panorama: A Question of Leadership

[FARIID]

Those nomads in the Uk who saw the programme last night, this is the thread to vent your anger. Having missed the programme myself due to unreliable public transport, none the less having read the programme transcript (it’s the same as watching just without the sound track). After reading the programme I didn't know who to direct my anger at. On the one hand the journalist's line of questioning was highly loaded. Every answer was a potential news headline the following morning. This made the being questioned rather uneasy. His selective quotes from Maulana Maududi and other were out of context and at times outright dishonest. On the whole he went about making this programme with a pre-conceived notion of Islam as spiritual and that ‘extremists’ were making it political. He tailored his programme to fit his distorted views. As any Professor will tell you, one doesn’t start research having already written the conclusions.

 

At one time Dr bari complains about the manner of the questions. Never the less I didn’t expect Ware to do Muslims any favours with his programme but really the participants especially Iqbal Sacranie and Dr bari should have stuck to their guns.

 

On the other hand when each of the Muslims was asked about something, they were always doing a very hard juggling act of trying to please two very different audiences. They wanted to appear ‘moderate’ and ‘tolerant’ to non-Muslims but this posse the danger of being seen to compromise their Islamic values by fellow Muslims. I sure wouldn't want to be in their shoes. A good example was when he pressed Dr bari about inviting Sheikh Sudaisi on the opening of the East London Muslim Center despite him 'having utter contempt for Jews and Christians and having called Hindus idol worshipers- apparently this is uncalled for- '. Well you can imagine he is lost for words. He can't ostracise sh. Sudaisi because he knows he is right and his fellow Muslims won't take that lightly but he can't also condone what is attributed to the sheikh because the 'sun and 'Daily Mail' will be on his case the whole week. He will be labelled 'preacher of hate', 'extremist' and all sorts of adjectives.

 

The question that has been going through my head in the aftermath of the London Bombing has been 'How far should one compromise his Islamic Value in order to please westerners or can one really Please these people at the same time hold fast to his religion'?. Nomads what do you think?

[Viking]

FARIID,

The program exposed what the Muslim community in the UK have known fo a long time, that the MCB does not speak for the them. They (MCB) are trying to satisfy the whims of the govt and at the same time trying to speak for the Muslims. This sometimes leads to compromising of one's faith.

 

When asked whether it was right (for the cleric from Saudi Arabia) to call Hindus idol-worshippers, Iqbal Sacranie, the secretary-general of the MCB started stammering and was very cautious/evasive in his answer. He started explaining away the differences in how "God" is viewed in different cultures.

 

When it came to the issue of "suicide bombers" the only one who didn't look like a hypocrite was Azzam Tamimi. The MCB and other affiliate groups were pressured by the UK govt to denounce terrorism and were even forced to refer to the Palestianians resistance as "terrorism".

 

This is the reason why most young Muslims feel alienated in this society...they see that the MCB and it's affiliates are apologists whose primary aim is to appease the govt and are often afraid to stand for what they believed in.

[NGONGE]

Originally posted by FARIID:

On the other hand when each of the Muslims was asked about something, they were always doing a very hard juggling act of trying to please two very different audiences. They wanted to appear ‘moderate’ and ‘tolerant’ to non-Muslims but this posse the danger of being seen to compromise their Islamic values by fellow Muslims. I sure wouldn't want to be in their shoes. A good example was when he pressed Dr bari about inviting Sheikh Sudaisi on the opening of the East London Muslim Center despite him 'having utter contempt for Jews and Christians and having called Hindus idol worshipers-

apparently this is uncalled for

- '. Well you can imagine he is lost for words. He can't ostracise sh. Sudaisi because he knows he is right and his fellow Muslims won't take that lightly but he can't also condone what is attributed to the sheikh because the 'sun and 'Daily Mail' will be on his case the whole week. He will be labelled 'preacher of hate', 'extremist' and all sorts of adjectives.

I’m not sure how you managed to read that whole transcript, Farid. It was aggressive, pointless and very dull. Only the fact that it related to Islam is what sustained me through all that meaningless rhetoric.

 

The Muslim Council of Britain comes across as some sort of political organisation (mostly through the actions of those that work for it) and when they’re put to the test, they time and again prove what a shabby political organisation they are. Having said that, I do feel sorry for these brothers, it can’t be easy to seek peace and try to stick to your principles (wrong principles if you ask me – politicians should join political parties not Islamic organisations).

 

As for the Saudi Sheikh, it’s probably true that he (and many other Scholars) use terms such as pigs, monkeys and idol-worshippers to describe Jews, Christians and Hindus. However, these same scholars (excluding the odd one here and there of course) also speak about the tolerance of Islam and how the proof of history is on our side when it comes to tolerance and peaceful co-existence. Is it possible that they should hold these two conflicting views at the same time?

