The Guardian Gagged by Chowdhury Mueen-Uddin of the MCB

Last week, the Guardian published an article in which the author, Delwar Hussain, named a number of prominent British Muslims who have been associated with war crimes in the Genocide of East Pakistan in 1971.

We discussed the article on the Spittoon, in which we expressed our expectation that the Guardian was bound to get sued by Chowdhury Mueen-Uddin for publishing Delwar’s piece:

Being an extremely litigious sort of individual, published reports which recounted these allegations have almost always been silenced by a swift libel notice from Mueen-Uddin’s lawyers and it is very likely that the Guardian might also be forced to retract that article in a similar manner.

Harry’s Place made a similar assertion:

Mueen-Uddin usually responds to these reports by instructing Carter Ruck to fire off a letter before action. Perhaps he won’t this time, and is now content to be described as a war criminal and the murderer of Bangladeshi patriots. If not, I hope that the Guardian stands its ground when the letter before action comes flying.

Well that is exactly what has happened.

Following a “legal complaint”, the Guardian has been forced to remove all references to Mueen-Uddin from both the article from all comments below the line. The article on CiF now shows this message:

• On 13 October this article was changed following a legal complaint.

This was one of the sections that was expunged from Delwar’s article:

A Channel Four documentary from 1995 made allegations of involvement by British Bangladeshis in the genocide. Chowdhury Mueen-Uddin, director of Muslim Spiritual Care Provision in the NHS, who was until recently vice-chairman of the East London Mosque and London Muslim Centre and was involved in setting up the Muslim Council of Britain, is one of the most prominent people to be accused of having carried out war crimes.

Mueen-Uddin is alleged to have been part of a group that abducted and “disappeared” people. Witnesses at the time describe seeing him kidnapping a university professor and a journalist in Dhaka during the war. Mueen-Uddin told the documentary makers “all the accusations being made against me are … utterly false and malicious, and either politically motivated or instigated otherwise”.

Having left the newly created country of Bangladesh for London, Mueen-Uddin, along with other members of JI set up Islamic Forum Europe, an avowedly Islamist organisation connected to the East London Mosque.

This is a shocking and disgraceful tactic from one of Britain’s more notorious resident-Islamists. Mueen-Uddin is simply taking full advantage of British defamation laws which are strongly weighted in favour of claimants and against freedom of expression.

Following closely in the heels of the Trafigura gagging order, this is yet another example of the Guardian being silenced at the wave of a chequebook. But the Trafigura incident did demonstrate to us how e-activism on twitter can be used as pressure-tool to reverse and withdraw gagging orders.

Those who are in favour of freedom of expression and justice in Britain must counter this despicable underhand move by Chowdhury Mueen-Uddin.

Update:

Harry’s Place picks up the story.

Thanks to the efforts of judges like Mr Justice Eady, and England’s claimant-friendly law of Defamation, activists connected to Jamaat-e-Islami and the Muslim Brotherhood routinely instruct their solicitors to fire off letters before action, claiming that their poor client’s reputations have been sullied, whenever blogs or newspapers report on their clients’ words, deeds, or the politics of the organisations to which they belong. Harry’s Place receives these sorts of letters all the time.

This entry was posted in Freedom of Expression, Islamism. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.

50 Comments

  1. Rashid
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 12:04 AM | Permalink

    So, basically what you are saying is that you want free and unfettered ability to lie and smear people without truth getting in the way. No court has charged him, but your happy to pre-judge him and prosecute him without a fair trial. Thank god we’re not governed by kangaroo (and sharia) courts

  2. dawood
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 12:08 AM | Permalink

    This was the report from the Indy back in 1995 on the Channel 4 Dispatches documentary:

    Three prominent British Muslims are denying allegations that they were involved in atrocities during the Bangladesh war of independence from Pakistan in the early Seventies.

    Two former ministers have called on the British authorities to investigate the claims by witnesses who say they saw acts of murder and incitement to murder, and collaboration with the retreating Pakistani army.

    The claims are made in a documentary – Dispatches – tonight on Channel 4. One of the three linked at the time with organisations which persecuted intellectuals, is Chowdhury Mueen Uddin, in his late forties, who lives in Tottenham, north London; he works for a housing cooperative, is vice- chairman of East London Mosque, and is a campaigner against Salman Rushdie. The second accused is Abu Sayeed, also in his late forties, who lives in London; he is principal of the Islamic College in the East End and is a co-opted member of the Tower Hamlets education committee.

