Newsnight Spoiler: Islam Channel Islamic Propagandists Shock Horror!! 56

With support for the ludicrous occupation of Afghanistan flagging, government efforts to ramp up Islamophobia become ncreasingly febrile. Now we have the deeply unlovely taxpayer funded Quilliam Foundation

being paid by Newsnight to produce a piece exposing the Islam Channel as a biased and unbalanced source of Islamic propaganda. It will be hitting our screens sometime in the next week.

I am really glad the government funds the Quilliam Foundation. Without their sterling work, we might all have been taken in – I am sure that I for one thought the Islam Channel was Movies for Men plus one hour.

Just as with Andrew Gilligan’s execrable piece on the East London Mosque,

I have no doubt that we will learn that the Islam Channel contains people who are homophobic, have regressive views about women, want to impose sharia law on the UK, etc.

Nobody deplores theocratic government more than I do. Faith may motivate individuals but religious dogma should not be imposed on society. But many good Muslims believe that, for the proper order of society, the laws established by Mohammed to govern Medina 1500 years ago should be imposed universally now.

They are quite entitled to believe that, just as I am quite entitled to disagree. Probably a majority of British Muslims would agree with Quilliam that precise laws need to be updated for modern times and maybe it is unrealistic anyway to want to impose Islamic law in a country with 3% Muslims. But some deeply religious Muslims want to proselytise and impose, just as Livingstone wanted to impart Christianity and Christian values on an Africa where Christians were at the time a tiny minority. We are more than entitled to think they are wrong, but the proponents of sharia law are in their own eyes trying to save us from our sins.

What we have seen in the “War on Terror” is a growing intolerance of this Islamic proselytising, and increasing efforts to ban groups or outlaw activity which seeks to campaign for fundamentalist Islam. Yet at the same time we are urging young Muslims to eschew political violence and engage in the political process. If we forbid the outlet of political organisation and activity such as campaigning and broadcasting to the tiny groups of extreme Muslims, we grant them more publicity than they merit (as Newsnight is about to) and appear to justify those among them who argue that there is no freedom in the West and the way forward is violence.

Still there’s good money in it for the Quilliam Foundation and hacks like Gilligan. And it all feeds in to the ridiculous line that killing Afghan civilians keeps us safe in the UK.

Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

56 thoughts on “Newsnight Spoiler: Islam Channel Islamic Propagandists Shock Horror!!

1 2
  • anno


    It is very wrong to suggest that any population condones violence in another country. I have heard it suggested and I have challenged the suggestion vigorously. It is a shocking thing to say. The cure is to turn it round and suggest that their population is secretly happy about another population’s distress. e.g. tell an Italian that they are happy that Greece is in financial difficulties. No, they know that they are lucky to be surviving themselves and they are very unhappy about their neighbour’s situation.

    All I have been trying to say today on this topic is that the Church is part of the status quo that has delivered recent financial and military criminality. Financial, because it refuses to condemn banks charging interest, which propels the greed which has bankrupted the UK. Military, because they have failed to recognise the connection between the faiths of Christianity and Islam, and condemn anti-Islam state-terrorism because they like their hymns and cathedrals and places in the house of Lords. So, speaking as a Muslim, fuck em, I say.

  • anno

    Anyway, I’ve just been sent an email advertising ‘New opportunities working for MI6’ There again it’s probably just a mailshot to all Muslim addresses. Maybe Larry has resigned.

    They can send you an email, which if you open it, cracks open your whole computer, like US marines kicking an Iraqi door down, and burns out your disk drive. That’s why I put everything in my heart on my sleeve. They could torture out a few lies.

  • glenn

    Anno: ok, so you weren’t seriously positing that British people welcomed this abominable war? Very well, accepted, although I admit to not recognising your irony. I’m rather glad of that because your comments are usually rather interesting, and it seemed you were condemning anyone not of the Muslim faith as liars, immoral murderers and supporters of war. I’m glad to be corrected on that.

