I was invited as a guest, along with Ed Husain (Quilliam Foundation) on Islam Channel’s ‘Politics and Media’ show – or so I thought.
As it turned out, Ed was not happy to be on a live show with me. His voice broke, his face screwed up with disdain, and the whites of his eyes were plain to see as he retorted, “I’m not going on if he is”.
Ed was apparently upset at my previous post about him, Maajid and Hasan Butt on this blog. I assured him that he had nothing to fear, and that if he truly believed what he said – why not debate them? After all, I had no hard feelings about Ed calling me an ‘extremist’ on national television!
All to no avail. After Ed threatened to walk away, the presenter decided that he would rather have Ed on the show than me, and herein lies the folly of ‘enagement’ – or to be more precise, conditional engagement! It seems that Ed will only ‘engage’ on his terms. That is, Inayat Bunglawala (the co-presenter) cannot be present, nor anyone else who can counter his arguments! So much for democratic debate.
And this is not the first time that Inayat has been ‘sacrificed’. At the recent ‘Living Islam’ camp (by ISB), Ed was also a guest panellist in the ‘Question Time’ debate. His appearance was again apparently conditional on Inayat Bunglawala’s absence from the panel.
So what led the Islamic Society of Britain and others to sacrifice their ‘own’ for a one-way discussion with Ed? Has ISB forgotten Ed’s remarks about the Prophet Muhammad? Or his ‘comical’support for the Iraq war? He was for the war against Iraq, but stopped supporting it after the first innocent Iraqi was killed! Can you imagine the naïveté? Ed, you really should not believe what you read in those comic books!
For what possible motive has ISB, and others like the Radical Middle Way, overlooked these transgressions without challenge or debate, and capitulate to an open endorsement? Has any of the Islam-bashing been publicly retracted by Ed without us noticing?
It cannot surely be in the interest of free speech and debate. After all, Ed ensures that doesn’t happen. And for all those believe it was good to have included Ed on the panel discussion, so he could face the barrage of disapproval, jeering and boos, I have one question. When have Muslims ever supported Ed? Did they applaud when he called the Hadith (prophetic tradition) that prescribes the [Hadd] punishment for adultery as ‘barbaric’? They never did, in case you wondered.
All that has been achieved is ‘credibility’ in the eyes of Ed’s patrons, ie the government which now formally funds his think-tank. It was the same government that tried to bolster the ‘credibility’ of the Quilliam Foundation and others like the Sufi Muslim Council, and ensure that they in turn had the ability to launch initiatives such as the ‘theology board’. Only then, can they claim “it was the Muslims themselves that asked for it”.
I have a feeling that the true reason for the likes of ISB and RMW ‘endorsing’ Ed Husain [et al], is between wanting to be ‘accepted’ by the government themselves. Their fear of being isolated by the government or losing funding opportunities makes them feel insecure, or they actually believe the ‘heretical’ views that Ed and Maajid espouse.
The question is – which is it?
Did Islam Channel make it clear that Azad Ali was dropped due to Ed Hussain’s refusal to appear? Credible and mainstream programmes like BBC2 Newsnight always make it clear when ministers and others refuse to discuss with their opposite members.
Has Islam Channel forgotten that it was fined for one-sided output – impartiality compromised?
It shows how fickle these people are when they put conditions on who can sit on their panel and who can’t. If one is so complicit in their opinion and beliefs, then it doesn’t matter who is against them.
I feel those groups who do sacrifice their own for his bit part comments are falling into the classic trap of divide and rule. It’s a shame that some muslim groups are selling themselves for that moment of pleasure.
Short term gain overlooking long term loss has sadly become the norm. It shows how far we are as a community in being politically shrewd.
Giving this charlatan a platform is shocking and deplorable, ISB has become a disenfranchised, misguided bastion of pseudo-intellectualism and free-thinking. Its leaders have lost all sense of Islamic direction and loyalty to the Jammah. Somebody referred to Living Islam as Living Fitan or the Muslim Glastonbury. Their treachery in giving this fascist imbecile the opportunity to dominate the debate, insult Muslim personalities from the past and present and vilify organisations they claim to be affiliated to is a disgrace. The ISB shura should hold its head in shame, for the sake of misplaced inclusivity and debate they have given this cretin the moral high ground, as he has already expressed his victory of being invited to Living Fitan, on his state-funded website. They need to re-title this grouping of loose canons, conceited egotists and self-declared reformists the Islamic Slaves of Britain! Do not fear, the real moderate and principled guardians of this Deen and are in it for the long haul, as their promise and covenant is with Allah (swt).
Brother Azad
You post says it all really
They have given him credibility – he will now proceed to exaggerate his “engagement” with the Muslims in front of the government, buying him more of the peoples tax money
“Islam” channel has been incredibly naive, as has the ISB
But at the end of the day – any one who associates themselves with a blacksmith…
wasalam
And IMAGINE HOW DAMAGING it would have been if he had refused to come on, and then the show went ahead without him
It would have destroyed his credibility even more – like WORLD HAVE YOUR SAY
Its pathetic to think that the BBC has more integrity than the so called Islam channel
wasalam
What I worry about Azad is the second option! Indeed we have Usama Hassan now in there camp and we knew his history.
Imagine it! They want to debate homosexuality, the Huduud, call orthodox Islam barbaric and equate it with Nazism and we have people like Usama Hassan calling us liars for telling the world they are heretics.
I wonder are there anymore Usama Hassan’s out there in our midsts?
Salam all,
Jazakamullah khayer for the comments. I am waiting for Islam Channel to get back to me regarding the incident, but I do not have any qualms with them as such. It is more with the gullibility of some people.
However, sometimes I do sense that it is more to do with peoples understanding of Islam and their constant search for ways to redact the constants or pillars of faith.
Well what a shame! It would of been nice to see him get a real grilling. I would question also organisaions like RMW, who exactly are they funded by? And what are their aims and objetives? Just the fact that they would even awknowledge someone like Ed is an issue for me.
I think we should all start calling “Ed’ by his real name “MohammED Husain”, i think that will take away his government allure immediately and re-set him into what he really is – just an average ordinary second generation Bengali Muslim wanting a bit of the limelight.
say it with me people, Mohammed Husain
he ain’t such a big deal is he now?
Salam,
Ibn Adam – I hear you akhi. I am sure there will be plenty more popping up with their desperation to reconcile the taghut with the Haq, and find accommodation for both!
What we must avoid is to be drawn in to the foray with emotional or a reckless approach. What was Haq for Muhammad, peace be upon him, is Haq for us and vice versa. In their desperation to find support they will always resort to this scholar or that scholar, so they abandoned Shaykh Qaradawi for Ali Goma – but what they found was that he was even more supportive of the very things they accuse Shaykh Qaradawi of.
We must approach the discussion or debate with calmness, clarity and most importantly with the intention of seeking the pleasure of Allah. This will mean that we learn how to prioritise, how to co-exist within our diversity, help each other, overlook fiqhi disagreements, widen our alliances and decipher the root causes of our troubles.
If we can hold to this, success will be ours in the Duniya and Akhira.
I prefer to call Mr Hussain by his slave name ‘Ed’, as his is a pawn of the government. Let us not give him the honour of having ‘Muhammad’ – as he himself is too ashamed to uphold it.
How can we take our Islam from a person who is not proud of his name, and disgard our scholars of long standing unbroken chains of trasmission from the Prophet (saw) himself. From a man who insults hadith and seeks to push the wrath of the media/press against the vast majority of law-abiding Muslims of the UK. A Muslim would not bring enemies to the house in such a way, I would question the man’s iman – by the simple notion that he knows he is causing and stiring trouble for Muslims by his very action. He knows that every word of his is used and abused by the enemies of Islam, he knows clearly and fully that he is pushing the Muslims into a corner and creating a larger divide between the Muslims and the non-Muslims. He is guilty of this, if not anything else, he is guilty of creating ‘fitna’ in the truest sense and may Allah forgive him and us.
Only with Allah do hearts find rest – and only with him will we have success. So let us not stray from his path while we try and defend the deen and our community from these heretical thoughts and individuals.
The ‘Radical’ Middle Way (RMW) are just a joke- sending out a defeatist message aimed at pacifying the Muslim masses with their hippy collection of speakers/personalities with Usama Hassan and Edward added to the collection now.
Akh Abu Talha you asked who funds the RMW? See for yourself bro: http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/fco-in-action/casestudies/young-muslims-uk
The ISB have been going down hill for years which is not at all surprising really as they have retained no traits of what Maulana Maududi and Jammati Islam once stood for. When you turn your back on truth as its just too ‘fundementist’ in this day and age you have nothing left. The soon to be dead donkey will breath its last unless they pause and return back to their manhaj without trying to appease all the critics apologising for everything. YM has practically died out and all ISB are around for is the rag mag Emel and their fitnah fest Living ‘Islam’ which should be renamed Leaving Islam.
Another cluster of clowns can be found in Usama Hassan’s City Circle which now preaches some new creed/religion he has coined ‘Secular Islam’.
The Quilliam Foundation says the following about certain groups which may not be a coincidence:
“There are already positive signs emerging in British Muslim communal discourse with groups such as the City Circle, JIMAS, Radical Middle Way, and sections within the Islamic Society of Britain pushing for a more Western Islam, relevant to our lives in the West, away from the influences of Indian and Arab cultural practices.” (Page 6 of Pulling Together to Defeat Terror”).
Salam,
Fantastic post. Br Azad you probably hit the nail on the coffin, everyone is too scared to lose the funding or is it even ‘fame.’ ED is seriously such a JOKE! Do they not see that?!
