Miqdaad Versi, the Muslim Brotherhood activities in the UK, and Islamic Supremacism

Miqdaad Versi, the Muslim Brotherhood activities in the UK, and Islamic Supremacism

A Clash between Civilisation and Barbarism – a little historical context

Samuel Huntington postulates that since the Cold War was over there could develop a new Clash of Civilizations and that one of these possible clashes could be between Western Civilization and Islamic ideology.  Today we could look at a resurgent Russia and the growing influence and power of China as possible flash points  (Russia in the Middle East and Eastern Europe, China in Asia).   This site will concentrate on the modern day clash between Western Civilization and Islamic ideology.  

Battle of Vienna and the blunting of Islamic expansion into Europe

Despite the claims of Islamic State to be a world wide caliphate the Muslim Caliphate ended in 1924 with the collapse of the Ottoman Caliphate.  This Caliphate dominated an extensive empire and had done so for hundreds of years.

The Ottoman Caliphate, under the Ottoman dynasty of the Ottoman Empire, was the last Sunni Islamic caliphate of the late medieval and the early modern era. During the period of Ottoman growth, Ottoman rulers claimed caliphal authority since Murad I‘sconquest of Edirne in 1362.[1] Later Selim I, through conquering and unification of Muslim lands, became the defender of the Holy Cities of Mecca and Medina which further strengthened the Ottoman claim to caliphate in the Muslim world.

The demise of the Ottoman Caliphate took place because of a slow erosion of power in relation to Western Europe, and because of the end of the Ottoman state in consequence of the partitioning of the Ottoman Empire by the League of Nations mandate.Abdülmecid II, the last Ottoman caliph, held his caliphal position for a couple of years after the partitioning, but with Mustafa Kemal’ssecular reforms and the subsequent exile of the royal Osmanoğlu family from the Republic of Turkey in 1924, the caliphal position was abolished.

When we review Islamic history we see that Islam has always been an aggressive, expansionist ideology that expanded its religious and political sphere of influence through military might.  Its expansion was quite rapid  as it coincided with the decline of Roman influence in the region and it eventually came into conflict with Western Civilization on its home ground (Europe), and made significant inroads into Europe, until its ambition for control over Europe (in fact the whole world) was blunted at the battle for Vienna in 1683.

Battle of Vienna 1683

 This battle saw a huge Ottoman army under Kara Mustafa Pasha defeated by John III Sobieski, king of Poland – who commanded the smaller Western (Christian) forces.

This battle is widely recognised as the turning point in Islamic expansionism and over the next 16 years Islamic forces were driven further back towards their own heartland.

Gradual decline of the Islamic Caliphate

As we have seen in the above  Islamic military expansion was blunted at Vienna and over the the coming centuries European power and  influence grew while the Ottoman Caliphate‘s power and influence slowly waned until it collapsed under European pressure in 1924.  Yet with the collapse of the Islamic Caliphate a new movement was born and started to grow within Islam.  This movement yearned, and still yearns, for the glory days of the Islamic Caliphate (IC).  This is what Islamic State (IS) is all about.  But IS were not the first to seek the re-institution of the Islamic Caliphate.

The Muslim Brotherhood

The Society of the Muslim Brothers (Arabic: جماعة الإخوان المسلمين‎‎Jami’ah al-Ikhwān al-Muslimūn), shortened to the Muslim Brotherhood (الإخوان المسلمون al-Ikhwān al-Muslimūn), is a transnational Sunni Islamist organization founded in Egypt by Islamic scholar and schoolteacher Hassan al-Banna in 1928.[1][2][3][4] The organisation gained supporters throughout the Arab world and

influenced other Islamist groups such as Hamas[5] with its “model of political activism combined with Islamic charity work”,[6] and in 2012 sponsored the elected political party in Egypt after the January Revolution in 2011. However, it suffered from periodic government crackdowns for alleged terrorist activities, and as of 2015 is considered a terrorist organization by the governments ofBahrain,[7][8] Egypt, Russia, Syria, Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates.[9][10][11][12]

The Brotherhood’s stated goal is to instill the Qur’an and Sunnah as the “sole reference point for … ordering the life

Founding father of the Muslim Brotherhood

of the Muslim family, individual, community … and state.”[13] Its mottos include “Believers are but Brothers”, “Islam is the Solution”, and “Allah is our objective; the Qur’an is the Constitution; the Prophet is our leader; jihad is our way; death for the sake of Allah is our wish.”[14][15][16]

Follow the above embedded link for the full article on the Muslim Brotherhood and just google it for more information.  At the end of the day Islam is supremacist in every way: religious, social, cultural and political (it is in fact an all embracing ideology).  A simple definition is a person who believes that one group of people is better than all other groups and should have control over them.  A well known usage of the word is white supremacists .  But what is missing is Islamic Supremacism.  A very good introduction to it is Raymond Ibrahim’s: ISLAMIC SUPREMACISM: THE TRUE SOURCE OF MUSLIM ‘GRIEVANCES’.

The ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) is the reinstatement of the caliphate (and thus sharia) and it uses every means at its disposal to progress this goal.  An interesting article on the state of the Egyptian MB can be found here.  A good introduction to the MB work in the USA is the Clarion Projects article The Muslim Brotherhood’s Strategic Plan For America – Court Document and an extensive look at their work and goals can be seen at  The Muslim Brotherhood in America (by Frank Gaffney).  This is a must see and read set of articles and videos and should be shared with family and friends.