  • anon

    lets all slag off sharia law…oh but lets adopt sharia finance mr big high street banks…we can make some money from it…

  • Anonymous

    “If Muslims achieve a majority in a given state and introduce Sharia law, surely that entails imposing it by force on the minority who do not subscribe to Islam?

    Firstly, isn’t that the meaning of law?

    Isn’t the laws here imposed on everybody, regardless on whether the believe or agree to the law?

    That is a very silly argument.

    And secondly you are wrong in some sense. The Khilafah system gives non-Muslim communities a very large degree of autonomy in how they run themselves.

    I sometimes wonder whether those who advocate Halal butchery should be given the chance to experience it from the animal’s point of view.

    So are you willing to be slaughtered in a Non-Halal way?

    If yes, go slaughter yourself. Humanely of course.

  • Duncan McFarlane

    Completely agree Craig. People like Nick Cohen seem to think that allowing Muslim fundamentalists to express their views through free speech and standing for election in democracies is “undemocratic” (which makes little sense in itself) and that it will lead on to terrorism.

    In fact the major driving forces behind terrorism by a small minority of Muslims are torture, repression and lack of free elections under dictatorships backed by the US and most EU governments in many Muslim countries (e.g Saudi, Egypt) along with occupations, wars and sieges like Afghanistan, Pakistan and the West Bank and Gaza.

    What’s more parties like the Muslim Brotherhood in Jordan and Egypt are targeted by the terrorists as “collaborators” rather than being allied to the terrorist groups.

    I’m opposed to Islamic fundamentalism, but just because i disagree with them doesn’t mean they have no right to free speech or to campaign for what they believe in non-violently.

  • Zohan

    Anon @ 11:09

    > Isn’t the laws here imposed on everybody, regardless on whether the believe or agree to the law?

    Great. So you agree that Craig was correct to mention the desire to impose Sharia law on non-Muslims, then. QED. But someone here tried to dispute it.

    > The Khilafah system gives non-Muslim communities a very large degree of autonomy in how they run themselves.

    An interesting nuance to the debate. However, from what little I know about the Caliphate scheme, it seems to be all about superiority and the power to rule absolutely. Someday I’d like to find something to back up what you said.

    > So are you willing to be slaughtered in a Non-Halal way?

    If it came down to a choice of those methods, yes, I’d prefer at least to be stunned unconscious before having my throat slit and being left to bleed slowly to death. In fact, I’d favour quicker methods. What’s your choice? Maybe you’d prefer to be a spectator to your own slow, painful and bloody death.

    I wouldn’t expect you to admit that you’ve been misled into anachronistic practices by a false prophet (pbuh) but at least try to stay rational.

  • arsalan

    Zohan, The post you quoted from was from me, not Anon.

    And No as I said before Craig was incorrect. Muslim in general and the group he was referring to in particular have do desire to impose it here.

    That group in particular believe Muslims here should leave this country once the Islamic state is established.

    They have no concerns with this country or how it is ruled.

    You were welcome to give yourself an electric shock, or drive a bolt through your head if that is what you want.

    But you are the one being irrational if you think it would be a form of pain relief. It is about saving time and money, not saving suffering.

    Zohan your last point is the Key issue here. To you the Prophet is false, so all that was revealed to him is irrelevant. To Muslims he is truthful, so we believe and follow all that was revealed.

    You keep your way and we will keep ours.

    You try and figure out how you think best to mix and match ideologies and philosophies at the same time trying to build some sort of concensius, and we will rule by Khilafah.

    The Khilafah is the highest authority in Islam. But his authority is not absolute Khalifs can be sued in the courts, and have been.

  • Arsalan

    Hay Craig, this thread has just reminded me of something.

    Will joining the Libs prevent TV channels form broadcasting what you say?

    Why would I think that you ask?

    Because Islam channel were fined 30 000 by Ofcom for allowing George Galloway to host a program! For breaking the rules on political impartiality! Because he was a respect MP at the time!

    So will they be able to stop people broadcasting your views in the same way?

