Why do English nonmuslims treat English muslims so badly?

Honestly, I can’t figure it out why UK nonmuslims treat UK muslims so badly.

Nonmuslims in general treat muslims badly and I am tempted to write similar articles about most nonmuslim majority countries; but this article will focus on the UK.

This article is a sequel to these two previous articles on nonmuslims mistreating muslims and their comment sections.

I can think of no better example of this phenomenon than the story of Tania Joya, a Bengali UK muslim mother of four who recently divorced one of the highest ranking living leaders of Daesh, assuming he is still alive:

Tania Joya now lives in the US, works for an NGO, and engages in dialogue with Islamists in an attempt to de-radicalize Islamists. She is a great force for love, light and good in the world. She says she is afraid of being attacked if she ever visits England again, and sadly she is right to fear this.

She was raised by British muslim bengali working class parents. Her parents appear to be very hard working, living a very challenging life. They appear to have been denied education at posh elite snobbish Bengali schools, which I believe might be the best in the world. They also appear to have been denied the opportunity to be educated in Arabic, the Koran, Hadiths and Sira. Co-host interviewer Ali Rizvi described her parents as a type of moderate hippy muslims. As an aside Ali Rizvi–who is of Pakistani Deshi heritage–is one of the wisest, most sophisticated, intelligent, and well rounded people I have ever heard. When then seventeen year old Tania was seduced by Islamists in 2001, her parents lacked the knowledge of Islam, Bengali culture, and wisdom to understand and help her. They were powerless when 17 year old Tania wagged her finger at them quoting the Koranic passages they were in violation of and when Tania started wearing very conservative muslim clothing that her parents didn’t understand. Tania painfully recalls the way the Bengali community failed her. The Bangladesh and Bengal Tania saw were hardly models of wisdom, openness, freedom, pluralism, respect for all countries/cultures/religions, competence and success that Tania felt she could respect, emulate or associate herself with. (This deserves an article by itself.)

Tania also felt betrayed by nonmuslim English people. She describes not having been exposed to classical Voltaire enlightenment liberal values (perhaps such as freedom, equality, the absence of racism and bigotry) at school or by nonmuslim English society. I am not completely sure what she means by this. But I think perhaps she means that English schools and non muslim English no longer teach traditional English values and now teach post modernism. Or that good and bad, right and wrong are unreal social constructions, that we should never judge others . . . unless we do these things in politically correct ways subject to Orwellian post modernist mind control. And to believe in irrational nonsensical concepts such as hegemony, imperialism, colonialism, oppression, exploitation etc. Tania only learned about classical liberalism when she moved to the US. This was a major factor in how Islamists were able to brainwash and seduce her in 2001.

She and her American husband John were both 19 when they met. John was born in an extremely conservative American Greek Orthodox family and was a very serious devout spiritual Christian as a child. John converted to Islam at the age of 17, learned Arabic, the Koran, the Hadiths and Sura in Syria at the age of 17. John like Tania sympathized with Salafi Jihadis by the time the two met. They married almost immediately. John quickly became one of the greatest Koranic, Hadith, Sura and Arabic theologians in the world, despite knowing nothing about Islam and Arabic when John was 17. John appears to have been extremely intelligent, religious, spiritual and loving. His intelligence was probably in the top one tenth of 1% of all humans. Despite being so young, John was hired by Qatar to assist Qatar with theological writing. John appears to have played a major role in creating ISIS, and inspiring many to join ISIS. John was one of the leaders of Daesh’s public relations arm and theological arm. ISIS’s ability to inspire and attract the world’s brightest, most religious people is extraordinary.

Sadly few nonmuslims secular leaders appear to be be similarly intelligent. 🙁       While there are spiritual nonmuslims who are highly intelligent, the vast majority of them avoid secular politics.

The reason I am emphasizing this point is because the world’s 6 billion nonmuslims consistently under estimate Islamists and are continually manipulated and outplayed by Islamists.

In much the way the nonmuslim English people have failed Tania, they have similarly failed large numbers of English muslims. UK nonmuslims have so far failed Quillium, one of the most important and respected muslim groups in the world. Quillium’s CEO Haras Rafiq has explained how the UK has supported Islamists since 1979. Conservatively over 10,000 UK national Islamists have traveled all over the world to attack muslims since 1979. [My estimate is tens of thousands  of UK citizen Islamists] Including attacking muslims in Afghanistan 1979-1989, Kashmir 1988-2018, Palestine, Iraq [2003-2008 and again 2013-2017], Syria, Libya, Tunisia, Algeria, Mali, Nigeria, Somalia, Yemen, Philippines and too many other countries to mention. The UK government, Tories, Labor, Liberal Democrats and nonmuslim English civil society should apologize to the rest of the world and to UK muslims for their large role in facilitating this.

