This counter-terror plan is in ruins

The British government’s brand new counter-terrorism strategy is already in disarray – and ministers have only themselves to blame. The souped-up plan to fight al-Qaida, confound dirty bombers, halt suicide attacks and confront “extremism” in the country’s Muslim community was unveiled by the prime minister with much fanfare on Tuesday. But even before the 175-page “Contest 2” document had been launched, the credibility of its promise to engage with the Muslim mainstream had been thrown into question by the decision of Hazel Blears, the communities secretary, to cut all links with the Muslim Council of Britain.

Blears had been gunning for the MCB, the country’s main Muslim umbrella body, which has shown increasing independence in recent years, particularly in relation to British foreign policy. The pretext was a statement about Israel’s onslaught on Gaza signed by the MCB’s number two, Daud Abdullah, which Blears interpreted as a call for attacks on British ships if they were sent to intercept arms supplies to Hamas. Ten days ago, in a tone more associated with Raj-era colonial governors than democratic politicians addressing independent community bodies, Blears delivered an ultimatum to the MCB: either it sacked its elected deputy general secretary or all contacts would be severed.

Never mind that Gordon Brown’s idea about policing Palestinian waters has been kicked into the long grass of international talks; or that Abdullah, a Caribbean-born veteran of Grenada’s leftwing New Jewel Movement (later overthrown by Ronald Reagan) made clear he was not calling for such attacks – let alone attacks on Jewish communities, as Blears claims in a letter in today’s Guardian. All links have now been suspended. And if there were any doubt that the attempt to isolate Britain’s most significant Muslim body was linked to the new anti-terror policy, the timing of the ultimatum for the eve of the launch made clear that for Blears they were all of a piece.

Seumas Milne in the Guardian, 26 March 2009

‘Apartheid culture’ existed at Met police station, Muslim officer tells tribunal

Scotland Yard’s claims to have put its racist past behind it suffered a blow yesterday when it was alleged that senior officers allowed a “culture of apartheid” at a police station where white officers threatened black colleagues and refused to ride in the same van.

The allegations will be heard at an employment tribunal tomorrow and will embarrass the force, whose head, Sir Paul Stephenson, yesterday said the Metropolitan police was no longer institutionally racist. He was speaking at a conference to mark the 10th anniversary of the Macpherson report into the bungled Stephen Lawrence murder investigation.

The allegations of discrimination and victimisation to be heard at a tribunal this week – which the Met will deny – centre on Belgravia police station in central London. A Muslim police community support officer (PCSO), Asad Saeed, claims white officers framed him by alleging he had abused and threatened to assault a drunk vagrant in a McDonald’s burger restaurant in central London.

The officer was ordered to be dismissed, but later reinstated on appeal. Both of the internal police discipline hearings heard allegations of racism that Scotland Yard thought belonged to the canteen culture of two decades ago.

Alfred John, chair of the Metropolitan branch of the Black Police Association, said: “It displays all the hallmarks of a very familiar and disturbing picture.”

Saeed’s MP, George Galloway, said: “It is quite clear there was a culture of overt racism in the station which was tolerated, if not encouraged, by senior management. Asad was wrongly dismissed from the police service.”

Guardian, 25 February 2009

Update:  See “Police played ‘spot the black officer in the dark’, tribunal hears”, Guardian, 2 March 2009

Update 2:  See “Police community support officer Asad Saeed loses discrimination case”, Times, 29 October 2009

Express is shocked by case of torture victim – he ‘costs taxpayers money’

Treated Like RoyaltyA former Al Qaeda suspect was flown back to Britain on a luxury jet yesterday – at Government expense. Now taxpayers face a massive bill for his new life on benefits.

Alleged torture victim Binyam Mohamed, 30, stepped off a twin-engined Gulfstream at an RAF base after more than six years as a US prisoner being held in Guantanamo Bay. Accompanied on the flight by two Foreign Office officials, two Metropolitan Police officers and a doctor, Ethiopian Mohamed’s return to his adopted country cost an amazing £120,000.

Tory MP David Davies said: “I don’t think it should be a source of pleasure to anyone that this man has returned to the UK. He is an Ethiopian national who was lucky ever to be in Britain in the first place. If he was flown back to Addis Ababa, I think we would all breathe a sigh of relief.”

