Monthly Archives: July 2008

Oklahoma Muslim denied job because of Islamic scarf

Posted on by Bob Pitt

The Oklahoma chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-OK) announced today that it has filed an EEOC complaint on behalf of a Muslim woman who was allegedly denied employment at an Abercrombie Kids store in that state because of the applicant’s religiously-mandated headscarf, or hijab.

The woman told CAIR-OK that a district manager claimed he could not hire her because her Islamic headscarf “does not fit the Abercrombie image.”

“Employers have a clear legal duty to accommodate the religious practices of their workers,” said CAIR-OK Executive Director Razi Hashmi. “To deny someone employment because of apparent religious bias goes against long-standing American traditions of tolerance and inclusion.”

Continue reading →

‘Kids can now defy heads to wear burkha’

Posted on by Bob Pitt

A sikh girl’s court victory yesterday means Muslim teens are now free to cover up with the burkha at school. Sarika Watkins-Singh, 14, won the right to wear a Kara bracelet after being excluded for defying a schools ban on jewellery. A judge’s ruling that she had been the victim of unlawful discrimination could start a stampede of kids wearing religious clobber in class.

Lawyer Caroline Newman said: “A time is coming where Muslim girls will be allowed to wear a full burka as part of their uniform, though it might have to be in a colour to match. This decision brings us one step closer to that day.” The discrimination guru added: “It could open the floodgates for more religious clothing, jewellery and symbols to be allowed as long as they don’t incite racial hatred and are proportionate.”

Daily Star, 30 July 2008

And we can’t be having that, can we?

Joint statement: divisive study for divisive ends

Posted on by Bob Pitt

British Muslim students have long contributed to the success of Britain. Muslim students have gone on to become doctors, business people and public servants, and all have been part of making Britain the vibrant society that it is today. ‘Islam on Campus’ a survey published on Sunday that supposedly charts UK student opinion is silent on this, just as it is silent on seeking positive good practise examples of British Muslims reaching out, seeking the common good.

The latest report on British Muslim students by the Centre for Social Cohesion serves only to strengthen bigots and demagogues keen to sow discord amongst British people. The authors of the report cannot hide behind a purportedly scientific survey to justify their own agenda of creating anything but cohesion in society. We refer to more concrete polling data that illustrate the commitment British Muslims have to British society and the people around them. The authors cite their unsatisfactory sampling to extrapolate ideological and biased conclusions to serve their own divisive ends.

We are a cross-section of British people who believe in the importance of meaningful social cohesion, where British people from all backgrounds and persuasions can live together without maligning each other. The Centre for Social Cohesion is opposed to this, and we reject their conclusions utterly.

We do not deny that the terror threat is serious, nor do we object to the notion that separatism and bigotry should be challenged, including from within the Muslim community. However the report incorrectly ascribes guilt by tenuous association with those national Muslim organisations who have been firm and innovative on both counts. Moreover, these organisations are theologically diverse, and yet the study insinuates that they favour one Islamic tradition over another.

The report reserves a lot of its fire for the Islamic student societies that operate from campus up and down the country. We find it curious, therefore, that the report sought qualitative opinions from only twelve Islamic student societies, yet there are scores of Muslim student bodies in the UK – hardly a representative sample. Islamic societies have done much to engage Muslim students with the mainstream. The study could have cited, for example, those Islamic societies that worked in partnership with those Jewish student societies to bring about greater understanding.

A report like this can only create discord amongst us. It has already done so with incendiary headlines such as ‘Muslim students back killings‘. Muslim students do not back killings, they are not separatist, they are British and very much part of our vibrant society.

Signed by:

Wes Streeting – President, National Union of Students
Dr Muhammad Abdul Bari – Secretary General, The Muslim Council of Britain
Pav Akhtar – National Race Equality Officer, UNISON
Khurshid Ahmad – Chairman, British Muslim Forum
Milena Buyum – Vice-Chair, National Assembly Against Racism
Ahmad al-Rawi – Muslim Association of Britain
Faisal Hanjra – President, FOSIS

See also Joint Statement Between Islamic Societies and FOSIS in Response to Islam on Campus Report.

Can Britain survive multiculturalism?

Posted on by Bob Pitt

In the modern British politically correct state, multiculturalism runs amok. And the government persecutes and suppresses British culture and tradition, while allowing hate and injustice within radical Islam to flourish.

When former drug dealer and now born again Christian Paul Ray wrote in his blog that the Muslim drug gangs in his hometown of Luton were “savages,” he was arrested on suspicion of a hate crime. “It’s ok for the Muslims to do what they’re doing, and no one arrests them, but then if we start saying and disagreeing with what’s actually happening, then we’re breaching community cohesion and we get arrested for it,” he explained. Ray fled Britain after this interview, because of threats against his life from Muslim gangs.

Whole sections of Britain are now considered dangerous “no-go zones” for non-Muslims.

Sally McNamara is at the Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom at the Heritage Foundation. “When you have a government which is so hampered by political correctness, that they’re unwilling to assert national values of tolerance, of rule of law, of human rights, of women’s rights… then you’re creating mixed messages where you’re saying the extremists can flourish,” she said.

