Dutch MPs condemn plan for coalition backed by Wilders

Dutch MPs returned temporarily from their summer recess today for a special debate with chief negotiator Ruud Lubbers about the progress of the coalition talks.

The public gallery was jammed solid as the party leaders on the left and the right passed judgment on the proposed coalition of the conservative VVD and the centre-right Christian Democrats which could become the first minority government in the Netherlands since World War II. They plan to rule with parliamentary support from Geert Wilders’ anti-Islamic Freedom Party.

Labour Party leader Job Cohen said Geert Wilders was the real winner. He was “the puppet master pulling the strings behind the scenes. With all the advantages and none of the responsibility.”

Green Left’s Femke Halsema called the minority coalition the “worst conceivable alternative” and accused Christian Democrat leader Maxime Verhagen of betraying his principles. She quoted his own words about Geert Wilders about whom he once said “by spreading fear and hatred he is involved only in destruction”.

RNW, 4 August 2010

Schools and universities should have power to ban veil says Swedish education minister

The leaders of Swedish schools and universities should be allowed to ban students from wearing clothes that cover their faces, including Islamic veils such as the full-body burqa and the full-face niqab, Education Minister Jan Bjorklund said Wednesday.

“Education is based on an interaction between teacher and students. You have to be able see each others’ faces,” Bjorklund said. “I think that it is questionable if the school can fulfil its task if a student wears clothing that covers the face, like the burqa and niqab.”

The Left Party’s education spokeswoman, Rossana Dinamarca, said the proposal would “force more girls with full-face veils to (religious) independent schools” and criticized the proposal as populistic, noting the upcoming elections in September.

DPA, 4 August 2010

Home Office adviser suspended for criticising ban on Zakir Naik

In the Sunday Times David Leppard reveals that Sabin Khan, a senior adviser to home secretary Theresa May, has been suspended for opposing May’s decision to ban Zakir Naik from entering the UK. Apparently Khan’s offence was to describe this stupid and ignorant decision, entirely accurately, as “a huge error of judgment”. Leppard reports that Charles Farr, Khan’s boss at the Office for Security and Counter-Terrorism (the Home Office directorate responsible for counter-terrorism in the UK), also opposed the ban.

Of course, both Leppard and the Sunday Times have an axe to grind here, as it was Leppard’s misleading and scaremongering article (“Muslim preacher of hate is let into Britain”, Sunday Times, 30 May 2010) that provided the basis for the ban on Dr Naik.

A statement by the Islamic Research Foundation rebutting the Home Office’s charges against Dr Naik can be consulted here. It points out that the apparently damning quote produced by Leppard and echoed by the Home Office, that “every Muslim should be a terrorist”, was actually in defence of police repression of violent criminals – a stance on law and order that you might have thought would endear Dr Naik to a Tory home secretary.

Leppard reports that Charles Farr welcomed the IRF’s response as “a good strong statement”. Unfortunately, instead of reassessing the Naik ban and rectifying her mistake, it would appear that May prefers to discipline her critics.

Continue reading

Is fear of Islam the new McCarthyism?

Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite poses the question over at the Washington Post. She takes on the Islamophobic views of veteran Republican right-winger Newt Gingrich who, she writes, “believes that Americans are ‘at risk’ as a nation, not only from the violence of a ‘militant Islam’, but also from the cultural integration of Muslims in the West. The latter he calls ‘stealth jihadists’. A close historical parallel, Gingrich argued in a lengthy address to the American Enterprise Institute entitled America at Risk: Camus, National Security and Afghanistan, where he is now a senior fellow, is the struggle with communism.”

Standard and Mail pay damages over suicide bomber slur

Reza PankhurstA Muslim academic today accepted an apology and substantial undisclosed damages after the Daily Mail claimed he groomed Tel Aviv suicide bomber Omar Sharif.

In addition to accepting damages from Associated Newspapers, publisher of the Daily Mail, Reza Pankhurst also accepted an apology and damages from the London Evening Standard at London’s High Court this morning over a similar story.

Pankhurst launched a libel action against the two papers over articles which appears in the Standard and the Mail on 15 January with the respective headlines “LSE’s Islamist teacher ‘groomed suicide bomber for Tel Aviv attack'”, and “Revealed: Islamist preacher who lectures at top London university ‘groomed suicide bomber’.” A third article headed “Teaching at a leading university ‘the mentor of a suicide bomber'”appeared in the Mail the following day.

Acting for Pankhurst, Lucy Moorman told Justice Tugendhat at the time of publication her client was a PhD student and graduate teaching assistant at the LSE. She told the judge that Pankhurst, a devout Muslim who wished to become a full time academic, had been an undergraduate at Kings College until 1996 where he was in the year above Sharif. The court was told that Pankhurst had limited contact with Sharif during the period they were at university.