I was at Living Islam, it was a fantastic event. ISB seems to be the only organisation that has a vision of Britain, most others like MAB, IFE, UKIM are hot headed irrational people who neither have a vision nor a good thing to say about anyone.
As for Azad Ali maybe Islam Channel did not put him on was because he adds no value to any debate, has nothing intelligent to say and really has nothing to offer, just like his organisation IFE.
wow….talk about pot calling kettle black…sure your response wasnt a bit ‘hot headed and irrational’ brother?
and if IFE and Br Azad have nothing intelligent to say, what does Islam Channel have to lose? Surely if anything you could all have had a laugh and IC could have been recognised as revelaing the ‘unintelligence’ of the organisation, perhaps it is more the opposite case!
if talking about and portraying true Islam is classified as ‘unintelligent’ then i am happy to have that title, come on people anyone else want to join the ‘unintelligent’ crew?!
I was at Living Islam 2008. What a great event. Those of you wishing to call it various names, you obviously didnt go….your loss. As for ISB giving Ed a platform, well done ISB for sticking their head above the water. The rest of the organisations can live in their own dream world. The best way to tackle some one you dont agree with is to talk and discuss, not to swear at them. What is every one scared of, it is a typical Muslim response where debate has been pushed so far away that we have stagnated. The writers forget to mention that there were four other people on that panel all of whom could comfortably look after themselves in relation to Ed! As far as Inayat being on, why on earth would you have two people on the panel that would just swear at each other due to their obvious animosity? Inayat has no shortage of chances to speak at ISB events so really all of this is a non argument.
I don’t even know why I am on this forum or a member of IFE. It is obvious that ISB is on all together different level that you people are not capable of understanding. Massalam and good luck.
Salaam, i know a few muslims who went to Living Islam and their response was it should be renamed “LEAVING ISLAM”.
Also notice how the post reads “ISB seems to be the only organisation that has a vision of britain” which i do not doubt, but the irony is that the vision is exactly the same as the governments.
I would much prefer be with a Jammah who has a vision for the (now the key word) “MUSLIMS” of Britain
Pray tell Abu Zayd, which Jammah has the vision for ‘Muslims’ of Britain?
Definitely not ISB
The issue is not only that Ed spoke
The issue is that he is being given a platform and the choice to silence those who are against him
If he won’t even sit with someone like Inayat, then what is all the hot air from the QF about debating with HT?
Ed has been given a pretty free ride on mainstream media, with little chance to put forward an opposing view
So why is the so-called Islamic media doing the same thing, in fact even worse?
When Ed refused to turn up on a BBC radio show because there was going to be the chance for HT to have a comment – only a comment – it damaged his credibility badly
If Islam Channel also left the door open for him to sit with Azad but he refused and didn’t show – it would have damaged him further
Instead, he now has the chance to add to his CV and embellish his “achievements” even further
Simple politics actually
wasalam
(And from an Islamic point of view – showing deference and hospitability to a deviant ahead of a Muslim goes against basic adab)
@ debater: the whole point of having Br Azad on IC was to debate and discuss with ED. It was ED who refused to do that. So who is staggering who? who is stopping whos debate and discussion? Surely with the strong opinions one holds you would be ready to take on any one who refutes you?
Spot on!!
Mkhan – you sound as if you’re a member of IFE – if they are so bad why are you there with them? Further, your points regrading Azad as an individual are off the mark – it has nothing to do with that. You should re-phrase your senetence and say that you agree with Ed’s views regarding Islam – don’t be a closet bloke! Ed is looking for volunteers, why don’t you join them!
Debater – you say that the event was great – the blog does not detract from that. All it questions is why would you allow a panellist who has consistently attacked Muslims of all kind and defamed the Prophet on to the stage without challenging those views? Or are you like Mkhan – who agrees that the Hadd punishment for Zina is “barbaric”?
The fact is Ed is a pawn who is being used to attack Muslims and get the government to come up with ideas to further “reform” Islam. The blogger questions what motive has ISB in entertaining Ed Husain – is it for the “conditional engagement” with the government or is it that they agree with Ed’s heretical stance on Islam?
Can either of you answer the question?
Mr Khan, who are you calling hot headed and irrational, some people just aren’t prepared to negotiate on the non-negotiable. ISB seem to be willing to do just that. They gave Mr Hussain an unconstrained and open podium to continue his incessant attacks against genuine Muslim organisations, so much so that he even insulted the de-facto Amir or figurehead of the largest, representative grouping of Muslim in the UK., he call Dr Bari an extremist and a terrorist. This may bode well with you, but I can assure you its doesn’t with a lot of others
Who gave him the right to defame people in this way, what evidence did he provide to corroborate this outrageous outburst, why was he not immediately removed from the stage, why was he not briefed that such incitement and peddling of hate will not be tolerated, why was he was not properly questioned and rebuked for his numerous excesses, such as attacks on the hijab, on the non-existance of Islamophobia, his support of unjust, illegal wars and the list of questions go on.
Lets be blunt, this individual has unequivocally been denounced as a publicity seeking, stoolie and recreant whose malevolent plan is to cause hatred and division within our ranks. Lets us stand firm, united as the Prophet (pbuh) said that Muslim are like to one another what bricks are in a wall, re-enforcing and strengthening each other. Back to basics our treasured ISB brothers and sisters, what has Allah (swt) and his Messenger ordained, read it for yourself and then consider whether it was a good idea to give this mischief maker the oxygen of publicity which he so much desires.
Verily this brotherhood of yours is a single Brotherhood and I am your Lord and Cherisher: therefore serve Me (and no other)’ Al-Qur’an 21:92
“Beware of suspicion for suspicion is the worst of false takers, and don’t look for the faults of others and don’t spy, and don’t be jealous of one another; and O’Allah’s worshippers ! Be brothers (as Allah has ordered you)”, (Sahih Bukhari).
…A Muslim is the brother of a Muslim. He neither oppresses him nor humiliates him nor looks down upon him. The piety is here, (and while saying so) he pointed towards his chest thrice. It is a serious evil for a Muslim that he should look down upon his brother Muslim. All things of a Muslim are inviolable for his brother in faith; his blood, his wealth and his honor. (Sahih Muslim)
That ‘MKhan’ is no member of IFE despite his claim trying to get sympathy points- if he/she claims they are then why not just name yourself (you’re almost there anyhow) and provide us of what section/unit you’re supposed to be under? IFE Bangla/ MMT/ etc. before quiting membership and joining rank with the ISB/QF stooges? Seriously before you go get lost I challenge you to give us your name and which section of IFE you claim to be in so that we can actually identify if truly you’re a member or another fake like Edward who boasts about YMO/IFE membership where he got ‘Qutbi brainwashing’ when in fact the piece of trash was actually unknown.
I haven’t ever read or heard such rubbish coming from any of IFE member mashaallah.
That Debater sounds like one of the QF boys guised up to show support for ISB and their stupidity, a ‘vision for Britain’ where we become no different then the non-Muslims is a vision of the shayateen.
Jezakallah Akh Ali Abdullah for sharing this:
The Quilliam Foundation says the following about certain groups which may not be a coincidence:
“There are already positive signs emerging in British Muslim communal discourse with groups such as the City Circle, JIMAS, Radical Middle Way, and sections within the Islamic Society of Britain pushing for a more Western Islam, relevant to our lives in the West, away from the influences of Indian and Arab cultural practices.” (Page 6 of Pulling Together to Defeat Terror”).
Source: http://www.quilliamfoundation.org/images/stories/pdfs/pulling-together-to-defeat-terror.pdf
Truly these are the ones to be careful of- we already know of the losers of RMW and ISB as well as CityCirle’s ‘Secular Islam’ lead by their Ameer Usama Hassan of QF, Usama is a close friend of another so called-’Salafi’ sell out group JIMAS whose Ameer Abu Muntasir and aid ‘Sidi’ Abu Aaliyah are named by the QF clowns as ‘progressive British voices’:
“….Again, there are positive trends developing here. Over the last decade, in
sections of the Muslim community there has been a maturity of debate that
has led to the emergence of progressive, British voices. These include T J
Winter, Dr Ghayasudin Siddiqui, Dr Musharraf Hussain, Dr UsamaHassan,
Humera Khan, Asim Siddiqui, Haras Rafiq, Abu Muntasir, Abu Aaliyah,
Khola Hassan, Dilwar Hussain, Yahya Birt, Fareena Alam, Abdul-Rehman
Malik, and others.” (Page 8 of Pulling Together to Defeat Terror)
QF’s Usama Hassan appears on the same page 8 again:
“Among Muslim scholars too, there has been a bolder identification of the
nature of extremism. Here, Muslim scholars such as T J Winter, Imam Ba-
Bikr Ahmed, Dr Musharraf Hussain, Dr Usama Hassan have been crucial.”
In return JIMAS the so-called modernist ‘Salafis’ have rewarded Usama with a platform to spread his call to Secular ‘Islam’ in their annual conference alongside his mates Abu Muntasir and ‘Sidi’ Abu Aaliyah (who works for al Kauthar Institute and is founder of the Sufistic Ibn Jawziyyah Institute) on hand: http://www.jimas.org/conf08/conf08.htm
QF are therefore so proud and trusting of these type of ‘Wahabis’ (who are Salafi by name alone) that they’ve added JIMAS onto their links page alongside RMW, the ‘Sufi’ Muslim Council, et al: http://www.quilliamfoundation.org/links.html
What happened Edward? Why does the ‘Wahabi’ threat that you keep ranting about not apply in the case of JIMAS? Is it because they are ‘progressive British voices’ who do not stand against you when you insult the Prophet (saw)? And because Usama, Muntasir, and Aaliyah allow the spread of Secular ‘Islam’ thereby ‘Salafi’ by name?
