Shiv Malik on HT and the Tel Aviv bombings
New Statesman - NS Profile - Omar Sharif (you can load this once, and then it goes into pay per view).
Our old friend Shiv Malik writes in the New Statesman with a profile of Omar Sharif, one of the two British Muslim men who were involved in the Tel Aviv pizza parlour bombing in April 2003. Sharif appears to have been a devotee of Omar Bakri Muhammad, although this of course does not demonstrate in any way that OBM was responsible. Malik can't let go of his dog-and-bone obsession with Hizbut-Tahrir, however:
At about this time, Omar Bakri fell out with Hizb ut-Tahrir's international leadership, based in Lebanon. Bakri says the party told him that since Britain was not part of the Islamic world, he could not work to establish sharia here. He disagreed and in January 1996 set up al-Muhajiroun.
Sharif appears to have followed Bakri into the new, more radical organisation and to have had less contact with HT. As we shall see, he was still a close follower of Bakri in the spring of 2003.
Is it fair to say, then, that Hizb ut-Tahrir laid the founda- tions of Sharif's radicalism? That the hardline group (which Tony Blair announced last year he wants to see banned) took this "empty bowl" and filled his head with its ideas? The group adamantly denies it.
The obvious conclusion, from the facts he presents in his own article, is: Omar Sharif was radicalised by his contacts with OBM and his gang. After OBM split with HT, Sharif followed him. This has no relevance whatsoever to Hizbut-Tahreer now that OBM's former group have moved into increasingly extreme territory.
Even so, most people who got involved with either group did not end up as terrorists, so the question has to be asked how he and Asif Hanif were actually recruited for the Tel Aviv job, which besides killing innocent people, resulted in a major setback for foreign Muslim students studying the deen in the Middle East and particularly Syria, who have been prevented from enrolling in private Islamic schools because of spurious "security" considerations arising from the attack. The vast majority were peaceful, and sought Islamic learning away from the Urdu-dominated environments of Indian-run Islamic institutions in the west.
Comments
The vast majority of OBM's followers were peaceful, or did not have the balls to blow themselves up?
Posted by: Sunny | April 20, 2006 6:57 PM
Sunny: I said that the vast majority of foreign Muslim students in Syria were peaceful, not OBM's followers. But most of OBM's followers are probably not inclined to blow themselves up. The group was not encouraging people to, even if it held that suicide bombings were praiseworthy (a minority scholarly position, but one common among ill-educated Muslims).
Posted by: Yusuf Smith
|
April 20, 2006 8:32 PM
Malik seems to be on a personal crusade against Hizb ut-Tahrir.
There are some blatant mistakes in this article e.g. the reference to an email from 1924.org is a mailing list which goes to over 100,000 recipients - if you google the quote he gives you can see that it has been completely taken out of context.
Posted by: Shiraz Maher | April 21, 2006 12:16 AM
Anyone see the interview with Maajid Nawaz on the BBC's Hard Talk?
He was the HT member who was tortured and locked up in Egypt for 4 years- just for discussing the plight of Muslims under dictators around the world.
Everyone has a view on HT, but no one can condone the barbaric torture inflicted on him and others by the Egyptian Govt. The real tragedy was the British Govt's lack of response to these torture allegations and to the unfair trial. By visiting Egypt every year while those Muslims brothers were locked up and tortured, Tony Blair effectively endorsed the practices of the Egyptian Govt.
Posted by: Imran | April 21, 2006 4:22 PM
Oh no! Shiv Malik is on a crusade against HuT. I wonder if those wonderful mummy's boys with nice fluffy bunnies on their website and peaceful "non-violent" ways of life will survive.
The real tragedy was the British Govt's lack of response to these torture allegations
As opposed to the side tragedy that the Egyptians tortured them, I presume? I'm sure that was just a little mishap by the Egyptians.
Posted by: Sunny | April 21, 2006 8:43 PM
Did Shiv Malik justify 9/11?
Interesting article with the same recycled stuff - he doesn't seem to have stumbled on anything new.
I have got some interesting info about the journalist Shiv Malik – I was in discussion with a senior member of HT who had found some interesting information about him. I thought it would be useful as it completely discredits the guys journalistic credentials.
Just some background….