 

The point that the producers of Panorama miss (and more worryingly, many Muslims too) is that this Sheikh and the many others that view Israel with utter contempt do so because Israel is the enemy. Zionism is the enemy. Those that fight Muslims are the enemy. NOT ordinary Jews and Christians (or Hindus) that neither fight Islam nor encourage the hatred of Islam. Many such Jews and Christians live in the West, in Israel and even in India.

 

As for your question, why do you need to please anyone? Do you feel you have to?

Being polite, non-confrontational and peaceful have nothing to do with ‘compromising’ one’s faith.

Yes, there is pressure being put on Muslims to dilute their faith. But to be honest, most Muslims probably do need to loosen up and drop much of the rhetoric anyway. Most of what UK Muslims ‘believe’ are reactionary ideas based on correct grievances (does not make the ideas right, see).

 

 

Panorama transcript

[Emotionally_unstable]

Leaders of the Muslim communities were summoned to Downing Street by the Prime Minister who called on them to help root out what he termed this "evil ideology" of Islamist extremism.

The above is a quote of what the prime minister said, as people of Intelligence we should ask ourselves what is the ‘evil ideology’ that Tony Blair seems to be talking about. The ‘evil ideology’ he is referring to is the Islamic concept of JIHAD, time after time the term JIHAD comes up in the media, in debates whether it is a public debate or whether it is a Christian/Muslim Dialogue. The utterance of this term JIHAD by a Muslim has the Kufar shaking in their boots. In the last few years we have seen the World change, we have watched through the TV how the European governments i.e. Britain and France are taking actions that will see the future Imams of Islam be replaced by British born and bred Imams, and French Islamic institutionally educated Imams. According to these two governments they plan to root out so called ‘extremism’ by eliminating its ‘roots’ so they say, and what are its ‘roots’? Well that answer is simple it is the Islamic concept of JIHAD.

 

So now we can see what Tony Blair means with the ‘evil ideology’ or more precisely JIHAD, he wishes to eradicate this Islamic concept! Or is it the whole of ISLAM? I think the latter is more accurate.

 

The question is can they succeed? The answer is NO they cannot, neither can they change the meaning of Jihad nor can they tamper with the Quran.

 

The time has come for the Muslims to speak the truth and not try to be a ’moderate’ and try to please the British people. You are your own person, and you have your own religion, speak with some intelligence and if they ask you to denounce terrorism, reply “I DENOUNCE THE TRUE TERRORISM WHICH IS THE WESTERN STATESâ€.

 

That’s all.

[Shirwac]

I hate to single out a specific group, but why are Muslim orginizations recognized by the governments in the west are headed by Indo-Pakistanis? Who elected to represent all muslims, and reintroduce Islamic concepts that you only find in the west?

[OG Moti]

As for your question, why do you need to please anyone? Do you feel you have to?

Being polite, non-confrontational and peaceful have nothing to do with ‘compromising’ one’s faith.

Yes, there is pressure being put on Muslims to dilute their faith. But to be honest, most Muslims probably do need to loosen up and drop much of the rhetoric anyway. Most of what UK Muslims ‘believe’ are reactionary ideas based on correct grievances (does not make the ideas right, see).

 

Brother Fear Allah, I really thing you are drugging yourself to the danger zone... You can compromise something that is man made, and policies and rules written by men, Not the instructions of Allah, Allah damned Jews in his Quran, he send them prophets they deny them.. they are damned by Allah and by damning people.. so please dont tell me loosen up.. and yes Hindus are idol-worshippers, they are as a fact, so where is the mistake there.. Christians eat pigs and you are what you eat, Jewish are damned nothing worse than that.. so infidel is doomed unless Allah mercy touches them... so everything about Islam is clear like the noon sun.. no need to compromise or too loosen up about...

 

I would say the words of the Suddies the Saudi sheikh in any stage and on any TV show.. Allah is who he deserve to be feared and no one else...

 

PEace

[Paragon]

The MCB and the MAB have both found themselves in quagmire in last night's panorama. It seemed the main object of the questioner was to unearth the duality of these organizations by first, concentrating of their 'private' and 'hostile' believes that were propagated by the likes of sheikh Mawduudi and second, by displaying their contradictory public appearance, which Blair and prince Charles cluelessly follow. In a sense to portray them in a hypocritical spotlight. And to separate politics from Islam. Except for Azzam Tamimi, the rest interviewed indeed seemed like hypocrites.

 

PS: Iqbal was put in a peculiar position for visitng the memorial of Hamas leader Sheikh Yassin and not attending the holocaust memorial, and his reason for not attending the holocaust memorial.

[Emotionally_unstable]

Originally posted by Hibo:

U, Uk Muslims, its your responsibility to set the interpretation of Islam right it was done wrong. However, running your mouths in SOL won't solve it. In Islam when something you don't like or you oppose is said or done near you.. you have three options..

 

1. To stand against it and talk

2. To leave that place

3. To keep quiet.

 

Since you all need Britain I suggest you keep quiet. Or else leave the damn place. Just like I did with US

And where did you go then? Somalia, or perhaps Saudi?

