This is an open letter by Usman Raja refuting the forgery [HTTP Link removed] which has been published in his name by the website “Traditional Islamism”.
****
Salam! Peace!
I would like to take this opportunity to clarify a few distortions and lies that are being circulated by certain factions. Namely:
1. The alleged “resignation letter” to the Quilliam Foundation. This letter is a fabrication and none of its content is true in any way or form. I did not send this letter to Quilliam at all.
2. I have no connection at all, philosophically or in practise with the Islamists and Jihadists at the loathed website “Traditional Islamism”. I do not advocate their message, and am deeply distressed that these people should abuse my name on that forum.
3. I believe Islam, in it’s classical form, as expounded by the mashaikh of tassawuf of the spiritual path is a message of mercy and love, which is diametrically opposed to the propaganda espoused by websites such as “Traditional Islamism”.
4. I am active and, inshallah, will remain so to ensure that the classical understanding of Islam is disseminated to build strong British Muslim communities in our liberal democracy.
I demand that this fabricated letter be removed by all those involved and these lies circulated in my name ceased by those involved, if they have any integrity.
Salam-Peace
Usman Raja
Update:
Following this message by Usman Raja, the “TraditionalIslamists” have taken down the forgery.
39 Comments
Traditional Islamism site is full of fabrications, distortions and conspiracy theories.
Not suprised to hear that they are now even fabricating letters and posting them on their blog.
What a pathetic bunch of jokers!
Traditional Islamist explains his reasons for putting up the fake letter;
http://traditionalislamizm.wordpress.com/
Is he bonkers or what?
Talk about scraping the barrel, maybe he should ask Bungles for advice since they both have the same obsession. Get over it guys.
Yeah, it’s like:
“I published a forged letter of Usman Raja on my website without verifying it but the ones who are at fault are Usman Raja for refuting it and the Spittoon for publishing his refutal”.
What a fool.
Why are all Islamist bloggers so thick?
They were born that way?
Faisal! How can you ask ‘were they born that way?’! And I know you are joking, but, of course not!!!
We don’t really care what Mr Usman thinks of Traditional Islamism, the question that Mr Raja fails to answer is has he left the Quilliam Foundation? If he has then his contention against this ‘fabricated ‘ letter suddenly becomes suspect…doesn’t it?
Even if he has left Quilliam, why would it be ‘suspect’ if he objected to a fabricated letter being written in his name?
Hold on a minute, he joins six months ago, he then abruptly leaves and this coincides with a fabricated letter of resignation????
I always thought you political Islam haters who belittle and defame all notions of just and equitable Islamic governance here at the enlightened spittoon forum would be a little more astute in such analysis.
What if in a few weeks time Ms Shikwa… he explains his ‘resignation’ in the same way as was described in the letter, then in your political Islam hating little mind, would the content of the letter suddenly take on a new light again. I would say it would, you are obviously going to explain it won’t!
Allah (swt) knows best, but I can assure you that this is not the end of this little episode, which will undoubtedly once again expose the Munafiqs over at Quilliam for what they really are. Get ready to eat your hat (something you people are probably used to on this side).
Mahmood,
I am not aware of when Usman Raja joined Quilliam or when he left, or for what reasons. I’m sure the same goes for you?
The issue seems quite simple to me: he left Quilliam for reasons that are known to him and his employers. Then a letter purporting to be from him emerged and he denied it. It’s simple cause and effect really. He left and someone thought they could/should fabricate a letter – I don’t see where all the conspiracy and intrigue comes from?
If, in a few weeks time Usman explains his reasons for resigning with a letter which echoes the original then it won’t be a fabrication. If this happened you ask whether the contents of the letter would be take on a new light. Of course they would because the contents would no longer be fabricated. They would be true. Therefore, that changes things! It means the things within it have some value as they are based in fact, not fiction.
Again, I don’t see how/why we’re getting so confused about this?
Finally, I ask you – given that you support, what you call ‘just and equitable Islamic governance’ – where you found sanction for your rudeness. It’s a shame because some of you HuT /Islamist lot used to be quite polite even when we disagreed. I remember disagreeing with ‘political Islamists’ a lot at university (many years ago) and they were generally polite, even when losing. But it seems like as the pressure on you has intensified in recent years that you have abandoned the very values you claim to represent (ironically, something you accuse the west of doing all the time).