English empire supported Islamists against muslims for centuries. I have discussed my thoughts on the many harms committed by English empire in two previous Brown Pundit articles. To quickly summarize and over simplify English empire has long used orientalist semiology , structuralism, post modernism to deconstruct and delegitimize colonial civilizations, history, culture and religions in an attempt to mis-categorize local hierarchies of competence, capacity, merit, tradition and greatness as exploitative, oppressive, imperialist, colonial, hegemonic, racist, bigoted, classist, primitive, backward, savage and evil. Turning local against local in a divide and conquer policy and colonizing the local mind to encourage inferiority complexes to damage local self confidence. Perhaps this has motivated English empire to use Islamists against muslims and to a lesser degree nonmuslims for centuries. This said, nonmuslim English people alive today are in no way guilty of the crimes of their grandparents and for this reason I would much rather focus on post 1979 UK policy.

Many of the UK citizen Islamists after fighting Jihad abroad have returned home. This has led to widespread crimes and intimidation by Islamists against UK muslims. Much of the responsibility for this can only be blamed on UK nonmuslims.

Tania has been viciously slandered and attacked by the nonmuslim English media establishment in dozens of articles. Here is one example. Here is another. Pierce Morgan, who I would argue has a long history of supporting Islamists against muslims while simultaneously being an anti muslim bigot viciously attacked her while interviewing her (can’t find the original clip, maybe because Pierce Morgan doesn’t come across well):

Tania Joya has done more over the past month to defang ISIS and Islamism more generally than Pierce Morgan has in his entire life.

I have seen previous interviews where Pierce Morgan snidely, pretentiously, condescendingly, and contemptuously asked questions about the Iraqi Army before 2008; implying the Iraqi Army was incompetent with the subtle inference that Islamists (Al Qaeda in this case) were better than the Iraqi Army. Pierce Morgan never apologized for this when the Iraqi Army decisively won in 2008. Yet Pierce Morgan was back to this despicable behavior in 2014, implying that ISIS was better than the Iraqi Army. And again didn’t apologize when the Iraqi Army decisively defeated ISIS in 2016. Pierce Morgan dishonored the more than 35,000 brave Iraqi martyrs who have died for their country fighting Al Qaeda, Daesh and other Islamists. Pierce Morgan has similarly in interviews talked down about the Afghan Army, implicitly inferring that the Taliban, Daesh and Deep State proxies fighting them were better than the Afghan Army. The Afghan Army has been locked in a stalemate with Islamists for over a decade and cannot defeat Islamists without international help. But neither are they incompetent or cowardly or losing. Pierce Morgan dishonored the more than than 50,000 brave Afghan National Security Forces martyrs who have sacrificed their lives for their country.

Although I haven’t seen Pierce Morgan do this, many other nonmuslim English commentators have similarly contemptuously squinted their noses and talked down about Libyans muslims fighting Daesh and Al Qaeda, Tunisian muslims fighting Daesh and Al Qaeda, Nigerian muslims fighting Daesh, Somalians muslims fighting Al Qaeda, Free Syrian Army muslims and Kurdish muslims fighting Daesh and Al Qaeda, Yemenese muslims fighting Al Qaeda and Daesh, the Palestinian National Security Forces fighting Islamists, any muslim anywhere resisting Islamists. Any muslim who disagrees with Islamists is invariably accused by many non muslim English people of being an “islamaphobe”, racist, loser, unnecessarily “provoking” Islamists, or secretly pro Mossad. And for the life of me I can’t figure out why.

Could one reason the UK national media establishment is attacking Tania be because she is making public the UK’s dirty laundry? I honestly don’t know.

Could one of the reasons nonmuslims call minority and liberal muslims “Islamaphobes” be an attempt to deconstruct, delegitimise, divide and conquer muslims? Sadly some rich powerful Arab Salafi forces are perfectly happy to collaborate with nonmuslims in this project since they also are not fond of liberal and minority muslims; and to be perfectly blunt . . . they believe their nonmuslims allies aren’t intelligent enough to be a threat to Salafism. This has long been the case.

Recently Iran’s Supreme Leader and unelected dictator Sayyed Khamenei, may peace be upon him, and his followers have gotten into the act of allying with nonmuslims (UK nonmuslims in particular) to attack UK muslims. Sayyed Khamenei, may peace be upon him, is opposed by the large majority of the world’s 150 million twelvers including almost all of the 30 Marjas (leaders of twelverism). This video cleverly collaborates with UK nonmuslims to attacks any Shiite [with an emphasis on UK linked Shiites] who dares be critical of Sayyed Khamenei, may peace be upon him, as an Islamaphobe:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbL9KHRZCSA

Note the muslim leaders being attacked are mainstream Shiites closely linked to the Najaf Marjeya, Quom Marjeya and the Shiite leadership in India (Uttar Pradesh), Pakistan, Afghanistan and Azerbaijan. Yes they are probably allies with Indian PM Modi, the Afghan government, the Azerbaijani government, Iraqi government; but so what?

