Shah Wali Allah: The Inner Dimension of Hajj and the “Distorters of Faith”


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.

Continue reading

Maajid Nawaz, Ex-Muslims and the “Minority within a Minority”

douglasmurrayMaajidnawazOne 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.

Continue reading

Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s Deformist Call and a Lesson from the Haskalah


The past couple of weeks have been quite eventful in the context of the “reformist” deformist attack on Islam. There is no longer a need for a smokescreen of social issues behind which to mount the attack. It seems to be the case that the events like the actions of ISIS have provided a sufficient pretext to renew the call to deform Islam. This, despite the fact that scholars from different theological backgrounds have continually expressed their revulsion at ISIS activities, not as a matter of political expedience but through Islamic textual deductions.

The Conveyor Belt to Disbelief

Neoconservatism has been at the forefront of pushing a reformation, or as I call it, a deformation in Islam, particularly after the onset of the Iraq War. Leading neocon and architect of the disastrous US foreign policy, Paul Wolfowitz stated on the eve of the Iraq war,

“We need an Islamic reformation and I think there is a real hope for one”.[1]

The fountains of traditional Islamic learning also came in for neocon smear. In a speech at Georgetown University on the 30th of October 2003, Wolfowitz described madaaris (Islamic schools) as “schools that teach hatred, schools that teach terrorism” while providing free “theologically extremist teaching to ‘millions’” of Muslim children.[2]

Continue reading

British Deception, Zionism, Neocons and the Reformation of Islam


My writings have thus far centred predominantly on neoconservatives, who are not merely threatening, but decimating British values.  This is with good reason, because neoconservatives are also Zionists who protect Israel from criticism, render insignificance to the atrocities and crimes against humanity perpetrated against the Palestinians and architect phantom enemies to perpetuate the colonialist architecting of the Middle East. All the while, domestically promoting “moderate”, “modernist” and “progressive” Muslims who are pacifist in their protests against crimes perpetuated against Muslims globally.

The Deceit of the British and Zionists

It is worth noting the history around the topic of the deceptive and racist Zionism.  Prior the Balfour Declaration, David Wolffsohn, the right-hand man of the founding father of Zionism, Theodore Herzl and second President of the World Zionist Organisation, in an attempt to calm the alarm regarding the perceived aims of the Zionists in the Ottoman Empire, wrote in the Times,

“While fully admitting the evident desire of your Correspondent to present an objective and impartial account of Zionism in the Ottoman Empire, I regret that his limited knowledge of our movement and the sources from which he appears to have derived it made it impossible for him to realize his desire. The cardinal defect of his article consists in the assumption that Zionism is a scheme for the foundation of a Jewish State in Palestine. This assumption is wrong. His comments upon our movement and his account of the views upon it in Turkish circles are mainly dependent upon this assumption…

“The object of Zionism is clearly defined in its programme adopted at our first Congress at Basel in 1897, and hence known as the Basel Programme… The aim thus formulated is essentially different from the aspiration to found a State and those who attribute to us such an aspiration misrepresent us in a very serious degree, as they are likely, however, unwittingly, to cause difficulties being put in our way.” (D.Wolffsohn, President of the Zionist Organisation, Cologne, May 1st.” (The Times, Wednesday, May 10, 1911; pg. 8; Issue 39581; col B.)

Upon the establishment of the Balfour Declaration soon after the drawing up of the infamous Sykes-Picot agreement, the Arab world was shook in dismay for its claim:

“His Majesty’s Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.” (Balfour Declaration, 2nd November 1917.)

Continue reading

When Government Focus Shifted from British Automotive Engineering to Engineering British Islam

Engineering British Islam

Government is focussing on the wrong engineering industry

Alex Moulton (hyrdagas suspension system), Alec Issigonis (original Mini-designer), Gordon Murray (veteran F1 designer and the brains behind the legendary Mclaren F1) – these are the names of some of the best engineers in the world.  But successive governments over the past few decades have not supported this industry.  From the Rover debacle, to allowing some of the most emotive marques in British history, like the MG, TVR, Triumph, Land Rover, Lotus, and Mini, fall into foreign hands, the British car industry has been let down.

The British government has not completely divorced itself from engineering however.  With the assistance of the extremism “experts” industry, and the highly contentious, neocon-driven Iraq and Afghan invasions, the UK government was able to divert its focus to engineering a government-compliant, government-serving, “British Islam”.

