What will history make of Britain’s treatment of Chowdhury Mueen-Uddin?

8 November 2013

5:49 PM

8 November 2013

5:49 PM

‘A historic catastrophe’ is how Martin Bright describes it. He is referring to the policy by which successive governments in the UK, Conservative, Labour and coalition, are accused of having promoted the worst people into the positions of Muslim community leaders.
The specific case that sparks this reflection is the case of Chowdhury Mueen-Uddin. Since leaving Bangladesh and becoming a British citizen he has been at the very pinnacle of Britain’s interfaith and moderate Muslim industry. Here he is with Prince Charles at the Islamic Foundation in Leicester. Major politicians of all parties as well as numerous ‘faith leaders’ have rubbed shoulders with him. He was a founder and leading figure of the Muslim Council of Britain, a vice-chair of the East London mosque and a director of ‘spiritual care provision’ in the NHS.
Unfortunately last week he was also convicted – in absentia – of the most horrific war crimes. The specific charges of which he was convicted by the special tribunal in Bangladesh are that during the 1971 war of independence he was a leading figure in the pro-Pakistan ‘al-Badr’ militia. In this role he is convicted of playing an active role in the abduction and killing of pro-Bangladeshi intellectuals, scientists, academics and journalists. Mr Mueen-Uddin denies the charges and strongly asserts his innocence. He refuses to return to Bangladesh to face justice. If he does he could be hanged for the crimes for which he has been convicted. He himself has described the Bangladesh legal process as ‘corrupt’.
It is interesting to consider what has led Britain to this path. At one end of the spectrum few people in our country admire Argentina for its provision of a safe haven for Nazi war-criminals after World War II. Very few people would think it acceptable if this country hosted those accused or convicted of war crimes in the Balkans in the 1990s. So should we ignore or take lightly the verdicts and demands of a court in Bangladesh? How is it that this country has ended up as a refuge for people embroiled in such trials? We face being accused of ignoring the victims of such an atrocity and not only welcoming in but elevating into positions of responsibility people who are, rightly or wrongly, alleged to have perpetrated of one of the late twentieth century’s most appalling atrocities.
When history combs over our civilisation it must be bewildered by this madness. Which is hardly surprising. We are living through it and it is hard enough to understand from here.

Subscribe to The Spectator today for a quality of argument not found in any other publication. Get more Spectator for less – just £12 for 12 issues.

Show comments
  • Joe Monee

    The UK immigration officers and politicians have been complicit in knowingly admitting as welfare refugees the worst third world scum of all sorts. These scum hog off the welfare system and spend their entire time plotting the downfall of the very country that had the misfortune of giving them a helping hand.

    As for the USA, they provide all the protective cover to the wahabi thugs who fund all the global muslim religious zealots.

    ……. so what is the real agenda of these governments?

  • Sabina G

    Being a Muslim woman, sometimes I feel ashamed that my co-coreligionists have no problem to support murderers and rapers. We have really become morally bankrupted Muslims, that’s why we have no problem to support a killer.

  • Mohammed

    The war crimes trials are utter disgraceful, the crimes has been committed by Pakistani generals. Why not implicate Pakistan? There are war criminals within the current government who directly given aid to the Pakistani Army during the killings, why not implicate them? Why after 40 years? The evidence is dubious.

    What about the killers of the Muhkti Bahini, they killed anyone that spoke Urdu, are we going to see justice for those families?? Guess not as the Islamaphobes will block such justice, even though it WAS committed by muslims.

    Civil war at a muslim country! Fault of Islam
    Civil war at a non muslim country! Fault of the human beings. They just need to get on.

    All the comments are pathetic and Doulas Murray is a typical Islamaphobe.

    If a secularist/non muslim commit crimes, its fine to all of you. If a muslim commits crime, then is death to muslims and Islam. Pathetic and hateful.

  • Fugstar

    A community organiser has been sentenced to death in absentia by an internationally discredited kangaroo court. Yeah! lets score some ideological points and join the mob!

