Radicalised in London

Probes into the movements of the ‘Detroit 253′ bomber, 23 year old Nigerian student Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, have shown links to radical Islamic groups in the UK. They also show that he made a number of visits to East London Mosque.

The New York Times also reports Abdulmutallab studied at the University College London between 2005 and 2008 where he was president of the UCL Islamic Society.

From the Independent:

Security agencies in Britain are investigating reports that Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the young Nigerian accused of attempting to blow up a transatlantic airliner, contacted radical Muslims while studying at university in London, The Independent understands.

Mohammed Mutallab, a cousin of the arrested man, has claimed that the 23-year-old came under the influence of extremist groups while in this country, and associates claim he visited the East London Mosque, which has attracted criticism for hosting Muslim hardline preachers, three times.

The same Indy report also mentions that Adbulmutallab was not in London when East London Mosque was the venue for a “video lecture” by Anwar al-Awlaki.

However, Abdulmutallab was not in the UK at the time, and the mosque authorities stressed that they dissociated it from al-Awlaki’s views at the event, which was organised by an outside organisation.

But that does not let the East London Mosque completely off the hook.

There are two recorded Awlaki video lectures which were held at the East London Mosque/London Muslim Centre this year. The Independent is probably referring to this one. The “outside organisation” which organised the event in this case was Noor Pro Media, which continues to organise lectures by known Jihadists at the LMC.

The notion that East London Mosque should not be held accountable in any way simply because the Awlaki lectures held on its premises were arranged by “an outside organisation” is a laughably facile excuse.

Rather than ban Noor Pro Media, East London Mosque continues to allow them to book their facilities for an event on New Year’s Day 2010 where, no doubt, they will sell Awlaki DVDs on the premises of the London Muslim Centre. And no doubt there are more planned in 2010.

And amidst all this activity in these hotbeds of Islamist radicalisation, Muhammad Abdul Bari, Chair of the ELM and the LMC continues to be lionised and celebrated by the House of Commons.

What dangerously perverse times we live in.

****

It is now clear US Army Major Nidal Hasan had a series of connections to the Islamist cleric, Anwar al-Awlaki . For those of us who have studied, with increasing concern, the extreme teachings of this cleric, this tragedy is the inevitable consequence of un-checked Islamist radicalisation. This situation has been made all the more distressing by the apparent lack of concern shown by the US Intelligence and Military authorities in taking Awlaki’s influence seriously.

Even before Major Nidal had fired a single bullet in Fort Hood, the US authorities knew about his increasingly vocal radicalisation and that he had attended the Dar al-Hijrah mosque in Virgina at the time Awlaki was its head Imam. Nidal had also been the subject of an FBI investigation after it was discovered that he made communication with Awlaki by email. There was certainly no lack of overt clues.

Inayat Bunglawala is right to say that most Islamic scholars, particularly in Britain, are opponents of the extremist fighting talk that is replete in Awlaki’s sermons. Even within political Islam, Awlaki’s teachings fall within the most extreme, Al Qaeda-aligned territory. Indeed, according to Charles E. Allen, the US Under Secretary for Intelligence and Analysis and Chief Intelligence Officer, Awlaki is the former spiritual leader to three of the 9/11 hijackers. He was also identified by the 9/11 Commission report as having provided advice to two of the 9/11 hijackers, Khaled Almihdar and Nawaf Alhazmi.

What should concern us most, however, is this. Awlaki has a huge internet following amongst Muslims, all over the world. His sermons, delivered in word perfect English and Arabic, are downloaded and shared by vast numbers of people in the Middle East and in the West. On his blog, which has now been taken down, his articles together with the stories of his scrapes with the FBI and his incarceration in Yemen, have earned him the status as the pre-eminent crossover Arabic-speaking theoretician of armed Jihad. 

Most disturbingly of all, Awlaki has been actively promoted by some of the United Kingdom’s most prominent Islamist organisations. Inayat Bunglawala’s description of Awlaki’s relationship with these organisations is an understatement of the seriousness of the problem. There are two points that are central to Bunglawala’s discussion of Awlaki’s connection in the UK. The first is that when Islamic organisations began inviting Awlaki to this country in the late 1990s, Awlaki was then still a mainstream, moderate imam with sensible views and showed “no hint of his later extremism”. The second, that Awlaki only became radicalised due to the US war against Iraq in 2003, and is therefore somehow the product of Western foreign policy. However, under greater scrutiny, neither of these claims stand up, even from the data available in the public domain on Awlaki.

