NUJ forces Daily Star to abandon anti-Muslim ‘spoof’

A staff revolt at the Daily Star prevented publication of a spoof Islamic version of the paper called the “Daily Fatwa”.

The mock-up “Daily Fatwa”, which promised a “Page 3 Burkha Babes Special” and competitions to “Burn a Flag and Win a Corsa” and “Win hooks just like Hamza’s”, was prepared to run as page 6 in Wednesday’s edition of the Daily Star, one of the stable of newspapers owned by publisher Richard Desmond. The page also included a spoof leader column under the headline “Allah is Great” but left blank save for a stamp with the word “Censored”.

But shortly before the Star was due to go to press on Tuesday evening, concerned members of the National of Journalists (NUJ) called an emergency meeting in the 9th floor canteen of Desmond’s Northern & Shell building beside the River Thames. After 25 minutes, the NUJ chapel passed a motion saying that the article was “deliberately offensive” to Muslims.

Independent, 19 October 2006

Mad Mel goes ‘behind the veil’

“On the Moral Maze last night, which discussed the place of religious symbols such as the Muslim veil and the Christian cross in public life, one of our witnesses was Nai’ma B Robert, a convert to Islam who wore the niqab or full-face veil. She spoke well, although I thought naively, about how she chose to wear the niqab as an ‘act of worship’ – naively because she was unwilling to face up to the political purpose of the veil and its role as a symbol of the jihad which is used to recruit more people to the cause of Islamising society and to demoralise and intimidate its victims. That is why not just the niqab but also the hijab has been banned from public places in Turkey and Indonesia.”

Melanie Phillips’s Diary, 19 October 2006

Feminism, imperialism and the veil

“Muslim women who adopt the veil in Europe may simultaneously be seeking to affirm their religious identity while being determined to enter the public sphere as full and equal citizens. They are often also trying to change the cultural and political meaning of the veil in a contemporary context. For some it may be linked to patriarchal pressure, for others a symbol of identity and emancipation in a commodified and patriarchal society – and for many a response to a religious vocation. Feminist politics needs to be flexible and respond to these complexities. And for Muslim women their religion and even their gender are not the only, or the most grievous, focus of their oppression – their bodies have also been, and continue to be, a battleground for European and US imperialism.

“Lord Cromer, British consul general in Egypt in the late 19th century, famously justified British colonial rule by arguing that it could liberate Egyptian women from their oppressive veils…. When the US launched its war on terror in Afghanistan in 2001, George Bush glorified his aims by stating: ‘Because of our recent military gains in much of Afghanistan, women are no longer imprisoned in their homes … The fight against terrorism is also a fight for the rights and dignity of women.’ The US social anthropologists Saba Mahmood and Charles Hirschkind have noted that the relationship between the neoconservative Bush administration and some US feminists was reciprocal and intimate….

“Those feminists who give well-meaning lectures to Muslim women on what they should think, say and wear are not in the end alone. There is a risk that their powerful female voices will inadvertently sustain another political discourse: the words and actions of an illustrious line of men who continue to justify their imperial ambitions on the bodies, often dead bodies, of Muslim women.”

Maleiha Malik in the Guardian, 19 October 2006

Anthony Glees: Internment should be a policy option

“Academics should think the unthinkable. We should not be blinkered by political correctness. People need to speak up. They shouldn’t be made to be afraid. Increasingly universities are becoming mental corsets because of over-regulation. I’ve had universities threatening legal action, vice-chancellors calling for me to be prevented from doing research. And it’s these people who claim to be for freedom of speech.

“The legal profession has taken the European Convention far too far in a way that is inappropriate in a country that’s at war. The convention is deeply flawed. It was set up in 1948 and it is not right for now. At the moment we are at war, the fact that it is being fought in Iraq and Afghanistan conceals that fact. The law has been used to favour the perpetrator, not the persecuted. We need to think about how we should behave to people who consider us enemies, whether they are British citizens or people who are in Britain seeking asylum.

“Internment in the second world war is called MI5’s darkest hour, but internment was a very effective way of keeping the country safe from Nazi subversion. People say that the vast majority of those interned were Jews, and they would be the last people to act in a subversive way. In fact research shows that there were some Jews in Britain as agents of the Third Reich. Their families were in the hands of the Gestapo and they were blackmailed. And some say that internment in Northern Ireland made the situation better. Internment needs to be talked about. There shouldn’t be things that shouldn’t be considered – if they can help.

“The German equivalent of MI5 is called the Office for the Protection of the Constitution. Liberal democracy will be easily destroyed if we do not act against extremism. We give our enemies the weapons they need to destroy us. We need to be more mindful that there is a threshold that should not be crossed. Not everything is permissible. Wearing the niqab is saying we don’t want to be British. Forty per cent of British Muslims say they want to live under sharia law. That is unacceptable. They should go to a country with sharia law.”

Anthony Glees in the Independent, 19 October 2008

Skin-deep liberalism

“Perhaps the bleakest stain in our system’s record is its turning on its least privileged of minorities, pushing it to the corner, surrounding it with suspicion, repressive measures and policies, giving free reign to bigotry and prejudice. Muslims are Britain’s poorest community, five times more likely to live in overcrowded accommodation than their fellow white Britons, four times more likely to be unemployed, twice as likely to have no qualifications, live in social rented accommodation, and suffer from ill health.

“But just as Thatcher had blamed the poor for their poverty, the trend today is to hold this new underclass responsible for its misfortunes in one of the most socially stratified, exclusionist and segregated social systems in the world. From ‘the working class character’ with its ‘laziness’ and ‘lack of motivation’, to Muslim culture and its ‘penchant for isolationism’, our system seems to excel in the creation of scapegoats.”

Soumaya Ghannoushi examines the limitations of Western liberalism.

Guardian Comment is Free, 19 October 2006

If this onslaught was about Jews, I would be looking for my passport

Jonathan Freedland“I’ve been trying to imagine what it must be like to be a Muslim in Britain. I guess there’s a sense of dread about switching on the radio or television, even about walking into a newsagents. What will they be saying about us today? Will we be under assault for the way we dress? Or the schools we go to, or the mosques we build? Who will be on the front page: a terror suspect, a woman in a veil or, the best of both worlds, a veiled terror suspect.

“… we’re getting it badly wrong – bombarding Muslims with pressure and prejudice, laying one social problem after another at their door. I try to imagine how I would feel if this rainstorm of headlines substituted the word ‘Jew’ for ‘Muslim’: Jews creating apartheid, Jews whose strange customs and costume should be banned. I wouldn’t just feel frightened. I would be looking for my passport.”

Jonathan Freedland in the Guardian, 18 October 2006

We’ve had some harsh words to say about Jonathan Freedland in the past – over Qaradawi and the proposed new mosque at West Ham – but this article should be applauded.

Want to wear the veil? Go and live somewhere else, says the Sun

Editorial in today’s Sun:

TONY Blair yesterday threw his weight behind Jack Straw’s call for Muslim women to drop the veil. The Prime Minister backed the school chiefs who suspended a teacher for refusing to remove her mask in front of pupils. The veil, he said, is a visible statement of separation and is “incompatible” with life in Britain, echoing Mr Straw’s earlier concerns.

Modern Muslim women agree the veil is a primitive throwback to an age when their oppressed sisters were treated little better than slaves. In benighted parts of the world, they still are.

Britain has a hard-won heritage of fairness and equal rights. It is the main reason so many migrants came here in the first place. Those who have taken advantage of such privileges must not be allowed to turn back the clock. It’s time to take a leaf out of Australian Prime Minister John Howard’s book. And tell extremists that if they want to live under Sharia law, they can’t live here.

Standing together against the Islamophobic attacks

The government’s attacks on Muslims have led to a series of racist attacks across Britain, but there is also resistance and signs of a new fighting unity between Muslims and non-Muslims.

Some 70 people gathered at an hour’s notice last Saturday, in Dudley, West Midlands to oppose the Nazi BNP and defend the right of the local Muslim community to build a new mosque. Around 30 fascist supporters had earlier turned up to use the opportunities created by ministers’ comments to boost their Islamophobic campaigning against the mosque. The mosque contacted Unite Against Fascism and together they held a protest to show their determination to keep the BNP out of Dudley.

A major rally is now planned for Sunday 29 October to stress mutual respect between people of different faiths and ethnic backgrounds, the rights of anyone to practice their religion and the need to stop the fascists.

In Glasgow anti-racists will gather this Saturday for a Unite Against Islamophobia rally called by Glasgow Stop the War Coalition and the Muslim Association of Britain.

Socialist Worker, 21 October 2006

BMI calls national rally to defend religious freedom and demand an end to attacks on Muslims

BMI rallyFreedom of religion is one of our most precious democratic rights. It took hundreds of years, including international and civil wars, to establish the right of every individual to freely pursue their religious beliefs subject only to their conscience. It must be defended against every challenge.

Britain today faces a systematic campaign by sections of the media and some politicians, fanned by the BNP, to undermine this right by sowing hatred against Muslims. This has culminated in physical attacks, fire bombings and assaults on women. This campaign constitutes an attack on civil and religious liberties including an attempt to suppress the right of persons of all faiths to dress in accordance with their religious convictions. It must be strongly opposed – as indeed should any attack on the rights of Christians, Jews, Sikhs or any other religious group.

It is necessary for all democrats, of all faiths and none, to come together to defend these basic principles of freedom of religion and culture.

As the first step, Faith groups are coming together with all political parties and communities to a central London public rally to support Freedom of religion and culture and to call for an end to the recent attacks on Muslims on 20th of November 2006 at Westminister Central Hall, 6:30-9:30pm. The aim is to develop a national campaign to defend freedom of religion and culture and to combat the rise of Islamophobia.

The rally is called by the British Muslim Initiative and supported by the Muslim Council of Britain, the Mayor of London, Pax Christi, Stop the War coalition, National Assembly Against Racism, the 1990 Trust, Islamic Forum Europe, the Cordoba Foundation, Muslims for JUSTICE and PEACE, Islamic Human Right Commission, Islamic Times, Dawatul Islam and Assembly for the Protection of Hijab.

British Muslim Initiative press release, 18 October 2006