The Muslim Council of Britain's Campaign Demands More Inaction

The Muslim Council of Britain (the UK's CAIR) is at it again.

Over one thousand five hundred (1,500) British Muslims had already travelled to Syria and Iraq -- in order to engage in jihad and terrorism -- before any of David Cameron's new policies against Muslim extremism had been put into action. Now think of the reality of the MCB's most recent position. There are over 1,500 British Muslim terrorists or jihadists -- either in the UK or about to return -- and the MCB is busy warning the government to keep its hands off Muslims... or else there'll be, eh, more Muslim extremism.

It seems that every time the government or other agencies take any concrete or real action against Islamic extremists -- or even against Islamic terrorists -- in the UK, the MCB has a serious problem with it. (See the MCB's recent 'Muslim Council of Britain Responds to The Times'.)

For example:

i) The MCB had a problem with the actions against Islamic terrorists in the UK between 2005 and 2010. It said that such actions “could cause [or did cause] extremism within the community”.

ii) The MCB had a problem with the investigations and actions against the Islamization of British schools. It said such investigations and actions “could cause [or did cause] extremism in the Muslim community”.

iii) The MCB had a problem with the emphasis on the Muslim and Pakistani nature of sexual-grooming gangs. It said such an emphasis “could cause [or did cause] extremism in the Muslim community”.

It's almost as if the MCB doesn't want any action -– of any kind -– to be taken. Now why would an organization which is part of the Muslim Brotherhood -- a worldwide Islamist movement -- not want any action to be taken against any section (extreme or otherwise) of the Muslim community...? Do I really need to answer that?

Talk to the MCB

The MCB has rather generously offered its services to the British government, despite the fact that the Conservative Party cut its links to the organization in 2010. The Labour Party also cut its links to this Islamist group in 2009, only to restore them in 1210. In fact, in 2007, David Cameron himself condemned the “hardline” members of the MCB. And the MCB's grandstanding (with its self-proclaimed “500 affiliated organisations”) was said, by Cameron, to simply be a result of it having the “loudest voice”: a voice which “crowd[ed] out other, genuinely moderate, voices”.

Even the website Onislam -- ironically reporting from Cairo -- mentions that previous relationship between the Labour Party and the MCB. It says that the “MCB had a constructive relationship with the previous Labour government”. (Is that why they broke up?) However, it then goes on to quote the MCB's deputy secretary, Harun Khan, who says that it has been "very difficult to have any formal engagement at all" since David Cameron came to power in 2010.

The MCB's secretary general, Saleem Kidwai, also pleads with the government in this way:

"I would say to the government, you must talk to the Muslim Council of Britain because it is the largest organization."

"You can talk to think-tanks but they are not the grassroots groups -- the MCB has got the mandate from 500 organizations who represent Muslims from all walks of life.”

The MCB's deputy secretary, Harun Khan (mentioned earlier), also rather arrogantly said (quoted in the Guardian) that the British government "need[s] to be talking to us and others to understand what it is that's leading these boys down this route".

And why is that, Mr. Khan? Is it because the Islamist MCB will tell the government that such Muslim extremism is all down to, well, Western governments and non-Muslims generally? More specifically, the MCB will mention British foreign policy towards Israel and the recent events in Gaza.... But hold on a minute! The MCB will also cite British foreign policy on Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Egypt, Syria, and so on.

And then the MCB will get onto the sins of non-Muslims in the UK itself.

It will say that Muslim extremism is caused by (amongst many other things) these things:

i) Not allowing Muslims to follow sharia law

ii) Not allowing the burkha and hijab to be worn in the workplace

iii) There not being Islamic prayer rooms at every place of work

iv) Not banning “Islamophobic” movements and individuals such as the EDL and Liberty GB's Paul Weston from marching and speaking; a well as not banning The Satanic Verses, that film on Muhammad, and much else.

v) Not allowing more Islamic schools

vi) Not allowing more about Islam to be taught in non-Islamic schools... and so on and so on.