A Washington Post report examined tax records from as early as 1998, which showed that Awlaki served as vice president of a charity (CSSW) founded by his then patron Abdul Majeed al-Zindani, a Yemeni politician who is named as an associate of Al-Qaeda. The CSSW has been described a “front organization to funnel money to terrorists”. The FBI also know that he was paid a visit in 2000 by an associate of Omar Abdel Rahman, known as the blind sheikh, who was convicted in connection with the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. The report also states that in 1999, Awlaki was investigdated by the FBI “when it learnt that he may have been visited by a “procurement agent” for bin Laden”.

In late 2002, Awlaki made a trip back to the USA, where he visited Ali al-Timimi, who was the time was accused by US prosecutors of recruiting Muslims to fight against US troops in Afghanistan. Timimi was convicted in 2005 and is now serving a life sentence for inciting followers to fight with the Taliban against Americans.

Inayat Bunglawala refers to an interview of Awlaki in the National Geographic from 2001, in which Awlaki’s responses are portrayed as reasonable and moderate. But what the interview doesn’t tell us is that in reality Awlaki had already been investigated twice by the FBI for his connections with Al-Qaeda. He was on his best behaviour. When Awlaki conducted another interview with IslamOnline – the website founded by the Muslim Brotherhood’s spiritual leader, Yusuf al-Qaradawi – he suggested that Mossad were behind the 9/11 attacks.

Therefore, by the time Awlaki was first invited to the UK by British Islamic organisations, he was, even by the Islamist standards, no moderate scholar. His actions show that he was a well known activist with a highly confrontational message for the cause of violent Jihad, long before the second Gulf War.

But it is what happened from 2002 onwards that is more important in the UK context. Since that date, Awlaki has been invited to speak in person, or via video link-up, by a large number of private Muslim organisations, university Islamic societies and registered charities which have benefited from government funding. They have promoted him, in spite of or perhaps because of, Awlaki’s track record and his increasingly explicit message exhorting Muslims to support violent Jihad.

Timeline

In June 2003, the Muslim Association of Britain (MAB), referred to as the official arm of the Muslim Brotherhood in the UK, organised a series of meetings with Awalki as guest speaker. 

Later that year, at an event organised by the East London Mosque (ELM) in December 2003, Awlaki addressed Muslims on the subject of terrorism arrests in the UK and urged them to never report on or turn over their fellow Muslims, under any circumstances. Two months prior in October 2003, the Islamic Forum Europe (IFE), an organisation closely associated with the ELM, invited Awlaki to speak at its ‘expoislamia’ event. In January 2009, the same ELM hosted  another event, entitled ‘The End of Time’, with Awlaki this time as delivering a video message. In spite of the fact that Awlaki’s “presence” at the event was reported in the national press, ELM refused to condemn Awlaki’s ideology or even cancel the meeting.

As late as 2005 Inayat Bunglawala and Awlaki were both listed as co- supporter of an organisation called ‘Stop Political Terror’ (SPT) which aimed to protect the civil rights of Muslims charged with extremism. One of individuals that SPT campaigned for was Babar Ahmad, who ran Azzam Publications, a pro-jihad website which, according to his indictment was “used to recruit individuals to be mujahideen and to solicit and raise funds and assistance for jihad”.

Osama Saeed, who now is poised to represent the Scottish National Party (SNP) for Glasgow Central in Parliament, wrote in his blog in 2006:

“Imam Anwar Al-Awlaki was originally hounded in the US because two of the 9/11 bombers happened to pray at his mosque. Many of my Muslim readers will either know him personally or have heard his lectures. He preached nothing but peace, and I pray he will be able to do so again.”

Saeed continues to cling on to the falsehood that Awlaki was a moderate when he praised his message of “nothing but peace” three years ago. He also references the National Geographic interview as proof of Awlaki’s moderateness, the citation of which is fast becoming the favoured get-out route for Islamists who want to justify their support of Awlaki.

