UK Muslim's letter to Tony Blair

[NGONGE]

British Muslim groups have written to the prime minister calling for "urgent" changes to UK foreign policy.

In an open letter they say British policy is putting civilians at increased risk in the UK and abroad. This is the text.

 

Prime Minister, As British Muslims we urge you to do more to fight against all those who target civilians with violence, whenever and wherever that happens.

 

It is our view that current British government policy risks putting civilians at increased risk both in the UK and abroad.

 

To combat terror the government has focused extensively on domestic legislation. While some of this will have an impact, the government must not ignore the role of its foreign policy.

 

The debacle of Iraq and now the failure to do more to secure an immediate end to the attacks on civilians in the Middle East not only increases the risk to ordinary people in that region, it is also ammunition to extremists who threaten us all.

 

Attacking civilians is never justified. This message is a global one. We urge the Prime Minister to redouble his efforts to tackle terror and extremism and change our foreign policy to show the world that we value the lives of civilians wherever they live and whatever their religion.

 

Such a move would make us all safer.

Source

 

Looks like I’m back to my old stomping ground. What an utterly duplicitous letter that was.

[Valenteenah.]

^^ What do you find so duplicitous about it?

[NGONGE]

They’re hiding their heads under the sand again and focusing on a different problem altogether! This letter was written as a response to the latest (alleged) terrorist arrests in the UK. As usual, the Muslim Council of Briton and others are no fans of self-examination and reflection. Instead, they would rather lay the blame somewhere else! Still, I don’t mind the tone of their letter to Tony Blair or the content. What I mind is that they consider a discourse with the British government of the greatest importance and pass copies of this letter to all media outlets yet don’t see or seem to remember their responsibility to their local ‘community’ on whose behalf they speak! There is not one single line where they urge and clearly advice the Muslim ‘community’ to distance itself from troublemakers (remember, with such a letter comes great exposure and any advice made in it would have reached most UK Muslims). Alas, these ‘community’ leaders are not interested in dealing with their own but instead would prefer to argue (in a most futile way) with the British government about its foreign policy and what not.

 

 

While I’m at it, let me talk about the thing that prompted them into writing that letter. Of course, the issues of Iraq and Lebanon might have given them the idea for the letter but only when the arrests were made did they finally get together and write it! Isn’t it strange then that they would not talk about these arrests and the real reason for them?

[AYOUB]

^^ My understanding was the letter was planned before the arrests and the timing of it's release was coincidental.

 

Here's one people behind the letter in today's Times:

 

 

Why Muslims must rise up now and join the battle against extremism

 

Shahid Malik

 

ON FRIDAY last week I agreed to add my name to a letter to the Government from Oxfam, other non-governmental organisations and individuals to express, in the wake of the Middle East crisis, our commitment to the fundamental humanitarian principle that all innocent lives should be valued equally.

 

As has been made apparent to me over the past few days, the letter was open to several interpretations. It has never been my contention that the Government ought to change foreign policy because of terrorist threats within our borders. We must never be held to ransom by those who would deliberately shed innocent blood in the name of their cause. I firmly believe that justice, righteousness and national interest should be our policy compass. So when ministers such as Kim Howells and Douglas Alexander argue that “no government worth its salt would allow any policy to be dictated by threats of terrorâ€, we are at one.

 

I doubt if many would question my commitment to fighting terrorism. I have vociferously argued, ever since it was revealed that the leader of the 7/7 bombers was my constituent, that no policy, domestic or foreign, can ever justify or excuse British-born Muslims strapping on suicide belts.

 

Yes, foreign policy causes anger among many British Muslims but this does not in itself cause terrorism. Unquestionably, the lethal ingredient is a twisted, perverted interpretation of Islam whereby you can legitimately kill yourself and other innocent people, and you will go to Heaven.

 

The notion that you change foreign policy to save civilian lives in, say, Lebanon, or Palestine, by slaying innocent men, women or children in the UK or US is perverse and profoundly abhorrent. Furthermore, all it does is create tremendous misery for the overwhelming majority of Muslims who reject the terrorist ideology.

