Melanie Phillips is inciting hatred

Melanie Phillips’ article in last week’s Observer stating that Islam in Britain has become “fused with an agenda of murder” has prompted the following letter in response:

Melanie Phillips (Comment, last week) may be right about the radicalising impact of The Satanic Verses and the Bosnian war on many Muslims, but her continued penchant for blaming the religion of Islam and depicting all Muslims as extremist murderers is a disgrace. Imagine her horror if someone wrote that Judaism had become fused with murder. It is naked incitement to argue that Islam and all Muslims in Britain are intent on killing when this only applies to a very small, albeit very extreme, minority.

If Phillips’s nonsense was even partially accurate, we would have mass murders and bombings every day as one million British Muslims fulfilled their divinely ordained mandate. This anti-Islamic invective is no less despicable than the anti-semitism that Phillips regularly castigates others for.
Chris Doyle
London EC4

Observer, 4 June 2006

German state bans hijab-clad teachers

The western state of North-Rhine Westphalia, Germany’s most populous, has banned teachers in public schools from wearing hijab.

The state’s regional parliament, where the conservative Christian Democrats hold a majority, adopted a law banning hijab on Wednesday, May 31. The law was voted against by the Greens and the Social Democrats. North-Rhine Westphalia became the eighth of Germany’s 16 federal states to ban hijab in public schools.

The Muslim minority blasted the hijab school ban as unconstitutional. The Central Council of Muslims in Germany said the new law does not treat all religions as equal, banning only the hijab and not the Christian cross or other religious symbols.

The constitutional court, Germany’s highest tribunal, ruled in July 2003 against a decision by the Baden-Wuerttemberg state to forbid a Muslim teacher from wearing hijab in the classroom. But it said Germany’s 16 states could issue new legislations to ban the Muslim headscarf if they believe it would influence children.

A number of states, including Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Saxony, Saxony-Anhalt and Thuringia, still allow hijab at schools. Others, including Baden-Wurttemberg, Saarland and Lower Saxony, ban teaching staff in state schools from wearing symbols that express religious, political, or ideological affiliation, including hijab.

Islam Online, 1 June 2006

Ontario’s ‘Sharia Law’ controversy: how Muslims were hung out to dry

Arjomand and mediaRichard Fidler provides a useful overview of last year’s hysterical campaign against the “introduction of sharia law” (i.e. faith-based arbitration for Muslims) in Ontario. He writes:

“Among the most vociferous of the ‘anti-Sharia’ opponents was Homa Arjomand, a Toronto-based transitional counselor and refugee from Iran. She is the Coordinator of the ‘International Campaign Against Shari’a Court in Canada’, which claims a membership of 87 organizations from 14 countries with over a thousand activists. Much of the material on its web site is outrageously Islamophobic.

“One such piece, by Elka Enola of the Humanist Association of Toronto, sketches a startling ‘Worst Case (but probable) Scenario’ of the effect of allowing Muslim FBA, starting with ‘Stage One – Using the Arbitration Act, the Shari’a courts appear to get legal sanction’ and ending with ‘Stage Three – Muslims now outnumber Christians and the majority rule of democracy is turned on its head as the majority Muslims make Shari’a the law of the land’. It concludes, ‘We must protect Canada from such a scenario’. Not surprisingly, the Humanist Association of Toronto proclaimed Arjomand its ‘Humanist of the Year’ in 2005.”

MR Zine, 27 May 2006

New Humanist justifies Islamophobia

Yusuf Smith has picked up on an article in the latest issue of New Humanist magazine (a sponsor of the “March for Free Expression”) by one Ben Marshall, which defends Islamophobia as “an entirely reasonable and honourable intellectual position”. According to Marshall, high levels of unemployment among British Muslims are nothing to do with racism but are the result of their religious beliefs. Marshall has a go at Islamophobia Watch, describing it as “a shady confederacy of Islamists, woolly-headed, well-meaning dunces and Marxists” and he goes on to accuse us of condoning anti-semitism.

Indigo Jo Blogs, 28 May 2006

Denmark condemned for mishandling cartoon crisis

The Danish government has been condemned in an official report for its mishandling of the cartoon crisis sparked by the publication of 12 caricatures that lampooned Prophet Muhammad in the Danish mass-circulation paper Jyllands Posten in September.

“The government’s management of the Muhammad (cartoon) affair was a bigger problem than the caricatures themselves and the prime minister … should have entered into dialogue with the Muslim ambassadors,” said the government-sanctioned study, a copy of which was obtained by Jyllands Posten, reported Agence France-Presse (AFP).

Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen refused in October 2005 to meet with 11 ambassadors from Muslim nations who had asked to see him in a bid to nip a looming crisis in the bud.

