Quilliam describes itself as "the world’s first counter-extremism think tank." It is based in London and set up by Maajid Nawaz, Mahboob 'Ed' Hussain and Rashaad Zaman Ali, all former members of the UK branch of the international Islamist group Hizb ut-Tahrir.

The foundation takes its name from the Islamic activist William Abdullah Quilliam, an English convert to Islam during the 1880s.

Objectives and ideology

Quilliam is a counter-extremism think tank. It supports the revival of an Islam of Andalusian heritage. Maajid Nawaz, one of its founders states,

The first (objective) is I want to demonstrate how the Islamist ideology is incompatible with Islam. Secondly, I want to develop a Western Islam that is at home in Britain and in Europe. We want to reverse radicalization by taking on their arguments and countering them.^[1]

Quilliam argues that Islam is not an ideology but a religion,^[2] namely “Islam is not Islamism.”^[3]

The organisation opposes Islamists, in particular the group Hizb ut-Tahrir. Its critique is based on the experiences of Quilliam founders Maajid Nawaz, Rashaad Zaman Ali and Ed husain who were all members of Hizb ut-Tahrir. Ali was the 'mujtahid' of Hizb ut-Tahrir in Britain. Quilliam also employs several other ex-activists of Hizb ut-Tahrir. There has been little academic research on Hizb ut-Tahrir apart from that undertaken by Dr Farouki as part of her PHD at Durham University.^[4]

Quilliam argues that Islam has no specific prescriptions for modes of governance, as Muslim history has illustrated a plethora of approaches to government. Unlike Christianity, it argues, Islam has not battled for the separation of church and state, clerics were almost always an entity separate from government. Quilliam argues that Muslim scholars such as Ibn al-Qayyim (d 1350) condemned those who claimed to rule in God's name - ^[5]

Proposals

A policy proposal has been published for the British government and journalists. There has been no response from the government. The Foundation claims it has relied on organisations including Civitas, Policy Exchange, Demos, IPPR and RUSI for its content,^[6] however, it does not reference any of its proposals to these organisations.

The primary recommendation is the establishment of rehabilitation centres^[7] in which to “detox” extremists, based on the success of Egyptian and Saudi programmes of this kind. These centres would expose extremists and terrorists who wish to leave their organisations to the work of scholars whose work has been recognized as sound and legitimate.^[8]

Other goals include instructing and urging communities, groups, scholars and leaders to identify and eject Islamists/extremists from their midst.

The organization's ultimate audience is British Muslims, with a particular focus on extremists and radicals. To date the organization's goals have been mainly communicated to non-Muslim audiences through presentations, interviews and discussions across Europe and the Middle East.

Founders

The three public founders are Maajid Nawaz, Rashad Zamaan Ali, and Mohammed Mahboob “Ed” Husain, who were ex-members of the UK branch of the Islamic political party Hizb ut-Tahrir. Maajid Nawaz was on their national executive leadership committee. Throughout Hizb ut-Tahrir’s history, no members had previously undertaken such a high profile 180-degree reversal of position^[4][9].

Mohammed “Ed” Mahboob Husain

Husain chronicled his experience with Hizb ut-Tahrir in his book “The Islamist”. Nick Cohen, Melanie Phillips, Michael Gove, David Aaronovitch and some Sufi Muslim leaders were among the positive reviewers whilst leader of Hizb ut-Tahrir in Britain, Taji Mustafa, Andrew Booso, Azam Tamimi and Yahya Birt were more critical with Ziauddin Sardar questioning whether the book was penned by someone in the Government of the United Kingdom.^[10]:

The fixation with HT is somewhat understandable considering the history of Husein. However, the obsession to blame it for the environment of terrorism is taking reductionism to its extreme. (Ziauddin Sardar)^[11]

Husain argued that he was a member of Hizb ut-Tahrir and left due to his contribution to the atmosphere surrounding the murder of a student at Newham College.^[12] Hizb ut-Tahrir categorically denied he had ever been a member^[13] and the trial Judge’s report concluded the Newham College murder had in fact resulted from an argument over a table tennis game.^[14]

Regarding extremist Muslims he says,

Call them jihadists, Islamists, but I wouldn't call them Muslim. Being Muslim is not enough for them. They make politics seem religious….^[15]

He informed the university authorities of the presence of members of the extremist group Hizb ut-Tahrir in Damascus and has called for them to be banned in the UK.^[16]

