Return to: Home | Blogs | Bright's Blog

A Meeting of Civilisations

The launch of the Quilliam Foundation was a meeting of Islam and the Enlightment without the usual apocalyptic language

I was privileged to attend the launch of the Quilliam Foundation, launched by Ed Husein, the celebrated author of The Islamist and Maajid Nawaaz, who spent four years in an Egyptian prison for his membership of extremist organisation Hizb-ut-Tahrir. The new think tank is named after the prominment early 20th century British convert and activist W.H. Quilliam. It is committed to finding solutions to the growth of political Islamist ideology in Britain.

The hall at the British Museum was packed and it was great to see such a high level of interest in the project. Even my old adversary, the Foreign Office's favourite Islamist, Mockbul Ali was there. I am told he has made a spiritual journey away from the Islamic radical right, a move which should be welcomed if true. Either way, it's good to know the Foreign Office has seen which way the wind is blowing and ended the monopoly hold of the Muslim Council of Britain on dialogue with the government.

I have little to add to Sunny Hundal's wise comments on Comment is Free today, except to record my astonishment at the reception given to Timothy Garton Ash, Guardian columnist and Professor of European Studies at Oxford University.

The sage professor began by saying that he didn't know a great deal about the Quran, the traditions of the Prophet ("hadith") or Islamic law ("fiqh"). He even made a made a joke that he "didn't give a fig for fiqh" to which the audience chortled politely. He told the gathered Muslims that the respect of the West had to be earned and (wait for it) "the central tenets of religions demand less respect than the proposition two plus two equals four". Everybody clapped.

It struck me that you can probably get away with saying almost anything as long as you say it in a gentle, bearded, professorial manner.

Post this article to

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • newsvine
  • Reddit

9 comments from readers

redharry
23 April 2008 at 17:03

What happened to the Sufi Muslim Council and the British Muslim Forum, previous attempts to set up alternatives to genuine Muslim groups?

I'm afraid the Quilliam Foundation is yet another example of an 'astroturf' rather than grassroots organisation.

ps Quilliam not only believed in the Caliphate, he was employed by it!

see

Abdullah Quilliam: Britain’s First Islamist?

http://www.yahyabirt.com/?p=136

Martin Bright
24 April 2008 at 11:16

Zia Sardar's critique of the Quilliam Foundation in the Guardian is very thoughtful. Take a look.

As far as I know, the Sufi Muslim Council is still goinf and the British Muslim Forum is very well-established. But whatever happened to the Muslim Council of Britain I ask myself?

Good old Yahya, Britain's last Islamist?

My argument has always been that there should be more than one organisation in dialogue with the government and ideally not one created by the government, like the MCB.

I prefer to deal with genuine grassroots organisations with respect for the traditions of secular democracy and the fight against clerical fascism such as the Bangladeshi group Drishtipat.

javK
25 April 2008 at 19:34

Quillam does not reflect any grassroots views of Muslims - the founders and the guy behind the scences (Mr Rashad Ali) are interested in maxing out how much funds they can get from the current anti-Islamic anti-terror attitudes. These funds help them to study for doctorates to give them the pieces of paper that lets them speak with credibility - until them, they are using the tactics of fooling academics to front for them until they are found out and dumped (eg Hamza Yusuf et al).

All the three founders were kicked out of HT not for noble intellectual differences but more down to earth reasons like sexual deviations, fraudulent activities and subversive mutterings - all these might find welcome homes in any of the UK mainstream parties, but Islamist groups do not tend to accept any of this nonsense.

Intellectually, the script is being driven by the Home Office, where the purse strings are controlled - all these guys are gradually becoming aligned to the Home Office script if one reviews their initial speeches and writings over time.

The problem is that if you lie, be damned good at it. In the information age, you can be easily caught out - it's worth having a look at www.abu-ibrahim.blogspot.com where their attempting subversion of classical Islamic scholarship is exposed...

z1
25 April 2008 at 23:16

JavK yet more smears and defamation of character attempts .Don't you know about the characteristics of some in the Hizb. Where is your adab[islamic manners] ? Maybe we should start by looking at the fundamental lack of adab and pathetic level of slander employed to counter Quilliam. Stop being so hypocritical guys. Why don't you debate rather than sneer and slur!!! Turn it around and ask who funds you , what do you do with your student members money, why do you all unislamically, irreligiously dump your husbands, wives, families and kids for political concepts and as Ed puts it, to be controlled by a faceless dictatorial control freak in the middle east somewhere.

javK
26 April 2008 at 03:13

Z1 - you appear to have jumped to the conclusion that I am with HT - maybe you should take your own advice and be careful of slandering others based on your personal prejudices.

If you read the entire comment, there is a detailed website quoted which refutes all the "intellectual" issues these individuals raise - www.abu-ibrahim.blogspot.com. Despite promises on their site about refuting it, they have yet to do so.

Finally, integrity, honesty and sincerity are important matters when analysing the motivations and agendas of individuals and organisations - when they come into question, whole organisations can fall apart! I would suggest you look at any methodology module of post-graduate level study to see this is standard material when writing a critique.

z1
26 April 2008 at 09:31

Obviously touched a nerve with you Javk; miaow! Really all this slandering is not good adab and your attack on my literary/intellectual capabilities is just typical of what is taking place right now in response to any commentary on the hizb. Tell us why Asif Khan is now the latest high ranking member to leave HT! Maybe the hizb should have taken up the challenge just set by Newsnight and debated with Maajid rather than one 'anonymous' blog response by 'abu-ibrahim'. Open debate is something Nazreen Nawaz is not afraid to do. What about the men in HT however who run the show. Where are they when more than ever they should now be debating ? This is about the future/welfare of muslims that they claim to work for. Also please don't accuse me of prejudice when you do not know me and keep this impersonal.Thanks.

knave
26 April 2008 at 17:25

Martin can I ask why is this obsessions with the Islamic right. Surely an article one every 6 months but nearly every week .

I don't like them as much you but I ask a few questions

1. Why don't you ever mention the influence of the christian right on foreign policy of the US, science and educations . Plus gay rights.

2. Ten times more Muslims in the last 10 years have been killed by the west and Israel than the other way round. You and Cohen don't mention that.

3. I didn't remember articles from right wing journalist like yourself and Cohen when

javK
29 April 2008 at 05:10

Z1 An open debate in a limited timeframe with a lay-audience proves very ltitle aside from being a show of rhetoric. I cannot speak for HT however I would raise the question that if they were so interested in knowing HT's response, why did they not raise such questions whilst they were members of the organisation? Nawaz states he had the doubts and questions when he was with HT. I believe such claims are little more than publicity seeking maneuvers.

Some serious independent sites like www.abuibrahim.blogspot.com have produced referenced critique of Hussain's/Nawaz's arguments - if they or even you can respond, please respond in writing - I personally would be most interested in following the thread.

javK
25 June 2008 at 06:34

A comprehensive critique has been done on the Quilliam lot which Martin may want to have a read of: http://islamic-considerations.blogspot.com/

Post your comment

(Your email address will not be published)

Recent Posts

The horror comes home

22 January 2009 09:58

Ken Clarke's return

19 January 2009 16:10

A New Deal of the mind

15 January 2009 09:31

It's a New New Deal

08 January 2009 09:51

A year of ups and downs

18 December 2008 09:44

Mystic Mart

15 December 2008 13:06

The two-man show

11 December 2008 09:44

Past Entries

Follow this blog

Vote!

Was the government wrong to sack David Nutt?

Suggest a question

View comments

© New Statesman 1913 – 2009

Tracker