It takes a nation to protect the nation
Although many in the EDL are suspicious of the Quilliam Foundation, it's interesting to note that the foundation itself is suspicious of Mo Ansar. Then again, Mo Ansar doesn't like the Muslim Uncle Toms who make up the foundation either. And neither do the Leftists who like their Muslims to be Islamist a.... (Trotskyists/progressives think that Islamists, and even many plain Muslims, are basically Trotskyists/progressives with the simple addition of brown skin. That is, through a miraculous piece of Marxist 'analysis', Islam itself is completely erased from the picture.)
To be more specific on the Mo Ansar/Quilliam rupture (not that they were ever in agreement), Maajid Nawaz also questioned Mo Ansar's supposed moderation. And it was then that Tommy Robinson 'realised that even within the Muslim community there are people who are sick and tired of fanatical Muslims'.
“Mo Ansar is the perfect example of how Muslim leaders in this country behave. They are not trying to solve any problems. They only want to defend Islam. Ansar thought that he would emerge as he good guy in he film but I knew all the time that he would be exposed. What he stands for is exactly what made us start the EDL. He spends 95 percent of his time calling other people Islamophobes.”
Dispatch International also asked Tommy if Mo Ansar influenced his decision to leave the EDL. Tommy replied:
“In no way. The fact is that he confirmed my opinions. He is the embodiment of all that is wrong with Islam. Are we going to solve any problems with clowns like him? Many Muslim leaders need to be exposed the way he has been. After the film, he has refused to talk to me.”
Mo Ansar, if anything, is worse than people like Anjem Choudary because he believes pretty much the same as the latter, but does so with a smiling face. That is, with a smiling face plus the required and oft-repeated phrases especially selected from Leftist, multicultural and even post-modernist vocabularies – all used, by Mo, to convince his kuffar false friends that he's just like them, only with the irrelevant – I'm sure - addition of being a fundamentalist/reactionary Muslim.
On a personal note, I myself was reported to Twitter by Mo Ansar after just four posts on his Twitter page. That was not a surprise. He's well known to having a penchant only for his Twitter sycophants - and they don't all work for the BBC. Someone has even created a Twitter account by the name, 'Blocked By Mo Ansar'. There's also a very funny Twitter page called MoDawahMOParody (King of Dawah) which lampoons Mo's cheesy use of popular- culture references, as well as his many post-modern/Leftist phrases, his intolerance of contradictory views and his pseudo Islamic scholarship.
“Did you know that 'Mo' has a direct line to Allah? They speak every day. He's also second-cousin to Muhammad himself.”
“Muslims invented the cheese sandwich. They also created world peace, for a year, in a small part of Arabia - ca. 643.”
“I wonder how long it takes Mo to trim his beard/tash. Neat. I'd love to know which moisturizer he uses.”
“I think everyone should embrace deeper diversity. Such as Borneo head-hunters & Texas chainsaw massacrists. Love all and each .”
I don't think Mo Ansar is the BBC's choice. AFAIK he has appeared on very few programmes. The first time I saw him was on the debate programme with Tommy & him and that fool Matthew Goodwin. The presenter was Nicky Campbell, and he also did the voice-over on this production. Given the way the BBC makes programmes these days (most are apparently made by outside companies), it's just as likely that Nicky Campbell is the owner of the production company. And Mo Ansar might be the only muslim that Campbell knows who wants to be on TV with Tommy.
Most of these muslims are not any kind of "leader". Mo Ansar represents no-one but himself. Mohammed Shafiq's Ramadhan Foundation is a pretty bogus operation (some of the few pages on their website are empty, and have been empty for 5 or 6 years), and the RF has not put on an event since 2008. Equally Maajid Nawaz represents no-one except himself and the other 2 useless muslims in Quilliam.
The real power among muslims doesn't lie with these people. It lies with the likes of Hizb ut Tahrir, IFE, FOSIS, ELM, MCB, etc. Each of these organisations represent 1000s of muslims. None of these organisations have any moderate representatives. The man who was the vice-chair of ELM and a founder of MCB has been sentenced to death for genocide.
50% of the muslims in Britain say "no muslim organisation represents my views". The other 50% are represented by the likes of HuT, MCB, Fosis, etc. The people the media claim to be "moderate" muslim "leaders" are mostly just egotists who represent nothing. The muslims with power let these egotists play with the media, whilst the rest continue their subversion in the background, unnoticed.
It's more Mo Ansar's influence on non-Muslims, not Muslims, that I had in mind.
I have heard and seen him on other BBC programmes, including that that R4 programme on "religious debate" on which he claimed Yusuf Qaradawi was a moderate and that Norman Finklestein had interesting things to says about the Jews and Israel. I've also heard in on the Today programme, as well as frequented quoted on the BBC news website, etc.
Mo Ansar does seem to be taking up a lot of air time, whether on tv, radio or Twitter, where people are trolled, baited then reported.
Mo is just another face to keep the deception going. People watch Mo seemingly talking for all muslims, the same as people like Tariq Ramadan on the news and it all looks great. And yes its the non muslims they influence, far more than muslims. The Muslims take their instructions through the mosques.
Put Mo and Anjem in the same room and they'd say the same thing. It just wouldn't sound like they were in agreement to the average person.
Mo Ansar has apparently been threatened by Somalia's al-Shabaab for "speaking out against jihadism". That will do his media-face-of-Islam the world of good. Firstly, HAS he spoken out against Islamic terrorism? Also, there are no sources or evidence of the video which I have seen. Most journalists have taken Mo Ansar's word for it.
More importantly, there are two Islamic approaches to Islamic terrorism. One, the Al-Shabaab/Al-Qaeda/Anjem Choudary etc. approach in which Muslims tell the truth about Islamic terrorism and jihadism. Two, the Mo Ansar/Muslim Brotherhood approach in which jihadism is not explicitly condoned or accepted, but, nonetheless, it is justified, rationalised and explained instead. All the latter group does is fall short of saying: "Yes, Islamic terrorism is a good thing." But, of course, a British or American media-Muslim could never say that without committing political suicide. Al-Shabaab and Al-Qaeda can say that - and they do. However, when you rationalise, justify and explain Islamic terrorism you SUPPORT it but stop short of condoning it for the reasons just given. In the end, then, the Muslim Brotherhood approach is probably more dangerous to the West.
Incidentally, to change the subject, listen to Mo Ansar's Islamic fatalism towards this, which shows us one of the reasons why Muslims are so anti-science and anti-progress:
"My reaction is simple – if my death has been destined at a particular place, in a particular way and at a particular time, there is nothing in the world that can alter or avert it."
British muslims attempting to get Maajid Nawaz killed over "Jesus & Mo" imagery.