On Imam Abdul Alim Musa and the UK's list of banned people

"This is a list, in truth, which clearly has no more substance than the "dodgy dossier" by which Tony Blair justified his support for America's invasion of Iraq in 2003, which was later found to have been plagiarised from a post-graduate dissertation that officials found on the internet. 

"That deceit contributed to the deaths of well over 100,000 Iraqis over the next few years.  This one may have somewhat less dramatic consequences, but is no less telling of the true nature of politics in the 'free' and 'democratic' West that the rest of the world is supposed to envy and aspire to emulate."

Several people have contacted me about the list of people banned from the UK published by the Home Office on Wednesday May 5.  One of the reasons that they are approaching me in particular is that the list includes Imam Abdul Alim Musa of the USA, who is member of the Institute of Contemporary Islamic Thought (ICIT), with which I am also associated. 

Frankly, I was very surprised to see Imam Musa's name on the list when I read it on Wednesday morning, as he is so far from the sort of salafi-jihadi "extremist" Muslims that the authorities are usually concerned with.  I have known him all my adult life, as he regularly came to London at the invitation of the Muslim Institute and the Muslim Parliament of Great Britain during the 1980s and early 1990s.  More recently, I have met him mostly in South Africa, when we have both attended conferences and taken part in lecture tours organized by the local Crescent International office there.  As a close friend of my late father, he also spoke at the Kalim Siddiqui Memorial Conference in London in April 2006.  He has not been to the UK since then, and confirmed to me on the telephone last evening that he has not tried to come recently, nor has any plans to.

It was very strange, therefore, to see his name (or a mis-spelt version of it) included on the list of what the Independent newspaper this morning called "Britain's least wanted".  To explain his banning, the paper described him as an "Islamic writer" and "a controversial US-born Muslim convert who heads the Institute of Contemporary Islamic Thought in Washington, a global Islamic think tank that promotes orthodox Sunni Islam". 

Considering that the ICIT and Crescent are usually accused of being Shi'i or crypto-Shi'is because of our sympathy for Islamic Iran, we should perhaps appreciate the "orthodox Sunni" label! -- although the implication that we have a sectarian agenda of any kind is quite wrong.  The idea that we are a "global Islamic think tank" is stretching it a bit too, though we should perhaps be flattered by that one. (Having said that, the line may have been lifted from our own website, so perhaps we shouldn't complain!)  What definitely is inaccurate is to say that Imam Musa heads the ICIT operation in Washington. 

In fact, Imam Abdul Alim Musa, who was indeed born "Clarence Reams", as stated in the Home Office list, is more a community activist, leader and speaker than a writer.  He heads the Masjid Al-Islam, a Muslim community organization in the USA, with mosques in Washington DC and Oakland CA.  This provides support, education and other services mainly to African-American Muslims, most of them converts or families of converts.  It is also involved in da'wah work.  In areas where young African-Americans, Muslim and non-Muslim, suffer huge social, behavioural and other problems, his organisation is known for the stability and discipline it promotes.  Perhaps the only vaguely accurate part of the Independent pen portrait of him was the "orthodox Sunni Islam" bit, although even that referred to the ICIT rather than Masjid al-Islam or him personally. 

What has probably got Imam Musa on to the list of people banned from the UK is the fact that he is a charismatic and fearless speaker, who has never taken a backward step when challenged to speak his mind on any subject.  That is not to say he is a ranter and raver; far from it.  I have never seen him being anything other than controlled and measured in his expression, which tends only to add to the impact of his words.  Nor is he particularly a scholar or an intellectual; he will not mind my saying that.  But he is a clear thinker and direct speaker, with a knack of cutting straight to the heart of any issue concerning Muslims in America or the world. 

As a result he has been targeted by Fox News in America in particular, accused of being anti-semitic for his views on Israel and of supporting terrorism for his views on American foreign policy and the US's role in the world.  He has also become a target of groups like the Jewish Anti-Defamation League and anti-terrorism experts like Steve Emerson, who specialise in targeting Muslims whom they regard as anti-Israeli and anti-American.  And it is presumably such accusations that have resulted in his being included in the UK banned list, despite the fact that he has nothing to do with "extremist" Islam as represented by groups such as al-Qa'ida.