Fellow Tory MP Philip Davies said: “It’s absolutely ludicrous. This guy isn’t a British citizen, he just happened to be residing in Britain. I cannot see any advantage to the British taxpayer in him coming here. The likelihood is that he will be on benefits and we will be forking out for him while the country is going bankrupt.

“And is he a danger to public safety? Will the Government be putting him under 24-hour monitoring by the security services with the extra strain that on taxpayers’ money? It is an astonishing decision.”

Susie Squire, of the TaxPayers’ Alliance, said: “Binyam Mohamed has already cost the British public quite enough without the luxury of private jets. A cheaper way should have been found to bring him back.

“This man is not even a British citizen, and yet is going to continue to be a massive financial burden on law-abiding taxpayers in this country. We’re in a recession and people need money to feed their kids, not foot the bill for chartering planes and round-the-clock surveillance.”
Daily Express, 24 February 2009

Update:  For comment on this and other similar articles, see ENGAGE, 24 February 2009

Protest by East End artists at National Theatre

National Theatre refuses to debate racist play ENGLAND PEOPLE VERY NICE with East End artists

Artists from the East End will be holding a protest outside the National Theatre at 5pm on Friday 27th February in the run up to the platform discussion at 6pm with Richard Bean, the writer of the play. At a meeting on Friday 20th February Nicholas Hytner, the boss of the National, refused to organise a proper joint debate in the next few weeks on a play that is anti-irish, anti-Bangladeshi and Islamophobic, and which the Evening Standard described as cruel and abusive, and intent on attacking immigrants.

Playwright Hussain Ismail, who will be leading the campaign, said: “Hytner is scared of a debate. We are from the East End and we know that it is the most multicultural place in the world. Brick Lane in particular is the centre of the multicultural universe. It’s the coolest place on the earth and that’s why people come from all over the world to hang out there. Bean and Hytner haven’t got a clue about the East End. That’s why the play is bonkers!”

“We want a right of reply ­ a proper debate ­ not a 40 minute platform discussion where the director just asks some bland questions to the writer and we all go home. We want a vigorous and robust debate with Bean and Hytner and us on the same platform with the media and public present on mass.”

Organisers of the protest are asking everybody to come celebrate multicultural London and demand that East End artists have the right to a debate, and challenge misrepresentation of their communities. They are asking protesters to bring whistles and drums to stand up for multiculturalism.

Protest details:
5pm 27th February
National Theatre, Southbank, London SE1 9PX
Embankment and Waterloo tube stations.

For more information contact:
Hussain Ismail
hussain@soulfiretheatre.org.uk

British mosques promote community cohesion

MCB welcomes independent Charity Commission report on Muslim centres of worship

The Muslim Council of Britain today welcomed the findings of an independent Charity Commission survey of mosques in Britain. The survey shows that mosques contribute to their local communities through a wide range of services and activities in addition to providing space for worship, from sport and leisure activities to healthy living programmes and assistance for senior citizens.

The survey charts how an overwhelming majority (94%) deliver educational programme for children and young people and three in five (61%) carry out women’s groups/activities. It is also a welcome information that increasingly more and more mosques have young people (52%) and women (15%) represented in their management responsibility. Far from being a source of separation, mosques are integral to community cohesion and development.

Dr Manazir Ahsan, the Chair of the Muslim Council of Britain’s Mosques Committee said, “I fully concur with Dame Suzi Leather the chair of the Charity Commission that ‘this new survey reveals the important contribution that Mosques are making to communities across England and Wales’. We agree with the primary conclusion of the report, that mosques should not only be a place of solace and worship, but should also benefit local communities, irrespective of faith. We are in no doubt that some mosques — with very little resources — require the necessary help and assistance to serve its users and the local community. To that end, we endorse the Charity Commission call to mosques to engage with the Commission and benefit from its services in order to have proper policies in place.”

“Despite the good work emanating from the majority of our mosques, and regardless of authentic, and citable evidence such as those presented by the Charity Commission, I am in no doubt that bigots and doommongers will nevertheless continue to peddle Islamophobic hysteria, insisting that mosques are incapable of promoting community cohesion. We must prove these naysayers wrong by opening up and welcoming all people to our mosques.”

MCB press release, 23 February 2009

See also “Survey reveals mosque insights”, BBC News, 23 February 2009

Download the Charity Commission report here.

