Now it might look like I’ve got something of an obsession these days, but Inayat Bunglawala has really lost the plot.
His Saudi-backed iEngage slime machine is accusing Ghaffar Hussain, of the Quilliam Foundation, of wanting to ban the burqa. Unfortunately for Bungle, this is not true. Have a look at Quilliam’s website – it’s very clear – “Quilliam Opposes Burkha Ban.” Poor Inayat, he’s bungled it all up. It’s easy to understand why – early versions of the Express story misquoted Mr Hussain, an error which they have now corrected.
Ghaffar Hussain, of the anti-extremist think-tank Quilliam, said that while not in favour of an outright ban, there was nothing on religious grounds that justified women having to wear burkhas.
The think tank said that people should be allowed to wear what they wanted.
Bungle really is running the gauntlet here. If he doesn’t correct the story as the Express has then he’ll risk being sued, and these kinds of legalities are rather close to Bungle’s heart. Yet more evidence of the depths to which Quilliam’s opponents will sink. If you can’t be bothered to counter your opponent’s arguments and instead resort to this kind of “tactic” then it’s fairly obvious who’s won.
**************
UPDATE:
iEngage have somewhat unbungled themselves by correcting their story – even if they have some strange usage of scare quotes.
Ghaffar Hussain of the QF argues that “wearing a burkha does limit a woman, restricting her in the jobs she can do” although a later ‘correction’ on the Express website sought to clarify that QF were opposed to an outright ban.
It’s something though.
14 Comments
Wait a minute…he is not favour of an outright ban, but he undermines and refutes the theological precept and basis for this religous attire??? Since when has Ghaffar ‘illegitimate spawn of Ed & Majid’ been a scholar of Islam, who enabled him to make such statements??
Shahid, if Ghaffar is not fit to comment due to his lack of scholarship, what credentials do IENGAGE have? Perhaps you’d care to tell us which ‘scholars’ are involved with them?
What about the way IENGAGE labels Quilliam as ‘sellouts’, ‘charlatans’ etc? Is it one rule for them, and one rule for you?
And why did you just ignore my last questions to you? Couldn’t face the truth? Oh well, Allah tells us that truth always prevails over falsehood – and you’ve just proved that with your actions here.
Lovely.
Bungles is just trying to keep his Saudi paymasters happy so that he can get more funding. Attacking moderates and Sufi’s seems to work, must be music to Saudi ears : )
Does anyone know what Bungles has done wth the £5 million funding he has received from the Saudi’s so far?
I heard Muhammad Ali of the Islam Channel also helps out with iengage. Is he off the interpol ‘wanted terrorist’ list yet?, see:
http://www.interpol.int/Public/Data/Wanted/Notices/Data/1992/85/1992_27585.asp
Wow what a major error. not.
Quillaim might be wildly popular with zionists but they are worse than a joke in the Muslim community.
And it seems like you have bungled
“Ghaffar Hussain of the QF argues that “wearing a burkha does limit a woman, restricting her in the jobs she can do” although a later ‘correction’ on the Express website sought to clarify that QF were opposed to an outright ban.”
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/109563/Ban-the-Burkha-here-in-Britain
Covering the face was practiced by our mothers the wives of the Prophet (may Allah be pleased with them)
Hadith – Bukhari 6:282
‘Aisha used to say: “When (the Verse): ‘They should draw their veils over their necks and bosoms,’ was revealed, (the ladies) cut their waist sheets at the edges and covered their faces with the cut pieces.”
All of the four Sunni maddhabs concur that the niqab (face veil) is part of Islam . They differ on whether it is an obligation or just recommended.
QF are simply talking out of their hats
Quillaim might be wildly popular with zionists but they are worse than a joke in the Muslim community.
Which Muslim community?
You are misrepresenting the issue ‘me’. Lots of scholars, many of them emanating from within the traditions of the four madhabs disagree over the issue of hijab/niqab/jilbab and its application today. Surely, you are aware of this? However, you hold a view that lots of people share and are consequently entitled to challenge Quilliam on that issue. It’s a debate that is currently taking place among Muslims and challenging Quilliam on their understanding of it is not the problem.
Once again, however, you fail to grasp what is actually going on and you’re simply reading what you want to read, rather than what is actually written. This post is criticising IENGAGE for misrepresenting Ghaffar as supporting a ban on the burqa. He doesn’t. Now that’s a completely different issue to the role/place of the headscarf in Islam.
Can’t you see that?
