Forum Menu - Click/Swipe to open
 
Top Members

BBC News Article on Moulana Masood Azhar and UK Deobandis

Jump to page:

You have contributed 0.0% of this topic

Thread Tools
Appreciate
Topic Appreciation
To appreciate this topic, click 'Appreciate Topic' on the right.
Rank Image
Muadh_Khan's avatar
Offline
UK
10,276
Brother
8,615
Muadh_Khan's avatar
#91 [Permalink] Posted on 14th April 2016 13:31

london786 wrote:
View original post

For a highly paid professional you are a shrimp when it comes to understanding politics. Please leave Islam out of the discussion and then read...

Needs of Pakistan:

Pakistan is a narrow cordon and they know that they cannot fight India without having strategic depth and the only option is Afghanistan. Geography of Afghanistan gives Pakistan Army a much better strategic advantage, people of Afghanistan give Pakistan fresh blood and joined ideology against India.  

Pakistan also needs to keep India tied down and on a slow burner to waste resources through attrition.

Needs of Taliban:

Landlocked country, and 50% of population will always oppose them on ethnic lines. Iran is ideologically opposed…Pakistan is needed to be able to retract and withdraw when needed, Pakistan is needed to raise funds, Pakistan is needed to funnel cash, resources etc…Pakistan is needed to give them political fig leaf

Needs of India:

Sitting in a country with 20-25% Muslims who COULD POTENTIALLY make allegiance to Pakistan (religiously), fighting multiple insurgencies and independence movements but needs to isolate Pakistan.

Needs of Saudia:

House of Saud is illegitimate! Whether the country tilts towards Islam or tilts towards Democracy either way House of Saud will fall…The only choice is to foster a “Cleric controlled Islam” which can be manipulated by the House of Saud. 

Needs of the West:

Masses of western population are scared and don’t want an attack anywhere on western soil so the only choice is to keep the fire burning in the East and let the body count keep rolling in the East…WHO CARES how many die in Karachi as long as nobody dies in London!

The Muslim world can NEVER be allowed to get united and present a united front because the day that happens Israel will fall, it stands NO CHANCE against even 50% of the Muslim acting in a united manner.

A “Cleric controlled Islam” has to be backed and manipulated otherwise real Islam will take hold.

Also hypocritically they need to APPEAR to act on issues without committing the resources of their Nation. In addition, sometimes people like Charlie Wilson are genuinely committed to an act and the will of the Nation catches up later. In all of these circumstances NON-STATE-ACTORS matter!

Where can you get them from? “Cleric controlled Islam” has a ready supply of sheep to be sent for the sacrifice.

Needs of the Ulama:

Masses must keep referring to them and there are two groups of Ulama and there are their reasons:

  1. Sincere ones believe that it’s their duty to guide the Ummah
  2. Insincere ones need their livelihood

Either way masses MUST BE FED things which they want to hear every once in a while. The mood of the masses must be judged, if they back Afghan Jihad then fire them up on Afghan Jihad…If its Babri Masjid so be it…If its Bashar Al-Asaad so be it.

Again some are sincere, some are not but their needs are the same.

Condition of the masses:

99.99999% are followers and can neither see why certain groups lead them in a certain direction nor have the capacity to understand. Come out of a firey Bayan 99.99% don't know WHY Maulana said what he said BUT they are fired up...

Are Ulama stooges?

Some are and there is no doubt.

Some are not but they have legitimate needs and the state backing can provide those needs e.g. during Afghan Jihad millions flew into Jihad and it was needed…Muslims knew but overlooked. It doesn’t mean that they were stooges but they needed the resources.