What happened Maajid to the ‘Ikhwaani’ and ‘Jammati Islam’ threat espoused by Maulana Maududi, Ustad Qutb, and Imam Banna when in the case of ISB? You’ve realised too that when it comes to Islamic Movement and ‘political’ Islam the ISB/YM lot are just claimants to the manhaj and are now so ashamed of these scholars and leaders as well as the Harakah that they make no mention of it prefering to embrace Emel brand ‘Leaving’ Islam fitnah fests and QF.
I just want to say all you sell outs out there wont gain no credibility with the practising muslims. We’ll keep loving and sticking to the Truth and as you all know batil will never stand in front Haq. We are not willing to sell parts of our deen to please people like Hazel Blair and her witch project. So you can stick your secular, British, European, US Islam where it belongs.
Haneef Bai thanks for the link……as i thought
one more thing BIG UP AZAM TAMIMI
Wasalaam
guys please drop the name calling. Please have a debate if you want to but dont do it by trying to put the other person down. You all seem perfectly happy to quote hadith and Qur’an, so how about a little Islamic etiquette when we speak to each other?
Ok lets start with where i can see your (Azad ali et al) point. Yes there is an argument that giving Ed a position on the floor of Living Islam does give him credibility. For me that is balanced against some one whose organisation (QF) makes some good points but generally goes too far and expresses them wrongly. So do you give Ed the benefit of doubt and think that his heart is in the right place if misguided and you develop a relationship with him to try and discuss with him and argue where he may listen to what you have to say…or do you blank him so he carrys on his merry way without any recourse to the Muslim community of what they think. The ISB will i hope use their opportunities to engage and talk to ED, in order to express their concerns about his message.
Please, respond to this but do so with some courtesy and deal with facts not slogans. JK
JK – considering Ed has blasphemed, attacked scholars of great repute, misrepresented the opinions of other scholars, lied, is creating a lie in the media against sincere Muslims and Islamic viewpoints etc. etc. etc.
- I therefore think that the benefit of the doubt argument is TIRED and a cop out
The same goes for the other muppets in the QF, they are actually anti-Islam and represent the worst aspects of nifaq, both in their personal and public conduct
If you want to pull the wool over your eyes after all this time – well – the Prophet mentioned a believer does not get bitten twice from the same hole
I am sure you have seen what Ed has said PUBLICLY, and his mates, all kinds of things that are outside of Islam, and the average jo who has seen them on TV does not even consider them Muslim any more (believe me – I have had a number of people normally disinterested in politics and Islamic issues coming up and saying this to me)… so I am somewhat bemused that you somehow still think this way
“express their concern about his message” … I am sorry it almost sounds quaint
Drop the name calling? Akhi he is the one who called Dr Bari a terrorist. Such an obstinate individual who is dedicated to the dismantlement of community organisations he dislikes (he personally told me outside the City Circle debacle where they launched this lunacy with Majids talk on ‘no more sovereignty fro Allah (swt) last year that organisations that disagree with his approach must be rooted out and dismantled. His ideas, tact and objectives are set and he is resolute in attaining them, I wish were as resolute in ours.
So forget this convincing and advising business, it has been tried till the cows came home, he is adamant to cause subversion in the community, I can tell you this because originally I had a very polite naseeha giving session with him and I can assure that it was not me that was foaming by the end of it…he was, because his every statement was being displaced by facts from the Book of Allah and Sunnah of the Prophet, so much so that he began denying Sahih hadith. So please br debator, preserve the Izza and honour of this Deen by drawing a line in the sand against those who opt for the dark-side, don’t worry this isn’t the first time such people have appeared, our history is littered with them. However the response from the parties of Islamic truth, equity and justice were always constant and unrelenting, I hope this will be the same today.
Hey I am just calling it as it is.
Salam all,
Very interesting debate. Indeed let’s keep it at the discussion level.
@ Mkhan. I don’t think you read my article properly. The issue isn’t about who I am or what I bring to the table – the issue IS that ISB and Islam Channel allowed Ed to appear on the panel with an agreement that they would not challenge or remind them of their heretical comments and statements. The reason Ed does not want Inayat or myself is he knows we will ask him about these heretical views that he has espoused.
And if I did not add any value why on earth did Islam invite me in the first place?! Please – wake up!
@ Debater
I just want to echo and add a few more points to the response by Abu Abdullah.
You state: “For me that is balanced against some one whose organisation (QF) makes some good points but generally goes too far and expresses them wrongly”
Can you please give me what this organisation has stated that is good in your view and how they have gone too far to express them?
You state: “So do you give Ed the benefit of doubt and think that his heart is in the right place if misguided and you develop a relationship with him to try and discuss with him and argue where he may listen to what you have to say…”
That’s the nub of it! I attended Islam Channel to debate and argue with him in the best of ways – yet it was Ed who did not want to – did you even read what I wrote?
You state: “or do you blank him so he carrys on his merry way without any recourse to the Muslim community of what they think”
After so many people, like Usama, Abu Muntasir etc who all said that “we are only trying to guide them and help them”, after most of the bloggers on Deenport asked to give him the benefit of doubt – it seems his nefarious attack on Muslims, whether it is about Islamophobia, or a certain Masjid or group or book or the Shari’ah, or the concept of Ummah or the suffering of the Palestinians etc. has not abated at all!
It seems you want the rest of us to forget all this and accept him as a new born baby! I am happy to give him another chance – but he must publicly recant all those malicious things he said and make tawbah first! This is the point akhi.
You state: “The ISB will i hope use their opportunities to engage and talk to ED, in order to express their concerns about his message.”
How are they going to do this, in private? Why – he has done the damage in public and he needs to be advised in public, that way we do not have to rely on the Jinns to tell us what the intention of ISB is!
In Islam we do not judge what the intention of a person was – we judge their action. It is Allah who judges their intention.
Well said br azad, though lets hope we all READ it properly before we start making bold comments.
Assalamualaikum. Brothers and sisters, please deploy a little compassion, hikmah and adab in your comments. You are right, Islam Channel and ISB should reflect on their inability to allow those who criticise Ed Husain on the same platform. But this is a mistake which they have to answer for – to suggest that their decision borders on treachery or to insinuate that by doing so they endorse ‘heresy’ is plain ridiculous. And, if we are are to go down the road of free speech and discussion as the great Mr Azad orchestrates, I look forward to IFE hosting at the East London Mosque a debate with Mahbub Husain (should he have the guts to engage) and other people that our brothers at IFE have been so shy invite (apparently, the sheep, sorry, workers of IFE are so gullible they don’t have the intellectual resistance to engage and not be swayed away by other points of view).
Salaam Brothers and Sisters.
I am shocked and saddened by the vitriolic comments being made here. To brand the recent Living Islam event attended by 5000 muslim brothers and sisters of all backgrounds, of all ages from across the UK ‘Living Fitna’ / ‘Leaving Islam’ just because one individual was given a platform amoungst over 25 esteemed speakers & scholars of renown is frankly deplorable.
There are also other accusations on this blog of ISB’s intentions. All these accusations are baseless and do nothing but damage the reputation of both IFE & ISB. One assumes these views are not that of IFE however this blog having a prominent place on IFE’s home page may prove otherwise. Perhaps IFE Shura members would care to comment? Are brothers Abdul Bari & Dilowar Hussain even aware of this? If not it would be wise to bring it to their attention before further fitna is caused.
Ma salaama
Rabbi, it seems that you have not been reading dear brother. Br Azad was ready to challenge Ed on national tv and he got scared and chickened out! Get it?
@ Rabbi – pray tell who on the panel was given an opportunity to come back on Ed’s assertion that Dr Bari is an “extremist & terrorist” as mentioned by Khalid above?
In my opinion, 1. The invitation to Ed was not to challenge his heretical views (not one person on the Panel asked him why he defamed the Prophet, peace be upon him. 2. It is a well known fact that to be seen with QF will bring brownie points for both ‘engagement’ and funding from the government. 3. Are you sure that no one in ISB believes some of the views that Ed and others hold, as I recall some of the ISB shura were at the launch of QF? I have argued my case – tell me where I am wrong or show me the fourth option – I’m happy to stand corrected.
As for inviting people IFE is ’shy’ of – why would we invite Salman Rushdie, Nick Griffin, Irshad Manji and their ilk? Perhaps you should read my blog and then post. The point is why would ISB allow “conditional engagement”. Why dump Inayat?
And Rabbi – practice what you preach! You start your post with “…please deploy compassion, hikmah and adab…” and then swiftly call IFE workers “sheep”. Tut tut…
@ Tahir Miah – the blog piece is my views alone. Dr Bari is not a member of IFE – he has no reason to be informed. As for the IFE shura – I am sure they read the blog. Since you know Dilowar Hussain – please do inform him of your complaint – happy to sit with you or anyone else to answer for my blog.
Salaam,
Br Azad makes serious allegations against ISB. And all because ISB gave ‘Ed’ a platform (presumably ISB also endorses the views of the other panalists and speakers even though they are the complete opposite of ‘Ed’s’ views)
He starts the last paragraph with ‘I have a feeling the true reason…’ before citing endorsing ‘Ed’, being ‘accepted’ by government, loss of funding, being isolated or beliving in ‘Ed’s’ views. You have to agree that’s some stretch. Asking the question at the end ‘Which is it?’ is purely rhetorical as he has already expressed why he thinks ISB did it. Note also that he does not supply any facts or evidence for his ‘feelings’ or indeed the allegations he makes.
