But despite the involvement of multiple directors and trustees of the mosque in IFE, we're assured it's a positively teensy minority of extremists there who support the IFE's work.
More on this story. "Inextricably linked to controversial mosque: the secret world of IFE," by Andrew Gilligan for the Telegraph, February 28 (thanks to Twostellas):
For most of the 15,000 ordinary Muslims who pray there each week, it is simply a place of worship. For many, it provides valuable social facilities, and creche and outreach services.
But for a small number, the mosque is the headquarters of a secretive, fundamentalist political network. The Islamic Forum of Europe is dedicated, in its own words, to changing the "very infrastructure of society, its institutions, its culture, its political order and its creed ... from ignorance to Islam".
The mosque and IFE are inextricably intertwined. Dr Mohammed Abdul Bari, the chairman of the mosque, and its vice-chairman are former IFE presidents.
The director and imam of the mosque are trustees of the group. Of 22 IFE trustees in recent years, only five have not also been trustees or officeholders of the religious centre.
The mosque calls the IFE a "social welfare organisation" and the IFE presents itself as committed to "community cohesion" and "tolerance".
Caveat emptor: Tolerance within the limits of Islamic law. Note also the Hamas- and Hizballah-style combination of jihadist ideology and activity and "social services." The latter must not in any way excuse the former.
But the undercover reporters discovered that it was also a sophisticated political group with a structured rank system and hardline goals.
Prospective recruits must attend training. One undercover reporter was told that she would have to take an exam and swear an oath of allegiance and ordered to keep her membership of the IFE a secret.
The reading list for the recruits' training course consists of the key works of the revolutionary political creed known as Islamism, which advocates the overthrow of secular democratic government and its replacement by Islamic government.
Above is the use of "Islamism" to displace responsibility from Islam's own texts and traditions -- most notably, the imperative to wage jihad to impose Islamic law, and offer unbelievers conversion, subjugation, or war (Qur'an 9:29).
The key text, Let Us Be Muslims, by Syed Mawdudi, a high priest of Islamism, instructs recruits: "The sacred duty of Muslims ... wherever you are, in whichever country you live, you must strive to change the wrong basis of government, and seize all powers to rule and make laws from those who do not fear God." [...]
This newspaper obtained an official transcript from the two-day annual training camp held for the IFE's youth wing, the Young Muslim Organisation UK, held in Leicestershire last June. In one talk, Muhammad Rabbani, a trustee of the youth wing, told the recruits: "Our goal is to create the True Believer, [and] to then mobilise these believers into an organised force for change who will carry out dawah [preaching], hisbah [enforcement of Islamic law] and jihad. This will lead to social change and Iqamatud-Deen [an Islamic social and political order]."
Quoting Qur'an 3:85:
The nature of that Islamic social and political order in Britain was made clear when Mr Rabbani said: "Whoever seeks a religion other than Islam, it will never be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he will be one of the losers." He instructed the recruits to "protect yourselves" from music, television and "free mixing with women in that which is not necessary"....
Summary of Muhammadan infiltration.
http://crombouke.blogspot.com/2010/01/muslim-subversion-sedition-and-social.html
Committed to "tolerance", are they? How grand, how generous, how terribly kind.
(Condescending and creepy.)
I look at the Socialist/Marxist that inhabits the White House and know that all things are possible.
The Brits should demand that their right to bear arms be returned to them while they still have a numerical advantage.
It's all well and good to wait for the cops to come while someone is killing you...oh wait. Maybe not. Maybe they should prepare for the inevitable and prepare for war.
Who knows. I understand that the Brits had their first "Tea Party" gathering in the UK yesterday.
In WWII American citizens sent their personal firearms to aid the Home Guard. When the conflict was over the vast majority of those weapons were destroyed, not returned. They learned nothing from the experience.
I have a couple of shotguns I could send them, knowing they would throw them in the sea, thus inviting history to repeat itself yet again.
Churches are being burned with regularity and people of all religions or lack thereof are being murdered in the name of mo the world over. None are spared.
If I'm not mistaken, the pace and number of attacks on Liberty by islam seems to be increasing quite steadily.
There are no moderate muslims.
muslims in small numbers are often mistaken for moderate muslims because of their behavior.
When in the smallest of minorities, they are happy with their lot, happy to wait.
Bravery, bravado, islamic supremacism begins to show itself as their numbers grow. They then rightly assume that silence is approval, permission to proceed. The silence of the "moderate muslim" is deafening. Approval overwhelming...and the speed of the "radicalization" increases.
islam is a lie and
Truth is killing it.
