Jump to content

Talk:Ed Husain

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

Posts should be signed as per the Wikipedia guidelines.

Avramlieberman 21:43, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this page is helpful, including comments from some former colleagues: http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/riazat_butt/2007/05/there_is_much_excitement_about.html

I'll make no secret of the fact that this man, I believe is neither actually a Sufi, or is clearly violating Sufi principles on being fair and balanced on potraying events.

The fact that it is mentioned that he was more of a follower of Omar Bakri Muhammad, not HT itself, and that he left HT when Omar Bakri was expelled is important to mention. Aaliyah Stevens 15:36, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here's another useful reference guys (& girl): http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/brian_whitaker/2007/05/bank_of_fundamentalism.html 82.26.71.11 21:39, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality

[edit]

Referring to his "Shia brothers" is not neutral and Wahhabi is a derogatory term. Perspicacite 17:14, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fact Checking?

[edit]

Can someone verify that he said "Islam as it was practiced two thousand years ago"? Islam didn't exist two thousand years ago... 72.70.79.136 (talk)

Complaint from Penguin

[edit]

I’m writing on behalf of Penguin, publisher of Ed Husain’s The Islamist.

We are concerned that over the past few months facts and quoted opinions have been removed from Ed Husain’s Wikipedia entry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ed_Husain) and from that of The Islamist, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Islamist) leaving an imbalanced and unfair portrayal of the man and his work.


Our concerns outlined here:


Ed Husain (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ed_Husain)


Personal life, education and Career

The following information was removed or altered:

He studied Arabic at the University of Damascus and has completed an MA in Middle Eastern Studies at the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London. He is currently enrolled at the School’s Ph.D programme in Political Science. Husain is also a visiting fellow at Civitas, the independent think-tank.

He is a member of the Labour Party and supports Amnesty International.

The Islamist

The final sentence of this section currently reads:

'Husain's book has received some mixed reviews, among them some strong criticism, in relation to accuracy and Husain's analysis'

We believe a factually accurate presentation would read:

'Husain's book has received positive reviews from mainstream British commentators but some strong criticism from Islamism-influenced individuals. '

I believe the following links (some of which have been removed from the entry by other parties) reflect this analysis:

The Guardian http://books.guardian.co.uk/departments/politicsphilosophyandsociety/story/0,,2078103,00.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,2071237,00.html

The Times http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article1685725.ece

International Herald Tribune http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/06/01/news/profile.php



The Islamist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Islamist)

We are concerned about the division of reviews of The Islamist into Approving Critique and a larger section entitled Critical Reception.

Especially as the distinction between these two terms is very small.


We are particularly troubled by the following quote, which strays from the book itself into debate and conjecture. It constitutes criticism but has nothing to do with the critical reception of The Islamist:

A review of The Islamist in the Sunday Times notes that Husain asserts that Hizb ut-Tahrir supported Saddam Hussain and recruited the suicide bomber Asif Hanif in London. However, academics have documented the execution of Hizb ut-Tahrir members by the Saddam regime. Taji-Farouki notes that "In December 1990 five activists were executed in Suleymaniyya and six in Mosul in response to a note sent to the Iraqi embassy in Amman urging Saddam Hussain to abandon Ba'thism and to declare an Islamic Caliphate" [4]. An Islamic scholar and leader from Hizb ut-Tahrir was also tortured and killed by the Saddam Hussain regime after the scholar criticised Saddam's treatment of their Shia brothers. Asif Hanif was associated with 'LightStudy', an educational Sufi Muslim group based at Hounslow mosque [5]. The group is led by the Syrian scholar and Sufi Sheikh Muhammad al-Yaqoubi and an investigation by The Observer found that Hanif was most probably recruited in Damascus, not London.


The extensive quote from Taji-Farouki is totally unrelated to the critical reception of the book, as are the sentences that follow it.