One assumes Br Azad is an IFE member and this blog is hosted by IFE. By extension one could argue (following Br Azad’s logic) that IFE as an organisation endorses Br Azad’s views of ISB having given him a platform on it’s website. If you haven’t cottoned on yet the argument Br Azad makes against ISB and the one I make against IFE is nonsensical for obvious reasons.
I’m up for debate but lets base it on facts, not hearsay or innuendo about ISB, whatever our ‘feelings’ may be about said organisation. Lets apply some basic adab as some posters have said and remeber the hadiths about verifying what you hear and also making seventy excuses for your brothers.
As for the views of ‘Ed’ I can’t stand them. I would like to hear from other posters how we should deal with him and those that hold similar views – , engage in debate, browbeat into silence, isolate completely or ignore & hope he & QF are just a passing fade like the Sufi Muslim Council, Muslims for Secular Democracy, Muslim Parliament of Britain and British Muslim Forum? All these as you know have been touted at one time or another as a replacement for the MCB. Anyway some fact based arguments would be most welcome.
Well,
I do know how NOT to deal with them – by NOT allowing them to dictate who can engage and who/ what they can be challenged on is a bare MINIMUM, the only excuse that would have been acceptable is “we invited him on to account him publicly for his heresy” but according to brother Azad he explicityly made it a condition that his heretical ideas (which almost all his ideas are) are not brought up.
If what brother Azad said is true, that he was invited on with the condition that his heresies not be raised – and so far no one has said otherwise – that is truly pathetic and disturbing. I can only ask those involved to fear Allah
If we can at least agree that the way Islam Channel and the ISB have handled it is a good example of how NOT to deal with these heretics, then we can move on to how they should be dealt with
wasalam
Look we are all missing the point! I mean we talk about Islam and the problems that we face as Muslims and we go on and on about engagement……so when someone who is deemed by others as the new face of Islam (ed) is asked to do a show with Azad Bai…he backs out. So what does this show? This shows that the views and perceptions that people like Ed hold, have no base. They fear that someone like Azad Bai or Innayat will make their points of view just shattar and fall. Thats the main point we should be debating. The fact that engagement is only conducted on other people’s terms. Why is this? That other people (less credible) are given the advantage? In my opinion Islam Channel, ISB or whatever organisation shouldnt give people like Ed the time. But hey if he wants to come down ELM or even the Radio show…I say go for it, iam all for engagement man!
Can I also ask brother Tahir
should we also start engaging with Irshad Manji? Ayan Hersi Ali?
And if so – should we not challenge their heretic views in that engagement, or should we just give them the platform unchallenged?
If not – why not – to both of the above
wasalam
Wa Assalam Tahir,
The reason we belittle your precious fitnah fest Leaving ‘Islam’ attended by 5,000 or so that you boast of was not ‘just because of one individual’ ie. the fool Edward of QF and his evil actually- its due to numerous reasons- you play music, have dancing clappy concert goers, free-mixing by the public, and also hugging and shaking hands going on between non-Mahram ISB workers who are apparently part of an ‘Islamic’ Movement of some sort, etc. and yes this was all witnessed by brothers who went and saw this happen in front of their eyes so don’t deny it.
Why do your ‘over 25 esteemed speakers & scholars of renown’ not forbid this munkar and speak up for the maroof? And why on earth did they attend such a ‘frankly deplorable’ event that only QF, the gov, and those for Secular ‘Islam’ would lap up?
You make us laugh- now you can’t stand the criticism so mention IFE shurah and senior brothers to us so as to threaten to go crying on their shoulders subhanallah? Inshaallah go tell them the truth of what occurs in your Leaving ‘Islam’ camp of fitnah and ask any of them to speak on your behalf and defend you.
Forget IFE shurah- what’s going on with your YM/ISB shurah man? Do they go into hibernation each Summer so as to be able to ‘bring it to their attention before further fitna is caused’ in regards to their fitnah festival? Oh wait no they know about it as they’re on stage stealing the show.
Whatever happened to the teachings of Maulana Maududi and his writings on purdah oh ISB/YM?
Whatever happened to the dawah and hisbah of Imam Hassan al Banna oh shurah of ISB?
Is Ustadh Sayyed Qutb too ‘extreme’ in our time?
Take care, don’t give your new ‘esteemed scholar’ Edwardo our salam- say hello or aribas or bonjour Amigo or whatever he prefers.
Tahir in your crusade to defend ISB from what I can read as is plain you are the one with all ‘hearsay’ and ‘innuendo’ when it comes to brother Azad and IFE and lack ‘basic adab’ so are one to talk.
Wa Assalam
You know all these people and their attitude towards Isalm, Islamic movements etc reminds of a few verses from Surah Bakarah:
2:14 And when they meet those who have attained to faith, they assert, “We believe [as you believe]“; but when they find themselves alone with their- evil impulses, [10] they say, “Verily, we are with you; we were only mocking!”
Salaam Br Haneef,
I make no accusations against IFE – please reread my post. If anything I only have praise for the work IFE are doing in our communities, may Allah SWT reward them all abundantly. Apologies if I’ve offended you or any other posters. That was not my intention. Simply wanted to avoid exactly what neocons and others of their ilk want – keeping us busy infighting amongst ourselves. I guess I didn;t make the point clearly.
As for your opinion about Living Islam if you are happy to malign 5000 muslim brothers & sisters (not a boast, just a fact) plus the likes of Dr Tariq Ramadan, Professor Salim Al-Hasani, Dr Hani Al-Banna, Imam Zia Ullah Khan, Dr Zulfikar Ali Shah, Imam Mojlum Khan, Qari Muhammed Abu Bakr, Qari Zahir Ali and others that is your choice. As to why they came that’s for them to answer. All I know is that they have been before and chose to grace the camp this year with their presence again.
If you are happy to condem the likes of Muslim Aid, Islamic Relief, Islam Channel, Channel S, Noor TVand others who sponsored Living Islam, atended the event, gave talks etc that is also your choice.
Your bring up a list of things that certain brothers who went witnessed some of which deal with fiqh issues. I cannot deny or affirm simply because I wasn’t a witness. Suffice to say the camp is never likely to please everyone. We are human and make mistakes. However we try to learn from our mistakes, improve the next time and hope & pray Allah SWT forgives and accepts our intentions and actions. If however you are only prepared to see the downside and critise that is also your choice. We welcome criticism as long as its constructive.
Salaam Br Azad,
Apologies to you also. My comments were based on your commentary ref ISB, not against you personally or the case you make about ‘Ed’ / QFs selective engagement with which I agree by the way. ISB made a choise, the wrong one in your opinion. Its upto you to give the counter argument, not accuse a whole organsiation of…
Anyway I wish everyone peace & pray Allah SWT continues to keep us all on the straight path. Ameen.
Wa Assalam Tahir,
I am not maligning the 5,000 that you boast attend the fitnah fest ‘Leaving’ Islam- I am maligning the organisors ie. ISB and YM who have reached a lowly standard for facilitating and allowing such evil to occur openly and inviting people to it. How can you blame the attendees when you and your ‘Islamic’ Movement workers who are meant to be the ones looked up to by all carrying the banner of la illaha illallah are not only making way for the fitnah but also partaking in it?
As for the speakers that attended yes I stand by my criticism of them all no matter who they are- be he some grandson of Imam Hassan al Banna or the uppermost Mufti I am not swayed by their names and standing for munkar is munkar and just because they are ‘invited guests’ at any event by whichever organisation this does not mean that somehow their duties go out the window. Sure address the topic that is on hand but just because they’ve paid for your travel and are good hosts doesn’t mean you should be shy to not tell it like it is and if they know of all the filth that goes on yet attend (thereby others flock and attend too) yet do not speak out then they shall be accountable.
Lets not get ahead of ourselves- my condemnation is of your Leaving ‘Islam’ fitnah fest and what occurs in it and the organisors ie. ISB and YM roping in others in some vain defence is just shallow. Though yes I happily condemn the munkar of IC’s GPU fitnah and some of its programming as well as the garbage nationalist shows on Channel S and Noor TV.
So now we make 70 excuses for evil that occurs in the fitnah fest of ‘Islamic’ Movement workers by ‘Islamic’ Movement workers as ‘fiqh issues’ do we? Well that makes sense seen as you being so-called duaat have no excuse of ignorance which the 5,000 or so who attend may do. Tahir are you telling me honestly you are not aware of the matters I mention because you say you never witnessed it? Dude go look at the publicity material and see that they invited Edward and looks at the ‘entertainment’ they have and deny musicians/singers and concerts do not take place along side the munkar attached. Maybe you should get to know your fellow Islamic workers and over some tea they’ll relate stories of what occurs there.
Well whatever ‘mistakes’ you make it seems you’re not learning from it- year after year its either the same old fitnah if not worse. I only seen downside because there is only downside to be seen- you’ve made up my choice to see it as thats all there is to see from ISB/ YM. Seen as you folks never learn and don’t take note of constructive criticism (those brother who attended formally wrote letters to ISB with they not replying back) this bitter pill though not going down too well may serve to strengthen you on the long run or will show you for what you truly stand for.
Ameen to the dua.
