»   Anti-capitalist? Critics of #occupy movement are more anti-capitalist than the protesters http://t.co/AqoWor9T < by me 1 hr ago

»   Govt's push for elected police commissioners will cost millions as other jobs are slashed to save money http://t.co/LeOuFZxT 2 hrs ago

»   Also, it'll be interesting to see which Labour MPs follow EdM's lead and focus on growing inequality and which shy away from the debate. 9 hrs ago

»   ...or too dominated by the usual gang of trots who want nothing at all to do with the mainstream or even include them in their jamboree 9 hrs ago

»   When Obama said ppl should pay heed to #occupywallstreet - at least they didn't attack him in response. Let's see if @occupyLSX is maturer 9 hrs ago

» More updates...


  • Family

    • Liberal Conspiracy
  • Comrades

    • Andy Worthington
    • Angela Saini
    • Bartholomew’s notes
    • Bleeding Heart Show
    • Bloggerheads
    • Blood & Treasure
    • Campaign against Honour Killings
    • Cath Elliott
    • Chicken Yoghurt
    • Daily Mail Watch
    • Dave Hill
    • Dr. Mitu Khurana
    • Europhobia
    • Faith in Society
    • Feminism for non-lefties
    • Feministing
    • Gender Bytes
    • Harry’s Place
    • IKWRO
    • MediaWatchWatch
    • Ministry of Truth
    • Natalie Bennett
    • New Statesman blogs
    • Operation Black Vote
    • Our Kingdom
    • Robert Sharp
    • Rupa Huq
    • Shiraz Socialist
    • Shuggy’s Blog
    • Stumbling and Mumbling
    • Ta-Nehisi Coates
    • The F Word
    • Though Cowards Flinch
    • Tory Troll
    • UK Polling Report
  • In-laws

    • Aaron Heath
    • Douglas Clark's saloon
    • Earwicga
    • Get There Steppin’
    • Incurable Hippie
    • Neha Viswanathan
    • Power of Choice
    • Rita Banerji
    • Sarah
    • Sepia Mutiny
    • Sonia Faleiro
    • Southall Black Sisters
    • The Langar Hall
    • Turban Head



  • Technorati: graph / links

    Quilliam Funding Shocker


    by Sid (Faisal)
    21st January, 2009 at 10:00 pm    

    Another day, another Muslim exposé.

    Apparently the Times has uncovered, in a coup of investigative journalism, what its editors probably like to think is the Quilliam Foundation’s big dirty ugly secret. And it is, wait for it: the QF receive government money…

    Whup-de-doo! That’s huge, right? Well it would be, if we didn’t know it already.

    Almost £1 million of public money is being given to a think-tank run by two former Islamic extremists, despite reservations being expressed by members of the Government and the Opposition.

    The funding is for the Quilliam Foundation — a counter-extremism think-tank set up nine months ago by Ed Husain, a bestselling author, and Maajid Nawaz, a former political prisoner in Egypt — as part of the Government’s strategy to combat the radicalisation of British Muslims.

    The scale of the funding has aroused concerns that the Government is relying too heavily on a relatively unknown organisation in its desperation to counter extremism.

    The Times understands that the foundation, which has 18 full-time staff, is paying about £110,000 a year to rent offices at one of Central London’s most prestigious addresses, which, for security reasons, have no name plate or sign outside. Inside, the offices are expensively furnished with state-of-the-art computers and plasma screen televisions.

    Doubts have been expressed by Labour and Conservative MPs as to whether the investment will produce results.

    Some people are going to be mighty happy with this “scoop”. One such person who can’t conceal his obvious glee is, surprise, that scowling, self-serving Muslim Brotherhood fanboy, Inayat Bunglawala.

    Inayat Bunglawala, of the Muslim Council of Britain, dismissed the Quilliam Foundation as a government stooge. “It has very little credibility amongst British Muslims . . .

    They have fashionably styled themselves as being the UK’s first anti-extremism think-tank,” he said. “Their recent criticism of the Government concerning Israel’s criminal actions in Gaza will not fool many people and is transparently designed to win support from a very sceptical Muslim community.”

