Now that is called brotherhood.

W/s
Abu Bakr

Can someone please explain how the allegations against Asghar Bukhari are anti-Semitic? Even if we accept the modern interpretation of this term, I fail to see how it is anti-Semitic. Semites are surely people who come from the Levant, Hejaz and Maghreb where semitic languages are spoken. Most Muslims in UK are from the Indian sub-continent and are Indo-Aryans by ethnicity and mother tongue. If the allegations are directed at Mr Bukhari because he is a Muslim, this is surely Islamophobic and not anti-Semitic.
In reality all this blustering protestation is caused by the embarrassment MPACUK feels at being caught out. David Irving is a well-known racist of long standing. It is incredible that Mr. Bukhari did not know this. It rather suggests that his enthusiasm for anything that could be loosely construed as being anti-Zionist overcame his pursuit of the facts about David Irving.

Salams MPACUK,

This malicous muckracking on MPAC has only spurred me to help you even more.

I will be setting up a regular donation and I hope others follow my example.

I like the idea that supporting a holocaust denier and imfamous racist can be desribed as 'overly idealistic'. But not so much that I don't feel sickened by this disingenuous posturing.

The proper thing to do would be for Mr. Bukhari to apologise fulsomely, and to disappear for a long while. I for one don't want to read of his 'idealism' or about Zionist 'smears'. Smears by nature are not true. Bukhari has supported the UK's most imfamous ant-Semite and holocaust denier, and MPAC has given and still gives web-space to others of similar views.

You can have no credibility and no standing until you address the racism in your own organisation.

Yours,

Simon Sandberg

Not surprising that this supportive article is only under a personal capacity from Inayat and not on behalf of the MCB.

Well done to brother Inayat who dares to speak out against the Zionist lobbies efforts to discredit and smear MPAC.

Where are others though.......??!!

Simon,

Islam teaches that if someone has made a mistake then (a) you give them the benefit of the doubt and assume good intentions in the light of their actions. (b) if a person regrets what they have done and changes their ways - especially if they are honest about it! - that person is to be treated as if they had never done it in the first place. Of course things may be different if a lot of damage was done and another thing is to repair whatever damage was done, as much as possible.

But Asghar does not even fit into the category properly of one who should even 'change his ways' because it was a single mistake and furthermore did not do any damage to anyone.

Asghar Bukhari has done a lot more for community relations between Muslims and Jews than many other Muslims in the country, and the fact that you believe that what he has done should mae him hide away really goes to show that either you have been taken in by Zionist propaganda or you are influenced by them yourself and are trying to exacerbate the disgusting claims made against Asghar.

Perhaps Asghar was trying to give the benefit of the doubt to someone who had not been proven as anti-semite at the time? After all, I am sure many would not be deterred from donating to MPACUK, despite fallacious claims that they are anti-semitic.

But I do think - unlike yourself - that I should give you the benefit of the doubt and I will not assume anything malicious of you.

If a Muslim brother or sister is wrongly accused, it is our duty as a muslim to stand by them. So I call upon all muslims out there to to give their support to brother Asghars Insha-Allah.

Simon

Perhaps it would be in your interest to see Asghar Bukari disappear for a while as you fear the truth that he, along with many others, speak of about Zionists on MPAC. He is not anti Jewish and therefore not anti-Semitic and like many of us is heartened when we hear Jews speak out against Israeli policies especially on Palestine.

I have made many comments on MPAC about the holocaust and although I do not deny that Jews suffered at the hands of Hitler, I will also say again that so did many other non Jews. Since the end of World War 2 there have been many other tyrants who have committed worse crimes against humanity than Hitler did but no one, especially the Jewish community chooses to acknowledge this fact. It is my feeling that Holocaust Day is a day of remembrance for the Jewish community. I would certainly not choose to attend but if there were to be a day of remembrance for all who have died in this world at the hands of tyrants, then I would be first in line to attend. We are all God's children and no one group should consider themselves exclusive.

Simon,

My "incisive-view" formed solely from your comments are as follows:

1) You are most definitely a malicious character.
2) You certainly have links with zionism.

As for you saying Asghar to stand down. I think that is a ridiculous idea! As a result of this smear campaign by certain zionist related media outlets my support for Asghar Bukhari and MPACUK has grown exponentially. The more I learn about MPACUK, it's objectives and goals the more excited I feel. The futures bright, The future is MPACUK!

Dr Xiang
From incisive-view

Wayfarer,

I'm afraid "the disgusting claims" have already been admitted as true. Therein lies the problem.