@Me
See the article below concerning Grand Mufti Ali Gum’ah’s fatwa on Muslim women wearing the niqab in non-Muslim countries:
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=ArticleA_C&cid=1173695288775&pagename=Zone-Arabic-Shariah%2FSRALayout
Inayat Bunglawala has not yet, just as many others haven’t, realized that there has been a quantum shift in the perceptions of a large part of the European “West”. Unfortunately for some people the majority of the British and Indeed most other “Western” societies don’t like the burkha. An inconvenient fact some would say but nevertheless a fact.
It goes against everything the West stands for, re women’s rights and there will come a time when the ‘left’ will not be able stem the flow of anger felt, rightly or wrongly, at what they see as an alien and backward dress code.
The credulous left think the burkha is just another multicultural oddity but the ‘left’ are going to be out of power soon and some people, especially those in their early 20s, are in for a bit of a shock because if the likes of the British Tory Party don’t do something about people like Anjem Choudary, Inayat Bunglawala, and women clad in Burkha’s, then the “people” will vote for a government that does.
These are simple realities that some people seem unable to grasp. If governments in the west don’t deal with the perceived fears, real or imagined, then the people will vote in governments that will.
It’s not the “Muslims” that an ever growing number of people have a problem with, it’s Islam and some of its ‘adherents’ overt attempts to rile non-Muslims, which as far as I am concerned is what the wearing of the Burkha is all about. The credulous Left will always give anyone the benefit of the doubt in the interests of “community cohesion” and I do respect their position but unless some people have been living in igloo in the South pole for the last 10 years, there has been a change in perception.
If I were an Islamic person I would drop this political attire like a ton of bricks, it’s the logical choice. Politically things are going to change in a big way all over Europe in the next few years, a lot of people from many different nations have only seen the “West” when times are good, good for the West that is, they haven’t seen the “West” when times are bad, take it from me, the West can be just as violent if not infinitely ‘worse’ than the worst of them.
Peace to all, but not at any cost.
One doesn’t have to be an Islamic scholar to point out the well known fact that there is nothing in the Quran about wearing a Burqa. Even if one is of the view that the Burqa is neccessary then they should be aware of the fact that firstly it is minority view and secondly there is no need to follow it in a place like Britain where you are attracting an unnecessary amount of attention to yourself and making a bold public statement about rejecting the society you are living in. In such a situation you are at liberty to adopt another valid view, i.e. hijab, because it is less hostile.
The truth is many of these girls are sticking two fingers to society and making an identity statement which further antagonises Muslim – non Muslim relations at a time in which we should be working to mend them. They make me sick!
Ibn Khaldun, I agree totally, as I am certain, do most muslims living in the UK and indeed Europe. I must leave for work now but I look forward to reading the articles and comments of this blog in the future. Thanks.
I am not sure you are clear about what you are saying here… Hijab means a cover and includes traditionally the face according the majority of classical schools; as per Fiqh al-Mazahib al-Arba’a noting the difference of the maliki school there which it states does not take this view.
Hanafi scholars of certain persuasions have adopted a lighter view as being acceptable too, such as uncovering the face (what I asssume you describe as ‘hijab’ i.e. merely wearing a scarf covering the hair but not the face). Other Shafi’Is have given that view also today.
Your interpretation that they are doing so as a two fingers up to society I find highly debatable if not flimsy. The NIqab is almost only worn by Muslim women for religious grounds, based upon the verse which tells them to draw their veil over them (the naming of the burka or any other is not the issue), this verse by the majority was taken to mean a complete cover as I have mentioned.
I am not an advocate of it today, but your comment like the QF commentator just sounds a little, off the mark – there are some, a tiny minority who take your view, and it is valid, but that does not make it accurate to say it is cultural or in fact not obligatory to cover; but in general it is not a political but religious statement.
Your attitude towards it, I do not find helpful to the debate. Nor in fact is it at all to do with rejecting society, the irony here is that those calling for a ban are aiding extremists, by alienating them. We should be seeking to integrate them further into society not abuse them like what you have in your post.
I agree we should not seek to ban it but I firmly believe that is had very little to do with religious observance. After 911 a quite large number of Muslims in my area either grew beards or wore the Niqab and Hijab. They were saying ‘look I am a Muslim and I want to stand by my Muslim brothers and sisters around the world’. Now many of these individuals have reverted back to how they dressed pre-911. So in my humble view it is more about identity.
You must also try to put yourself in the shoes of non-Muslims who are working to integrate Muslim communities. Doesn’t the Burqa throw up a fresh set of challenges which are entirely unnecessary. 70% of communication is via facial expressions, the Burqa prevents this and turns women into voiceless and faceless beings who don’t want to make a contribution to society.