Azad Ali is a civil servant in HM Treasury. He is the President of the Civil Service Islamic Society and sits on the council of Liberty. In January 2009, the Mail on Sunday reported Mr Ali’s extreme Islamist views in entries he had written on the IFE’s blog, ‘Between the Lines’ on which he has gushed about his “love” for the “Sheikh”, and then went on to justify Awlaki’s view that American Muslims who voted in elections were people who had “humiliated themselves by voting for candidates who have no serious concern for their issues”.

One of the directors of the MAB, Anas Altikriti, is now with the Cordoba Foundation which sponsored an event this summer in the Kensington and Chelsea Town Hall called ‘Beyond Guantanamo’ that was to feature an online video address by Awlaki.

Cage Prisoners (CP) is a successor organisation to Stop Political Terror, which also campaigns for Muslims who have been detained or imprisoned. They are also the most active supporters of Awlaki in the UK today. The CP website contains an extensive and friendly interview between Awlaki and Moazzam Begg, one of its directors and a former Guantanamo detainee. In August 2009, CP were the organisers of an event in the Kensington and Chelsea Town Hall in which guests were promised the treat of a live video link-up with Awlaki, who the CP regard as an “Inspirational Imam”. In the weeks before the event, CP were informed by the local council that their event could only go ahead if they cancelled the video address by Awlaki. CP complied with this, although they issued a statement on their site which refused to acknowledge Awlaki’s extremist nature.

The notion that Awlaki was previously a moderate imam whose public and personal journey to the extremes of violent Islamism happened relatively recently and long after British organisations endorsed and supported him is a false one. There are a host of organisations and individuals who operate within the Islamist landscape in this country who have, at one point or another, praised or defended Awlaki. I have listed only some of the British organisations which will have been aware of Awlaki’s views. Many of their leaders will have pored over every word and inflection he made in his articles and sermons. They will have been supporters of Awlaki’s rhetoric because of his message of violent Jihad and not in spite of it.

The US authorities are not the only ones who have been slow in responding to their own intelligence on Awlaki. British institutions have been equally lethargic, sometimes even supportive, in responding to organisations and individuals who have embraced and endorsed the ideology of Awlaki in their campaigns, seminars, public meetings and broadcasts. Whereas people who have pointed out the dangerous potential of Awlaki have been allowed to be defamed as Muslim-haters or self-loathing Muslim hypocrites.

Although the leadership of the Awlaki-supporting organisations cannot have mistaken him for a moderate, the same does not necessarily hold true for their rank and file. Ordinary Muslims, turning up at events at which Awlaki was promoted, may well have taken on trust the assertion that he is a religious authority with prodigious qualifications and a sincere and important message. It is these ordinary members who have been imperilled, by being exposed to jihadi theology in its purest form. They have been betrayed by their leadership.

The supporters of these organisations need to think long and hard about how their leadership came to champion Awlaki. We must also give serious consideration to the question on whether the leadership of these organisations should be trusted in the future.

Chowdhury Mueen-Uddin

Chowdhury Mueen-Uddin, one of those individuals named in the documentary, was alleged to have been instrumental in plotting the assassinations of intellectuals, journalists and students with the al-Badr death squads, assisted by the Jamaat-e-Islami. The program included eyewitness accounts directly linking Mueen-Uddin to the murders of two men; Dr. M H Choudhaury, a professor at the University of Dhaka, and Najmul Huq, a journalist.

Channel 4 received a letter from Chowdhury Mueen-Uddin’s lawyers and very little of that documentary has been heard of since. Until today, when Delwar Hossain re-opened the discussion on the Bangladesh War Crimes and Mueen-Uddin’s involvement in them in an article on CiF:

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.

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.

An article on the Channel 4 documentary contained this eyewitness account of how Mueen-Uddin was recognised by the relatives of one of his victims:

Another of Jamaat and Al-Badr’s tasks was to supply women as prostitutes for the Pakistani army. ‘They didn’t differentiate between Hindus or Muslims or anything,’ says Syeda Jebunessa Hoque, who worked at a tea garden in Sylhet. ‘They just grabbed any girl they could find and raped them. They raped girls in front of their fathers. Jamaat and Al Badr took thousands of women this way.’ But when Abu Sayeed is confronted with this evidence, he just claims it to be ridiculous.

