MPACUK – Subtle Racism in The Name of Islam

The language of the Muslim Public Affairs Committee UK (MPACUK) is simple (and sadly, highly simplistic). Their mission statement is to get Muslims to ‘be political’. According to MPACUK, instead of Muslims arguing over the minutiae of religious rituals, they should become politically active. Doesn’t sound too bad at this point, I must say. However, try probing a little more deeply and you will find that depth is where MPACUK’s tissues of lies get ripped apart. For example, ask them this:

Whose politics do you want us to embrace?

Asghar Bukhari, the deceptive individual who is the face of MPACUK, has never dared to answer this question. It is our duty as Muslims to speak candidly of our beliefs but I guess Asghar didn’t know that (It’s 33/70 of the Quran btw, Asghar). I am guessing the reason behind this is that Asghar subscribes to the idea of the Islamic state, that fascist instrument which would make the Third Reich look like Friends of the Earth.  I could be wrong but Asghar has declared his intention to murder me (on grounds of heresy)  should the Islamic state be formed.

Another article caught my attention today. I captured it as a jpeg as Asghar has been known to delete posts when he has been caught out. Here it is:

‘our names are not Billy and Mo, it’s Bilal and Mohammad’ is the interesting quote here. Let us deconstruct this to unearth the subtle racism of MPACUK . ‘Billy and Mo’ are ostensibly White or Western names. This is who Malcolm X talked about when he used the term ‘oppressors’ and we can discern this from the context of his politics. Do Muslims who shorten their names hate their names? Not necessarily. How did MPACUK or Malcolm himself detect this? Unless they have some Allah-complex where they can look into people’s hearts, they wouldn’t know!

And what of Muslims who shorten their names in an Islamic mold (the human culture of Islam, that is). In the middle east, ‘Fatimah’s are often called ‘Fatoom’. In South East Asia, they are call ‘Fati’. ‘Muhammad’s are called ‘Mat’ over there. Why aren’t these chastised by MPACUK? This is also a cultural manoeuvre, same as ‘Billy’ and ‘Mo’ yet MPACUK doesn’t mention this.

In the case of the Salafees, it’s more drastic. You lose your own name and become Abu this or Ummu that, if you’re a parent. If you’re a child, you can either be Ibn this or Bint that. A more recent development is taking on the name of the spouse as well! You can either be Zawja this or Zawjatu that! But these things are not a problem to MPACUK, it seems.

How bout converts to Islam? Why are they encouraged to take ‘Muslim’ names? Is Islam a culture after all then? Or did Allah love Arabs so much that we are all to become pseudo-Arabs by taking on Arabic names. MPACUK does not denounce this practice either, it seems. Why, I wonder?

Because MPACUK is not about islam. It is about racism and protecting the Islamic tribe. They believe the identity of the Muslims should remain within the scope of Arabic culture (as are the names ‘Bilal’ and ‘Muhammad’ although strictly speaking ‘Bilal’ is Habshi). As long as it does, we are not people who ‘self-hate’. Changing our names to ‘Billy’ and ‘Mo’ apparently compromises our religious integrity. Such is the superficial nonsense MPACUK peddles. Our faith has been reduced to names now.
Except of course for one thing – the Quran nowhere mentions the culture of our names. Our islam is about deeds, not names. We do not become lesser or indeed greater human being by switching our names between cultures, let alone shortening them. Do not  be fooled by the ‘brand’ of Malcolm X. He went through a racist phase and this video could well be part of it.

This rhetoric is superficial nonsense spoken by a subtly racist organisation. They do not represent Islam. It is our duty as Muslims to speak out against this. I highly encourage Muslims to attend their events and question their motives before their racist poison spreads to the Muslim youth.

Adebolajo Hijacks Allah and Islam

Whenever Michael Adebolajo, one of the Woolwich Terrorists, pops up in the media, he is carefully framed so as to make a prominent link between himself and Islamic terminology. Islamophobes cannot ask for better publicity than this – an actual maniac telling you he is doing it for Allah and Islam and quoting (or rather misquoting) the Quran. Today the mainstream was all over this and I grew tired of listening to my God and faith being dragged through the proverbial mud.

The time for his trial has now come and of course the media circus which follows will rub salt in our wounds. Most Muslims in the UK were deeply appalled by this act of murder last May by these two men. As a Muslim myself, I am especially offended today that Adebolajo claims that he is a ‘soldier of Allah’! Soldier of ALLAH? Really?! If one were to read the Quran in the quest to discern the character or personality of Allah (such as it were), would one find the Allah Adebolajo claims to follow? Absolutely not!