    Quilliam has undoubtedly made a long list of enemies in high places in the relatively short period of time since it was launched. This might explain the Times’ silly hatchet job.

    Most recently Melanie Griffiths Phillips made a scathing personal attack on Ed Husain because the “confused one” had the temerity to criticise Israel over the Gaza bombings. Ed Husain’s understandable reaction, made at a visceral level, of seeing the horrors of the massacre of Gazans was pointed out as a particular reflex which could only be, she claimed, a throwback to his Islamist conditioning. Surely he was nothing but a complete ranting, antisemitic ‘mentalist in a sensible well-tailored suit? Whatever he was, she no longer thought him fit to be considered a “plausible antidote to Islamist extremism in Britain”.

    Then there is the “unnamed minister” who is quoted in the Times article. Who could he be? A minister cynical enough to claim that a pro-secular Muslim think tank is irrelevant because he would rather see his chosen mainstream Muslims organisations be populated with advocates of religious supremacism, jihadi Islam and antisemitism. Could this be one of the Ministers who was engaged to speak at the IslamExpo before it was exposed by Ed as a Muslim Brotherhood-organised event, perhaps? An MP3 of my favourite Smiths track if you can name that minister.

    “Ed and Quilliam have very little support in the mainstream Muslim community,” the minister said. “They have much more enemies than friends. But he’s loved by some ministers, which is why his organisation is having so much money thrown at it. And the Government knows that if you want a Muslim to say pro-government things, then Quilliam is the answer.”

    But the people who hate Quilliam the most are probably those who work as Islamist interlocutors of government-patronage such as Azad Ali, who makes no effort to hide his loathing of Quilliam.

    All that has been achieved is ‘credibility’ in the eyes of Ed’s patrons, ie the government which now formally funds his think-tank. It was the same government that tried to bolster the ‘credibility’ of the Quilliam Foundation and others like the Sufi Muslim Council, and ensure that they in turn had the ability to launch initiatives such as the ‘theology board’. Only then, can they claim “it was the Muslims themselves that asked for it”.

    It is very clear that Azad Ali, and other “soft-jihadis” like him, dearly want to be regarded as the real moderates. If you’ve machinated for years to position yourself as “The Muslims you want when you want to talk to the hardliners”, then you’re not going to be too pleased when some ‘johnny-come-lately’ like Ed Husain appears on the scene. Unfortunately, in spite of lovingly nurturing some reprehensible hardline attitudes of their very own.

    Firstly, Quilliam is a think tank. It does not claim to be universally representative of mainstream Muslim communities. Any organisation which says it does is, any case, lying. Bunglawala and others needn’t worry about Quilliam cramping the MCB’s style because they operate in different spaces. Yet the “representative” trope is always wheeled out when they need to attack Quilliam. Secondly, Quilliam does have influence. Last week they co-ordinated the letter condemning anti-semitic attacks signed by every respected non-jihadi Imam in the UK. Quilliam also trains local authorities and others in how to recognise and diffuse Islamist activities.

    Other Muslim groups have also received PVE money, not least of which is the Cordoba Foundation, yet another Muslim Brotherhood front. However, we don’t see knowing smiles and raised eyebrows or “government stooges” innuendo when Cordoba get their hands on government cash.

    It is irrelevent how the Quilliam Foundation received its seed funding. In a democracy it is perfectly legitimate for them to receive tax payers money via government funding, as long as they agree their legitimacy comes from their participation in the democratic process.

    The Quilliam Foundation should start reaching for higher fruit now. They must take the battle to where Islamist activity is most fervent in the UK, to oppose the calls for Sharia tribunals in the Muslim community. As Muslim nations gravitate slowly but inexorably towards secular democratic polities, it is strange that the need for formalised Sharia should be invoked in pockets in Pakistan, Somalia, Afghanistan, Djibouti, Nigeria and, erm, the UK. I would like to see the Quilliam Foundation oppose parallel tribunals because this is going to be a flashpoint in the growing influence of Islamist organisations in Britain’s Muslim communities.