In Dhaka, Al-Badr’s Operations-in-Charge was Chowdhury Mueen Uddin, who is now the Vice Chairman of the East London Mosque. At the time, Mueen worked as a journalist. ‘He was the first person to mention the formation of Al-Badr, before any other newspapers had any idea,’ says colleague Atiqur Rahman. Mueen was relatively new in Dhaka but was already well known in Feni. ‘We had informers who told us of his frequent visits to Al-Badr headquarters,’ says Professor Joynal Abedin, a member of the Mukti Bahini charged with reporting on Al-Badr and Jamaat. Another freedom fighter, Giasuddin Ahmed Nanu says, ‘We were given a list of ten or twelve people whom headquarters believed to be Al-Badr collaborators; Chowdhury Mueen Uddin was on the top of that list.’

During the final days of the occupation, the Pakistani army was on the verge of collapse, having been soundly beaten back by the Mukti Bahini and Indian army which was now fighting on their side. This culminated in Al-Badr’s last effort at destroying what would be the new country of Bangladesh, the infamous massacre of intellectuals in Rayerbazaar. Dolly Chowdhury recounts the day her husband, Moffazel Hyder Chowdhury, was taken away by Al-Badr. ‘They stormed into the house brandishing guns and with gamchas over their faces. While being taken away, my husband pulled down the gamcha from one of the men’s faces, I recognised him immediately. It was Chowdhury Mueen Uddin; I knew him because he used to come to our house to study.’

The website GenocideBangladesh has an impressive catalogue of references, articles and citations on Mueen-Uddin’s alleged crimes. It reference this report on Mueen-Uddin from a New York Times article from January 1972:

[T]o his fellow reporters on the Bengali-language paper where he worked, Chowdhury Mueenuddin was a pleasant, well-mannered and intelligent young man…there was nothing exceptional about him except perhaps that he often received telephone calls from the leader of a right-wing Moslem political party. But, investigations in the last few days show that those calls were significant. For Mr. Mueenuddin has been identified as the head of a secret, commando like organization of fantatic Moslems that murdered several hundred prominent Bengali professors, doctors, lawyer and journalists in a Dhaka brick yard. Dressed in black sweaters and khaki pants, members of the group, known as Al-Badar, rounded up their victims on the last three nights of the war…Their goal, captured members have since said, was to wipe out all Bengali intellectuals who advocated independence from Pakistan and the creation a of a secular, non Moslem state.

Mueen-Uddin hasn’t done too badly for himself since coming to the UK after the Bangladeshi genocide. Here is his bio in his own words:

Director – Muslim Spiritual Care Provision in the NHS (2005 – now)

Formerly Deputy Director: the Islamic Foundation, Markfield, Leicestershire (1995 – 2005).

He is a graduate ( B.A ) from the University of Dhaka, Bangladesh and is married with 4 children.

Chowdhury Mueen-uddin has served as a member of the Multi Faith Joint National Working Party (MFJNWP) since its inception in 1998 and became a member of of its successor organisation the Multi Faith Group for Healthcare Chaplaincy (MFGHC). He has over 25 years of experience working with the community organisations and served and on the Board of a number of distinguished charities. These include among others Board member and vice chairman – As Shahada Housing Association, Board member Labo Housing Association and currently Gateway Housing Association,

Chairman – Muslim Aid (at present board member ,

Vice Chairman – East London Mosque and London Muslim Centre,

Chairman – Governing Body, the London East Academy ( a private secondary school).

He served as the Secretary General of the Council of Mosques UK and Eire for 2 terms (1984 – 1988) and was involved in setting up the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB).

He occassionally contributes to news papers and journals and some of his articles were published in journals in housing releated sector such as ‘Regeneration’ and ‘Planning’.

Delwar Hussain calls for the prosecution of the war criminals of East London for which he must be applauded.

Among the numerous ways in which consecutive Bangladeshi governments have lagged behind public opinion, the inaction with regard to trying the alleged war criminals is the least forgivable for many. Undeterred, Bengali civil society has continued to be vociferous in making sure this issue does not disappear.

Unless trials are seen to be free and fair, they will be perceived as political point-scoring by the Awami League. It is incumbent on the British Bangladeshi community, together with wider British society, to join the demands to bring the Bangladeshi war criminals to justice. It is also time to rethink a period of history which has continuing ramifications for today.