Many Ulama genuinely back Kashmir Jihad BUT you cannot perform Jihad in Kashmir without the backing of Pakistan Army, its strategically impossible so ….You scratch my back & I scratch your back.

report post quote code quick quote reply
+3 -0Winner x 2
back to top
Rank Image
Abdur Rahman ibn Awf's avatar
Offline
Unspecified
2,154
Brother
3,201
Abdur Rahman ibn Awf's avatar
#92 [Permalink] Posted on 14th April 2016 15:05
london786 wrote:
View original post


The American Judge Janet Hall during her sentencing of Babar Ahmed,affirmed the fact that struggles such as Chechnya Bosnia were legitimate struggles against oppression and cannot and should not be labelled as terrorist.

Also as I stated in my post on the previous page, in similar struggles which involved Christians in East Timor and South Sudan media stance was very different... The BBC when challenged on this issue were unable to offer any explanation as to there hypocrisy.

Back in 2002 various Kashmiri groups were proscribed by the then British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw, I wrote to my Local MP at the time who was also a minister in the Government Claire Short, giving the history and background of the Kashmiri struggle, and numerous graphic accounts of victims of torture and mass rape in Kashmir and Britains role in the Subjugation of the Kashmiri peoples, and in defence of the Mujahadeen and Maulana Masood Azhar.

She in turn shocked by the Graphic accounts of Rape and Torture forwarded my letter to Mr Straw asking him to respond, he himself did not have a response other then..."we have raised issues of Human rights violations with India."

So on issues like Palestine, Kashmir, Bosnia, Chechnya, Southern Thailand, Xinajiang China we have nothing to apologise for.

The Problem here is majority of our community have no knowledge in the History or background of these struggles...Therefore immediately go on the defensive when confronted by the Media.

For example if your condemning the British Ulemah for Supporting the Taliban, then America and its agencies themselves supported the Taliban for apparently " For bringing Peace and stability to Afghanistan." Although as western analysts have written the real reason was America wanted to establish an Oil Pipeline from Caspian Sea to the Port of Karachi to see that vision fulfilled they needed an end to the Civil War and a government that was in full control of Afghanistan, the only group seen as likely to bring stability was the Taliban.

So when we point out the role of Mi6 or Mi5 or CIA in responding to the Media it is merely to challenge them, on their hypocrisy why do they villify the Muslims for supporting something, whilst completely remaining silent on the role of their own agencies, if the Muslims were wrong then the Media must also point out that there agencies and institutions were wrong.

Pointing out the role of Mi6 Mi5 CIA is merely done for the purposes of refutation and not demean the legitimacy of these struggles, such as the Struggles in Bosnia and Afghanistan.

When refutation is done in this manner the Media in particular the BBC are silenced and goe on the defensive and start chanting " It is not true, we the BBC are not biased, We BBC Impartial"... So you should just view this type of refutation as a counter offensive.





report post quote code quick quote reply
+1 -0Winner x 1
back to top
Rank Image
Muadh_Khan's avatar
Offline
UK
10,276
Brother
8,615
Muadh_Khan's avatar
#93 [Permalink] Posted on 14th April 2016 16:18

mkdon101 wrote:
View original post

Response of Darul-uloom Bury to BBC has been released (or leaked). Its all over WhatsApp now, please read it.

Jzk

report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Abdur Rahman ibn Awf's avatar
Offline
Unspecified
2,154
Brother
3,201
Abdur Rahman ibn Awf's avatar
#94 [Permalink] Posted on 14th April 2016 16:44
Muadh_Khan wrote:
View original post


Can you provide a link for those of us who do not have Whatsapp or twitter.

report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Abdur Rahman ibn Awf's avatar
Offline
Unspecified
2,154
Brother
3,201
Abdur Rahman ibn Awf's avatar
#95 [Permalink] Posted on 14th April 2016 17:55
Martin Bashir and Michael Jackson..!

In 1995 Martin Bashir was as a British journalist, given exclusive access to Princess Diana for a lengthy Interview for BBC'S Panorama.

The resulting publicity turned Bashir into an A List Journalist...!