Wa Assalam
Assallaam Alekuum, again
I really do not have much more to say than to summarise our red alerts
We know that the Quilliam Foundation spreads Kufr that goes against what is established by necessity in Islam, so I am just shocked that certain Muslims continue to bring this “husn al dhunn” thing in. Still we now know this
1-Certain members in the ISB attended the Quilliam launch and certain people gave this traitor a platform ON HIS OWN CONDITIONS
2-Usama Hassan of JAMAS has also supported the Quilliam foundation and has supported there Kufr, considering it within Islam. We all know his position on the Hijab as well
3-We have a certain “main stream” scholar of the “Sufi’s” who had adopted the same apporach but we will not name him for now. Inshallah that will come later. In other words they are brothers and we should have “husn al dhunn” of them!
4-A member of the Radical Middle Way was caught praising the movement and inshallah in his reply he will correct himself ( he is editing it as we speak)
Isnt it just shocking now that we have this spread that supports or engages a group ON THEIR OWN CONDITIONS, which calls our prophets edicts barbaric, equates Islam with fascism and the BNP, debates the legality of homosexuality, divorces the difference between Zina and marriage (in effect allows a boyfriend girlfriend relationship), takes this maqasid fitnah to Kufr! (remember THE RAND WAS VERY KEEN ON THE MAQASID APPROACH AND NOW WE KNOW WHY!) and so on and so on.
We had Shiekh Kabbani making that shocking speech in the States in the late 90’s and even Hamza Yusuf signed a petition against it. Now we have this and certain Muslims want engage with “husn al dhunn” and even SUPPORT THEM!
Of course the only problem I had with the Islam channel thing was this. ED SHOULD HAVE ATTACHED NO CONDITIONS.
Br Tahir
Azad has said in an earlier response that he is ‘happy to stand corrected’ – tell him, and us, what ISB sought to achieve by inviting Ed on his condition that Inayat Bunglawala does not appear on the Panel?
Your assumption that his question at the end was rhetorical is proven incorrect by the above statement.
The issue is not to judge ISB’s intention – but the comment piece is based on their action – so you being an ISB follower, of sorts, should tell us what was ‘positive’ about the panel discussion. What did it achieve for ISB? What was ‘new’ that the audience discovered about Ed and his views – other than the opportunity to boo him? Or was that the intention?
Khalid makes a serious assertion that Ed called the MCB an ‘extremist organisation’ and named Dr Bari as an ‘extremist’ – Azad and now I ask – who rebutted this point of view? Further – their stated aim is for ‘Western Islam’ is that something the ISB subscribe to – according some posts above it seems they do?
You ask what would others do with the likes of Ed – Azad has made it clear that he wanted to debate him and his views – but not on the condition that certain questions will not be asked – do you find this condition acceptable?
Look forward to your response.
“of course the only problem I had with the Islam channel thing was this. ED SHOULD NOT HAVE ATTACHED NO CONDITIONS.”
and there in lies the whole point of the arguement! Well said.
reading all the posts that are against Br Azad’s blog, why is it that the simple question of why ED was allowed conditions is still not been answered?
Salam All,
This man is beyond reasonable debate. We should stop trying to think we can engage with him. It’s like trying to have a “reasonable” debate with Nick Griffith, or to try to have a calm conversation with an enraged skinhead. Reasonable debate is with people who can “reason” if they cannot, and do not have the guts to act properly then they have to be exposed for the cowards that they are. His transparency will be his own downfall. Dont worry about him! SHAME HIM INTO SUBMISSION. LET ALLAH DO THE REST!!!
Thanks for this post. You are of course right when you say that Ed Husain certainly has a strange conception of free speech. Remember this is the same fellow who wanted to ban HT – although he has since recanted of that particular stupidity.
Regarding the Living Islam Event (and it was a wonderful event) I do not think it was necessarily wrong for the organisers to have invited Ed to be on their Question Time panel. After all, the ISB is a more open and democratic platform than the Quilliam Foundation. Ed’s stipulation that I could not be on the Question Time panel was certainly cowardly but provided that there were other panellists who were prepared to challenge Ed’s constant pandering in the media to Zionists and Islamophobes then this could have still been a useful exercise. In my view, some members of the panel – with the notable exception of Ahtsham Ali – did not robustly challenge Ed but even so, Ed was loudly booed and jeered at by the audience when he tried to push his ridiculous views about the MCB and ‘Islamism’. Remember that for many members of the audience this was the very first time they had actually seen and heard Ed and from the conversations I had with people afterwards he left an awful impression in their minds.
When it came to the Islam Channel show, my co-presenter, Abdurahman Jafar asked Ed if he was willing to come on and take part in a discussion. Ed’s first response was ‘Will your co-presenter (ie me!) be there’. I told Abdurahman that I was quite prepared to absent myself from the show this week provided that we also had another guest along with Ed who would challenge his views. The show is meant to encourage debate after all. So we invited you (Azad) on to the show as well. Again, the fact the Ed refused to take part in the programme if you were on reflects very poorly on Ed. Even then, you saw the response of our viewers who rang in to say they were ‘livid’ at Ed’s views in support of the invasion of Iraq and his transparent ‘insincerity’ towards the sufferings of the Palestinian people.
I think you make a good point when you say that Ed wants to prove himself to be a ‘useful asset’ to the government handlers who are now funding the Quilliam Foundation and so needs to show that he is going out to various Muslim platforms. However, provided he is properly challenged and exposed for what he is then his usefulness to his handlers will quickly dissipate and they will realise just how counterproductive their strategy is.
In next Monday’s show we will, God Willing, be showing extracts of the interview with Ed again and both you and I will be there to comment on Ed’s views. This time if Ed does not want to appear on the show if we are also on then he can frankly go somewhere else and multiply.
You say that there are some in the ISB who are secretly supporting Ed in order to secure governmental favours. I don’t know about this and I think it is important that we are all careful to refrain from making allegations that are not properly substantiated.
ws
We are with you, charitable sours, when you rise up against those who perpetrate the base deeds instigated by the powers that be, or whipped up by demonical forces. We the faithful of Islam are with you, and we will be so ever more and more faithful resolute our courage and in the assurance of our father Abraham (ala-ihisalam), smasher of idols.
We stretch forth our hand to you ,fellow human souls, whatever your convictions, so long as human compassion and love animate your hearts and acts.
Salam,
Really great idea to go over extracts from the Ed interview and commentate on them! I really look forward to seeing it.
Salam,
Many thanks for the comments:
1. I mentioned before, I am happy to stand corrected and if anyone can tell me what the ISB had achieved by bringing Ed on then I am more than happy to hear it. The reason I said what i did regarding ISB or RMW is that I cannot see the logic nor benefit in what they are doing? This is what has led me to conclude that there must be other ‘reasons’. Inayat mentions something about some have not come across Ed or his views – if that is a reason then so be it, in my view it is not a strong one.
2. Inayat – thanks for the feedback and for the record I did not say anything negative about the Living Islam camp overall – I just questioned the Panel discussion and the manner it was orchestrated. I am indeed very careful before I say things publicly, this does not preclude the fact that I can make mistakes, however on the point regarding ’some’ in the ISB supporting QF or Ed in particular this is established and I am surprised you are not aware of them. That being said – I still am unclear why they are being ’supportive’ of them – I certainly don’t know it is for ‘money’, ‘engagement’ or ‘acceptance’ of the QF philosophy and that is why I asked the question.
3. Look forward to Monday’s show – I doubt if Ed would come on – but if he does this will be an opportunity for him to renounce and recant his views that have caused much hurt and negative portrayal of Muslims and Islam in general – the first being his defamation of the Prophet, peace be upon him.
4. Ed – I know you’re reading this – I will say what I said to you last Monday. You have nothing to fear from me, I only wish to challenge your views about the Prophet and his traditions, about the concept of Ummah, about why you attack Muslims, why you think Muslims in the UK should not care about Palestine and what you really think you are achieving as opposed to what is really taking place.
WS
Someone who doesn’t fear Allah, will always be afraid of everyone else
And someone who has no respect for Allah and His Messenger, will never have respect for anyone except those who are fighting Islam
Its no wonder he puts down all his conditions, he doesn’t want to get humiliated in front of his master by the field negros
wasalam
Looking forward to mondays show. I think at the end of the day, we should make Dua for these people. I was just watching a youtube clip of Muhammed Hussain (Ed) and Riz Khan and Ed mentioned Scholars such as Habib Ali Jifiri and Hamzah Yusuf. Ed do you really think that these Scholars would agree with what your comming out with these days? I mean I know many people have issues with Hamzah Yusuf et al but I am sure you will find it difficult to get backing from them…….thats Ed that is. Also in the interview he banged on about how “Wahabis” have gone against traditional Islam and how people like Sayd Qutb had no scholarly backing…………..i dont know about the rest of you guys, but no Scholar in his right mind would back your views ED.
Wasalaam, Ed come to ELM bro we can talk InshAllah.
I didn’t get to very many talks at Living Islam but the Question Time was one of the highlights for me.
We should provide every opportunity for this man to engage with the Muslim public. We all know his repressive Macarthyite message will gain no sympathy with the Muslim masses, even the more middle class types that attend Living Islam. But it provides another chance for Ed to be reminded just how marginalised he has made himself.
We don’t need the expertise of Inayat on stage to give the brother a good grilling. He was very capably challenged by the panel which included Sabin Inayat, Ahtesham Ali and Tariq Ramadhan. There was no comfort for him from yahya Birt either.
The panel put him to task on his opposition to Islam Expo, and was asked exactly what huge difference in ideology existed between Living Islam and Islam Expo. He was almost booed off the stage when he asserted in habitual fashion that the MCB is unrepresentative and led by a dangerous Islamist extremist. Fabulous! In contrast the remaining panelists, particularly Ahtesham regularly attracted a generous applause from the audience.
