Russia: Imam found guilty of “extremism”

TablighiJamaatThe Tablighi Jamaat is an organization dedicated to proselytizing for Islam. It doesn’t work actively for the establishment of an Islamic state, but is a pro-Sharia group that exhorts Muslims to adhere to Sharia in its fullness — so that Sharia is ultimately observed by so many that an Islamic state becomes a reality as an expression of the popular will.

Also, it is tied to jihad terror groups:

Tablighi Jamaat has long been directly involved in the sponsorship of terrorist groups. Pakistani and Indian observers believe, for instance, that Tablighi Jamaat was instrumental in founding Harakat ul-Mujahideen. Founded at Raiwind in 1980, almost all of the Harakat ul-Mujahideen’s original members were Tablighis. Famous for the December 1998 hijacking of an Air India passenger jet and the May 8, 2002 murder of a busload of French engineers in Karachi, Harakat members make no secret of their ties. “The two organizations together make up a truly international network of genuine jihadi Muslims,” one senior Harakat ul-Mujahideen official said.

Tablighi Jamaar is banned in Russia (which is why this imam was arrested), as well as in the former Soviet republics of Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan, but it has thousands of adherents in the U.S. Americans, after all, are not “Islamophobic” enough to think that Sharia poses any conceivable threat or problem.

“Former Siberian imam found guilty of extremism,” from RAPSI News, March 6:

GORNO-ALTAISK, March 6 (RAPSI) – A magistrate court in the Altai Republic in southwest Siberia has found Serzhan Svatov, former imam of the Kosh-Agach Region, guilty of creating a cell of the Tablighi Jamaat extremist movement, a law enforcement source told RIA Novosti.

Svatov, who was dismissed from his position as imam in early 2014, was charged with promoting Tablighi canons and ideology over a period of years.

Tablighi Jamaat (Proselytizing Group) has been banned in Russia as an extremist organization. Svatov was charged under an article on operating a public or religious organization that has been banned by the court on grounds of extremism.

“Serzhan Svatov was found guilty, fined 100,000 rubles ($2,770) and prohibited from holding a religious position for two years,” the source said.

The Prosecutor General’s Office reported in July 2013 that extremism cases were on the rise. First Deputy Aleksandr Buksman of the Prosecutor General’s Office said that the number of registered crimes connected with extremism increased by 11% in 2012, and by 20% in the first six months of 2013.

Russia says jihad terror leader Doku Umarov is dead
Robert Spencer on KNUS Denver's Peter Boyles Show, on Muslim attacks in China and Putin's response in Ukraine
FacebookTwitterLinkedInDiggBlogger PostDeliciousEmailPinterestRedditStumbleUponPrint


  1. Don Davenport says

    He is guilty of being a devout Muslim who follows the teachings and texts of his religion’s founder and so-called “holy book-.

  2. Alex says

    In spite of western countries’ constant efforts to convince ignorant people that Putin is a horrible racist homophobic monster, Russia is a liberal country which is not afraid to fight islam. Its laws are perfectly compatible with its christian roots and homosexuality is not a crime! Homosexual propaganda is! Thank God for people like Putin, who is doing his very best to save as many Christians as possible from US-funded terrorist groups in the Middle East.

    • shrugger says

      I’m deeply ashamed that ‘US-funded’ and ‘Terrorist groups’ can be used in the same sentence.

      • panther says

        “US-funded terrorist groups”.
        Nothing new. Remember how CIA created ‘al-Qaida’ & ‘Taliban’ in 1980’s to defeat communist USSR, which has come back to bite them in 21st century.
        Moslems could never be our friends, no matter how much you placate them, feed them make them wealthy their aim is to bide their time & destroy us.
        If one looks deeply into this current ‘moslem’ problem it would never have become so dire if USA had not funded different moslem groups in Afghanistan back in 1980’s. On their own these coward moslems would never have won any fight against communists Russians.
        USSR were within their right & might to crush these savages. If US had not interfered in USSR/Afghan matter chances are the world would have been a better place to live in 21st century.
        Modern Islamic terrorism is a problem created, funded & fueled by western countries. Britain did that in middle east during 1920’s & later again in 40’s, USA repeated the same mistake in 1980’s & 90’s.

  3. Angemon says

    Hey guys, let’s play a game I like to call “Find the Qualifier”:

    the Tablighi Jamaat extremist movement

    Tablighi Jamaat (Proselytizing Group) has been banned in Russia as an extremist organization.

    banned by the court on grounds of extremism.

    The Prosecutor General’s Office reported in July 2013 that extremism cases were on the rise.

    the number of registered crimes connected with extremism increased by 11% in 2012, and by 20% in the first six months of 2013.