    • James Lovelace

      You’ll be defending Hitler next. We all know that Mein Kampf is a best-seller with muslims in Turkey, Egypt, Bangaldesh, etc.

      • Fugstar

        if you visit bangladesh, you are much more likely to see books of marx mister lovely face. The racist fascism that the people there are most burdened by today is the incumbent government whose agenda Douglas Murray is simply a useful idiot for.

        • James Lovelace

          Marx was another genocidal maniac. In fact, the communist regimes surpassed the Nazis in their mass-murdering.

          Islam, Communism, Nazism. All the same thing. Genocidal, totalitarian, collectivist dogma.

          The above story from the muslim-loving BBC is quite clear – it is Mein Kampf that muslims in Bangladesh are buying, not Das Kapital. Clearly it’s the jew-hatred that draws them. After all, Mohammed’s genocide was against the jews.

          • SameerAhmed

            Please what a bunch of lies. Typical brainwashed neocon.

            • James Lovelace

              Mecca and Medina were multicultural – pagans and jews permitting Mohammed to proclaim his new religion. Once he had control, no more pagans in Mecca nor Jews in Medina. Totalitarianism. Genocide.

              Go and read Ibn Ishaq, Tabari, Ibn Hisham.

              Unlike you lying muslims, I provide links for others to go and learn for themselves.

              • Ibrahim F

                Well, no. Muhammed actually had to go to war with them. They certainly didn’t “permit” him anything. And the early wars were mainly about survival, not the conquest that occurred after his death.

                Also, you have to know something about Bangladesh to understand what the OP is talking about. You are just being an ignorant moron.

                The court trials were a farce that were politically motivated to get rid of opposition party members on misleading/false charges. It’s an internal political thing. It gets complicated.

    • SameerAhmed

      Fugstar, internationally discredited is a credit to us, cause all western courts are more corrupt and kangaroo than ICT

  • Hippograd

    ‘A historic catastrophe’ is how Martin Bright
    describes it. He is referring to the policy by which successive
    governments in the UK, Conservative, Labour and coalition, are accused
    of having promoted the worst people into the positions of Muslim
    community leaders.

    No, the historic catastrophe — and treachery — was the way in which successive governments allowed the United Kingdom to be colonized by adherents of a Third World religion. Martin Bright, like many others, has always been fully in favour of this immigration. Now that it’s turning into a wholly predictable disaster, he’s pretending it’s the “policy” that was wrong. Does he seriously believe there was ever any chance of Muslims behaving well in the UK? If he does, why does he not support mass immigration by Muslims into Israel? Does he not want Israel’s economy to boom and Israel’s culture to be enriched?

  • zanzamander

    When history combs over our civilisation it must be bewildered by this madness.

    Depends who inherits the history from us, who writes it and who reads it.

    Let me put it like this: Do you think Muslims in modern day Islamic countries are going through mental torture asking themselves how did their ancestors allow their lands to be conquered by Islam, how their people got killed and subjugated and got converted from their ancient faiths and beliefs into the followers of Mohammad and how did their language, dress and culture all got Arabised?

    I doubt it. Their history was totally supplanted by Islam and they’ve grown up to despise their ancient un-Islamic beliefs and culture.

    So it will be in the West.

    So don’t worry about that. I bet your friends at Quillaim will help you get over it.

    • sardindukurup

      Right on dot. Ihas happened amongst many peoples and countries.The “present” we love wil be briefly described as darkness .

    • James Lovelace

      “Depends who inherits the history from us, who writes it and who reads it.”

      Yep. The literati in the west won’t even read the history of Mohammd’s genocide and child-murder as written by Mohammed’s fellow muslims.

      If the pagans and the jews who were slaughtered had been able to leave behind their versions of his monstrous crimes, no doubt they would paint him as far more of a monster than do those who love Mohammed. The history of the rise of Islam is like the Nazis had won WW2, and all our history books were written by them.

      BTW, I’m sure that Douglas Murray and Tommy Robinson are rightly sceptical about Quilliam.

      • zanzamander

        BTW, I’m sure that Douglas Murray and Tommy Robinson are rightly sceptical about Quilliam.