Until these allegations are cleared up once and for all, the British government should discontinue any further dealings with the MCB. And politicians should think carefully before they patronise East London Mosque and the London Muslim Centre in the credulous assumption that they symbolise quasi-democratic spiritual establishments representative of the Bangladeshi community of East London. Delwar Hussain’s article should be distributed to any politician, such as Boris Johnson and Lord Phillips, who have been foolish enough accept invitations from these establishments or are thinking of doing so.

Charity Principal of the Year:

Catriona McPhee-Smith, CEO, Inspire

Ed Bracher, CEO, Riding for the Disabled Association

Emma Jayne Cross, CEO, Beatbullying

Dilowar Hussain Khan, executive director, East London Mosque and London Muslim Centre

Jane Davis, Director, The Reader Organisation

Jeanette Allen, CEO, MedicAlert Foundation

Howard Sinclair, CEO, Broadway Homelessness & Support

Steve Kirk, CEO, St Lukes Hospice

And also:

Trustee Board of the Year:

Broadway Homelessness & Support

East London Mosque and London Muslim Centre

Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation

Tyneside Rape Crisis Centre

You can admire the list of trustees of this fine Jamaat-e-Islami linked establishment here.

Now, the East London Mosque, with Dilowar Husasin Khan at its helm, may well have done some good work in 2009, but it’s also managed to trip up on more than the odd occasion. Whilst the recent Fitzpatrick affair was an overblown egotrip for a minister nobody had ever heard of, there are genuine concerns about the influence Jamaat-e-Islami influenced Islamists Islamic Forum Europe are gaining through East London Mosque. The mosque also found itself in the papers recently after playing host to the Antisemitic Imam of Mecca, Abdur Rahman al-Sudais.

Before that there was the iEra “Dawah” (propagation of the faith) tour, which saw Malaysian bigot Hussein Ye, Bilal Philips and Abdur Raheem Green come to East London Mosque (and other locations around the country) to spread their particularly conservative and intolerant strand of Islam.

Going further back, on January 1st 2009, East London Mosque hosted an event called The End of Time. Publicised with pictures of a burning New York skyline, it featured a video address by Anwar al-Awlaki, whose views Kensington and Chelsea Council has recently condemned as “not appropriate for broadcast in [council] premises”. Apparently East London Mosque was untroubled by his stated support for terrorist groups and the killing of innocent Israeli women and children.

So, despite all of these goings on at East London Mosque this year, its executive director and trustees have been nominated for awards at the Charity Times Awards. How must the other charities on the shortlists feel to be in such inauspicious company?

An article in the Sunday Express yesterday, by Ted Jeory, details the extent to which the Labour party in Tower Hamlets is infiltrated by members of the Saudi-backed hardline Islamist group, the Islamic Forum Europe (IFE):

The growing influence of the East London Mosque, whose education wing was built with Saudi money, on the Labour party is causing concern in Downing Street.

Gordon Brown, Justice Secretary Jack Straw and new Communities Secretary John Denham have been briefed on Islamic groups based there.

Party officials have held crisis talks about one group in particular, the Islamic Forum of Europe.

Senior party members fear it has infiltrated Labour and exerts too much power over MPs and councillors in areas with large Muslim populations.

Politicians fear that IFE can persuade imams to direct bloc votes at elections.

Labour insiders are particularly concerned about events in Tower Hamlets in east London, a £1billion authority that is home to parts of the City, Canary Wharf and the Olympics.

Ten days ago, Labour council leader Lutfur Rahman sparked outrage after asking the authority’s highly respected chief executive, Martin Smith, to go on leave because he had lost confidence in him.

His move came just days after he, three other councillors and an IFE official returned from a privately funded delegation to Saudi Arabia.

It is understood that they went to be blessed by Sheikh Adil al-Kalbani, a controversial and high-ranking imam in Mecca who said recently that Jews and Christians should only be allowed to live in the Arabian Peninsular “if their presence is essential”.

Cllr Rahman also held talks with Sheikh al-Kalbani in Tower Hamlets last October.

The East London Mosque is currently on an international fundraising drive to finance a large extension that would house new teaching facilities.

Mr Smith is understood to have had concerns about a request by the mosque to buy the council’s share in its freehold.

A spokesman for the IFE denied deliberate “infiltration” of political parties saying its supporters were free to follow any party they liked.

“We support the work of anyone who progresses the work of Islam,” he added.