 

Listen darling the matter of fact is that it is true that we need this country but that is only until I finish my degree, after that insha allah I will heading for Dubai to establish myself as a great entrepreneur. But until then we will speak of what is AL-HAQ, unless you are a person who is DACIIF.

 

Wa Salaam

[FARIID]

The Muslim Council of Britain comes across as some sort of political organisation (mostly through the actions of those that work for it) and when they’re put to the test, they time and again prove what a shabby political organisation they are. Having said that, I do feel sorry for these brothers, it can’t be easy to seek peace and try to stick to your principles (wrong principles if you ask me – politicians should join political parties not Islamic organisations

Ngonge care to share with the rest of us what these wrong principles are. By saying that they should join a poilitical, am I right to infer that you believe islam and politics dont mix. If that is your line of reasoning then sadly the programme producer has succeeded in achieving his set out goals. Here was an attempt to portray islam as spiritual, something you do on a friday.

 

shirwac wrote

hate to single out a specific group, but why are Muslim orginizations recognized by the governments in the west are headed by Indo-Pakistanis? Who elected to represent all muslims, and reintroduce Islamic concepts that you only find in the west?

for your info 70% of muslims in britain are from the indian sub-continent and as such this will reflect in the organisations. If those qad chewing somalis that gather at southal did something useful with their time perhaps we could change the demographics of these organisations.

[Kashafa]

Does anybody know wheher they have a web-broadcast or archive..like Hardtalk.. a transcript is kinda dry.

[NGONGE]

Originally posted by P_508:

quote: As for your question, why do you need to please anyone? Do you feel you have to?

Being polite, non-confrontational and peaceful have nothing to do with ‘compromising’ one’s faith.

Yes, there is pressure being put on Muslims to dilute their faith. But to be honest, most Muslims probably do need to loosen up and drop much of the rhetoric anyway. Most of what UK Muslims ‘believe’ are reactionary ideas based on correct grievances (does not make the ideas right, see).

 

Brother Fear Allah, I really thing you are drugging yourself to the danger zone... You can compromise something that is man made, and policies and rules written by men, Not the instructions of Allah, Allah damned Jews in his Quran, he send them prophets they deny them.. they are damned by Allah and by damning people.. so please dont tell me loosen up.. and yes Hindus are idol-worshippers, they are as a fact, so where is the mistake there.. Christians eat pigs and you are what you eat, Jewish are damned nothing worse than that.. so infidel is doomed unless Allah mercy touches them... so everything about Islam is clear like the noon sun.. no need to compromise or too loosen up about...

 

I would say the words of the Suddies the Saudi sheikh in any stage and on any TV show.. Allah is who he deserve to be feared and no one else...

 

PEace

Saaxib, this is basic stuff and you are being very emotional in your approach. I refuse to believe that your knowledge is that lacking and minimal. That you choose to remember all the instances where Allah curses the Jews, Christians and Idol worshipers yet cant be balanced enough to remember a single occasion where Allah encourages us to be just and fair to all these people! It is the total and utter conviction you and your like have when issuing such verdicts that shocks me, saaxib!

 

Fine, maybe you are right after all. How about you preach to us all and show us the errors of our ways. I choose to follow your interpretation, saaxib. But the scraps and tiny morsels of Islam that I know tell me that I should be good to the non-believers and should call them to the way of Allah with good words and deeds. You, by sticking to one interpretation of our faith, obviously are privy to more information and better interpretations. Don’t leave us in the dark, saaxib. If trying to be just to Christians, Hindus and Jews is wrong, I don’t want to carry on with this wrong. Please enlighten me and show me the errors of my way.

 

Fariid,

 

Yes you are right. From where I’m standing, the members and representatives of the Muslim Council of the UK are adhering to and following the British political system. They try to always be ‘politically correct’ and, for the most part, use left wing (rarely right wing, though they’re closer to our ideology) ideas to further the Islamic cause in Britain.

 

Now, I’m not saying that Islam should be confined to the mosque and that it should be limited to the spiritual (though you’ve got to admit that not many Muslims are unenthusiastic about the idea of ‘only on a Friday’). Islam is political indeed, but based on what rules, Fariid?

[Castro]

Originally posted by Kashafa:

Does anybody know wheher they have a web-broadcast or archive..like Hardtalk.. a transcript is kinda dry.

The Panorama has a link to "recent" video. I can't confirm it's the show referred to in this topic.

 

Edited: It's not the show in this topic. I agree the transcript is very dry.

[Haddad]

Originally posted by FARIID:

How far should one compromise his Islamic Value in order to please westerners or can one really Please these people at the same time hold fast to his religion'?

It's not necessary and there's no need to please westerners. It wouldn't make a difference. At least when you don't, they know you're genuine. The only Muslims they can at least trust are Islamists, unlike mercurial Muslims (liberal, moderate, progressive, etc) whose motto is: We side with winners. A Muslim should at all times side with haqq, and never compromise with his/her deen.