  • arsalan

    You know that is kind of strange.

    You see MPs hosting programs all the time, wasn’t that last one hosted by that Labour bastard?

  • Arsalan

    Especially if you put it together with this thread title. It seems sort of serial!

    An Islamic channel is accused of being biased towards Islam. Even though it had at least on serial hosted by a non-Muslim.

    For which it was fined because he was an MP, even though MPs host programs all the time.

    How many Christian channels have non-Christian hosts?

    I kind of thought a religious channel would be biased towards that religion by definition?

    Anyway, I don’t think any of this has actually happened. I am either dreaming, or too much work and not enough sleep.

  • Anonymous

    to those who want islamic law in the uk for themselves, what an arrogant statement to make.

    there is ONE law…UK Law, cant handle it…..please go live somewhere else, there are more important things for us to be bothered with!

  • Jon

    @anno – so you wouldn’t force it on people until they’d been persuaded, but after that, people will just have to put up with it. So I’d put you in the same category as the enthusiastic young man from Islam4UK – big on religion, not bad on history, but opposed to liberty and logic wholeheartedly.

    Still, I shouldn’t worry. It’s not going to happen any time soon: why would we be persuaded of the need for a regime significantly more violent and extremist than the one we’ve got? Add in some capital punishment, floggings and punishment amputations, and a major regression of female rights, and you’ve got a recipe for riots and massive civil unrest. I should imagine there is some sadistic phsyical hurt awaiting the adulterer in your dystopia, and you say you are in favour of this. Wonderful!

    That worrying position aside, you appear to be too blinkered to notice you’re wearing blinkers. It has been a constant theme in your posts, for as long as I can remember, that if only everyone would turn to Islam or Sharia, all the worlds problems would be solved.

    And you’re even arrogant enough to determine that Christianity is mumbo-jumbo, but that your preferred brand of indoctrination is the panacea we’re all searching for. Isn’t it possible that your religion is just as worthwhile as the other world religions?

    Glenn suggests you study humanism to broaden your world view – I suggest you study free market capitalism, to see how social ills are brought about by inequalities of various kinds, and to correlate between the repression it creates and the violence needed to maintain it. You might also look into social movements across the ages, and it might show you that the people of the UK are not evil for not having succeeded in stopping the invasion of Iraq.

    I wish I could find the words to illustrate to you convincingly how brainwashed and logic-free your arguments seem, using the secular systems of proof, evidence and logic. But you don’t really respect those things, and even if such words came to me easily, you would move onto your next post, still convinced that religious extremism and hardline societal repression shall be the saving of the world.

  • a


    Totally agree. In fact, without seeing this comment, I was making exactly the same comment about usury in Craig’s later posts.

    If accounting wasn’t so boring I would look into whether UK plc loses or profits financially by usury. When the whole economy collapses into a black hole, it’s easy to see that Allah’s words are true. He puts loss into Usury and Increase into charity.

    Quite apart from the hidden punishments of disobeying Him, that is.

  • arsalan

    David Cameron, and all others who use arguments like that, whether they refer to Muslims in general or the minority who try to spread their faith are hypocrites of the worst order.

    So those David Cameron call himself Hitler when his party distributes their literature to call people to Conservatism, his ideas?

    Does he call the other parties Hitler when they call people towards their beliefs?

    Does he call Christians Hitlers because they give out papers or knock on doors to call people to Christianity.

    How about environmentalists, vegetarians ?

    Anno, I again I think I’m going to repeat that I don’t think the Arch Bishop meant anything by his comment.

    I’m not stating that he is a good man or a bad man, I really don’t know that much about him. I just think he informally answered a question, and it was used as a bases for an attack on Muslims by the tabloids.

    As I said before, whatever words he used, the tabloids used, or the Munafiqs of Qullam, the apostate sects like the Qadyanis used all he was supporting was mediation and advice being given in Musjids to Muslims.

    I actually think he should learn from this service, instead of just stating he thought it was inevitable, and then the divorce rate in this country will stop sky rocketing.