The study said that the Danish government has not proved forthcoming and responded negatively to Muslim bids to break the standoff. “Denmark, in practice, did not want dialogue,” said the Danish university researchers who wrote the study. “It did not acknowledge the points of view of the other party (Muslim nations) and … saw being open to dialogue as compromising its own values.”

Danish Muslim leaders had taken pains to settle the crisis, but they were given the cold shoulder by the government. They then took their case to the Muslim world, embarking on a multi-leg Arab tour that outraged the government which accused them of “internationalizing” the issue and inciting anti-Danish hatred.

Islam Online, 26 May 2006

Anti-Muslim hate speech gets sites removed from Google News

Those of us who use Google News have often been appalled by the inclusion of articles from anti-Muslim hate sites. To their credit, Google have now decided to remove some of the most egregious examples of internet Islamophobia.

The New Media Journal was kicked off Google News after posting an article entitled “How Has Islam Enriched Your Life?” by syndicated columnist Arlen Peck. In it, Peck wrote: “It is common for the men to have multiple wives, and harvest many children with each of his wives to train for martyrdom.” He asked: “Is it really tacky of me to smile at the nightly scenes on TV showing Arab, Afghani and Pakistani Muslims bombing mosques and killing their Muslim brothers, sisters and children at a brisk pace because that’s all they know how to do?”

The Journal said it feels it did nothing wrong by running these stories. “Something frighteningly ominous has been happening on the Internet lately: Google, without any prior explanation or notice, has been terminating its News relationship with conservative e-zines and web journals,” the Journal posted on its site.

eWeek, 23 May 2006

Incidences of anti-Muslim abuse on the rise in Ireland

Physical and verbal abuse against Muslims in Ireland is on the rise. According to the Equality Authority, negative portrayals of Muslims in the media are leading to more attacks.

Up to 25,000 Muslims live in Ireland.

A number of famous Muslim writers and actors are speaking about Islamophobia in Dublin tonight in a conference organised by the Equality Authority to raise the profile of the issue.

Chief Executive Neil Crowley said: “Xenophobia is a global phenomenon so we would be foolish to think we were exempt from it.”

“And there are indicators that it is an issue here, indicators in terms of reports of physical and verbal abuse and in terms of some media reporting that does stereotype Muslim people.”

He also claimed there were indicators from the Garda Human Rights Office that highlighted difficulties in relations between the Gardaí and the Muslim community.

Ireland Online, 24 May 2006

They should be ashamed

“I was in Warsaw to speak at an OSCE conference on Islamophobia when my office forwarded me an article that had just appeared in the New York Sun, a purveyor of incitement and hate, masquerading as a newspaper. Entitled ‘The Three Myths About Islam‘, the article sets out to demonstrate that because of liberal political correctness, Americans had come to believe a number of falsehoods about Islam: namely that it is a peaceful, tolerant and under attack. In fact, according to the author, the opposite is true. The religion of 1.5 billion, he claims, is, by its nature and history, intolerant, aggressive, and violent….

“While the article was clearly disturbing, I might not have become as upset as I did (since I don’t expect anything more from the Sun), had it not been for the fact that the author of this malevolent attack was identified as a senior advisor at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), one of Washington’s premier think tanks. More troubling is the fact that the article was being distributed to a larger list, via email, by an official at the Washington office of the American Jewish Committee (AJC), one of the US’s mainstream Jewish organizations….

“From Warsaw, I wrote to the AJC demanding an explanation. I noted that if an Arab American or Muslim American group had distributed a piece called ‘The Three Myths of Judaism’, that had similarly grotesquely caricatured the Jewish faith, that group would have been called anti-Semitic – a rebuke they would have rightly deserved.”

James Zogby writes in The American Muslim, 22 May 2006

MFE debate rumbles on

defenders of free expressionMilena Buyum of the National Assembly Against Racism had a letter in the 5 May issue of Tribune condemning the presence of the British National Party and its front organisation Civil Liberty at the “March for Free Expression” in Trafalgar Square in March. She pointed out: “There is a clear danger that actions such as the Freedom of Speech rally give the extreme Right a cloak of legitimacy.”

In reply, one Mazin Zeki has a letter in the current issue of Tribune (19 May) actually defending the participation of fascists in the demonstration: “Everyone was welcome to the rally regardless of their political or other allegiance. That is exactly how it should be. Free speech is the democratic space which allows the clear and open clash of differences to be resolved…. Free speech cannot be abandoned on the basis of demagogic ‘anti-racist’ demands from self-appointed groups …”.

Zeki continues: “I am submitting a motion in favour of free speech to the annual general meeting of Liberty on May 30 and welcome support from all true democrats including Tribune readers.” Hopefully Liberty’s members will treat Zeki’s arguments with the contempt they deserve.

For a detailed analysis of the forces involved in the “March for Free Expression”, see “The Right, the Left and ‘Free Expression'”, in What Next? No.31