    The third is Lutfur Rahman, in his late fifties, who lives in Bordesley Green, Birmingham; he is an imam of Bordesley Green Islamic Centre, and like Abu Sayeed, was said to be a member of a radical Islamic group, Dawatul Islam. All three deny involvement in any atrocities.

  3. Rashid
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 12:18 AM | Permalink

    The last time neo-cons complained about Muslims using legal redress was after your buddies at the Policy Exchange LIED about extremism in mosques. Soon after the delightful Henry Jackson society brought over neocon US quarterbacks to talk about the ‘legal Jihad’ used by so called Islamists. But as we saw from the exposure of the Policy Exchange by Newsnight, liers never can see beyond their blinkered ideological worldview

  4. Effendi
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 12:24 AM | Permalink

    “No court has charged him, but your happy to pre-judge him and prosecute him without a fair trial.”

    No we want a free press, not one hamstrung by lawfare and libel tourists.

    But having said that, I dearly hope the Guardian stands its ground, so the case goes to court and then we start seeing real accusers, witnesses and evidence in a real court of law. That would be fair, don’t you think?

  5. 264u
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 8:07 AM | Permalink

    This must be so confusing for you Rashad. Aren’t Muslims always the victims? If ever, God forbid, they are accused of being the aggressors it must be a neo con Zionist conspiracy. Damn those neo cons must be so busy.

  6. Abu Faris
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 8:34 AM | Permalink

    I agree, Effendi.

    Someone needs to make a stand against this sort of censorious threat of litigation by Islamists – and who better than a leading news provider with all the legal muscle it can bring to bear.

    Let’s have this out in open court. If Mueen Uddin has no case to answer, if the allegations made against him are false, then what better place for him to clear his name than in a court of law?

  7. Abu Faris
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 8:40 AM | Permalink

    Even Wikipedia seems to have the measure of JI – can they expect the threats of writs any time soon?

    They [JI] are an anti-liberation front, who openly attempted to stop the liberation of Bangladesh from Pakistan, believing it would have existed better as a dominated islamic state under Pakistani rule. A large number of members of the party have played a crucial role in the 1971 Bangladesh atrocities during the liberation war such as organized killing of intellectuals, genocide and violence against women.

    Emphases added

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamaat-e-Islami_Bangladesh

  8. Humzah
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 9:24 AM | Permalink

    I somehow doubt The Guardian will take this to court once they realise these are sham accusations made by Awami League and their buddies in the Labour Party and Quilliam Foundation in the UK. This case has already been dismissed in the 90′s for these reasons.

  9. Abu Faris
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 9:50 AM | Permalink

    Humzah,

    Tosh.

  10. Effendi
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 10:00 AM | Permalink

    Humzah

    Rubbish. The allegations against CM-U and his involvement in the al-Badr death squads outside of Bangladesh go back to 1972 when it was reported by the New York Times. Here in the UK, reportage appeared, thanks to the Channel 4 Dispatches documentary, in 1995. Back then there was no such thing as the Quilliam Foundation and the Tories were in power.

  11. Humzah
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 10:27 AM | Permalink

    yep. As we can see from the Guardian. Anyone can report politically motivated smears and dress them up as fact, so the New York Times report is of no consequence. Sure Labour were not around but where did these lies originate from? Vindictive Awami League chumps who wanted to destroy their political opponents. If there was such a case why after thirty years have none of these so called ‘razakars’ been prosecuted? It is because once the ‘facts’ on which these allegations lie are considered, they are shown up to be nothing but sham political smearing by the awami league et al. Why do you think the CPS and then Conservative Home Office minister dismissed the case?

  12. Effendi
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 10:40 AM | Permalink

    Likewise, anyone can be involved in death squads in one country, and abscond to the UK – where they rebuild their lives, hide their past crimes and continue to become prominent members of the Muslim community – helped along by knowing and credulous Muslim “chumps”.

    If the facts were so worthless, why has this individual routinely instructed his solicitors to fire off letters before action, claiming that their poor client’s reputations has been sullied? And why do we continue to see “chumps” from the MCB and the political Islamists from the East London Mosque rushing to his defence?

    And as for the “it’s been thirty years, why no prosecution” bollocks, well have you heard of John Demjanjuk, the 89-year-old Nazi war-crimes suspect, who goes on trial in Munich more than 60 years after he committed his crimes? “Chumps” from the MCB should familiarise yourselves with the Demjanjuk case.

  13. Abu Faris
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 10:49 AM | Permalink

    “Chumps” from the MCB should familiarise yourselves with the Demjanjuk case.