Husain has described racism in the Arab world,^[17][18][17] cites Mohandas K. Gandhi as his hero,^[3][19][17] criticises the director of MI5 for "pussyfooting around" with extremists,^[20][17] he defends the government's decision to ban Muslim cleric al-Qaradawi from Britain because Qaradawi defends Islamic suicide attacks on civilians^[21][20] and Husian attacks multiculturalism, declaring there to be too many immigrants in the country.^[22]

Maajid Nawaz

Maajid Nawaz was a senior member of Hizb ut-Tahrir for 12 years and he was on their national executive leadership committee. He was jailed in Egypt in 2002 with two others for belonging to Hizb ut-Tahrir. Whilst in prison, he began to review and reconsider some of his Islamist ideas^[23] and developing his understanding of traditional Islam. On his release, he appeared on BBC’s Hardtalk claiming Hizb ut-Tahrir’s ideas were peaceful and had prevented him from becoming violent despite the oppression he had faced, arguing his time in prison had “convinced me even more... that there is a need to establish this Caliphate as soon as possible”.

In 2007 Nawaz resigned from Hizb ut-tahrir. He claimed he had been with Hizb ut-Tahrir for 12 years,^[24] and, nearly two years later, in 2008 this became,

“I have been training people [in Hizb ut-Tahrir] for 14 years, every single week for two hours a week…“^[25]

Nawaz attributes his departure from Hizb ut-Tahrir to the party's violent and separatist agenda and his profound doubts about what the group represents.

Rashad Zaman Ali

Rashad Zaman Ali is of Bangladeshi and originally from Sheffield;^[26] he encountered Hizb ut-Tahrir when a party member delivered a school assembly.^[26] Following this he read a tract of Hizb ut-Tahrir’s economic system which deconstructed western economic theory of Adam Smith, Ricardo and Malthus through to Marx.^[9] He began studying with Hizb ut-Tahrir, became a senior member and mujtahid of the party. He was with them for 12 years.^{[26][27][28][29]}

The Quilliam name

Abdullah Quilliam, a 19th century British convert to Islam, was influential in advancing knowledge of Islam within the British Isles, and gained converts through literary works and charitable institutions he founded.

Support

The foundation has received support significantly at the beginning from Tory Member of Parliament Michael Gove and from the labour government, Melanie Philips, Ed Husain being a member of Labour, the home office and DCLG, the PVE and PREVENT strategies.^{[citation needed]}

.

Advisors, associates and affilliates

The Quilliam site formerly listed a number of scholars as supporters and advisors. All their names were removed, however, after some of them reported that they had been threatened and harassed by Islamists:

“In the meantime, we have decided to respect our advisors' wishes that they continue to advise us in private so as to save them the indignity of constant Islamist-Wahhabite harrassment [sic]. We have therefore decided to no longer publicise their names," Hussain said.^[30]

He cited a number of scholars whom he approved of in his book, including Hamza Yusuf Hanson, Nuh Keller and T.J. Winter; ^[31]

Critics and responses

The Quilliam Foundation has been criticised by some for its staunch theological position. Critics, many of whom are Islamists or are on the hard left, have included Diane Abbot, Azam Tamimi (Ikhwan al-Muslimeen), Inayat Bunglawala (MCB), Ziauddin Sardar, Yahaya Birt and Seumas Milne (The Guardian). Others like Anas al-Tikriti, Yvonne Ridley, Ihtisham Hibatullah, Ismail Patel, and Roshan Salih have written:

We represent a cross section of the Muslim community, and reject the simplistic narrative about the dangers of Islamism espoused by the Quilliam Foundation… We believe this is just another establishment-backed attempt to divert attention from the main cause of radicalisation and extremism in Britain: the UK's disastrous foreign policy in the Muslim world, including its occupation of Muslim lands and its support for pro-western Muslim dictators. The foundation has no proven grassroots support within the Muslim community, although it does seem to have the ear of the powers that be, probably because it is telling them what they want to hear. It is quite possible to be a politically engaged Muslim without wanting to fly planes into tall buildings. Yet the foundation equates all forms of political Islam with extremism and terrorism. But those misguided few who are willing to cross the line into terrorism are not driven by disfranchisement or Sayyid Qutb's writings; they do it because they are furious about western foreign policy....^[32]