I'm afraid that almost every sentient being on the planet knew Irving as a anti-semite and holocaust denier long before the Lipstadt trial. It is almost impossible, however benign one's world view, to see how the letter could be an 'honest mistake'. My point is precisely that Mr. Bukhari is not being honest.

I don't know what Mr. Bukhari has done to promote good relations between Muslims and Jews - perhaps you could provide details of his accomplishments. My working assumption is that Irving supporters and members of an organisation that use material taken from neo-Nazi web-sites, that allow posts from deniers and revisionists, will have an uphill task in promoting good relations with Jews or with any one else possessing a shred of decency.

Kathy,

One thing I fear is racism and I don't like it whether it is expressed by people like Lieberman or people like Irving or Bukhari.

Your points about Holocaust day are tendentious and are not relevant to the matter at hand. Again, not that this is at all relevant to Mr. Bukhari and Irving, but perhaps you can tell us of the 'worse crimes against humanity' committed since WW2.

Dr. Xiang,

You are wonderfully insightful. My 'link' with Zionism is that I am an anti-Zionist. You identify me as a malicious character because I take exception to Holocaust denial and anti-semitism. Well if that's your working definition fine.... be prepared to come across many many equally malicious people.

Do you think it possible to take exception to Holocaust denial, to antisemitism without being a Zionist? In any event, Zionists who take exception to Holocaust denial and ant-semitism are absolutely right to do so and I stand shoulder to shoulder with them.

Simon Sandberg

There is no way I think Asghar is a racist. We know why stories like this make the news. But I have thought about this quite a lot and blogged on it at length. Allah tells us to witness the truth, even to our kin.

The phrase 'cultural illiteracy' keeps popping up. Asghar really should have known what kind of person Irving was in 2000 - check the media for January of that year to confirm my assertion. I just don't think he put two and two together and that's sad.

But the papers seemed to have dropped this story. Perhaps its time MPACUK did, too.

To address a number of disturbing posts on this subject would be pointless given the hostility targetted towards difference on this website.

I have posted on here before and enjoy the debate, whether I agree with it or not is another matter - I am willing to contribute to debates regardless of whether my view 'wins' or not.

To call a fellow poster on here a 'zionist' just for questioning the logic of another, or advocating a different opinion to yourself is just ridiculous. Another thing that is ridiculous (and I noticed this on another post earlier) is branding the dutch 'animals' for their opinions regarding all headwear (not only Muslim) which covers the face.

It is this combatative attitude which plays into the hands of islamophobes everywhere and justifies their cries of Muslims everywhere being aggressive, confrontational and irrational. I know this view is nonsense. I respect the vast majority of posters on this website - most of which offer balanced opinion'led, yet consistently argued, points. What annoys me is the small element of people hell-bent on aggressive behaviour.

Why exactly is Simon a 'malicious character'? Thats crazy talk, he just has a different opinion and feels so strongly about it that he feels you all should here it - not to irritate you but to contribute to your debate. As this is a forum, you should expect, acknowldge and consider other opinions, otherwise why bother?

In my opinion, the background to Irving was well-documented and anyone offering financial support to him and 'his cause', yet claims to be oblivious to his personal orientation as a racist anti-semite are cretinous at best.

I feel that some people must shed this 'lets stick together regardless' attitude and start thinking for themselves.

I do not wish to offend anyone on here, and am certainly not a 'zionist'.

Regards

MPAC received a letter of support from Inayat, a man of great intellect and nobility. The matter is finished.

Could any one say how is Inayat important in this episode. Is it because he was standing up for muslims to say that Naipual be denied nobel price for literature for his anti-Islamic, rightly so, views.

Truth Seeker

Simon is an obvious pro Israeli Zionist, don’t listen to him. The claim that everyone knew about it "David Irving" is just stupid. Only those who paid any attention to the issue in real detail would have known, everyone else would simply have taken some stand from a distance. As a Zionist it may have been top of your agenda it wasn’t even on most people thoughts!

Spice girls are were big news some time ago, I cant remember any of them. Would you say "well everyone knew them, they were well known" ...obviously not. I may not remember their names, I have never heard them speak, but I remember clearly thinking i don’t like them.

Bukhari made a simple judgment from where I stand, “do I believe these Zionists or do I believe the other guy”. Considering the Zionists are always lying and smearing everyone, "I will chose to believe the other guy".

I would have done the same.

Mistakes happen. Only a Zionist would get worked up about it. If only you guys got so worked up about how many little children you kill daily in Israel, we may live in a safer and less racist world. Smearing Mr Bukhari only makes you look desperate to do down th poor guy, which is exactly what you are trying to do.

I salute MPAC and Mr Bukhari, and hope he is not deterred by these little moaning ninnies around his heels.

