By Hamza Bajwa of The Muslim Weekly
Leading Muslim organisations have united to condemn C4 Dispatches for seeking to further demonise sections of the Muslim community through sensationalising, exaggerating and purposeful misquotations.
Aired on Monday evening, the documentary attempted to "bring Muslims into disrepute" by selectively quoting preachers in an attempt to malign Britain’s most respected and influential organisations of teaching an "ideology of intolerance and religious bigotry, inspired by Saudi Arabia".
But Muslims leaders have hit back charging the Dispatches investigative team of having a "preconceived agenda". The Muslim Council of Britain (MCB), UK’s largest umbrella group, said it was a "clear attempt to foment sectarian divisions among British Muslims and misrepresent some leading UK Muslim institutions".
Lord Nazir Ahmed, who was accused in the report of praising Green Lane Mosque in Birmingham, headquarters of the UK branch of Jamiat Ahl-e-Hadith, said the makers had a "proper new conservative agenda to attack the Muslim community".
While UK Islamic Mission’s (UKIM) President, Shafiq ur-Rahman, in a letter to the Dispatches Producer, Andrew Smith, wrote: "This open season of Muslim-bashing and Islamophobia has been with us for so long that one is little surprised about yet another C4 ‘investigation.’" He said that this phobia in certain sections of the media was getting "absurd by the day".
This is not the first time that the Muslim community has been subject to undercover investigations.
British Muslim charity Interpal was at the center of a similar witch-hunt last year when John Ware’s BBC Panorama documentary entitled "Faith, Hate and Charity" attempted to show the charity was funding terrorism. The same team produced "A Question of Leadership", aired in August of 2005, which attempted to impugn MCB and other organisations including the Islamic Foundation, Muslim Association of Britain, Markazi Jamiat Ahl-e-Hadith and the Leeds Grand Mosque.
The main thrust of the investigation was its attack on the Saudi branch of Islamic thought called "Wahhabism" which it alleged was spreading a "message of hatred and intolerance". In an interview with Dr Irfan Al Alawi, chairman of the Islamic Heritage Foundation, who has also in the past accused the Muslim sect Tablighi Jamaat of not being moderate, claimed that Green Lane Mosque was "one of the extreme Wahhabi centres in the UK". But the Saltley Gate Peace Group, an interfaith community action group, based at the Saltley Methodist Church in Birmingham, has defended the mosque describing it as "diverse, multiracial and [with] peaceful worshippers and administration".
It further said that Green Lane Mosque was "not known to promote extremism and the founders and committee of the mosque have always distanced themselves from such extremism", and that it’s Imam, Abdul Hadi, works closely with peace organisations and government authorities. "The Saltley Gate Peace Group would like to express its undiminished support for Green Lane Mosque and its congregation and praise them for their faith and community work, whatever the outcome of the documentary."
Although it added that it could not speak for the views of specific individuals. Abu Usamah, an Imam at the mosque, was heavily quoted throughout the programme. But the American convert to Islam told The Muslim Weekly that there existed a "hidden agenda" which he believed was not about eradicating extreme elements within the Muslim community but of some people "trying to sell a new brand of Islam".
He said: "This so-called ‘Wahhabi’ mentality they’re so afraid of doesn’t even exist. The term ‘Wahhabi’ is a relative term depending upon who’s using it and for what reason. There are some people who do not like the pure unadulterated, undiluted interpretation of the Qur’an and Sunnah (the way of the Prophet Mohammed), so they call the person who wants to be strict in his Islam ‘a Wahhabi’."
It also had Dr Taj Hargey suggesting the word "kafir" was a "very pejorative, negative, disparaging term".
"When you call someone a ‘kafir’, they are not worthy to be associated with. This kind of intolerance is something that gives rise to extremists," he claimed.
But Shafiq ur-Rahman said this was untrue which was used by God in the Qur’an and meant "the coverer - that is, one who hides or covers. It is an objective statement of fact and not a word of abuse or insult".
