
is that your evidence to your inability to debate a single point on this thread and use the tactics of the Nazi;s to deligitimize people?
You are showing yourself up to be a true embarressment
Guest- Guest
Re: Reform Muslims Stand Up To Take On the Ideology of Islamism
by Guest Sat Mar 26, 2016 3:08 pm
Maajid Nawaz has found himself to be quite unpopular among the majority of Muslims in Britain. There are quite a few reasons for this, which I'll try to explain.
Nawaz estimates that the majority of Muslims are socially conservative and as well as challenging Islamism he also challenges the socially conservatives attitudes of Muslims in Britain and elsewhere. For example he supports gay rights, whilst the vast majority of Muslims don't. This runs him into a lot of trouble, as he is trying to reform a faith where the majority of people do not feel it needs reformed. [1]
Then you have Israel, the great scourge of the earth, in the minds of too many British Muslims and the British left. Nawaz neither demonizes nor denigrates Israel. His opinions can be found in a very measured and balanced article here. He also has pointed out the hypocrisy of his fellow Muslims fixating on and obsessing about Israel. [2]
In Britain the majority of Muslims do not support free speech. Last time polling was done, 78 per cent thought that the publishers of the
wikipedia.org
Danish cartoons should have been prosecuted and 68 per cent believed those who insult Islam should be prosecuted. Maajid Nawaz is stanch defender of freedom of speech. He didn't stand up like many Muslim and leftist journalists and commentators and smear Charlie Hebdo as being racist and didn't do the whole 'I believe in free speech... but' rigmarole. [3][4]
Lastly, he doesn't blame radicalization solely on the West and tries to debunk the victim narrative which is tacitly accepted by many Muslims. Both these are not popular views.
[1]Muslims in Britain have zero tolerance of homosexuality, says poll
[2]maajid nawaz on Twitter
[3]UK Polling Report
[4]Not all Muslims agree on what is offensive. And we must make that clearer
Nawaz estimates that the majority of Muslims are socially conservative and as well as challenging Islamism he also challenges the socially conservatives attitudes of Muslims in Britain and elsewhere. For example he supports gay rights, whilst the vast majority of Muslims don't. This runs him into a lot of trouble, as he is trying to reform a faith where the majority of people do not feel it needs reformed. [1]
Then you have Israel, the great scourge of the earth, in the minds of too many British Muslims and the British left. Nawaz neither demonizes nor denigrates Israel. His opinions can be found in a very measured and balanced article here. He also has pointed out the hypocrisy of his fellow Muslims fixating on and obsessing about Israel. [2]
In Britain the majority of Muslims do not support free speech. Last time polling was done, 78 per cent thought that the publishers of the
wikipedia.org
Danish cartoons should have been prosecuted and 68 per cent believed those who insult Islam should be prosecuted. Maajid Nawaz is stanch defender of freedom of speech. He didn't stand up like many Muslim and leftist journalists and commentators and smear Charlie Hebdo as being racist and didn't do the whole 'I believe in free speech... but' rigmarole. [3][4]
Lastly, he doesn't blame radicalization solely on the West and tries to debunk the victim narrative which is tacitly accepted by many Muslims. Both these are not popular views.
[1]Muslims in Britain have zero tolerance of homosexuality, says poll
[2]maajid nawaz on Twitter
[3]UK Polling Report
[4]Not all Muslims agree on what is offensive. And we must make that clearer
Guest- Guest
Re: Reform Muslims Stand Up To Take On the Ideology of Islamism
by Guest Sat Mar 26, 2016 3:13 pm
Fuzzy Zack wrote:Didge wrote:Maajid Nawaz has found himself to be quite unpopular among the majority of Muslims in Britain. There are quite a few reasons for this, which I'll try to explain.
