This is a guest post by Sheikh Spear
****
Iran is a brutal theocratic dictatorship that executes minors, stones adulterous women to death, persecutes religious and ethnic minorities and murders and imprisons non-violent protestors for calling for free and fair elections.
Fareena Alam presenting on Press TV
It is also not exactly supportive of the UK’s struggle against Islamist extremism. The Iranian government is widely believed to have supplied Iraqi insurgents with many of the roadside bombs that killed British soldiers in Iraq, Iran’s leaders have also called for the extrajudicial murder of a British novelist and funded London-based radical Islamist outfits such as the comically misnamed Islamic Human Rights Commission.
One would think, therefore, that the British government would regard employees of the Iranian government as being less than ideal partners for the UK domestic ‘Preventing Violent Extremism’ programme.
Unfortunately, this is not the case.
One of the UK government’s flagship counter-extremism programmes is the Radical Middle Way (RMW) which was established with £460,000 of government money in 2005 by former members of Q-News magazine, namely Fuad Nahdi, Abdul Rehman Malik and Malik’s wife Fareena Alam.
Fareena Alam first shot to fame two days after the 9-11 when she told a former US ambassador in a now-notorious edition of BBC Question Time that the US had deserved for the attacks because of its support for Israel, which she described as a ‘terrorist’ state.
Of the resulting media furore, she later said that ‘I think I got picked on in the papers because I had tanned skin, I’m a Muslim, a woman and I was wearing a headscarf’ and that ‘If it was untimely, it was the BBC’s fault for running it two days after the attack’.
Despite this, Alam became one of the RMW’s most main public faces. She also chaired a number of the group’s public events, including one event in April 2008 that included Fuad Nahdi’s wife, Humera Khan, and Catherine Heseltine from MPACUK, an organisation which has been widely described as Anti-Semitic.
In around mid-2008, however, Alam joined Press TV, the Iranian government-run and –funded propaganda station, as a reporter. She immediately began producing a stream of blatantly one-sided TV pieces that parroted the Iranian government’s line.
For instance, in one story nominally about the Iraqi president’s visit to London, Alam concluded that “Maliki’s visit to London occurred on the day that British troops started to finally withdraw from Iraq after six years. Most Iraqis will be glad to see the back of them and if they return in business suits instead of jackboots, their welcome will be far from certain.”
Leaving aside her sweeping assumption that ‘most Iraqis will be glad to see the back of them’, it is striking that Alam used the word ‘jackboots’ in reference to British troops. As far as I am used ‘jackboots’ references are used almost solely to make Nazi comparisons. Does Fareena Alam really think that British troops are comparable with the Nazis? And if she does, what does she make of the totalitarian and undemocratic Iranian government that pays her wages?
Despite producing such anti-British propaganda on behalf of the Iranian government, Alam has remained one of the RMW’s public faces. For instance, in May 2009, she chaired an RMW event called ‘Wired Warriors for the soul of Islam’ featuring Muslim bloggers. This event was presumably funded through the £350,000 that the Department for Communities and Local Government gave to RMW during 6-month period from October 2008 to April 2009.
Alam, while working for the Iranian government, also remained closely involved in the RMW’s day-to-day administration. In April this year, for instance, she posted on the RMW’s facebook page to thank the group’s followers for RSVP-ing to the group’s upcoming events and telling them about RMW’s future plans:
Since starting work for Press TV, she has also written she written on the group’s facebook page that RMW had joined twitter, telling readers to “follow us” – by which she presumably means the RMW rather than Press TV:
Of course, the RMW could argue that Alam was not making these statements on behalf of the group and has been doing so without its knowledge. I don’t believe that this is the case however – RMW employees could hardly fail to notice that she is regularly posting in the group’s name on their popular facebook page.
And even if this is the case, then why is Alam also one of only 7 administrators in the group’s facebook page – one of its main points of contact with its youthful audience – if she is no longer seen as being part of RMW?
Now, I’m sure that Fareena is a lovely person in many ways. And I also appreciate that because her husband, Abdul Rehman Malik, is heavily involved in RMW, it is difficult for her to sever contact with the group.
At the same time, however, it is manifestly insane that an Iranian government employee, especially one who works for Tehran’s main English language propaganda outlet and who compares British soldiers to fascist storm-troopers, should be involved in running the UK’s most lavishly-funded counter-extremism programme.