On a Newsnight discussion with Nawaz, Azam Tamimi of the Muslim Brotherhood alleged the Quilliam Foundation was comprised of, what he labelled as, "neocons". Others have cited that the founders of Quilliam Foundation are no different to those contained in Dr Sa'id Al-Ghamdi’s doctorate, issued by Medina University, “Deviation from the Faith as Reflected in [Arab] Thought and Literature on Modernity”, which names more than 200 Arab intellectuals and authors as heretical, controversially making it permissible to kill them.^[33] There is also a small number of websites which attempt to satirize the Quilliam Foundation, alleging a lack of originality whilst others have invaded the privacy of the Quilliam Foundation's founders by reproducing private photographs of them.

Journalists have refrained from criticising the Foundation’s narratives, ties with radical scholars, extreme positions and indiscretions.^[34]

Controversy

The Quilliam Foundation's critics have included organizations and personalities such as Hizb ut-Tahrir, Azam Tamimi (Ikhwan al-Muslimeen), Inayat Bunglawala (MCB), Yvonne Ridley, Ihtisham Hibatullah amongst others. "On blogs and among many Muslims", co-founder Ed Husain "has been condemned as a government stooge, an MI5 agent" and even an apostate from Islam.^[35],

Funding

The Foundation has come under fire for its spending and funding. It allegedly spends "about £110,000 a year to rent offices at one of Central London’s most prestigious addresses", which, are "expensively furnished with state-of-the-art computers and plasma screen televisions". When it was disclosed the government had given it 1 Million pounds, "members of the Government and the Opposition" questioned the wisdom of "relying too heavily on a relatively unknown organisation ... to counter extremism." ^[36]

Conflating Islamists and Jihadist

Martin Sullivan of Islamophobia-Watch describes the Quilliam Foundation as "an organisation that has spent its entire existence... claiming that Islamist ideology not foreign policy is the root cause of "radicalisation", ...[radicalisation being] a term which of course obliterates the distinction between the general politicisation of Muslim youth in response to imperialism and the influence of terrorist groupuscules"^[37]

Dolan Cummings in his article 'When exactly did 'radicalisation' become a dirty word?' argues regarding the perceived demonization of Islamists that "the climate of suspicion and spooky mood-music around even non-violent Islamist politics surely reinforces the sense many Muslims have that everyone is out to get them, encouraging further self-absorption."^[38]

The Hijab Debate

Quilliam support the right of women to wear the hijab and the right of women to take it off. In an commentary in the Sun newspaper, Maajid Nawaz stated: "If Muslims object to the French ban on the hijab, we must also object to the `Islamist` plan to impose the hijab and ban women uncovering their hair." ^[39]

Philosophical beginnings

Maajid Nawaz spent a number of years in an Egyptian prison where he came into contact with state sanctioned ideas. Much appear to be influenced by writings of secularists like al-Ashmawi: “Islamists confuse Sharia and fiqh”, “Egyptian law is consistent with the Sharia”, “Governance is civil (secular) in Islam”, “There has never been a glorious Caliphate”, “Extremists are descendants of the earlier Khawarij” and “Religious governance is disastrous.”^[40]

The Quilliam Foundation opposes Hizb ut-Tahrir’s epistemological outlook contending the standard Civitas view that an ideological mode of thought represses truth.^[41] Rashad Ali’s presentation at the Institute of Ideas states,

“There is [sic] a number of reasons why they [Hizb ut-Tahrir] believe the Quran is divine and the prophetic narrations are divine… They have a set of intelligible arguments for this…”^[41]

Typology

The Quilliam Foundation believes Islam to be a faith like other religions, a personal and private religion as opposed to an ideology.^[42] Critics argue a review of its advisors highlights the source of this perspective - the Policy Exchange describes Islam as "a religion practiced by Muslims worldwide" and Islamism as "a political ideology that aims to create a state and society in strict conformity with religious doctrine." Civitas describes Islam as “the Arabic word denoting submission or self-surrender to Allah as revealed through the message and life of his Prophet Mohammed” and Islamism as “radical, militantly ideological versions of Islam, as interpreted by the practitioners and in which violent actions such as terrorism, suicide bombings or revolutions are explicitly advocated, practised and justified using religious terminology”.^[43]

Quilliam say “Islam, like other world faiths, is a religion, not a political ideology”^[42] and “the Islamist ideology is incompatible with Islam” and “[Hizb ut-Tahrir state] we need a Prophet to define a political ideology”^[27] show the argument to be disingenuous – objecting to defining Islam as a “political ideology” rather than defining Islam as an “ideology”. The attempt reminiscent of modernists suggests Islam is not inherently political and Muslim activists are attempting to politicise it through the use of ideologies. The same argument is presented by neoconservative politicians:

…respect for Islam as a religion of peace suggests by implication that Islamic activism in general is un-Islamic, a perverse exploitation of religion for political ends, and that jihadi activism in particular -- conceived as merely the extremist end of the Islamist spectrum - is simply evil. But while it is rooted in the understandable concern of Western governments to make clear that "the war against terrorism" is not a war of religion, this approach renders jihadi activism inexplicable in terms of cause and effect….^[44]

Politics of terminology

The Quilliam Foundation argues that “[Islamists] are extreme because of their rigidity in understanding politics”^[45].

Laird Wilcox, a researcher specializing in the study of political fringe movements, defines extremism by identifying 21 traits of "political extremists".^[46] Applying these styles to the pronouncements and publications of the Quilliam Foundation paradoxically classify it as an extremist organization,that has a tendency to character assassination, name calling and labelling and the making of irresponsible, sweeping generalizations.

Islamism^[47] has been defined as “the belief that Islam should guide social and political as well as personal life”^[48]. Secularists are usually defined in converse to “Islamists” as “any view that openly rejects Islamism” or “any view that would follow an ideology other than Islam in most areas of public life”^[49] – the Quilliam Foundation being amongst the secularists by this definition.

Critics argue the Quilliam Foundation introduces its own definitions:

“The modernist attempt to claim that political sovereignty belongs to God, that the Shari'ah equates to state law, and it is a religious duty on all Muslims to create a political entity that reflects the above… Islamism is the belief that Islam is a political ideology”^[50]

Husain’s definition of Islamism comprises:^[51] · the rejection of 1400 years of Muslim traditional scholarship and re-reading of scripture with political lenses · a world view that's based on eventually at some stage confronting the West · the rejection of mainstream Muslims giving them all sorts of labels such as 'non-practising Muslims', 'jahils', 'partial Muslims' · those individuals from al-Qaida to Ikhwan who believe sovereignty is for God · underwritten by the works of particular writers - Mawdudi, Syed Qutb, al-Nabhani and Fathi Yaqoun

These definitions dichotomise Muslims into two camps, the Islamists and non-Islamists, mirroring comments from Western leaders:"…on the one hand, Islam qua religion and its adherents - 'ordinary decent Muslims' for whom 'Islam' is a matter of personal piety, not political commitment - and, on the other hand, 'Islamism' or 'political Islam' - by implication an affair of a minority of agitators exploiting the faith of their fellow-Muslims for political ends, stirring up resentment, constituting a problem for Western interests and 'friendly' Muslim states alike."

Scholarly treatments of the subject analyzed particular national Islamist movements and the regimes they confront.^[52] The ICG's report makes the point:

…the conception of 'political Islam' inherent in this dichotomy is unhistorical as well as self-serving. The term 'political Islam' is an American coinage which came into circulation in the wake of the Iranian revolution. It implied or presupposed that an 'apolitical Islam' had been the norm until Khomeini turned things upside down. In fact, Islam had been a highly politicised religion for generations before 1979. It only appeared to have become apolitical in the historically specific and short lived heyday of secular Arab nationalism between 1945 and 1970.^[53]

The ICG thus suggests a more meaningful definition of Islamist, terming it synonymous with “Islamic activism”:

the active assertion and promotion of beliefs, prescriptions, laws or policies that are held to be Islamic in character.

Political thought

Political philosophy is the study of fundamental and normative questions about the state, government, politics, liberty, justice, property, rights, law and the enforcement of a legal code by authority: what they are, why (or even if) they are needed, what makes a government legitimate, what rights and freedoms it should protect and why, what form it should take and why, what the law is, and what duties citizens owe to a legitimate government, if any, and when it may be legitimately overthrown—if ever. Quilliam’s position is “Islam has no role in politics” and sovereignty is not solely for God. Secular democracy is advocated in place of the classical Islamic theology of the Caliphate and existing dictatorial post-colonial regimes in the Muslim world are legitimate.