Similarly we feel, that the final point in this section is not recording a ‘critical reception’ rather using Wikipedia as a platform to debate issues arising from the book:


Husain states (regarding Ghulam Sarwar's Islam: Beliefs and Teachings) that "The first book I read about Islam in English was Islam: Beliefs and Teachings by Gulam Sarwar" [6] and goes on to state that after only being taught about Islam orally by his family, Sarwars book "filled a gap". As he was taught that Islam and politics do not mix [6] he says that "one part of the book has stayed with me." This being the chapter "Political System in Islam" [6]. He says that Sarwar said that Politics within Islam is fundamental. [6]

Husain goes on to say that "What I did not know at school was that Sarwar was a business management lecturer, not a scholar of religion. And he was an activist in the organisations that he mentioned Muslim Brotherhood and Jamat-e-Islami]. Sarwar's book was not the dispassionate educational treatise it purported to be." and that "He was also the brains behind the separation of Muslim children from school assemblies into what we called 'Muslim assembly', managed by the Muslim Educational Trust (MET) [of which Sarwar is the Director]. What seemed like an innocuous body was, in fact, an organisation with an agenda. In my school, a Jamat-e-Islami activist named Abdul Rabb represented the MET and awarded us trophies and medals for our performance in MET exams. Ostensibly it all seemed harmless, but the personnel all belonged to Jamat-e-Islami front organisations in Britain. Their key message was that Islam was not merely a religion but also an ideology that sought political power and was beginning to make headway." [6]

However, when Husain quotes Sarwar on page 21 of The Islamist regarding politics and Islam (page 169 of Sarwar's book), he does so but, although not wrong, he words the quoting very differently to what is actually written in Sarwar's book.

Additionally, as discussed above, Husain mentions that "What I did not know at school was that Sarwar was a business management lecturer, not a scholar of religion." However, it says clearly in Sarwar's book that he "obtained his first degree in Commerce and a masters in Business Management from the University of Dhaka, Bangkladesh" and that "For three years he taught Business Management to first-degree students in City College".



The Islamist is a contentious book and we realise it may divide opinion. However, we strongly believe that people using your site to look for a record of critical opinion on the The Islamist or a biography of Ed Husain should not instead be exposed to a live and often one-sided debate.

We would very much like to hear from you on how we can go forward from this point. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.47.223.5 (talk) 13:44, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Arriving at a Neutral Point of View (NPOV) (continuing the discussion in response to post from Penguin)

[edit]

I agree with much of what is said above but disagree with this quote: "'Husain's book has received positive reviews from mainstream British commentators but some strong criticism from Islamism-influenced individuals." - this is an unwarranted simplification. Right-wing commentators such as Melanie Phillips have lauded the book but there are other equally mainstream critics (Diane Abbot for example) who have openly criticised the author's alarmist message as being shrill and agenda led. They are no less mainstream and for you to isolate critique to "Islamist" quarters (whatever that means) is itself compromising neutrality. Perhaps the solution is to quote reviews verbatim from prominent authorities with RS to enable the reader to make up his/her own mind.

That said, the page needs more balance. It is too one-sided. 81.105.65.95 (talk) 23:03, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Warning to User Edhusain who keeps blanking

[edit]

Edhusain, if it is you, the real Edhusain, are you aware that you and your IP/computer can be blocked from vandalising this page The_Islamist, and the page "ed_husain" if you continue to vandalise it, by blanking it. Please see WP:Vandal. Aaliyah Stevens 12:45, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Response to Penguin claims on neutrality

[edit]

I hope that you intend to address the clear factual inaccuracy in "The Islamist". Husain writes of his association with Isa al-Hindi, who he alleges is a convicted Al-Qaida terrorist - this is completely untrue - the Isa with whom Husain had contact with continues to live in London and has never been arrested, charged or convicted in relation to any terrorist offences. This is a blatant lie - one of several clear inaccuracies in the book which you don't care to mention. I suspect that the points made above by "Penguin" are more likely to have been made by Husain himself who passes all criticism off as being by those who are linked to "Islamism".Localgains1441 (talk)

Source? --BoogaLouie (talk) 02:11, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

terrorist associates

[edit]

I deleted this sentence since there is no source, no context and it seems to have just been dumped into the middle of the article.

Husain was a former associate of convicted terrorist Dhiren Barot, MCB media secretary Inayat Bunglawala and Omar Bakri Muhammad.[citation needed]

--BoogaLouie (talk) 17:28, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

war in Iraq and Afghanistan

[edit]

Deleted

He has supported the war in Iraq and Afghanistan and has been accused of associating with pro-war groups and individuals, and of holding racist attitudes towards Arabs[8]. as the citation
Not always right | Comment is free
... was completely unrelated and its one mention of Husain very favorable. --BoogaLouie (talk) 00:56, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More vandalism

[edit]

Malicious edits by 82.11.14.228. changing a quote about Husain's book from "highly acclaimed" to "highly criticsed" and deleting positive reviews.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ed_Husain&diff=243769238&oldid=238333375 --BoogaLouie (talk) 23:37, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Muslim sect missing