Rather than giving him credibility, offering him the platform and a chance to rant, only helped to discredit him further in the eyes of the audience. I hadn’t expected any different. Shame Quilliam don’t have a video of the proceedings on their website – that would make for some hearty entertainment.
So as far as I’m concerned, it was a job well done! And let’s have plenty more such encounters.
A little naseeha, bros and sis, please be less aggressive!! It is very sad to see people bad mouthing each others organisations in this way. From my experience, Living Islam was a credit to ISB. Labelling them fitna, devious, sell outs etc just comes across as immature, petty minded and sanctimonious. It is not how the Prophet would behave, who was even courteous to munafiqun in Medina.
lots of love to you all, ws
Br Inayat, Assallamu’Alaikum,
You have to appreciate why people are questioning ISB’s facilitation of this individual, senior members supposedly attended the launch of the Quilliam Farceation, Edwardo himself commends the group in his amteurish policy documents and there is talk of clandestine meetings between him and members of the Shura. So Akhi, as a member of the shura, please eleborate the offical ISB stance on Ed Hussain.
Where do Br’s Ahtesham Ali, Dilwar (IF), Dr Zahoor Qureshi and Dr Munir Ahmed stand with regards to his attacks on community organisations, leaders, texts etc. Please allay the inferences of collusion with this Judas by requesting a clear and candid public statement from the ISB hierarchy. Otherwise comments such as the ones below, which I extracted from the MPAC forum board will persist and ultimately damage ISB’s local, regional and national standing.
‘…it is well known that parts of the ISB leadership wholeheartedly support the views of Ed Hussain…’
I agree with Inayat ’s point especially. “important that we are all careful to refrain from making allegations that are not properly substantiated.”
All the best Azad for the forthcoming program, always remember that you are not doing this to defend yourself or something of that sort, but you are doing it for the Deen of Allah SWT and his prophet.
Iam sure brother Azad knows that…he shouts that in our ears on a daily basis. LOL
Did the Islam Channel come back to you regarding the incident?
Azad Ali, if you are so interested in figuring out the “reasons” behind things then maybe you should have written a blog when the Radical Middle Way invited Shaykh Kemal Helbawy as a guest to their program, got lambasted for it on NEWSNIGHT by QF and despite it all, went ahead with the program with Shaykh Kemal as a guest speaker – not to be dictated by QF or their ‘friends’ in govt or media.
If you can make derogatory conclusions about people’s intentions when it suits you, but not positive ones when it is due, then I can only take it that your niyyah in writing this blog is dubious.
BLOG EDITOR: ‘Intention’ or Niyyah is judged by Allah alone. One can have good intentions but carry out ‘bad’ actions. This is not a matter of debate. Please do not question people’s -Azad’s or Ed’s – intentions for their alleged wrong actions.
You people give the QF TOO MUCH POWER by assuming that any Muslim who gets govt funding must have to kiss QF’s bum first. Unlike the ISB (who I applaud for a good Islam camp), the RMW has never hosted the QF on its platform, nor been on their advisors list (as far as I know). They have very different visions and methodologies but that reality must be too much for the braying mobs to accept!
Assalaam ‘alaykum,
I think something is being overlooked here. Ed and Maajid are products of HT. They are products of a culture that speaks without knowledge, get easily impressed with people who know two words of arabic and are cultish in their outlook of things.
Dont forget HT have:
1. Allowed a culture of ikhtilaf on many issues such as Isa AS return, Punishment from the grave, Imaan etc etc So when they justify these things, they never go to any real scholars but always use shadh(odd) opinions which have no basis in Islaam. In other words: the-one-scholar-equals=ikhtilaf approach….typical of modernists today such as Quilliam. So no surprise Ed plays the same game as HT do.
2. HT as well as not achieving an iota for Muslims in their 60 year history, they fail to confront their opponents. For 60 years HT have not took part in any major events the Muslims have had since 1924, always accusing people of being compromised, where as they are the most compromised of groups with their U turns on voting, parliament, co operation, marches, charity etc. Why does HT just not accept their public challenge?
I think they know that, as I said in point 1, that they will use the modernist approach to justify their views, something which HT has always been doing.
3. The Sunnis have made such good replies against the likes of Quilliam, for example sh Haytham Al Haddads talk on maqasid shariah amongst others…what has HT done? I think because of their lack of scholars, achievement etc they cannot compete in the arena of ideas.
Some thoughts :)
Oh BTW, can we have the quote where Ed insulted the Prophet Sallahu Alahi Wasallam and where he said the punishments were barbaric.
Shame upon him! I dont get it, why does he just not join the ex Muslim council of britia rathr then faking his Islaam?!
Salam,
Ameen, here are two links which contain some of the heretical statements of the QF boys.
http://maqasid.wordpress.com/2008/04/27/a-call-to-shaykh-babikr-ahmed-babikr-to-dissociate-himself-from-the-quilliam-foundation/
and
http://traditionalislamism.wordpress.com/2008/04/26/the-heretical-counter/
Ameen
Ed is as much a product of all the other groups as well as HT he hung out with everyone
In fact – to be even more fair – his more recent influences are people like Hamza Yusuf, and Habib Ali Jifri, so its a bit of a silly claim to make that he was a product of a group he was supposedly a part of more than 10 years ago
Usama Hasan – who also follows their corrupt ideas to some extent – was a “salafi” and anti HT
It seems you have an axe to grind with HT – fair enough – but why do it here when the topic is Islam Channel/ ISB and ED
Also – just to warn you
Your point one is pretty inaccurate – there are differences within the hanafi school on the nature of punishment of the grave and its status in the aqeeda, and the Iman issue is one of ikhtilaf between ulama.
In effect you are calling opinions of people like Abu Hanifa and Imam Shaybana “shawath”
ws
The reality is – there is always nifaq – even at the time of the Prophet peace and blessing be upon him people became murtad
Mr SNoor, less of the Radical Middle Way advocacy, they invited Edwardo to their Sh Ali Goma dinner and he has a good rappor with Fuad Nahdi at Q News (the real driver behind the RMW project) and the current editor of Q News and convenor of the RMW went on a Foreign and Common Wealth Office funded trip to Al-Azhar with Edwardo and Usama ‘no need for Hijab any more’ Hasan. So less of this different methodology stuff, they are all in bed with one another…would you go on a foriegn trip with that creep???
AA Yahya,
Many thanks for your post. Please note the following:
Firstly, I am not a member of the ISB shura as you have mistakenly stated in your post.
Secondly, it is best to talk in terms of facts not innnuendo. So when you say ’senior members [of ISB] supposedly attended the launch of QF’, I have no idea who you are referring to. Please state the facts. I know of some people who attended the QF launch not because of any clandestine support but to see what they were up to and with whom.
Thirdly, you ask me about what various senior ISB brothers think of Ed. Surely it is better that you ask them yourself and obtain your answer first-hand? I personally have known Ahtsham, Zahoor and Munir each for over twenty years and know that they all regard Ed as an utter idiot and a stooge. Of course, there may be some in the ISB leadership who have different views. That is their right.
ws,
inayat
Azad who are these people in the ISB who support Ed ?
Salaams Abu Abdullah,
Thanks for your reply…
1. The hanafis dont say nothing about punishment from the grave being doubtful and ikthilafi. You may have some quotes from your party, quoting Imaam Sarkhasi, but thats old news and has been refuted. The people who reject such things, generally, are not Muslims.
Can you please tell me one hanafi Alim, you know in person who accepts ikhtilaf upon the issue?
2. There is no axe to grind with HT, they are dead a long time ago, but its very important that we understand the origins of such people…why is it anyone that questions HT has an axe to grind with them? Hehe, we have a lot of growing up to do brother.
Salam,
@ Snoor – I was on Islam Chanel with Abdur Rahman Malik regarding what Majid Nawaz said regarding RMW and Dr Kamal. Also, I am aware of what action Fuad Nahdi took regarding this matter in my ensuing discussions with him. I did commend Fuad for not buckling. A blog was not necessary in my view – but thanks for the advice.
I hope the statement by the blog editor is enough – nobody is talking about intention – I have never judged Ed’s intention let alone ISB’s or RMW.
Abdurahman Malik will make the RMW’s position and his clear regarding the ‘endorsement’ of QF – for further reading go to http://traditionalislamism.wordpress.com/2008/07/16/.
&
http://traditionalislamism.wordpress.com/2008/07/20/radical-middle-way-representitive-has-replied/
@ Redwan – yes they did and Inayat, Abdurahman Jafar and I will be on air on Monday to add balance to last week’s show!
One thing I should clarify (and I wish people would read the blog) that my concerns were specifically the “endoresement” of QF and the lack of taking to task Ed’s ‘heretical’ comments.
What RMW, ISB or Islam Channel do in general as their dawah – I did not seek to comment on at all in this post – maybe another time ;-)
@ Ibn Adam – when the need arises, inshallah I will be willing to say who they are. There is no benefit in naming them here now.
I have not seen one argument yet that informs me or the readers in the benefit that was gained by bringing Ed on a conditional basis (i.e. without Inayat or me). Abu Ali (the first one) mentions that he was tackled re Islam Expo etc. These are secondary matters – where was the challenge regarding his defamation of the Prophet, peace be upon him?
@Ameen
Akhi – it is obvious from your posting you are partisan – who could claim that the issue of Iman was not differed over except for a blinkered salafi type? Definately no one who has studied for more than a week could say such a thing.