For example, in my reply to you, I put a straightforward question to you. In reply you were confrontational and sarcastic, and you accuse me of having a “little mind”. Is that what your Islamic principles teach you? What happened to debating with hikma?
In the Name of Allah the Merciful the Kind
There has been no fabrication…you know it as well as I, the letter has both the recipient and the senders address, does that ring any bells.
My light hearted sarcasm and remark of ‘little mind’ phased you, it is a shame however that the wholesale defamation and criminalisation of upstanding individuals, Mosques, organisations and institutions who have been working tirelessly in their respective British Muslim communities for over 40 years does not perturb you in the slightest.
Instead you spend your time propogating and supporting hatred of those who hold a holistic view of faith and belief. You purposefully ignore the blatant division, deciet and aggressive slander perpetuated by the likes of Quilliam and cast all ‘Islamists’ in the same pigeon hole as charlatons such as Al Mahjiroun. Call me what you want but I am a patriotic British Muslim who loves his country but rightfully contends with aspects of its foreign policy and social decay, at the same time I believe in the concept of Ummah as directed by our Prophet (pbuh) and the quest for establishing a free, pluralistic, modern Islamic democracy which is both just and equitable.
There are many shades of political Islamic thought my dear, I would request you to read about the Seerah of the Prophet (pbuh), his authentic biography will inspire you to understand that not all things political in Islam need be anti-human as is continually adduced by the stooges at Quilliam and their likes. A good one is Muhammed: Man and Prophet, published by the Islamic Foundation. Lest we find ourselves in a position one day were we refer to the Prophet (pbuh) and the Rightly Guided Caliphs in a derrogatory manner as ‘Islamists’ because by your definition they undoubtedly were.
Apologies for any offence caused, may Allah (swt) forgive us and guide us to that which is true. Allah (swt) knows best.
Salaams
Why did you guys put up a letter without verifing it in the first place? Are you guys that desperate to attack Quilliam?
So what if he has left? People are free to join and leave companies you know.
You guys just need to grow up and stop making fools of yourseleves.
Mahmoud
Just because an organisation has been active in the UK for 40 years doesn’t mean that they are beyond critique. Just because they are doing a good job in your eyes doesn’t mean that other Muslims and non-Muslims alike should not be able to disagree or indeed critique them.
I believe the kind of groups you are refering to are the many Jamati Islami and Ikhwan front groups or groups inspired by the philosophy of fanatics like Mawdudi. Indeed they have been active for a long time but in my humble view such groups have done more damage to community cohesion and Muslim- nonMuslim relations than any good. The Islamic foundation in Leicester has translated and circulated vile hate filled books such as ‘Jihad in Islam’ by the fanatical Mawdudi who talks about Muslims conquering the world and enforcing shariah on everyone against their will. Indeed such works made the job of HT and AM types much easier when they wanted to take it to the next level.
Such organisations which you are so proud of have contibuted towards spreading a Wahabi/Islamist understanding of Islam which divides communities, turns Muslims against the authorities and creates a negative view of Muslims and Islam.I agree they are not the same as HT and AM but they are on the same spectrum just as the BNP is not the same as the National Front.
This is not about having a wholistic view of Islam but rather having a distorted politicised view of theology and a binary conspiratorial view of the world. By claiming that this is the true Islam you do the religion a great dis-service and you also ignore the ridiculous propaganda and outright shameful lies that the groups you admire spew against people who stand up for a genuinely pluralistic, inclusive and peaceful understanding of Islam as preached by Muhammad.
BTW – the Prophet and the first 4 Caliphs were not Islamists according to any proper definition of the term. They adapted the legal and political framework according to the needs of the time and the interests of the people. They did not claim that Islam pre-defined a political framework that must be followed in all times nor did they seek to implement one interpretation of Shariah at state level.
Islam is and always has been secular until Islamists in the 20th century decided to mix theology with fascism and socialism to produce Islamism, brain-washing a new generation into thinking that this is the true Islam despite their experiment being condemned by the vast majority of Muslims theologians.
I’ve now seen two very different versions of that Usman Raja letter. So it was quite obviously a hoax. I also notice that ‘TraditionalIslamists’ have taken down their ‘Update’ message about why they took down the letter.