 

On a recent visit to the US, I was shocked to learn that tens of thousands of Muslims left their adopted country after 9/11 — with more planning to continue the exodus because of increased domestic hostility. Even in Britain, fear has propelled some Muslims to build homes abroad, just in case.

 

While being tough on terrorists, however, the Government should be flexible enough to listen to those who have genuine policy concerns. Today I, along with other Muslim MPs, will discuss with John Prescott some of the challenges ahead. The Prime Minister has also indicated that he is willing to meet those with concerns.

 

This is the way forward. Any British Muslims who are in disagreement with foreign policy must follow the path of others by exercising their right as citizens to influence policy through the established route: that is, by engaging in the political process.

 

In this world of indiscriminate terrorist bombings, where Muslims are just as likely to be victims of terrorism as other British and US citizens, we have an equal stake in fighting extremism. But more importantly, given that these acts are carried out in our name (Islam), we have a greater responsibility, not merely to condemn but to confront. As an MP for the constituency with the country’s highest BNP vote, I strongly believe that the BNP will only be defeated by white people taking leadership. Likewise, Muslims themselves must take the lead if we are to defeat the extremism within.

 

With the exception of a very few, mosques in Britain are extremely vigilant about who and what they allow on to their platforms. The greater danger is now posed in the virtual world, by the preachers of hatred accessible on the internet and based virtually anywhere, ever ready to prey on the angry and frustrated.

 

As I said to some 500 Muslims in a hall in Leeds on Saturday, a whole year on from the heinous acts of 7/7, the Muslim community has not yet risen to the challenge presented by extremism in its ranks. This was depressingly laid bare by a recent Times poll that stated that 13 per cent of British Muslims believed that the 7/7 attackers were martyrs.

 

And foreign policy issues are undoubtedly a factor in formulating such beliefs. Is it a sane response to kill more than 1,000 civilians in Lebanon — mainly women and children — for the kidnapping of two Israeli soldiers (not forgetting the 40 or so civilians killed by Hezbollah rockets)? The answer is unequivocally “noâ€. And that’s before we even touch on Kashmir and Palestine, both of which have UN resolutions 59 and 39 years old respectively with no international will to deliver justice to these people. It is this perception of double standards that fuels anger and hatred and has single-handedly served to undermine our counter-extremism arguments.

 

As a Muslim I believe that there is no better place in the world to live than Britain. After 7/7 we expected a backlash against Muslims but it didn’t really materialise. Yet had 7/7 taken place in Pakistan and the perpetrators done it in the name of Christianity, how many Christians, one year later, would be dead? Ten or 100 or perhaps 1,000? A real-life analogy in that region came in 2002 when some 50 Hindus died on a train in Gujarat .What was the response? Some 3,000 Muslims were butchered, hundreds of women raped, businesses and homes looted and razed to the ground.

 

The freedoms and lifestyle we enjoy here cannot be matched in either the Muslim or non-Muslim world, but they do demand a price. Despite accusations of “sell-outâ€, a barrage of hate mail and the compromising of my personal safety, I would still support the Government’s anti-terror legislation, including the 90-day pre-charge maximum detention period.

 

For British Muslims the fight against extremism is not just for the very soul of Islam but for the freedoms we enjoy as Britons.

 

 

Shahid Malik is Labour MP for Dewsbury source

[NGONGE]

^^To say it was coincidental would be stretching things a little, saaxib. It’s either these ‘community’ leaders are in denial or (even worse) are not politically savvy! The arrests were made on Thursday, the tenth of August. The author in your article above claims he was approached on Friday the eleventh!

