It is that time of the year: a hectic month as the British people recover from their frenzied Christmas shopping, briefly punctuated with the peace of the annual family get together, only to be followed by scrambling over various items thanks to the hype produced by corporations eager to increase the debt through boxing day “sales”. As the recovery from these activities begins and the damage to the bank accounts dawn, we take advantage of this lull for some customary reflection.
This year has been a particularly unsettling one; the sordidly racist campaign which ultimately culminated in Brexit; the far-right terrorist attack claiming the life of Jo Cox – the first killing of an MP in 26 years; the B-movie being played in the US starring Donald Trump, the West-wide rise of the far-right and unleashing of political and social xenophobia, security globalisation via totalitarian measures like the Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) agenda; Britain passing one of the world’s widest and intrusive surveillance laws; the list goes on. Sadly, it is the Muslim minority, either through scapegoating or being subjected to the fruits of this dangerous concoction of nationalism, disenfranchisement through the global neoliberal order, and neoconservative domestic and foreign policies, which has by and large, bore the brunt.
Muslims have been understandably expressing consternation at Theresa May becoming prime minister. Whilst the sacking of Michael Gove has brought delight, her appointment of Amber Rudd as Home Secretary is being seen as deeply worrying given Rudd’s policy council membership of the notorious hate-funded Henry Jackson Society. No doubt we will be seeing a continuation of closed society, illiberal security policies in the name of liberalism and freedom, as Muslims remain the punch bag for anti-Muslim rhetoric. May is no friend of Muslims, with animosity towards Islam articulated through counter-extremism rhetoric.
As the Conservative prospective candidates demonstrated their reality by stabbing each other in the back, dropping low-blows about not having children, and employing Machiavellian tactics against each other for once, as the leadership came to a head, it was interesting to note the prominent voices which fell into line behind May.
One of the recurring themes of “counter-extremism” groups – be it the latent Radical Middle Way (RMW) and ISB, or the more overt Quilliam Foundation, and the puppeteered Humza Arshad – is that it always tracks back to an agenda to undermine Islam, “reform” it, crush dissent and deflect Western foreign policy critique. This is one of the reasons why, I believe, that our “transparent” public bodies are more resilient in disclosing the organisations they are funding from the counter-extremism pot. A link to PREVENT is all that is needed to expose the soul-destroying efforts of whichever organisation is acting as a conduit for neoconservative, anti-Islam agendas.
With the counter-extremism industry growing over the years, a cross-pollination of those neoconservative-based ideas has occurred, primarily between US, UK and Europe. The ideal for the neocons is to mount an ethnocentric, culturalist attack on Islam. History shows us two ways of doing this, as exemplified by Britain’s evolution of the PREVENT Strategy. The current strategy is one of secularisation of Islam through the “British values” social engineering programme. The previous strategy, also designed by the “sophist” (or rather supremacist) minds of neocons is one where apolitical, pacifist readings, usually through the abuse of Sufi Ulama, is posited as the “ideal” Islam. This is a temporary measure only, of course, until the next phase of the neocon agenda of aggressively promoting “progressive Muslims” and “ex-Muslims” is entered, as per the current strategy.
This strategy of promoting “moderate Islam” seems to be returning into vogue, as can be seen by Shaykh Abdullah bin Bayyah and Imam Hamza Yusuf-endorsed ImamsOnline initiative. Another recurrent theme is the Zionist interest and involvement in influencing the counter-extremism discourse, with the likes of Mossad internationally monitoring “moderate”, pacifist Muslim movements, and domestically, organisations like the Board of deputies of Jews contributing to the counter-extremism policy.
Jumping on the deradicalisation VW Camper Van is “Abdullah-X”, a character of a graphic novel aimed at providing the “counter-narrative”. The character in the initial episodes experiences some sort of divine unveiling, all on the topic of “extremism”. He then possesses a “mind of a scholar” and the “heart of a warrior” who proceeds to provide the counter-narrative to the “extremist” discourse. Not exactly Frank Miller’s Dark Knight then.
It is fast approaching that time of year when people engage in the process of democracy to elect their leader of a party which represents the wishes of the electorate. Of course that is the ideal understanding of democracy, however the reality of this non-existent utopia is dominated by corporations and lobby groups.
The neoconservative perversion has pervaded the upper echelons of most parties, as demonstrated most emphatically through the rapid passing of the Counter Terrorism and Security Act. Hook line and sinker, most sections of all big three parties, including the shapeless Lib Dems voted in its favour without batting an eyelid at the incredibly invasive, thought-policing measures being proposed.
After perniciously battering the Muslim minority with a host of further “extremism” measures, where “extremism” continues to entail normative Islamic beliefs, where the Muslim community continue to be treated like a fifth column and where Shari’ah courts are investigated, Theresa May gifted Muslims the penny Mojo chew, just to “sweeten” the taste of blood in the mouth. Five years of harsh rhetoric targeting the Muslim minority, government interference with religion and thought, harassment and “disruption” is meant to be excused because the anti-Muslim hate crime, born in part because of this public treatment against Muslims, will be categorised as a more serious crime.
No. Way. I was touched. No really, I am speaking the truth (in a neoconservative sort of way).
In my previous blog, I elucidated upon the overt strategy of deforming Islam. In short, individuals, Muslims and non, demand a change in Islam, either by removing parts of the Qur’an, or by post-modernist deconstructionism vis-à-vis free-for-all interpretations of the texts. In this piece I intend to cover another method of pushing deformation and control: through the subterfuge of fronting traditional scholars for the counter-extremism agenda.
The desire for a deformation in Islam, if it wasn’t clear from my previous blog, is to control/shape Muslims and/or their thinking. At the geopolitical level, Muslim movements deemed “moderate” are being closely monitored by Western governments and their agencies. A digital leak published by Al-Jazeera shows the Zionist intelligence agency, Mossad, tracking government-sponsored movements promoting “moderate Islam”. It notes that Arab and North African states are abusing Islamic scholars to push a “moderate Islam” in order to effectively ensure government compliance. The Egyptian government, for instance, has “harnessed” Al-Azhar institute and the Waqf bureau by sending their scholars on “indoctrination missions” to Sinai at the behest of the regime. As another example, the top secret document records that a new association of scholars has been set up and tasked to disseminate “moderate Islam based on the Maliki School in the accepted Sahel states and considered moderate compared to other schools of Sunni Islam.” It carries out “propaganda” work to prevent radicalisation and violence. In essence, Islam and traditional scholars are being abused to instantiate state control, all to the glee of Mossad.
The question is what is this “moderate Islam” which excites Mossad?