Muslim supremacy

Islam is an ideology of submission.  Islam means submission (not peace) and as we have seen, it has a history of aggressive expansionism. European military might stopped them and militarily they are too weak to engage in open warfare with the West.

Therefore, as Gaffney shows, they have a different strategy for dominance.  Many think that it is only those that are seen as extremist that share this goal.  Not so.

We have all probably seen such photographs, and here in the UK some of us will have actually seen the demonstrations.  Yet these are not the real dangerous Islamist’s.  We see them for what they are – dangerous extremists that will kill us if they can.  The recent attacks in Europe and the USA have shown us this face of Islam.

It is not the extremist protesters and Islamist terrorists that poise the real danger to our society but the clean shaven men in suits and women in Muslim dress that espouse to be feminists but in reality seek to advance the influence of sharia law above Western values.   They work within the freedoms afforded to them as members of our society to destroy the very thing they are gifted as members of our society.

In the UK we have men like Miqdaad Versi who works for the Muslim Council of Britain a darling of the mainstream media (including the BBC).  Douglas Murray writes of Versi in a recent Gatestone article:

On the day that the BBC were giving Versi his rave review, he was on social media sharing an untrue story claiming that the government’s Prevent counter-radicalisation strategy was forcing King’s College London to monitor all student emails. The story was wholly bogus (KCL’s policy of reserving the right to monitor all emails on their system came a year before such a policy became a legal duty). But the fact that Versi was sharing this story was typical of the double-ledger he runs when it comes to facts. He is happy to apply rigorous standards to others, but holds exceedingly lax standards himself, so long as he can carry on his own campaigning work against the UK government’s counter-terrorism and counter-extremism programmes — or continue to exercise his own low standards in trying to cover for people who are designated as “extremists” by the UK government . Or indeed, in belonging to an organisation correctly identified as an “enabler” of prejudice against the minority Ahmadiyya community.

According to the UK government the Muslim Council of Britain, the  Islamic Society of Britain and the Muslim Association of Britain were all founded by the Muslim Brotherhood:

In the 1990s the Muslim Brotherhood and their associates established public facing and apparently national organisations in the UK to promote their views. None were openly identified with the Muslim Brotherhood and membership of the Muslim Brotherhood remained (and still remains) a secret. But for some years the Muslim Brotherhood shaped the new Islamic Society of Britain (ISB), dominated the Muslim Association of Britain (MAB) and played an important role in establishing and then running the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB).

So Versi (like counterparts in the USA – Council on American-Islamic Relations – there are a number of articles on CAIR on this site) are products off and working on behalf off, the Muslim Brotherhood.  Yet how many times are we told by the political and media elite that there is no such link and that we are foolish and paranoid to think that there is an international link between what is going on in Europe and the USA (indeed globally).  Are we so dumb that we are incapable of connecting the dots?

None were openly identified with the Muslim Brotherhood and membership of the Muslim Brotherhood remained (and still remains) a secret.

The links are kept secret, or so they hoped, but such links are out in the open.  A transparency no one in the Islamic leadership, in the Muslim Brotherhood or the above Islamic organisations, desired.

Then we have female activists like Malia Bouattia  the current President of the National Union of Students in the UK that Murray describes as a nasty anti-Semite.  What is obvious here is two Mulsim activists that are both anti-Semitic while pretending to stand up for human rights.  Their close ideological links are illustrated by their opposition to Prevent: UK’s Counter-Terrorism Strategy.  A clear-eyed look at this strategy: Myths and Misunderstandings: Understanding Opposition to The Prevent Strategy.   Miqdaad Versi and Malia Bouattia are on the same page when it comes to opposing the UK’s attempts at tackling Islamic radicalisation and terrorism.  It is hardly surprising in Bouattia’s case when she is closely allied with the Islamic radical group CAGE in the UK.  A group that openly supports Islamic terrorists.  A tangled web of mutual support and deceit spaning international borders – much of it centred on hatred of Jews and especially Israel.  A hatred that stems from their prophet Muhammad.

An example from the US is Linda Sarsour a star of the left (democrats).  Here we see her with Bernie Sanders the guardian of the working class, women and minorities (the down trodden).  A perfect example of a radical Islamist masquerading as a feminist yet if she had her way America would be living under sharia.  The acceptable face of radical Islam put forward by the political elites to try and soften the image of Islam and so many are taken in.

Islamic ideology is clearly supremacist and violently so

Yet we see our mainstream media (dominated by the left) and politicians regurgitating the worn out mantra `Islam is a religion of peace’. The piece Theresa‬ May – Islamic apologist? looks at this.  From Theresa May to Obama we are told this and they expect the general public to believe this despite what we see on a daily basis.  Obama wrote in his Op-Ed in the Los Angeles Times:

“The world must continue to lift up the voices of Muslim clerics and scholars who teach the true peaceful nature of Islam,”

His argument is that real Islam is not the aggressive supremacist ideology presented by the likes of the Muslim Brotherhood. We see the lie of this every day of our lives.  Bombs, guns, axes, knives and lorries – anything that can kill and maim and spread terror and fear – are used against us.  The constant barrage that Islam is above criticism and under pain of death we are not to voice any criticism to this barbaric ideology.