A Few years Later Bashir went to America, he was this time was the first Journalist to be given exclusive access to Michael Jackson...
( His exclusive with Michael Jackson was only the first step, apparently many other reclusive Celebritys were lining up to do exclusives with Bashir which would have led him to becoming a superstar in his own right and earning Millions of Dollars.)

When the Documentary on Michael Jackson aired around the world it was a complete hatchet job, he stated what a terrible father he was, what a terrible person he was, etc.

But...Michael Jacksons legal team were smart enough to ensure that they had their own camera crew present to record every single interaction with Bashir.

So when Bashir came out with the line " Jackson is a terrible father I fear for his children.".... They released footage of Bashir saying to Jackson "You are such a wonderful father, you are so loving when I see you with them I almost want to weep."

Every single allegation made by Bashir was rebutted with secret footage of him saying the complete opposite to Michael Jackson when he thought the cameras were off.... The Impending Multi-Million Dollar contract for Bashir disappeared all those reclusive and not easily accessible celebrities who had committed to giving exclusives to Martin Bashir retracted their commitments...

It was the most Public and International humiliation of a journalist caught pathologically lying, Martin Bashir was like the man who had won the lottery and then lost the ticket, he has never fully re-covered and credibility fully and irrevocably damaged.

My point here is that every interaction when dealing with the Media needs to be recorded. The British MP Tony Benn Long before the creation of technology always carried a tape recorder to record his every interaction with Journalists.

I remember in the weeks after 9/11 the BBC Panorama, sent their veteran reporter Vivian White to make a documentary on Muslim communities reaction to the events.... Mr White a very nice friendly and soft spoken chap was at the Masjid for a few weeks approaching worshippers, telling how he was concerned rabid Islamaphobia, against Muslims how muslim community was being mis-represented in the media consistently, how Muslim communities concerns about western foreign policy were being represented
as being anti-western, and esentially how he was there to rectify this imbalance in the media coverage. Every Muslim who spoke to Mr White thought what a Lovely Chap...!

When he released his documentary it was a hatchett job villifying Muslims.
report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Abdur Rahman ibn Awf's avatar
Offline
Unspecified
2,154
Brother
3,201
Abdur Rahman ibn Awf's avatar
#96 [Permalink] Posted on 14th April 2016 22:02
Just doing some research on Shaykh Musa Admani, I found a review of this Panorama documentary from several years ago, I bolded the relevant part...What is also clear is that the measures being introduced by this government are extension of the policy of the previous Labour government.



Review of “Muslim First, British Second”
Posted on 19th February, 2009 by Matthew Smith


A brother has asked me to review the Panorama programme entitled Muslim First, British Second which was on BBC1 on Monday night. You can watch it (as I did) on the BBC’s iPlayer here - I’m not sure if you can watch it outside the UK, but it concerns British Muslims mostly anyway.

The programme has one worthwhile point, but before we get to it, I must point out that the limitations of the brain-dead, soundbite-ridden half-hour format of Panorama is obvious in this programme as I have found in many others. Jeremy Vine is the main presenter, although he does not present most of it, and opens by telling us that “many British Muslims have divided loyalties”, cutting to footage of Muslims rioting and shouting “takbeer”. Brief clips are shown from an interview with Abdur-Raheem Green and there is some library footage of Khalid Yasin as well. Sensationalism is the name of the game here. (You may read my review of an earlier Vine handling of Muslim extremism here.)

The programme is presented by one Richard Watson, who starts off with images of “Britain’s south-west coast, noted for beaches rather than bombs”, the supposed setting for the attempted bombing of a café in Exeter (which actually is not on the coast) by Nicky Reilly, a convert with low intelligence and Asperger’s syndrome whose bomb did not explode properly and injured only him. There was speculation that Reilly’s radicalisation did not come entirely from the Internet, and that “an extremist in the local community held his hand”. Watson then diverges into the subject of persuading Muslims to join the fight against extremism and offer intelligence.

