The neocon propaganda machine is at full tilt as the government reveals its ultimate legislative weapon to excise active Muslim political activists from civil society under the dissent-suppressing counter-extremism discourse. Andrew Gilligan has already taken a swipe at Muslim organisations through his trademark blend of Muslim “extremists”, spin and lies. Even Peter Oborne could not help but notice that his article contained “a number of unsubstantiated claims” and “a number of factual errors”.
Elsewhere, David Cameron apparently likes Muslims. Well *some* Muslims would be more accurate. In what must be the most sterile PR stunt ever, he has lent his approval to a head-scarf wearing Muslim contestant of the TV show, the Great British Bake Off. One can understand why:
- Is her politics reflective of a Muslim who needs to prove her “Britishness”? Check.
- Does the Muslim belong to a gender group which needs to be saved from Islam? Check.
- Does the show have the word “British” as part of its title? Check.
- Are the general public supporting her? Check.
It sure is a safe bet. Previously, in Eid messages, Cameron has spoken of the “good Muslims” who fought for “our freedoms” off the back of the brutal colonialism of the Muslim world. Later, in his Birmingham speech, he would go onto proclaim that he was going to “actively encourage the reforming and moderate Muslim voices.” These voices incidentally belong to “progressive Muslims” who also happen to be primed by key neoconservative officials and who support their key policies, from the discourse on Muslims and global democracy-spreading to Trident. Such promotion and support is key to maintaining the neoconservative assumptions around the Muslim context. The fundamental impediment is garnering legitimacy from the mainstream Muslim community.
Since the government’s warning to the NUS to stand down its opposition to the government counter-extremism PREVENT Strategy, reports about PREVENT miscarriages of justice taking place in the education sphere have been increasing. Last year, I wrote a detailed piece about the strategy which would absurdly target toddlers through the counter-terrorism discourse. I elucidated the fact that it was to create a neo-Stasi state in which public service employees were co-opted to act as informers for the state. Britain’s neo-Stasi operation courtesy of the PREVENT strategy is now is being felt by the Muslim minority with full force.
The period of Hajj is one which means many different, important things to Muslims: devotion, a demonstration of longing for their Creator, and reliving the practice of their most venerated men and women from the greatest period of Islam, khayr al-quroon (the best of generations – being the three generations during and after the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him).
Another, deeper meaning is the restorative nature of the Hajj pilgrimage. It purifies ones Iman, removes the grime of bad deeds from one’s spiritual repository, and returns the state of a person to that of a new-born. Scholars have also explicated another restorative quality.
Legislative hunting season has started. Predictably the neocons are disseminating their versions of “truth” whilst the churnalistic media regurgitate what they have to say without much of challenge to the claims being made.
With the onset of the Counter-Extremism Bill, a press release was issued by the government on the 17th of September announcing, as part of the neoconservative “One-Nation” Toryism (a euphemism for war and the creation of a “closed society”), a new duty to stop extremists radicalising students on campuses. This duty came into force on the 21st of September 2015. It will ensure that “extremists” espousing “extremist views” would not go unchallenged and that staff are thoroughly brainwashed and bathed in the neoconservative counter-extremism discourse so that they may be able to protect students from “poisonous and pernicious ideas”. Offering some hot chocolate with an arm of comfort around the shoulders of the circa 280 academics, lawyers and public figures who slammed the counter-extremism strategy (PREVENT) and the assumptions which underpin them, Cameron stated that,
“It is not about oppressing free speech or stifling academic freedom, it is about making sure that radical views and ideas are not given the oxygen they need to flourish.”
This is the “guided” liberalism of Cameron as opposed to the university leaders’ “misguided liberalism” condemned in his Birmingham speech. By reconstituting human rights-violating measures into a “duty to protect”, the central objections to such measures are somehow magically meant to disappear. Even the establishment “independent reviewer” of terrorism laws David Anderson QC said,
“These issues matter because they concern the scope of UK discrimination, hate speech and public order laws, the limit that the state may place on some of our most basic freedoms, the proper limits of surveillance, and the acceptability of imposing suppressive measures without the protections of the criminal law…”
Putting it in slightly less diplomatic terms, Cameron and his neocon cabal are riding rough-shod over the principle of non-discrimination, free speech and freedom of belief on the basis of views that he and his nihilist neocons deem unacceptable.
A shocking letter from a Bradford school has surfaced on the social network asking parents to inform the school as to which lessons they are going to attend on the day of Eid.
Dixons Trinity Academy asserts that though “the school policy does allow students to take up to one day for each religious festival”, apparently, “most students come into school after Eid prayers in the morning ensuring they able to maintain their outstanding attendance”.
The upshot of the letter is that if Muslim pupils do decide to taken the day off, it may be counted as an authorised absence, thus depriving them of rewards for 100% attendance.
One of the most evident and prominent issues of self-proclaimed “reformist” deformists often guided by the malicious neoconservative discourse on Islam is that just a like a deformity, the arguments promulgated are often malformed, incongruent and inconsistent. With materialism and unfettered desires replacing a heart nurtured by spirituality, the claims of such individuals are as erratic as their egos. Be it “feminists” like Sara Khan using women as “weapons” in the fight against extremism, or “reforming liberal Muslims” who use post-modernist malarkey to give justification to their lifestyles devoid of Islam, oxymoron and desperation does not begin to describe these efforts to deconstruct Islam and the Muslim identity rooted in within the Islamic paradigm.
Maajid Nawaz is no different in avoiding these contradictions. Whether it is bemoandefing “hatchet-jobs” against him while feverishly tweeting blatant propaganda from the Daily Mail, happily receiving funding from “extremists” to counter-extremism, or attacking journalists and academics who have criticised him for their “privileged elite” backgrounds whilst simultaneously acting as a significant conduit in delivering a neoconservative, colonialist campaign of “reforming” Islam to the glee of hate preachers like Douglas Murray and Sam Harris, (and blatantly ignoring his own Western liberal privilege when lecturing Muslims about the need to reform Islam to conform to ethereal liberal ideals), there is a clear display of the hallmarks of one riddled with internal conflicts devoid of a stable moral-compass. Indeed, this moral compass, in his own words do not require “Hadith to set… morality”, the second foremost scriptural set of texts which form the basis of Islam.
The former governor of Park View Educational Trust has issued a public response to a draconian banning order issued by Nicky Morgan. The undeniably political nature of the ban needs to be made the subject of judicial scrutiny, as the basis of the ban remains obscure and spurious upon analysis. Regardless of whether a court would exonerate Alam (and evidence of a structurally discriminatory judiciary impacted by anti-Muslim xenophobia exists), the fact remains the Department for Education and the rest of the politicised arms of the State (see here and here) remain comparatively lethargic or even non-existent when it comes to dealing with “extremist” traits in the Orthodox Jewish community (see here, here, here and here), or indeed in tackling allegations of “Christianist plots” to takeover “secular” state schools (see here, here and here).