    Did everyone catch that? So, where’s the qualifier? If you said “extremism”, then you’re absolutely WRONG!!! A qualifier is a word (for example, an adjective) or word group that limits or modifies the meaning of another word or word group. Extremism is a quantifier, a word or number (such as “many,” “few,” “some,” “two,” or “2”) that is used with a noun to show the amount of something. It means “not moderate” or “as far from the center as possible”.

    Using the first definition we know that the imam was jailed for being “not moderate” but we don’t know what he was being not moderate about. Was he a right wing non-moderate? A left-wing non-moderate? An environmentalist non-moderate? A religious non-moderate? We’ll never know since the news article carefully dodges the issue.

  4. Anushirvan says

    I once read a few books by Gilles Kepel, who consistently designates Tablighi Jamaat as a rather innocuous “pietist” group, or even as a “quietist” variety of Salafism. That’s all neat and well if you keep looking at the surface, IMO.

    He never ever seems to consider what’s lurking behind this façade. Makes you wonder what the expertise of such authors is actually based on.

    • says

      This business of distinguishing Tablighi Jamaat as being “apolitical” or “quietist” is to commit the error of superimposing onto Islam our Western categories by which we have created the sense of a distinction between Religion and State. Islam has no such sense. The Islam which Tablighi Jamaat is promoting, advocating and inculcating is the same fusion of “Religion” and “State” which all other Muslims believe in, including the “terrorists” who are simply spearheading Islam’s rightful conquest of the world. The advancement of Islam has many styles, many tactics — but only one goal and rationale, shared by all Muslims. By distinguishing Tablighi Jamaat and “Salafists” we tend to confuse flavor with essence. I notice even Robert Spencer lapses into this facile and specious distinction as well: ” Tablighi Jamaat … doesn’t work actively for the establishment of an Islamic state, but …”

      • Anushirvan says

        I fully agree with your statement. A very astute summary of my own thoughts on this very subject. Couldn’t have put this into words much better than that.

        • says

          P.S.: Former Dean of the Harvard Divinity School, William A. Graham, a professor of Middle East studies whose field of expertise is Islam, gave a speech in 2003 revealing his appallingly inaccurate presumptions about his own subject and about his own West. Amongst the hill of beans and crap of that speech, Dean Graham deposited this gem of a turd:

          A final thought about the integrative aspect of Islamism is that not every Islamist group has been politically engaged, or wants Muslims to be politically engaged. Probably one of the largest Islamist movements in the world today is a group called the Tabligis. The Tabligi Jama’a began in the late 1930s under a man named Mohammad Ilyas, in what is now Pakistan (at that time, it was still British India). The Tabligis have a strictly nonengagement-in-politics approach to Islamic revival and to becoming a better Muslim. Their practice is effectively “each one, reach one.” They don’t seek to convert the world, to go out and convert infidels, if you like, or people who are not Muslims. Rather they strive to convert Muslims to faithful practice of Islam, to being real Muslims, real “submitters to God.” To be a Muslim, according to the Tabligis, you only have to: have faith in God; pray; act with modesty; learn the word of God and transmit it; follow the right way; and receive all faithful Muslims, in other words, be kindly. That is a pretty simple credo. The movement has publishing houses around the world and has spread out through societies all over the world. In numbers, they are probably the largest Islamist, that is Muslim reform, movement in the world today. We don’t hear about them because they are quietists; they are apolitical in their approach. “Reform the world, beginning with me” is their approach.

          For more details, see:


        • Anushirvan says

          William A. Graham’s rhetoric is indeed quite reminiscent of Kepelism, so to speak.

          I couldn’t possibly comment on the exact turn of phrases Gilles Kepel used (seeing as I read these books in a translation of the original [so neither in French nor English]), so I can’t possibly quote from these works directly in return, however, both the content and the limp-wristed formality of the discourse are eerily similar.

          In fact, I was getting the impression that Gilles Kepel tried his hardest to distinguish between different Jihadi organizations (in France and the rest of the world) as if he could differentiate between multiple shades of Salafism or Islam, even, for the sake of soothing the public opinion’s wariness of Islam . As if the nitpicky differences between such groups would spell some reprieve with regards to the safety of Western civilizations in the long run.

          At the time, It appeared to me that Kepel desperately wanted to conclude that we can reason with “standard” Salafist, “ultra”-Salafist, “hyper”-Salafist and “ultra-hyper” Salafist groups separately to finally mediate the intransigence of all of these groups by sitting around the conference table with each of them. That’s the sort of attitude we’re getting from these pseudo-intellectuals: let’s talk about it at length and all will be fine.