It is, in truth, difficult to take the list of banned people at all seriously.  It appears to have been published at this time entirely for domestic political purposes -- to try to portray the government of Gordon Brown as taking firm action against "extremism" at a time when is under immense pressure because of its handing of the economic crisis, public relations disasters such as the Gurkha controversy, and mounting political scandals concerning such things as ministers' expense claims.

The basis of the list is a law passed in 2005, authorising the government to pre-emptively ban people who promote hatred, terrorism or serious criminal activity from entering the country.  Since then, 101 people have reportedly been banned, 22 of them in the last six months.  This last group includes the 16 whose names were published on Wednesday, plus six others whose names were withheld by the Home Office, supposedly for national security reasons.  Eight of the 16 named are Muslims, including Samir al-Quntar, a Lebanese militant released from Israeli custody last year; Yunus al-Astal, a Hamas MP; and assorted others.  The eight non-Muslims include Mike Guzofski, an Israeli Jew; Michael Weiner, an American radio "shock jock"; a couple of anti-gay American Christian evangelists; and assorted racists of various hews. 

Imam Abdul Alim Musa's inclusion on the list is by no means the only oddity.  Michael Weiner, a.k.a. Michael Savage, is clearly not someone I would care to have dinner with, but he is, by many accounts, no worse than countless other right-wing radio personalities in the US.  He reacted with anger to his inclusion on the list, claiming that he had not been to the UK for 20 years and had no plans to.  How then did he end up being banned? 

The cases of Russians Artur Ryno and Pavel Skachevsky are even odder.  Described as Slav supremacists and skinheads, both have been in jail since October 2007, and were convicted in December last year of involvement in at least 20 racist murders.  They are unlikely, therefore, to have attempted to have come to the UK within the last six months, or to have any immediate plans to do so.  Banning them makes no more sense than banning the Muslims from various parts of the world currently still incarcerated at Guantanamo Bay.

It is difficult, therefore, to discern any logic or even pattern to the list.  The official criteria for inclusion are those laid down in the 2005 legislation, but it is difficult to imagine that in nearly four years, only 101 people have been discovered to meet them.  (The equivalent American list reportedly has over 1 million names.)  Or that the 16 names on Wednesday are among the 22 most dangerous people to have been discovered by the Home Office in the last six months.  Frankly, I myself could suggest eight Muslims who meet the criteria better than the ones named in the list. 

The procedure by which people are nominated for banning, assessed, and then listed as banned, is unclear at the moment.  It may emerge if the list comes under greater scrutiny in the next few months, particularly if Michael Weiner follows through with his threat to sue the UK government for including his name on it. 
  
One suspects, however, that there is no logic or procedure.  The list appears to owe more to the demands of political expediency than any real intelligence, and to have been cobbled together on the basis of rumour and allegation rather than anything concrete.  The fact that they even got Imam Musa's name wrong -- calling him "Abdul Ali Musa" instead of "Abdul Alim Musa" -- suggests it was a rush job with minimal genuine research or checking.  It appears they did little more than trawl the internet for the names of people described -- rightly or wrongly -- as dangerous extremists. Having found eight Muslims -- their main target, given the Islamophobic hysteria of the British tabloid media -- they probably went looking for eight non-Muslims to balance the list out.

It is clear, therefore, that this is a list that has no more substance than the "dodgy dossier" by which Tony Blair justified his support for America's invasion of Iraq in 2003, which was later found to have been plagiarised from a post-graduate dissertation that officials found on the internet. 

That deceit contributed to the deaths of well over 100,000 Iraqis over the next few years.  This one may have somewhat less dramatic consequences, but is no less telling of the true nature of politics in the 'free' and 'democratic' West that the rest of the world is supposed to envy and aspire to emulate.

 

.

Comments

[Music_master]

Congratulations! You have so much useful information, write more.

[zh]

Great commentary on a dodgy topic.