This is what we see on our streets all too often – done by Muslims on behalf of Islam.  Yet after each attack we are told this is not real Islam and that real Islam is a religion of peace.  We have American law enforcement not allowed to use the words Islamic (under the Obama administration) when it comes to attacks. It is radicalism.  Radical what?  We see this in the media nearly every time they cover Islamic terrorist attacks.  They struggle for a link that is not Islamic!  The worst kind of delusions if you believed they believed what they were telling us.  But I can’t believe they actually believe the nonsense they feed us.  Is it possible they actually believe Islam is a religion of peace?

We have been fed so many lies for so long that many of us no longer know what truth is.  Lots of us are so compliant we take no heed of what is going on around us.  We are caught up with the cares of life: job, family, home, car and what ever else occupies our time.  What’s happening in the Middle East, or France, Germany and the rest of Europe hardly registers.  If it does we do a few hashtags and maybe attend a prayer vigil and then completely forget about it.

Western Civilization is at war and the war is on our streets.  But we are not in a clash of civilizations we are at war with a barbaric ideology from seventh century Arabia.  Surely our politicians cannot expect us to believe we are not?  Are we nothing more that dumb morons to be lead by the superior class?

For those of us who are Jews and Christians we should remember Muhammad’s view of us:

He curses Jews and Christians for taking graves as places of worship:

When the disease of Allah’s Apostle got aggravated, he . . . . would say, “. . . May Allah curse the Jews [and] Christians because they took the graves of their prophets as places of worship.” By that he warned his follower of imitating them, by doing that which they did. (Bukhari)

We are viewed as nothing more than apes and pigs that are worse than nothing compared to Muslims.  We are like vile beasts and should be treated as such.

Religion of Peace



Originally posted 2017-02-13 16:12:45. Republished by Blog Post Promoter

The UK and the Future of Islamist Subversion

The UK and the Future of Islamist Subversion


Originally posted 2016-12-26 17:40:51. Republished by Blog Post Promoter

The Muslim Brotherhood, political Islam and the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee part two

The Muslim Brotherhood, political Islam and the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee part two

A naive and ill-informed assessment of the Muslim Brotherhood

In the first part of this piece we looked at a response by Egyptian MP’s to the  House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee ‘Political Islam’, and the Muslim Brotherhood Review This report is at odds with the official UK Government (FCO) position on the Muslim Brotherhood ( a summary can be found here) in the sense it has a much more positive view of political Islam and the Muslim Brotherhood in particular.

From the view point of someone that has lived and worked extensively in the Middle East (Muslim majority countries) it is hard to understand how any Western politicians can laud political Islam in any shape or form.  A system that is the antithesis of Western Civilisation and we see a situation where we have Egyptians warning us about the dangers of political Islam and how it would destroy Western Civilisation. (more…)

Originally posted 2016-11-26 14:57:21. Republished by Blog Post Promoter

New Report On Swedish Muslim Brotherhood Draws Academic Ire

New Report On Swedish Muslim Brotherhood Draws Academic Ire

English language media in Sweden is reporting on the controversy surrounding a new report about the Muslim Brotherhood in Sweden. According to The Local article, a group of Swedish religious researchers has challenged the report’s conclusions:

March 3, 2017 A report commissioned by Sweden’s Civil Contingencies Agency (MSB) to look into the influence of the Islamist organization the Muslim Brotherhood in the country has sparked debate, with a number of researchers disputing the methodology used and conclusions reached. The report suggests that the Muslim Brotherhood is secretly leading Islamists in building a parallel society in Sweden by infiltrating organizations and political parties in the country.

It also claims that there is an ‘established structure of values among the country’s political elite which stipulate how as a citizen you should approach ‘minorities”.

But in a blog post signed by 22 Swedish researchers specializing in religious studies, the claims were labelled as ‘almost conspiracy-theory like’, and the study accused of ignoring previous research, lacking sources, and basing conclusions on personal views rather than evidence.

The idea that Islamists are secretly building a parallel society in Sweden is, according to the 22 researchers ‘a conclusion which goes against the collective research’ in the field.

‘The major shortcoming of the report is that it seems to be completely unaware of Islamic research which currently exists at Swedish and Nordic universities,’ Lund University professor of Islamic studies Jan Hjärpe, who was one of the 22 researchers to sign the blog post, told The Local.

‘The list of signatories is comprised largely of active researchers who have done and do in-depth studies on a range of the relevant concerns. It is striking that MSB ordered this report without at all consulting the expertise available. I suspect this is due to ignorance on the authority’s behalf,’ he added.

MSB defended the report however, saying it is a feasibility study designed in part to present proposals for further studies and research in the area.

Read the rest here.

Although the report in question is written in Swedish, the GMBDW has machine translated portions and despite the objections referred to above, it appears to be fully credible. For example, the report identifies the Islamiska förbundet i Sveriges (IFIS) as the major organization representing the Muslim Brotherhood in Sweden. In 2013, the GMBDW had already identified the IFIS as tied to the Brotherhood in Sweden. Other organizations discussed in the report, such as the Federation of Islamic Organizations in Europe (FIOE) and the Islamic Relief (IRW), have also long been so identified by the GMBDW. Although the 22 Swedish researchers have objected to the report, claiming specialized and relevant expertise, the GMBDW Editor has never encountered any of their work in 16 years of daily research on the subject. We also find it distressingly common to encounter opposition to our own work from academics who also appear unfamiliar with the actual relevant material.