When terrorism isn’t newsworthy

At the Scottish Islamic Foundation website Osama Saeed lambasts the media’s almost total failure to report the conviction of Neil MacGregor, the self-proclaimed “proud racist and National Front member” who threatened to blow up Glasgow Central Mosque and behead one Muslim a week until every mosque in Scotland was shut down:

“Imagine if a Scottish Muslim had pled guilty to threatening to blow up Glasgow Cathedral and behead one Christian a week until all British troops were pulled out of Iraq and Afghanistan.

“There would be outrage, right? It would be splashed over the front page of every newspaper in the land. It would be the top of all news bulletins. There would be volumes written on what motivated him, his family background and his beliefs. There would be a rich stream of analysis from a variety of positions. Government would be asked what it was doing to avoid such a thing from happening.

“So when news came into the Scottish-Islamic Foundation office this week of one Neil MacGregor pleading guilty to threatening to blow up Glasgow Central Mosque and behead one Muslim a week until all Scottish mosques were shut down, we thought it couldn’t possibly be true. There had been no build up to such a trial, no coverage during it and none on the verdict. We Googled it, and nothing came up. Not a sausage, nada, zilch.

“Immediately, we fired out a press release. If this hadn’t been brought to the attention of our media, surely they’d cover it once they heard of it? Seems not. Well, apart from Scotland Today (brief mention 10 minutes in).

“So I phoned up the newsdesks of some of our major newspapers and asked how this could have happened. Some said they’d get back to me, but haven’t. Others put their hands up and said it was a big mistake. Helpfully, it was pointed out that some news outlets rely entirely on output from the Glasgow Courts Press Agency, and it seems that they might not have put anything out on this. It’s something we’ll be following up. At the Atif Siddique trial in 2007, there were even unidentified figures there on hand to brief the press on a plot to behead the Canadian prime minister which wasn’t even brought up during the trial, but led the news the next day as a result.

“There is a chance for redemption. MacGregor will be sentenced on March 6. This should provide a sufficient hook for media outlets to give coverage.”

But these double standards are par for the course, quite frankly. The media initially ignored the Robert Cottage case. And coverage of the Brian Donegan trial was non-existent. Violent extremism is deemed worthy of serious attention only when the violent extremists aren’t white.

Why the Wilders ban was right

“I was disappointed by your one-sided coverage of the Geert Wilders controversy. Neither your editorial (‘Ban on Wilders was folly‘) nor your columnist Catherine Bennett (‘Geert Wilders has just made our leaders look truly idiotic‘, Comment) appeared able to distinguish between causing offence and inciting racial hatred. It is on the latter charge that Wilders faces prosecution in the Netherlands. While the principle of free speech covers the right to offend people, it certainly does not allow racists the right to whip up hatred against minority communities. For this reason, I and many others fully supported Jacqui Smith’s decision to ban Wilders from entering Britain.”

Letter from London Assembly member Murad Qureshi in theObserver, 22 February 2009

Muslim schools ban our culture

Muslim Schools Ban Our CultureA number of Muslim schools are promoting Islamic extremism and encouraging pupils to grow up despising Britain, a think tank report claims today.

Youngsters are discouraged from playing cricket and board games, listening to western music and even reading Shakespeare plays or Harry Potter books by fanatics targeting classrooms, the research says.

Some children are even being told to shun “the evil system of western culture” and encouraged to live in “ghettos”.

The vile diktats to Muslim pupils, some of primary school age, appear on school websites or on other internet sites linked directly to school sites and operated by fund amentalist groups. Critics last night called for strict vetting of Muslim education to root out extremist influence. Moderate Muslim groups welcomed the findings and called for the attempts by extremists to target children to be stamped out.

The propaganda is highlighted in a report called Music, Chess and Other Sins from the Westminster-based think tank Civitas. Author Denis MacEoin investigated hundreds of school websites and Islamic websites linked to schools to uncover the material.

Daily Express, 20 February 2009


The Express editorial is headed “Britain must stand up for its time-honoured values”. We are told: “Before mass immigration got under way in the middle of the last century, Britain was a country blessed with a cohesive culture. It isn’t now….Things have now reached a point where some Muslim schools ban such pillars of British life as chess, Shakespeare and even the very idea of women’s equality….This is a disastrous state of affairs, meaning young Muslims are bound to grow up confused and alienated. Experience tells us that some will become the Islamist terrorists of tomorrow.”

The Telegraph went with “The Muslim children taught to hate Britain” and the article began: “Islamic fundamentalism that encourages children to despise British society is being promoted on websites at Muslim schools in the UK, think tank Civitas has revealed.”