Usman Raja – the QF’s Outreach officer – has left the Quilliam Foundation in the past few days over ‘moral differences’.
Several of the QF’s much-trumpeted ‘advisors’ have also resigned in recent months after watching the shameful antics of Ed and Maajid.
The QF was always a government creation and now is dying an embarrassing and agonising death…
Shikwa…he’s left presumeably by way of resignation, maybe the letter of resignation had some truth after all!
Ibn Khuldun it was sickening to read the parallels you drew between Islamic movements active in this country and fascists like the National Front/BNP. Their respected, benevolent and God conscious members hold unblemished records of sincere service and decades of social welfare, education, community outreach, institution building, publishing and dawah.
And the statement ‘Islam is and always has been secular’ is an affront to 1400 years of statesmanship by Muslim rulers who looked upon the Book of Allah (swt) & the Sunnah of the Prophet (pbuh) and the ijtihad of authentic scholars as their main sources of legislation. Your deciet, manipulation and lies are bemusing when placed in the glory and blaze of political Islamic history.
Abu Bakr – promoting the writings of fanatics and freaks like Mawdudi and Qutb is not dawah, its an insult to Islam and Muslims. These people promoting waging holy wars against all non Muslims and hatred of non believers in general. Its so sad to see people in the UK who think they are some sort of Muslim heros. In my view they were fascists and what does that say for those who promote them. By pretending to represent Muslims and presenting government and society with extremist views is an insult to all Muslims in the UK who are now sick of these people and are starting to speak out.
Muslim rulers looked to Islam for guidance in some matters, they never claimed that Islam provided one fixed system of governance for all times and all places. Neither did they seek to implement one interpretation of Shariah as state law. In fact throughout Muslim history it was when people did seek to do that we had trouble and internal strife. Please read history independently and don’t rely on articles that spin in to suit their political agenda’s. Good reading in this area are:
‘Chasing a Mirage – The tragic illusion of the Islamic state’ by Tareq Fatah
Peace and love.
Yahya – where in his letter does Usman speak of ‘moral differences’? Which advisors have resigned? What do any of you know about Usman and the circumstances around his departure from Quilliam ? I take it you have been reading Bungles crazy site which is dedicated to bullying and harrasing people who challenge extremists nutters like him.
Such speak is a mix of self-delusion and wishful thinking.
Yahya
You have posted an identical comment on bungles iengage website:
http://www.iengage.org.uk/forum?func=view&catid=3&id=136#136
Either that or you have copy and pasted from his site. How original of you!
So Usman left, I still dont see what the big deal is. It still doesn’t give people the right to publish fake resignation letters does it?
People are leaving and joining companies/groups all the time. Why keep banging on about this? is it a pathetic attempt to have a swipe a Quilliam?
If you are so concerned about his resignation then why don’t you ask Quilliam its side of the story (if there is one) ? Will you do that?…. the answer is ‘No’ because people like you are not interested in the truth. You just want to create rumours and circulate silly stories.
Grow up man!
yahya,
Your arguments againsts QF reek of the MCB/iEngage line of ‘they are just Muslim sellouts to the government, you should be listening to our ramblings instead’. Can you confirm whether or not you still sympathise with these groups??
What are the ‘shameful antics’ to which you refer?
Also City Circle seem to be getting dodgier by the minute.
also, you tell us that Quilliam was a ‘government creation’ as if it is a terrible thing. I dont know whether or not that is entirely true, but if it was, what exactly is your problem with the government? It trying to do something about the radicalisation of Muslim youth in the UK, can you blame it?
MCB was also a government creation, as is MINAB, YMAG and a host of other initiatives. This all stems from the idea that we have a evil satanic government that is forever plotting to destroy Islam. Yet these people work for the Saudi funded Islam channel, the Saudi funded iengage and the Iranian funded Press TV. I know whose money I’d rather have. Quilliam should be proud to recieve tax payers money to fight extremism rather then encouraging it like the JI and Ikhwan types.
Was following this thread, I am a novice on these terms Ikwan, Jamat etc are these people even Muslim??
They are theological modernists and political opportunists.
Ikhwan refers to the Egyptian group ‘Ikhwan al Muslimeen’ or Muslim Brotherhood which was the original Islamist group that spawned all others, i.e. Al Qaeda.