          He also seemed convinced that the plurality of multifold “Islamisms” is reflective of some kind of intellectual dynamism within Islam itself, no less !!

          That’s basically the main stance Gilles Kepel is too quick to assume. As if all of this would make any difference to Western societies !!Which is mind boggling from such an “expert”. I simply don’t buy any of it.

        • says

          Kepel seems from your description to be rather trite, trafficking in conventional truisms about Islam — one of them being the shibboleth that if we can notice superficial morphological “diversity” (proving that Islam is “not a Monolith”), this ipso facto demonstrates that Islam itself is not the source of the dangers which even our conventional PC MC recognizes as such — under the safe label of “extremism” or “terrorism”, from which Islam proper has been safely sanitized, inoculated, and distinguished without the slightest trace of any Salafi “cooties”.

          I explored this on my blog in a couple of essays in a roundabout way — not by analyzing Kepel himself, but by analyzing some of the assiduous labors of the website Jihadica in their dizzyingly complex taxonomy of worrisome Muslims; from reading your description of Kepel, it sounds like it would be his dream job to be an analyst “expert” over there.

          What’s ironic is that Kepel and Jihadica analysts don’t seem to realize that their efforts at palpating the “diversity” of Islamic “extremism”, and the jungle of complexity they uncover in doing so, only has the opposite effect than they seem to intend: They are like a twist on that old Indian parable: One analyst studying the trunk of an elephant, the other studying the tail, neither realizing it’s an elephant — indeed, The Elephant in the Room.

  5. veggiedog says

    Thank goodness for the Russians who act on their beliefs that Islam is not to be tolerated. Putin may not be the best leader in the world, but he is strong and follows through on his beliefs to protect Mother Russia.

  6. dumbledoresarmy says

    Tablighi Jamaat are *dangerous*.

    Their job is to identify and round up the lax Muslims – Muslims who might even be drifting toward apostasy – and plug them right back in to that Old Time Religion.

    It’s the Muslim version of revivalism.

    Now, when Jews do revival, you get Chabad, and previously nonobservant Jews start observing Shabbat, keeping kashrut and studying torah. When Christians do it, you get large noisy happy clappy pentecostal churches or (among Catholics and Orthodox) a new charitable or contemplative Order is founded.

    But when Muslims do it, sooner or later there are large mass-murderous explosions, and/ or back-stabbings and throat-slittings accompanied by screams of allahu akhbar.

    Every western country should ban Tablighi Jamaat.

    Here is a posting, by an apostate, from long ago here at jihadwatch, with some information on Tablighi Jamaat.

    Here’s the thread:

    And here’s the posting:

    “As an ex-Muslim, I have had a lot of unpleasant encounters with these Tablighi Jamaat characters.
    “They always go around all areas in large all-male groups, especially on Thursdays, canvassing all homes looking to especially target nominal Muslim males.
    “They generally look for those without beards as potential recruits
    “If a woman answers the door, they rudely turn their backs on her and ask to speak to all the males in the house.
    “The males who come to the door are told that their movement is having a very informative talk on Islam at their local mosque and “request” their presence.
    “At the mosque, the indoctrination and brainwashing of the average nominal Muslim begins.
    “They are told that their present tolerant practice of Islam is nothing but ignorance. They are then “radicalised” i.e. taught “true” Islam.”

    Posted by: Shafee al-Zindig at September 8, 2009 5:29 AM

    Another poster then asked,
Interesting story. So what happens when these “requests” are not honored? 
Posted by: boneshack at September 8, 2009 11:54 AM

    To which ‘shafee’ replied:

    **”It’s like in the movie “The Godfather”. It’s an offer you dare not pass up.** {my emphasis – dda}

    “Many of my nominal Muslim family members and acquaintances make diplomatic excuses or feign illness or say they will meet them at the mosque later on.

    “Thereafter on all future Thursdays they first check before answering the door and if it’s them again they hide and pretend nobody is at home.

    “This problem of their intimidatory tactics is especially rife in the Muslim enclaves (Dar al-Islam ) that have been carved out in Western countries.”

    Posted by: Shafee al-Zindig at September 9, 2009 12:18 AM

  7. dumbledoresarmy says

    In another jihadwatch thread some years ago, someone from India talked about how Tablighi Jamaat operates there.

    Hedgehogg | September 3, 2012 8:50 PM | Reply

    “Kafirs need to know a lot more about the Tablighis.

    “They work only in Muslim areas on Muslim people, hence under the kufr’s radar.