    Unfortunately, let’s be frank about this, quite a few of these fellows either:

    (a) Deny the Holocaust ever happened, or play down its extent;

    (b) Quietly believe that the victims of Nazi genocide had it coming to them.

    They hold similar attitudes, it would seem, about the Bangladesh Genocide too.

  14. nazrulski
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 10:55 AM | Permalink

    Ah yes, create and choose a bogeyman on which you can pin all the blame so that you don’t have to face up to yours.

    Before the Quilliam Foundation appeared on the scene, the universal bogeyman were the Jews and before them, the Hindus, and even before them, “the Briteesh”.

  15. Humzah
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 10:59 AM | Permalink

    hmm, seem to have hit a raw nerve in exposing your shoddy campaign. You seem to have failed to answer the question. Why has the prosecution been not ignored but rejected by governments? It is because the British government do not really view Bengali tribal accusations as serious. Funnily enough I am not involved in the MCB and could not really give two hoots about Islamism. I do find the shallow tribalism and quest for power by you and your bed fellows at Quilliam amusing though.

  16. Humzah
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 11:00 AM | Permalink

    yes whilst for all of you the bogeyman on which you can pin all your problems have always been the Muslimists.

  17. nazrulski
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 11:08 AM | Permalink

    yes whilst for all of you the bogeyman on which you can pin all your problems have always been the Muslimists.

    damn straight!

  18. Effendi
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 11:11 AM | Permalink

    “Funnily enough I am not involved in the MCB and could not really give two hoots about Islamism. I do find the shallow tribalism and quest for power by you and your bed fellows at Quilliam amusing though.”

    Funny that, because you sound just like a textbook, shallow tribalist “chump” from the MCB.

  19. Humzah
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 11:13 AM | Permalink

    how very sad. Perhaps you should another more healthy pastime.
    Maybe find a girl take her out. Or if your already married i imagine the relationship has gone a bit sour. Do something to spice it up. Or perhaps you are into boys.

  20. Humzah
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 11:15 AM | Permalink

    “Funny that, because you sound just like a textbook, shallow tribalist “chump” from the MCB.”

    Yes it is funny how you can conveniently fit anyone who disagrees with your wild positions as an Islamist or from the MCB.

  21. Effendi
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 11:18 AM | Permalink

    Yes it is funny, isn’t it?

  22. Humzah
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 11:25 AM | Permalink

    boring. not able to answer the questions then. Just goes to show how useless your accusations are.

  23. Abu Faris
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 11:26 AM | Permalink

    Humzah

    Can you explain to me why, invariably, whenever Islamists engage with people who don’t happen to agree with them, they resort to crude name-calling, insults and assorted ad hominem attacks?

    Is it because you don’t have a leg to stand on?

  24. Posted October 15, 2009 at 11:29 AM | Permalink

    Ideally such cases would be tried in a court and then everyone can know who is guilty and who is innocent. If the absence of such a trial, however, people should be able to report on who is suspected of committing crimes and ask questions about them.

  25. Effendi
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 11:29 AM | Permalink

    Just goes to show how useless you accusations are.

    Not nearly as useless or self-contradictory as your defences of the accusations. You need to improve your game if you want to be respected around here.

  26. Posted October 15, 2009 at 11:33 AM | Permalink

    So, Humzah, you say to Effendi:

    “Yes it is funny how you can conveniently fit anyone who disagrees with your wild positions as an Islamist or from the MCB.”

    Yet, you label everyone here Quilliam just because we disagree with you!! I love it when you Islamists/apologists for Islamism open your mouths…you can’t help but put your foot in it.

  27. Abu Faris
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 11:35 AM | Permalink

    D’oh!

  28. Humzah
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 11:47 AM | Permalink

    Please explain how I have made an ad hominem attack and then explain if it is in an ad hominem attack how it is different from any of the attacks this website regularly makes on muslims.

    Ok i agree i did resort to labelling everyone Quilliamists. (although i would like to know how many variations of Ed are on this blog). There may very well be different shades of quilliam.

  29. Posted October 15, 2009 at 11:51 AM | Permalink

    …just as there are different shades of Islamism.

  30. Posted October 15, 2009 at 11:58 AM | Permalink

    “Variations of Ed”. I thought that we were all Rashad Ali. You crazy cats need to sort out your conspiracy theories.

  31. Inayat
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 12:00 PM | Permalink

    No I am Ed Husain!

  32. Daud Abdullah
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 12:00 PM | Permalink

    No *I* am Ed Husain!

  33. Chuda Mofo-Uddin
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 12:01 PM | Permalink

    No! I am Ed Husain!