 

Still, he’s been at least balanced in his views and he seems to appreciate the quandary we find ourselves in. However, and this is an important fact, he’s a member of the Blair ruling party and not many Muslims would take his words seriously (as he seems to attest in his referral to comments such as being a sell out, etc). It’s the self-appointed Muslim Council of Britain that I have a problem with. They never seem to take the initiative and tackle this problem. All they do is react to arrests and talk about being victimised (not that there is no truth to this fact of course). I needn’t remind you of the recent channel four survey and the damning findings, saaxib. I’m sure most of it was exaggerated however, I’m also sure that such people as those that took part in that poll do exist (and also believe that most of them are not bad or blood-thirsty but, rather, ill-informed).

[AYOUB]

So the Muslim Council is "self-appointment" and "never taking the initiative" at the same time?

I think the people dubbed UK's Muslim Leaders have one of the hardest jobs out there. They have to balance the sending of the right message to the Muslim youth without alienating them completely. It does not matter what the biased media or politicians make of it as long as they (Muslim Leaders) get the balance right.

 

The arrests were made on Thursday, the tenth of August. The author in your article above claims he was approached on Friday the eleventh!

That does not necessarily mean the letter was written after the arrests. The letter was reaction to Mr Blair's reaction to the Lebanon crisis and the Americans' use of British airports to transport arms to Israelis.

[S.O.S]

As usual, the Muslim Council of Briton and others are no fans of self-examination and reflection. Instead, they would rather lay the blame somewhere else!

I've seen few other self-hating-Muslims expressing this very point! Interesting.

[NGONGE]

^^ Good for you, SOS. If you were not a stranger and I was not scared of paedophilia laws, I’d pat you on the head for these obliging remarks.

 

Care to share any of your exciting sightings with us? Or maybe, if it's not too much trouble, you will comment on the topic rather than its author. Give us the Self-loving-Muslim’s point of view, so to speak.

 

I see no contradiction in what I wrote, Ayuub. They’re self-appointed and they never take the initiative.

 

The Muslim leaders have not got the balance right. Their attitude here (and unwitting message) tilts heavily towards the laying the blame elsewhere and arguing about foreign policies. Besides, at the moment, the youth are alienated anyway (see the Channel Four documentary).

 

As for the timing of the letter, even if we concede that it was written in advance, it’s still a giant cock-up to have it broadcast once the news about the arrests were out (again, as you can see from the article above, it was not yet published by the Friday. They could have easily adjusted it, postponed it or even explained it).

[Tahliil]

It's another hair splitting, purely on one side and argumentative bro. Aren't those who tipped off the government, those who worked with them up until the last minute, aren't they those who made the arrests first and unfolded this horrible plot, weren't they Muslims themselves...mind you, Muslims who were trying to do the decent thing in their communities, for their communities??? It's purely illogic to demand the Muslims to do more while they themselves are leading the investigations and arresting the terror suspects before the Stephenson’s of this world and their boys started dramatizing a plot that was under the radar of the Pakistanis for a long while.

 

I think you are only missing the point which is to me how much more should the Muslims be demanded to do and how much more can we the Muslims in the west do to protect our adopted homes here? I would argue they could only do nothing more than they’ve already done. We are not the police. Our role could only come in the form of assisting the police and we are happy to assist and work with them. We are just members of this community, hard working and honest as anyone else, who work, who go to school, who rise their kids and who have busy lives like everyone else’. Of course there is a problem and we are ready to tackle it by working with the law enforcement.

 

But there is no magic solution to apply to this current problem. We have to do our part and we are, no doubt about it, doing it. Even Stephenson admits that the force is receiving “a great deal of co-operation†and getting unprecedented collaboration from the Muslim community in Briton. We are all into this and no Muslim needs to be reminded about that simple fact. The council is trying to walk on a really fine line. On one hand trying to convince the public in general that we are peaceful and mean no harm at all and on the other trying to help the government to apprehend the trouble-makers among us? But honestly what's wrong with digging a little bit deeper and asking about the roooooot cauuuuusesss of these horrible acts? Regardless of weather we agree or disagree with the way the government is handling this matter, I think this needs to be examined from the bottom and up. That letter only urges the government to do its part while the council is trying to play its role in all of this. These here are our homes too bro and everyone knows that we should defend it....