    If the Quilliam Foundation come forward and continue to support an inclusive, secular, pro-democratic agenda for British Muslims which is robustly opposed to the separatist, communalist, anti-statist, anti-democratic trojan-horse structures that currently pass as Muslim organisations today, then we should support them unreservedly.

    [proof-read by Katy Newton]


                  Post to del.icio.us


    Filed in: British Identity






    52 Comments below   |  

    Reactions: Twitter, blogs
    1. It’s Not Islamism That Troubles Him, It’s Impudence… « Back Towards The Locus

      [...] suspect that, like Mel, Murray doesn’t really object to QF’s actions, but their politics. He doesn’t [...]


    2. Pickled Politics » Dealing with the Muslim lobby

      [...] it’s all over. Melanie Phillips washed her hands off Ed Husain last week, then came the hatchet job in The Times, and now Murray is on the [...]


    3. Old Holborn

      RT @LordLindley: http://is.gd/cFJ1q Who is paying for this and why?>>we are of course. Quilliam foundation http://bit.ly/bJl5eQ




    1. Katy Newton — on 21st January, 2009 at 10:28 pm  

      Most recently Melanie Griffiths made

      I had no idea that Melanie Griffiths had abandoned her film career for neoconservative frothery :-)

    2. Sid — on 21st January, 2009 at 10:31 pm  

      Well I did like Melanie Phillips’ sharply combatative performance as a deranged journalist in Mulholland Falls, cleverclogs.

    3. Katy Newton — on 21st January, 2009 at 10:34 pm  

      You wouldn’t think she’d be Banderas’ type…

    4. Katy Newton — on 21st January, 2009 at 10:34 pm  

      … go on, banish THAT mental image

    5. Sunny — on 21st January, 2009 at 10:45 pm  

      LOL! Bizarrely enough I was going to say almost entirely the same in a post. Thanks for saving me the time.

    6. Sid — on 21st January, 2009 at 11:16 pm  

      Great minds, Sunny, great minds…

    7. dave bones — on 22nd January, 2009 at 12:46 am  

      Yeah they were nice enough to invite us down, but some of these questions are valid. If they are recieving public money they should account for it to the public. That is fair enough. Why is Banglawala complaining? Didn’t the MCB also recieve government money and call for a ceasefire in Gaza.

    8. dave bones — on 22nd January, 2009 at 12:57 am  

      Guessing at their set up from their launch event I would suppose they are advising the government on “Wordings to use with Muslim Issues” maybe? That is the function of most think tanks isn’t it? If anyone knows do post. You dont get a lot of what they are about from the article.

    9. shariq — on 22nd January, 2009 at 1:19 am  

      Excellent post Sid. The stuff about plasma screens and what not also seemed pretty flimsy.

      I personally think Quilliam needs to do more on the ground. Organise groups in local communities and university campuses.

      In a parallel way to way what Ed and Majid did when they where members of HT, except openly and honestly rather than through deception and dishonesty.

    10. Andrew — on 22nd January, 2009 at 2:48 am  

      Can’t say I’m really keen on these types of religion-specific groups getting taxpayers money, whether it’s the Quilliam Foundation, or the Cordoba Foundation or the MCB, etc. It all seems a very colonial attitude to me to work though these groups. Why can’t the government engage directly with Muslims as individuals and cut out the intermediaries?

    11. Imran Khan — on 22nd January, 2009 at 7:46 am  

      Sid - covering your tracks very well. You now claim it doesn’t matter how thye recieve their funding and that this was well known and yet in the past you have claimed this was an independant think tank.

      How can it be independant and government funded at the same time.

      Your assertions are nonsense as the times points out that QF readi;y and happily tow the government line andhave little community support. Your ludicrous statement about what they need to do when you know full well that QF have said they are not a community organisation.