For the full MSB report, go here.



By Valentina Colombo

MEP Soraya Post is hosting on March 2, 2016 a public hearing on Islamophobia and Gender that confirms the strong link between S&D group and the galaxy of the European Muslim Brotherhood at the European level. It is noteworthy that such a controversial issues such as islamophobia and gender seems, at least in the case of the above-mentioned event, to be almost monopolized by organisations and individuals linked to a single ideological area, namely political Islam, of the immense and variegated universe of Muslims living in Europe. S&D group has already hosted Tariq Ramadan and Malika Hamidi, respectively President and Director of the European Muslim Network based in Brussels, Islamic Relief Belgium, FEMYSO and other actors of European political Islam.

The co-organisers of the upcoming event are the European Forum of Muslim Women (EFOMW), the Forum of European and Muslim Youth Organisations (FEMYSO) and the European Network Against Racism (ENAR). Although they seem to be independent from one another, it will be shown that they have, both in the past and in the present, not only common goals and strategy, but they also belong to the same Islamic context and trend.

Capture decran 2016-02-29 à 15.34.58


EFOMW, founded in 2006, is the European umbrella organisation of women associations belonging to the Federation of Islamic Organisations in Europe (FIOE), which is the main umbrella organisation of Muslim Brotherhood associations in Europe.

The official goal of FIOE is to broaden the cooperation and coordination of Muslim groups in Europe and to reinforce participation in societal dialogue, emphasizing that extra attention should be “granted to the affairs of youth, women, and the professional segments”. FIOE’s Shura Council, the consultative council chaired by Samir Falah – president of the Islamische Gemeinschaft in Deutschland – has encouraged Muslim participation in the European Parliament elections and has sought to take the lead on certain international political issues such as the situation in Ukraine, “escalating violations of the City of Jerusalem”, opposition to the Assad regime in Syria and Sisi’s government in Egypt, and Islamophobia in Europe.

The fight against Islamophobia and women are declared objectives of FIOE programme. In the Final Statement of the Fifth Shura Council Meeting in the Tenth Term of FIOE (Madrid, 22-25 October 2015) it was highlighted that it “also discussed developing a strategy specifically focused on supporting the values of human rights and equality, and in combating racism, hate, and Islamophobia”. On the other hand, the last paragraph of the Final Statement of the 3rd General Assembly Meeting in the 10th Executive Term of FIOE (Tunis, 21-24 January 2016) “called for greater effort in developing the presence of women and youth in the leadership bodies and councils of Islamic organisations in Europe, and to encourage them to raise their participation in all positive spheres”. Both documents confirm that the upcoming event at the European parliament perfectly fits into FIOE strategy about islamophobia and its tendency to point out women both as the most vulnerable and visible victims of hate against Islam and Muslims and as front-line actors in against Islamophobia.

It is worth pointing out the official link between FIOE and its members and the global Muslim Brotherhood. On July 6, 2009, that is still under Mubarak’s regime, Ibrahim Munir – present deputy Supreme Guide of the Muslim Brotherhood, was interviewed by the Egyptian daily Al-Masry al-Yom and clearly explained the role of the European umbrella organisation:

“Islamic activities [of the MB] in Europe are different, there is a completely independent structure which is called the Federation of Islamic Organisations in Europe (FIOE). It is registered at the European Union; it has an office in Brussels and is known at the European level. On this basis, they cooperate. We must obey the laws of our countries and they must obey the laws of their countries. In all European countries, there are Islamic organizations that convey the thought of the Muslim Brotherhood and others that do not. All of these organizations are working for the benefit of their country and according to the laws of that country.”

FIOE is among other things behind the birth of the European Council for Fatwa and Research (ECFR) in Dublin, headed by the controversial preacher Yusuf Qaradawi. ECFR inaugural meeting took place, as stated in the introduction of its First collection of Fatwas, “in London, UK, on 21-22 Dhul Qi’da 1417AH, 29-30 March 1997. The meeting was attended by more than 15 scholars who responded to the invitation of the Federation of Islamic Organisations in Europe.” It is thus clear that EFOMW vision of women in Europe follows the model presented both by FIOE and ECFR.

When it comes to women both Qaradawi and ECFR hold ambiguous positions. For instance, Qaradawi in his essay The Lawful and Prohibited in Islam explains the reason of the prohibition of marriage between a Muslim woman and a non-Muslim man as follows:

“A marriage between a man and woman of different faiths can be based only on the husband’s respect for his wife’s beliefs; otherwise a good relationship can never develop. Now, the Muslim believes that both Judaism and Christianity originated in divine revelation, although later distortions were introduced into them. He also believes that Allah revealed the Torah to Moses and the Evangel to Jesus, and that both Moses and Jesus – peace be on them – were among the messengers of Allah who were distinguished by their steadfast determination. Accordingly, the Christian or Jewish wife of a Muslim lives under the protection of a man who respects the basic tenets of her faith, her scripture, and her prophets, while in contrast to this the Jew or Christian recognizes neither the divine origin of Islam, its Book, or its Prophet (peace be on him). How then could a Muslim woman live with such a man, while her religion requires of her the observance of certain worships, duties, and obligations, as well as certain prohibitions? It would be impossible for the Muslim woman to retain her respect for her beliefs as well as to practice her religion properly if she were opposed in this regard by the master of the house at every step.”

