Quilliam’s parliamentary supporters demand more taxpayers money

Following on from last week’s post about how many of the Quilliam Foundation’s supporters (many pro-Iraq war enthusiasts including Nick Cohen, Denis MacShane, Paul Goodman as well as Martin ‘The Great Koran Con Trick’ Bright) had been mobilising to ensure continued government funding of the Quilliam Foundation – all with our taxpayer money of course, yesterday morning witnessed a very interesting parliamentary debate specifically on the topic of QF funding.

You can read the debate in full here. One of the interesting details revealed during the debate is that Quilliam received 2.7 million pounds from the Home Office and the Foreign Office during the past three years. This was more Prevent funding than received by any single other organisation.

This is astonishing given that Quilliam is so widely reviled amongst UK Muslims and whose routine smear-mongering of mainstream UK Muslim organisations as being ‘Islamists’ has only served to increase mistrust between UK Muslims and the government.

Quilliam’s parliamentary supporters argue that unless they receive 150K urgently the organisation may well fold in the next few days. How revealing that such an organisation has been so utterly dependent on government-funding throughout its existence and has the likes of Nick Cohen and Martin Bright and Denis MacShane etc as its most vocal supporters.

This entry was posted in Extremism, Government and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Quilliam’s parliamentary supporters demand more taxpayers money

  1. Ahmed says:

    I found this bot quit interesting…’A few days ago, for example, Quilliam issued a statement publicly defending Usama Hasan-a progressive London imam who received death threats for stating his belief in evolution-and criticising the total silence of the Muslim community in the face of the threats against him. The statement encouraged more than a dozen major British Muslim organisations to issue their own statements defending Hasan and his right to free speech.’

    I think the most skewed and overly generous and oddly blind written support came from your Islamic Society of Britain Inayat, with the words ‘The Islamic Society of Britain commends the bravery and honesty of Sheikh Usama Hasan’ I agree with standing up against death threats against the man, but couldn’t the statement have been a little more balanced, for this brave and courageous saviour of the Muslim Ummah 🙂 has made some pathetic utterances and stands of late. Ironically beginning with his taking the podium at the launch of the Quilliam in 2008, promoting the idea that Hijab can be abandoned, standing outside a Masjid congratulating the troops for the wonderful work they are doing n Helmand http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZdVE9iBP0U and now this ape to Adam malakee…he might be a ‘Shaikh’ to ISB, but practising, principled Muslims have now rejected this ultra-liberal, psuedo intellectual, maybe its about time ISB did the same.

  2. Ahmed: Yes, I thought the ISB statement was a bit OTT but at least they took a stand against the morons who think intimidation and accusations of apostasy are a valid intellectual response to Usama’s views on evolution. As it happens I don’t think that wearing the Hijab is necessary either: I certainly don’t believe God will punish women just because they don’t wear the hijab or punish men because they don’t keep a beard. Still, Usama is only human and he like the rest of us is prone to getting things wrong. I would not look to him for any kind of guidance on issues to do with Afghanistan or the Middle East for example. Most ‘Islamic scholars’ are only good for knowledge about ancient books written in Arabic.

  3. Ahmed says:

    Thank you Inayat, to lighten the mood, check out this light-hearted take on the topic.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Sw7XFIPBgo

    Also in regard to the hijab, I beg to differ…I came across this quite reasonable article on the reasoning and partial evidence behind… http://www.wliconline.org/index.php?state=2&id=246&cat=3

    Oh and less of the quips on Islamic scholars and books in Arabic 🙂 I know it is a profession which is much scoffed at today by te enlightened technocrat crowd, but we need principled but progressive clergy, as the preservation of our Deen is not up for compromise, though I consider discussion, dialogue and debate a very good thing.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s