        I hope so, but I doubt it.

  • crosscop

    Here’s another one – wanted for murder in Pakistan. Conservative councillor and guest at 10 Downing Street in the UK.

  • rogermurrayclark

    It is an absolute and utter disgrace that the Royal Marine Sergeant was prosecuted for finishing off a wounded Taliban whilst the British Estanlishment from Prince Tree Hugger Quisling down shamefully toadied this monster

    “It should also prompt some soul-searching among those who have chosen to do business with these institutions over the years. These include a string of government ministers, Prince Charles, two London Mayors, Citizens UK, the interfaith movement and members of the Jewish community who argue for dialogue with the Islamists who dominate Muslim institutions in the UK.”

    As to Murray’s implication that there really are all these moderates out there, this is a pious hope indeed, good luck with this Holy Grail – it has been utterly unavailing thus far

    As to the absurdly wrong prosecution of the sergeant reports tell of how the fighting he was involved in was of a level savagery not seen since Burma 44-45

    And who ever got prosecuted for finishing off a wounded member of the Imperial Japanese Army?

    Maybe the Quisling Westminster Appeasers think that their show trial will impress Islamists with this display of “British values”; in fact they just come over as more weak and stupid and equivocating than ever; and of course totally disloyal and unsupportive to the lads they sent out to that hell-hole in the first place. Nothing new there of course

    • Jackthesmilingblack

      Remember the scene in “Full Metal Jacket”? Walk from away a gravely wounded enemy combatant, no worries. Finish him off and slammer time beckons.

      • Toby Esterházy

        More anti-British rubbish from this Japanese chap!

  • KC2013

    He is a convicted war criminal found guilty of mass murder.I couldn’t give a hoot how high up in the UK’s Muslim hierarchy he is. Get him on a plane to Bangladesh. The same as we in the west would expect had he been an Iraqi or Serbian wanted for war crimes

    • monty61

      Precisely. Widening the issue for point scoring purposes doesn’t really help (much as I’m sympathetic to many of the arguments). He should be put on a plane, or if his ‘human rights’ would be infringed by a possible death penalty, tried here.

  • DazEng

    One rule for Mohammed…

  • margaret benjamin

    Douglas Murry. How can the British Government apologise for the Balfour Declaration from Palestine Post 6/11/13. Agreed upon by Baroness Jenny Tongue Jeremy Corbyn just to mention a few.!
    Surly we cannot change history, Or question What Lord Balfour had put in his Declaration.

  • Jackthesmilingblack

    I notice you aren`t covering that story of the Royal Marine convicted of the murder of an Afghan, Spectator. But then you seldom cover stories that paint the Army as brutal, licentious soldiery. Or indeed any story that shows the UK in a poor light.
    Jack, Japan Alps

    • Jules Wright

      Warfare. Another thing ruined by lawyers.

      • Jackthesmilingblack

        A nasty outbreak of peace.
        “I`ve supplied every army bar the Salvation Army”

    • James Lovelace

      Afghanistan should have been nuked before 9/11 ever happened. And Pakistan should have been taken out at the same time.

      • Jackthesmilingblack

        So how are those anger management classes going, Jimmy?

        • James Lovelace

          Anger has nothing to do with it. Emotion clouds judgement.

          • Toby Esterházy

            Ignore the obvious Internet Trolls.

    • Toby Esterházy

      “Licentious soldiery”, for the British Army and Armed Forces—obviously a case of trolling.

  • Coleridge1

    No surprises here that a founder of the Jew-hating, terror-supporting Moslem Council of Britain is himself a mass murderer! is there no way that Islamist settlers can be deported back to their racist apartheid homelands of Bangladesh and Pakistan?

    • anyfool

      Yes change the law on citizenship and elect politicians who already have a pair.

    • Guest


      This is a comical query on so many levels ☺

    • Ibrahim F


      This is a comical query on so many levels

  • Fugstar

    The 1971 war year was a terrible one for us Bangladeshis, and our official national mythologies have a peculiar habit of creating hate figures on the basis of rumour. That what has happened with these internationally discredited tribunals, an insult to the dead and the living and political ploy that exploits guilt, ignorance and pride.