As far as your question goes, yes i do know some personally and also from books you can check the book by Manzoor Nomani al-hanafi where he talks about how punishment of the grave falls under those issues which are not entirely emphatic and therefore do not rule someone who disbelieves in them outside of Islam (which is what we are talking about when we mean accepting ikhtilaf in the issue)
(btw – when you say “the hanafis DON’T SAY NOTHING about” you are correct – unintentionally)
This is completely off the subject anyway…we are talking about who is backing the QF and ED and their ilk today
and the last time i saw – JIMAS and the “salafi’s” are still giving Usama Hassan a platform – shameful… don’t you agree?
If you can contribute to this particular issue which the blog is discussing – it would be better rather than raising your own issues with HT which I am sure you can find places to discuss other than here
wasalam
@Azad
- “where was the challenge regarding his defamtion of the Prophet” peace be upon him
Exactly
And why haven’t those ulama that he keeps name dropping disowned him publicly yet either
wasalam
Abu Abdullah
Heres some basic questions for you
1. Why have you ignored my posts and the points are being made? ( a typical HT tactic). Such as your modenrist techniques being xactly that of qulliam, your running away from debates etc.
2. Are you studying with HT…a simple yes or no would suffice.
Other points.
1. I asked who have you IN PERSON from the hanafis have you been to, accepted ikthilaf upon punishment from the grave….you somehow misunderstood my question and said that he doenst regard it amongst the clear cut issues( which is a different issue!). The question is, who have you been to, form the hanafis who have accepted that there is ikthilaf upon adab al qabr? No hanafi scholars accept this in the UK, from Sh suliman ghani, to Sh riyadh ul haqq, to Sh Atabek Shukorav
2. As for what Sh Numan said, that this is something which we sunnis have accepted too, for there is excuse for ignorance on punishment from the grave but the person is has still committed blasphemy.
3. You then have craftily switched the topic of discussion on Imaan, we will get to this, but lets talk about adab al qabr first. The differences between the hanafis and others from amongst ahl sunnah has universally been agreed to be a matter of linguistics. They both accept actions as part of Imaan, as has been agreed before Abu Hanfifah himself. Secondly theres ikthilaf upon whether he said some of the things he mentioned. so how can you make decisive statements based upon different narrations?
Where does HT fit in this? They dont accpet actions part of Imaan and hence are an enemy to hanafis and the 3 other madhabs!
So akhi, lets stick to one topic at a time, firstly, are you with HT, secondly, who from the hanafis said there is ikthilaf on adab al qabr….who did you go to in person,and pls dont give me those copy and pastes that your party FWD to each other….theyve all been refuted and laughed at already
Also @ Abu Abdullah,
You talk of JIMAS, well last I hear they werent salafi anymore…besides. The ’salafis’ have actually made takfir of Usama….and have utterly refuted him……..question is, did your party refute your ex khaleefah Maajid, or your ex mujtahid Rashad?Did they confront them? Or hide behind its ’supporters’ ?
BLOG EDITOR: You have made a serious allegation about takfir on Usama [Hasan]. Unless you can quote specific scholars with references, or point to a statement made by the ’salafis’ – your allegations are baseless and therefore slander. I’d suggest you either provide the proof or retract your allegation with apology. Please think before you write.
Ameen,
Again – you are going against the discussion of this board.
Read the topic discussion – sadly its not punishment of the grave, nor HT, nor me and you. Who are you to come here and try to dictate the discussion?
It is obvious to me that you are still ignorant in the details of your deen and it would be fruitless to engage further with you. All your assumptions are sadly misplaced.
If you agree with what Maulana Manzoor says then there is no disagreement between us, and as for the Iman issue you have sadly misunderstood the hanafi position though it is correct to say that ibn Taymiyya and his students follow that it is an issue of semantics (to say universally agreed though is again indication of lack of study on your part, and typically grandoise claims of someone who staunchly believes that they are the only ones who are on the right path).
As for your other questions, it is clear that your reading skills displayed on this board are about the same level as your writing, may Allah increase you in eloquence
Instead of foaming at the mouth and trying to make it personal or carrying some kind of crusade you have going on – contribute to the discussion at hand
btw – who has made takfir of Usama? I would be genuinely interested to know who these people are…jezakAllahkhairun
wasalam
Assalamu Alaikum my dear brothers and sisters. Jazzakumullahu Khairan khairl jaza for all the comments, masha’Allah its nice to see the zeal and passion from all the contributors for the haq. However, please keep the discussion topical and free from accusations.
There was a comment yesterday regarding our brother and Ust Abu Aliyah and his involvement with the QF. As far as I am aware he does not hold the erroneous beliefs of the QF, and Usama Hasan on the secularism issue. I was informed by a close friend of his that he was not happy to see his name being cited in the QF launch paper. Therefore, please do not put him in the same basket as them. I hope, and I was informed that he will make this clear Insha’Allah.
Wassalam
Salaams all,
Alhamdillah, Alhamdillah, Alhamdillah, what a fantastic blog. It would seem that the IFE is engaging in such a healthy discussion providing the very people that they seem to despise a platform. Look deeper…..
Have you thought about renaming this site “Fitna Forum of Europe” where one can backbite accuse, assume, slander, and seek to know the intentions of other Muslims, be they good or bad – why do you feel it necessary to provide a platform to increase infighting- if you all seem to know so much about Islam and Hadith what happened to making 72 excuses for your brother. What happened to staying away from what is bad. If you don’t like ISB/RMW/QF don’t support them, don’t go to there events don’t mention them, read Dua for them, if you feel they are doing wrong, ask for them to be guided.
BLOG EDITOR: If the idea of this blog/forum is so bad (fitan), why can’t you resist visiting it and commenting on it? Also, please try to make just one excuse (out of 72) for the brothers (& sisters) here. If you don’t like it, please don’t visit – just make dua for us. I refer you to the Qur’anic verse: ‘O you who believe, why do you say that which you do not do’ (Surah al-Saff: 2).
How is the IFE better than any other group – what are you saying different- after all aren’t you saying- it is our way or the way of ELM everyone else is wrong!! That is what this platform and all your “supporters” seem to be saying. Don’t QF say that also, seems there is more in common after all.
The ISB/RMW/QF and many others don’t seem to have created blogs to further “essential discourse” There are many ways to get attention – surely this cant be the only one.
salaam
I have also heard the same that Abu aaliyah does not hold those opinions, but I would think that since the document was publicised the onus remains upon those mentioned to free themselves of this association
Additionally it is sad that people are still giving Usama Hassan a platform – but given the position of his father it is more understandable than that of the QF
It has been a typical Ed tactic to name-drop in an attempt to gain legitimacy in the community, beginning with Sheikh Nuh and the like, and they will squeeze whatever they can out of other sincere individuals who may not have had any idea what they are up
Engaging – it has already been mentioned a load of times, especially by Azad (I think he is probably sick and tired of saying it) –
The blog entry was not talking about intentions – it was talking about the terms of engagement
Azad was invited to sit on a show with Ed – Ed refused to sit on the same show – so Azad got asked not to appear……
Ed then got to speak on Islam Channel without anyone challenging him on his UNISLAMIC HERETIC comments
This is – according to Azad, and probably any other Muslim who cares about their deen – completely unacceptable
wasalam
[Deleted by BLOG EDITOR] knows he would of got owned if either Azad Ali or Inayat was on the show, face it the guy’s argument is as weak as a building with no foundations, he lacks intellect, and if he was faced with Azad Ali or Inayat, he would of got proper ownage, the fact he didnt want them shows his cowardice, shame on ISB and IC for bowing to the demands of a neo con Islam/Muslim hater.
Jazakallah khayer Abu Abdullah – I just wish people would read what I wrote rather than respond after being told about it.
The ISB need to make a statement regarding this QF statement (which I think Ed himself wrote):
“There are already positive signs emerging in British Muslim communal discourse with groups such as the City Circle, JIMAS, Radical Middle Way, and sections within the Islamic Society of Britain pushing for a more Western Islam, relevant to our lives in the West, away from the influences of Indian and Arab cultural practices.” (Page 6 of Pulling Together to Defeat Terror”).
The statement must disassociate the ISB from QF and Ed, and clarify what QF says about “sections within the Islamic Society of Britain pushing for a more Western Islam.”
I have read this discussion with much interest. I am very pleased to see IFE standing up to the corruption. I didn’t think people were standing up, as I see corruption is filtering through into our communities and masjids. There is easy money coming into our community from the local government.
I fear that masjids are predominantly run by the tabligui jamat (maybe my personal experience), and they are smooth operators at the top and unaware at the bottom and confused in general. They dont seem to understand the reformation game and some would dismiss heretic points by influentials as simply being diference of opinion.
I fear that the easy money is very attractive to our community leaders and the conditions attached to the money are not recognised. I fear that whilst the ground level of the tabligui jamat brothers in the masjid remain unaware and traditional in their clothes, the smooth operators at the top are moving behind curtains towards reformation of islam with their pet topics/subjects being the likes of social modernism.
Like Usama Hassan the sons of these influentials seem to be shifiting grounds having been influneced in their academic period and dragging their fathers towards such direction.
Just a peice of worry i feel to pass incase those who are capable can look after us (by Allah’s will). I have in the past been a very highly praising person towards the tabligui jamaat.
Assalalmu alikum. I’m simply over the moon for the fact that at least we have started to read and think at the same time- Alhamdulillah. As for our men in the temptation, leave him. I’ve personally seen him doing a full circle. However this time it seems he is spinning out of control even by his own standard. Islamic history is littered with folks like him. Let’s push our deen forward with our positive work and ‘help each other in good deeds’. I admire Br Azad and IFE for their maturity in thoughts and actions.