How to persuade nonmuslims to stop calling good muslims Islamaphobes? I honestly don’t know.

Shouldn’t any nonmuslim who is pro muslim support authentic leaders of the global ummah [muslim community]?  An example of such a leader would be Maajid Nawaz:

UK muslims have little freedom of art, music, dance, poetry, speech, thought, intuition or feeling. I think this is why many UK muslims–I believe–didn’t share their actual opinions in a recent national UK opinion survey:

For example 52% of UK muslims said they believed homosexuality should be illegal. Large percentages of UK muslims expressed their support of many other extreme sentiments on jews, polygamy and many other issues. Note that in many cases young UK muslims were as extreme or more extreme than elder UK muslims.

I believe this poll is fake. UK muslims were virtually signaling; saying what the they believed Islamists wanted them to say for fear politically incorrect answers could result in Islamists attacking them. As we all know many or most non muslim English people tacitly and quietly condone islamist attacks against UK muslims as part of a general anti muslim bigotry. Not openly but wink, wink, nod, nod. Muslims who complain about Islamist threats against them are laughed at or called racist by UK police. Non UK muslims generally blame the UK muslim victims of Islamist crime for “provoking” Islamists.

To be clear, I believe that the polling company conducted the poll in good faith and that UK muslims have extreme positions. But I don’t for one moment believe UK muslim positions are this extreme in reality. The fact that young UK muslims claim extreme positions is a give away. Young UK muslims are more afraid of Islamists and post modernists than their elders and have internalized virtue signaling more than older generations.

Tania Joya’s experience suggests that most UK nonmuslims aren’t mature enough or ready for a real discussion of Islamism, Islam, and the role of UK nonmuslims in supporting Islamists who harm UK muslims. Without understanding there can be no adjustment, no policy, no progress, no solution. And most UK nonmuslims clearly lack understanding. The only way to get understanding is a real conversation about Islam and Islamism which most UK nonmuslims are too emotional to have.

Islamists believe that they are loving and helping the world. Islamists believe they are helping all humans. Islamists believe that they are implementing God’s will on earth, where God’s will is defined, interpreted and enforced by them. Islamists believe that Jihad and taking over global society is an act of love. A majority of Islamists want to very slowly take over global society over a long period of time through mostly nonviolent, legal and civil society means. A large minority of Islamists want to conquer and rule the world. Maajid Nawaz has estimated that about 100 million Islamists want to conquer and rule the world. About 300 million Islamists want to nonviolently very slowly take over global society. About a quarter of the world’s muslims–400 million–are Islamist. Three quarters are not Islamists. Before Maajid Nawaz made these estimates, I uncannily calculated the exact same numbers as Maajid Nawaz.

Many Islamists are highly spiritual, loving people who have touched mystical experience. They believe that the infinitude of the transcendent is indescribably greater than all the pleasures of this temporary material temporal world.

I strongly disagree with Islamists, but Islamists cannot be stopped without understanding Islamists. Islamists may not know that mystical experience and God can be touched in many other ways. If Islamists develop even a 1% doubt that they are completely following the will of God, they will introspect and be open to new possibilities. This is the purpose of dialogue with Islamists.

When muslims around the world have freedom of art, music, dance, poetry, speech, thought, intuition and feeling; dialogue will take place and extremism will die.

Published by

AnAn

http://2.gravatar.com/avatar/2a60f8ed9535fd0dca77aa3a6fd94018?s=96&d=mm&r=g

0 0 votes
Article Rating
30 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Razib Khan
5 years ago

she also criticizes british muslims in the interview.

Kabir
Kabir
5 years ago
Reply to  AnAn

You can consider “atheist Muslims” as Muslims if you wish. That is your right. But the Islamic view is that unless one considers Allah to be the one and only God and Muhammad (peace be upon him) to be his Prophet, one is not a Muslim. The Kalima (Declaration of Faith) very clearly states: “There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is his Prophet”. This is the definition of Islam. Even the Sufis you admire so much are clear that Allah is the only God. But I’m not arguing in favor of ex-communicating anyone from Islam. Only Allah knows what is in one’s heart and anyone who believes in Islam believes that they will answer to Allah on the Day of Judgement. They don’t have to answer to me in this life.

There is a difference between atheism and agnosticism by the way. Atheists disbelieve in God while agnostics say that there is no way of knowing.

The ability to accommodate atheists into the fold is one of the big differences between Hinduism and the monotheistic religions. Belief in one God is the fundamental of Christianity, Judaism and Islam. The differences between these three are that Christians believe in Christ as their savior, while the other two religions don’t. Muslims believe Muhammad (pbuh) came to correct Christianity and Judaism. Jews and Christians obviously don’t believe this.