Nick Clegg’s Strategy for “Extremism”

With the seemingly assimilationist comments coming from David Cameron premised on the fabricated, completely rejected Trojan Hoax plot and rooted in the anti-Muslim, neocon Michael Gove’s attack on Islam and Muslims, Nick Clegg has given off his view on the matter of “British values” and Muslims.

Michael Gove’s position has been one of focussing on Islam and conflating increased religiosity with extremism, as Whitehall officials themselves have stated.  He has said that all extremists should be confronted regardless of whether they support violence, and described the Home Office approach to “just beating back the crocodiles that come close to the boat rather than draining the swamp”.

Referring to Islam and Muslims as a “swamp” says a lot about Gove and his thoughts on the Muslim minority.  In contrast Clegg does come off, at first, a lot more nuanced and with less Gove-ian seething hate:

“Muslims in Britain are the best antidote to extremism and much more effective than any number of decisions from Whitehall. The deputy prime minister believes moderate Muslims in Britain are key to safe and happy communities, and should be praised not singled out in an attempt to gain headlines.”

I would like to commend and extend my thanks to Clegg for taking (the delayed) steps to counter to some degree, the narrative of the neocons being pushed down the throats of compromised government bodies, which surely he is aware of, and the Muslim minority of Britain.

The “Moderate Muslim”, Labour’s PREVENT and Radical Middle Way Continue reading

The Homosexuality Smokescreen, Personal Interpretations and the Reformation Agenda


BBC Three Free Speech aired on 25/03/2014

BBC Three Free Speech aired on 25/03/2014

Many contemporary and normative Muslim writers have brilliantly discussed the issue of homosexuality. A nuanced, intellectual answer is certainly in order and has been provided to the emotional topic. This discussion however differs from the above. It is to ascertain the “why” behind the discussion. To understand this, we need some context.

Christian/Jewish Reformation

During the 1500s the reformation movement began challenging the papacy. It was a response to nationalism, the Vatican’s rigidity with philosophical thought and the abuses of power by the Church. Calvin and others promulgated the separation of Church and State in an effort to protect the citizens from abuses of power. It was thus a response to societal and authoritarian degeneration and the lack flexibility to deal with advancements. It was a unique European paradigm. Christian religion began to be reduced to a private sphere and with this came the notion of a “personal” understanding of Christian texts in effort to reconcile it with changing attitudes and societal norms.

The Jewish faith underwent the same reformation with the Jewish Haskalah, a movement which sought revision within the faith which allowed easier assimilation, through the adoption of the culture in Europe and resultant survival from the onslaught of persecution by the Europeans.

The experience of the Jews and Christians, thus was unique to their conditions.

Islam as a faith did not suffer these problems because the jurisprudence emanating from the Islamic sources of Law did not allow for abuse of power and economic inequity. Nor did it hinder intellectual development. Conversely Islam provided the catalyst for the European Enlightenment which forced Christian scholars to rethink their sciences. St. Thomas Aquinas derived much of his thought from the Andalusian Muslim Maliki scholar Ibn Rushd’s understanding of precedent, logic and physics for instance.

Subjecting it to a European-style reformation thus, is illogical due to the distinct paradigms of “reformation” on the one hand (being Euro-centric) and Islam on the other (theologically flexible and universal to the whole of humanity).

Nevertheless, a Western desire to reform Islam into an indistinct set of rituals has been strong, especially to break the connection with the Qur’an, which provides the protection mechanism necessary for a distinct Islamic society unique in its practices. It also, at a geopolitical level, provides for the Muslims globally, the spiritual connection to al-Quds, which hinders Western Zionist and neoconservative aims.

RAND’s “Democratic Islam”

Which neatly brings us to the neoconservative think tank RAND’s report on reforming Islam. To understand the contemporary debate on homosexuality and the complimentary positing of modernists and progressive “Muslims” there is a need to study the father of the current UK Government’s PREVENT policy, the RAND Corporation policy document ethnocentrically entitled “Civil Democratic Islam”. In it, the methodology suggested to deconstruct Islam into something but Islam is mentioned in some depth by its author Cheryl Bernard. She states that her approach,

“seeks to strengthen and foster the development of civil, democratic Islam and of modernization and development.” (p.47)


Continue reading