Husain argues against fundamental notions such as “sovereignty is for God”, arguing the Arabic term siyaadah does not appear in the Quran. However, technical terms used by jurists were coined to reflect concepts found in the revelation and usually did not appear in divine texts. Al-Nabhani uses the term siyadah for sovereignty whereas Syed Qutb and Mawdudi use the term hakimiyyat – all cite verses where judgment (hukm) is ascribed to Allah alone (12:40, 12:67, 5:44, 5:45, and 5:47).^[54]

Neoconservatives

Critics have called the Quilliam Foundation another neoconservative organisation. David Edgar of the Guardian cited “all three are straight out of the cold war defectors' mould trading heavily on their former associations and traveling rapidly in a conservative direction”.^{[citation needed]} The Quilliam Foundation has recruited the likes of Tory frontbencher Micheal Gove, David Goodhard and David Green, director of the liberal think tank Civitas, as advisers. ^{[citation needed]}

Husain's book was greeted with enthusiasm last year by British neoconservatives such as Tory frontbencher Michael Gove and The Daily Mail columnist Melanie Phillips.^[55] Nawaz has befriended Douglas Murray, author of “Neoconservatism: Why we need it”. When asked to criticize neoconservatism in a City Circle discussion, he said to Murray, "I mean American Neoconservatism, but not the British Neoconservatism."^[56]

The Quilliam Foundation defends the regimes in the Muslim world and their systems as being consistent with Islam. It believes that if any reform is needed the existing systems should be modified, allowing more representation, accountability and population centred policies, rather than demolishing the system and replacing it with something new.

Jurisprudential revisionism

The Quilliam Foundation is undertaking theological revisionism in line with its views on modernity^[57] to support its objective of creating a Western Islam.^[58] This section reviews its theological pronouncements along with a comparative analysis of the theological positions of the classical jurists and also that of Hizb ut-Tahrir.

Historically the science of Usul al-Fiqh was developed to determine the sources of Islamic law, rules of interpretation, philosophy and rationale and procedures by which the law is to be applied and extended. Over the centuries two main approaches were identified by the Sunni jurists, that of the Hanafites and the Shaffites.

The Quilliam Foundation has not documented its methodology. It claims it follows classical scholarship, without stating which historical legal school it follows, however its publications imply a methodology that is neither orthodox nor traditional – resembling the modernist approach to jurisprudence: · Reduction of Quranic revelation to ethical principles such as mercy, reason and justice, · Use of categories of ibadaat and muamalaat to infer human moral agency in matters of muamalaat especially politics, · Careful selection of Quranic ayaat based on potential utility, · Category errors due to viewing different realities as homogenous – e.g., jihad to free land from occupation being equated to war against civilians, · Rejection of laws by arbitrary “contextualisation” – e.g., implemented laws were relevant to Arabia of the time and not relevant today, and, · Legal systems in Muslim countries being in accordance with Sharia – e.g., the Egyptian French Napoleonic code is equated with Islamic jurisprudence.

The absence of any substantive methodology negates any juristic arguments the Foundation may advocate.

Much of Quilliam Foundation’s jurisprudence has been controversial and is regularly aired by Husain – receiving considerable criticism.^[59] His juristic arguments have regularly proven to be incorrect despite his insistence that he follows traditional classical scholarship. Regarding apostasy, Husain debated it did not appear in the Quran, subtly omitting its mention in the Sunnah^[60] – however the matter appears in both and is argued as such by numerous classical scholars.^[61]

Shariah penal punishments

Ed Husain has said that some Shariah huddod punishments are not applicable in the modern age ^[62]. In response to another Muslim who was trying to argue that punishing women exclusively for adultery rather than both the man and woman based on strict conditions (see Zina) was not mandated by Islam, Ed responded to contradict the Muslim reconfirming the notion that exclusively women only are punished saying "In the time of Muhammad stoning did take place... we have other modes of reaching the noble aims of the shariah... why do we need to go down that barbaric, ihumane, outdated mode of stoning, and flogging people.... Let's bring an end to this madness of stoning, flogging and amputating...." ^[63]

Eastern Islam or Western Islam

The Quilliam Foundation argues for the creation of a new “Western Islam”,^[64] modelled on Andalusian Spain between 711 and 1492 AD,^[65] raising the question,