Watson shows a press conference by al-Muhajiroun in 2004 in which the speaker talked of the planes flying “magnificiently” into the Twin Towers and of the killing of civilians being “according to Islam … absolutely right”. More recently, he is shown attending a Muhajiroun-by-another-name group in London during a meeting at a publically-funded arts centre at which a video of Omar Bakri Muhammad is shown, encouraging Muslims not to obey man-made systems but only the law of Allah, and later on, a young man is shown heckling the presenter, telling him that everyone present hates him, and suggesting that something bad might happen if they met him in a dark alleyway. The man desists after Anjem Choudhary intervenes on the presenter’s behalf, but a young boy is shown mock-throwing an empty Lucozade bottle at the presenter behind his back. Back in the hall, Choudhary proclaims:

This is the Fir’awn (Pharaoh) of the day; we are like Musa (‘alaihi as-salaam) in the palace of Fir’awn; one day we will rise up and overthrow the Fir’awn insha Allah.

A takbeer goes up from the audience, followed by a massed “Allahu akbar”, at which point the programme cuts to footage of violence during the recent Gaza protests, accompanied by an explanation of how peaceful protests were at times exploited by extremists, and that grievances combined with “influences”, whether in person or over the Internet, could move someone from being aggrieved to wanting to carry out acts of terrorism, according to a police officer interviewed. The presenter tells us that it has been suggested that radical preachers are instrumental in this, among them Khalid Yasin (shown working out at the gym), “one of the stars of the preaching circuit”, who “doesn’t support terrorism, but has radical views”, among them that there was no irrefutable evidence that “there was a group called al-Qa’ida that did the September 11th bombings”, and that fashion designers whose names are on popular clothes are mostly “faggots, homosexuals and lesbians”.

So far, so offensive. However, the presenter then interviews a local female youth leader he identifies only as “Ayesha” (including the quotes), and here is what they said:

Watson: Why did you choose Shaikh Khalid Yasin, because he is a man who has some controversial views about some things, like homosexuality for example; he’s vehemently against homosexuality, and one might argue that in Britain that is a completely unacceptable point of view.

Ayesha: Well, homosexuality is not accepted in Islam; it’s not accepted in Christianity.

Watson: But we live in Britain.

Ayesha: But it doesn’t … we’re not discriminating against it; if you ask a question, “is it allowed in Islam?”, it’s not.

Why the presenter did not mention Yasin’s actual use of language is beyond me. Unaccepting views on homosexuality are common among Muslims; the language displayed in the clip is what causes the offence. If anyone really advocated that Muslims accept homosexuality, in the sense of homosexual conduct being permitted in the religion, that person would be an immediate outcast, because the prohibition is universally known.

He then explains that the issue of whether to court preachers with controversial conservative views has split those working in counter-terrorism. He interviews Abdur-Raheem Green, who is shown briefly stating that Islam, on some sort of philosophical level, is incompatible with democracy, challenging him that if he does not accept that, then he doesn’t accept man-made law and “Parliament just down the road”. “You’re a British citizen”, he tells Abdur-Raheem, who responds that this is true, but as a Muslim he still believes that he is bound by those laws. Chief Constable Norman Bettison of the Association of Chief Police Officers (he is the chief constable of West Yorkshire police, and was formerly chief constable on Merseyside) said that the police police violence, not ideas, and that he was willing to meet people who see the world differently to him, but not to tolerate them inciting violence.

There is yet more YouTube footage of Abdur-Raheem Green expounding more predictably controversial views, a pointless brief flash of an interview with him, a section on the embarrassment of ACPO taking advice from a man who advocated an Islamic state ruled by the leader of Hamas, Ismail Haniyeh (Bettison said that they would be extremely unlikely to take advice from him ever again).

