Heresy is another word for freedom of thought

Read Faizur Rahman’s piece on David Cameron’s game changing speech. Here’s an excerpt, taken from the Indian Muslims blog:

British Prime Minister David Cameron’s speech against “Islamist extremism” delivered recently at a security conference in Munich sparked an unnecessary controversy in the U.K., particularly among Muslims. Ramadhan Foundation, a Muslim youth group, described it as an attempt to “score cheap political points” in a way that would “rip communities apart.” And as the speech coincidentally came on the same day the right-wing English Defense League (EDL) demonstrated against the Muslims in Luton, Labour’s shadow justice secretary Sadiq Khan, a prominent Muslim MP, joined the chorus of protests to accuse Mr. Cameron of “writing propaganda material for the EDL.” Mr. Cameron on his part stood by his statements saying a “whole new way of thinking is needed.” He certainly has a point.

This is a cross-post by Lucy Lips

---

iEngage presents itself as a body which campaigns against Islamophobia. However, it spends its time attacking Muslim liberals and progressives, as well as journalists and politicians who oppose hate preachers and Islamist political parties.

It also engages in advocacy for Islamist terrorist organisations and their supporters, and demands various changes to Britain’s foreign policies. Here are a few examples.

Opposing the ban on Hezbollah activist, Ibrahim al-Musawi

Senior Hezbollah activist, Ibrahim al-Musawi, was banned from the United Kingdom in March 2009 by the Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith. Al Musawi had previously worked for the Hezbollah propaganda TV station, Al-Manar. When Al-Manar was banned from French satellite TV for airing a 29-part Ramadan special Ash-Shatat (Diaspora) during October–November 2003, which showed Jews drinking the blood of Christian children , and which quoted extensively from the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, Mousawi said the ban resulted from “political pressure by the Jewish lobby”.

This is a cross-post by Lucy Lips from Harry’s Place

---

Over the last few days, we’ve been considering the manner in which iEngage has conducted itself. iEngage hopes to be appointed the Secretariat of the APPG on Islamophobia. Despite the opposition of the APPG’s first chairs – Lord Janner and Kris Hopkins – who resigned when it became clear that Jack Straw, Sadiq Khan, Stephen Timms and Simon Hughes appear determined to retain this body’s services.

Yesterday, we demonstrated that iEngage’s major target is Muslim liberals and progressives, and opponents of hate preachers and Islamist political parties. Today we will consider some of those hate preachers and Islamist political parties which iEngage defends.

Before we start, let’s look very quickly at one of its “Trustees“: Mohammed Ali Harrath.

This is a cross-post by Lucy Lips

---

iEngage is an attack organisation, which hopes to be appointed as the Secretariat to the APPG on Islamophobia. As we will show, this is not an organisation whose primary focus is opposing racism and anti-Muslim bigotry. Instead, it is significantly devoted to attacking non-Islamist Muslims and liberals, while defending hate preachers and Islamist political parties.

The following politicians have led the charge to install iEngage as the Secretariat:

• Stephen Timms
• Sadiq Khan
• Jack Straw
• Lord Sheik
• Peter Bottomley
• Simon Hughes

If they allow iEngage to continue as Secretariat to the APPG, they will personally be betraying those Muslims and liberals who are the primary target of iEngage. iEngage is certain to use its authority to continue the attacks on Muslim liberals that have been the hallmark of its campaigning activity to date. The