As Britain's outspoken Ambassador to the Central
Asian Republic of Uzbekistan, Craig Murray helped
expose vicious human rights abuses by the
US-funded regime of Islam Karimov. He is now
a prominent critic of Western policy in the region.




August 24, 2006
The 'Neoconservative' Sufi Muslim Council
The Washington neo-cons, President Karimov of Uzbekistan and Jack Straw appear to be linked to a newly prominent "Muslim interest group" that supports the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan and Israeli action in the Lebanon...


Who and what is the "Sufi Muslim Council"? They seem to have emerged from nowhere – suddenly their spokesman is interviewed on Radio 4 and Newsnight and a Channel 4 documentary gives their views some weight. They have a new website and a new magazine. But hardly anyone knows who they are or what they stand for?

We wanted to know the answer to these questions so we set about doing some basic research. We have uncovered very worrying links between this new council and the neocons in Washington. There are also links to some of the most brutal regimes in the world e.g. the Karimov regime in Uzbekistan. We have also unearthed allegations of dodgy business dealings and vote rigging.

The Neocon Link

Just take a look at the SMC website [www.sufimuslimcouncil.org] and the influence of the neocons in Washington becomes very clear. The majority of the content is written by neocons that criticise Islamic groups – 'Wahhabis', the Muslim Brotherhood, MCB, MAB, Hizb ut-Tahrir, Tablighi Jamaat and Jamaati Islami are some of the examples that come in for criticism. There are articles entitled "The Muslim Brotherhood's Conquest of Europe", "Hizb ut-Tahrir – Islam's Political Insurgency" and "Islamic Radicalism – Its Wahhabi roots and current representation".

We found that one of the prominent authors on the SMC website, who also writes for the SMC magazine "Spirit", is Zeyno Baran – a self confessed neocon who works for the ultra right wing Hudson Institute. She is close to the Uzbek regime and close to the oil and gas interests in Washington and Central Asia. She tirelessly does the bidding of the dictatorial regimes of Central Asia by playing down human rights abuses and encouraging western governments to enact draconian measures against Muslims. She has condemned Sheikh Qaradawi and the International Union of Muslim Scholars, amongst others. She says that Islam should play no role in politics and condemns even the mere mention of Islam in the Iraqi and Afghan constitutions.

From our enquiries it seems that for some time now, Baran has been trying to establish a neocon-friendly Muslim organisation in the UK. She has talked of the need to, "provide money and help create the political space for moderate Muslims to organize, publish, broadcast, and translate their work." We also uncovered evidence that she has also held meetings with government officials in the UK, urging them to ban the Muslim Brotherhood and Hizb ut-Tahrir and cease working with Muslim organisations that mix Islam with politics.

What do real Sufis and local Muslim leaders say about the Sufi Muslim council?

In a recent survey of Sufi Muslim Scholars and Imams in the UK none had heard about the SMC or its founders until its launch. Most found it very disturbing that there was no real evidence of real tassawuf in their organisation.

The hard right neocon think tank the Nixon Center published a document by Zeyno Baran which encouraged using Sufism as a means to attack Islam.

[http://www.nixoncenter.org/publicati...hs/Sufism.pdf]

Similarly the RAND corporation in their paper Civil Democratic Islam talk of using one group of Muslims against another - Shia vs. Sunni; Sufi vs. Non Sufi. Divide and Rule.

The Kabbani/Jack Straw link

The SMC is closely linked to Shaykh Hisham Kabbani of the Islamic Supreme Council of America (ISCA). The SMC website and magazine are full of Kabbani's writings and Haras Rafiq has admitted that Kabbani is the spiritual leader of the SMC.

On the 29th of April 2005, the head of the Islamic Supreme Council of America (ISCA), Shaykh Hisham Kabbani, met with the then UK Foreign Secretary Jack Straw in Blackburn (right). The meeting was also attended by Haras Rafiq and Hedieh Mirahmadi, an apologist for the Uzbek regime and the founder of the neocon "Committee on the Present Danger". She is also a foreign policy analyst at the right-wing neocon think tank, the American Enterprise Institute.