This position is also confirmed by ECFR fatwa. Although ECFR issues fatawa for Muslims living as minority in Europe and is meant to adapt sharia to a new minoritarian context, ECFR views about women are definitely conservative. For instance, the need of segregation between men and women is confirmed by the following ECFR fatwa regarding the attendance of mixed ceremonies by women:

“Our opinion in this matter is that Islamic Shari’a did not object to men and women being present in one place on condition that three matters are avoided and refrained from:

First: Seclusion, i.e. where a man and woman meet in a position where no one else can see them.

Second: Adornment of women, i.e. where a woman uncovers what Allah (swt) decreed to be covered from her body, perfume or jewellery or walks in such a way which draws attention and raises ill-thoughts and feelings.

Third: Contact, i.e. skin contact.

If these three matters were avoided and refrained from then there remains no legal objection to the congregation, whether it is a marriage ceremony or any other. However, we see that people often do not abide by these conditions in weddings, and thus the presence of men and women in one place becomes unlawful.”

Similarly, in ordinary life ECFR advises a correct form of dialogue between men and women that finally relegates it to greetings and limited intercourse:

“There are many Hadiths which confirm the permissibility of men greeting women and women greeting men, as well as the lawfulness of men visiting sick women and vice versa.

However, this does not imply the lifting of all boundaries, so that women start speaking to all men who come and go or that men start speaking to all women, as this is rejected by logic and good taste before being rejected by Islam. It is permissible for a woman to speak to a male relative, a teacher, a neighbour, a supervisor at work, and others according to the requirements and needs of every day life and complex relations amongst people in our days, as long as trust is established, troubles (fitna) are in restraint and conditions are normal.”

During Session 24, which was held in Istanbul August 16-19, 2014, ECFR issued many fatwas that apparently aimed to appease the West and its standards. For instance Fatwa 24/3 about “the cure for recalcitrance of a woman toward her husband” explains that the Qur’anic verse referring to it as IV, 34 that is “Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband’s) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill conduct, admonish them (first), (next), refuse to share their beds, (and last) beat them; but if they return to obedience, seek not against them means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all)”. The key expression is “beat them”.

ECFR states that Muslims have to follow the example of the Prophet who never hit his wives, however, in an interview with the London-based Guardian newspaper, Qaradawi said he accepts wife-beating “as a method of last resort – though only lightly.” He also said that female rape victims should be punished if dressed “immodestly” when assaulted.

ECFR Fatwa 24/4 about khul’ – that is the Islamic divorce at the instance of the wife, who must pay a compensation – is interesting because after stating that in Europe there is no such a divorce, it advises the woman to refer to “Islamic centers or sharia councils if existing, because this is not against the law since the International convention for human rights states that minorities have the right to practice their religion”. The fatwa thus implicitly allows double standards and allows Islamic centers to handle family issues.

ECFR went also so far as issuing a fatwa about the possibility for a woman to ride a bicycle:

“Riding a bicycle or car or any other form of transportation is permissible in itself. The Arab woman during the days of ignorance as well as Islam used to ride camels. The Prophet Mohammed (ppbuh) said: The best of women who rode camels are the women of Qureish; they are the most merciful with their children and the most considerate with their husbands’ wealth” .

However, a woman must abide by Islamic mannerisms when riding a bicycle, such as wearing appropriate Islamic dress and avoiding physical contact with men. As for the possibility of teenage girls losing their hymen; it is important to examine such possibility. If it remains a rare occurring, then Islam has decided that a rule cannot be based upon a rarity.

However, if it is likely that the girl will indeed lose her hymen if she rides a bicycle and no measures can prevent her from doing so, then the Muslim girl ought to be stopped from this, so that people do not think ill of her and that she is not accused of what she has not committed. However, if riding a bicycle is an actual need for the girl, for instance to get to her school or important work, etc., then it remains that necessities make prohibitions permissible. Allah (swt) stated:

“But if one is forced by necessity without wilful disobedience nor transgressing due limits, then there is no sin on him. Truly, Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful” (2:173)” (Fatwa 38)

It is interesting that both Qaradawi and ECFR stand for the veil as a duty for Muslim women, while there are many Islamic theologians saying that it is not a duty, but a free choice. Considering the veil an Islamic duty, any action and/or law against it can be targeted and labelled as islamophobic. This is why not only EFOMW, but also ENAR have been focusing on projects on both gender and islamophobia. Last, but not least it should be noted that Qaradawi also heads the International Union of Muslim Scholars, based in Doha, that on the eve of the 57th session of the UN Commission on the Status of Women which was held between March 4th and 15th 2013 issued an official statement in which IUMS attacked the UN Convention for the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) because it contradicted Islamic principles for the following reasons:

“1- Substituting qawwama (male caretaking or responsibility) with partnership and complete sharing of roles inside the family between the man and woman (spending, child care, household issues).

2- Complete equality in marriage laws (cancelling all forms of: polygamy, `idda, guardianship, dowry, a man’s spending commitment toward the family, allowing Muslim women to marry non-Muslims and so on).

3- Equality in inheritance.

4- Withdrawing the power to divorce, referring it to the judiciary, and a sharing of all possessions upon divorce.

5- Giving women the authority to file a complaint against her husband accusing him of rape or harassment. The concerned departments would be obliged to exact a penalty on the husband equal to the penalty specified for a person who commits rape or harassment against a woman of no relation to him.