Iranian government employee involved in British ‘Prevent’ programme
This is a guest post by Sheikh Spear
Iran is a brutal theocratic dictatorship that executes minors, stones adulterous women to death, persecutes religious and ethnic minorities and murders and imprisons non-violent protestors for calling for free and fair elections.
It is also not exactly supportive of the UK’s struggle against Islamist extremism. The Iranian government is widely believed to have supplied Iraqi insurgents with many of the roadside bombs that killed British soldiers in Iraq, Iran’s leaders have also called for the extrajudicial murder of a British novelist and funded London-based radical Islamist outfits such as the comically misnamed Islamic Human Rights Commission.
One would think, therefore, that the British government would regard employees of the Iranian government as being less than ideal partners for the UK domestic ‘Preventing Violent Extremism’ programme.
Unfortunately, this is not the case.
One of the UK government’s flagship counter-extremism programmes is the Radical Middle Way (RMW) which was established with £460,000 of government money in 2005 by former members of Q-News magazine, namely Fuad Nahdi, Abdul Rehman Malik and Malik’s wife Fareena Alam.
Fareena Alam first shot to fame two days after the 9-11 when she told a former US ambassador in a now-notorious edition of BBC Question Time that the US had deserved for the attacks because of its support for Israel, which she described as a ‘terrorist’ state.
Of the resulting media furore, she later said that ‘I think I got picked on in the papers because I had tanned skin, I’m a Muslim, a woman and I was wearing a headscarf’ and that ‘If it was untimely, it was the BBC’s fault for running it two days after the attack’.
Despite this, Alam became one of the RMW’s most main public faces. She also chaired a number of the group’s public events, including one event in April 2008 that included Fuad Nahdi’s wife, Humera Khan, and Catherine Heseltine, from the anti-Semitic MPACUK organisation.
In around mid-2008, however, Alam joined Press TV, the Iranian government-run and –funded propaganda station, as a reporter. She immediately began producing a stream of blatantly one-sided TV pieces that parroted the Iranian government’s line.
For instance, in one story nominally about the Iraqi president’s visit to London, Alam concluded that “Maliki’s visit to London occurred on the day that British troops started to finally withdraw from Iraq after six years. Most Iraqis will be glad to see the back of them and if they return in business suits instead of jackboots, their welcome will be far from certain.”
<object style=”height: 344px; width: 425px”><param name=”movie” value=”http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsD1KL-ObQQ&feature=player_detailpage”><param name=”allowFullScreen” value=”true”><param name=”allowScriptAccess” value=”always”><embed src=”http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsD1KL-ObQQ&feature=player_detailpage” type=”application/x-shockwave-flash” allowfullscreen=”true” allowScriptAccess=”always” width=”425″ height=”344″></object>
Leaving aside her sweeping assumption that ‘most Iraqis will be glad to see the back of them’, it is striking that Alam used the word ‘jackboots’ in reference to British troops. As far as I am used ‘jackboots’ references are used almost solely to make Nazi comparisons. Does Fareena Alam really think that British troops are comparable with the Nazis? And if she does, what does she make of the totalitarian and undemocratic Iranian government that pays her wages?
Despite producing such anti-British propaganda on behalf of the Iranian government, Alam has remained one of the RMW’s public faces. For instance, in May 2009, she chaired an RMW event called ‘Wired Warriors for the soul of Islam’ featuring Muslim bloggers. This event was presumably funded through the £350,000 that the Department for Communities and Local Government gave to RMW during 6-month period from October 2008 to April 2009.
Alam, while working for the Iranian government, also remained closely involved in the RMW’s day-to-day administration. In April this year, for instance, she posted on the RMW’s facebook page to thank the group’s followers for RSVP-ing to the group’s upcoming events and telling them about RMW’s future plans:
Since starting work for Press TV, she has also written she written on the group’s facebook page that RMW had joined twitter, telling readers to “follow us” – by which she presumably means the RMW rather than Press TV:
Of course, the RMW could argue that Alam was not making these statements on behalf of the group and has been doing so without its knowledge. I don’t believe that this is the case however – RMW employees could hardly fail to notice that she is regularly posting in the group’s name on their popular facebook page.
And even if this is the case, then why is Alam also one of only 7 administrators in the group’s facebook page – one of its main points of contact with its youthful audience – if she is no longer seen as being part of RMW?
Now, I’m sure that Fareena is a lovely person in many ways. And I also appreciate that because her husband, Abdul Rehman Malik, is heavily involved in RMW, it is difficult for her to sever contact with the group.
