Britain’s (and Israel’s) terrible problem

The Spectator

More very alarming evidence indeed of the attitudes of ‘mainstream’ British Muslims. As the Telegraph reports, the Conservative Muslim Forum, a body set up by David Cameron to advise the Conservatives on Muslim issues and which is headed by Lord Sheikh, has condemned the government’s support for Israel on the grounds that this displeases Muslims and says that Iran has ‘legitimate’ reasons for wanting nuclear weapons. It also argues that preachers who advocate a rejection of democracy and its institutions should not be denied entry into Britain.
In the document, the group says:

Regardless of the foreign policies of the United States, hostility to Iran is not in Britain’s national interest. A constructive engagement with Iran offers many possibilities for progress.

But of course, this inverts the facts. Britain is not hostile to Iran; Iran has declared war upon Britain and the west. There can be no ‘constructive engagement’ with a country that is currently blowing up our soldiers in Iraq. For British citizens to state that although they oppose Iran getting nuclear weapons, it has legitimate reasons for wanting them when it is committed to the destruction of Israel and war against the west, is appalling.

But then, their attitude to Israel is diabolical. The Tories, they say, must stop supporting not just Israel’s policies but the very right of the Jews to a homeland at all:

An incoming Conservative Administration must appreciate that a pro-zionist [sic] attitude will not bode well with many. Pro-zionist statements only damage relationships with Muslims nationally and internationally. Thus, statements like the one made by David Cameron on 12th June 2007 can be too easily interpreted as unbalanced and weighted towards only the zionist and Israeli positions.

[Footnote]: David Cameron said ‘If what you mean by Zionist, someone who believes that the Jews have a right to a homeland in Israel and a right to their country then yes I am a Zionist and I’m proud of the fact that Conservative politicians down the ages have played a huge role in helping to bring this about’ and ‘There is something deep in our Party’s DNA that believes in Israel, the right of Israel to exist, the right of Israel to defend itself and that a deal should only happen if it means that Israel is really allowed to have peace within secure borders and real guarantees about its future’. Source: www.cfoi.co.uk

From this, we must infer that these mainstream British Muslims want the Conservative party to agree with them that Israel’s very existence should no longer be supported. They do not believe that Jews have a right to their homeland in Israel; they do not believe that Israel has the right to exist; they do not believe that Israel has the right to defend itself; they do not believe that Israel should have peace within secure borders and real guarantees about its future.
These are not moderate attitudes. They are vile.

Their views on Islamic terror are all of a piece with this bigotry. In a classic piece of verbal slipperiness, they praise the distinction between Islam and Islamism — which is made purely to distinguish those who derive merely spiritual solace from the faith from those who use the religion of Islam to wage war upon the non-Islamic world — for allegedly denying any relationship between this terror and Islam. But that’s not what ‘Islamism’ means at all. On the contrary, it asserts an explicit relationship between terrorism and Islam. it simply allows for those Muslims who genuinely do not support terror or the jihad. But just to make sure there can be no doubt, the group goes on to insist that the Tories must never link terrorism to Islam. It instructs them to censor their language:

We accept that some terrorists do abuse Islam for their purposes. However, an incoming Conservative administration must deny their attempt to link criminal acts to any religion. The term ‘terrorism’ must be separated from any religious references. We reiterate that the Conservative Party should not explicitly or implicitly link terrorism with Islam as, similar to other major religions, Islam forbids terrorism.

In other words, the usual mind-bending dissembling designed to mask the true nature of the jihad. These are not moderate attitudes.
The group goes on effectively to defend the Muslim Council of Britain against the charge of extremism because it is well respected by many Muslims and non-Muslims.

But the MCB itself subscribes to the philosophy of Maulana Maududi, who along with Syed Qutb was one of the founding fathers of modern jihadi Islamism. Its spokesman, Inayat Bungalwala, has said he is committed to the Islamisation of Britain. Furthermore, it shelters under its umbrella many groups which are even more extreme.

Shocking as all this is, nothing in the document, alas, is surprising. These extremist attitudes are mainstream among British Muslims. The fact that they are regarded as ‘moderate’ — by a British political and educated class that in no small measure actually shares the animus expressed here towards Israel and America —is why Britain has such a terrible problem.

This document follows the recent pronouncement by the 138 Muslim religious leaders reported here which, although hailed as an olive branch to the Christian church, was actually a demonstrable threat. It is only when other Muslims come out and denounce these attitudes loud and clear for the treacherous, bigoted and lethal opinions that they are that we will have any hope that Britain’s Muslims will join the struggle against the jihad instead of fanning the flames of religious war.