A clarification concerning my views of Mansur at Speakers’ Corner

On social media and at Speakers’ Corner there has been some confusion and misunderstanding about my views. I will now try to make myself crystal clear:

Mansur

I have never alleged that he is a terrorist or a supporter of terrorism. He is not. Neither is he an extremist of any kind nor to my knowledge has he ever been one. He does not share the evil ideology of Abu Qasim.

My beef with Mansur concerns his actions at the park (or lack of action) and the fact that he was in the wrong. This does not mean he is therefore a terrorist or anything like that. I can’t stress this point enough.

As I wrote in my original article:

Just over a year ago when I became alarmed at ISIS supporters activity at the park I decided to publicly call Abdul Hakeem out. I challenged him on camera. As a result I received a huge amount of criticism from many Muslims for my actions which I was told contradicted certain hadith. I invited Mansur to join me in my public campaign to expose the extremists in our midst. He refused point blank. It had nothing to do with him he said, and he didn’t want to get involved with confronting them. I pleaded with him to use the moral authority he possessed to refute these dangerous people publicly and by name as I had attempted to do. But to no avail. Mansur was happy to condemn terrorism in theory but not to lift a finger to confront real propagators of terrorist ideology at the park. I was appalled. Mansur and I were good friends. This incident destroyed our friendship. Last Sunday, he finally joined forces with Adnan and a few others in confronting Abu Qasim. You can see it on youtube. But it was too little too late.

I am happy to answer any questions about this in the comments section below.

Paul Williams

 

 

 

 

 

 



Categories: Paul Williams, Speakers' Corner

16 replies

  1. Paul Williams
    Can you put a finger on why mansur would decline to publicly call out these extremist? If so, were they personal or Islamic reasons.

    Liked by 1 person

    • As far as I recall no Islamic reason was given. As I wrote in my article:

      ‘It had nothing to do with him he said, and he didn’t want to get involved with confronting them.’

      As wrong as that was Hashim’s response to the threat was far worse. He deleted all the comments and posts i had put up on the Speakers’ Corner Dawah Group on Facebook where I had sounded the alarm about ISIS supporters activity at the park.

      Like

  2. Salaam Ummah

    I think as a general overview of this whole circumstance brother Paul Williams was right to take Mansur aside seeing him as prominent figure at speakers corner someone who has many years of experience and competent approach in talking to people I believe Paul assumed Mansur was a safe candidate to express his concerns about Abu Qassim and thought Mansur could have some form of influence in getting rid of the dirt at speakers corner.

    But in my opinion I think the only reason Mansur walked away in assisting Paul to form a coalition to combat these terrorist scums was the fact that Mansur did not want to be “that guy” meaning getting his hands dirty, he just wanted to mind his own business and not get involved playing a so called the police. I think with Mansur is someone who has been active at speakers corners for over 20 years just turning up doing his dawah and going home non of this bothering with social media, YouTube etc
    I think only recently Mansur has opened a Twitter account.
    Sometimes people do not want to take on a responsibility eventhough it may be an obvious thing to do but feel they are not about that life.

    I dont believe Mansur was being ignorant nor turning blind eye towards this whole situation and certainly Mansur is not in any shape or form a terrorist sympathiser nor promotes any such views.
    Paul Willams does not stipulate Mansur to be a terrorist nor does he slander Mansur in anyway.
    I can understand why people would see the article as if Paul was putting Mansur in danger as Paul does quite clearly and firmly address all of his experience with Mansur in regards to Abu Qassim but I see Paul expressing his honesty and highlighting in stern language his disappointment with Mansur.

    I do hope all the brothers In the park would unite and safeguard speakers corner from these terrorist groups and fringe of new faces coming and amalgamating into false friendship with the dawah brothers pretending to be good people when they are carrying dark and evil personalities.

    Thank you

    Liked by 2 people

  3. Paul you have abused the Muslim & Islam hospitality & fraternity to do this kind of shameless actions. you are a shame & you should STOP to affiliate yourself with Islam & Muslims cause nor Islam nor Muslims have nothing to do with you.
    you are an evil person, hypocrite liar & you have a now clear agenda against Islam & Muslim that nobody can still deny
    .

    Shame on you; I already enjoy the coming day you will face Truth, soon or later.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. I don’t think this is a fair description. I am not Muslim and you may disagree with Paul. However. Paul’s motives seems to be a concern for Islam, Muslims and everyone else, making the streets of London safer. The fact that many Muslims share Paul”s concern including Shamsi, shows that calling him a liar and hypocrite and abuser of Muslim hospitality is simply mot true. What Paul did is to critique the notion that others should do nothing even when informed of the danger.

    Liked by 2 people

  5. There is a difference between that and being evil, hypocrite and a liar which is what the accusation hurled against Paul was. Paul seems to work tirelessly to eradicate dangerous individuals, and was refused support when he tried to get it.

    I don’t know much about the other examples.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Of course comments like “abu AbdAllah” are stupid insane and dangerous. But Williams has no credibility in this matter, as he himself is a propagandist with an anti-democratic, anti-liberal and explicit anti-humanist agenda. In my opinion he is probably a dangerous individual himself, pro-death penalty and the like, his goal is a shariah-based caliphate.

      Liked by 1 person

  6. Well, I am sure Paul can defend himself. The reason I openly support Paul, apart from the fact that I think he is right to publically call out such people, when others refused, is because IMHO he has been suffering from a lot of unfair criticism such as the above comment.

    I don’t know Paul’s view but he does not strike me as one who would support a caliphate in say UK – or anywhere else for that matter- against the will of its people. I think this incident has demonstrated that Paul will not tolerate injustice simply because it comes from “his own religion”. He stands up for what he believes is right even when few were ready to support him and was ostracised according to his own testimony. To me that’s very admirable. And I wish any community of whatever persuasion would do what Paul has done to remove the evil from their own midst.

    Whenever Paul writes whatever views you may find to be dangerous or hypocritical you are free to call him out. So if you have an example of such behaviour bring it out in the open for all to see.

    I may disagree with Paul on other matters, but on this point I agree and think he deserves our respect and support.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. I feel that people fail to appreciate br paul and his character.

    Liked by 3 people

Leave a Reply to Marc C. Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: