Has Islam been Hijacked in the UK?

3 11 2007

Policy Exchange is a center-right think tank based in London. Recently they have published a report entitled: The hijacking of British Islam. Far from an extensive honest research it appears to be an agenda document propagating a campaign against Islam and Muslims in the UK. Policy exchange has previously published reports and researches on similar lines which can be deemed as material spreading hatred towards Muslim members of society. Although they don’t advocate violence, they are hell-bent on taking their hateful extreme version of liberal democracy to the world at the cost of innocent lives…which would inevitably lead to violence and chaos as we see in parts of the world.

The author of the recent report is a Dr. Denis MacEoin, Wikipedia article describes him as:

a novelist and a former lecturer in Islamic studies. His academic specializations are Shi‘ism, Shaykhism, Bábism, and the Bahá’í Faith, on all of which he has written extensively. His novels are written under the pen names Daniel Easterman and Jonathan Aycliffe.

The article also mentions:

In recent years, he has become active in pro-Israel advocacy (hasbara), chiefly in his capacity as a writer. He continues to work on Islamic issues, particularly the development of radical Islam.

I think reports such as these should serve as a wakeup call for the advocates of liberal democracy who are quick to address extremism elsewhere, when they have such dangerous form of extremism growing inside. Perhaps one day we will see the moderate voices condemn these hate-filled extremists from mainstream think tanks and British politics for sake of a peaceful progressive future. I am not counting on it!

The video below contain an interesting interview by Riz Khan (al-Jazeera) with guests from Policy Exchange and the Muslim council of Britain.

Advertisements

Actions

Information

23 responses

3 11 2007
marranci

thanks for this post. I think that there is an urgent need of serious research which focus more on how this material is used.
The fact that the radical material is there does not tell us very much. I am also very concerned about the methodology of the report. I think that there are issues which may compromise the overall structure. I have written a post concerning my doubts. I hope that a more independent can be conducted that also will include the issues of by whom and how and for which reasons this literature is read.
Best wishes
Gabriele

4 11 2007
Sumera

What the heebeejeebies is “Shaykhism”??

4 11 2007
Tia

Thanks for your comment Dr. Marranci.

I won’t deny that there is some material widely available which can perhaps be interpreted as radical, however at the same time Muslim organisations, mosques, committees have bent backwards to clean up the mess created by the Govt and the neo-cons. Take for example Muslim council of Britain, who have not only co-operated with the Government but have gone to great lengths to build bridges even at the cost of being called stooges and sell-outs by other Muslims. This wasn’t enough, the same people attacked the Govt for engaging with MCB promoting a dubious unheard organisation by the name ‘Sufi Muslim council’ even before its official launch. It is clear in my view that there are extremists within the British politics who are digging holes in the already weak bridges of community cohesion.

Its refreshing to see the moderates speak out. Thank you.

4 11 2007
Tia

Sumera I was wondering that myself.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaykhism

4 11 2007
Shahrzad

I dont know how much you read about Baha’is, Babis and Shaykhiyah as well..
They are deviant groups. Also their foundation is completely “questionable”..
There are many documents that UK and Jewish Agency -which basically is a Zionist organization- were behind the project..
Even there are many documents that who were the first so called believers to Baha or Bab, were from those jews who had tribally converted to Islam via Shaykhiyah group 2 or 3 years before appearing a Bab.. They seemingly were muslim, but in their home they were practising jews.. They made a bahai religion, for jews usually are cursed all over the world. So they made a Bahai religion for 2 reasons:

1. weaken the power and influence of islam, religious scholars and mosques and a motivating place for islamic movements

2. The Bahai religion came to be as a good peaceful religion. Yet behind the idea there were many crimes. They show themselves good peaceful kind citizens, yet mostly they are spying for Israel against muslim world!

For example, If you see the Bahai fitnah is right after Tobacco banning by Ayyatullah Shirazi. For the British organizations wanted to take it under their control, to start for a colonisation in Iran, like what they did in India. But people burned all Tobaccos and the organizations couldnt be defeated..

Complicated story.. But you can see whole this games, started from a Sufi group, named as Shaykhiyah!
Foundation of Sufiyyah also has many kind of complicated stories..
Anyway..