[Socod_badne]

This letter reeks of double-talk so common with these organisations. Always grumbling about overlooked root-causes as if that exonerates them from their failures as leaders of their respective communities... in protecting it's most vulnerable -- the impressionable and the young -- from sinister characters, intent on using them to carry out macabre plots.

 

Let's be honest here and look at the facts from purely rational, detached perspective. What are these root-causes that has so many people teed-off, some unable to restraint their anger and express it in violent means? The most ubiquitous, of course, is the West's support for Israel. But I question the sincerity of this grieve. I say it's phoney.

 

The geographical epicenter of this grievance is Palestine/Israel. Land populated by Palestinians or Arabs. But we see Indonesians 15 miles removed from Palestine threatening to blow-up Westerners for what they did to people they never met. You can substitute Indonesians for another group of non-arab muslims and they'd all rail against the West.

 

It's examples like these that tosses these claimed grievances over to the disingeneuos side.

 

Since the sense of muslim grieve cuts across all cultural, national, racial boundaries it would be the height of disingenuity to say Westerners can't be suspicious of muslims in general. Afterall, it wasn't the West that turned a petty land squabble into religiously charged one that has every doomsday enthusiast bursting with excitement.

 

With respect to muslims in the West, they need to do much more to fight extremism in their ranks. So far, it's been see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil. The rather perversely skewed perception many have of the West doesn't help matters either.

[Kashafa]

Their attitude here (and unwitting message) tilts heavily towards the

laying the blame elsewhere and arguing about foreign policies

Two-time Republican presidential nominee and stalwart christan Pat Buchanan gets it.

 

Head of the CIA "Bin Laden unit" and author of Imperial Hubris Michael Scheuer gets it.

 

So why can't Grandpappy Ngonge comprehend this most basic demonstration of Newton's 3rd law ?

 

It's the freakin' foreign policy, istupidh

 

I quote

 

"The fundamental flaw in our thinking about Bin Laden is that "Muslims hate and attack us for what we are and think, rather than what we do." Muslims are bothered by our modernity, democracy, and sexuality, but they are rarely spurred to action unless American forces encroach on their lands. It's American foreign policy that enrages Osama and al-Qaeda , not American culture and society"

 

You want to make this spectre of 'extremism' go away ? Identify, acknowledge, and address the root causes. Dig a litle bit deeper than radical mosques and "they hate us because of our freedoms". Don't solve the root causes, and I assure you, the "clash of civillisations" will only flourish. Duplitious you say ? no atheerkis, the MCB's coming correct on this one. And I bet you the British public is with them on their emphasis on foreign policy.

 

The Middle East, Asia, and Africa have been the playground of the West for the past 300 years. Like kids in a sandbox, Western governments(with a few exceptions) have been changing the fates of entire nations with a few strokes of the pen. No need to recount the suffering and deaths caused during the colonial era. Aight, after that, if they'da stayed the hell away and stopped supporting this dictator or invading that country, I'd hear you. But the greivances that SB so causally dismisses(u need to wake up, boy) are being constantly stoked and restoked by imperialistic interference in the lives of Muslims and non-Muslims worldwide, covertly and overtly. It's like picking at a scab wound and saying "Dammit, why won't it heal"(Dammit, why do they hate us so much)

 

put it best when he impersonated a fictitious Arab ruler calling Bush: Aaaaloooo.... Mr.Boooosh, Hoow ar yooo....We like your Beebsiii...We like your Koka-koolaaa... We like your Baywatch...and Angelina Joliiiie...and Hollywoooood..but Mr.Booosh...bleees...STOP KILLING US

 

Stop killing us, indeed.

 

With respect to muslims in the West, they need to do much more to fight extremism in their ranks. So far, it's been see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil. The rather perversely skewed perception many have of the West doesn't help matters either.

SB, u got some typos in your post. I redid the grammer and spelling, but the meat of what you were trying to articulate came through just fine. don't even mention it, brah..help u anytime with the editing

 

"With respect to Western goverments, they need to do much more to fight imperialism in their ranks. So far, it's been See a Muslim, Steal a Muslim , Kill a Muslim. The rather perversely inhumane attitude many have towards Muslim lives & property doesn't help matters either."