    “Even the Hindus tend to leave them alone; after all they aren’t trying to convert Hindus but only working in their own community.

    “I’ve seen some of the Tablighis in and around Delhi.

    “Their slogan, in the Indian Subcontinent at least, is “E Mussalmano, Mussalman bano,” translating as, “O Muslims, become (true) Muslims”.

    “They work on the youth especially and motivate them to adopt “Muslim” dress and grow a beard.

    “That is just the beginning. The next stage is the indoctrination.

    “There used to parts of India where you couldn’t tell a Muslim from a Hindu unless he told you his name. But that was about 25 years ago.

    “The new generation has disturbingly large numbers going around in little round caps, a beard, a loose robe-like tunic and baggy pajamas reaching well above the ankles.

    “All the terror outfits find willing recruits amongst these men.”

    Ban Tablighi Jamaat!

  8. says

    More on the Tablighi Jamaat, an article in The Middle East Quarterly by Alex Alexiev is useful. On their supposedly “apolitical” and “quietist” demeanor, Alexiev notes how key members of Pakistan’s government, military and intelligence service were Tablighi Jamaat and they were quite active in pivotal political events:

    For example, in 1998, Muhammad Rafique Tarar [a Tablighi] took the ceremonial presidency while, in 1990, Javed Nasir [a Tablighi] assumed the powerful director-generalship of the Inter-Services Intelligence, Pakistan’s chief intelligence agency. When Benazir Bhutto, less sympathetic to Islamist causes, returned to the premiership in 1993, Tablighis conspired to overthrow her government. In 1995, the Pakistani army thwarted a coup attempt by several dozen high-ranking military officers and civilians, all of whom were members of the Tablighi Jamaat and some of whom also held membership in Harakat ul-Mujahideen, a U.S. State Department-defined terrorist organization.[5] Some of the confusion over Tablighi Jamaat’s apolitical characterization derives from the fact that the movement does not consider individual states to be legitimate. [of course not — they, like all Muslims, consider the only legitimate unit of political existence to be the Umma]. They may not become actively involved in internal politics or disputes over local issues, but, from a philosophical and transnational perspective, the Tablighi Jamaat’s millenarian philosophy is very political indeed. According to the French Tablighi expert Marc Gaborieau, its ultimate objective is nothing short of a “planned conquest of the world” in the spirit of jihad.

  9. dumbledoresarmy says

    A Tablighi Jamaat gang boss and recruiter for Jihad doesn’t *belong* in Siberia, which is traditionally animist, Buddhist, and Christian. Nor anywhere else in Russia.

    Russia would do best to strip him of Russian citizenship and give him the boot. He belongs in the lands already ruined by Islam. I suggest they pack him off to Afghanistan.

    • Mazo says

      The South Asian origin Tablighi Jamaat may not have anything to do with Siberia, but Islam very much does, along with Buddhism and animism.

      The Sibr Khanate, after which Siberia was named, was very much Muslim and Animist.

      And by the way, the animist Siberians and the animist Native Americans were conquered and colonized by foreign Christian powers, mind telling me how Christianity is traditional in Siberia while Islam is not?

      • dumbledoresarmy says

        No mention of Islam in the description I can find of the Siberian Federal District.

        Buryats mostly practise lamaistic Buddhism and Shamanism; Christianity today is coming via peaceable mother-tongue evangelism and bible translation; people are free to make up their own minds to accept or reject and – unlike Islam – if people decide to *leave* Christianity after accepting it, no assassins will come after them to kill them.

        The Khakass are described as “Turkic animist-shamanist”. No mention of Islam *whatsoever*.

        The Tuvans are Buddhists. They were persecuted by the Communists.

        The peoples of the Altai republic are shamanists and Buddhists. Some of them, as they encounter the Christian scriptures that have been recently translated into their own languages, are becoming Christians of their own free will. They can become Christian without losing their culture, their history or their language.

        Guess what: none of these people are described as having or ever having had any particularly significant Muslim presence.

        As for the Far Eastern Federal District: I observe that the Sakha are described as Orthodox and animist.

        Chukotka is populated by the Chukchi who are related to the Inuit: mostly animist, and some Christian…*recently* converting, by peaceable Christian witness, not by force.

        Y’know what? – in both these major regions, which are what *I* think of when I say the word “Siberia”, I see no real evidence of any significant Muslim presence at all, certainly not historically.