6- Granting complete sexual freedom to girls in addition to the freedom to choose her sex, and the sex of her partner (i.e. to choose to have natural or homosexual relations) in addition to raising marriage age to 18.

7- Giving teenage girls access to contraceptives, training them to use it, and allowing abortion to dispose of an undesired pregnancy (under claims of sexual and reproductive rights).

8- Equating an adulteress with a wife, equating children from an adulterous relation with legal children completely in all rights.”

IUMS statement eventually clarified its vision of women. Most of IUMS members – such as Qaradawi, Rached al-Ghannouchi, Ali Qaradaghi – are also members of ECFR. It should thus be assumed that ECFR, which is the theological reference for FIOE and EFOMW, shares IUMS views about women. Although EFOMW and FIOE promote women’s activism – which is limited to an élite and a restricted group of leading figures – in society and politics, they consider ordinary women’s role as mainly complementary to men’s role in family and life.


EFOMW partners for the event at the European parliament are FEMYSO and ENAR.

FEMYSO is a transnational umbrella organization, connecting 33 Islamic youth and student organizations in 26 European countries, which can be considered the breeding ground of FIOE.

The first meeting of MB Muslim youth organisations across Europe took place in Sweden in 1995, when the Foreign Ministry of Sweden in co-operation with the Swedish Muslim Youth organization (Sveriges Unga Muslimer), organized an international conference on “Islam in Europe”. The participants expressed the need to establish better communications between the organizations and to undertake steps towards more fruitful and organized cooperation. Jeunes Musulmans de France, Young Muslims UK and Sveriges Unga Muslimer were given the responsibility to further develop this idea. In June 1996 FIOE invited the three organizations in Birmingham to facilitate this process along with the Islamic Foundation based in Leicester. During a successive meeting in the same year FEMYSO was established as a youth offshoot of FIOE, whose Youth & Students section is member of FEMYSO.

FEMYSO is headquartered in Brussels, where it is registered as an international NGO. It adopts a formal administrative structure and communications activities similar to that of other MB EUOs. The organization has tried to maintain its autonomy from the global MB; however, FEMYSO’s composition and ideology represent indelible marks indicating that it is an important component of the MB European network. By operating out of Brussels FEMYSO is well placed to foster contact with EU institutions, allowing it to position itself as the voice of young Muslims in Europe.

FEMYSO Executive Committee confirms the nepotism in its upper ranks, as sons and daughters of senior MB leaders hold its key roles. Many past and current Executive Committee members have remained in power for extended periods, sometimes only switching offices. For instance, FEMYSO former President Intissar Kherigi – Rached Ghannouchi’s daughter – is a former Vice President, just like Huda Himmat – Ali Ghalib Himmat’s daughter – who was replaced by her brother Youssef at the end of her term. Youssef Himmat is now FEMYSO President. At present Intissar Kherigi sits on the Board of Trustees both of FEMYSO and ENAR and acts more behind the scenes.

Founded in October 1998 by grassroots activists on a mission to achieve legal changes at the European level and make decisive progress towards racial equality in all European Union member states and based in Brussels, Belgium, the European Network Against Racism (ENAR) connects local and national anti-racism NGOs throughout Europe and acts as an interface between member organizations and the European institutions. ENAR is a result of the 1997 European Year Against Racism. Between March and September 1998, more than 600 NGOs were involved in national and European roundtable discussions regarding the viability of such a structure. The Constitutive Conference of ENAR brought together more than 200 representatives of these organizations to draw up a common program of action. According to its website, ENAR is the only pan-European anti-racism network that combines advocacy for racial equality and facilitating cooperation among civil society anti-racist actors in Europe.

ENAR states its “mission is to achieve full equality, solidarity and well-being for all in Europe” by fostering a collective voice in civil society and to influence decision-making in the EU. To this end, its main activity is to lobby the European Parliament on behalf of its member organizations, notably by calling on MEPs and political groups to establish a strong cooperative on anti-racism in the European Parliament, to advance a comprehensive anti-racist agenda and to jointly react to manifestations of racism and hate.

ENAR issues an annual Shadow Report on racism in Europe, which is a compilation of information and data collected by member organizations and produced to fill the gaps in the official and academic data while offering an NGO perspective on the realities of racism in the EU.

The Belgian convert Michael Privot, who started as networking and campaigns officer in January 2006, in March 2010 became ENAR director. Besides being an international expert on radicalization processes within Muslim communities, in 2008 the Belgian newspaper Le Soir published an article of his, entitled “Muslim Brotherhood: Time for Coming-Out”, where he declared his belonging the MB. Later he explained that he did not join the Egyptian Brotherhood, but he felt close to the way of understanding Islam of an Islamic organisation close to the ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Policy officer is Julie Pascoet, who joined ENAR in April 2010 after working as communication and advocacy assistant for the NGO Islamic Relief Belgium and converting to Islam.

The presence in ENAR’s board of Intissar Kherigi has strengthened the relation and coordination with FEMYSO.


All the speakers of the public hearing on Islamophobia and Gender at the European Parliament belong to the above-mentioned network:

  • Raghad Al Tikriti represents the Muslim Association of Britain (MAB), which is member of FEMYSO and FIOE. Al Tikriti is the sister of Anas Al Tikriti, one of the key people of the MB network in the UK and president of the Cordoba Foundation;
  • Ilham Skah, presented as researcher on conditions of Muslim women in Norway, is an activist in the Islamiska Forbundet, which is member of FIOE;
  • Julie Pascoet is the responsible of the ENAR project Forgotten Women Project and ENAR policy officer;
  • Nora Rami is presented as an expert on the question of “laïcité” (The March 15th Freedom Committee). As a matter of fact, the March 15th Freedom Committee has been founded to defend the right of women to wear the veil and has been working very closely with the Union des Organisations Islamiques de France (UOIF), member of FIOE;
  • Fatima Doubakil, Swedish Muslim Human Rights Committee. She is very active in Swedish Islamic organisations close to and members of FIOE;
  • Yasser Louati represents the Collectif Contre l’Islamophobie en France (CCIF), which is a partner of FEMYSO in the IMAN Project about Islamophobia, funded by the Directorate of Justice of the European Commission;
  • Assia Oulkadi represents FEMYSO;
  • Lamia Elamri is President of European Forum of Muslim Women (EFOMW) and Vice Chair of the Board of Trustees of Islamic Relief Worldwide.

The above-mentioned list of speakers totally belongs to the same area of influence and to the same ideological background. The event organised at the European Parliament will consequently deal with the issue of Islamophobia and Gender only from one point of view without any questioning and true debate and will empower and strengthen the idea that organised/political Islam is the main representative of Muslims in Europe.

The event thus confirms the monopoly of Muslim Brotherhood linked organisations not only within the S&D group, but also within European institutions. On June 24-25, 2015 S&D group and the Foundation for European Progressive Studies (FEPS), which is headed by former Italian Prime Minister Massimo D’Alema, co-organised a conference in Brussels entitled “Call to Europe V: Islam in Europe”. The conference was attended by some European actors of the ideological galaxy of the MB, notably the Belgian Michael Privot, German Mehmet Celebi, deputy head of the Zentralrat der Muslime in Deutschland (Central Muslim Council of Germany), and Tarafa Baghajati, chairman of the Austrian Muslim Initiative (AMI).

Federica Mogherini, High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and vice president of the European Commission, presented the closing remark suggesting European policy should include not only Islam, but also political Islam:

“I am not afraid to say that political Islam should be part of the picture. Religion plays a role in politics – not always for good, not always for bad. Religion can be part of the process. What makes the difference is whether the process is democratic or not. That is what matters to us, the key point.”

The 2nd March public hearing finally highlights the trend of confusing Islam and political Islam at the European level, of turning the latter in the only representative of Islam and Muslims in Europe which is unfortunately very far from the reality on the ground and discriminating towards the variegated majority of Muslims who live their religion in an apolitical way and do not recognise themselves in the above-mentioned organisations.

Valentina Colombo

German Intelligence Official Calls Muslim Brotherhood “A Threat To Western Democratic Systems”

German Intelligence Official Calls Muslim Brotherhood “A Threat To Western Democratic Systems”

UK media is reporting on comments by an official of the German domestic intelligence agency regarding the Muslim Brotherhood in Germany. According to the Express.co.uk report, Gordian Meyer-Plath said the Brotherhood wants to establish Islamic law in Germany and that the organisation “poses a threat to western democratic systems”:

February 7, 2106  Gordian Meyer-Plath claimed the Muslim Brotherhood want a ‘monopoly’ on mosques in Saxony Gordian Meyer-Plath, president of the regional department of the German domestic security and anti-terrorist organisation claimed the Muslim Brotherhood ‘have long been active in Saxony, although they were stealthy’.

The BfV anti-terror leader posed the question that when ‘a [large]number of Muslims have come to Germany, do they see a chance to expand their network beyond some central structures and become interesting for the new Muslims in Saxony?’

Right-wing groups like Pegida have protested about the construction of mosques in Germany Mr Meyer-Plath claimed that while the Muslim Brotherhood in Germany is ‘beyond jihad’ – meaning it is not directly involved with terror attacks – he says the organisation poses a threat to western democratic systems.

Mr Meyer-Plath added: ‘The Muslim Brothers still want to establish Sharia law in Germany.’

The Muslim Brotherhood currently operates in 70 countries. The group is reportedly sponsoring the construction of mosques in Germany in Dresden, Leipzig, Meissen, Riesa, Pirna, Bautzen and Goerlitz.

The security expert urged residents not to be prejudiced to people choosing to pray in these places of worship as it ‘does not mean that people who go there are necessarily being indoctrinated [into and becoming extremists]’.

He added Muslims who visit such mosques are ‘often absolutely unaware’ about the nature of the facilities because the Salafist structures are ‘cautious about what they are saying’.

Read the rest here.

The German domestic intelligence agency has long described the Islamischen Gemeinschaft in Deutschland (IGD) (Islamic Society of Germany) as the central organization of the Muslim Brotherhood in Germany.

For the historical background on the origins of the IGD, go here.

For the new GMBRC report on the long-standing Global Muslim Brotherhood, Salafi and Jihadi Alliance known as the Global Anti-Aggression Campaign (GAAC), go here.

The Muslim Brotherhood in Europe and the UK

The Muslim Brotherhood in Europe and the UK

The Muslim Brotherhood’s Movement West

After the Second World War, much of the Islamic world fell under Soviet domination, and the rest under the efforts of the Soviet Union to extend the Communist world.