[NGONGE]

Tahliil,

 

I’ve got no argument with anything you wrote there. In fact, I wholly agree. However, that’s a different argument altogether. This is not about how the Muslim Council deals with the British government. This is about how the Muslim Council deals with its own people. The events of last July and the arrests last week give ample proof of the existence of radical Muslims in our midst. There are many young Muslims that are angry and upset about British (American) foreign policy. A large number of these have a passing acquaintance with their own faith and don’t understand or know the basic rules. Many more do understand but allow their anger to rule their heads. In shouting about foreign policy and laying the best part of the blame on the doors of the UK & America, the Muslim Council is giving these impressionable people the idea (and belief in some cases) that terrorism is justified. This is my point of contention with the Muslim Council, not the fact that they stated the obvious idea of cause and effect.

 

There is already (and justifiably so) a feeling of victimisation and discrimination in the Muslim Community (the world over). This is caused by (among other things) the treatment of Muslims in the Middle East and the distrust of Muslims in the West. That in turn is caused by the acts of terrorism that, for the most part, are a result of Western foreign policies. Still, from a political point of view (if nothing else) the Muslim Council needs to be seen and heard when condemning these acts of terrorism and advising Muslims in the UK to distance themselves from them. From a religious point of view (and this is really the point I’ve been trying to make all along), one needs to understand how the Muslim Council (and you) view terrorism. If it’s viewed as being wrong, forbidden and Haram then would you not consider it the responsibility of the Muslim Council to reiterate this fact at every opportunity? After all, you, I and every Muslim that is frothing at the mouth at the treatment of Muslims all over the world do follow the news and are bound to read OPEN LETTERS that the Muslim Council writes to Mr Bush and Mr Blair. Would it not be the duty of these so-called Community Leaders to remind us of how wrong terrorism is? Surely terrorism erodes on our faith and dealing with it is of more importance than the tired argument of cause and effect!

 

(as you can see, I’m going from the starting point that terrorism is wrong here).

[Naxar Nugaaleed]

brilliant! try to blow up peoples countries and their people and infrastructure and make demands.

I think other non-western communities should also try this brilliant method.

[N.O.R.F]

NG

 

Although i agree with you on most points, but i think the british media has won this one. The constant berating of anyone who talks any kind of sense is disregarded with the populace on too willing to do the same based upon what they read/hear/watch.

 

The MCB nead some PR work and they also need to be more proactive in their actions both toward the media and to the muslims community.

 

Here is a response for your NG.

 

I yearn for a foreign policy of which we can be proud

 

The Muslim community is asking for dialogue, not appeasement, says Muhammad Abdul Bari

 

Thursday August 17, 2006

The Guardian

 

 

Polly Toynbee was right in stating that "British foreign policy has helped foment murderous extremism" (We can't let God-blinded killers set our foreign policy, August 15). She was also right in claiming that "there are 1,001 good reasons why we should never have supported, let alone joined, the war in Iraq. The one truly bad reason would have been fear of terrorism."

 

The open letter to the prime minister - which I signed alongside more than 40 Muslim groups, MPs and peers - has been subject to deliberate misinterpretation, suggesting a willingness among Muslim leaders to excuse violence and promote a simplified view of how extremism takes root. Toynbee's accusation - that the letter sails "perilously close to suggesting the government had it coming" - may be an unintentional misrepresentation but it is a grave one.

 

The letter articulated the need to base foreign policy on principle. It condemned attacks on civilians wherever they take place. It also sought acknowledgement that, though the causes and motivations are complex, British foreign policy contributes to the radicalisation of Muslims here and elsewhere. The welcome debate that followed the letter illustrates that this has been widely accepted. I believe there was merit in laying this fact on the table so that a consensus could emerge.