4 11 2007
Shahrzad

weakening*

4 11 2007
Observor

What do they REALLY want? do they want Muslims to remove hadith which says ‘whoever changes his deen, kill him’?? As you said, everything has a context and can be interpreted as something else. Like this whole obsession with stopping Islamisation comes from wrong understanding of the role of Islam in the west!

shahrzad I didn’t know about this bahaism and shaykhism before. I was reading about this other group called Yazidis and coincidently they also have some sufi origins. This sufism is breeding ground for deviant cults.. like a conveyer belt..lol

5 11 2007
sonia

Interesting observations Sharhzad. I wonder how many people think of Islam – overall – in the same way – that we came to be a good peaceful lot ( or maybe not even that) and we had crimes in our past, some might think that we only existed to fill the gap in the Byzantine and Roman empires. And that we ourselves – were a ‘deviant’ cult basing ourselves on Judaism and Christianity. Isn’t that the irony of all these people who believe in God – everyone is obsessed with thinking who is the legitimate cult and who isn’t? CLearly none of us can know the answer to that question, and can only follow what we think best. I am surprised so many people have so much vitriol for ‘heresies’ – look at how the Catholic Church behaved towards so-called heresies. How is it possible – if religions/ groupings within religion are concerned with giving themselves legitimacy over others, is it not about ‘power’ and who has the right – to say they are from God? If we are going to be completely unbiased ( i.e. not convinced it is OUR ancestors who are right) then surely we would have to say fairly that there is no particular reason any of these people are ‘right’ over others. It is hardly suprising so many people think that religions are simply out for social control and authority – given this kind of ‘they’re a heretic, they’re not legitimate’ discourse. And surely – it is arrogant to think You/We know God’s will, and that others do not. To me, that seems the supreme sort of arrogance that a Supreme Maker would be annoyed about, if they are going to get annoyed about. Mind you though, given the Supreme Maker seems to be purposefully trying to cause this kind of strife, by sending so many different memos to people all over the world, knowing full well most people are simply going to follow their ancestors ( though there are a few people who didnt like the Prophet Mohammad) and not question things too much – what can you expect, apart from this sort of =mine is the true religion, yours is not?

5 11 2007
Tia

Thanks Shahrzad for explaining the origins of these cults.

Observor we just going to have to beat the neo cons at their game.

5 11 2007
Tia

Sonia I understand what you are saying, however what we have to appreciate is that Truth is only One. We cannot live our lives believing there can be more than one Truth or many Truths and all of us do have the ability to arrive at the conclusion of one single Truth. That single Truth is the one based on individuals perception of reality, which is undeniably the same based on enlightened proofs. I accept Islam as the Truth based on enlightened thought and rational proofs, and I reject anything other than Islam as false. Some may arrive at another conclusion based on superficial, irrational, emotional, dogmatic thought, blind faith or to satisfy some form of spiritual void. In such cases, their claims to Truth will have to be examined from the basis and if the basis are dubious or bunch of refutable facts… whats wrong with considering it false?? The process did not involve declaring others false because one does not agree with a particular law they believe in or any one particular practice to be absurd!! The process is clearly based on questioning the origins and the basis. Similarly, I encourage Muslims and non-Muslims alike, infact Islam itself encourages people to question the basis and origins of Islamic belief and to accept it wholeheartedly as the Truth.

Also, this has nothing to do with the subject of God’s will as we do NOT have knowledge of God’s well except we experience it in our lives. The subject is Man’s will or the Freewill granted to Man and Human beings making correct decisions to live their life according to strongest set of ideology truly capable of giving them the satisfaction in this life and the hereafter.

5 11 2007
Shahrzad

ُSonia, I dont said anything against any spc relgions and dont call them Kafir or Rafizi.. I even have many friends among other religions’ followers, plus Baha’is..

I just talk based on true documents always. It happens that during a period of time, an Islamic king be this or that. But it is not related to Islam particularely. For Islam basically is completely clear way.. And one can get who act islamically and who dont..

Really we can write our feelings and discuss emotionally about everything and everyone, pages and pages. But emotion is not base in intellectual discussion.
Those are “Documents” which are discussed intellectually. They say something else..

5 11 2007
Shahrzad

i dont say*

5 11 2007
Shahrzad

Tia, i wrote something about brain death and organ donation in Islam. I wanted to discuss about it. For there are different ideas about..
May you read my entry? “When Brain dies..”

5 11 2007
sonia

I am not suggesting Tia that the Truth isn’t only ONe – but the question – is – precisely- how do we know we are the ones in the possession of that ONe truth? ANd not the Hindus – say?

If there is only One truth, then some of us are in big trouble, and it could well be Muslims, i wonder how many of us apply that logic – that it might not actually be in our favour!

5 11 2007
Shahrzad

Sonia, It doesnt take much time. Need to study source of all religions, their books and their sayings..
And thinking..
It doesnt mean you reject all other religions, but you find the truth and you get sure. I know that’s What Tia mean..
Why it is that much difficult to know the truth?
That’s simple, clear and front of our eyes..
When a God gets that much little that be in shape of human, cow, idols, then better that God run his own way!!

5 11 2007
Tia

Sonia as I said, we know the truth by examining its foundation and basis.. which has to be rationally assessable and must agree with human intellect and needs. Anyone who takes their life seriously must begin with asking the most fundamental questions and searching for the most convincing rational answers: Where did I come from? What is purpose of my life? What will happen to me afterlife?