      “It is irrelevent how the Quilliam Foundation received its seed funding. In a democracy it is perfectly legitimate for them to receive tax payers money via government funding, as long as they agree their legitimacy comes from their participation in the democratic process.”

      But they said they received no government funding, it was stated by their director on Newsnight so why hide the fact and how can you then trust what they say when they are not clear to you on where their funding came from? You were misled old chap and now you say its perfectly ok for them to recieve such funding so was it ok for them to mislead their major cheerleader?

    12. dave bones — on 22nd January, 2009 at 8:07 am  

      Why can’t the government engage directly with Muslims as individuals and cut out the intermediaries?

      How?

      What do Quilliam do?

      Anyone?

    13. Sid — on 22nd January, 2009 at 10:07 am  

      Sid - covering your tracks very well. You now claim it doesn’t matter how thye recieve their funding and that this was well known and yet in the past you have claimed this was an independant think tank.

      There *were* an independent think tank when they were funded by unnamed Arab backers. But the Arab backers pulled out when it became apparent that Quilliam were secular and raising the offensive against Muslim Brotherhood fronts in the UK. How could you forget?

      Personally I would much prefer these Muslim orgs which work for “community cohesion” to be far more transparent about the work they do and the funds they receive. And that’s more likely if they receive government funds for which they are accountable to than from some Saudi sheikh.

    14. gazan — on 22nd January, 2009 at 10:59 am  

      Desperate stuff Sid. It isnt just “Islamists ” who dont like Quillam- they have virtually no credibility in the Muslim community (even governemnt ministers recognise this). Seriously Ed and Majid were unknown before this.

      Even they recognise this since they seemed to have stopped addressing Muslims and address senate committees/non-Muslims instead.

    15. zaffer — on 22nd January, 2009 at 11:03 am  

      Most Third sector organisations receive some level of government funding- this does not mean they loose their independent, a-political stance.

    16. qidniz — on 22nd January, 2009 at 11:05 am  

      As Muslim nations gravitate slowly but inexorably towards secular democratic polities

      I’ll have some of what you’re smoking, please, thanks so much.

      While it lasts, of course.

      Which won’t be long.

      Now, where were we?

    17. douglas clark — on 22nd January, 2009 at 11:13 am  

      gazan,

      senate committees

      Wrong country?

    18. Leon — on 22nd January, 2009 at 11:19 am  

      I personally think Quilliam needs to do more on the ground. Organise groups in local communities and university campuses.

      I’m not sure they do need to as this isn’t what Think Tanks are about. Think Tanks exist to formulate policy ideas, essentially to do the Government and oppositions thinking for them.

      They’re not front line service providers or grassroots community organisations.

    19. The Common Humanist — on 22nd January, 2009 at 11:20 am  

      Katy
      “… go on, banish THAT mental image”

      Well that is me scarred for life!

      8-)

    20. fug — on 22nd January, 2009 at 11:54 am  

      written through the prism of jionijom, proofread through the lens of zionism. an interesting reliance.

      the most ingenious reflection of the quilliam phenomena is The Islamicist. you may not comprehend many of the symbols, but im sure you’ll get enough to have some belly laughs. http://theislamicist.wordpress.com/

    21. Sid — on 22nd January, 2009 at 12:12 pm  

      Leon - point.

    22. Andrew — on 22nd January, 2009 at 12:18 pm  
    23. Katy Newton — on 22nd January, 2009 at 12:20 pm  

      proofread through the lens of zionism. an interesting reliance

      Yawn. That’s right, fug. Hidden deep within my comment pointing out that in what must be a first Sid had accidentally confused Melanie Phillips, neocon hysteria-merchant, and Melanie Griffiths, trout-mouthed Hollywood luminary, are all sorts of crazy subconscious Zionist terror messages.

      Yes. I’m in yr websitez controllin yr mediaz.

    24. fug — on 22nd January, 2009 at 12:43 pm  

      Nope, you’re just as superficial as he is.

      Let me define jionijom, the secular bangladeshi apeing of zionism for you. Then you two can get along better.