Watson then explains that there is about to be a “sea change in government policy”, and that a source inside the Home Office had told him that they now wanted to move away from merely challenging violent extremism towards challenging people who opposed democracy and state institutions. Lord Nazir Ahmad was shown saying that people who preach hate and division should be isolated and that the mainstream community leadership should be empowered. Musa Admani voiced the opinion that cohesion was a separate issue from terrorism; that people who opposed homosexuality or “female rights” might not support violence.

Watson said he had found that there was a lack of trust within the community for the authorities; one young Asian man, sitting at the wheel of a white Mercedes, alleged victimisation and said that he did not believe “them lads” did the 2005 bombings (or rather, that the claim that they did was bollocks). Some Muslims, he said, also feel that people do not trust them; “Ayesha” from Derby told of an incident in which people took fright after she dropped her bag on the train and some fruit rolled on the floor. The government had allocated £80million to a programme called “Contest” to build trust within the Muslim community, but any hint of government control would undermine credibility.

An organisation run by Musa Admani, for example, who is supposedly “renowned as an inspirational preacher”, last year received £180,000 from the Home Office to develop some sort of training manual to deradicalise extremists. The Home Office wanted Admani to work with some business consultant whom he knew and with whom he had worked before, but the consultant, who had worked for an MOD think-tank and run workshops for NATO among other organisations, was getting more “hands on” and was undermining the project’s perception as a Muslim project. When Admani protested to the Home Office, they insisted that the project was dependent on her involvement; Admani then told them they could cancel the whole thing.

Back in Derby, Watson interviewed Shokat Lal of the Derby Muslim Forum who also received £100,000 from the Home Office to “prevent violent extremism”, but was facing suspicion within the community that people like him were acting as spies, and himself he suspected that it was about intelligence. Watson said that his intelligence sources told him that PVE really is about gathering intelligence, and that many intelligence analysts are already in place, and that every Muslim who had spoken out about foreign policy grievances could be placed on an intelligence database. Bettison flatly denied this; he said it was “much more holistic, much more long-term, much more engaging than the tactic you describe”.

The programme ends with the forecast that the government was shortly to come out with some sort of new policy on this issue, and that the “hawks” were winning the argument. Indeed, yesterday the Guardian reported that they had learned of a draft of the government’s “Contest 2” strategy, which includes a whole list of criteria for “extremism”, which includes the contention that Islam forbids homosexuality, advocating a pan-Islamic state, promoting Shari’ah law or believing in jihad anywhere in the world. This is clearly a very broad definition, and the first of these in particular would alienate any real Muslim. The influence of the Harry’s Place clique is obvious. I realise it is only a draft, but this is preposterous. Since when was homosexuality a significant issue for any of the groups they want to stop doing business with? They are mainly concerned about Palestine, Iraq, and other foreign policy issues, and Muslim rights in this country.

This Panorama was not the hatchet job some Muslims expected it to be, but it was a rotten film anyway. A sensational title, lifted from some mid-market tabloid and irrelevant to most of the programme; a line of questioning which was hostile to not only extremist but also conservative religious thinking; and generally not giving enough time to any issue before moving onto the next. The one important point in this film was that the government was wasting tax-payers’ money on obviously wasteful schemes to infiltrate the Muslim community by using untrusted (and not even Muslim) consultants with military connections, but would they have been trusted anyway? I suspect not, much as the Radical Middle Way has attracted suspicion from the beginning. With one failure after another, it appears that the government’s next proposal will be dismissed with ridicule by everyone outside a small clique of secularists.

Source: IndigoJoBlogs.
report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Rajab's avatar
Offline
Unspecified
880
Brother
456
Rajab's avatar
#97 [Permalink] Posted on 15th April 2016 16:04
Dear Mr X

Thanks for contacting us about the “The Deobandis” broadcast on 9 April. We appreciate some listeners felt the programme was biased against the Deobandi sect, or was offensive towards Deobandis and Islam in general.

We have received a wide range of feedback about this programme. Keeping in mind pressures on licence fee resources, this response seeks to address the key points raised. That said, we apologise in advance if your complaint has not been specifically addressed here.