While Abu Usamah said: "They seem to take offence at the usage of the word ‘kafir’ and ‘kuffaar’. These are generic terms that are not derogatory. It doesn’t mean ‘infidel’, which can be understood as derogatory; it just means a non-believer. So for a Muslim to say ‘I disassociate myself from calling the kuffaar kuffaar’ that’s a problem because Allah says in the Qur’an: ‘Those who kafaru - disbelieve…’"
Lord Ahmed said his words were "absolutely taken out of context". He said: "They have exaggerated and sensationalised my connections with everyone concerned. As far as I’m concerned, in the radio programme in 2003 I was describing a masjid (mosque) which is God’s house, describing how wonderful it is and how wonderful feelings are in a masjid rather than describing any Imam and his quotations." He added: "There may be some people who have preached wrong things and they should be challenged, there’s no doubt about that, and I would be the first one to do that. But to take things out of context, exaggerate and sensationalise does not help the debate. "It’s a sad state of affairs that C4 is being used by a group of people with a certain agenda whereas in the past C4 has been very good. "C4 should now owe it to us to give us a budget and make a programme to explore the lies in this programme."
He added: "They’ve taken the controversial things from the teachings [of Islam] rather than everything else, and they’ve done that deliberately to spread hatred. "This programme will be very damaging for the race relations." He said: "Spying on the Muslim community in this sneaky way is the desperation of the new-conservatives to bring Islam and the Muslim community into disrepute."
In his defence, Abu Usamah said that many of his statements too had been taken out of context.
"There were some quotes that were inappropriate, insensitive, and incorrect and we free ourselves from that. But there were other quotes that were the truth - ayaat (verses) from the Qur’an and ahadeeth (authentic Prophetic traditions), which we accept, but then there were other quotes still that were taken out of context," he said. He also emphasised the point that as a human being he was "prone like everyone else to make mistakes, or make statements that are insensitive and incorrect". "If I made such a mistake I would rectify it in public," he said. Following the Dispatches programme, Abu Usamah published an interview recording on Goggle Video in which he cited examples of being taken out of context.
The programme had Abu Usamah stating: "No one loves the kuffaar, not a single person here loves the kuffaar," and: "We hate the kuffaar". But he claimed this had been taken out of context. "It is the religious obligation for every Muslim to hate the disbelief of every non-Muslim," which he said was based on the principle of "loving and hating" for the sake of God.
"Allah hates disbelief, so therefore we have to hate disbelief." However, he clarified further saying: "But hating the non-Muslim itself, I never said that, because the Prophet himself was told in the Qur’an: ‘You (O Muhammad) do not guide those whom you love, but Allah guides whom He chooses.’ This ayaah (verse) by unanimous agreement of the scholars of al-Islam was revealed because of the uncle of the Prophet who died as a non-Muslim. So the Prophet loved his grandfather, loved his uncle, loved his relatives who were non-Muslims." He added: "The vast majority of my relatives are ‘kuffaar’. You can’t help but love your mother and your father who may happen to be non-Muslims. So Islam doesn’t prevent that."
Saltley Gate Peace Group also defended Abu Usamah as one who was known by his interfaith community to be a "peaceful man" who "numerously denounced terrorism and encouraged worshippers to concentrate more on family life and family values rather than 'political Islam' and radicalism".
Sparkbrook Islamic Centre, which is run by UKIM, was also targeted by Dispatches covert reporter. But Shafiq ur-Rahman said the hall was available for hiring by other community organizations and "almost all the alleged ‘angry outburst’ you cite seems to have happened during its use by some non-UKIM organisation". He also rebuffed the alleged link between Jama’at-e-Islami and UKIM saying: "The UK Islamic Mission is an independent British Muslim institution." He added: "The UK Islamic Mission has no organic links with Jama’at-e-Islami in Pakistan or for that matter with any other Islamic party or society overseas, neither does it defer to or take its policies or programmes from any foreign body or individual."
Dr Ijaz Mian, described by the report as a "travelling speaker" who was allegedly "found promoting segregation and intolerance from Saudi Arabia", said his words were "taken out of context". The programme showed Dr Mian preaching: "You are in a situation in which you have to live like a state within a state, until you take over. But until this happens, you have to preach, until you become such a force that the people they just submit to you, hands up, until you become strong enough to take over." It concluded: "It’s an extreme vision – that Muslims will one day take over Britain, and impose an Islamic state with Saudi-style sharia law."