A spokesman for the London Labour party conceded there were concerns about latest developments.

He said: “We’re keeping a close eye on things. The local party is in special measures because of concerns with membership. It means the regional director of the party will be managing the selection process for candidates for next year’s elections. We want to ensure candidates have the best intentions for the party.”

The Express report raises some questions that need to be urgently addressed by the London Labour party:
1) Why was Martin Smith suspended by Cllr Lutfor Rahman?
2) What was discussed by Cllr Lutfor Rahman and Sheikh Adil al-Kalbani when the latter visited Tower Hamlets in October?
3) Who are the three other councillors and the “IFE official” who travelled to Saudi Arabia to meet Sheikh Adil al-Kalbani?
4) In what official capacity did they travel to Saudi Arabia?

A clue towards an answer to the first question about the suspension of chief executive Martin Smith is found in an article from last year, also by Ted Jeory, in the East London Advertiser. It shows how Lutfor Rahman has been trying to oust Martin Smith and replace him with his crony Lutfor Rahman Ali since at least last year, despite doubts about Ali’s qualifications and credibility.

Opposition politicians on the council believe Lutfur Rahman is trying to oust Martin Smith to make way for assistant chief executive Lutfur Rahman Ali (aka Lutfur Ali, and no relation to the above).
Ali was controversially appointed to the £125,000 a year post last year. Headhunters apparently thought him a marginal candidate at best, but Lutfur Rahman backed him and his name was added to the shortlist.
Despite doubts over his suitability and questions over his CV, the seven-strong appointments sub-committee chose him for the job, in a narrow 4-3 decision. The four councillors who voted for him were fellow Bengalis and East London Mosque bigwigs Lutfur Rahman, his deputy Siraj Islam, Ohid Ahmed and local Respect leader Abjol Miah.

Imam al-Kalbani is the first black imam of the Grand Mosque in Mecca and also happens to be a sectarian hate-preacher and a racist. He spoke at the Global Peace and Unity event last year. As far as his “peace and unity” credentials are concerned, al-Kalbani regards the Shi’ite sect as heretical and Shi’a imams as apostates. Last month, 600 Saudi clerics called for Imam al-Kalbani to be prosecuted for inciting hatred against the Shi’a. His racist statements concerning Jewish inhabitants of Saudi Arabia are captured here.

The Prophet’s guidance, by which we act, dictates: “Drive the Jews and the Christians out of the Arabian Peninsula.” Driving them out is undoubtedly the prerogative of the ruler, but they should be allowed to live here only if their presence is essential.

Cllr Abjol Miah is the George Galloway understudy for the disgraced Respect Party in Tower Hamlets.

Cllr Lutfor Rahman is backed by Islamic Forum Europe (IFE), an Islamist group run out of the London Muslim Centre/East London Mosque. The IFE has strong links to Jamaat-e-Islami – a clerical-fascist party which operates with only marginal support in Bangladesh but which is disproportionately over-represented in Tower Hamlets Council.

****

Abdur Raheem Green, a British convert to Islam, is one of the founders of the “Islamic Education & Research Academy” (iERA). As reported here, iERA hopes to host extremists Bilal Philips and Hussein Ye in a UK dawah (Islamic propagation) tour running from June 23 to 29.

Green’s father was a colonial administrator in Africa. According to Green, he took pride in the Empire. His father in turn was a high court judge in Bombay. Well, here is Green himself admonishing Pakistan for not being Islamic enough:

Naturally Israel too must be scourged. This is from an Islamic Voice magazine interview in 1997:

The West’s capacity to brainwash its people became plain to me when I discussed the Palestine issue with Egyptians and Palestinians. Several myths-historical, political, economic – were fabricated by the Zionists and propagated unchallenged by the Western media. How could a land vacated by Jews 2000 years earlier be their homeland? I also came to know that existing Jewish people were actually Slavs, not Semites and that Palestinian land was always a green orchard. Israel fabricated the myth of “magical transformation of desert into greenland.”

…

I realised that popular opinion in the West was totally hostage to the Zionist-controlled media. The question of Palestine was one among these. My conversation with Palestinians revealed as to how the West had believed in myths about Israel. First among them was that the Jews had the right to return to their original homeland in Israel. Secondly they conveniently described themselves Semitic while the fact was that most Jews of the world were Slavs who had later converted to Judaism. Thirdly Israel’s economic miracle was theorised to create the economic and scientific myth.

