M A Q A S I D - مقاصد

I just came across Maajid’s article, where he defends himself against a critical article written by Zia Sardar. Much of the stuff he has written has been mentioned before in his interview on Newsnight. However, what has now come about is how much Sir Edward Husain has become a liability to Maajid, where his mad views hang over him to haunt him. Maajid’s organization will never takeoff and is cursed from the very beginning because of his association with Ed. Anyway, I found a comment left by a user called ‘gambit57′ which mentions the exact same points I had in mind, so I thought I would post the comment below:

You really should have consulted “Ed”/Mahbub Husain and his handlers at the Foreign Office before writing this. The contradictions between what he has publicly said and written and what you have just written are so easy to pick apart that i’ll save the posters some time and space and post a few of the choiciest cuts here:

… but we had more than 20 former members of different Islamist groups attending in support, joining over 400 well-wishers from across British society.

Your sole claim to fame that distinguishes you from other British taxpayer funded “anti-extremist organizations” i.e. Sufi Muslim Council, Radical Middle Way, British Muslims for Secular Democracy, is that as “former extremists” you guys are supposed to know the insides better than the former 3 groups. How are you supposed to continue milking public funds if you blur the lines between your brand and the other generic, secular, flavors of “anti extremism”, STAY ON MESSAGE!

Sardar goes even further: Sheikh Abdul Aziz al-Bukhari, a great man of peace who spoke at our launch, is described as a “neocon Sufi” despite his dedication to campaigning for cooperation between Palestinians and Israelis and his anti-war message.

Sardar pointed out his words SUPPORTING THE WAR, INVASION, and CONTINUED OCCUPATION of IRAQ. Palestine/Israel was NOT mentioned. But since you have brought it up, could you, “Ed” or your Research policy guy, Rashad, please post your evidences that you said that you would have making the case from islamic texts, for Muslims to recognize the state of Israel and have FULL diplomatic relations with it. Would you also be willing to condemn those academics who have tried to organize an embargo/boycott of Israel on University campuses? Please put this in writing if so.

We have not been silent on government policy, both at home and abroad.

Q1. Does this also include support for Nazir-Ali’s race/religion baiting about no-go areas here:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/01/13/do1303.xml

Q2. Does it also include Quilliam Foundation’s opposition to the Megamosque planned in West Ham, Newham.

http://christian-1.cust.host-it.co.uk/london/?page=news&id=262

We have spoken out against support for dictators abroad, the Iraq war and terror laws;…

Lets see, the DIRECTOR of your British taxpayer funded ‘foundation’ (and your LINK to the funds in the govt):

1. Is on record as having supported the Iraq war but not the aftermath or handling of it.
2. Poured cold water on the idea that western policy in the Muslim world makes terror attacks in Britain and elsewhere more likely,
3. Wants caps on immigration and thinks too many non-white people are in the UK
4. He has no truck with the idea of Islamophobia, which he dismisses as the “squeal of an Islamist leadership pleading special favours”
5. On issues such as segregation, he is confident it is the fault of multiculturalism.

sources:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/news/anyquestions_transcripts_20080229.shtml
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/seumas_milne/2008/04/all_mod_cons.html

Q3. What more could an oil based dictator in the Middle East want besides a loyal, trustworthy pet like “Ed”? Have you also made these ideas known to your Kuwaiti patrons?

… and despite my fierce criticism of Hizb ut-Tahrir I have opposed the government threat to ban them, preferring debate instead..

Just curious, are the preconditions of “debate” with Islamists still the same that your DIRECTOR “Ed” laid down here:

My background is in the public domain - kindly tell us more about yourself and your past/current affiliations with Islamism (of any shade). For others waiting in the wings, please introduce yourself or your family connections to Islamism which make you vulnerable to rise to the defence of Islamism.
Otherwise, I reserve the right to silence.
Mohamed Mahbub Husain* 04.06.2007 IPinSight”

This sounds an awfully lot like George W’s “You are either with us or against us” and “we don’t talk to evil” preconditions as to why he rejected the findings of the Iraq Study Group.

Q4. How do you expect to “debate” and win Muslims to your cause if these are precondition?

More questions than answers. You are more than free to try and answer them, though i suspect you and your surrogates will stay silent on this. Please also, refrain from the crazy “Ed” has his own views offensive — he is your money man — he recruited you in and got the money from the govt. to get his project off the ground.

Furthermore, He’s the co-director! He appears in the media and speaks in your organization’s name! He travels and advocates with you! Declares his war mongerig views as the co-director of Quilliam! You two have shared numerous stages and spoken where he has articulated all of the above and you stayed silent.

EITHER PUT UP OR SHUT UP.

Regards,
G57

Source: Click Here