      An ideology that tries to build itself on metaphors of race, jealousy and bloodletting. It isnt good at providing enduring fruit, causing the unfortunately afflicted group to sink in the ocean. This wouldnt be so bad if Jionijoms nature was not to drag everyone else nearby down with it while proudly celebrating itself.

      Jionijom was probably not intended. It is the sum of bad situations, judgements and pronounciation. Many people pity Jionists and try to help them, but it only makes them worse. Some cases just can’t be helped in such ways.

      Jionist commonsense has been coded with a few trademarks.

      -Religion and politics have nothing to do with each other.
      -Dissent, defame, destroy with indignance, but never resolve.
      -Civil society is ‘vibrant’.(Anything but donor induced social engineering)
      -We are an independant state mr ambassador, how much aid money this time sir?
      -The eternal reason for national creation is for secularism to flower.

    25. Katy Newton — on 22nd January, 2009 at 1:08 pm  

      fug, do you understand that the only contribution I have made on this thread or in relation to this post - the only comment - is to point out to Sid that he said Griffiths instead of Phillips?

    26. fug — on 22nd January, 2009 at 2:46 pm  

      and try to ape my imagined diction and pull the zionophobia chain.

    27. Jai — on 22nd January, 2009 at 3:00 pm  

      Katy/Sid,

      Well I did like Melanie Phillips’ sharply combatative performance as a deranged journalist in Mulholland Falls, cleverclogs.

      It’s a good thing you didn’t accidentally say “Mulholland Drive” too, cos that’s a whole different movie (and a whole different mental image)….

      Ahem.

    28. Sid — on 22nd January, 2009 at 3:19 pm  

      Katy, ignore the toe-rag.

    29. Leon — on 22nd January, 2009 at 4:24 pm  

      Indeed.

      Fug, please stop derailing this thread.

    30. sonia — on 22nd January, 2009 at 7:11 pm  

      “If they are recieving public money they should account for it to the public.”

      as Dave Bones says.

      dave - they should take a leaf out of your book!

      how much funding do they get from the govt. per year? £1 million a year - or was that a million and that’s it. Would be useful to know! i doubt its enough for them to rent wherever it is they’re renting! and if it is, well people can quibble on that point (heh) seeing as everyone wants some of public money, and we know there isn’t enough to go around.

      I don’t know how you combat extremism, but there seems to be a hell of a lot of victimhood about.

    31. sonia — on 22nd January, 2009 at 7:17 pm  

      perhaps if people like fug were to come out of hiding and explain his thinking a bit more, (or use language we might understand) that might be a start. but no, fug is like one of those people - whaddya call them - angsty teenagers! - who want to be misunderstood (at least by those he doesn’t respect, or thinks is part of the prob.)

      Some of the things full grown men said at the Toynbee hall thingie I went to in dec. (which i must write about!) were really suprisingly ‘paranoid’. Stuff like ‘everyone apart from us muslims own/have influence with the media’ - ???!! I really did want to stand up and shout - are you crazy? You ain’t the only one idiot! Most people, don’t own the media. yes that’s the bloody point - control of media is in few, powerful hands. And “your community” isn’t the only one ‘left out’. I mean - what kind of victimhood complex is that? very uneducated, me thinks. We need to send them all on a course on political economy of the media -if they want to be radicalised, let them realise they ain’t the only f***ing ones. at least bunglawala was speaking sense at that event - i did want to cheer him on (very strange feeling that was as well)

      i wonder if fug or ashik were there in the audience…

    32. sonia — on 22nd January, 2009 at 7:21 pm  

      “the secular bangladeshi apeing of zionism for you.”

      jionijom - what language is this fug? you really must live in a strange little world - i am curious. what world is it? do you live in london? can i come and meet you? it would be such an ethnographic encounter.

    33. sonia — on 22nd January, 2009 at 7:24 pm  

      13 - well said sid.