JI refers to Jamaati Islami which is an Islamist group founded by Mawdudi.
Yes they are Muslim but a bit like the Muslim version of the BNP.
You could attribiute all the current forms of radicalism to the Ikhwan and JI etc but how do you answer for the expansionist spreading of Islam by the sword to places like India and Turkey, it seems your ploy to suggest Islamism is a new construct is deceptive, what were the despotic Mohammed Bin Qasim and Tariq Bin Zayd doing in India and Spain respectively during the 8th century, killing and plundering in the name of Islam…that makes them Islamists as their enactments were based on the authority of Caliphs of the time.
Umar Raja
“I believe Islam, in it’s classical form, as expounded by the mashaikh of tassawuf of the spiritual path is a message of mercy and love, which is diametrically opposed to the propaganda espoused by websites such as “Traditional Islamism”.”
Great to know but it ignores the fact that the scholars of traditional Islam wont touch Quilliam with a barge pole and have refused to endorse them largely because their views deviate from Orthodox classical Islam
“also, you tell us that Quilliam was a ‘government creation’ as if it is a terrible thing. ”
The fact is it has no roots in the Muslim community- the MCB which is made up of over 500 affiliated mosques has. QF is just a couple of attention seeking quislings trying to line their pockets
“I dont know whether or not that is entirely true, but if it was, what exactly is your problem with the government? It trying to do something about the radicalisation of Muslim youth in the UK, can you blame it?”
Like illegally invading Iraq you mean?
Wasn’t MCB also a government creation? Or even worse a Tory one. QF and MCB are two very different organisations in the sense that one is a political thinktank that doesn’t claim to represent the ‘community’ nor claims to be a grassroots movement. The MCB does claim to represent the ‘community’ and claims to be an umbrella body. Whether or not ordinary Muslims support either, I don’t know. No-one has done any proper research into this, in fact most ordinary Muslims have never heard of either. What I do know is that most Ikhwan and Jamaati Islami front groups in the UK do support the MCB, now that’s no surprise is it.
Also I think you’ll find that there is more than just a couple of people working at QF, just check their website if your not sure. But the real gribe here is that the MCB applied for government funding but failed, hence the bitterness from the supporters. So they tried to line their pockets but were too full of Islamist nutters to succeed.
Me – i think you’ll find that there were plenty or radicalised nutters in the UK planning attacks here before we invaded Iraq. So sad pathetic excuses to deflect attention are not helpful to the debate. Also by promoting the works of crazies like Mawdudi and Qutb – the Ikhwani crowd of which the MCB belongs have aided the process of radicalisation, shabash.
You could attribiute all the current forms of radicalism to the Ikhwan and JI etc but how do you answer for the expansionist spreading of Islam by the sword to places like India and Turkey, it seems your ploy to suggest Islamism is a new construct is deceptive, what were the despotic Mohammed Bin Qasim and Tariq Bin Zayd doing in India and Spain respectively during the 8th century, killing and plundering in the name of Islam…that makes them Islamists as their enactments were based on the authority of Caliphs of the time.
Ibn Khaldun you follower of a forever Islamist religion, answer my post!!
They were doing what people did in those days, they were expanding their empire in the only way they knew how. They were not claiming that political soverignity belongs to God nor where they synchronising Shariah with state law. Saddam Hussain attacked countries to for ‘expansionist’ reasons, doesn’t make him an Islamist.
Siva
Mohammaed bin Qassim wasn’t a Prophet was he ? of course he could make mistakes. He was a 18-19 year old commander who died at the age of 20. Circumstances around his death are disputed. Some say he was executed by the Umayyad Sultan, some say he was tortured to death in prison and others say he died on his way to Syria. Either the Umayyad Sultan was upset by his excesses or maybe even jealous of him.
Tariq Bin Zayd was invited to Spain by the Christians and Jews who were being persecuted by the Goths. They went their to save ‘the people of the book’ from oppression.
You clearly haven’t grasped the diference between the Khawarij (the first Islamists) and regular Muslims.
Read some history PROPERLY and not just Islamist nonsense!