This has now been amended so the headline reads “Islamic fundamentalism promoted on websites at some Muslim schools in the UK, think tank finds” and the opening sentence now also includes the word “some” before “Muslim schools”.

MacEoin himself contributes an article headlined “We must stop Muslim schools teaching that integration is a sin” although the online version now carries the standfirst: “Some Muslim schools make it their mission to prevent assimiliation – and it is time the Government changed that, says Denis MacEoin.”

And a Telegraph editorial recycles the familiar right-wing myth about Christians being discriminated against in favour of Muslims: “Sneering at Christianity is routine. Perhaps that is an inevitable consequence of living in a free society – but it is interesting that militant atheists clam up when it is suggested that Islam might be a target for ridicule. [What planet do Torygraph leaders writers live on? Have they never come across Richard Dawkins?] And when was the last time a Muslim woman was banned from wearing a small symbol of her faith? This double standard runs through the government sector and the intelligentsia.”

The Times announces: “Ofsted accused of soft line on Muslims.”

Amanda Platell’s comment piece in the Daily Mail is headlined: “Schooling children to hate our values” (“schools like these risk breeding a new generation of Islamic fundamentalists, whose hatred of the West may very well spill over into acts of violence – or even murder. How can we tolerate such hatred in our midst?”).

The Daily Star has “Islam kids taught forget Potter and prepare for jihad“.

See also ENGAGE which reproduces the following poll from the Star:

Should Muslim schools be banned

Guilty plea on bomb threat to Glasgow Central Mosque

Glasgow_Central_MosqueA man has admitted to threatening to blow up Glasgow Central Mosque, and behead one Muslim a week until every mosque in Scotland was shut down.

The proceedings at Glasgow Sheriff Court regarding Neil MacGregor, who sent the threats to Strathclyde Police as a National Front member, are reported in the latest edition of the Digger and have caused extreme alarm in the Muslim community.

Osama Saeed of the Scottish-Islamic Foundation said:

“I hope that he is dealt with in exactly the same manner as an extremist who was Muslim would be.

“This latest episode underscores the need for effective action tackling Islamophobia. The far right use fear of Muslims as a cloak for their old overt racism. They should realise they follow the same ideology as Al-Qaeda when they target an entire community for violence.”

Bashir Maan, President of Glasgow Central Mosque said:

“I’m surprised there hasn’t been more coverage of this. I could imagine the controversy and analysis there would have been if he had been a Muslim doing this to non-Muslims.”

Last year in Glasgow, Mary McKay was sentenced to six years for stabbing a Muslim man in the chest. She said: “I hope the guy is dead. I just stabbed a guy with the same colour of skin as a terrorist. I just saw the two Pakis and he had an NY on his top.”

Mosques across Scotland have been subject of attacks. As well as in Glasgow, this includes Edinburgh, Falkirk, Bathgate and Stirling.

The last Scottish Government Social Attitudes Survey found that half of Scots saw Muslims as a “cultural threat” to the country.

In the recent past, far right extremists have been found guilty of possessing explosives and planning to use them, for example Robert Cottage and Martyn Gilleard.

Scottish Islamic Foundation press release, 18 February 2009

Labour’s cricket test for British Muslims

Inayat B“So, almost 20 years after Norman Tebbit devised his famous cricket test for immigrants to the UK, we learn that the Labour government is seriously discussing how to set up its own modern version for British Muslims….

“Asim Siddiqui observed yesterday on Cif that the government’s ‘tests’ were nonsensical and if pursued would destroy the already precious little credibility that its Preventing Violent Extremism (soon to be simply Preventing Extremism) agenda has. I would go even further and say that if these foolish proposals are adopted by our politicians then it will result in the government being viewed by the majority of UK Muslims as trying to actively undermine Islam and will do fatal damage to the hard work that has gone on in the last few years to try and build trust between Muslim communities and the police….

“The proposals are essentially foolish because they utterly fail to distinguish between what a person may believe and how that same person actually acts. It is perfectly possible for people to believe in the desirability of a caliphate in Muslim countries, the superiority of sharia law and to regard the practice of homosexuality as a sin, but as long as they are prepared to abide by UK law while they reside here and do not discriminate against gays, why on earth should the government classify them as extremists?”

Inayat Bunglawala at Comment is Free, 18 February 2009

Continue reading