  • David Lindsay

    Very few people would think it acceptable if this country hosted those accused or convicted of war crimes in the Balkans in the 1990s.

    Hashim Thaçi? Ejup Ganić?

    Se also Akhmed Zakayev and the late Abdulmalik Rigi.

    When history combs over our civilisation it must be bewildered by this madness. Which is hardly surprising. We are living through it and it is hard enough to understand from here.

    Presumably a reference to the treatment of Douglas Murray as anything remotely resembling a serious figure.

    • Baron

      But, David, the former, Hashim Thaçi, doesn’t live here, the latter was cleared by a London judge, the evidence against him came from newspaper articles. You think you know better than the man of law?

      • David Lindsay

        He was certainly “accused” (Murray’s word) while he was here. It went to court. Let’s say no more than that, if you like.

        Murray, a couple of years younger than I am, ought to have been starting out as a commentator in the last few years, once he was quite sure what he thought and why.

        Instead, still only his middle thirties, he is already a washed up relic of an age which now seems much longer ago than it was.

        He must curse those who made him their poster boy a decade and more ago. At any rate, he should.

    • Jambo25

      My son lives in Bedford. Not too far from where he lives there also stayed an ex Rwandan genocidaire. In this country legally.

      • David Lindsay

        Indeed so.

        The apparent disbandment of the M23 rebellion by ethnic Tutsis in the
        eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo reminds us, or at rate ought to remind us, that we have been wrong about the sponsor of that rebellion, Tutsi-ruled Rwanda, for a very long time.

        If anything, there really were two genocides in Rwanda. But “genocide” is a slipperier concept than you might think. In 1993, the former Bolivian President, García Meza Tejada, was convicted of “genocide” for the deaths of fully eight people. Those may or may not have been the only people whom he killed. But they were the only victims of his “genocide”. And so to Rwanda.

        Or, rather, to a kangaroo court in Tanzania, set up by a UN Security Council resolution with no authority to do so, and specifically empowered – again, on no proper authority whatever – to try only members of the former, devoutly Catholic regime, and not of that which
        overthrew it, namely a direct extension, by means of a Ugandan invasion of Rwanda in 1990, of the only-too-successful Maoist insurrection in Uganda. Thank God that no one is now to be sent from this country, historic refuge of the oppressed, to appear before that kangaroo court.

        Théoneste Bagosora was finally convicted (well, of course he was – this sort of thing never, ever acquits anyone) eighteen months after the prosecution’s final submission, and fully twelve years after his arrest, even though his trial had started almost immediately.

        That was entirely typical, as is the use of European and American activists as “expert witnesses” even though they witnessed absolutely nothing and were in fact thousands of miles away at the time alleged. As is the heavy reliance on anonymous prosecution witnesses (even
        though it is in fact six defence witnesses before this “Tribunal” who have been murdered soon after giving evidence), universally known to be paid liars.

        As is the routine holding of session in camera. As is the admission of hearsay evidence. As are the rulings that no corroboration is necessary to convict a man of rape even he has pleaded not guilty, and that it matters not one jot if a prosecution witness’s written statement differs markedly from his testimony in court. As is the astonishing principle that a prosecution witness’s inconsistencies are proof of trauma, and therefore of the guilt of the accused. And as are the farcical translation problems.

        The remit of this “Tribunal” is frankly racist, providing only for the trial of Hutus, the overwhelmingly predominant ethnic group, for crimes against Tutsis, the historically royal and aristocratic minority. Crimes by Hutus against Tutsis undoubtedly happened. But so did crimes by Tutsis against Hutus.

        Neither Maoist guerrillas nor embittered, dispossessed aristocrats are characteristically restrained in these matters. No one knows how many people were killed, often with machetes. The usual figure cited is eight hundred thousand. Perhaps that is correct. Perhaps it is not.

