The only way the BMF can get its credibility back is by removing Khurshid Ahmed from his position!

Salaams

Unfortunately its not just the BMF that betrayed the Muslims community but also the four Muslims MPs that betrayed the Muslims. Not one of them voted aganst the act, what a disgrace!!

Since when did the BMF have any credibility to start with?

It shows that Islam and Muslims have no power whatsoever in this country, and that Islamism will be defeated using every means possible.

What this shows is that people will always be gullible to buy into propaganda and government deceit to take away more of our rights.

what peope like terry are forgettting to remember is that these laws will in the end be used against joe public,the muslims are the bait.

if you study the political history of britain you will see through the ages we have always been deceived by governments to cover up their failures by scapegoating others to gain political advantage.

The irish-the jews-the asian and black people before muslims were the whipping boys now it is the turn of muslims.

I personally have more respect for david davies who has resigned as a M.P because he beleives our fundmental rights are being taken away with this legislation.
Th irony of this is that america which was attacked killing thousands does not have such draconian laws to lock up its own citizens.

I salute Conservative Shadow Home Secretary who has resigned today from his post and as an MP. Better then Muslim MPs.

I will be in his constituency to help him at by election. Please do join me if you can.

Why do muslims seem to think that because an mp is muslim he has to make all his or her decisions based on what muslims want?
This is totally ridiculous seeing its because of muslims why we need the anti terror laws.
The government needs to completely ignore every single muslin demand when it comes to islam.
This is the only way foreward

David Davies clearly has more principles than the Muslim MPs or the British Muslim Forum!

Markuk the hypocrite still cannot get around to accepting that people who happen to be muslims are citzens as well with rights.
Markuk we still have not been able to read your condemnation of racists and bigots who attacked the asian community centre in cornwall.
Until then everything you say will be taken with a dollop of salt.

Yes thats what they would say. 'We represent our constituents'. Then why is it that whenever a 'muslim' issue is brought into the limelight these lackies are wheeled out to speak on issues they have no knowledge of? Why are they being used by the government in their 'promotion of british islam' programme and sent to the muslim world as if they are spokes people for muslims in the uk? What a cop out. If they do things against muslims, they are only representing their constituents. If they do things for muslims, it's because they are muslims.

A snippet from a comment posted on the BMF comment is free article, sums up what people are being taught to believe...that the lethargic, pacifist and deviant modes of Sufism are the real projections of. Islam. Would the Prophet of Allah have advocated the unjust imprisonment of his people???

Thank you for this article Kurshid. While I generally regard Islam as nothing but an out-dated bankrupt totalitarian ideology, I think that Sufism stands out as a deeply profound religion that can be respected, and has much to offer the modern world.

I didn't agree with the 42 days pland but can understand the BMF's position. No before you go mad consider the following?

If you think that this is going to be a losing battle (high probability after the deal with the Irish) what do you do, well you concentrate on the safeguards and that is what the BMF did they agreed to disagree and fight for the safeguards and i tell you what Khurshid Ahmed may have got paid it was £3,000 per day compensation for every day beyond the 28 days for innocent victims, why would the government have announced this late on???

If you read his article and forget about titles that is just papers playing with titles, what he actually said was that they fought as hard as they could to get govt to change there minds but when it was inevitable that this was going to be close they decided to fight for the safeguards rather than oppose the bill simply for opposing it. They still don't think this is necessary but they would rather focus on their attentions towards the safeguards. someone should its better having safeguards for this horrendous bill than no safeguards at all.

As for David Davis his position should be commended but their are different responsibilities on different people and Khurshid has a responsibility to safeguard the interests of the membership his organisation represents, now however unpopular his decision has been it has been due to finally accepting that they cannot prevent this bill and therefore, they will concentrate damage limitation.

In my opinion that is true leadership, I don't agree with it but its a fact, what do others do now? if this gets past a second vote after being defeated at the Lords??? If this gets enacted (high probability)at least the BMF are the ones who are concentrating on the detail of the safeguards and fighting for a compensation deal for victims of this draconian piece of legislation whilst others who opposed will continue to fight a winnless war without thinking of the actual victims.

I therefore commend the foresight of Khurshid Ahmed and hope that time will defend his position.

I don't expect MPAC to post this view because they will disagree with it, and there is nothing wrong with disagreeing it is ok to agree to disagree.

Lets just hope that the lords reject it and it becomes difficult in the second round of voting. I am more convinced that at least someone is bothering to look at the detail.

Over the last six months, the British Muslim Forum along with other prominent Muslim organisations have engaged in intensive discussions with the Government on the proposal to extend the pre-charge detention period from the current 28 days to 42. Like all other civil liberty campaigners, the British Muslim Forum has been strongly and explicitly opposed to the proposal. Like everyone else we believe this would be seen as a victory by those who seek to undermine our values and compromise the high standards of justice for which our country is renowned over the world.

We also believe that this is not a Muslim-only issue. It is an issue for the whole of our society and therefore, we must not allow the Muslim community to be used as a political football nor should we be singled out for blame in precipitating the need for such measures. Terrorism has no place in Islam or indeed in any other faith. Terrorists are indiscriminate and callous murderers. Muslims are not only “their” victims like everyone else but we also bear the brunt of the increased levels of Islamophobia and hostility following acts of terror. It is in this context that we have had to adapt a more pragmatic approach to this issue rather than a mere campaign against the proposals just for the sake of it.

Whilst we have vigorously campaigned against the former 90 day and the current 42 day proposal, we have never ignored the severity and a high probability of the security threat faced by the country. Nor have we underestimated the Government’s strong resolve to secure the proposal in Parliament and a reasonable likelihood of it being enacted. In this given context, our strategy was to campaign against the proposal whilst at the same time seek concessions to secure a balance between the need to safeguard the security of the country and provide protection of civil liberties. The package of concessions reinforced by the proposal to compensate for the damage done in loss of opportunity, reputation and the accompanying stigma goes a long way in addressing our concerns. The legal process now proposed renders the use of these powers to very exceptional circumstances only.
In these circumstances, by agreeing the package, we are acknowledging the severity of the threat to this country and playing our part in securing the safety of all our citizens. British Muslims are confident in their faith and proud to be British. We support tough measures against terrorism and all forms of criminality as long as they are applied fairly and proportionately across all communities.

Our discussions with Ministers have been robust and often intemperate. We have been impressed with their patience, sincerity, courtesy and commitment to the national interest. Equally, we have found our fellow campaigners to be sincere and highly committed to protecting our rights and interests as citizens.

We hope this issue is finally determined by Parliament in the best interests of all British people.

You may view the pre-charge concession here.


Thats what the BMF said.

Great post from another site but explaining it in a way that the MCB and others having a go at BMF could understand

"While we have vigorously campaigned against the former 90-day and the current 42-day proposal, we have never ignored the severity and a high probability of the security threat faced by this country. Nor have we underestimated the government's strong resolve to secure the proposal in parliament and a reasonable likelihood of it being enacted. In this context, our strategy was to campaign against the proposal while at the same time seeking concessions to secure a balance between the need to safeguard the security of the country and provide protection of civil liberties. The package of concessions reinforced by the proposal to compensate for the damage done in loss of opportunity, reputation and the accompanying stigma goes a long way in addressing our concerns. The legal process now proposed renders the use of these powers to very exceptional circumstances only."

Now let me put that into street English for you:

Government: Get lost,we're going through with this legislation,whether you like it or not,what can you do anyway?

BMF: Well you will have to compensate for misusing your powers against innocents in future,at least you will have to be accountable by way of signed agreement.

Government: OK lads we cant afford to be indiscriminate like before,
we may get the pants sued off us aswell as get exposed in a court of law. "sh**"

I still dont like the proposal nor do i want it to go ahead,but we have a chance of either getting some sort of deterrent against the govt misusing such powers against innocents or we could just sit there shouting "not one extra day " and have 2 fingers stuck up at us as usual and get nothing but more indiscriminate arrests in future,because i think we can be certain this proposal will be passed whether we like it or not.

What have muslims stopped the government in doing in the name of fighting terrorism so far?

If you cant stop them then at least make them think twice before embarking on another nazi style arresting of innnocent muslim individuals.

You are very coy about telling us what the "F" actuallyu stands for. What is it?

Oh I dunno. Fraudsters? Fakes? Flimflams? fools?

Use your imagination.

F*@kers?

Sky High & Mr Mahmood stop making flimsy defences for such untenable actions and speech. Mr Kurshid and his barelvi cohorts are renowned for such poitical ballets and manipulative speech. He clearly says one thing such as people killed oppressing Muslims in Muslim lands are 'martyrs' or we back 42 day detention and then having realised this is completely contrary to Islamic teaching or community sentiment, spends the coming days explaining his skewed reasoning through damage limitation. Regardless of the stance of state officials, the message from our leadership or representatives on such issues should be lucid and firm. No detention without charge..end off! I guess this is why people like hm and organisations like the BMF are a God-send to the government, politically inept, lethargic, anti-Ummah, superstition followers who claim to love the Prophet in song and dance, and speech only not in action.

HAHAHAHAHAHA Yeah attack the berelvis now great tact AYUB the 42 day bill is not a religious matter. Only time will tell whether fighting for safeguards to minimise the affect on hi constituents was right or wrong, especially when this draconian bill was highly expected to go through after the shabby deal or no deal with the Irish.

I think he has shown more political shrewdness and you are the inept polititian, HAHHAHAHA