 

As early as May 2004, Michael Jay, permanent under-secretary at the Foreign Office, acknowledged in a letter to the cabinet secretary that the perception of foreign policy was a "key driver behind recruitment by extremist organisations". In this context, as Toynbee asserts, government denials of this reality are absurd.

 

But pushing for this recognition is not an argument that a priority of foreign policy should be "sparing us from threats by God-blinded killers". I do not advocate a policy of appeasement, tailoring UK foreign policy to win global popularity and insulate ourselves from threat. I yearn for a foreign policy that engenders a feeling of pride among this and future generations, and attracts respect from others. When difficult decisions are made, we must be ready to tackle the consequences that ensue. But these decisions must be principled and be seen to be so. Successive British governments' foreign policies, demonstrated recently by the refusal to call for an immediate ceasefire in Lebanon, have left many Muslims and others feeling aggrieved and powerless.

 

As Muslim representatives, our letter sought to engage constructively in this debate and give voice to many Muslims who feel alienated. Toynbee is right that we are not alone, nor unique in this respect yet it is important that this widespread sentiment was aired.

 

The Muslim community is not homogeneous. Our response to the encroachment of extremism must address the diversity within the community as much as the complexity of root causes. But Muslim leaders, parents and communities will be better positioned to defuse the potency of extremists' arguments once the impact of foreign policy has been acknowledged. Without a willingness to have an honest and open debate, the government is in danger of wishing to hear only echoes of its own voice.

 

· Muhammad Abdul Bari is secretary general of the Muslim Council of Britain

 

 

sg@mcb.org.uk

 

Guardian

 

And another about the media bais

 

The venomous media voices who think no Muslim is worth talking to

 

As government efforts to 'tackle' extremism flounder, it should beware the advice of armchair warriors and fantasists

 

Madeleine Bunting

Wednesday August 16, 2006

The Guardian

 

 

One could almost feel sorry for them. A minister like Ruth Kelly is wrenched from her bucket-and spade holiday on a rainy British beach with the kids to launch yet another push to "engage" with Muslims and to step up efforts to "tackle" extremism. A ministerial tour of nine cities to meet Muslims is announced.

It's all designed to sound energetic and purposeful. We pay fat cabinet salaries and we want our politicians to sound like they are earning them. But in truth, beneath the rhetoric - an odd verbal combination of rugby tackles and romantic engagement - is a profound confusion in government policy as to what to do about British-grown Islamist terrorism, apart from large amounts of surveillance and frequent use of detention. Beyond that, the hearts-and-minds strategy is running on empty.

 

 

Article continues

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I've seen government ministers do "engagement": Paul Murphy, when he had the community-cohesion brief, listened carefully, answered questions patiently and got precisely nowhere. His young, angry Muslim audience heard him out but were profoundly cynical; their views didn't change a jot.

Events of the last few days will have immeasurably increased that cynicism: Muslim MPs and peers have been roundly ticked off by a succession of government ministers as if they were imperial vassals who should know their place. Yet they were simply stating the obvious - that British foreign policy is incubating (we can argue whether it's the root cause another time) Muslim extremism. Given that kind of opening salvo from her colleagues, perhaps Kelly should save herself the trouble and return to the beach for some more sandcastles and rock pools.

 

While she's there, the best thing she can do is to get a bit of perspective on a worn-out policy. Even more importantly, she would do well to take stock of a pernicious media onslaught in danger of spiralling out of control. The ministerial tours, the meetings with selected Muslims - most of whom are as baffled by Islamic extremism as ministers - were the responses to last summer's London bombings. The danger is that as the government's "community cohesion" policy flounders, there is no shortage of media commentators pouring out a flood of venomous advice on exactly why no Muslim is worth talking to anyway.

 

If, reader, you're short of time and need the summary, it runs thus: the government can't talk to extremists because they endorse violence and/or are nutty and irrational, and can't talk to "moderates" (warning: the word is on the point of becoming a term of abuse in the Muslim community) because they're not representative. These methods of dismissal are so frequently used by journalists that the only possible conclusion is that there are many people in this country who have no interest in listening to any Muslim unless they can chorus their own loathing and suspicion of Islam - the former Dutch MP Ayaan Hirsi Ali is the case par excellence.