[edit]

I have added Husain to the maintenance category Category:Muslims with sect missing. Now, my familiarity with Islam is limited and I am unsure whether all Muslims can appropriately be classified as belonging to one sect or another. In the case of some intellectuals such as possibly Ed Husain, such categorization may even be rejected outright. Any comments? __meco (talk) 12:40, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what you mean. Ed Husain is a Sunni Muslim. Most people, and pretty much all Muslims, would call Sunni Islam one of the two major "branchs" or wings or something of Islam, rather than a "sect". --BoogaLouie (talk) 18:26, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the article does not state that he is Sunni. As for the choice of the term sect I surmise this is a Wikipedia consensus decision (see Category:Muslims by sect). __meco (talk) 13:03, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Member of HT?

[edit]

An editor of this article has an issue with whether Husain was a member of Hizb ut-Tahrir.

(Hizb ut-Tahrir's UK spokesman denies he was ever a formal member),

  • Taji Mustafa Spokesman of Hizb Tahrir UK on CNN stated Ed Husain had never been a member (whereas Majid Nawaz (Ed's colleague) is acknowledged as an ex-member) - Ed's response was he "studied" with them for two years:
   MUSTAFA: Ed Husain was never a member of Hizb-ut-Tahrir. We need to have our facts very clear.
   AMANPOUR: So you're denying that?
   MUSTAFA: That Ed Husain was a member of Hizb-ut-Tahrir? Absolutely.
   http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0705/04/cnr.02.html</ref>

I don't think this needs to be mentioned in the lead as there doesn't seem to be too much disagreement that Husain was active in HT.

according to a NY TIMES article http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/02/world/europe/02husain.html?_r=1&pagewanted=2&ei=5087%0A&em&en=ef59bd95605c9bd4&ex=1180929600&oref=slogin

A spokesman, Taji Mustafa, said that Mr. Husain was never a formal member who took a pledge, but rather attended the group’s circles like thousands of others.

We can just say he was an activist. --BoogaLouie (talk) 20:59, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another issue is that HT is a vanguard party, only the elite can join. You can be an active supporter but not be found worthy of being in the "vanguard" and so not be a party member. --BoogaLouie (talk) 19:33, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Response to: Member of HT?

[edit]

I agree that the Mustafa-Amanpour exchange does not need to be quoted in the first paragraph and so am removing it.

--User:ABmagoo 15:04, 13 May 2009

Deleted paragraph

[edit]

Husain describes the Arab "psyche" as irredeemably racist, cites Gandhi as his hero, criticises the director of MI5 for "pussyfooting around" with extremists, defends the government's decision to ban Muslim cleric al-Qaradawi from Britain because he defends Palestinian martyrdom operations and attacks multiculturalism, declaring there to be too many immigrants in the country.

Further information: Quilliam Foundation

I have deleted this paragraph as I believe it is cherry picked to collect the most incindiery possible comments to arrouse fury against Husain, and in violation of WP:BLP. For one thing it is not "written responsibly, conservatively, and in a neutral, encyclopedic tone." --BoogaLouie (talk) 21:49, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

These are the controversial views of Husain which are cited by many critics - they should stay imo Jk54 (talk) 22:05, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Bangladeshi" versus "Bengali Muslim"

[edit]

On January 18 2011 I changed the claim that Husain was born into "a Bangladeshi family" to "a Bengali Muslim family", on the grounds that the former was inaccurate considering that neither of his parents had ever lived in Bangladesh, both having moved to Britain before Bangladeshi independence, while the latter describes ethnic/cultural/linguistic/religious identity without referring to citizenship or political views. On February 6 2011 Winston786 changed this to "a Bangladeshi Muslim family", without citing a reason. I didn't want to just revert that edit without putting the issue up for discussion, in case there was a good reason for referring to his family as "Bangladeshi". It's worth noting that in the infobox Hussein's ethnicity is described as "Bengali" and nationality as "British".

Static Sleepstorm (talk) 11:17, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Islamicism and sufiism

[edit]

The section about Husain's reversal and his interest in Sufiism contains the line about him being critical of "these groups". Is this solely the islamicist groups or the Sufi ones as well? (188.146.134.28 (talk) 11:12, 20 June 2017 (UTC))[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ed Husain. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:46, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Ed Husain. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:43, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ed_Husain&oldid=1217825895"