The Muslim Brotherhood’s leadership, which had supported the Nazis in WWII, looked upon Germans as allies and the Soviets as enemies. Many of their leaders immigrated to Germany because the Brotherhood was suppressed in Egypt, following their attempt to overthrow the Nasser government. They had originally been friendly to Nasser, whom they helped to overthrow the previous Egyptian government.

Now their top figures needed a home abroad where they could live and organize safely, while the Ikhwan (“Brotherhood” in Arabic) shifted into underground operations in Egypt itself.

Germany welcomed them. The Brotherhood built a large Islamic Center in Munich, which became the nexus for a Brotherhood partnership with the Central Intelligence Agency under President Eisenhower. Eisenhower and subsequent presidents saw them as useful for transmitting anti-Soviet propaganda throughout the Islamic world, as well as for organizing resistance to Russian expansion.

Into England

The Munich Islamic Center was the headquarters during years of steady growth in Europe through the 1960s and 1970s.

In the 1980s, however, the Brotherhood moved its European headquarters from Germany to the United Kingdom. Under the leadership of Mohammed Akef, later the Muslim Brotherhood’s Supreme Guide, the Ikhwan’s European operations shifted to the Markfield Conference Centre near Leicester, U.K. The Markfield Conference Centre is owned by the Islamic Foundation, an affiliate of the Muslim Council of Britain. Both of those organizations are Muslim Brotherhood offshoots.

The Centre also now houses the Federation of Islamic Organizations in Europe (FIOE), one of Europe’s largest Brotherhood organizations. It has served as well as headquarters for other Brotherhood entities including the European Council for Fatwa and Research, currently based in Dublin, whose work is headed by Brotherhood “spiritual leader” Yusuf al-Qaradawi.

The ECFR states its goal as demonstrating the supremacy of shariah law:

Shari’ah cannot be amended to conform to changing human values and standards, rather, it is the absolute norm to which all human values and conduct must conform; it is the frame to which they must be referred; it is the scale on which they must be weighed.

Influence With Governments In The West

In addition to these organizations, which proclaim that they are chiefly interested in persuasion and education, the Ikhwan has established direct relationships with Western governments designed to influence policy.

In France, the Brotherhood has the Union of Islamic Organizations in France; the Italian counterpart is the Union of the Islamic Communities and Organizations in Italy. Those groups work, respectively, with the French and Italian governments.

They use claims of victimhood and demands for tolerance to mask their true intentions to marginalize or silence critics. In the U.K., the Muslim Council of Britain and the Muslim Association of Britain are two of the most prominent MB organizations.

Like their continental counterparts, the MCB and MAB work with Her Majesty’s government at the highest levels toward the same end. The effects of these organizations include major security failures detailed in another recent backgrounder.

The policies they have convinced Western governments to adopt have distorted security services’ capacity to think and talk honestly about the threats they face. This has led to tragedies such as the child rape ring in Rotherham, England, that ran for 16 years in spite of the government being informed about it repeatedly from the first years of its operation.

Official policy quashed the investigations, such that high government officials discouraged it and police and social workers feared punishment as xenophobes or racists should they pursue the charges.

Domination Of Muslim Groups Across Europe

As we shall see with respect to the Brotherhood footprint in the United States, the leading Muslim organizations across Europe – virtually without exception – are offshoots of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Even though the affiliation with the Brotherhood for most of these organizations is easily established, and the true objectives of these organizations are readily discernable, most European governments are unwilling to deal effectively with the threats posed by Brotherhood penetration of the highest levels of their societies.

For example, two of the most prominent MB operatives in Europe, Ghaleb Himmat and Yousef Nada, were designated as terrorism financiers by the U.S. Department of the Treasury in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. Their bank was found to be involved in 9/11 and, on investigation, to have a history of financing a host of terrorist organizations. These men were nevertheless allowed to continue doing business with and in Europe.

Likewise, Brotherhood “spiritual leader” Yousef al-Qaradawi was named in the 2008 Holy Land Foundation terrorism financing trial for his involvement with the a Hamas fundraising front. He also remains involved in Europe, especially with the European Council for Fatwa and Research (ECFR) in Dublin. The ECFR makes no secret of its agenda, which is the supremacy of shariah law.

As is often the case, both the readily established agenda and the direct connection to well-known terrorist organizations is tolerated by Western governments.

Why Are Western Governments Complacent?

One reason for Europe’s general unwillingness to confront and counter the danger posed by the Muslim Brotherhood and its operatives is that in the parliamentary politics of some countries, Muslim communities are increasingly seen as critical voting blocs.

This is only increasing as Europe continues to court large-scale immigration from the Islamic world, and as Europeans continue to have low native birth rates. The influx of millions of refugees will speed the growing power of this perceived voting bloc. It will be increasingly difficult for Europe to turn the corner as the voting bloc grows in size.

Since the Brotherhood gave rise to the leading European Islamic organizations across Europe, those organizations are well placed to influence the voting choices of this growing bloc. It will only be increasingly difficult for European governments to adopt thoughtful, critical views of the security issues involved.

Only the demands of a sizable majority of European citizens could serve to change their minds. Those demands are beginning to come, and growing louder the more European governments seek to suppress them.

Originally posted 2016-12-14 21:49:07. Republished by Blog Post Promoter

Double Games Of The UK Muslim Brotherhood

Double Games Of The UK Muslim Brotherhood


Pin It on Pinterest