  34. Abdul Rahman Sudais
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 12:03 PM | Permalink

    No!!!!! I am Ed Husain!

  35. Omar Bakri
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 12:04 PM | Permalink

    Fuck off girls. I am the ONE, true, Ed Husain.

  36. 264u
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 12:10 PM | Permalink

    Another nut job who sees Quilliam everywhere. JI and their front groups are disliked by people everywhere and have been heavily criticised for over 60 years. It’s nothing new. Your desire to drag quilliam into the debate without there being any link whatsoever, exposes a shallow mind thats in denial.

  37. Humzah
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 12:15 PM | Permalink

    yes people absolutly everywhere. So you go on to prove once again it is your dislike of JI that fuels these accusations rather than actual facts. Thanks.

  38. Effendi
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 12:23 PM | Permalink

    Humzah

    “yes people absolutly everywhere. So you go on to prove once again it is your dislike/ envy of JI that fuels these accusations rather than actual facts.”

    Tell us what is there to envy of a clerical fascist outfit of political-Islam, which has been irrefutably associated with organizing the killing of intellectuals, genocide and violence against women? It is a sick joke that these same clerical fascists now purport to represent Muslims in Britain because they are the grandees of the MCB.

    Do you not actually think it’s the facts that inspires dislike of genocidal Islamism rather than the other way round?

  39. Humzah
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 12:36 PM | Permalink

    you seem strange understanding of what facts actually are. Claims made by Awami League and associates about what JI may have done are not ‘irrefutable”. Far from it, once you delve deeper they are actually constructed fantasies. A quick reading of historical literature on the issue proves as much. What are the JI ‘hated’ for? They supported the union with Pakistan. So did many other Bengali’s at the time. This may well be questionable but do not conflate two issues.

  40. Ahmed Fieldgate-St
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 12:38 PM | Permalink

    Whitechapel is crawling with Jamaati bastards, businesses, landlords you name it. Kids as young as 16 are now Jamaati activists. Something got to be done.

  41. Effendi
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 12:39 PM | Permalink

    you seem strange understanding of what facts actually are. Claims made by Awami League and associates about what JI may have done are not ‘irrefutable”. Far from it, once you delve deeper they are actually constructed fantasies.

    Some of your deep-felt wishes, no doubt.

  42. Abu Faris
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 1:31 PM | Permalink

    Please explain how I have made an ad hominem attack

    You played the man, not the ball here, sir:

    http://www.spittoon.org/archives/2996/comment-page-1#comment-12894

    Quod erat demonstrandum

    Find and use a dictionary if you do not know what ad hominem means. Either that or learn some Latin.

    Salve.

  43. Abu Faris
    Posted October 15, 2009 at 1:34 PM | Permalink

    … and I am Ed Hussein (as well).

  44. Mustapha
    Posted October 16, 2009 at 12:39 AM | Permalink

    Munafiqeen and Kafiroon indeed every breath you take brings you closer to the meeting with Angels of Allah (swt) and indeed the Lord of the Throne proclaims war on those who oppress and demonise His believing men and women. But of course you no longer believe in any meeting with the Divine as described by the Prophet of Allah, so continue your whim filled existence, it will not change the inevitable..in a hundred years we will be gone and then we will see who stood for truth and who stood for falsehood. Allahu Akbar!!

  45. Humzah
    Posted October 16, 2009 at 12:27 PM | Permalink

    i expect i will be gone before a hundred years. You never know though.

  46. Abdullah Ibrahim
    Posted October 16, 2009 at 12:32 PM | Permalink

    “in a hundred years we will be gone and then we will see who stood for truth and who stood for falsehood.”

    In a hundred years we will be gone and then we will see who aided the genocide of Bengalis, the mass rape of women and children and who aided, supported and protected the culpable from the confines of MCB affiliated mosques in East London.

  47. Humzah
    Posted October 16, 2009 at 12:40 PM | Permalink

    wow, you both have a tremendous insight into the future.

  48. RobG
    Posted January 31, 2011 at 1:27 PM | Permalink

    Is the same guy that has a letter in todays Guardian?

  49. Posted October 18, 2012 at 10:22 PM | Permalink

    Awesome issues here. I’m very glad to see your article. Thank you so much and I’m taking a look ahead to touch you.
    Will you kindly drop me a mail?

  50. Posted October 18, 2012 at 10:24 PM | Permalink

    I am in fact thankful to the owner of this web page who has shared
    this impressive piece of writing at at this time.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *

*
*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Subscribe without commenting

  • Categories

  • Archives