Category Archives: Hijab

Dutch Muslims protest against face veil ban

Posted on by Bob Pitt

About 80 people protested outside the Dutch parliament on Thursday against a recent government decision to ban Muslim burqas and face veils, the toughest ban thus far in Europe.

Seven women clad in niqabs – a veil concealing the face except the eyes – and loose robes that covered them from neck to toes, and 20 women in headscarves gathered in front of parliament, which was to convene on Thursday for the first time after national elections were held last week. Around 50 supporters carried banners written with the phrases: “Before you judge me, try hard to know me” and “The first lesson of integration: the constitution is for everyone.”

Earlier this month, the outgoing government agreed to a total ban on burqas and other Muslim face veils in public, citing security concerns. Critics said the move was likely to alienate and victimise the country’s 1 million Muslims.

“Every time there is an election, the thing with the burqa comes up,” said Aishah Bayrat, a 41-year-old teacher and mother of five. “The burqa is a religious thing, nobody should interfere with it.”

Clad in a black and blue niqab, 17-year-old Tamara dismissed official concerns that the robe would make it hard for people to identify the wearer or serve as a cover for criminals and terrorists. “What about Santa Claus? He can go out on the streets with his long beard and we can’t recognise him.”

Reuters, 30 November 2006

Survey finds support for veil ban

Posted on by Bob Pitt

One in three people would support a ban on the Muslim face-covering veil in public places, a survey suggests. Asked if the veils should be prohibited in airports and at passport control, six out of 10 agreed. The survey was carried out for the BBC by ICM. Muslim groups say the figures may reflect public unease because of how the media has presented the veil.

Rajnaara Akhtar, of the Assembly for the Protection of the Hijab, said the findings were “positive” because it showed “the vast majority of people … believe women should be allowed to wear what they like”.

She told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that there was a common misconception that Muslim women who wore the face-covering veil had been forced to do so, whereas in reality only a “tiny, tiny minority” were forced. “What we, as Muslims, need to do is to ensure were are educating people on it and making sure that people do understand it is a choice,” she said. “We are living in Britain, which is a democratic society and the vast majority of people in this country promote that and respect that completely.”

BBC News, 29 October 2006

Generating more heat than light

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Salma addressing rally“Unfortunately, despite the intentions of its authors, I fear that their focus on attacking the currently dominant faith organisations will generate more heat than light. In conflating HT with the BNP as if they both pose equal threats to race relations; in echoing in all but name the charge of ‘Islamofascist’ against organisations like MCB; in regurgitating, along with the government and rightwing tabloids, the spectre of sinister self-appointed Muslim community leaders who keep the their foot firmly on the neck of their communities; the manifesto only serves to add more layers of confusion than strip them away.”

Salma Yaqoob responds to the “New Generation Network manifesto”.

Comment is Free, 28 November 2006

NSS congratulates BA for having defied ‘the religious lobby’

Posted on by Bob Pitt

There are striking parallels between the BA cross-wearing case and a similar dispute at Denbigh High School last year. There, the Luton school had a uniform policy that was agreed with and respected by all parents and pupils, except that is for one selfish religious extremist who demanded it be changed to cover her more personal statement of her Muslim faith, namely wearing a jilbab.

The Muslim Council of Britain inevitably took her side, placing the chance to advance the religious cause against the school’s common-sense approach which had the agreement of the wider community.

BA has a uniform policy respected and adhered to by all its 34,000 uniformed employees, and one which doubtless has been the subject of discussion and agreement with unions.

Again, one selfish religious extremist wants the rules changed to fit her personal demands. Again, a spokesman for the religion involved, in this case the Archbishop of York, places that demand above the need for the company to apply a commonsense dress code that 33,999 other people appear happy to accept.

BA is to be congratulated for sticking to its guns. No company should have its policies dictated to it by any one religious fundamentalist engaged in silly posturing, nor be intimidated by the religious lobby.

Letter from Alistair McBay of the National Secular Society in the Courier, 27 November 2006

Veil is ‘a symbol of subservience’

Posted on by Bob Pitt

“I object strongly to teachers wearing the veil. It is more than a choice of dress. It is a symbol of subservience, everything our parents, grandparents, the suffragettes fought against and we have still not won complete equality and freedom for women.

“The veil is a disguise with no place in school. It may hide a highly educated professional woman, a wealthy woman wearing the latest fashions and marvellous jewellery, a poor woman subjected to clitorectomy, a woman beaten and bruised, a child married against her will, or a woman about to be murdered by her family for loving the wrong man. It could also hide a loving mother and a truly religious woman.

“Seeing a pair of dark eyes, you may be looking at a terrorist in disguise, a murderer who believes in jihad and fatwa. Which of the women behind the veil genuinely represents Islam? How do we know?

“It is anathema to free, Western thinking for children to be taught that it is wrong for a man to see a woman’s face.”

Rose Hacker in the Camden New Journal, 23 November 2006

‘Don’t succumb to Islamophobia’ – Mecca2Medina

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Mecca2Medina (2)The Islamic hip-hop and ragga group, Mecca2Medina, has urged black and other ethnic minorities not to succumb to what they described as the worrying trend of Islamophobia in the UK.

Abdul-Karim Talib and Rakin Fetuga told The Voice that prominent news items about British-raised Islamic extremists and media debates about whether women should wear the niqab (or face veil) have led to negative perceptions of the Muslim community.