    More then just him, all religions should have this service in their places of worship.

    His comments were nothing new, the Queen mother made exactly the same comments when she visted a Mosque soon after her grandchildren divorced.

    What we do in Musjids is actually common sense and should be expected in not just all Musjids but all places of worship of all religions.

    If they use their places of worship to marry, the least that can be expected is they will use them to resolve marital disputes. That is common sense, but the bastards owned by Rupert Murdock and the Munfiq owned by Dejjal call is Shariya law, or “one rule for us and another for them”.

    Sorry brother, I can’t express my support for your attack on the Arch Bishop on this issue, but I may or may not express support to you if you attack him on another issue.

  • Arsalan

    Tony Blair and Rupert Murdoch are not nice men in any sense of the word.

    Whether privately or publicly, may both of them burn in the deepest pits of hell.

    Anno, I don’t know much about the C of E, not even enough to fain knowledge convincingly.

    I do agree with you that many women are very disrespectful to their husbands, and that disrespect is being promoted in this country as feminism.

    Many Muslim women treat their husbands with disrespect too, and demand devoice at times when they have no right to it.

    This is part and parcel of the culture here where men are deemed as nothing.

    And this is why many men in this country

    are scared of commitment, so leave a long trail of illegitimate children.

    And why the streets are filled with feral young men, who are devoid of a father’s guidance and discipline.

  • arsalan


    I couldn’t careless who sits in the elections because none of it matters.

    Democracy is the opium of the masses.

    When Muslims sit in elections in Muslim countries, and the more Islamic party wins. these elections are nullified, with the overt support of the colonialist nations of Britain, France and America.

    This is because they don’t believe in Democracy, it is just a slogan to them.

    When their man is not elected in an election, they and their media mouth pieces such as the Guardian state: “sometime you have to use undemocratic means to secure democracy”.

    So what make you think anything can be achieved by democracy here?

    Would they really allow an Islamic party to win elections here, when they deny us this right in our own countries?

  • technicolour

    OK, I have stumbled on this thread; didn’t realise things had gone so haywire. arsalan, how are the fish? anno, how’s life in the construction industry? you are not alone in your poltical analysis, by the way.

  • Jon

    Forgot to mention – when I spoke to Islam4UK, an Islamic state was characterised to me as a one-party state, and it was readily agreed that they hoped British democracy would be done away with entirely. That is a serious strike against voting for Sharia Law: no party can be “democratically voted in” if it then intends to dismantle that same democracy.

  • anno


    Islam4uk probably meant cut off your head if you didn’t agree with them rather than actually voting out the opposition. It’s a bit like owning an illegal breed dog, nicely threatening when you walk past people, but not so nice when they turn on your own baby, if you know what I mean. Best leave these groups well alone. They do not represent Islam.

  • arsalan

    Jon The Islamic system of government isn’t limited to punishments.

    And your point about poverty doesn’t explain extremely rich MP, who are paid extremely large amounts stealing whatever they can get their thieving hands on.

    I know they claimed they don’t get paid enough and they state the way to get them to keep their thieving hand to themselves would be to pay them more.

    But that is rubbish, they already get amongst the highest salaries in the UK.

    What would stop them from stealing is the Islamic punishment for theft.

    The Islamic punishment system isn’t as ridged as you might think. People who are trying to feed themselves and steal due to poverty do not have their hands chopped off. These MPs weren’t starving and they weren’t in any form of need or poverty.

    They just new they wont be punished for stealing so have nothing to loss by doing it.

    If they had a hand to lose, I’m sure they wouldn’t do it again.

    Anno, love thy neighbor is actually in the old testament, in Leviticus to be precise. The same chapter that is full of the Punishment system sent down for the Children of Israel to implement.

    Implementing the laws of God and loving thy neighbor go hand in hand. According to the law sent down to us, the law sent down to Jesus the son of Mary, the Law sent down to Moses and the law sent down to all the other Prophets and Messengers pbh sent down to every nation on the face of the Earth.