Moorman said that at the time of Sharif’s attempted suicide bombing in 2003, Pankhurst was a political prisoner in Egypt and had had no contact with Sharif for at least eight years. “Mr Pankhurst has never mentored a terrorist or groomed anyone to carry out an act of terrorism. He is committed to furthering the cause of Muslims in an exclusively non-violent way,”she said.

Moorman told the court the allegations in the articles were false and that both papers had now agreed to pay him costs and damages for the ‘injury to his reputation and the distress caused to him’by the articles.

Press Gazette, 28 July 2010

Hollobone could face legal action, warns Liberty

Philip HolloboneA Tory MP has been warned he could face legal action if he follows through on a threat to refuse to meet constituents wearing the veil.

Lawyers for Liberty have written to Philip Hollobone insisting that his stance is unlawful and that they “will be happy to represent any of your constituents that you refuse to meet because they are veiled”.

Continue reading

Finsbury Park mosque calls on Khalid Mahmood to retract slanders

North London Central Mosque

Press Release

Khalid Mahmood’s False Claims Increase Risk of Islamophobic Attacks on North London Central Mosque

We wish to put the record straight following false claims made by Khalid Mahmood MP for Birmingham Perry Bar, a former trustee of North London Central Mosque (NLCM). Until this week we intended to remain silent in the face of his provocative and ill-informed statements in the media but now we must speak out to defend the good name of our mosque, our community and our partners in Islington – Jeremy Corbyn, our MP, politicians and officials, police officers and faith and community leaders.

Equally, important, we must highlight the increased risk of Islamophobic attacks that we now face as a result of Khalid’s Mahmood’s false claims and the climate of anti-Muslim sentiment he is helping to stir up against NLCM.

Continue reading

Staten Island mosque voted down

Staten Island anti-mosque placardThe mosque proposed for Staten Island has been voted down by the church that was going to sell the property to The Muslim American Society [MAS].

You’ll recall that the pastor of the church had quietly signed a contract to sell the old convent to MAS, and then some Staten Island locals (i.e. NYC rednecks) caught wind of it, and held ugly protests to stop it, because it would have “made it difficult to find parking.” It’s also probably too close to Ground Zero, and would stab poor Sarah Palin in the heart. Or as one protester put it, “We just want to leave our neighborhood the way it is – Christian, Catholic.”

The church’s pastor changed his mind in the midst of the uproar, and since the contract stipulated that the sale had to be approved by the board of trustees of St. Margaret Mary’s Roman Catholic Church, today the decision was reversed, according to SI Live. Chalk another one up for Real America! The church won’t get its $750,000, the convent will remain empty and fall into disrepair, and the residents of Midland Beach will never be terrorized by an anti-American lack of parking.

Gothamist, 22 July 2010

For an alternative view, see “VICTORY! No Muslim Brotherhood MAS Mosque in Staten Island”, Atlas Shrugs, 22 July 2010


Muslim American Society Statement

St. Margaret Mary’s board voted today against the pending sale of the vacant convent in Midland Beach to the Muslim American Society (MAS).

The Muslim community, including MAS, is disappointed with the Archdiocese’s decision to back away from this sale.  This denial reinforced an unfortunate notion that the pressures of bigotry and Islamophobia triumphed over a good, long-standing relationship between the Archdiocese and the Muslim community.  It is indeed a setback.

Every person and religious institution has a right to build a house of worship, including the Muslims in the South Shore of Staten Island. It is a travesty that a public official subjected MAS to an investigation simply because it chose to exercise its constitutional right to establish an Islamic center. The results of the investigation proved false all the inflammatory accusations against MAS – something already clear to everyone who has worked closely with us.

While we continue to pursue our religious and constitutional rights, we will not hesitate to reach out to the Staten Island community at large, to establish mutual understanding and to protect freedom of religion.

MAS is determined to serve all communities across the nation including Staten Island and is currently studying all available options in response to the Archdiocese’s decision.

Islamophobia and the Muslim center at Ground Zero

Islamophobia must be recognized for what it is, a social cancer as unacceptable as anti-Semitism, a threat to the very fabric of our democratic, pluralistic way of life.

The line that distinguishes Islam from those who commit violence and terror in the name of Islam – between the majority of mainstream Muslims and the acts of a minority of Muslim terrorists – must be maintained.

Blurring these distinctions risks the adoption of foreign and domestic policies that promote a clash rather than co-existence of cultures and threaten the rights and civil liberties of Muslims.

John Esposito writes in response to the “Ground Zero mosque” controversy.

CNN, 20 July 2010