M. Hussain’s journey so far: Fooltoli peer in early 80’s (family tradition) – mid 80’s YMO – early 90’s HT – mid 90’s YMs/ISB – Late 90’s confused and bewildered – 2000+ diff sufi traits – now again Fooltoli peer with added sleepwalk into dazzling limelight. May Allah save us!
Some very heated comments!! Thought provoking and stimulating? Not quite there yet!!
There is a lot to say about many of the comments but time is too short, I will only state the following.
The comments generated from this blog has lost focus, as can be seen from a barrage of accusations, negative comments and counter comments about ISB (mostly against ISB) and IFE. It is actually quite disheartening to read all this.
The very accusations about ISB endorsing immoral behaviour, guest scholars and speakers not speaking against munkar, seeking government recognition and funding all seems too familiar. Once upon a time not very long ago and to this very day the same accusations were and are made against IFE, MCB, MAB and so on. Nasheed Concert, Community Fair, ExpoIslamia, Government Task Force, MCR…Are we following?
Seeking funds and engaging with the government local or national in it-self is not blameworthy as long as the integrity of freedom and independency is transparent.
Ed is probably enjoying all this, nothing substantial has been said about his grotesque opinions and crusade against the politically active Muslims apart from, he is “anti-Muslim”, “anti-Islam” rant. He is sitting on his sofa and enjoying the quarrel between supporters of IFE and ISB.
It would have had been far more fruitful if someone had scrutinised his views, refuted with reference that which is wrong and be humble enough to agree any little good that he may have expressed (I am talking about his experience with the Hizb-ut Tahrir, their extremism and intolerance).
On a final note let’s forgive one another and raise issues of concern on a platform that is suitable and let us celebrate the positive contribution made to British society by both IFE and ISB.
Was-salaam
May Allah love and protect you all.
Br Matin – the accusations against organisations for events such as nasheed concerts, community fair etc are completely different from what is being discussed here.
Ed and the QF gang purport ‘heretical’ ideas – there can be no compromise on this. These ideas should be challenged directly and that is the crux of my blog. The former are issues of fiqh which we can differ on and the latter are issues to do the fundamentals of the deen, where there is Ijma.
When someone defames the Prophet, peace be upon him, and says the Shari’ah is barbaric – this has to be challenged – there is no point in challenging whether IslamExpo is good or bad, as this is secondary and in this discussion irrelevant.
Further, the issue is not engagement itself or getting money from the government – but ‘conditional engagement’ and ‘conditional funding’ is a problem.
I hope that clarifies the matter.
Abu Abdullah, I don’t know who the bigger idiot is, you…or me who has replied to you!
Your understanding of Emaan shows that you don’t know the differnce betwene HT and the Sunnis on the issue. You do the typical trick of hiding behind the hanafis, whereas if you ask any Hanafi scholar in the UK about their position on Emaan and HT’s then they would surely condemn HT! Besides I wonder how many of the Hanfais would also acknowledge HT’s doubting Isa AS return, Adab al qabr etc…
You Question my reading skills and yet you misread what the hanafi scholar said….(deleted)…the sheikh was merely saying that the issues which your party commits kufr upon, are not ones that make one an apostate their and then.
As for those who staunchly believe they are the only ones upon the haqq…not sure who you mean!…was you talking about HT? The group that claimed to be Tayeeful Mansoorah(or ‘saved group’) and the only ones to address the issue of ruling by Islaam? ( although, they ran away from Muslim countries
Again, you fail to answer any questions (typical ofd HT’s), but rather change the subject continually…I understand you have not been to any scholars, the only scholar you had in your party was rashad ali- and now he’s a secularist…now who have you got? Kamal Abu Zahra who went to egypt for a year when at SOAS and now is regarded a scholar!?LOL.
The bottom line is Qulliam and HT are the different faces on the same coin. Rashad Ali (HT’s mujtahid) uses the one-scholar=equals-ikthilaf approach which you have used since day 1.
I guess you failed to answer anything in any of my posts….
Anyways, I’d like to ask( I know this is going to fall on someone’s deaf ears and a numb skull) but how do the brothers here view HT’s running away from engaging with Quilliam? Do you think that if they engaged with them, then HT’s modernist principles will be seen as exactly the same as Quilliams?
I read your posts Ameen, yes Abu Abdullah, being a typical HT can’t answer anything. Why bother Ameen? They are as good as dead as you have already stated. QF and HT are just as bad as each other. One is modernist in aqeedah and has a cultish outlook, the other is modernist in fiqh and has a secular outlook.
@Blog Editor.
I wouldn’t like to mention the name of the ‘Salafi’ ( he hates that term) who made takfeer over him.
But the argument was that he contradicted the Deen to such a degree, that there was no excuse for him and hence he become a murtaad. For example his stances on the Hijaab, for how can someone like himself contradict a matter that is well known in this community and how can he, coming from a scholary community, make such a blunder!?
[BLOG EDITOR: The point was very clear. We cannot force an apology out of you, but would still encourage you to offer it. A casual comment does not equal takfir - which should be a 'collective effort' by named scholars. This is unlikely to happen, as scholars know how grave it is to declare someone 'murtad'. Unreferenced fatawa are not fatawa at all. In any case, the objective of this blog is not to declare or relay takfir on people - Ed or otherwise. On this point I'm sure (almost) all the readers here would agree. As such we will accept this as a retraction of your takfir claim.]
Ameen, I suggest you stick to the topic inshallah. There are other forums where you can discuss this.
Salam,
With due respect, some posts in here are going drastically off-topic. If you really want to continue, maybe create a blog where these comments would be relevant inshallah?
As for the topic at hand, the discussion is on the folly of CONDITIONAL engagement; why some people are allowing it to happen and are facilitating for it.
It would be nice to read more posts answering, tackling or rebutting this issue!
Wasalam
AA
Sara – HT’s aqeedah adoptions are akin to the traditional Ashari positions with some slight variations – please read Dr Suha Taji Farouki’s book on them which details their jurisprudence (Caliphate is the classical scholar’s understanding of Islamic politics) and their theology. If you disagree please provide the same with references to HT material ia.
Ameen – HT do not doubt azaab qabar, Isa etc I would request your references for it please. There is a clear discussion of what constitutes certainty and what does not – these two examples are clearly not certain and for anyone to assert such should prove it. I would be interested in seeing your proofsif you have them ameen.
Quilliam Foundation is quite different to HT – please read these detailed articles which compare the ideas from the two sides and maybe comments would be useful… http://www.islamic-considerations.blogspot.com and http://www.abu-ibrahim.blogspot.com
“I’m not going on if he is”
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS AN OPEN DEBATE IF THEIR ARE CONDITIONS APPLIED.
Assalamu ‘alaikum.
I have never thought about writing on selfish people such as Ed, as writing or saying too much about such people may just encourage them to continue doing more harm. They greedily and blindly build up their fame (read notoriety) and fortune, at the expense of their faith, friends and sometimes even their family. Thus, for the sake of the common good it may seem better not to engage with them so that they can reflect upon their misdeeds until they “get back to reality”.
However, it seems now that Ed has started realizing his weaknesses, which is why he is scared to sit with his “friends”. It appears that he has realized the power of the truth and that of the people who know the truth, and the truth about him. It is really a shame that Ed is afraid of Br.Azad and Br.Inayat. This is prime evidence of the clear bankruptcy of his arguments.
But I want to be positive about Ed too. I think he may have had good intentions but unfortunately ended up in this way due to the lack of appropriate companionship who could have guided him during his journey from ‘extremism’ to ‘enlightenment’. I also think he is on the brink of another change. We can hope that it is a change towards fearing God, not people or the government. Therefore, Br.Azad , perhaps it is time to extend our hand of cooperation to bring back a “brother” towards the balanced way. To do so you need to understand his current circumstances more closely, then invite him towards positive change for his own good.
Understanding is a two-way street. As a matter of principle, I think you need to give him encouragement and the opportunity to understand what is changing and why. You also need to understand his reluctance. I believe you know that when people approach change, the following are important considerations:
• They need help to understand the change you want in them as a friend. They naturally want to know what the change will be and when it will happen, but they will also want to know why. Why is it happening now? Why can’t things stay like they have always been? Why is it happening to them?
• It is also important that they understand what is not changing. Not only does this give them one less thing to stress about, it also gives them an anchor, something to hold on to as they face the winds of uncertainty and change.
• You need to understand their specific fears. What are they concerned about? How strongly do they feel about it? Do they perceive it as a good or a bad thing?
I think it is time to tell him that nothing to be feared except Allah. Let us start a fresh journey of togetherness and understanding, and work for the common good.
@Ameen – until you learn how to read and write English properly, I suggest you resist engaging on this blog.
The Prophet Mohammad (peace and blessing be upon him) said that the Believer does not humiliate himself.
With your comments you are embaressing yourself – you need to take a step back, and I would also suggest at least 5-6 years of Islamic study, and perhaps a refresher course in English grammar also would not be amiss, before you start to rengage in these issues.
I would still like to know the name of the scholar/ salafi who did takfir on Usama – it was mentioned it as if it was done publicly, so why can’t the accusation be made clearly or retracted????
Takfir is not some small issue that is done by mysterious individuals under the cover of an internet screen
By the way Ameen – your personal accusations such as “you have never been to any scholars” etc. etc. “you are with HT” etc. etc.
Since you have no idea who I am – I suggest you stop making assumptions
Wasalam