Shiv Malik is a Leeds graduate who has worked on recent articles for the Independent on Sunday and New Statesman. His claims to fame are "outing" Dilpazier Aslam, the Guardian trainee, and also calling a lot of other employers to inform them that they are employing members of Hizb ut-Tahrir. He has also written disparaging articles about other Islamic groups including Young Muslims and Islamic Society of Britain. He has employed some very underhand tactics in writing these articles – for example calling up and claiming to be someone else. He has also printed complete lies in some of his articles – he says for example that HT members joined the Territorial Army.
He has also recycled again and again the ridiculous "conveyor belt" theory, created by the neo-cons in the USA – that HT are some sort of "conveyor belt" for terror because they call for the peaceful establishment of an Islamic Caliphate and just by calling for such a state they are a recruiting sergeant for AQ. His expediency is amazing – in his article in the New Statesman back in September 2004 he referred to the "enthused, informed debate" of HT study circles but in an article in the Independent on Sunday on 7 August 2005 these had become "indoctrination cells". His article said "Hizb ut-Tahrir is a real threat to society"; not at all his conclusion back in September 2004. It seems that his opportunism and attempt to use the Muslim community and groups to get up the career ladder knows no bounds.
Back to the interesting information…
On the 17th of September 2001, before the blood of the victims of 9/11 had even dried, Mr Malik posted the following heartless comment on the Indymedia website:
https://www2.indymedia.org.uk/en/2001/09/11599.html Worlds gone crazy 17.09.2001 02:32
The world has gone crazy. 5000 businessmen and military personnel die and suddenly we are at war. With, whom? In what way? With a prime suspect who no one has any proof of guilt and who himself denies responsibility. More people die each day from starvation or bad water as a result of IMF loans yet were are all the three minute silences for them. Over 1.5 million children have died in Iraq as a direct result of the American imposed embargo. Which CNN viewer knows their suffering, much longer and much more painful?
It is sickening watching countries who poured vitriol on the U.S. in their daily papers for years, suddenly Kowtowing to it’s demands and sending in messages of condolences. It is disgusting watching the press of the supposedly “free and civilised” world printing such obvious propaganda and attempting to rile masses to whatever cause the Whitehouse may choose. Where are those questions like “why did this happen”? Why is the press simply Muslim bashing? Where’s all the reflection that’s supposed to happen at a time like this? Why is no one noticing what’s happening in Palestine? Someone needs some sense right now. S.M.
shiv Malik e-mail: ShivMalik@hotmail.com
He expresses these views that now seem at odds with the journalistic witch hunt he has been conducting in the Muslim community. Is he trying to "justify" these attacks by drawing comparisons to the number killed by the embargo in Iraq? He finds it sickening that countries are "sending in messages of condolences" – well would he rather these countries send messages of admiration – "serves you right"???
He finally asks "why is press simply Muslim bashing?" – Good question Mr Malik – we are waiting for an explanation from you for your "Muslim bashing".
The weird thing is that since the senior member of HT told me about this, it has now disappeared from the Indymedia site – the link is still there if you search for "shiv malik" on the main page, but is now inaccessible.
Any way, using the Wayback Machine, his views are still on there [be careful he may try and delete them] - http://web.archive.org/web/20041026051616/http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2001/09/11599.html
The Internet is such a wonderful thing!
Posted by: Faisal Khan | April 25, 2006 9:41 PM
That shows more than anything Faisal, that Shiv Malik is not out for hating Muslims, but exposing the duplicity of Hizb ut Tahrir.
The same HuT who claim that freedom of expression of religion is the hallmark of a civilised society, and then concede that they would not be affording the same freedom of religion to fellow Muslims under their own khalifah. What a farce.
Posted by: Sunny | April 26, 2006 2:50 PM
Sunny - surely your hatred of HuT can't lead you to defend the events of 9/11, events which even HuT condemned?
Also, given some of your previous reports, is it the case that you feel that HuT members should be tortured?
Posted by: Faisal Khan | April 26, 2006 9:29 PM
Sunny,
What is duplicitous about HT?
The right to expression would exist in the Khilafah, likewise the right to belief- what HT espouse is actually the opposite of duplicitous, they don't deceive people (like the western countries and parties) by claiming rights= freedoms, as freedoms do not exist in reality within any country. HT merely wish to be honest about their definitions. If you heard what they ACTUALLY said you would know that it was in reference to Cartoons of the Prophet (saw), when a western interviewer on TV argued the Cartoons are ok under freedom of expression, upon which they replied: "it is not the hallmark of a civilised society that people slander and abuse each other.." Taji mustapha
Posted by: abdullah | May 15, 2006 4:20 AM