    With the laws sent down to us from God we demonstrate our love for our brothers and sisters in humanity whether they are oppressed or oppressors.

    We give the oppressed love by ending the oppression on them by the oppressors, and we give the oppressors love by stopping them from doing the oppression.

    So if the UK ever does decide to become an Islamic state and implement the Islamic punishment for theft on those MPs retrospectively, the MPs should be grateful. If they don’t see why they need to be grateful in this life, they will definitely see it in the next when they are burning in hell, they will be very grateful for the loss of a hand preventing them from doing further crimes which would have resulted in a worse eternal abode.

  • anno


    Yes of course Love thy neighbour is previous to Jesus pbuh, because the Gospels say that he asked someone to explain his religion and they replied with this answer.

    You missed my point though, that, somewhere along the way, someone constructed a completely new religion , part Mithraic, part Sufic, part Islamic, part reincarnationist, which we call Christianity. It negates all of the instructions of Islam, from any prophet.

    peace be upon them all.

    Indeed my brother, I am currently debating where to go in this world and we find that everywhere you look negates one part of Islam. If you negate one part, you cancel the whole of Islam. For example, in this country you can talk about politics, but you can’t talk about qadr, destiny. If you say that a 14 yr old girl fell out of a pick-up and died, in this country, they will not permit you to say that it was Allah’s will. It was the catch on the rear door, or the driver, or the road. I am totally bombarded by petty legislation , in the electrical and renewable energy field, requiring me to write out a health and safety certificate every time I release germs by blowing my own nose.

    By refusing to allow you to maintain a Muslim mindset, they succesfully destroy the faith of the majority of Muslims. By contrast, in a Muslim country you can’t say it’s the door lock. You have to say that it was the will of Allah.

    Lastly, you talk about Muslim love to the oppressors. Allah says that mercy is written for Him. By no means does He oppress His creation , except with the intention that, by the Day of Judgement, they have come to know Who is their God. You don’t get to that realisation always in comfortable surroundings. Sometimes bad things happen, to bring us back to God. As you know, but maybe others didn’t.

    I have come to realise that the pressure to conform to un-Islamic understandings, such H & S, Usury economic theory, Western psychology, are MORE oppressive to our faith than incarceration under a dictator, even if less painful. Craig makes the point above that this society is intolerant of Islamic proselytising about Shariah. But this society is also extremely intolerant of every tiny aspect of our faith.

  • anno

    ‘ religious dogma should not be imposed on society.

    What I am trying to say, in the above,is that this society has a religion, which exonerates people from personal responsibility, which creates monsters like Blair and his Iraq blood-bath, and which also creates a petty legislative attitude to life, on which an entirely false economy has been based, both of which are directly opposed to the religion of Islam. Christianity is the fundamental cause of most of the problems of this world in my opinion, and, not content with imposing its shit on its own citizens, it is constantly trying to force its shit on the rest of the world by force.

    I don’t think Craig’s going to listen any more that he notices when I stick the pointing finger of my computer’s cursor up the picture of his nose.

  • Suhayl Saadi

    Technicolour, the fish are swimming, 10,000 fathoms down, along with the spirits of the fathers.

    anno, make sure you have a full set of handkerchiefs with you, wherever you go. Don’t cross the road without them! Mind the gap. Don’t leave your underwear unattended at any time or they may be picked-up and destroyed by giant rabid dogs. And above all, don’t sneeze!

    There’s no point seeking perfection in this world; you won’t find it anywhere, don’t tie yourself up in knots about it, like the ‘perfectionist’ H and S officer: it’s a recipe for madness. Do what you can, man; your spirit is good.

  • Jeffrey

    Let’s suppose that Quilliam Foundation

    wishes that telecasts to British Muslims should take an enlightened

    approach. Can they help us find some befitting examples. Can they educate the Muslim audiences in Europe on how to engage with restrictions on how their women chose to wear and how to counter that holy book incites violence?

1 2

Comments are closed.