A hero under threat
This week’s New Statesman carries a piece by Ed Husain (If words could kill me), which reminds me that I promised to review his book “The Islamist” (Penguin, £8.99). I haven’t done so, and apologise for that. Here’s someone else’s review. The gist of it is that Hizb ut-Tahir (of which Husain is an ex-member) is an avowedly extreme Islamist outfit, but that most “respectable” Muslim organisations, like the Muslim Council of Britain and the Muslim Association of Britain are, essentially, Islamist Salafi or Wahhabi groups. And it seems the first Muslim Peer of the Realm, Lord Ahmed, is in with them, judging by his reactionary, vicious and outrageous comments on a recent conference and upon Salman Rushdie’s knighthood.
But now it appears that Husain, an ex-Islamist who’s had the guts to break with the Islamo-fascists and write up his story, has been threatened with death (why aren’t I surprised?).
He even names his would-be assassin: Showkat Ali.
In this week’s New Statesman Husain writes:
“In internet chatrooms and discussion threads the Islamists break news of beheadings in Iraq, the downing of US helicopters and didcuss who is next on their agenda of killing and destruction. The mainstream media is bewilderingly unaware of this fast-moving, influential underworld.
“But things took an uglier turn recently. Showkat Ali, a member of Hizb ut-Tahir, who is training in Birmingham to become a school teacher, wrote a rap-like poem and posted it on several prominent Muslim websites. He wrote that his poem “was inspired by several Muslims who have betrayed Islam and the Ummah and are now openly working for the Crusader West in its losing battle against Political Islam.
“Purporting to speak my mind and likening me to Judas, he wrote:
No ifs no Butts [Hassan Butt]
Some people after me
To stab me in the heart
Like they did Hassan in Manchester
I dread the return of the Caliphate
Who will apply to extradite me
Put me on trial
And then execute me
As a traitor.
“I believe the above lines are a coded call for my death, written in the first-person narrative to absolve Ali and his organisation from any responsibility”.
Until recently, someone like Ed Husain – who had broken from the most reactionary aspects of his religious/cultural upbringing - would have looked to the Left for support. Not now. The SWP-type relativist ”left” would turn him in and then apologise for his execution.
We – the real Left, must rally round Ed Husain in his hour of need: he’s told us who wants to kill him; and why.
Will said,
June 19, 2007 at 12:57 pm
One thing Jim: “The SWP-type relativist ”left” would turn him in and then apologise for his execution.”
They wouldn’t apologise for it. They’d celebrate it.
Lobby Ludd said,
June 19, 2007 at 7:51 pm
The circle widens.
Now it’s not just the SWP, but the ‘the SWP-type relativist ”left”’, and it’s not just anti-semitism, they’d hand over apostates to their death and celebrate it.
I didn’t know things were so bad – thanks for that.
Jim Denham said,
June 19, 2007 at 11:20 pm
They are, Lobby, believe me.
Btw: I remember my Dad telling me about you and what you did at seaside resorts: something to do with reading the ‘News Chronicle’ and claiming a prize, wasn’t it?
Renegade Eye said,
June 20, 2007 at 3:08 pm
I would imagine Maryam Namazie’s new group will have a new member.
Southpawpunch said,
June 21, 2007 at 2:13 am
Maybe it’s true, maybe it’s bollocks – who knows. I’m also sure that there are also various fundamentalist sects – Christian, ‘New Age’ and more that threaten death or at least very bad things to those who leave.
But none of that would interest you would it? It’s just Muslim this or Islam that in your monomanical obsession with just one of countless superstitious belief systems that maybe the majority of the planet participate in.
modernityblog said,
June 21, 2007 at 12:44 pm
Southpawpunch,
as you are a “valiant” supporter of the resistance in Iraq, Afghanistan and I assume anywhere else
could you explain to us:
do you approve of suicide bombings in only London, or just when they are in a “far away countries”??
which is it?
Southpawpunch said,
June 23, 2007 at 5:49 pm
Modernity,
If it were legal to answer your question, I’d be happy to do so.
modernityblog said,
June 23, 2007 at 5:58 pm
Southpawpunch,
nudge nudge wink wink eh?
I’ll take that as a yes.
don’t you find yourself in a strange position, you are clearly a highly educated person and fairly well versed in politics, and yet you are reduced to some form of “critical, but unconditional support” for child murderers, reactionary thugs in Afghanistan, simply because you’re a political contrarian?
you must find that immensely frustrating?