Wayfarer

You said "Islam teaches that if someone has made a mistake then (a) you give them the benefit of the doubt and assume good intentions in the light of their actions. (b) if a person regrets what they have done and changes their ways - especially if they are honest about it! - that person is to be treated as if they had never done it in the first place."

What if they don't regret what they have done and will not change their actions what do you do then? Chop off their limbs or stone a woman for adultery or maybe expect a rape victim to kill herself for bringing dishonour on her family even though she is the victim!

My Brother Simon Sandberg, you are correct in that Holocaust Deniers whether WWII or Bosnia/Kosovo are in fact encouraging Anti Semitism and Islamophobia.

Especially after what happened in Bosnia when nearly a quarter of million 'Whites'were murdered whose only crime was they were Muslim without any condemnation from our UK government - I will stand with our Jewish Brothers/Sisters any day any time against Anti Semitism and those that deny mass murder.

And My brother Simon - if Ashgar did give some money to defend the undefendable - then yes I think that is wrong - but we need to put things like this into context - we feel a lot of anger with what happened in Bosnia and is happening in the middle east.

Irving is the poster boy of Nick Griffin and anything to help these monsters is wrong.

I apologise for any of my brothers or sisters who may have rubbed our Jewish brothers/sisters the wrong way - we need your support to encourage lasting peace through dialogue in the middle east. Mohammed Abbasi email: abbasimm@aol.com

This is how it shuld be. Muslim shoulder to shoulder against our oppressors.

I am personally offended by Dr Xiang's suggestion that anyone who objects to the act of funding the most notorious Holocaust denier must "have links with Zionism". This is a fundamental misperception of European history. I am Anglo-Saxon British and have no Jewish blood and I have never visited Israel. I am, however, the grandson of a British prisoner of war who saw the survivors of Bergen-Belsen with his own eyes. I physically possess my grand-father's war diaries that contain evidence of the Holocaust. The filthy lies of Irving are not just the concern of the Jews - his revisionist and false histories are calling the most significant chapter of my own family history a lie. In every village and town of this country there are memorials to those who fought and died to extinguish Nazi fascism. When individuals such as Mr Bukhari donate to the legal fighting fund of a man such as Irving, they are assisting in the assault on something sacred in the British and European identity, and human psyche that has deep emotive bonds, and not all of those bonds are connected to the conflict between Palestinians and Israelis. History has other chapters, other things that are sacred to other people.

Mohammed- I salute you honesty and insight into this issue.

As an Israeli, labour-Zionist, I am concerned by some of the ideas that are put forward by MPAC. Not because I worry about zionist 'crimes' being exposed but because the language that is used to criticise my country or the Zionist movement, doesn't speak to Jews and so is counter-productive. We can easily dismiss criticism that appears to be tinged with or motivated by anti-Semitism.

I don't dispute that Asghar may be ignorant of European anti-Semitic discourse but he needs to educate himself if he wishes to avoid accusations of anti-Semitism (as do other anti-Zionists). Precisely because if there is to peace in the middle-east we must see beyond the tragedy and atrocities committed by both sides and speak to each other as fellow human beings.

The Jewish narrative is one of suffering at the hands of those who hate us simply because of who we are. This unfounded hatred has been spread using various untrue slurs and culminated in the inustrial slaughter of six million Jews. This murder was carried out at the hands of the most 'civilised' and 'enlightened' nations of the times. Incidentally, the holocaust was not the first attempt to destroy the Jews, so it doesn't take too much to understand why we as a people are sensitive to anti-Semitism, or worried about further attempts to destroy us.

If you speak of 'Zionist' child-killers, it reminds Jews of accusations (which have also appeared in the Islamic world) of blood-libels (killing non-Jewish children for religious purposes). If you can take a statement (Jews kill children) and simply substitute one word (jews), with a closely associated one (zionists) you shouldn't be sursprised if this is thought of a being a veiled form of the first statement, particularly when their is a hisorical precendent. There are many ways to criticise the violence of the occupation without alluding (even unintentionally) to classicaly anti-Semitic stereotypes. It certainly doesn't help when people dismiss this serious issue as an attempt to silence criticism of Israel. If I used traditionally offensive language about Muslims or Arabs (as far as I know I don't), I wouldn't continue to use that language after having been informed about it. I don't see why classically anti-Semitic language or imagery is any different.

The occupation of the West Bank and some of the tactics used to prolong it are wrong and need to be condemned. However, doing so in terms that can be interpreted as motivated by anti-Semitism are unliklely to influence the very people who can actually bring about an end to the occupation.