“One of the worst things that is happening in England is that people are being ignored,” Stephen Gash said. Gash helps lead a grassroots group called SIOE, Stop the Islamization of Europe, which has a chapter in Britain. “They’re discriminating against the majority people in Europe now in favor of the Islamists and Muslims.” he added. “The way we’re going, we’re going to be taken back to the stoning age. That’s what’s going to happen to this country.”

It’s clear that multiculturalism and political correctness have backfired badly. The hardcore Islamists have not been assimilated, but the nation’s confidence in democracy and Christian civilization has been sapped, and its will to resist the cultural aggressiveness of radical Islam has been weakened.

CBN News, 27 July 2008

Hate-crime charges in Seattle convenience store attack

Posted on by Bob Pitt

King County prosecutors have filed felony hate-crime charges against a Seattle man accused of beating a convenience store clerk while shouting anti-Muslim epithets. Edward Hugh Campbell, who, according to investigators, claimed to be a member of a non-governmental, terrorist-fighting “volunteer army,” faces a single count of malicious harassment for the July 3 assault at a Fremont convenience store.

Court documents say that Campbell, 46, entered the store and began yelling anti-Muslim and anti-Arab slurs at the store clerk. Campbell, who was noticeably intoxicated, then smashed a beer can against the clerk’s face, causing severe cuts around the victim’s left eye.

During the altercation, a customer called 911 as another customer restrained Campbell in the store, in the 400 block of North 36th Street. The clerk was rushed to the hospital by ambulance.

Responding officers took a statement from Campbell, who claimed the clerk “was a Bin Laden sympathizer” who “did not respect (Campbell’s) military uniform.” That uniform, according to police reports, included head-to-toe green camouflage, which Campbell was wearing at the time of his arrest. Campbell is not thought to be an active member of any armed service.

Seattle Post Intelligencer, 29 July 2008

‘A third of Muslim students back killings’

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Almost a third of British Muslim students believe killing in the name of Islam can be justified, according to a poll. The study also found that two in five Muslims at university support the incorporation of Islamic sharia codes into British law.

The YouGov poll for the Centre for Social Cohesion (CSC) will raise concerns about the extent of campus radicalism. “Significant numbers appear to hold beliefs which contravene democratic values,” said Hannah Stuart, one of the report’s authors. “These results are deeply embarrassing for those who have said there is no extremism in British universities.”

The report was criticised by the country’s largest Muslim student body, Fosis, but Anthony Glees, professor of security and intelligence studies at Buckingham University, said: “The finding that a large number of students think it is okay to kill in the name of religion is alarming. There is a wide cultural divide between Muslim and non-Muslim students. The solution is to stop talking about celebrating diversity and focus on integration and assimilation.”

Sunday Times, 27 July 2008

See the FOSIS press release which quotes Faisal Hanjra, President of FOSIS, as stating: “This is yet another damning attack on the Muslim community by elements within the academic arena whose only purpose seems to be the undermining of sincere efforts by mainstream Muslim organisations to tackle the threat of terror which wider society faces. The report is methodologically weak, it is unrepresentative and above all serves only to undermine the positive work carried out by Islamic Societies across the country.”

Wes Streeting, president of the National Union of Students, is also quoted as condemning the study: “This report is a reflection of the biases and prejudices of a right wing think tank – not the views of Muslim students across Britain. Only 632 Muslim students were asked vague and misleading questions, and their answers were then wilfully misinterpreted in order to fit this organisation’s own tawdry obsession with Islam.”

See also the Sunday Herald, which reports that Muslim students’ leaders in Scotland have dismissed the CSC’s research as flawed. Adel Daas, president of Strathclyde University Muslim Students’ Association, said: “What scares me is how this report is going to be used. It will be used to divide Muslims from non-Muslims. This is not working to bring communities together, it is trying to highlight the things that separate us from others, which is wrong. This study is going to cause more pressure, more separation, more issues and more problems.”

The Scottish Islamic Foundation also expressed reservations about the findings. Noman Tahir, a Glasgow University student who is also from the foundation, said of the Centre for Social Cohesion: “Despite the pleasant name, it has become increasingly apparent over the last few years that this organisation is less concerned about social cohesion and instead more apt at spreading vicious lies and hatred towards Muslims.”

Usman Anwar, a member of the Federation of Student Islamic Societies’ student affairs committee, said: “You can tell by the language the report uses throughout that it has a specific agenda to paint a bleak picture. We meet many students on a regular basis and our findings do not correlate with the findings of this survey. This report serves only to vilify Islamic societies and undermine the sincere efforts by mainstream Muslim organisations to tackle the threat of terror which wider society faces.”

See also the Sunday Times where Minette Marrin asks: “how can young Muslims fit into a liberal western democracy if they believe things that are intolerant, illegal and, in plain English, unBritish?”

Marrin offers a solution: “There must be no public recognition of religious associations as representatives of anything or anybody: not on campuses, not in student unions, not in government consultations or in parliament. So-called religious community leaders, or umbrella groups of religious bodies, must of course be free to associate as they like in private, in a free country, but publicly they must be ignored.”

The CSC report is available (pdf) here.

Update:  The YouGov poll asked Muslim students: “Is it ever justifiable to kill in the name of religion?” Only 4% agreed that it was justifiable “in order to preserve and promote that religion”, while 28% agreed with the view that it was justifiable “only if that religion is under attack”. This is where the “third of Muslim students back killings” headline comes from. In fact 53% agreed that killing in the name of religion is “never justifiable”.

Imagine a polling organisation asking students whether they think killing is ever justifiable in the name of their country. 4% say yes, in order to preserve and promote that country, 28% say yes, but only if that country is under attack, and 53% say never under any circumstances. Would the right-wing press report this as “one third of students back killings”? No, they’d report it as “half of students would refuse to fight to defend their country” and denounce the iniquitous influence of pacifism on university campuses!

In fact, it looks to me as though the YouGov poll revealed that the British Muslim student population holds much more moderate views than the Islamophobes of the Centre for Social Cohesion had anticipated, which is why they have to spin the results so dishonestly.

Anti-Islamic movement hits the rocks

Posted on by Bob Pitt

SIOE NederlandAn attempt to set up a pan-European anti-Islam movement is in tatters after its launch activities turned into a series of disasters and its two main components in Denmark and the Netherlands split up.

Stop Islamisation of Europe (SIOE) was founded in 2007 after Stop Islamisation of Denmark (SIAD), led by Anders Gravers, had experienced momentary success in the wake of the controversy over the publication of anti-Islamic cartoons in a regional newspaper in September 2005.

Gravers and Stephen Gash from the UK became SIOE’s official spokesmen, believing it would act as a springboard for a wider European campaign this spring even though similar anti-Islamic groups were active only in the Netherlands. SIOE planned several anti-Islam demonstrations but few took place and the intended large rallies turned out to be no more than small gatherings in the Netherlands and Denmark.

On 26 January 2008, Gravers spoke at a poorly attended demonstration in Amsterdam. This was followed by two demonstrations in Denmark, on 14 March in Hobro and on 15 March in Aalborg, attended by Martin and Monique van der Hulst from SIOE Netherlands and the notorious Dutch nazi Ben van der Kooi.

Van der Kooi’s presence is interesting. His participation in demonstrations split SIOE in the Netherlands because of objections to cooperation with a known extremist. Others in SIOE were unperturbed and organised another demonstration in Amsterdam, but called it off when few people turned up.

The final demonstration was to be on 31 May in the heart of Copenhagen. By then the rot had set in but the grandiose plans for the day included speakers from Britain and Norway and rabble bussed in from all over Denmark to vent their anti-Islam spleen.

As in Amsterdam, the demonstration was, most embarrassingly, called off. The official reason was that Gash, the main speaker, had “been prevented” from taking part. A more likely reason is that anti-racist groups were organising a large counter-demonstration.

That was the least of SIOE’s headaches because it emerged that, days after the failure of the Amsterdam activity on 5 April, SIOE Netherlands had withdrawn from European cooperation, denouncing Gravers as an authoritarian who routinely ignores criticism from SIOE members.

Searchlight, August 2008

Judge tosses Savage’s suit against Islamic group

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Savage NationSAN FRANCISCO — A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit filed by conservative radio talk show host Michael Savage against an Islamic civil rights group over its use of a portion of his show in which he called the Quran a “book of hate.”

Savage sued the Council on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR, for copyright infringement and racketeering in a lawsuit late last year, claiming the group violated his rights by using a segment of his “Savage Nation” show in a letter-writing campaign to get advertisers to boycott the program. In the broadcast used by CAIR, Savage also called the Muslim holy book “a throwback document.”

In her ruling Friday, U.S. District Judge Susan Illston said people who listen to a public broadcast are entitled to use excerpts for purposes of comment and criticism. She also said no evidence was presented to show that advertising on the show’s broadcast was affected by CAIR’s actions.

The racketeering element of the lawsuit alleged that CAIR was not a civil rights group, but a political organization with ties to terrorist groups. CAIR denies those claims, saying it opposes terrorism and religious extremism.

In an interview with The Associated Press after he filed the lawsuit in December, Savage said he was referring to Iran’s president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his violent brand of Islamic extremism in the broadcast, not about the religion in general.

Savage’s attorney, Daniel Horowitz, told the San Francisco Chronicle he plans to file a new racketeering suit.

Associated Press, 26 July 2008

See also “Suit against ‘Savage Nation’ radio host tossed”, San Francisco Chronicle, 26 July 2008

What is Nick Cohen playing at?

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Sunny Hundal poses the question, in response to Cohen’s Evening Standard article applauding Anthony Browne, recently appointed to a senior position in London mayor Boris Johnson’s administration, for having “stood up for free speech and against liberal alliances with radical Islam, and exposed the civil servants who were pretending that a rise in HIV was due to poor sex education rather than immigration from African countries”.

Pickled Politics, 25 July 2008