Southpawpunch said,
June 23, 2007 at 11:03 pm
I’d rather be as I am (rather than as you think I am) – that is supporting the only opposition who are fighting to rid places of Afghanistan of the muderous occupation of the imperialists – than to be on the side of the oppressors like, for example, reactionary thugs such as the Saudi religious police (who you would oppose) or the reactionary thugs AND child murderers such as the Israeli ‘Defence’ Forces (who you support).
voltaires_priest said,
June 23, 2007 at 11:17 pm
Don’t forget your defence of Anti-Imperialist Paris Hilton, eh Punchy?
modernityblog said,
June 23, 2007 at 11:30 pm
SSP wrote:
that is supporting the only opposition who are fighting to rid places of Afghanistan of the muderous occupation of the imperialists
that is a bit like arguing to support any opposition of the murdering imperialist powers (Britain and America) during World War II, then suddenly finding you in the same camp as the Nazis, eh?
a bit illogical?
which surprises me, honest, “my enemy’s enemy is my friend” was a shit doctrine when used by the Americans to prop up every murdering Latin American dictator as long as they played their tune, and it is still a shit doctrine when employed by you, to “critically, but unconditionally” support the Taliban
if you took the “a pox on all the houses” approach at least that would be morally consistent but as it is you end up supporting a bunch of thugs who take delight in killing children because they want an education
again another surprise, as I’m sure you’ve probably had a very privileged education and could conjugate most Latin verbs to the nth degree, I’ll bet you can even name the other Roman kings, apart from Tarquin?
I will assume that you’re a dab hand with google, therefore not ill informed about the Taliban’s premeditated killing of children and teachers, but here’s a reminder of the taliban’s regime that you wish again upon the Afghanis, http://www.rawa.org/murder-w.htm
the thing is, I’d just like you to be open about your views, I’m always surprised when people with strongly held opinions try to hide them, I don’t understand why
concerning your ‘baiting’ comment on the IDF, I have no difficulty condemning any IDF soldier who intentionally kill civilians, I think they should be court-martialled and thrown in jail. Still worse, I utterly condemn any IDF that kills children.
I hope you’re clear about my views now? not that I suspect you’re terribly interested in any one else’s opinion
Have you never worked out how morally repugnant your views are? and that is probably the reason why your form of political nihilism and support for the conscious murder of civilians has so little “traction” with working class or anyone with a conscience and more than 2 brain cells
See the connection?
Southpawpunch said,
June 24, 2007 at 1:49 am
I always found Latin hard, sadly I’d much rather play fives than do my Latin homework. I’m not aware of hiding my views save ignoring provocations to break the law by possible state touts – see my post on Dave Osler’s latest article on the CIA for more (comment awaiting approval).
You are, as always, selective in your information, modernity. The Taliban have undertaken many vicious activities, I fully acknowledge it and support them in full knowledge of this.
But you make no mention of the much higher level of imperialist murderous activities e.g. the very rare apology this week by the US forces for a deadly 10 mile random highway killing spree by their troops. Who do you think can kill more – Taliban AK47s or US aircraft?
And you can indeed be in the same camp as fascists and correct, as Marxist acknowledge. For example, the Indian National Army was worthy of support. They were a Japanese funded army that used captured POWs and pre-war Indian nationalists to fight to kick the British out of India.
Of course the Japanese, whilst promising a free India to the INA would intend no such thing. The INA knew that – they expected to try and come through the middle to remove both invaders – they were right to do so and were a 100 times better than the Congress collaborators in their idea of how to free India.
It can be hard having the courage to be against your own country or even the majority view of lefts. When the heat turns up and the social chauvinism runs riot, many a former left will capitulate. But it’s ‘moral’ to stay focussed on the big picture, despite this – such as the 650,000 dead because of the invasion of Iraq.
I don’t think there is any point in discussing this with you further.
modernityblog said,
June 24, 2007 at 1:10 pm
SSP wrote:
I’m not aware of hiding my views save ignoring provocations to break the law by possible state touts
tsh tsh, your paranoia sleeping through
I couldn’t give a damn one way or the other, my question was one about psychology
I’m curious as to why otherwise highly intelligent people, such yourself, feel compelled to support the Taliban
it clearly not out of ignorance, as we have documented evidence of the years of barbarism under the Taliban, I doubt that it is over their policies, as I’m sure that even you do not wish young girls to be shot or blown up simply because they wish an education
so I’m curious as to how people rationalise these things in their heads?