They said prejudice has increased although only a minority of Muslims become extremists. They said blacks should be wary of jumping on these bandwagons because black people in the past have also been victims of stereotyping. “It is being blown out of proportion. The Muslim community feels as if it is under attack,” they said.

Mecca2Medina made their comments after their performance at the first staging of Eid in the Square.

The Voice, 24 November 2006

‘Veil Wars’ reveal Europe’s intolerance

Posted on by Bob Pitt

“Europe’s traditions of secular tolerance appear to be haunted by the Islamic veil. Every week seems to bring new headlines announcing moves to crack down on the wearing of what critics appear to deem this most alienating symbol of Muslim faith, whether in French public schools, British government buildings or out in public in the Netherlands.

“But is European tolerance more threatened by hijab head-scarf, or even the face-covering niqab … or by the hypocrisy and low-grade xenophobia of those telling Muslim women that this attack on their religious practice is really for their own good? Beneath all the reminders of secularist tradition and progressive discourse cited in Europe’s headscarf debate lies the mean, provincial ‘not in our country, you don’t’ attitude – even when many of the women at whom it’s addressed to were born and raised in ‘our country’.”

Bruce Crumley in Time Magazine, 24 November 2006

Intolerance in Europe

Posted on by Bob Pitt

The Washington Post examines “the blatant bigotry of many mainstream political leaders, journalists and other elites against Islam and its followers” in Europe.

The article continues: “Sometimes the bigots portray their crude attacks on Muslim beliefs and culture as a defense of freedom of speech – as when a Danish newspaper last year chose to publish gratuitously offensive cartoons about the prophet Muhammad. Sometimes they claim to be promoting better communication, as when British parliamentarian Jack Straw recently asked Muslim women to remove their veils when visiting his office. Luckily for the enemies of cynicism and disingenuousness, there is also the Dutch government – which no longer bothers to disguise its ugly prejudice.”

Editorial in Washington Post, 25 November 2006

‘We’re leaving the country after racists abused and spat at me’

Posted on by Bob Pitt

A white Muslim mother who was spat at and abused by drunken football fans in front of her children today told of her humiliation at the hands of the “racist cowards”. Mother-of-five Michelle Idrees, 27, from Luton, said she had been too scared to travel to London or use public transport since the ordeal.

British-born convert Mrs Idrees was called a “f***ing Muslim slag” and told her son, then aged four, would be the “next suicide bomber” by a family of Arsenal supporters on a busy train. She is now planning to leave Britain because she feels her children have no future in this country.

Mrs Idrees said: “It was terrifying. All my children were crying hysterically, but these men wouldn’t stop. It makes me sick to think things have got so bad for Muslims that three men can say such disgusting things and threaten to punch a mother in the face, in front of her children, and nobody on the train does anything.”

One of the men had called her a “Paki-loving whore” and told her to go back to her own country. “They were big, aggressive men. I wouldn’t have answered back but I had to protect my children. Britain’s changed so much since 9/11 and 7/7 that people think we’re all terrorists.”

Mrs Idrees, who was wearing a headscarf, had been to London last August to attend an Islamic commemorative service for victims of the London bombings. She was travelling home on a Thameslink train with four of her children Stephen, 12, Chelsea, 10, Sharnia, six, and Shazan, five, as well as a friend’s two children and a neighbour, when the half-hour tirade began. Mrs Idrees, who converted to Islam after meeting her second husband, told the men that real Muslims did not support terrorism.

“They called the police and told them I had bomb in my handbag. Then they called a black woman on the train a nigger. They’re just racist cowards.”

Continue reading →

Aishah Azmi sacked

Posted on by Bob Pitt

A Muslim teaching assistant who was suspended for refusing to remove her veil in the classroom has been sacked.

Aishah Azmi, 24, of Thornhill Lees, Dewsbury, west Yorkshire, was suspended on full pay earlier this year by Kirklees council and has now been sacked, sources said.

Last month, an employment tribunal dismissed three of Mrs Azmi’s claims of discrimination and harassment but found that she was victimised by Headfield Church of England junior school in Dewsbury and awarded her £1,000 for “injury to feelings”.

Mrs Azmi said she was willing to remove her veil in front of children – but not when male colleagues were present. Her case sparked a national debate on multiculturalism in Britain.

The prime minister, Tony Blair, said the veil row was part of a necessary debate about the way the Muslim community integrates into British society and said the veil was a “mark of separation” which makes people of other ethnic backgrounds feel uncomfortable.

The intervention by a series of politicians, which culminated in Mr Blair’s remarks, were criticised both by the tribunal and Muslim community leaders. The tribunal report said it was “most unfortunate” that politicians had made comments on the case which were sub judice.

The debate was sparked by the leader of the House of Commons, Jack Straw, when he said that the wearing of full veils – or niqab – made community relations more difficult.

The government’s race minister, Phil Woolas, demanded Mrs Azmi be sacked, accusing her of “denying the right of children to a full education” because her stand meant she could not “do her job” and insisted that barring men from working with her would amount to “sexual discrimination”.

The shadow home secretary, David Davis, launched a stinging attack on Muslim leaders for risking “voluntary apartheid” in Britain, and allegedly expecting special protection from criticism.

Press Association, 24 November 2006