Lets first analyse Adebolajo’s act – he masqueraded as a peaceful citizen of the UK when in fact, by his own admission, he was at war. Where did Allah actually tell him to go do this? Nowhere in Quran does it tell you to pretend to be peaceful in order to infiltrate a community whilst all the while plotting to murder one of its members. If you are a soldier, then you must declare your position as a soldier so as to let the enemy prepare for your acts of war. Adebolajo did nothing of this sort. Instead he used his British passport to travel to certain places to receive training and then return home. This is already unislamic.

Indeed if we were to read Ch 8/9 of the Quran (the chapter which Adebolajo misquoted, by the way) which describes a conflict between the system of justice and oppression, a very clear declaration is given by Allah and the mssenger (9/1-3) towards oppressors. In Traditional readings, there is even a period for the oppressors to gather themselves. 4 months to be precise. Why didn’t Adebolajo heed this pattern of behaviour? This is the proper conduct of war according to the Quran, the very same book Adebolajo (mis)quoted with his face in the camera for the world to see. Quite patently because he is not a soldier of Allah. He is a terrorist who used tactics of deception to reach his goals. He does not represent Allah’s cause but rather he imagines he is representing the cause of Islam. What he is actually contributing to is the cause of Islamofascism which brings us to the next point.

Let us not forget that the first two attributes of Allah, repeated as a formula before each chapter of the Quran is ‘ar-rahmaan’ and ‘ar-raheem’. Both these attributes are etymologically related to the ‘rahm’ or womb in Arabic. Allah is a god of nourishment and sustenance and protection – not one of cold-blooded murder.

Adebolajo’s case becomes more damning, he now admits Al-Qaeda (the media blanket term for all Islamic terrorist groups, it seems) are his ‘brothers in Islam’. This in itself will tell you Adebolajo’s agenda. Al-Qaeda’s end game is none other than the global Islamic state – that heinous instrument which aims to enslave humankind. This effectively negates Adebolajo’s earlier plea that he was doing to this to liberate ‘his people’, the very same people who kill each other more than any foreign power ever has. Adebolajo lives in a delusionary world, much like most Islamofascists.

The question we should ask is: Is this the goal of islam itself? Absolutely not! One of the most prominent principles from the Quran is ‘there is no compulsion in ad-deen’ (Quran 2/256) meaning in any aspect of the deen (usually translated as the system of islam), people should volunteer to practice whatever aspect of the faith They cannot be compelled to do so and yet this is exactly what Al-Qaeda seeks – to compel us to be unwilling citizens. So once again Adebolajo fails to represent what he claims to – Islam in this case.

For the Muslims who read this and wish to liberate our faith from the Islamofascists – analyse the rhetoric of Islamofascists deeply. They are usually full of holes and are anti-thetical to the Quran itself. Adebolajo is no exception to this but also look at softer groups which use highly academic language (like Muslim Public Affairs Committee and the newer Islamic Renaissance Front). These groups are not violent but try asking them what their end game is – what do they seek exactly by making Muslims political? Make them explicitly state their goals for all to see and you may be surprised. In the mean time, speak out against Adebolajo – he has hijacked our Allah and our Islam. Lets take these two terms back through our positive attitudes and action.

The Reality of the Muslim Race and Its Implications

by Farouk A. Peru

The evil attack on the soldier Lee Rigby last Wednesday has shocked the nation terribly. Two Jihadists took the threat of Islamic terrorism to a whole new level by targeting a soldier and hacking him to death on a London street. The reactive anger from the British public was swift and natural. The English Defence League congregated that very night in protest and Islamophobic attacks ‘spiked’ as is normally the case when something like this happens. In the face of this backlash, I hope to identify a race – the Muslim race. I believe understanding the race element in this whole tragedy is crucial to stem the tide of negativity facing the world.

I have a fear  that one day this will happen – Some far right chaps (possibly the aforementioned EDL)  will corner me somewhere and that will be end of me. That would be one ironic day indeed. Ironic because I am utterly opposed to Jihadism and Sharia law. Given the opportunity, I could expound for hours on why both Jihadism and Sharia law are antithetical to the teachings of the Quran. However, on that fateful day, I doubt those far right chaps would rent some lecture theatre to hear me speak. Rather they would simply kick my head in because I have the ‘Muslim appearance’. The ‘Muslim appearance’ is a key concept in understanding  the Muslim race.

I had been incubating this idea of the Muslim race for years now. That Muslims are only theoretically defined by the religion they profess, Islam. I say ‘theoretically’ one cannot tell a person’s religion by simply looking at them unless one employs stereotyping of some sort. In real life, this inquiry into a person’s religious views simply does not happen. Instead, there is an immediate, instantaneous practical level which operates somewhat independently of theory.

Today, on the day terror returned to our streets, I caught the phrase ‘Muslim appearance’  on  the BBC (they have since apologised for this) when I was reading about this evil act.  It was a very interesting phrase indeed because when I read it, I pictured the Islamic robes,  skullcap and beard and yet when the video of one of the assailants finally emerged, he did not have the Muslim look at all. He looked like a typical youth one would find in Woolwich and would never second guess. Perhaps the BBC meant he had the ‘Muslim sound’ as he was reported to have yelled ‘Allahu akbar’. (God is the Greatest). All the news channels repeated this report endlessly, carefully enunciating ‘Allahu akbar’ and thus firmly nailing the coffin for us Muslims once again.

Why is this idea of the ‘Muslim appearance’ so important to note? Because, during the time of emergencies, there is simply no time to investigate any other possibility. How a person looks in that split second will determine your reaction towards him. When a 75 year old man, Mr Mohamed Saleem was knifed to death in Birmingham some weeks ago, it is not likely that the racially-motivated murderer sat down with him to have a chat about his notion of jihad and sharia law or whether he hated the Queen. No, the murderer simply caught the ‘Muslim appearance’ and acted upon it. Google the picture of ‘Mohamed Saleem Birmingham’ and you’ll see one version of the Muslim appearance.

Racism is all about this – stereotyping a group of people based upon superficial signals. You perceive the Muslim look and you react. This is why Muslims – on a purely practical and perceptive level – is a race or at the very least, a collection of races. We have a variety of perceptive signals due to our looks and invoke a variety of reactions. These reactions could be negative or if they come from another Muslim, very positive. I have been given the ‘salaam’ (Islamic greeting) by Muslims I’ve never met when I fail to shave for a week or two even though I do not believe keeping a beard is a religious duty (I was just being lazy!). I have no doubt that those who gave me the ‘salaam’ did so out of reverence for the religion but shouldn’t ‘salaam’ (a greeting conveying peace) be for everyone? The Quran certainly looks at it that way (Quran Ch 4 , Vs 86)

Let us consider the Muslim race from another angle – imagine if you were a Japanese individual living in the USA during world war two. If you were interned, then it would not be because you supported the imperialist agenda of Japan. Rather it would be because you were of a certain heritage. I would even imagine that even other oriental looking individuals were checked before it could be ascertained that they were not Japanese (by checking their names maybe!). The Japanese, like the Muslims, have very distinct names. Once again, a cultural grouping was the criteria behind a political manoeuvre rather than ideology. Virtually the same thing is happening now.

It is not just Muslims who are affected by this ‘Muslim appearance’ either. People of other religions (or indeed no religion at all) can be affected by it as well. Jean Charles de Menezes, the poor Brazilian man who was killed by British police on a counter-terrorism operation in 2005 is an example of this. Jean Charles looked unmistakeably Syrian or Lebanese. Had he looked English, would that have happened to him? And what about the poor Sikh man who was killed in the aftermath of 9/11. Once again, ‘foreign look’, facial hair, turban and no investigation. He simply sported the ‘Muslim appearance’ and paid dearly for it.

Muslim women are obviously included in this ‘Muslim look’ idea as well. How can they not be? Muslim women tend to wear their famous hijabs. With the hijabs, even white and black Muslim women would be easily identified. It is such an unambiguous sign of being part of the Muslim race. It is a universal and highly politicised symbol of the Islamic race. Ironic considering many Muslims including myself don’t even consider the hijab as part of Islamic dress but again, it is not about being religiously correct. Its overtness makes it an easy symbol to identify. In the aftermath of any act of Islamic terrorism, Muslim hijabi women are those who need to be the most careful.

Muslim names greatly help the construction of a Muslim race as well. In the recent sex gangs expose where the perpetrators were British Pakistani, one did not even have that fact mentioned. All one had to do was to mention the culturally distinct names. Most of the names were not only ‘Muslim’ but they were of Muslim of a certain origin. This is yet another indication of the Muslim race. The names are unmistakeable and thus give an instantaneous perception of the ‘Muslim appearance’.

If  you agree with the arguments I made above, we are presented with the reality of the Muslim race. If Muslims are a indeed race, then targeting them is an act of racism.  I am arguing this because for those people who attack Muslims then say ‘this is not being racist, Islam is a religion not a race’, your excuse is pathetic. Those Muslims who were were never asked about their views. If the attackers, I am fairly certain that their views would not be radical, let alone Jihadi. Indeed you may have attacked a Muslim who is actually an atheist. Yes they do exist. They simply retain Muslim cultural signals but stopped believing in God. Even more ironically, they may not even be Muslim at all but simply look Muslim on their race. Have a look at Richard Dart (White British Jihadi) before he grew his beard and you would probably think he belonged to the EDL rather than to the Jihadis. You would simply never know this unless you sat and spoke with them about their views. However, these reactions are never about stopping any Jihadi threat. They are instead about bloodlust pure and simple. And currently the target of that bloodlust is the Muslim race.

Next Week: The Racism of Islamofascism – How Racism within the Muslim community gives rise to Jihadism.