While Britain continued to arm Israel and occupy Iraq, Kabbani, thanked Straw for the role the UK played in the Middle East and said, “We are glad to see changes taking place in the political mechanisms in the Middle East. We hope to see an end to tyranny and we are happy to observe a strong upsurge in freedom of speech, freedom of belief and political openness in the region.”

Most Muslim organisations in the USA, of all schools of thought, have strongly criticised ISCA for its close relationship with the US government and its strange theological positions, including outlandish claims that the late Princess Diana, Prince Charles and Hillary Clinton have all embraced Islam at the hands of the leaders of the ISCA.

Igor Rotar, the Forum 18 News Service Correspondent in Central Asia, has noted that, "The Uzbek government supports close ties with the Islamic Supreme Council of America (ISCA), which embraces Naqshbandi followers in the USA, and plays up its supposed popularity in the Islamic world. Although the number of ISCA members is relatively small, Uzbek propaganda represents ISCA as being one of the most influential Muslim organisations in the United States."

On January 7 1999, Kabbani infuriated the overwhelming majority of Muslims in the US when he gave a clandestine testimony to the State Department in which he claimed 80% of mosques and Muslims in the US were "extremists", Muslims pose a threat to the USA and the US government needs to act quickly and Israeli occupation is legitimate and should be accepted. Only those with State Department security clearance were allowed to attend the event. Following this meeting, all the major US Muslim organisations including CAIR, ISNA, ICNA, AMC, MPAC, AMA, ING, and IAP, issued a statement condemning the ISCA. In a later statement, Shaykh Hamza Yusuf, of the Zaytuna Institute, joined the above groups in their condemnation.

Soon after the American invasion of Afghanistan, Kabbani had Iftar with George W Bush and US Secretary of State Colin Powell. There are also photos of meetings with Dick Cheney and Islam Karimov of Uzbekistan (below). The photo of George Bush with Sheikh Kabbani (above) has mysteriously disappeared from the ISCA website, but a trawl through internet archives unearthed it.

Zeyno Baran has enjoyed a very close relationship with the ISCA. In particular she has had a close relationship with Hedieh Mirahmadi, Executive Director of ISCA, a "former top aide" to Shaykh Muhammad Hisham Kabbani and a former senior adviser to the US embassy in Kabul. In writing the Nixon Center monograph "Hizb ut-Tahrir: Islam's political insurgency", Baran acknowledges the "tremendous intellectual and personal support" given to her by Mirahmadi.

Mirahmadi is an apologist for one of the most repressive regimes on Earth. About a government that bans all dissent, represses religion and boils dissidents alive, Ms. Mirahmadi had this to say: "We were all grateful to experience for ourselves the spectacular growth of this new republic. We sincerely believe Uzbekistan will be a formidable contributor to Islamic tradition and culture for centuries to come. Their great history and scholarship will preserve the traditional Islamic teachings of our ancestors and deserves the support and acknowledgement of the American Muslim community." These were her words of praise for a viciously repressive government, uttered at the conclusion of her trip to Uzbekistan, where Mirahmadi was feted by the ruthless Uzbek dictator.

Who is behind the SMC?

There is very little publicly available information on the Islamic credentials of the Sufi Muslim Council. Unlike other Muslim groups from across the political spectrum, the leaders of the SMC are either underground or non-existent. Those who write for its magazine are unknown, other than those who work for neocon organisations in the US. Many of the articles in its magazine are just a "cut and paste" from ISCA publications. The most prominent person since its establishment is a guy called Haras Rafiq who originates from Rochdale in Lancashire.

Some may have noticed that the previously unheard of Rafiq has suddenly been giving interviews, claiming to speak for the "silent majority" of Muslims in Britain.

Haras Rafiq has said, "The prime minister and others have on many occasions rightly called for moderate Muslims to stand up and be counted. In response to this call, and following extensive consultations within the Muslim community, we have decided to establish the Sufi Muslim Council."

In most of his interviews, Haras Rafiq, talks a lot about representing 'apolitical' Sufis. However, from our investigations, the majority of Sufis in the UK had never heard of him. In an interview on Radio 4, when asked who supported the SMC, he did however say that they were supported by the Board of Deputies of British Jews.