Nawaz estimates that the majority of Muslims are socially conservative and as well as challenging Islamism he also challenges the socially conservatives attitudes of Muslims in Britain and elsewhere. For example he supports gay rights, whilst the vast majority of Muslims don't. This runs him into a lot of trouble, as he is trying to reform a faith where the majority of people do not feel it needs reformed. [1]
Then you have Israel, the great scourge of the earth, in the minds of too many British Muslims and the British left. Nawaz neither demonizes nor denigrates Israel. His opinions can be found in a very measured and balanced article here. He also has pointed out the hypocrisy of his fellow Muslims fixating on and obsessing about Israel. [2]
In Britain the majority of Muslims do not support free speech. Last time polling was done, 78 per cent thought that the publishers of the
wikipedia.org
Danish cartoons should have been prosecuted and 68 per cent believed those who insult Islam should be prosecuted. Maajid Nawaz is stanch defender of freedom of speech. He didn't stand up like many Muslim and leftist journalists and commentators and smear Charlie Hebdo as being racist and didn't do the whole 'I believe in free speech... but' rigmarole. [3][4]
Lastly, he doesn't blame radicalization solely on the West and tries to debunk the victim narrative which is tacitly accepted by many Muslims. Both these are not popular views.
[1]Muslims in Britain have zero tolerance of homosexuality, says poll
[2]maajid nawaz on Twitter
[3]UK Polling Report
[4]Not all Muslims agree on what is offensive. And we must make that clearer
HA HA!
You now admit you lied.
How
Is majority all now to you?
You see again you embarrass yourself and the reasons behind Muslims not backing him, is they are the problem as seen by the naratives of hate they buy into and their ultra conservative islamic views and hate of Jews
Guest- Guest
Re: Reform Muslims Stand Up To Take On the Ideology of Islamism
by Guest Sat Mar 26, 2016 3:14 pm
Fuzzy Zack wrote:Didge wrote:
Is that your evidence?
Did he receive votes as a Liberal MP
Again those who claim anger over his tweet shows the extensive problems with Literal Muslims in this country, as why did he post it?
How many voiced anger?
A couple of thousand?
is that your evidence to your inability to debate a single point on this thread and use the tactics of the Nazi;s to deligitimize people?
You are showing yourself up to be a true embarressment
HA HA!
See my post above.
What percentage voted for him?
Which candidate won? What religion is she?
You're the embarrassment, bruv.
You are as again you said zero Muslims did you not?
You need to back that statement, which was a complete an utter lie
And stop using that slang talk
You are not my bruv but Islamist extremist scum
Guest- Guest
Sponsored content
Similar topics» Islam Needs More Muslims Like This If It Is Ever Going To Reform
» High Schools Don’t Need More Ideology
» The gay community is in denial about Islamism
» The State Media - Gender Ideology
» Qutbism: An Ideology of Islamic-Fascism
» High Schools Don’t Need More Ideology
» The gay community is in denial about Islamism
» The State Media - Gender Ideology
» Qutbism: An Ideology of Islamic-Fascism
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
» TOTAL MADNESS Great British Railway Journeys among shows flagged by counter terror scheme ‘for encouraging far-right sympathies
» Interesting COVID figures
» HAPPY CHRISTMAS.
» The Fight Over Climate Change is Over (The Greenies Won!)
» Trump supporter murders wife, kills family dog, shoots daughter
» Quill
» Algerian Woman under investigation for torture and murder of French girl, 12, whose body was found in plastic case in Paris
» Wind turbines cool down the Earth (edited with better video link)
» Saying goodbye to our Queen.
» PHEW.
» And here's some more enrichment...
» John F Kennedy Assassination
» Where is everyone lately...?
» London violence over the weekend...
» Why should anyone believe anything that Mo Farah says...!?
» Liverpool Labour defends mayor role poll after turnout was only 3% and they say they will push ahead with the option that was least preferred!!!
» Labour leader Keir Stammer can't answer the simple question of whether a woman has a penis or not...
» More evidence of remoaners still trying to overturn Brexit... and this is a conservative MP who should be drummed out of the party and out of parliament!
» R Kelly 30 years, Ghislaine Maxwell 20 years... but here in UK...