Sara Khan’s credentials have taken a battering with her latest attempts at “tackling extremism”. Her links with Quilliam illuminaries and her endorsement of all things reformationist, have completely ruined her credibility amongst the mainstream Islamic community. Much can be written about Sara Khan and her organisation, Inspire. And I mean a lot. Her reformationist outlook which spills into marginalising (and here) the mainstream within the Muslim minority who uphold an alternate view to her, the endless “news” on ISIS and “extremism” in the news section, but complete silence on the issue of Gaza (and the comparative inactivity and inaction against the Zionist state of Israel – a possible factor in “radicalisation”), support from devolved reformationists like Usama Hasan and of course, how can we forget the Trojan Hoax plot – her diatribe recycles the lies and twists and even positively cites discredited anti-Muslim Andrew Gilligan. And that’s just a superficial anlaysis of her “work”.
Her latest charade involves her “Making a Stand” against ISIS, with the full support of David Cameron and Theresa May, both “extremists” using the PREVENT defintion and both of whom want to scrap the Human Rights Act to the rebuke of more reputable human rights organisations. No campaigns against them Sara?
“Campaigns” like Sara’s do nothing except appease a government which is completely at odds with the liberal principles it claims to uphold and enforce a narrative which results in a criminalisation of dissent. The discriminatory PREVENT Strategy is evidence of this. Are the people engaged in war, fighting and bloodshed really going to care for their rejection led by a woman who is seen as their enemy and an individual supporting the cold war on Muslim through the propping of the UK government and its policies?
Speaking to her former friends at YM, it seems she has really lost the plot, from a reasonably Islamically grounded Muslim to, well, a frankly confused stooge who has completely lost her way.
And I am not only talking about religion here.
One of the things which become evident from such confused individuals, is that their rhetoric and actions frequently fall at odds with each other.
Sara Khan is a feminist. She believes in some strange concoction of her version of “Islam” and feminism. From her own website, she “empowers women”, taking them out of the male paradigm of the world. Inspire also creates an awareness of human rights.
Yet we arrive at a paradoxical situation in which she is being exploited by (mainly) men in Government (she’s sick of “male-led Muslim organisations”, but has no problem being exploited by a male-led government), to push a policy involving further abuse of women as tools. It is a situation which is against everything she purportedly stands for: human rights and feminism.
Inspire – Anti-Human Rights, Anti-Feminism?
PREVENT, drafted with the help of neoconservative think-tanks, is an affront to human rights; it stands for everything Nazi Germany and then later East Germany’s Stasi state stood for – surveillance of the public by the public using arbitrary definitions with a special police branch intimidating the Muslim minority. PREVENT is about shaping the mind and controlling the views. Government compliant views. By force.
In supporting and implementing PREVENT, she is not fighting extremism, because outside her little ISB/Quilliam-linked clique and a few cheerleaders no one from the Muslim community will take her seriously. She is supporting the perpetuation of human rights violation and the reinforcement of the erroneous, politically expedient narrative that Islamic ideology and not domestic and foreign policy factors, is predominantly to blame. Undermining her “feminist” tendencies her organisation refers to women as “the single most powerful weapon against extremist behaviour”. Not exactly woman-liberating phraseology and it certainly resonates with the attitude of “control and domination” which she seeks to challenge.
In using her organisation, she is actively supporting the use and abuse of women by the government to push government policy: war in Iraq and the enshrinement of PREVENT into legislation. What type of human rights supporting feminist is this?
In an article written in 2012, she states that the pornography culture, as well as the Western objectification of women is contributing to female abuse:
“…white women are dehumanised by being perceived as sexual objects… Over the past three decades there has been a dramatic increase in the use of sexualised imagery of women and children in advertising. Pornography is normalised and unlike previous generations, it has become easily accessible by our children.”
One would think that cogs which support such factors to abuse should be repulsed, challenged and rebuked, especially if that cog is read and seen by the general masses of the public influencing their mind to reinforce these distorted perspectives. May be join the No More Page 3 campaign and support it? Surely one wouldn’t launch a campaign in a paper which objectifies women and is easily accessible by children?
Forget feminism. She has chosen to launch her human rights violation-supporting, women-abusing, “making a stand” campaign from the pages of the one Murdoch paper which continues to parade topless women to the perverted, objectifying eyes of men: the Sun.
Oh the irony.
It gets worse. This is a paper which has used Sara Khan to “springboard” it’s “united against ISIS” campaign, yet holds no restraint in attacking Muslims, and leveraging foreign and domestic policies for governments which have done nothing but reinforce the Muslim minority discrimination thereby exasperating chances of “radicalisation”. It has also attacked the Human Rights Act, calling it hated and complimenting the attack on human rights with an image of “immigrants”.
A failed feminist, pushing a failed strategy via a failed campaign in a failed paper.
Should we be surprised that the Sun has launched such a failed campaign? Of course not. It’s owned by Murdoch, who openly admits to trying to shape the 2003 Iraq war, courted David Cameron in attending his private parties. David Cameron in turn visited News Corp execs 26 times in 2011. Murdoch and Cameron are tight. If anything, the Sun is simply an alcohol-slurred, perverted, foul-mouthed mouthpiece for the neocon government.
Thinking people will not focus on the campaign; the dominant question will be, what is the agenda behind the convoluted message, delivered by a confused individual, backed by a neocon government and launched in a disreputable paper known for manufacturing xenophobic public opinions?
The next time Sara Khan tries to convince you that she isn’t pushing a neocon plot (the link has been removed from her site where she stated this since I last wrote this point), let us remember how low she fell to push a campaign rooted in the PREVENT strategy, supported by neocons David Cameron and Theresa May who are pushing to extend their draconian domestic policies and war. A war which will have contributed to the escalation of violence in Iraq, the death of innocent people as “collateral”, and threatened the security of Britain.