At the same time, however, it is manifestly insane that an Iranian government employee, especially one who works for Tehran’s main English language propaganda outlet and who compares British soldiers to fascist storm-troopers, should be involved in running the UK’s most lavishly-funded counter-extremism programme.
34 Comments
This is a difficult issue. Fareena has written some sensible things in the past – but at the same time, once a person starts working for the Iranian government they should have nothing whatsoever to do with the UK’s counter-radicalisation efforts. This should be a ‘no-brainer’.
It’s a case of denial psychology and an inverted value system:
“No matter how many muslims an Islamic State can murder, brutalise, torture and dislocate, they are far, far better than the West and can do no wrong”.
Damn straight! Fareena is a naughty little Bengali girl who will eventually learn the error of her ways..insha’ Allah
The problem with you Spittooners is that you are trying to widen your spectrum of enemies. This artcle is very weak and to go after someone like Fareena is frankly suicidal, it will do more to undermine your whole initiative. If you really wanted to venture beyond the predictable hatchet job reportage we have grown accustomed to, maybe you could have looked at whether RMW is just a plain waste of time and public money, as no hardened radical would be seen dead at their middle-class poetry fests and lectures which are attended by the usual crowd.
“This artcle is very weak and to go after someone like Fareena is frankly suicidal, it will do more to undermine your whole initiative.”
Try reading the points that are being made here with your eyes before talking out of your fundament.
I suppose she’s got to pay the bills somehow, British govt, Iranian govt whoever?
I don’t think she’s an extremist though, more opportunist.
A good wake up call to the so called ‘moderates’ over at RMW, their stupid little no effect events burn tax payers money like there is no tomorrow, yet they still get castigated by the Munafiqoon blog. Indeed the Munafiqoon will never rest till the Muslimeen attest to thier way of thinking and action.
So, RMW are really “extremists” are they? Fascinating.
I wager you would not be complaining if those revenues were instead being burned-up by out-and-out Islamists.
No, I don’t think the article was castigating RMW as such – rather, it was pointing out the dysfunction between their status as a partner in the government’s anti-extremist platform and the opinions and other activities of some of its leading members. Perhaps too subtle for you?
The hypocrites are Islamists who persist in their campaign to identify Islamism with Islam in toto and whinge and whine whenever they get called out.
Incidentally, most Muslims do not agree with Islamism.
Good grief, Mustapha.
Do give it a rest.
Is it only me that can’t get over the fact that a talentless, charmless, illiterate chancer passes for a ‘journalist’? I’m not too bothered about RMW, I am bothered about idiotic Muslims in any position of influence. Her appearances on the Sunday morning show ‘The Big Questions’ make me cringe with embarassment.
Press TV is a good home for her, first time I watched that channel I thought it was a spoof, its nearly as bad as Islam Channel news.
Why is it suicidal to take a look at Fareena Alam? What does that even mean? That Fareena will have people flood the site with hostile comments until the Spittooners give up and shut down? People should only talk about Muslims with radical ideas who are way out there, and not the ones who seem, on the surface, to be moderate or friendly or not as radical? I remember the ‘Question Time’ show in question. The man had tears in his eyes. The buildings were still on fire, and here came little Fareena, like one of those yappy dogs that bites a person’s ankle and doesn’t let up. Not saying that American policies can’t or shouldn’t be questioned or examine, but it was her manners, her lack of adab that was the problem.
This is such a remedial blog site – shoddy journalism (if that is what it can be called), half truths, manipulation of information – people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones. Regardless of what people may think of Fareena Alam at least she has the guts to be out there and be counted. Unlike people who hide behind the veil of blogs and websites that masturbate only their own egos!
Tiredofpolemics – So I take it that you think it is ok for Iranian government employees to be involved in the UK’s counter-extremism ‘Prevent’ work?
This is the point that my article is making. Fareena’s personality, politics etc are not relevant in this instance; it is the principle that I am interested in.
Should someone who works for the propaganda arm of totalitarian, anti-democratic Islamist theocracy be involved in running the UK’s taxpayer-funded counter-extremism initiatives?
What do you think?
I do not watch Press TV very often and I am not privy to how it is funded therefore am not able to verify your assertions. But from what I have seen on Press TV it is an eclectic range of programmes with all sorts of quite contradictory elements presented on it – some of it I find interesting and some quite banal. From what I have seen it employs a wide range of British political figures, commentators, activists and specialists to both present programmes and participate in them and they do not seem to find it a conflict of interest. It is no less partisan than any other TV channel including the BBC who recently stuck its neck out to put BNP leader Nick Griffin on Question Time – but maybe you think that a fascist like Nick Griffin is a great guy!