The imperial age of politics has come to an end today. Historically empires often, if not always, had some kind of religious or dynastic identity. In the Muslim case these were no different. The Ummayads, known as Ummayads because they were lead not by “Islamic scholars” as a theocracy but were lead by the Ummayad family. The Abbasid and Ottoman empires were no different. They did not believe in imposing an “Islamic” economic, political and social systems, nor imposing a singular legal system that was the “Sharia”. That was the norm of the time, and had more to do with the political norms than religious interpretations.
There were often diverse Muslim legal traditions e.g. Ottomans generally belonged to the hanafi school but different schools were practiced throughout the empire; different communal groupings existed in relatively (and I emphasize the word relatively) pluralistic society respecting different religions and different legal traditions for Jews, Christians etc known as the Millet system; the vast majority of laws were dictated by the existing Byzantine legal tradition in he Ottoman empire, and were not “Sharia” based.
Islamism is a mixture of the modern and medieval. Modern ideas of State, with laws, constitutions, and legal systems with judges implementing them on people, but medieval imperial political desires and seek to impose medieval interpretations of Sharia by the power of the modern state institutions. Islamo-facism or Islamo-communism are phrases that are used as it resembles more these political ideologies that modernity or ancient religion. Though it is a bastardization of both.
Ha Ha
Funny to see the non-”Islamists” Muslim yet again realise that extremist non-Muslims hate Islam in totality as a religion and Muslims . Your attacks on “Islamists” just strengthen Muslim haters
Grow some balls and fight Islamophobia
“Islamo-facism or Islamo-communism are phrases that are used as it resembles more these political ideologies that modernity or ancient religion. Though it is a bastardization of both.”
I like the phrase “Kosher fascism” or “Zion-nazism” to define zionism
Came across this, he seems to be having a dig at his ex-employers the Quilliamittes, I guess that resignation letter was genuine after all.
Debate is not enough – we need practical action Radicalisation among Muslims can only be tackled by practical measures at the grassroots – not academic navel-gazing
Usman Raja
guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 23 June 2009 16.00 BST
At a time when a clear problem of radicalisation is affecting our dislocated youth, who often, in their search for a spiritual identity, find themselves prey to literal interpretations of scripture, we are indulging in academic debates. The reality is that while discussions take place in ivory towers, the messages are not filtering down to the grassroots.
Much of the language used recently by the media lays the blame squarely on Islam, often pressing for assimilation rather than understanding that traditional Islam can adapt to new and different cultures. A clear historical example of this is Andalucía, where acceptance rather than tolerance was a trademark of Islam.
A fact that has to be understood is that the propagandist for jihad has no traditional Islamic roots and that his simplistic absolutist message only finds an audience among vulnerable and uninformed youths. Sheikh Faisal, for example, was well known to be ignorant of the nuances of traditional Islam, as indeed was Abu Hamza, who, from being a bouncer, within 3 years appointed himself an Islamic scholar. The very fact that an individual who would be considered a barbarian by the majority of pious Muslims in the community was able to promote himself in this way shows the vulnerability of Muslim youth.
Stigmatising the Muslim community as the problem or demonising sectarian or cultural groups whether they be Salafi, Sufi, Sunni or Shia will only lead to further radicalisation and segmentation of the community. Generalising about a faith group, especially Muslims, who are so diverse, only creates further obstacles and does not addressthe actual issue of a deviant subculture.
Often, during my own dialogues with radicalised youths, I have found that the demonstration of Islam both through traditional concepts and close understanding of texts destroys the feeble underpinnings jihadist ideology. However, to cement this understanding, an individual-focused effort at social and psychological support needs to be employed. Providing an academic counter to jihadist ideology is not the difficult part: the problem arises from the emotional, social and psychological factors that jihadists manipulate.
In my work I find myself crossing cultural borders within Muslim communities and have seen a myriad of social issues specific to each subgroup: whether it be first generation migrants who are rebelling against failed assimilation or British-born Muslims who feel a sense of dislocation and frustration further fuelled by the sociopolitical climate: some go on to find their identity within an extremist group and ideology. What has not been understood by observers is the sheer diversity of the Muslim community. As a result many Muslim youths are slipping through the net of current de-radicalisation efforts.
So what then should be the focus of the strategy and who is there with the relevant experience to tackle this issue?
The solution lies in being practical. Without direct engagement at the grassroots, theoretical analysis is futile. Until the authorities recognise the fact that it is only with the community that de-radicalisation can be conducted, we will not progress beyond academic navel-gazing.