Words have meanings and can’t be used so loosely that they cease to make sense. “Atheist Muslim” is a contradiction in terms (as is “Secular Muslim”–Secularism and Islam don’t go together). But don’t take my word for it, talk to an Islamic scholar.

Kabir
5 years ago
Reply to  AnAn

“native informants” are a real thing. Not sure what the context was and not really interested in watching a long video. But there are definitely people of color who subscribe to the agenda of those in power and are willing to sell out their own people. That’s what “native informant” means to me.

Kabir
5 years ago
Reply to  AnAn

Examples would be those American Muslims who supported the US’s illegal invasion of Iraq. Those American Muslims who work for the CIA and help attacks on their own people. Muslims who help white people hurt other Muslims. Muslims who help militant Hindus demonize Muslims. Those are what I would call “native informants”.

But it has an actual meaning in Anthropology.

https://culanth.org/fieldsights/1302-fieldwork-and-the-native-informant-a-review-of-culture-large-2017

Kabir
5 years ago
Reply to  AnAn

The bottom line is that “W” went into Iraq without sanction from the UN. Colin Powell lied to the UN and the American people at large about Saddam having “weapons of mass destruction”. I’m not defending Saddam (so I’m not going to read your lengthy comment about how evil he was), but he was not responsible for 9/11. He had not attacked America. I was in high school outside DC at the time. We protested the Iraq War. I don’t have the energy to re-litigate this with you right now. Saddam was evil but he held that country together. Many scholars have argued that the US entry and then exit from Iraq laid the preconditions for ISIS. Google their arguments. The US did not even understand that Iraq was a Shia-majority country being ruled by a Sunni dictator. Now, they don’t get why Shia Iran has so much influence there….

The point is that Iraq was W’s war of choice. Bin Laden was in Afghanistan and he was responsible for 9/11. That war had (some) justification. Going into Iraq in 2003 had no justification. Going into Libya under Obama had no justification–Libya is a disaster zone now. I’m sorry, but these neoliberal wars are wrong. And the Muslims who supported them were on the wrong side of history, acting as “uncle toms” and “native informants”.

Xerxes the Magian
5 years ago
Reply to  Kabir

IRAQ was a disaster
Arab spring was a disaster
Forcing the abdication of the Reza Shah senior was a disaster.

Western meddling in the Muslim world has generally been a disaster..

Kabir
5 years ago
Reply to  Kabir

Removing Mossadegh in 1952 was a disaster. He was democratically elected by the people of Iran. But he wanted to nationalize the oil….

The “Muslim world” is generally screwed. But it is up to the people of the “Muslim world” to fix their issues. The US should not play world cop.

Kabir
5 years ago
Reply to  AnAn

The Iraqis are not “native informants”. Native informants are those Muslims in America who were helping drive the American policy or agreeing with it–that policy that is destroying the Muslim world. I have no problem with Iraqis acting in what they see as Iraq’s interests.

Look Saddam wasn’t nice. Neither was Qadaffi. But they held those countries together. Going into a country without a plan for knowing when the mission is over and how to get out is stupid.

Bottom line is the US has no business trying to “fix” the Muslim world. Nor does any other non-Muslim country. Libyans need to fix Libya. Iraqis need to fix Iraq. We should all tend our own gardens.

Islamists are a problem but they are a problem for the Muslim world. Every other country should just protect their borders, which is why Homeland Security exists.

Kabir
5 years ago
Reply to  AnAn

Saudi and Iran are both very messed up countries, but if you force me to pick one, I’d pick Iran. Women are educated in Iran. Women can drive in Iran. Iranians are very cultured people. Saudis–not so much.

Sadly, Sunni Pakistan is firmly in the Saudi camp. Nothing I can do about it though.

Xerxes the Magian
5 years ago
Reply to  Kabir

Iran is light years ahead of Saudi. I haven’t been to Saudi but Iran is a surprisingly advanced and cohesive country

Kabir
5 years ago
Reply to  AnAn

Iraqi Shia have taken revenge on Iraqi Sunnis because of Saddam (aided and abetted by Shia Iran). Iran’s foreign policy is deeply messed up. This had some influence on the creation of ISIS.

This is not “propaganda”. This is fact. Again, Google is your friend. Western scholars (non-Muslim) have also made these arguments based on their own research.

In any case, when a foreign power comes in and destroys an existing government (however bad that existing government is), there will be some unintended consequences. That’s all I’m saying.

trackback

[…] Why do English nonmuslims treat English muslims so badly? […]

trackback

[…] Why do English nonmuslims treat English muslims so badly? […]

Brown Pundits