      One thing that struck me - I haven’t had a chance to get back to the gentleman who organises these Dialogue with Islam events - which i do plan to do - but he told me something strange. That they are purely self-funded through ticket sales (very admirable and enterprising) and that a big reason for that is that if they were to get govt. funding, they would lose legitimacy in the eyes of the people they want to include in these debates (i.e. the muslims).

      which i daresay may be the case. but i wonder why - what is it about government money - in this instance - they don’t like? they don’t seem to mind government funding when it comes in the shape of subsidized rents for council flats or benefits.

    34. Ismaeel — on 22nd January, 2009 at 7:36 pm  

      Secondly, Quilliam does have influence. Last week they co-ordinated the letter condemning anti-semitic attacks signed by every respected non-jihadi Imam in the UK.

      20 mainly unknown people, many of whom are not Imams out of several hundred Imams and Ulema in this country, who do u think you are kidding when u say these people have influence?

    35. sonia — on 22nd January, 2009 at 8:18 pm  

      15 - good point zaffer.

      and yes, a think-tank doesn’t have to do anything apart from Think.

      why people get so annoyed with ex-Islamists i can’t understand. at least they’re honest and have had some level of self-reflection!

      “they have virtually no credibility in the Muslim community (even governemnt ministers recognise this). Seriously Ed and Majid were unknown before this.”

      Who cares if they were ‘known’ or ‘unknown’ - you make it seem like the ‘Muslim’ community is one community which knows ‘itself’.. Unless you are referring to some ‘core’ community, and you can tell us who that is, and where they are - i can’t see that there is any one person, or persons - who the entire set of ‘Muslim’ communities knows, or will feel has some ‘legitimacy’. Unless that’s the Quran, or the Prophet. (and even there - look at the disagreements!) Only governments are stupid enough to believe that such a ‘community’ would be monolithic. (any muslim knows this full well) For a start, we can’t even agree to celebrate Eid on the same day - pray tell where is this ‘monolithic’ community? Hmm? it always seems the pakistani communities and the bengali communities always celebrate eid on different days!

      goodness. you lot just don’t like the fact that someone “saw the light” and was honest enough to admit it. what a lot of hizb-ut-tahrir types we have in our midst.

    36. sonia — on 22nd January, 2009 at 8:26 pm  

      andrew good point, it is a colonial attitude.

      “It all seems a very colonial attitude to me to work though these groups. Why can’t the government engage directly with Muslims as individuals and cut out the intermediaries?”

      because, then they’d be treating them as ordinary citizens - individuals -like everybody else? and not actually as Muslims.

      there is no reason why “Muslims” should be engaged - as a group. Actually. in fact is biased and discriminatory - full stop. People should engage as citizens - with government - if they don’t like something, they should campaign, on the basis of -being a citizen. people can speak for themselves, and say well i dont like this because i am green or muslim, or whatever, but the main reason for govt. engaging with their point - is because they are a citizen, not because of some ‘belonging’. people should argue their points on moral/ethical value - not ‘group membership’.

    37. fug — on 22nd January, 2009 at 9:41 pm  

      How is it humanly possible to derail a thread more than normal?

      It’s important to point out that sids approach to political islam is driven by a great passion which derails his judgement, pretty much all of the time. That passion is his hurt at the injustices wrought on Bangladeshis by a force he sees as jamat e islami and the lack of justice in that department. (JI who i beleive were tools in the scenario, though that causes me to become a genocide denier). So he sees genocidal maniacs in all the streams of islamism 1.0 that exist today.

      which is wrong.

      HT have a very different take on almost everything, neither HT nor IFE are responsible for violent criminality in the uk or abroad. But in Sid’s view they are, and all those in the constellation of islamic work are guilty of some strange shared original sin. So I say that this Jionijom is mispronounced Zionism. Its really got a hold of distressed bangladeshis who arent quite post pakistan. It explains Sid and Sonia’s willy waving on the thread about gaza the other day.

      He will pursue his demons and seek to disgrace everything in his path. I think thats quite irresponsible but its an inevitability that a lot of us have to live with.

