The Official Website of Shaykh Pirzada | News | Shaykh Pirzada condemns 42-day detention
Further to the controversy over whether the British Muslim Forum's shaikhs have supported or opposed the position of Khurshid Ahmed, the chairman of the BMF, Shaikh Muhammad Imdad Hussain Pirzada, the director of the Jamia al-Karam and one of the BMF's trustees, has opposed the position of Khurshid Ahmed CBE regarding 42-day detention for suspected terrorists (although he has not condemned him by name):
The founder and principal of Jamia Al-Karam, Shaykh Muhammad Imdad Hussain Pirzada has commented that imprisoning - merely out of suspicion - any individual for up to 42 days does not befit a civilised and developed state such as the United Kingdom. Whilst disagreeing and severely opposing the Counter-Terrorism Bill, Shaykh M I H Pirzada stressed that this Bill is a clear infringement of basic human rights.
Praising the stance of the former Shadow Home Secretary, David Davis, Shaykh M I H Pirzada stated, "As a consequence of this, the reaction of the Shadow Home Secretary, David Davis, that came in the form of his resignation from Parliament is clear. The courage that he has displayed by giving his resignation is honourable and worthy of praise. Moreover, the Conservative Party has given its indication that if they form the government, they will re-consider and re-examine this Bill."
Appealing to the Muslims, Shaykh M I H Pirzada said, "The Muslims, in particular, have been greatly saddened at the passing of this Bill in the House of Commons by the narrowest of margins, since, it is the Muslims who eventually become the predominant target and victims of such legislation. Therefore, I appeal to all Muslims that they profoundly lobby against this Bill so that this Bill is rejected by the House of Lords."
This should serve as a correction to those who insist that Bareilawis in general are sell-outs or tame "Sufi-wufis", particularly after the antics of certain elements who ran to the media to denounce the Tablighi Jama'at as extremists in order to score petty sectarian points over them by blocking the construction of the Abbey Mills mosque.
786
AA
It would also be helpful if such sweeping generalisations about the Sunni Ulema who are the Imams of the majority of the masajids in the UK as being 'Brealwis', the term is a misnomer because the majority of them have never studied at the Madrassah at Brealwi or any of its affiliated colleges around the world (which are few and far between) which is very different from those Ulema who are classified as Deobandis as they are all graduates of Dar-ul-Uloom Deoband and the various seminaries that have been set up by it around the world.
The Ulema classified as 'Brealwi' differ among themselves upon many issues of furu isues relating to aqidah and fiqh and regard themselves primarily as Sunni Muslims and do in fact represent the faith and practice of most Sunni Muslims in the Indian Subcontinent and indeed do not differ greatly from Sunni Ulema from other parts of the world in the Yemen, Syria, Turkey, North Africa except in cultural expressions.
On a final point the BMF does not represent all or even the majority of the 'Brealwi' Ulema in this country or elsewhere.
wasalaam
Ismaeel
AA
The trouble is, at the heart of Ahl al-Sunna wa'l-Jamaah kalaam, post 14th century, is this whole idea of weakening baraka, which results in a political dystopianism (citing Hamza Yusuf in his interview with Mark Lawson). So they aint ever gonna go for a better world scenaria in the broader sense, despite giving lip service to this or that cause.
Is it Quixotic and lunatic or principled and courageous? Is he grandstanding for a future leadership election? If so, does he deserve to be leader of the Conservative Party? It is unimaginable that Cameron would ever do such a thing, led as he is by focus groups rather than anything resembling a conviction or a principle.
Interestingly, UKIP MP Bob Spink voted with the government on the 42-day detention law.
http://www.ukip.org/ukip/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=666&Itemid=57
UKIP MEP Godfrey Bloom, a constituent of David Davis, applauds him and says he will campaign for him, but the fact is that UKIP’s only MP voted for 42-day detention.
http://www.ukip.org/ukip/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=667&Itemid=57
The BNP are against 42 day detention
http://www.bnp.org.uk/index.php/2008/06/freedom-rip/
as are the LibDems and Socialist Workers Party.
The British Muslim Forum's support for 42 day detention is a little surprising, but there's nowt so queer as folk ...
http://www.britishmuslimforum.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=74:extension-of-the-pre-charge-detention-period-to-42-days-the-bmf-position&catid=1:latest-news
Vote: Should David Davis have resigned from the House of Commons to take a stand against 42-day detention?
http://www.1party4all.co.uk/Home/Account/TopicForm.aspx?topicsId=111
Jzk for this. Though looking on their website (BMF), the shifty justification still remains. They don't support 90 days, but stand for 42 days?? Like somehow they are also privy to secret intelligence dossiers that explain why 42 is better than 28 (or even 7....or 2)?
My local masjid in north London is facing internal schisms because of the lure of money from the Pathfinder fund. The BMF is a strategic partner to the PVE initiative. The 'mapping' exercises taking place are certainly circumspect.
As-Salaamu 'alaikum,
The imams need to be let in on the sort of people who seem to be running the BMF, because right now it seems to be operating as a vehicle for Khurshid. As I understand it, many of them do not speak English as a first language.