There’s always one…
Mohammad Naseem, the chairman of Birmingham’s central mosque believes Muslims are being unfairly blamed in the war on terrorism. He claims also that the eight suspects in the two bombing attacks on London “could have been innocent passengers”.
Mohammad Naseem, the chairman of the city’s central mosque, called Tony Blair a “liar” and “unreliable witness” and questioned whether CCTV footage issued of the suspected bombers was of the perpetrators.
He said that Muslims “all over the world have never heard of an organisation called al-Qa’eda”.
So Blair’s a liar. Nobody doubts that but what’s that got to do with the police and the security services that are running the counter-terrorist operation?
The irony of the cleric’s outburst was that he made it at a press conference that involved police and Birmingham City council and was designed to allay fears of racial or religious tension after a spate of arrests there. From today’s Daily Telegraph:
He said: “Tony Blair has told lies on going to Iraq and in a court of law if a witness has proved to be a liar he ceases to be a reliable witness. So we cannot give our blind trust to the Government.
“To have that trust it is important that the process of law should be independent, open and transparent. I am also sad that unfortunately the impression has been given that Muslims are to be targeted in this war against terror. There seems to be a directive to target Muslims. Why do we not have an open mind about this?
“Muslim bashing seems to be more earnest than the need for national unity and harmony. Terrorists can be anybody - we will have to see [whether the bombers are Muslims]. The process is not open; the process is not transparent; the process is not independent. I do not have faith in the system as it stands.”
Quoted on the BBC News site he explained his doubts about the existence of al-Qaeda:
Speaking to BBC Radio WM on Thursday he questioned the existence of al-Qaeda.
“I don’t think al-Qaeda exists because we Muslims all over the world have not known this organisation,” he said.
“The only information about this organisation is coming from the CIA. Now, the CIA is not known for telling the truth.”
How representative of British Muslims is this man? I suspect - would like to suspect - that today British Muslims reading his words are breathing a collective sigh of frustration and wish the man would just quietly disappear. Thing is, I only have the insistent assertions of the politically correct police ‘authorities’ - the very PC PC Blair - and the very gay, sometime contributor to anarchist publications Deputy Assistant Commissioner Brian Paddick - to go by. Paddick has already shown his own mental insanity by saying that ‘Islam’ and ‘terrorist’ don’t go together when clearly, to a minority, they go together like toast and marmalade.
Methinks British Muslims need to tell these mullahs where to get off.
Thankfully, one already has:
Mr Khalid Mahmood, the first Muslim to be elected into Parliament, said: “What he has done is brought into disrepute the role of the chair of the Central Mosque and the Muslim community in Birmingham.
“If he wants to make cheap political points then he really ought to relinquish his position as chairman and let somebody who is neutral and has the interests of the community do it.”
Yes, he ought to relinquish his post. Or, maybe, British Muslims should give him the push he needs to vacate it…

No question al-Qaida (choose your spelling) exists, its the original CIA sponsored Muhjadeen fighters who are now casuing havoc in Afghanistan, Chechenya and Iraq.
As for the James Bond style gobal terror group, headed by an evil genius responsible for every bomb that goes off all over the world.. well it makes good copy and keeps people in jobs.
But why this cleric is dabbling in this stuff, and how its supposed to help anyone, I have no idea. Nothing he has said has not been said before manytimes. Violence in the name of Islam is real enough, and if this is his response one wonders why he is given a platform.
Comment by DE — July 28, 2005 @ 2:09 pm
I think the chap’s either just hacked off at something - a bit of a row with the wife that morning perhaps - or is looking to make a name for himself. He’s acheived the latter although not for the best of reasons.
I think most British Muslims will not welcome such words at this time. They must feel exposed enough as it is without him sticking his two pence worth in…
GM
Comment by Administrator — July 28, 2005 @ 4:24 pm
How do you need to wonder at why he’s been given a platform? People today are sensationalists, thrill seekers. They’ll cheer anything that they think is ‘interesting’ (ie, vacuous, vicious, lascivious or crude) and if that includes some idiot spouting murderous trash and foaming at the mouth, so much the better, it’ll give the witless twits more to jabber about at the water cooler.
Comment by Dumb Brit — July 28, 2005 @ 9:33 pm
In the same way BBCBrasil’s JC Menenzes ‘Forum’ is a charming little platform for some (actually a lot) of Brazilians to spit out anti English downright racist and repugnant sentiments over the guy’s ‘murder’. The BBC in particular is working hard to sensationalise this situation. I doubt id be allowed to post a churlish little remark calling all Brazilians ‘idiotic’ & ‘*****’ and have it posted by BBC over here - but you can in BBCBrazil. What gives? We keep giving people the opportunity. Apparently in the name of free speech and democracy.
Comment by Alison Figueiredo — July 29, 2005 @ 2:08 pm
But, as per usual, some are more free than others.
Comment by Dumb Brit — July 30, 2005 @ 4:53 pm
Actually, he isn’t a “cleric”. However, he is known as a moderate. And he echoes the sentinments of the majority of frustrated Muslims who love this country, but were sold out by Sir Iqbal Sacranie and others. Truth is more important than to bow down to blood lust, be it from terrorists (whoever they might be) or the great British press and public.
Platform? Someone just shoved a mike in his face, but Muslims are rightly frustrated at being so easily demonised.
He could have been a little bit more diplomatic, sure, but he spoke the truth and politicians are not meant to do that. His comments weren’t politically correct, but they were accurate.
This “guy” is not a “mullah” by any stretch of the imagination. He is a moderate, has been for a while and has had the respect of the large majority of the community, Muslim and non-Muslim.
What was so silly about the Al-Qaeda comments? Al-Qaeda is a creation of the West, we all know this now, surely? There is nothing to discuss here. There is absolutely zero evidence to suggest any “Al-Qaeda” involvement anyway. And until a few years ago, the Mujahideen of Afghanistan who represented the core of the CIA’s “Al-Qaeda” list were heroes of the West as they repelled the occupation of the Soviet Union. We paid them back well, didn’t we?
Muslims are asked to be whiter-than-white whilst being treated like lepers and being lied to - like the rest of the British public. I guess Naseem just got tired of the BS. Can’t say I blame him.
Comment by shahid — August 19, 2005 @ 2:15 pm