'Community Cohesion' is British Government doublespeak for Muslims behaving badly: http://crombouke.blogspot.com/2010/02/community-cohesion-and-muslims.html
Slow connection..so without looking at the video I'm gong to guess that the problem is a failure to integrate in to the community...yes?
Self enforced segregation?
islam is a lie and
Truth is killing it.
What is frightening about the British is that you can see that America is heading in the same direction.
And you can add Australia. They have no excuse here, none at all. They could quietly cut Muslim immigration numbers, if they wanted to. They could stop lying to us, could let the truth sneak out more openly. But they don't. The people in charge of our security are consigning their own children to the hell of Islam. In this way they are far worse than the Muslims, who we can partially excuse because they are brainwashed.
What deals have they made, and with whom? If you let the Janjaweed in your front door to rape and plunder, what can you get in return which could conceivably make it a worthwhile deal?
Writing in the Opera magazine Lyndon Terracini, Artistic Director for Opera Australia says 'we need to address the rapidly changing demographic situation in Australia. The next 50-years will see Australia become an Asian country.'
The fear for the future of opera around the world, which is already seen as an elitist pursuit and not the continuation of the highest form of Western culture, will die under an Islamic regime which has nothing but contempt for our arts and culture. Is this the future the Australian government really want for their people?
The BBC Radio4 programme 'Start the Week' today discussed a new book by Anthony Julius on anti-Semitism in Britain without once mentioning Islamic Koranic teachings, the spread of anti-Israeli propaganda in every campus in the country, the fire-bombing of synagogues and the rise in Muslim immigration into the country. Each speaker was seen to be picking their way through a minefield and careful not to mention the religion of hate in case of giving offence.
There are however signs of resistance in Australia as follows,
AUSTRALIAN View Of Torturing Terrorists
One thing about blokes from Australia is that their hearts and humour are always in the right place.
Mr. T. B. Bechtel, a City Councillor from a Sydney suburb, was asked on a local live radio talk show, just what he thought about the allegations of torture of suspected terrorists. His reply prompted his ejection from the studio, but to thunderous applause from the audience.
HIS STATEMENT:
'If hooking up one rag head terrorist prisoner's testicles to a car battery to get the truth out of the lying little camel shagger will save just one Australian life, then I have only three things to say, "Red is positive, Black is negative, and make sure his nuts are wet."
While in truth I think this is a bit too much it makes a change from the endless aLBbcera stories about "UK residents" aka "asylum seekers" sueing the government because they were roughed up in Gitmo and elsewhere.
"Xavier | February 28, 2010 4:48 PM | Reply
What is frightening about the British is that you can see that America is heading in the same direction."
and very fast indeed.
The term "Islamism" is perfectly reasonable to use. As long as one understands that Islamism has its roots in Islam. Bat Ye'or uses the term, and we don't think she is a sell out do we?
“Islamism” does not have to refer to a political doctrine that is in principally separate from Islamic teachings. Of course it is based on Qur’anic teachings, but that does not make the Qur’an the inevitable and sole explanation for the contemporary state of the jihad. Historical contingencies and reinforcements, and not a fatalism bestowed upon the scriptures, play a key role.
The problem with JW is its relentless emphasis on text and doctrine to the exclusion of absolutely everything else. This is not to say that doctrine is not important. It is. Jihad is undeniably a core, canonical doctrine in Islamic orthodox teachings. This is what Robert is good at explaining.
But to claim that the texts are what motivate and inspire jihadists - and not anything actually going on in the world - is to hypostatise The Word and imply that every jihadist has directly read the Umdat al-Salik, Bukhari, Muslim, Ibn Ishaq and the Qur'an. Many certainly have not.
There is undoubtedly a jihadist culture, with leadership literate in the scriptures, but many are inspired by the message relayed indirectly by others who have read the texts. Many are attracted to the jihadist cause for different initial reasons, and emphasis on the texts does not acknowledge this, though once they have assented to the cause there is a lock in process from which the texts subsequently take on a modeling role, shaping the outlook and guiding the actions of jihadists. This intitial attraction is not explained by reference to the texts. The existence of the texts does not explain their attraction.
A question for those that cede the texts so much explanatory power - how is it that in some places and in some times the texts seem to exert more influence than others? If you grant this, then what does that say about the importance of the receptivity of the message of the texts?