The are disturbing undertones to your article and your style of writing is sadly becoming increasingly popular ie as I said in my previous posting the growth of stone throwing behind hidden veils – I find this cheap and distasteful not just in your article but with all those who follow this approach. I would be interested in knowing whether you have ever spoken to Fareena Alam personally and asked her opinions on the allegations you are making. You are of course entitled to your viewpoint but to tell you the truth I really do not get the point you are trying to make – other than be offensive and insulting. People in the public arena need to be transparent and accountable but throwing cyber stones without first verifying your information or even speaking to the person and giving them a right to reply is cowardly and undemocratic.
Regarding your question ‘Should someone who works for the propaganda arm of totalitarian, anti-democratic Islamist theocracy be involved in running the UK’s taxpayer-funded counter-extremism initiatives?’ – I put to you should our Prime Minister and his government (current and previous) who is paid for by tax payers money in the name of democracy be allowed to spend billions of pounds (let alone loss of life) on a war based on erroneous intelligence information and which has plunged the world into greater turmoil be allowed to lead this country?
I have looked up who is behind your organisation/blog and you seem to give very little away. I do not often respond to blogs or other such arenas but by chance came across yours and felt compelled to respond because it represents so much of what makes me mad out there. I am a Muslim and I work on the basis that unfounded slander is a heinous injustice if not crime – I am tired of the plethora of unfounded information and slander being churned out there regardless of which end of the polemic they are from.
That Press TV is funded by the Iranian regime is not moot. It is a fact – and it is widely known. This fact does not require your verification.
Yes, you are right. It is rubbish, mostly. However, much the same could be said of any satellite TV station, in fact. However, this is not the issue at hand.
Well, they would not find it a conflict of interests, now would they?! The fact that the hirelings of Press TV can get a good night’s sleep after appearing alongside Holocaust Deniers, clerical fascists, and assorted bigots – or, for that matter, lend their names to a broadcaster funded by as heinous a regime as the Iranian government is, again, not the issue at hand.
You do not quite get the point, do you? It is not the partisan nature of the programming or editorial line which is directly at issue (although it is a concern); rather it is the fact that employees of the British state are supportng a propaganda outfit directly funded by a regime explicitly hostile to the values that are held dear in most liberal, Western democracies. This raises serious questions about the loyalties and appropriateness of these people in their roles in centrally vital areas of policy and government in Britain.
The comment about Nick Griffin is so ridiculous as to be not worth responding to – I would remind you that it was the Iranian regime that has repeatedly denied the Holocaust and supported Holocaust Deniers (that Griffin may sympathise with) – not least on Press TV.
Soe of us, elsewhere on this site, have noticed and discussed the Islamist approach to all debate, which appears to concentrate on style, or “professionalism”, etc, in order to evade the issues at hand. Another fine example – this time from you.
More of the same…
Unlike, Ahmedinejad and his regime, Blair (who is no longer our PM, incidentally) was elected in free and fair elections. Unlike the Iranian regime, the British government does not close down newspapers, arrest and imprison political opponents, execute people for living different lifestyles from that dictated to them by men in big beards on false religious pretexts. Unlike the Iranian state, the British state is not a totalitarian, deeply reactionary state, wedded to a form of clerical fascism with expansionist ambitions and interference as a matter of course as a foreign policy 9n the conduct of its nearest neighbours.
Apart from your own, barely disguised Islamist polemic, of course.
Thanks for your lengthy response. However, I note that you entirely failed to answer my question so I’ll put it to you again:
‘Should someone who works for the propaganda arm of totalitarian, anti-democratic Islamist theocracy be involved in running the UK’s taxpayer-funded counter-extremism initiatives?’
This – as I stated before – is the issue that is at the core of my article.
What do you think? Do you fancy having another crack at answering it?
“I am a Muslim and I work on the basis that unfounded slander is a heinous injustice if not crime – I am tired of the plethora of unfounded information and slander being churned out there regardless of which end of the polemic they are from.”
What exactly is “unfounded slander” in the article?
That Ms Alam is a reporter for PressTV, the propaganda outlet of the authoritarian Iranian theocratic regime?