        No doubt the petrodollar funded dawa artists are busy; no doubt Muslims, in their campaign to make all the rest of the planet as wretched as themselves, are “migrating” to these areas, practising the hijra of Islamisation, as described by ex-Muslim Sam Solomon. But the source I use, which is Christian and misson-minded, and always takes great care to be accurate and realistic and to get its history right, would certainly have mentioned Muslims if they were there in any numbers, or if they had been present to any significant degree in the past; and it doesn’t.

        Most of the peoples seem to have been originally tribal and animist/ shamanist; some then became Buddhist (I’d say Buddhism got there *centuries* ago), and others have become Christian through contact first with Orthodoxy and now with other Christian groups…which groups are NOT invading or ‘colonising’ nor are they forcing people to believe; they present the faith in the language of the people and the people may take it or leave it; and if a convert rethinks and chooses to leave Christianity, there will be no assassins coming after him or her. Unlike Infernal Islam, which attacks and murders anyone who tries to leave.

        • Mazo says

          Mind telling me how this so called peaceful contact with Orthodoxy occured? Something to do with Russia invading Siberia and destroying tons of Siberian pagan mounds and shipping Russian colonists to the far east over by the millions?

          Don’t tell me that these pagans and animists in Siberia were part of the “Tatar-Mongol” Golden Horde so they deserved to get curb stomped for raids they had nothing to do with.

  10. Angemon says

    Ah, a textbook example of “Poisoning the Well”. Poisoning the well is a rhetorical technique and logical fallacy that uses the association of negative emotions to distract a subject from actual evidence in an argument.

    Also, i’ve asked it before and i’ll ask it again: is it just me or does dawggie here have a hard-on for Robert?

  11. duh_swami says

    Dear Mr Dawg…Man, you shore is smart, in a twisted sort of way. Have you written any books, or had articles published anywhere? Do you get invited to speak at gatherings? If not you are missing your calling. There is no reason you can’t be as smart as Spencer and every bit as popular. All you need to do is get a little better informed, and, if you apply yourself, you can write your own ticket. You may be inferior to Spencer today, but it doesn’t have to stay that way…Good luclk…

  12. shrugger says

    We’ll have to see what he does next. But so far, Putin has NOT broken any laws or treaties concerning the Ukraine. Russia is perfectly with it’s right to do what it has so far done.
    And his treatment of Gay’s may seem a little harsh to your childlike temperament. But again, It is Russia. He’s within his right to do so.
    Funny how the exact same thing with the media is going on in the west. But you don’t have a problem with it when it’s The New York Times or MSNBC. NOW DO YOU!

  13. VampireJack says

    1 – Russia aren’t invading Ukraine. They are in the autonomous region of Crimea.

    2 – They don’t have anti gay laws on the books. They are merely concerned that children as young as 4 years old are being taught about homosexuality and feel that homosexual propaganda shouldn’t be aimed at CHILDREN.
    There are no plans to make homosexuality illegal – nor any plans for executions of gays. That would be the sharia…..

  14. David says

    It’s irrelevant what other politics Russia is involved in. This guy needed to go jail.

    Well done Russia

  15. Angemon says

    Well, since you’re too dumb to figure out obvious things and paranoid enough to assume other people are muslims trying to deceive mankind, i guess i have to explain it to you like you’re a 3-year-old “special” child. I’m criticizing the cowardliness obfuscation in the media who use generic, useless terms such as “extremist” instead of calling what it is – in this case, the support of islamic terrorists. RAPSI’s article makes no mention of islam, muslims, jihad or even terrorists or terror groups, just “extremist” groups/movements. Even you should be able to understand why it’s a really bad idea to use an umbrella term to describe organizations with radically different origins and ideas rather than calling them what they are, be it right wing, left wing, religious, environmentalist, etc.

    Here’s a bonus question for you: I explained why “extremist” is a quantifier, not a qualifier, so why are you telling “extremist groups” is my qualifier?

  16. Renko says

    He has broken the law.
    1994 treaty on Ukraine defence.
    And invasion of a foreign country.
    But well done for locking up another two-faced peaceful-warlike Imam.

  17. Bettina says

    Angemon — a sincere thanks for teaching me what “poisoning the well” means, in debate or argument. The deflection feels so familiar to me, having been raised in a Moroccan society where this syndrome is routinely applied to confuse and intimidate.

  18. Angemon says

    No problem. If you have the chance, read How to Win Every Argument: The Use and Abuse of Logic. It identifies and exemplifies the most common fallacies used in arguments. It’s a nice way if both improving your own thinking and identifying the weaknesses in other people arguments.

  19. Bettina says

    Gosh Angemon — you spoil me! Of course I’ll read How to Win Every Argument, and thanks so much!! As an aside, why don’t you teach us here how to practice some of these ways again MUZZIE accusations?