This time the MCB is responding to what David Cameron outlined on the 1st of September. More specifically:

i) The new plans to increase and tighten-up anti-terrorism measures

ii) Giving the police temporary powers to confiscate the passports of Muslims bound for Iraq and Syria

iii) Gtopping Muslim terrorists or jihadists from returning to the UK (from Syria and Iraq)

iv)The possibility of relocating suspected terrorists and jihadists to other countries

Harun Khan has explicitly said what he doesn't want the government to do on any of this. He doesn't want the government to legislate against Muslims; to monitor Muslims; to strip Muslims of their passports; or even to interview Muslims. In other words, he doesn't really want the government to do anything. Or in Khan's own words:

"Part of the problem is the constant talk of legislation, harassment and monitoring, stripping people of their passports.

"This is what's leading young people towards radicalism."

If the MCB could run and control such government “anti-extremist” programs, it would no doubt teach the jihadists and terrorists to focus their energies and anger in a political or Islamist direction. Say, in the direction of the Muslim Brotherhood and its children: such as Hamas, CAIR, and the MCB itself.

Muslim Extremism is a Response to Action Against Muslim Extremism

The MCB's Harun Khan intentionally gets the causal arrow the wrong way around.

He says that the “constant talk of legislation.... monitoring” and “striping people of their passports” causes Muslim extremism. Yet, as everyone knows, these are responses to Muslim “radicalism” and extremism, not the causes of it.

The MCB also says that the new measures announced by David Cameron will widen the gap between the Muslim community and the government. Here again the MCB has the causal arrow the wrong way around. David Cameron and many others are responding to an already wide gap between the Muslim community and non-Muslims.

And, not surprisingly, it's the MCB itself which is contributing to that widening gap between Muslims and non-Muslims with its constant activism for more sharia law, more Islamic schools and, in this instance, less action against Muslim extremism and terrorism.

Another obvious point to make –- blindingly obvious in fact -– is that Muslim extremism increases when no action is taken. The massive cases of the Muslim grooming-gangs and the Islamization of British schools graphically display that. But it's also true of Islamic terrorism and Islamic extremism in general.

So, again, how does the MCB attempt to pull off this neat and duplicitous trick? Simple. It's a kind of blackmail which says that any actions taken against Islamic extremism will cause Islamic extremism.

This is not a new gimmick.

Lord Ahmed, for example, once threatened “civil conflict” if actions were taken against Islamic terrorism in Birmingham. In both cases, Lord Ahmed and the MCB want precisely zero action to be taken against Muslim extremism.

Now why is that?  

The Muslim Council of Britain (the UK's CAIR) is at it again.

Over one thousand five hundred (1,500) British Muslims had already travelled to Syria and Iraq -- in order to engage in jihad and terrorism -- before any of David Cameron's new policies against Muslim extremism had been put into action. Now think of the reality of the MCB's most recent position. There are over 1,500 British Muslim terrorists or jihadists -- either in the UK or about to return -- and the MCB is busy warning the government to keep its hands off Muslims... or else there'll be, eh, more Muslim extremism.

It seems that every time the government or other agencies take any concrete or real action against Islamic extremists -- or even against Islamic terrorists -- in the UK, the MCB has a serious problem with it. (See the MCB's recent 'Muslim Council of Britain Responds to The Times'.)

For example:

i) The MCB had a problem with the actions against Islamic terrorists in the UK between 2005 and 2010. It said that such actions “could cause [or did cause] extremism within the community”.

ii) The MCB had a problem with the investigations and actions against the Islamization of British schools. It said such investigations and actions “could cause [or did cause] extremism in the Muslim community”.

iii) The MCB had a problem with the emphasis on the Muslim and Pakistani nature of sexual-grooming gangs. It said such an emphasis “could cause [or did cause] extremism in the Muslim community”.

It's almost as if the MCB doesn't want any action -– of any kind -– to be taken. Now why would an organization which is part of the Muslim Brotherhood -- a worldwide Islamist movement -- not want any action to be taken against any section (extreme or otherwise) of the Muslim community...? Do I really need to answer that?

Talk to the MCB

The MCB has rather generously offered its services to the British government, despite the fact that the Conservative Party cut its links to the organization in 2010. The Labour Party also cut its links to this Islamist group in 2009, only to restore them in 1210. In fact, in 2007, David Cameron himself condemned the “hardline” members of the MCB. And the MCB's grandstanding (with its self-proclaimed “500 affiliated organisations”) was said, by Cameron, to simply be a result of it having the “loudest voice”: a voice which “crowd[ed] out other, genuinely moderate, voices”.

Even the website Onislam -- ironically reporting from Cairo -- mentions that previous relationship between the Labour Party and the MCB. It says that the “MCB had a constructive relationship with the previous Labour government”. (Is that why they broke up?) However, it then goes on to quote the MCB's deputy secretary, Harun Khan, who says that it has been "very difficult to have any formal engagement at all" since David Cameron came to power in 2010.

The MCB's secretary general, Saleem Kidwai, also pleads with the government in this way:

"I would say to the government, you must talk to the Muslim Council of Britain because it is the largest organization."

"You can talk to think-tanks but they are not the grassroots groups -- the MCB has got the mandate from 500 organizations who represent Muslims from all walks of life.”

The MCB's deputy secretary, Harun Khan (mentioned earlier), also rather arrogantly said (quoted in the Guardian) that the British government "need[s] to be talking to us and others to understand what it is that's leading these boys down this route".

And why is that, Mr. Khan? Is it because the Islamist MCB will tell the government that such Muslim extremism is all down to, well, Western governments and non-Muslims generally? More specifically, the MCB will mention British foreign policy towards Israel and the recent events in Gaza.... But hold on a minute! The MCB will also cite British foreign policy on Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Egypt, Syria, and so on.

And then the MCB will get onto the sins of non-Muslims in the UK itself.

It will say that Muslim extremism is caused by (amongst many other things) these things:

i) Not allowing Muslims to follow sharia law

ii) Not allowing the burkha and hijab to be worn in the workplace

iii) There not being Islamic prayer rooms at every place of work

iv) Not banning “Islamophobic” movements and individuals such as the EDL and Liberty GB's Paul Weston from marching and speaking; a well as not banning The Satanic Verses, that film on Muhammad, and much else.

v) Not allowing more Islamic schools

vi) Not allowing more about Islam to be taught in non-Islamic schools... and so on and so on.

This time the MCB is responding to what David Cameron outlined on the 1st of September. More specifically:

i) The new plans to increase and tighten-up anti-terrorism measures

ii) Giving the police temporary powers to confiscate the passports of Muslims bound for Iraq and Syria

iii) Gtopping Muslim terrorists or jihadists from returning to the UK (from Syria and Iraq)

iv)The possibility of relocating suspected terrorists and jihadists to other countries

Harun Khan has explicitly said what he doesn't want the government to do on any of this. He doesn't want the government to legislate against Muslims; to monitor Muslims; to strip Muslims of their passports; or even to interview Muslims. In other words, he doesn't really want the government to do anything. Or in Khan's own words:

"Part of the problem is the constant talk of legislation, harassment and monitoring, stripping people of their passports.

"This is what's leading young people towards radicalism."

If the MCB could run and control such government “anti-extremist” programs, it would no doubt teach the jihadists and terrorists to focus their energies and anger in a political or Islamist direction. Say, in the direction of the Muslim Brotherhood and its children: such as Hamas, CAIR, and the MCB itself.

Muslim Extremism is a Response to Action Against Muslim Extremism

The MCB's Harun Khan intentionally gets the causal arrow the wrong way around.

He says that the “constant talk of legislation.... monitoring” and “striping people of their passports” causes Muslim extremism. Yet, as everyone knows, these are responses to Muslim “radicalism” and extremism, not the causes of it.

The MCB also says that the new measures announced by David Cameron will widen the gap between the Muslim community and the government. Here again the MCB has the causal arrow the wrong way around. David Cameron and many others are responding to an already wide gap between the Muslim community and non-Muslims.

And, not surprisingly, it's the MCB itself which is contributing to that widening gap between Muslims and non-Muslims with its constant activism for more sharia law, more Islamic schools and, in this instance, less action against Muslim extremism and terrorism.

Another obvious point to make –- blindingly obvious in fact -– is that Muslim extremism increases when no action is taken. The massive cases of the Muslim grooming-gangs and the Islamization of British schools graphically display that. But it's also true of Islamic terrorism and Islamic extremism in general.

So, again, how does the MCB attempt to pull off this neat and duplicitous trick? Simple. It's a kind of blackmail which says that any actions taken against Islamic extremism will cause Islamic extremism.

This is not a new gimmick.

Lord Ahmed, for example, once threatened “civil conflict” if actions were taken against Islamic terrorism in Birmingham. In both cases, Lord Ahmed and the MCB want precisely zero action to be taken against Muslim extremism.

Now why is that?