“…what the hell was the Islam of al-Andalus? Could Maajid or Eddy explain that in more detail? Is it the Islam of ibn Rushd and ibn Hazm…, who believed in jihad and shari'ah? Is it the Islam of the Arabs and Berbers who invaded the Iberian Peninsula and waged jihad against the Visigoth Christians and other Christian powers?”^[66]

The period of the Caliphate is seen by Muslim writers as the golden age of al-Andalus. Crops produced using irrigation, along with food imported from the Middle East, provided the area with an agricultural economic sector by far the most advanced in Europe. Among European cities, Córdoba under the Caliphate overtook Constantinople as the largest and most prosperous city in Europe, one of the leading cultural centres. The work of its most important philosophers and scientists^[67] had a major influence on the intellectual life of medieval Europe. The jurisprudence of Andalusian Spain, Malikite law, was that of much of North Africa.^[68] There appears little substantive difference between the Islam implemented in Spain and that implemented in the rest of the Muslim world. The Quilliam Foundation does not explain how its version of “Western Islam” differs from “Eastern Islam” nor the criteria and theology underpinning this idea.

The Foundation's inspiration derives from two historical projects - the first undertaken by the Indian ruler Akbar (1591) who commenced with legislating religious freedom and tolerance and then established a new religion, fusing Islam and Hinduism. Akbar failed in his effort, being generally seen as an apostate by Muslims and his rule was regarded as an exception to the Islamic rule over India. The second project was that of the 19th century reformists Afghani, Abdu and Rida,^[69] influenced by European thought, who argued European institutions and social processes could be accommodated by Islam, providing precedents in Islamic history that would provide justification. Abdu received backing from Lord Cromer whilst Afghani was a member of French Masonic lodges.^[70]

Terrorism

The Quilliam Foundation that Muslims have failed to doing enough to fight political extremism.^[71] For instance, the launch pamphlet states:

“Just as Western policies in Afghanistan, coupled with the growth of an aggressive Islamist ideology over the last two decades have contributed to the creation of international terrorism...”^[72]

Our foreign and domestic policies… have created an environment wherein Islamist politics and ideology can spread and therefore can be manipulated into providing political justifications for terrorist theology....^[73]

Undoubtedly, foreign policy has some role to play but let's not forget that countries such as Indonesia (Bali), Turkey, Egypt, Algeria and others have also suffered terrorism. Islamist terrorism started long before foreign policy blunders of Western government. The terrorists' targeting of nightclubs last year and talk of killing "slags" while they dance indicates a medieval mindset that cannot tolerate social freedoms.^[3]

However, it is not only the “terrorists” who oppose these innovations and social freedoms that the Foundation approves of – most Muslims oppose nightclubs, drink, sexual indecency etc^[74] and the authoritarian regimes that permit these are western educated elites imposed on their peoples.^[75][76]

Abdullah Quilliam

Many of Abdullah Quilliam’s activities in nineteenth century Britain were remarkably similar to those currently undertaken by the Muslim activists in the West, particularly Hizb ut-Tahrir in Britain.^[77]

“So the Foundation is named after a man who was an enemy of Britain - and the West - and whose sole loyalty was to Islam and to promoting the interests of Muslims. We have been warned. Hizb ut Tahrir at least have the merit of openness.” (WHYS)^[78]

Nawaz delivered a number of speeches whilst a member of Hizb ut-Tahrir and used Quilliam’s legacy to define the political role of Muslims in contemporary British society and its website details Quilliam’s legacy – albeit choosing to focus on those aspects that purport its version of Islam.^[79]

Yahya Birt has highlighted the attempt to project Abdullah Quilliam as a kind of proto-Brownite patriot, a social entrepreneur working in the third sector.^[80] This would not be the first time – accusations of revisionism were made in the blogs Nawaz contributed to^[81] before he published the first (and only) in his series of papers where he tried to refute the intellectual basis of the “Islamists”.

External links

• The Quilliam Foundation's official website
• Comprehensive critique of the Quilliam Foundation
• Critique of Quilliam Foundation theology
• Uptodate analysis of the Quilliam Foundation
• Ex-extremists call for 'Western Islam' - The Launch of the Quilliam Foundation
• New Muslim organisations exonerate government of its responsibilities and sideline credible voices
• Who is Rashaad Ali?
• Government gives £1m to anti-extremist think-tank

References

See also