        But what is undoubtedly the case is that not all the perpetrators were Hutus, although many were. What is undoubtedly the case is that not all the victims were Tutsis, although many were. What is undoubtedly the case is that no Tutsi has ever been tried, because none can be: that whole people has been declared innocent in advance, and another whole people declared guilty in advance.

        What is undoubtedly the case is that an invasion of a sovereign state by a larger neighbour at exactly the same time as the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait has been backed up to the hilt by the West in general and the United States, so that the Americans are now where first the Germans and then the Belgians once were: running Rwanda through a tiny clique drawn exclusively from the Tutsi minority.

        A clique, moreover, with a penchant for invading the Democratic Republic of the Congo and for sponsoring guerilla insurrections there, even if those insurrections do have some basis in the undeniable mistreatment of the Congolese Tutsi minority.

        And what is undoubtedly the case is that that clique is Maoist, whereas the majority-derived government that it overthrew was headed by a daily communicant, Jean Kambanda, whom it subsequently tortured into confession while illegally detaining him, and whom it denied the lawyer of his choice.

  • Agrippina

    That is why we gave Hook Hamza asylum, ditto Abu Qatada, in the mistaken belief that they will adopt our progressive liberal views, our enemy’s enemy is our friend. Warsi stood for election twice- tory vote went down, cameron enobled her. Vaz all sorts of probs expenses etc for him-still there. Lord Ahmed labour- supports all sorts of odd chaps. We have some Sudanese fellow here in Cambs-liberal- Salah al Bandah, he condemned some female (she against Sharia Law here) from his country, her brother was beaten up-all swept under the carpet.

    Our stupidity goes before us. How many of the Syrian refugees have been accepted by Saudi, UAE, Qatar etc nil, they don’t want trouble makers but we are putting out the red carpet for them, just as we did for the Somalians.

    • James Lovelace

      “Our stupidity goes before us.”

      We have journalists and academics who have lied to the people for more than 30 years. It’s no wonder that when Breivik decided to become the first anti-islam jihadi, his original plan was to blow up a conference full of journalists. Thinking he couldn’t do that, he chose a group of teenage socialists instead.

      40% of the British public think civil war is inevitable. I’ll bet when that gets closer, journalists will be assassinated. Not by muslims then, but by the indigenous peoples.

      • Alfred

        “40% of the British public think civil war is inevitable.”

        Can you provide a link to this statistic?

  • Advocatus_Diaboli_69

    “How is it that this country has ended up as a refuge for people embroiled in such trials?”

    For the same reason that gangs of Pakistani men gang raped vulnerable young women in the north west of England and in Oxfordshire for ten years before anyone did anything about it – cultural sensitivities.

    Political correctness, naivety, ignorance of the world and the people that inhabit it, all these things combined to create and maintain a society in which those who should know better are blind to the atrocities of those they treat as guests.

    • Jackthesmilingblack

      Come the Revolution, there a long list of people that need up against the wall and shot. The chance only comes by once every 400 years, so don`t waste it. Waste the traitors that dropped Britain in the $hit.

      • Toby Esterházy

        Stop trolling!

    • Ben Kelly

      Ideology. Plain and simple. The utter abject madness of ideologies that have become the secular people’s way of having something to cling to and believe in. The ideologue believes their cause is just and right but it narrows their mind, they in-fact become so blind that they will not stray from their dogma even in the face of evidence besmirching it.

      Multiculturalism, cultural relativism, moral relativism, political correctness, cultural Marxism etc. etc. etc. a load of ready made rigid belief systems that has destroyed the scepticism and individualism once characteristic of the British. Weep for out culture and fading country. Ben Kelly@Iabimyshkin

  • Pootles

    Oh, good lord!

  • Austin Barry

    Being designated an oxymoronic “Moderate Muslim” is, seemingly and in this instance literally, a get-out-of-jail card.

    And, of course, in any event, we must never, ever upset Muslims – they’re quite touchy you know.

    • James Lovelace

      That’s the true uselessness of the “moderate” vs. “extremist” classification. The more extreme some muslims are, the more that utterly vile muslims can claim to be “moderate”.