We did find evidence of Haras Rafiq's involvement in Bridges TV UK, a company incorporated on 24th August 2004. Reports suggest that it was envisaged that this would be a "Muslim version of Sky One". They have been involved in a trademark dispute with Bridges Network in the US. Contrary to an agreement with Bridges Network, Rafiq registered Bridges TV UK as a trademark in the UK in March 2005. The US district court in New York ruled against Rafiq in January 2006 and granted a temporary restraining order. Soon after that ruling, Bridges Network UK Limited changed its name at Companies House to Crescent Network UK Limited. Rafiq is also listed at Companies House as being the Director and Secretary of the little known Bury based Communications 4 Business Limited.

It is also noteworthy that the 'apolitical' Haras Rafiq also supported Labour Friends of Israel MP Lorna Fitzsimmons' re-election campaign in Rochdale in the 2005 general election.
[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politi...d/4452599.stm]

Rafiq was also presented in Martin Bright's Channel 4 documentary "Who Speaks for British Muslims?" In that documentary, Bright and Rafiq, said that the majority of Muslims were Sufis and 'apolitical'. Not much evidence was brought to substantiate that contention, but it was clear that Bright wanted Western politicians to utilise 'apolitical' Sufis to soften condemnation of Western foreign policy.

The other person who appears in a photo with Haras Rafiq and the Labour Communities Secretary, Ruth Kelly, at the 'apolitical' SMC launch in Parliament is the staunch Blair supporter, Azhar Ali, a former Labour councillor in Lancashire. He stood for the Labour NEC elections in July 2006.

The Labour party website makes no mention of Ali's new found interest in Sufism, merely stating, "Azhar has been a community activist since 1984 when he became NUS President at his local college, and a Labour party activist since the early 1990s. Azhar's politics have been shaped by living in a mill town in Lancashire hit hard by Thatcherite policies which led to urban and social decay." [http://www.labourhome.org/tag/Azhar%20Ali]

Not surprisingly, no mention is made of allegations in the Guardian of vote rigging involving Ali: "The Guardian counted at least 96 [declarations of identity] which were witnessed by Mr Iqbal, and dozens which were witnessed by Azhar Ali, Labour's leader on the council. On behalf of both councillors, Mr Iqbal denied that this was improper practice."
[http://www.guardian.co.uk/guardianpo...00525,00.html]

Speaking in Parliament, Lord Greaves, said, "I have a file of more than 100 cases in which we believe that either declarations or signatures—by either the witness or the voter—were forged. I have photocopies of them here. I do not understand why the police have not been able to deal with the evidence that we have provided."
[http://www.publications.parliament.u.../40129-36.htm]

Conclusion

We set out to discover who and what the SMC was about. We have uncovered very worrying links between this new council and the neocons in Washington, links to some of the most brutal regimes in the world and allegations of dodgy business dealings and vote rigging.

The SMC state, "We appeal to UK based Muslim organisations to openly disclose their ties to foreign groups and movements."

After this investigation, will they now disclose the full extent of their links to the neocons in Washington and Blair's new Labour? Or do they think the Muslims will be fooled by a Parliament launch, a magazine and the odd press release?

Rand Report on Islam revisited

By Abdus Sattar Ghazali

Al-Jazeerah, March 19, 2005




March 18th marks the first anniversary of formal release of the Rand Corporation report on Islam, entitled Civil Democratic Islam: Partners, Resources, and Strategies.

The report has two fold agenda: 1. Try to create a version of Islam that suits the post 9/11 western agenda. 2. Creating divisions in the Muslim society at home and abroad.

The Rand Report recipe to achieve this objective is to encourage and promote the so-called modernist Muslims and play one section of the society against another to split the society. In another report released in December 2004, the Rand Corporation elaborated on the second point and recommended playing the two major Muslim sects Sunnis and Shiites against each other to achieve policy objects.

We are not sure what impact the Rand report has on the 1.5 billion Muslims living in independent Muslim countries as well as minorities in many other countries.