Or that Ms Alam is one of the founding members of the Radical Middle Way, which has received hundreds of thousands of pounds of tax-payers money?
Or is it the conjoining of these two pieces of information that has upset you?
I am not the person who has set up this blog and who is writing my views about the world on it for all to see and get access to. Writing blogs as far as I understand is for the purpose of getting a reaction – that is unless of course those who are writing in this blog only want people who agree with them to respond.
I am not really interested in the principle of whether ‘…someone who works for the propaganda arm of totalitarian, anti-democratic Islamist theocracy be involved in running the UK’s taxpayer-funded counter-extremism initiatives?’ as the world is full of similar conflicts and contradictions relative to the context of particular countries. That is not what concerns me – it is the accusations made without first verifying the information, as far as I can see the person in question hasn’t been spoken to personally and the responses to the article do become personal because the original article was written is such a way as to create that response.
I would have found more merit in the position of the original article if it had supported what it was saying with a response from the organisations and individuals in question.
oh boy, more moral relativism.
Fine call it what you like but the ‘moral relativism’ works both ways!
Awww man …. For approximately the ten-billionth time: THIS IS NOT ABOUT FAREENA ALAM’S PERSONAL VIEWS OR ABILITIES.
The question is whether a ’someone who works for the propaganda arm of totalitarian, anti-democratic Islamist theocracy be involved in running the UK’s taxpayer-funded counter-extremism initiatives?’
The pertinent facts are that:
- Fareena works for Press TV
- Press TV is a propaganda arm of the Iranian government
- The Iranian government is a totalitarian, anti-democratic dictatorship
- Fareena is also heavily involved in the Radical Middle Way
- The Radical Middle Way is one of the UK government’s flag-ship counter-extremism programmes
I do not see how any of these facts need to be ‘verified’ or how they could in any way be altered by speaking to Fareena Alam or anyone-else!
Are you actually disputing any of these facts (and if so which ones) or do you have other objections which you are, for some reason, unable to articulate?
TredofPolemics, to be fair, may be waiting on the instructions about what to write next to be translated from Farsi.
I have made the points I want to make – therefore there is not point in continuing this discussion.
You have made no points whatsoever!
At least none that have any bearing on this discussion.
Abu Faris – you have just said what was going through my mind (though I am not sure that you may have meant it the way I have take it) – I guess what is behind my comments are what comes across as the vested interests of the original article – whether pro or anti Iran is immaterial to me – I am not interested in Iranian politics.
[Headbutts computer]
Tiredofpolenics
Do you intend to actually answer any of the very clear and direct questions you have been asked?
Yes or no?
It’s quite normal for people to come on Spittoon and try to argue insane and untenable points.
However it is unusual for someone to come on, write several hundred words of fairly passable English and still fail to make even one single, incoherent and intelligible point.
Tired of TiredofPolemics’s polemics.
may i return the same complement!
I’m happy to accept your compliments but they won’t make up for your inability to make a single worthwhile point or even address a single question that has been asked of you.
Well, I’m having enormous fun, sitting on my balcony, puffing on a shisha loaded with grape and mint tobacco, sipping coffee, struggling with the wifi connection and watching tens of thousands of Algerian and Egyptian footie fans running riot across down-town Khartoum in the build-up to the World Cup play-off here tonight.
Her indoors is in fits at NTN’s live match build-up commentary from the stadium in Omdurman, where the Algerian fans have already begun stoning Sudanese riot police… meanwhile the Egyptians are getting quietly stoned in a different way.
I am hoping this could be the final nail in the coffin of Shari’a compliance in Sudan.
Meanwhile, back on Spittoon…
For the final time my comments were a reflection on the nature of blogs and how it easy it is for people to write things without at least a comment on the side of the person being commented on.
As I have said I am not interested in the political points being made because there is very little ‘good’ politics out there.
Tiredofpolemics,
So you have no intention of answering any of the direct and very clear questions you were repeatedly asked?
You are not concerned with the contents of blogs, just their form. A sort of meta-critique, then? How very sophisticated and convenient for you.
I am sick and tired of fatuous remarks such as:
Excuse me? Has anyone stopped Fareena Alam or anyone else from making a comment? Are you seriously suggesting that we should not comment upon anything without first contacting the people with whom we may have issues?
The holier-and-thou act may work to close down discussion elsewhere, sunbeam; but (to mix metaphors) it butters no parsnips hereabouts.
Aren’t we rude! Tsk tsk.