However, Dr Mian said that what he meant by "a state within a state" was that "British Muslims who adhere to the tenets of Islam should not compromise their beliefs and continue to practice Islam according to the Qur’an and Sunnah". He said: "Although to give Dawah, (invitation to Islam), is incumbent upon every Muslim, Islam can not be forced on anyone as the Qur’an clearly states. "British democracy is based on the voting system. If you are able to convince enough people, then they will come to you ‘hands up’ and you will be in a position to take office."
The programme also says that Dr Mian was preaching "Muslims shouldn’t accept British democracy". Dr Mian was recorded as saying: "King, Queen, House of Commons. If you accept it, you are a part of it. You don’t accept it, you have to dismantle it. So you being a Muslim you have to fix a target, there will be no House of Commons. From that White House to this Black House, we know that we have to dismantle it." Dr Mian said what he meant was that man-made laws contravening the laws of God needed to be corrected (dismantled)."This does not mean to break the laws of the country you live in, whether in the east or west; but to enjoin good and forbid evil wherever you are," he said. He added that it was dangerous to report things out of context.
The report also attempted to show Saudi control and influence over the London Islamic Cultural Centre (ICC) and Central Mosque in London. It claimed: "Saudi influence at the mosque is such that the current director general, Dr Al-Dubayan, is from Saudi Arabia." Dr Ahmed Al-Dubayan said it was inaccurate to claim the London mosque was "become dominated by the influence of Saudi Arabia and its religious teachings".
In a response to Andrew Smith, he wrote: "The Imams of the Central Mosque hail from Egypt and are graduates of Egyptian educational institutions. Surely if your thesis was correct, they would all be from Saudi Arabia?" As for the claim that ICC was "funded by its [Saudi’s] Royal Family", Dr Al-Dubayan said that finances and donations had been received from individuals and countries from all over the world including Morocco, Malaysia, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bangladesh, Kuwait, Oman, and Great Britain.
He also said that any questionable material in the ICC bookshop would be looked into and appropriate action taken.
Lord Nazir was also certain that the programme was influenced by a certain group of Muslims whom he described as the "enemies of Muslims". He told The Muslim Weekly: "I will say that there are some so-called Muslims with an agenda themselves who are desperate to claim leadership of the Muslims and be in the good books of certain institutions and government departments." He warned that the repercussions of such an agenda was going to be very serious since he believed it attempted to divide the community into two categories.
"This is an attempt to demonise and divide a section of the Muslim community into two categories. You’re either a Sufi or a ‘Wahhabi’. "And it is also an attempt to provoke hatred against certain parts of the Muslim community, as far as the general public and the racists are concerned for them everybody who goes to the mosque is the same."
Abu Usamah was also certain that certain Muslims with a "hidden agenda" had a hand in the making of the programme. "If I wasn’t afraid of the political repercussions in terms of wisdom I would tell you which group. There’s only one Muslim group that uses this word ‘Wahhabi’, there’s only one group threatened by that word: the people who worship rocks and stones and sheikhs and so on." He added: "You can look at some of the names that have come out of the woodwork they are people who are like this."
The MCB said the "programme makers have mischievously tried to prove that key Muslim institutions are teaching the exact opposite by resorting to the dishonest tactic of selectively quoting from some recorded speeches for the purpose of misrepresentation". MCB’s Secretary-General, Dr Muhammad Abdul Bari, said: "Their aim is to attach guilt by association. This continuing demonisation of British Muslims and the risible attempt at promoting sectarianism among British Muslims will be firmly rejected." It urged all Muslim institutions to be vigilant and ensure that their premises were not allowed to be abused by those "intent on pursuing divisive agendas".
But they also said that "unacceptable and inflammatory language can never be accepted from Muslim speakers either during talks or on recorded DVDs. "It is vital that the sanctity of mosques and Islamic centres is maintained at all times and an Islamic code of conduct upheld".
|