We spoke to the programme team about the range of issues raised and they responded as follows:

“This edition, the first of two programmes, saw the BBC's former Pakistan correspondent Owen Bennett Jones look at which strands of Deobandi opinion have influence in the UK. He explored claims that Deobandi Islam is intentionally isolationist and that its strict beliefs put it at odds with mainstream British culture, leaving the community segregated from wider British society.

From our research we concluded that Deobandi networks were extremely complex and to a large extent not easily discernible to outsiders. We did not conclude from our research that there was a single command and control structure. We did however conclude that there were individuals acknowledged within the Deobandi school of thought in the UK who have been particularly influential: among them were Sheikh Yusuf Motala, Allama Dr Khalid Mehmood and the late Hafiz Patel.

We contacted many people within the Deobandi movement as part of our research. We found an exceptional level of reluctance to talk publicly or even to respond to our letters, calls and emails. Even people who were willing to talk to us off the record – and who had concerns about the movement in the UK - were unwilling to be interviewed on the record. Some of these people said that they feared they would be ostracised or even threatened for voicing concerns publicly. Even people who could have given a positive impression of the movement were, on the whole, unwilling to be interviewed. If the impression given by the programme is that the movement is secretive this is because, by the standards of other major religious organisations in the UK, it is.

We were therefore to a large extent restricted to interviewing former adherents to the Deobandi school of thought. Former Deobandi boarding school student, Aliyah Saleem was one such person. Her critical view of Islamic boarding schools was counterbalanced by the positive experience of three students at an Islamic day school in Walsall which had received a good Ofsted report. (Our researcher approached 30 Islamic schools. Only two responded.) Mobeen Azhar, a former member of the Tablighi Jamaat, was another former adherent. We included his positive observations about the Tablighi Jamaat as well as his concerns. As we said in the programme, the Tablighi Jamaat did not even respond to our request for an interview.”

We hope this gives you some helpful context and goes some way in addressing your concerns.

Thanks again for taking time to contact us.

Kind Regards

BBC Complaints
www.bbc.co.uk/complaints
report post quote code quick quote reply
+2 -0
back to top
Rank Image
Rajab's avatar
Offline
Unspecified
880
Brother
456
Rajab's avatar
#98 [Permalink] Posted on 15th April 2016 16:05
That's the generic response I got for part 1
report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Asaaghir's avatar
Tragic-istan
541
Brother
259
Asaaghir's avatar
#99 [Permalink] Posted on 15th April 2016 16:45
Could it be said that those who declined to have their say have been a disservice towards the Muslims of the UK?

The BBC wrote:
From our research we concluded that Deobandi networks were extremely complex[/quote]
That's what I've been trying to put forward to MK, we are really complex coz we got 2 eids lol.

The BBC wrote:
Some of these people said that they feared they would be ostracised or even threatened for voicing concerns publicly.
Ye man! Don't dis my hazrat on tv or you gonna get it man!

[quote="The BBC"]Tablighi Jamaat did not even respond to our request for an interview

Typical, must be in the six points somewhere - You see, they don't prevent evil, instead they do good to counteract the evil. Oh come on man!!!!!!!
report post quote code quick quote reply
+2 -0Like x 2
back to top
Rank Image
Offline
Unspecified
1,087
Brother
535
#100 [Permalink] Posted on 15th April 2016 22:59
typical response. thats more or less the same respond they given me each and every time i have ever complained. they will never accept they are wrong and use a kop out reply about how they try be impartial and give both sides and apologise if we felt it was unfair. i just fear now they will go on to do more and even more hatchet jobs.that is what we should prepare for,
report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Abdur Rahman ibn Awf's avatar
Offline
Unspecified
2,154
Brother
3,201
Abdur Rahman ibn Awf's avatar
#101 [Permalink] Posted on 15th April 2016 23:38
mkdon101 wrote:
View original post


No the response signifies that alot of people have complained..!Rather then the complaint department responding, the makers of the programme have been asked to formulate a response which is good...!



report post quote code quick quote reply
+1 -0Like x 1
back to top
Rank Image
Abu_Bilal's avatar
Offline
Pakistan
196
Brother
255
Abu_Bilal's avatar
#102 [Permalink] Posted on 16th April 2016 19:32
Never wanted to comment on this thread, since it is a UK issue.