However, we can see some reaction in the American Muslim community where the so called progressive or modern Muslims are trying to benefit from the current atmosphere of fear and siege caused by the arbitrary arrests, FBI interviews, racial profiling, surveillance of their mosques, closing down of Islamic charities and constant anti-Islam and anti-Muslim propaganda in the mainstream media.

We are experiencing the re-emergence of Orientalism of the 19th century aimed at forcing the Muslims living in US to abandon the basic tenets of Islam. This neo-Orientalism is coming in the shape of such research documents as the Rand Report which questions the authenticity of Islam’s holy scripture, the Quran. Even a fake version of Quran is now available in print. It was distributed in a private school in Kuwait.

At the same time, we see cropping up of some Muslim groups such as Free Muslims Against Terrorism, Progressive Muslim Union of North America (PMUNA) and Center for Islamic Pluralism which are not only challenging the basic tenets of Islam but also challenging the established Muslim organizations.

Free Muslims Against Terrorism, established by Kamal Nawash who ran for Virginia State Assembly in November 2003 as a Republican candidate. One can well understand his political ambitions and hidden agenda of his organization. Just one example, how it is working against the American Muslim groups. In January this year the Executive Director of Free Muslims Against Terrorism, wrote an e mail to Enver Masud of an Islamic website, Wisdom Foundation, saying: We are very disappointed in your site and it should be taken down…. I will recommend to our extremist watch committee that we place your site on our list of extremist sites or sites that support terrorism. Here is the website address of Wisdom Foundation where one can see what kind of message Enver Masud has: www.twf.org

The Progressive Muslim Union of North America (PMUNA) was formed on November 15, 2004 by some professed moderates who embrace the simple proposition that “you are a Muslim if you say you are a Muslim -- for whatever reason or set of reasons -- and that no one is entitled to question or undermine this identity.”

The PMUNA is now forcing mainstream Muslim organizations to take positions on even non-issues in order to put them at odds with their own community, and if don't take a position they would be considered as the "bad or extremist" Muslims. Sarah Eltantawi, one of its co-founders is demanding the major Muslim groups and organizations to take position on a non-issue, i.e. if a woman can lead Friday prayers. It is not an uncommon knowledge that the status of woman in Islam is now being used by the West to defame Islam.

“I demand to know where the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) stands on this issue. I demand to know where the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) stands on this issue. And KARAMAH, the American Sufi Muslim Association, Women in Islam, Azizah Magazine, and other groups who speak for Muslims and Muslim women,” Eltantawi asks.



The PMUNA is not alone in working against the major American Muslim organizations. The first goal of Center for Islamic Pluralism established by Stephan Shwartz, a Muslim convert, is the removal of CAIR and ISNA from monopoly status in representing Muslims to the American public because, according to CIP, as long as they retain a major foothold at the highest political level, no progress can be made for moderate American Islam. By the way, Shwartz claims to be a Sufi Muslim and the Rand study recommends promotion of Sufism in Islam for US policy objectives.

The Rand Report is silent on the reasons of discontentment in the Muslim world. The report does not address any of the core issues that are central in developing the perceptions of the Muslim world like; Palestine, Kashmir and Chechnya issues and the exploitative political systems supported by the American or European elites. No reference is made to the West’s support for totalitarian secular Muslim regimes, Israel ’s endless pogroms against the Palestinians and ethnic cleansing perpetrated against Muslims in Eastern Europe and Chechnya.

A number of recent studies have reaffirmed that the reason for anti-American sentiments in the Muslim masses is because of American policies. Pentagon advisory group, Defense Science Board, in its November 2004 report pointed out that Muslims do not hate our freedom, but rather they hate our policies. “American direct intervention in the Muslim World has paradoxically elevated the stature of and support for radical Islamists, while diminishing support for the United States to single-digits in some Arab societies.”