      Its a similar trip to what the so called quilliams are on. Lets call it Muslimosis, sickness of those who share your faith. Sid would like to see QF follow his own agenda, thats why he discursively sucks up to them. As if he has any idea of how to guide people. Its really undignified, but its a consequence of being damaged goods and setting off on a blame storm.

      Ed wet the bed over this and has been sending around a desperate text to save face, characteristically stupidly.

      I dont think you people realise what foul people these chaps are, at all levels. You can see it in how disgustingly Maajid behaves with people who wish to engage with him who he doesnt have time for. You could see it in Ed altercation with Queen Shami last year.

      Many organisations and institutions have been created to distract Muslims from advancing their thought and practise. A lot of these also fall into the revivalist category. Colonialists have done it with our education systems, and their proxies continue that mission to this day. Governments have done it throughout history. I can see the attraction, its very powerful.

      Taking government funding in the present context is never a good idea, even if you are talented (which QF are not). The QNews crew only just about got away with it, and thats being generous.

      Its probably because both individuals didnt really do ‘community work’ in terms of keeping ablution areas clean, solving peoples problems, working with people. Their histories were in simple political distraction and brutish cultish behaviour. This is why they cant generate their own funds locally, because nobody trusts them, expect people with a shared interest in kicking the prayerlights out of muslims.

      Meanwhile real ‘de-retardation’ work doesn’t seek fame nor glory nor news attention.

      QF want to ban me wearing bizzare ethnic attire? what superficial nonsense.

    38. Imran Khan — on 22nd January, 2009 at 9:58 pm  

      Sid -”There *were* an independent think tank when they were funded by unnamed Arab backers. But the Arab backers pulled out when it became apparent that Quilliam were secular and raising the offensive against Muslim Brotherhood fronts in the UK. How could you forget?”

      Sid with respect that isn’t about as accurate as as the so called advisors who have said they puled out because Quilliam Foundation didn’t make clear what their objectives were and Quilliam said they pulled out because they were being intimidated!

      They may have been independant at launch because they were not clear to the backers what they were up to, but shortly there after they took government money as the backers and advisors pulled out.

      It is nothig to do with secular or anti-MB it is to do with misleading what they said they were doing. That is vastly different.

      I wouldn’t have any complaints against QF if they were clear about funding and advisors. They’ve not been clear and you can’t dress that up.

      Now we know they have Govt funding although they themselves should have announced this it is easier for them to move forward as its clear where the funding comes from.

      Now they need to set a proper agenda and outline their plans like any other think tank. They now have the money to do it and it shouldn’t be squandered if they are secular then they need to outline their strategy and thinking clearly in future policy documents which won’t happenovernight but need to be produced in the next year.

      But they need to be straight forward in their dealing which gives a better more acceptable platform.

      Clearly they got funding last year but its strange they wouldn’t admit it and that makes it appear they have something to hide and thus doesn’t help their credibility.

      I don’t like being mislead and I am pretty sure despite your support you don’t either but now we both know where the funding is coming from it makes their next steps easier in terms of the money issue is out of the way so their work can begin.

      Are you sending a job application as they pay well and you get flat screens ;-)

    39. fug — on 22nd January, 2009 at 9:59 pm  

      11.

      Taking dunya(worldly) dollars isnt illegal, its just naff and telling. Its part of a broader trend of government beating the life out of the 3rds sector with its money and ‘service provision’. Only many Muslims dont get that, they think they are important because of it.

    40. douglas clark — on 22nd January, 2009 at 10:44 pm  

      Thanks Ismaeel @ 34,

      So, they are not useless after all?

    41. dave bones — on 23rd January, 2009 at 12:12 am  

      Yeah, I’m not dissing Quilliam. I am genuinely asking what they do. I know they approached Musa but he had family hassles and never got round to meeting them. I don’t think he thinks of himself as a good enough Muslim to get involved. Who organises these Dialogue with Islam events Sonia?