However, having read some of the comments, people don't know much about Maulana Masood Azhar (DB) and the Pakistani tanzeems. Allah knows best.
report post quote code quick quote reply
+1 -0
back to top
Rank Image
Abu_Bilal's avatar
Offline
Pakistan
196
Brother
255
Abu_Bilal's avatar
#103 [Permalink] Posted on 16th April 2016 19:38
london786 wrote:
View original post


Hazrat, what do you mean that Mufti Yusuf Ludhianvi (RA) ALSO gave khilafat to Maulana Tariq Jameel (DB)?

Maulana Tariq Jameel (DB) has got khilafat from Khaleefa Ghulam Rasul (RA) and other akabir too.
report post quote code quick quote reply
+1 -0
back to top
Rank Image
Offline
Unspecified
1,087
Brother
535
#104 [Permalink] Posted on 16th April 2016 23:35
report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Abdur Rahman ibn Awf's avatar
Offline
Unspecified
2,154
Brother
3,201
Abdur Rahman ibn Awf's avatar
#105 [Permalink] Posted on 17th April 2016 17:30
BBC and the Art of Trickerations.

The phrase 'Trickerations' was coined by the enigmatic and controversial boxing promoter Don King taking pride in his ability to con and hustle his adversaries.

Just examining the first part of the documentary the poor chap Owen Bennet Jones and his team did not have much to work with, they went with the pre-determined objective of projecting Muslims as Extremists. But unfortunately for them could not find any evidence, so the whole exercise became one of resorting to the art of 'trickerations' by deliberately engaging in misrepresentations, distortions, omissions, and deception.

Owen Bennet Jones knew that no one wanted to appear on his programme because of the deep distrust the Muslim community has of the Media, because of the consistent and deliberate witch hunts it engages in, so rather then stating the obvious he cleverly improvised and turned this disadvantage into an advantage and made it the main theme for his programme "The Deobandis are Isolationist and refuse to integrate or engage with the wider community", utilising the power of repetition, this point was emphasised over and over again.

Reminded me of a newspiece done by the award winning American current affairs programme, 6o minutes sometime after the first Gulfwar. In that news piece they showcased pretty little Princess Zahirah, the 15 year old daughter of Kuwaits ambassador to the U.S. In order to drum up support of the American public for American intervention in the Gulf. The State Department, produced the 15 year old Princess Zahirah who apparently had witnessed the invasion of Kuwait by Iraqi troops (before she managed to escape), her eyes filled with tears, she appeared at Press conferences, and TV news bulletins, telling everyone a harrowing account of how she had witnessed Babies in incubators being slaughtered by Iraqi troops. " Iraqi troops are killing babies in Incubators" suddenly became a war cry with journalists and politicians including the President George Bush repeating it over and over again, until it became embedded in the minds of the American Public that this war was about protecting and saving babies in incubators. After the Gulfwar it was discovered that infact no babies in incubators had been harmed the whole story had been an elaborate hoax, infact the traumatised Princess Zahirah had never been in Kuwait at the time of the Iraqi invasion.

In addition to that Owen Bennet Jones, then went on to make a completely unsubstantiated claim that many members of the Deobandi community had privately expressed their views but were afraid to appear on the show because they were afraid of being ostracised. Conveniently disguising the fact that Deobandis had refused to appear on the programme, because the lead researcher Holly Hopham had written fairly offensive letters to various religious institutes accusing them of links to extremisim then giving them a deadline to respond to her baseless accusations. Naturally the people being falsely accused were alienated and sought to seek legal advice instead.