Ahh, illumination. No wonder Green recommends Gilad Atzmon.

Now Green has claimed he no longer holds certain radical views. This is what he told BBC Panorama earlier this year:

“I surely have said some pretty radical things and maybe even written some radical things in the past,” he tells Panorama. “But one thing I have been very consistent on is terrorism, participating in terrorist activities, violent revolution – is not something that I have ever thought was part of the religion of Islam.”

Well, in that case, why invite two supporters of terrorism, Bilal Philips and Hussein Ye, to a dawah tour?

Or call, on your own website, for Ali al Timimi, “a treasure of this ummah, but a treasure purposely buried by the opposer’s [sic] of divine guidance”, to be freed? Timimi has been convicted of terrorism offences in the United States and sentenced to life in prison. This tape will give you a taste of Timimi’s jihadi hatred, preached in this case in the name of wrecking any Arab peace process with Israel.

Or how about standing up in court for Yassin Nassari, another man convicted of terrorism offences?

Or using this kind of threatening separatist language in an ode to a Chechen fighter of the 19th century, when so many young men today are tempted by jihad and do indeed go on to become terrorists?

There is no avoiding the fact that one of the greatest reasons for physical strength and toughness is for jihad. It at this juncture I am forced by the reality of the state of confusion prevalent in these times to reiterate that we as Muslims do not seek confrontation or desire to initiate hostilities. Despite the many virtues of jihad we should not imagine that this means we seek physical conflict, or that in desperation we can resort to means like terrorism that is so far removed from the nobility of this religion. We want and should desire to live a peaceful life and coexistence, but we have the right, and no one can take this away from us, to defend ourselves individually and collectively against attack and aggression. We also have the right and duty to prepare ourselves against such attack. The Quran teaches this and international law affirms that also. Jihad is not something we should be embarrassed about, or made to feel embarrassed about, but it is a noble principle that no reasonable person could disagree with.

Since terrorism does place extremists such as Green on the backfoot, toying with denial is always handy. Here he is on 9/11, 7/7 and Madrid and the UK airliner bomb plot, where the police even secured “martyrdom” videos, as reported not long after the arrests.

No wonder Green appears to have found an ally in Sakandar Madani, an imam in Norway who both supports terrorists and engages in 9/11 revisionism. The first video below is from a Norwegian documentary. The second is an advertisement for Green’s visit to Norway in March 2009.

Secular democracy is easier ground to negotiate in public. Green opposes it as “antithetical” to Islam, except where it can advance the interests of Muslims, and not just British Muslims:

It has long been my position that any type of participation in democracy is a type of approval of that system. I have no doubt that democracy is antithetical to Islam. However, having read and listened to the sayings of many scholars on this issue, and being faced with the reality of a growing Muslim population here in the UK, who for all intents and purposes consider this their home, it has become clear to me that we must participate in every aspect of society as much as possible to ensure our rights and continued existence and well being in this society. This participation most certainly includes voting for whichever party or candidate best serves the needs and interests of the UK and indeed world wide Muslim population. This does not mean approval or acceptance of the ideal of secular democracy, but the intention is to use the means and avenues available to benefit Muslims and the communities we reside in.

The same goes for other Islamic questions for Green, such as stoning adulterers and gays. Vicious punishments are only good social policy:

There is another direction from which the wisdom of such a punishment can be understood, and that is the death of two criminals can prevent the death and agony of many innocents. There is no doubt that adultery has caused many a jilted partner to kill not only the partner but in some instances the children as well. This is the harm that we can measure and see. It is more than likely that the psychological effects on the jilted partner, the children and their families is extensive, and can lead to behavioural problems that ultimately effect the well being of the whole society! The “harm” of the punishment for adultery is offset by the need of the “benefit” and protects the wider society. All of this also goes some way to help understand way acts of homosexuality are simlarily treated so harshly.

Australia has had enough of Mr Green. In 2005 he was refused entry to the country, where he had allegedly engaged in hate speech in 2003.

Britain has no such luxury with this son of its very own empire.

The East London Mosque and the Didsbury Mosque, however, do have options. If they go ahead with plans to host Mr Green’s dawah tour later this month, the rest of us will see just where they stand today.