To give a helping held in the daunting task of countering the anti-American sentiments in the Muslim world some ‘moderate’ Muslims established the American Muslim Group on Policy Planning (AMGPP) on December 13, 2004. “The AMGPP is willing to play a very active role in helping improve US image and counter the tide of extremism and anti-Americanism in the Muslim World, the AMGPP founder explains. Now one may ask does this group supports B! ush administration’s policy objects such as the occupation of Iraq, the war against Afghanistan, torture in Guantanamo Bay, Baghram and Abu Ghraib and support of undemocratic Muslim governments.

In this context, I would like to refer to a report “Understanding Islamism” issued earlier this month by the Brussels-based International Crisis Group: “The failure to address the Palestinian question and, above all, the decision to make war on Iraq and the even more extraordinary mishandling of the post-war situation there have unquestionably motivated and encouraged jihadi activism across the Muslim world.”

According to the report (the quotation of which does not mean its endorsement), Sunni political Islamism, is definitely modernist in most essential respects, favoring non-violent over violent strategies, open to dialogue and debate and interested in democratic ideas. The report adds: that the West can encourage this evolution. But should it choose to do so, it will need to drop or at least moderate its more activist and interventionist impulses where Muslim countries are concerned, display greater respect for their sovereignty, understand their ambition to renegotiate their relations with it over a range of issues and come to terms with and take account of their viewpoints on the most controversial questions in the current relationship, notably the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Iraq and the modalitie! s of the "war against terrorism" in general.



The report warned that if "moderate" is defined to mean "co-optable", it can only really refer to groups and tendencies which fail to articulate the frustrations and expectations of the mass of "ordinary decent Muslims", have little or no purchase on their political reflexes and will prove unable to promote either significant reform in Muslim countries or a substantive modernization of their cultural and ideological outlook. “Rather than reducing the appeal of extremist currents, the patronizing of "moderates" in this sense by Western governments risks reinforcing it, while undermining the modernist tendency in Sunni Islamism to the benefit of fundamentalists and jihadis,” the International Crisis Group report concluded.



Returning to the Rand report, Civil Democratic Islam: partners, resources, strategies, the suggestions of its author, Cheryl Benard, are nothing more than a Machiavellian manifesto that seeks to enforce Western hegemony and cultural imperialism through the policy of “divide and rule.” The type of Islam that Benard espouses is a passive and weak Islam that can be easily penetrated and hence reformulated to suit the West’s agenda.

The report may be seen as the latest in a long series of policy papers by the “embedded intellectuals” dedicated to further the military and economic objectives of the West as well as cultural onslaught on the Muslims.

In a briefing – entitled Taking Saudi Out of Arabia - given on July 10, 2002 to a the Defense Policy Board, former RAND analyst Laurent Murawiec described Saudi Arabia as the “kernel of evil, the prime mover, the most dangerous opponent” to US interests in the Middle East. He argued that Washington should demand that Saudi Arabia stop supporting “terrorism” or face seizures of its oil fields and its financial assets in the US. Murawiec urged a multi-stage Grand strategy for the Middle East, beginning with Iraq as the tactical pivot, continuing to Saudi Arabia as the strategic pivot and finally to Egypt as the prize.

Abdus Sattar Ghazali is the Executive Editor of the online magazine American Muslim Perspective www.amperspective.

__________________
SIGNATURE LOADING.....

ASA

i request members to give their opinion about a revamped islam , as west is trying to fashion one...will it succed and what will be its effects?

Regards.

__________________
SIGNATURE LOADING.....

nice info fatima keep it up

__________________
~It is possible to fail in many ways...while to succeed is possible only in one way.~

Wa alaikum as salam!
The West is not going for a "war against Islam", but rather, for a "war within Islam". They want the moderate muslims to stand up & fight against the fundamentalist muslims i.e. those Muslims who don't perceive Islam as a mere personal affair. But, consider it to be influencial in all spheres of life including the socio-economico-political system.

I invite everyone to listen an excellent speech, delivered by Dr. Israr Ahmed, on the issue: Mojuda Aalami Halat Mein Islam Aur Musalmanon Ka Mustaqbil It is a bit long, about 1 hour, 20 minutes lecture. But, if you find time, I would declare it a MUST-LISTEN for all muslims. 99% muslims are sleeping & they don't know/understand what is going on in the international community. We must realize this before its too late.