On to the subject of guests, there was only one representative guest Maulana Muhammad Amin Pandor, and to be fair Maulana despite obviously being inexperienced with the media, did try his best but he was at a heavy disadvantage. Very first thing being his heavy regional accent, since the dawn of radio and then Television. Researchers found, that when it comes to news, current affairs and political programmes the audience is heavily influenced by a very posh accent, or a neutral accent, subconciously people consider these as a sign of intelligence and it gives the speaker an air of authority even if they are completley ignorant on the topic they are speaking on. Traditionally individuals wanting to go into these fields would attend classes in diction and voice training run by speech therapists, to try and get rid of their regional accents. Whilst on the opposite end of the spectrum, comedians and entertainers would try to enhance their regional accents for entertainment purposes. All the other featured guests spoke in clear cut accents, were very articulate with the exception of Shaykh Musa Admani, this was subtly counteracted by Bennet Jones, who cited the Shaykhs alleged lofty credentials.

Everything was projected as something Sinister, for example we have had the media numerous times rattle on over and over about "Islamism" and "Political Islam", so you would think that the media and establishment would be pleased with an organisation like Tabligh Jamaat, that is apolitical, but no Sir this time one of the guests Mobeen Azhar was allowed to paint that as being "isolationist and out of touch".

The we had a young woman who after some years of studying at a Madrassah Boarding School, became an atheist..In any case the BBC invited her on hoping she would make some serious allegations unfortunately for the programme makers she failed to do so, only criticism she offered was that boarding School had very strict rules and regulations, things like TV and Photography not being allowed her interview was a massive fail for the Programme. Our dear old friend Owen Bennet Jones not to be beaten by this setback, tried to imply that madrassah code of conduct was harsh and repressive. Infact the madrassah code of conduct would not be out of place in Catholic Boarding Schools around the world. I am sure as a former Senior Pakistan Correspondent, is well aware that the most popular Boarding School in Pakistan Jesus and Mary Convent, based in Karachi were all the rich and wealthy send their daughters with the most famous student being Benazir Bhutto has rules and regulations that are no different, then the madrassah mentioned.

Owenn Bennet Jones desperately seeking to find something object to concerning "Deobandis" then went onto make criticisms, that went from laughable to absurd. The programme makers trawled through all the edition's of a magazine published by Shaykh Muhammad Amin Pandor, and were unable to find anything so the best he could come up with was "Your magazine says, Muslims
Should not Celebrate, Bonfire night,"... A commemoration of the the fifth of November each year where by effigies of Guy Fawkes are burned an individual who allegedly plotted to blow up the British Houses of Parliament in the year 1605 during which many are injured and maimed because of the fireworks ..Note: This event each year is a celebration of the gruesome and barbaric execution
of Guy Fawkes the irony seems to have been lost on our intrepid reporter.

On to the absurd, another accusation designed show how extreme them Deobandis are "You teach students that in university they should keep their heads down and focus on their courses and not involve themselves in University life." Yes Mr Bennet Jones that is the formula for success most educators, self help authors, and experts on productivity and high achievement say exactly the same thing, Focus on your studies do not involve yourself in the University Sub-Culture of Drugs Alcohol, Sex, and Sexually transmitted diseases. Thats what any responsible individuals would be teaching young people going to universities, after all many of those who involve themselves in University life become dropouts.

Finally another baseless accusation made about Muslims living in, Deobandi Villages, fact as shaykh Muhammad Amin Pandor pointed out and was conveniently glossed over by Bennet Jones was that this is what is called "White flight Syndrome" a phrase coined by social scientists in America several decades ago, a large neighbourhood of mainly white residents would see people of colour moving in to their area, not wanting to live next door to dark skinned people they would decide to sell and move, over a number of years the entire neighbourhood would become inhabited by people of colour with almost all white residents having moved out.

report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top

Jump to page: