Observer attacks Qaradawi … with the assistance of MEMRI

Qaradawi at conferenceUnder the headline “suicide bombs are a duty, says Islamic scholar”, Anthony Barnett claims that Yusuf al-Qaradawi “has said it is a duty of Muslims in Iraq to become suicide bombers”.

Observer, 28 August 2005

The report is taken from the Middle East Media Research Institute, which is of course notorious for producing selective translations designed to discredit supporters of the Palestinian cause. If you watch the video on MEMRI TV #822 you’ll see that it’s been carefully edited to bring out the points that serve MEMRI’s political agenda.

However, even judging by MEMRI’s selected extracts, it is clear that Qaradawi was responding to an earlier speaker who had, he noted, “stressed the legitimacy of defense, saying it is a legitimate right in Palestine and Iraq. I think that saying it is a legitimate right is not enough, because a right is something that can be relinquished. This is a duty. All scholars say that defending an occupied homeland is an individual duty applying to every Muslim”. So Qaradawi was clearly referring to the general duty to resist an occupying power, not to suicide bombings as such.

Qaradawi also reiterated his frequently stated view that these bombings are not in fact suicide, because the bomber “does not want to commit suicide, but rather to cause great damage to the enemy, and this is the only method he can use to cause such damage. Since this method did not exist in the past, we cannot find rulings about it in the ancient jurisprudence”. But that is rather different from arguing that everyone resisting Israeli and US occupation forces has a duty to become a suicide bomber.

Anthony Barnett’s confusion is due to the fact that MEMRI’s version of Qaradawi’s speech consists of three separate sections spliced together. There is an obvious splice after the section that ends “I am amazed by what Dr. Muhammad Rafat ‘Othman said” and before the next one, beginning “This has nothing to do with suicide”. There is no indication of this in MEMRI’s transcript of Qaradawi’s speech, which does not use ellipses, thus obscuring the editing that has taken place.

The (presumably intentional) result of this is to suggest that when Q was referring to resistance he was equating this with suicide bombing. Hence the Observer‘s headline stating that Q claimed suicide bombing was a duty.

However, MEMRI is at least prepared to admit that Qaradawi’s speech was delivered at a conference of religious scholars called to oppose terrorism – which is more than the Observer is prepared to do. (For a report of the conference, see Islam Online, 23 August 2005.)

Brett Lock is dead chuffed that the liberal press has uncritically reproduced MEMRI’s propaganda: “Well, this is progress! Finally The Guardian [sic – wrong paper, Brett] is reporting that Dr Qaradawi is indeed a supporter of suicide bombers.” (See Lock & Load blog, 28 August 2005.) But this is par for the course for Brett and his chums in Outrage!, who adopt material provided by right-wing Isamophobic bigots without a moment’s hesitation. And why not? They have so much in common.

Another attack on ‘anti-semitic’ MCB

Brett Lock of Outrage! joins the witch-hunt against the Muslim Council of Britain, repeating the sort of accusations of anti-semitism that we’ve already heard from the likes of Rod Liddle. According to Lock, arguing that some of those responsible for the campaign against the MCB are pursuing a pro-Israel agenda is the same as blaming it all on a plot by “the Jews”.

Lock & Load, 23 August 2005

A disappointingly thin selection of links on this new blog, I notice. I’m sure Brett’s readers would appreciate being directed to some of his co-thinkers, such as Jihad Watch or Melanie Phillips.

Muslim leaders accuse BBC of witch hunt

“The row between the Muslim Council of Britain and the BBC intensified last night as the corporation accused the MCB of putting pressure on interviewees on a controversial Panorama documentary to withdraw from the programme.”

Observer, 21 August 2005

For Iqbal Sacranie’s response to last week’s Observer attack on the MCB, see here.

The Observer also includes “a selection” of the responses they received to last week’s witch-hunt of the MCB. See here. Read it and ask yourself, does this selection reflect an earlier statement by Rafael Behr at the Observer blog that “the overwhelming balance of correspondence we have received has been towards defence of the MCB and anger at the tone and content of our story”? See here.

MP calls for ban on Inayat Bunglawala

A member of the Muslim Council of Britain has insisted he would sit on a government task force aimed at tackling Islamic extremism and denied suggestions he was anti-Semitic. But Liverpool Riverside MP Louise Ellman said the invitation should be withdrawn until Mr Bunglawala explained comments he made about Jewish influence in the British media.

She said: “I am calling on the Home Office to withdraw its invitation and I’m asking Mr Bunglawala to clarify his statements about Jewish people in the media. I heard him on the Radio 4 Today programme recently and he said that there are ‘highly-placed friends of Israel’ in the media.”

This is London, 21 August 2005

The BBC Panorama Special – some background

John WareThe BBC Panorama Special that provided the hook for the Observer‘s witch-hunt of the Muslim Council of Britain was originally scheduled to be broadcast on 14 August but has been postponed for a week. It will now be shown next Sunday at 10.15pm.

The BBC has announced that its intrepid reporter John Ware “spent the weeks since the London bombs traveling to Britain’s Muslim communities, to discover whether their leaders can tackle the growth of extremism in their midst”. (See here.)

It was in fact Ware’s hostile questioning of Iqbal Sacranie during the making of the programme that was the immediate cause of the MCB’s complaint to the BBC. The MCB have claimed that Ware devoted the interview almost exclusively to questions concerning the attitude of the MCB and its affiliates towards the Palestine-Israel conflict. (See here – pdf.)

This is not the first contentious Panorama programme that Ware has been centrally involved in. In July 2003 he was the writer and presenter of another Panorama Special, in this case dealing with alleged abuse of the asylum system. On the day of the broadcast, Ware published an article in the Daily Mail (23 July 2003) based on and publicising his programme. It was headlined: “For years the Mail has been attacked for its refusal to be silent on the asylum crisis. Tonight’s Panorama says we were utterly justified.”

Hailing the programme for supposedly having broken “a 35-year taboo on discussing the topic of immigration” that had followed Enoch Powell’s 1968 rivers of blood speech, Ware wrote: “If you, as a taxpayer, have been waiting in a queue for a house, a hospital appointment or a place for your child at a school, and someone from another country who has paid no taxes jumps ahead, you would have to be saintly not to feel resentful.” Particularly so, “if the queue-jumper had fooled the immigration authorities into believing he had been persecuted, when he hadn’t, and when his real purpose was to get here for a better life”.

The BBC was condemned by the then home secretary, David Blunkett, for “pursuing a Powellite anti-immigration agenda”. To quote the Guardian report, Blunkett “singled out for criticism the BBC1 Panorama special, the Asylum Game, and its writer and presenter, John Ware, for producing a ‘poorly researched and overspun documentary’ which repeated unchallenged the claims of ‘the rightwing anti-immigration pressure group, Migration Watch’.” (See here and here.)

However, both the programme and Ware’s article were applauded by Anthony Browne in the Spectator. (See here.)

It seems that Ware is much admired by Browne, who has achieved notoriety for his own provocative attacks on migrants in general and Muslims in particular – just recently, during the furore over his Times article accusing MAB and Yusuf al-Qaradawi of being “Islamic fascists”, Browne was exposed as having contributed to a racist US website. (See here and here.)

In the Times article Browne portrayed the Panorama reporter as a victim of political correctness, complaining that “John Ware, one of the BBC’s most-respected reporters, spent years trying to make a programme on Islamic fundamentalism in Britain, but was repeatedly blocked by senior editors who feared it was too sensitive”. (See here.)

It would now appear that Ware has got his way, and that he has made a documentary exposing Islamic “fundamentalism” in the form of an attack on Britain’s most mainstream Muslim organisation, the MCB.

Of course, we can’t say for sure till we’ve seen the programme. However, Ware did give us a foretaste of his approach when he persuaded Radio 4’s Today programme to broadcast an item on the MCB last month. This gave only a passing mention to the organisation’s role in combating extremism in Britain and instead concentrated on attacking the MCB over its attitude towards suicide bombings in Israel. (See here.)

So, when the MCB complains that “nearly all the questions that were put to Sir Iqbal Sacranie by the Panorama team were directly or indirectly about Israel. These included questions to do with the Holocaust Memorial Day, Shaykh Yusuf al-Qaradawi and Shaykh Ahmad Yasin”, judging by the Today broadcast we can only conclude that their accusation is entirely accurate.

Observer accusations ‘preposterous’ says Iqbal Sacranie

Top Muslim group denies extremist roots

Reuters, 14 August 2005

Britain’s leading Muslim lobby group, thrown into the spotlight by last month’s bombings in London, rejected an accusation on Sunday that its roots lay in extremist politics in Pakistan. Iqbal Sacranie, leader of the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB), said the allegation, made in the Observer newspaper, was “absolutely preposterous”.

“I can’t believe that anyone who knows anything about the MCB could take that statement seriously,” he told Reuters. In a lengthy report on the MCB, the Observer alleged the council’s leadership and some of its 400 diverse affiliates had “links with conservative Islamist movements in the Moslem world” and “the extremist politics of Pakistan”. It said the links were particularly strong with Jamaat-e-Islami, Pakistan’s leading mainstream Islamist party.

The MCB has come under close scrutiny since July 7, when four British Muslims – three of them ethnic Pakistanis – blew themselves up on London’s transport system, killing 52 people. The Observer singled out two MCB affiliate organisations – the Islamic Foundation and Jamiat Ahli-Hadith – for criticism, describing the latter as “an extremist sect”. The Islamic Foundation is an educational institution based in central England while Jamiat Ahli-Hadith is a religious group based in Birmingham.

Sacranie defended both groups, saying the MCB was proud to have them as affiliates. Neither of them was involved with extremist politics, he said. He said the MCB was a loose organisation and that the views of the council’s leadership did not always concur with those of its affiliates.

Continue reading

MEMRI stitches up Azzam Tamimi

Azzam Tamimi“In an August 29, 2005 article in the London Arabic-language daily Al-Quds Al-‘Arabi, titled ‘The London Bombing: Harm Is Brought Upon the Muslims Only by Their Own’, British Islamist Dr. ‘Azzam Al-Tamimi argues that Muslim critics are Islam’s worst enemies….

“Al-Tamimi is referring primarily to liberal Arab and Muslim writers who, following the London bombings, criticized the previous long-standing British policy of tolerance towards Islamist preachers of hatred and violence. He calls these liberal writers traitors….

“Al-Tamimi’s argument echoes a similar accusation by Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad, termed ‘the notorious fundamentalist’ by the London Arabic-language daily Al-Sharq Al-Awsat. Following the London bombings, Bakri, the head of the Islamist Al-Muhajiroon movement in Britain, fled to a Lebanon hideout from his London base of activity of many years.”

MEMRI, 7 September 2005

Front Page Magazine reports the MEMRI piece under the heading: “British Islamist calls moderate Muslims ‘traitors’.”

Continue reading

Foreign Office backs engagement with Qaradawi – Nick Cohen goes apoplectic

YusufalQaradawiNick Cohen retails another series of lies and distortions about Yusuf al-Qaradawi. Qaradawi “ruled that the an [sic] Arab princeling should be stoned to death” (in fact he didn’t), Aljazeera magazine “hadn’t withdrawn the report” (in reality they had) etc etc. And Cohen concludes this demonstration of ignorant bigotry with the smug announcement that his mission as a journalist is to “tell Truth to readers”! What a plonker.

Observer, 4 August 2005

And what has made Cohen so cross? Well, it’s the fact that the Observer has acquired a leaked Foreign Office briefing which recommends that Dr al-Qaradawi should not be banned from entering the UK. The document is a well-informed piece of work, by Mockbul Ali, which entirely bears out the positive assessment of Qaradawi’s role made on this website and elsewhere. See (pdf) here.

The FCO’s line on Qaradawi, as summarised by Cohen, is to “try to detach him and the millions who listen to him from al-Qaeda”. This amounts to wilful distortion. The FCO document in fact argues for engagement with Qaradawi precisely because he is one of the most authoritative and influential opponents of al-Qaeda. He hardly requires any “detaching”. Cohen’s colleague Martin Bright (author of the Observer‘s witch-hunt against the MCB) also tries to imply a link between Qaradawi and al-Qaeda, reporting that “the memo contains the warning that refusing Qaradawi entry could lead to further terrorist attacks”. See here.

Cohen holds up the FCO briefing as evidence that “the mandarins have been preparing for an accommodation with radical Islam”, and Martin Bright agrees that the leaked document “will further fuel concerns of increasing ‘Islamist’ influence in the Foreign Office”.

It is notable that nowhere does the Observer deal with the arguments in favour of Dr al-Qaradawi that are presented in some detail in the FCO document, and unless you consulted the link in the online edition you’d be none the wiser. So much for “telling Truth to readers”. For that you have to go to Islam Online, 4 September 2005

It’s also worth noting that Cohen’s article is warmly welcomed by the Zionist right. See Israpundit, 4 September 2005

Declare war on economic jihad, urges Mail’s Israel correspondent

Matthew Kalman, the Daily Mail‘s correspondent in Israel, asserts that the London bombings require a ban on fundraising for charities linked to Hamas and Hezbollah. Difficult to see the logic of that, given that neither Hamas nor Hezbollah had anything to do with the London bombings – indeed, both organisations have unequivocally condemned the attacks. Needless to say, the Mail also tries to implicate Yusuf al-Qaradawi.

Continue reading