 

Some of this armchair advice to government can be pretty briskly dismissed, such as the paranoid fantasies of the rightwing Daily Mail commentator Melanie Phillips in her book Londonistan or those of the Conservative MP Michael Gove in his book Celsius 7/7. Both authors haven't troubled themselves to get much beyond revived imperial delusions of demented, violent Muslims (check out Britain's history in India, Sudan or Egypt).

 

More insidious is the comprehensive attack on Whitehall's policy towards the Muslim community over the last decade by the New Statesman's political editor, Martin Bright. He argues that the government should have no truck with any Muslim organisation in the UK that has had any involvement with any person who has ever been influenced by the Muslim Brotherhood, the political Islamist organisation. That rules out the Muslim Council of Britain, the Federation of Student Islamic Societies and other mainstays of the government's "engagement" policy of the last 10 years. It would even include intellectuals such as Professor Tariq Ramadan (grandson, no less, of the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood), who was a member of the government taskforce set up to tackle Islamist extremism last year, and a star turn on its travelling roadshow for young Muslims. We are talking sweeping here. In fact, implement Bright's advice and you've got a pretty small tea party for your next round of engagement.

 

The Muslim Brotherhood is a global phenomenon that has taken many different guises in different places. It has been very successful at the ballot box in a host of countries, particularly Egypt. In some countries it has developed an armed wing, in many others it has not. Many of those in this country influenced by this strand of anti-colonial political Islamism have subsequently developed their thinking in entirely different directions. Almost every thoughtful, educated Muslim in this country has been exposed to - and to varying degrees influenced by - the Muslim Brotherhood, the 20th century's most influential political Islamic movement. The obvious historical analogy to Bright is those US cold war warriors in the 50s who smeared anyone who had ever read Marx.

 

For a story to really work you have to have good guys as well as bad, so the critics conjure up another absurdity - the "silent Sufi majority" of British Muslims. These are the gentle, peace-loving Muslims at the grassroots who have been betrayed, so the argument runs, by those who claim to represent them, such as the Muslim Council of Britain. One can argue for hours about how to define a Sufi in this country; and, leaving that aside, the characterisation of Sufism is wide of the mark: some of the most violent anti-colonial struggles have been led by Sufis, for example Chechnya and Algeria, even the Mahdi who did for General Gordon in Khartoum. Furthermore, some argue that Sufi-inclined traditions such as the Kashmiri Barelwi have failed to travel well to urban Britain and that it is precisely their youngsters who are most disorientated and likely to fail prey to extremism - as was the case of the July 7 bombers from Leeds.

 

The main target for Bright is the Muslim Council of Britain; he loathes it with a contempt that is hard to explain. Given that the MCB is in effect a small volunteer parish council scrabbling to represent a hugely diverse - both ethnically and theologically - community, it's not surprising that it has scored own goals in its time. It's a young, underconfident institution and falls short in many ways, but the fact remains that of all the Muslim organisations to emerge in recent decades it has proved the most successful in winning affiliates. There is no comparable substitute waiting in the wings. The Sufi Muslim Council of Britain has been in existence all of a month; I wish it well, but unlike the MCB it cannot claim to represent anything like the 40% of British mosques affiliated to the MCB.

 

Kelly has an urgent task ahead to assuage anxiety as the possibility looms of a second-class status for Muslims in this country - profiled, suspected, searched, endlessly quizzed and found wanting. As for the armchair warriors so keen to proffer advice, one has to question the motives of those intent on undermining the meagre organisational capacity the Muslim community has managed to weld together to combat just such a threat.

 

· Madeleine Bunting will become director of the thinktank Demos next month

 

Guardian

[The Resistance Movement]

As if Mr.Blair and Co. would take any heat to this letter.

 

It's time for a direct action from the Muslim leaders in fighting against these dogmentry foreign policies which have caused so much destruction, death and separation in the Ummah world.