    42. sonia — on 23rd January, 2009 at 12:28 am  

      dave, check them out, a guy called Shahinoor Ali runs Dialogue with Islam - and they’ve done some interesting events already, the one i went to was on Freedom of Speech and where Muslims should stand. well organised event, at Toynbee Hall, had Matthew Taylor who was chief exec of the RSA as chair, and an “interesting” panel, with HuT on it as well, inayat bunglawala of the MCB, Asim Siddiqui of the city circle, some Shaikh bloke (who i thought was really quite annoying) and the audience were mostly drawn through mosques etc. so quite a specific bunch with particular ideas. the Shaikh and HuT you can see, had a very ‘emotional’ message about “our Prophet” and how “they” really want to insult us on purpose, which sadly, a lot of the audience seemed to think as well.

    43. blah — on 23rd January, 2009 at 12:47 am  

      sonia

      “why people get so annoyed with ex-Islamists i can’t understand. at least they’re honest and have had some level of self-reflection!”

      Depending on who you believe parts of “the islamist” are not honest. People are annoyed at QF because they support wars against Muslims and the have Muslim/Islam haters like Douglas Murray as advisers

      blah
      “they have virtually no credibility in the Muslim community (even governemnt ministers recognise this). Seriously Ed and Majid were unknown before this.”

      sonia
      “Who cares if they were ‘known’ or ‘unknown’ - you make it seem like the ‘Muslim’ community is one community which knows ‘itself’..”

      You seem confused by the fact that there are differences in the Muslim community and by the other undeniable fact that there are Muslims who for years have worked tireless at a community level setting up and running schools, mosques, cultural centres. The are known in the community for their hard work and rightly respected. Such people deserve to be listened to.

      Majid and Ed have done nothing for the Muslim community prior to QF(though Majid did suffer in an Egyptian jail)

      “goodness. you lot just don’t like the fact that someone “saw the light” and was honest enough to admit it.”

      Im happy people leave HT. Many hundreds (thousands ? do). But they dont become neo-con pin up boys eager to bash Muslims for a fat fee.

      The fact that Majid and Ed are ex-HT is against them in many Muslims books. Many Muslims had no time for HT yet here we have two people stupid enough to join them telling Muslims how stupid it is to join a group they never intended to!!!

      The same youths who haranged Muslims into joined HT and condemning them for not doing so are now warning Muslims not to join.
      Yeah thanks we already knew.

      Its like ex-alcoholics preaching to a life long teetotaller!!!

    44. blah — on 23rd January, 2009 at 12:49 am  

      Ismaeel
      “Secondly, Quilliam does have influence. Last week they co-ordinated the letter condemning anti-semitic attacks signed by every respected non-jihadi Imam in the UK.

      20 mainly unknown people, many of whom are not Imams out of several hundred Imams and Ulema in this country, who do u think you are kidding when u say these people have influence?”

      Do you have any proof this is the case? Their website only has a link to the Guardian article. It doesnt mention QF instigated the letter

    45. Sid — on 23rd January, 2009 at 11:10 am  

      Im happy people leave HT. Many hundreds (thousands ? do). But they dont become neo-con pin up boys eager to bash Muslims for a fat fee.

      blah,

      Can you give us a factual example of how Quilliam “bash Muslims”?

    46. Ismaeel — on 23rd January, 2009 at 2:56 pm  

      blah

      I didn’t say Quilliam orchestrated it, Sid did, you’re better off asking him for proof.

    47. dave bones — on 23rd January, 2009 at 7:33 pm  

      Yes. It is pretty obvious no one knows what Quilliam do which is kind of dissapointing, unless they are doing something which needs to be kept quiet due to its sensitivity. I can’t imagine them dejihadifying from addresses in the West end really though.

    48. Andrew — on 24th January, 2009 at 3:56 am  

      I really hope that for their own credibility, QF produce an Annual Report which details what they do, including fully audited accounts.

    49. fug — on 24th January, 2009 at 1:59 pm  

      aah, thereby earning themselves a white technocratic kudos. as if open letters addressing white guilt issues are not enough.

    Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

    Pickled Politics © Copyright 2005 - 2010. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.
    With the help of PHP and Wordpress.