5 11 2007
Miss Specs

An excellent topic raised…

Sonia, i think what you pointed out is the basis of any faith. We must not assume that we are ‘the guided people’. In fact, the Quran repeatedly points towards this trait of the people that were astray. If you start at the beginning of your existence, and work forward…read everything and rationalize, there would be no need for this discussion about who is right and who is wrong. You’re right to call the ‘i-am-holier-than-thou’ attitude arrogant. But there is a certain, shall i say, smugness (for i am lost for want of a better synonym) that comes from having your feet firmly on the ground (of your knowledge).

Wrt the post…i think the man chosen to represent MCB was not really a good choice…he was getting a bit too emotional even though he had the facts firmly in his favor. He got sorta edgy at the in-your-face-lies of the other guy towards the end of the program. Its a Muslim trait i guess…we all get angry quick and have a short fuse when our religion is called out. 😦

5 11 2007
amal

asalam alaykum ! I have not checked anyones blogg , but I checked yours 😀 I am also going to go and check shahrzads . ;D

i just sent you a email as well .

I dont understand why people are so influenced by the media , I feel terribly confused as to why people do not thiNk ? and question ? I mean I do not get how the media is so powerful on peoples minds , people choose for them to interpret what they want to believe about muslims , no one can change your mind unless you give them permission .

15 11 2007
amal

TIA your tagged , where are you ? come and check the rules on my blog !

25 12 2007
Yossri Zurka

Dennis MacEoin claims to be an expert on Middle East but what he is enthusiastic about can be judged by his following contributions. Writing to The Times in March 2007 he wrote:

I could understand Muslims taking offence were it not for the fact that they are more than willing to give offence. Radical Islamic literature speaks openly of hating non-believers, describes Jews as the children of apes and pigs, describes women as of limited intellect and little worth, and calls music, singing, and other arts debased, corrupt, filthy, obscene and so on. If they are so willing to hand it out, they must learn to take it. Drawing Muhammad as a dog is not particularly witty, but it’s hardly a patch on what some Muslim ‘scholars’ say about things I and millions of others hold dear. When they curse freedom (it allows human beings to make their own laws instead of God’s laws) or democracy (the same), yet so many millions of Muslims have benefited from living in democracies that have given them refuge, I am deeply offended.
http://timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article1554701.ece

It seems that the subsequent publications were to make the Muslims learn to “take it.”

You may notice recent attempts to wipe one’s tracks off are all too visible
http://www.blogger.com/profile/05674063273157934670
(Though many retractions can still be recovered): http://tinyurl.com/2uk58s
http://tinyurl.com/yu9wg5 and http://tinyurl.com/yuh96u

MacEoin is the owner and principal contributor to “A Liberal Defence of Israel” which he introduces as: “A blog designed to correct the false impression that Israel is an illiberal, fascist, or apartheid state. Here, I shall present arguments to show that Israel actually embodies the best in democracy, anti-racism, religious freedom, and rights for women, gay people, and minorities of different kinds.” http://mid-eastplus.blogspot.com/

Observers will find it amusing to see entries on the blog roll to detemine where MacEoin takes his inspirations from and whom he identifies and aligns with.

Another blog to which MacEoin is associated is named as Middle East Analysis, Comment & Analysis about Middle East Affairs. The header blurb claims: Middle East Analysis presents a spectrum of views about Middle East political affairs. Opinions expressed in individual posts do not necessarily represent those of the group or of any other editor. http://middle-east-analysis.blogspot.com/

See what topics, occasions and events MacEoin chooses to comment on:
http://westernstandard.blogs.com/shotgun/2006/12/if_mary_and_jos.html

For the campaigns this ‘scholar’ is passionate about check:
http://hnn.us/blogs/archives/3/2005/5/
http://www.zionismontheweb.org/history_of_Muslim_antisemitism_and_anti-Zionism.htm
http://irenelancaster.typepad.com/my_weblog/2007/07/what-the-guardi.html

What kind of cards he has up in his sleeves can be guessed
from his adulation of the below work as “simply riveting”
http://irenelancaster.typepad.com/my_weblog/2007/10/eyewitness-repo.html

MacEoin generated many flacks and triggered many questioning his stands and writings http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/008296.php
http://www.jewlicious.com/?p=2513
http://tinyurl.com/2kxuqf
http://dan92024.blogstream.com/v1/pid/189031.html

The above writings are clear and undeniable evidences of Denis’ obsession to demonize, distort and denounce a specific faith and its values. Attempts to portray MacEoin as a scholar tantamount to asking someone paint the followers of a particular faith in black, to tarnish their image and to taunt their traditions.

2 01 2008
jessica simpsonpussy

Winkler trial not the only

SELMER – It’s a quiet spring afternoon, and Scotty Goodrum and his son Sidney are taking full advantage.

2 02 2008
Amina Ae Sook

Brother Islam seems to be getting hijacked a lot. Someone should keep an eye on that brother.

2 02 2008
Tia

no, it’s sister Islam.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




%d bloggers like this: