Category Archives: Resisting Islamophobia

Muslims on campus in Britain

Posted on by Bob Pitt

A briefing from the human rights group Islamic Human Rights Commission (IHRC) has challenged the current thinking on extremism on campus. Entitled: ‘You ONLY Have the Right to Silence: Muslims on Campus in Britain’, the report has criticised the stance proposed by Education Ministers and the Glees/Pope report on the connection between extremism and universities.

IHRC has said that proposals such as the interviewing of all foreign students in conjunction with MI5 upon their application to university, banning of all faith societies, Education Secretary Ruth Kelly’s encouragement of fellow students to spy upon each other, the undermining of academic freedom and the implementation of racism as policy would not lead towards the intended enhancement of Britain’s security.

The briefing rebutted the claim of a terrorist threat on campus as “wholly exaggerated” devoid of any substantial evidence or research, and cited the report conducted by the Federation of Student Islamic Societies (FOSIS), which found that following the July terrorist bombings, only 4% of Muslim students surveyed did not condemn the atrocity.

It continued by stating that the events of 9-11 and 7-7 were “being exploited and capitalized upon to silence any form of dissent or political activism on campus, specifically when Muslim students are involved and where the issue concerned is Palestine”.  It further added that the term ‘political activism’ was being tarnished with the label of “extremism” which it said was a “concerted effort to silence Muslim dissent”.

Continue reading →

Banning Hizb ut-Tahrir

Posted on by Bob Pitt

HizbOsama Saeed and Yusuf Smith comment on leaked official emails from August 2005, relating to the government’s anti-terror measures, that have been published by the New Statesman. The material provides some useful insights into the proposal to ban Hizb ut-Tahrir.

One of the emails (from Foreign Office official Robert Tinline, head of the multilateral and terrorist financing section of the counter-terrorism department) points out that “there is no apparent case to proscribe HuT” and notes that “much of their literature explicitly rejects the use of violence”.

But home secretary Charles Clarke did not reject a ban. Rather, he is reported as arguing that “he would prefer putting off proscription of HuT until after the proposed amendments to the current legislation: it would, for example, be much easier to argue that HuT met the criteria of ‘justifying and glorifying violence’. Clarke said that his fear was that the Government would lose the case for proscription and so wanted to act cautiously”.

There could hardly be a better illustration of the way the “glorification” clause in the Terrorism Bill (rejected by the Lords) would be used to ban organisations that pose no terrorist threat at all.

The leaked emails can be downloaded (in pdf format) here.

Lawsuit filed in support of Muslim scholar barred from US

Posted on by Bob Pitt

tariq-ramadan2Citing the case of a prominent Muslim scholar who has been barred from the United States, the American Civil Liberties Union filed a federal lawsuit yesterday seeking to strike down a clause of the USA Patriot Act that bars foreigners who endorse terrorism from entering to this country.

The suit was filed in Federal District Court in Manhattan on behalf of the scholar, Tariq Ramadan, and three national organizations of academics or writers who have invited him to speak to their members. The groups, including the American Academy of Religion, the leading American organization of scholars of religion, say Mr. Ramadan has never expressed support for terrorism. They also argue that the Patriot Act clause has been applied to stifle academic debate in the United States.

New York Times, 26 January 2006

Muslim memorial to the Holocaust

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Inayat_BunglawalaIn a letter in today’s Independent, Inayat Bunglawala of the Muslim Council of Britain replies to Yasmin Alibhai-Brown’s article in yesterday’s paper:

“Yasmin Alibhai-Brown casually misrepresents the position of the Muslim Council of Britain, accusing us of declining to ‘mourn victims of one of the deadliest mass exterminations in human history’ (23 January). The MCB fully accepts and recognises the monstrous horror and cruelty that underpinned the Nazi holocaust.

“The reason the MCB has called for a more inclusive ‘Genocide Memorial Day’ is because across the globe – not just among Muslims – there is a widespread view that we in the west practise double standards and devalue the lives of non-westerners. In the MCB’s view, the subtext of the Holocaust Memorial Day would thus be better served and help make the cry ‘Never Again’ real for all people who suffer, even now.

“In the last decade we have seen genocide take place in both Rwanda (one million killed in 1994 in the space of a few weeks) and Chechnya (10 per cent of its population has been killed since the Russians launched their invasion of the tiny republic.) We need to do more than just reflect on the past. We must be able to recognise when similar abuses occur in our own time.”

Exhibition will combat myths about Islam

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Europe’s biggest exhibition of modern-day Islam will take place in London a year after the 7 July bombings in an effort to depict the religion in a positive light.

The Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, is set to launch the event which hopes to “combat the myths, misconceptions and misunderstandings of Islam”. IslamExpo will consist of a series of exhibitions on Islam’s cultural heritage, lectures, debates, films, stand-up comedy and workshops at Alexandra Palace. Organisers plan to invite survivors of the Tube attacks to attend with a special commemoration on the day.

It is hoped that the event will help to improve relations between Britain’s 1.8 million Muslims and the wider community.

Independent, 23 January 2006

For details of Islam Expo, see here.

For the thoughtful comments of Jihad Watch supporters, see here.

Christian-Muslim Forum and Islam Expo seek to build bridges

Posted on by Bob Pitt

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, is to host the inaugural meeting and formal launch tomorrow of a new Christian-Muslim Forum in the UK. The event coincides with the unveiling in London today of what is claimed to be Europe’s largest-ever exhibition to “combat the myths, misconceptions and misunderstandings of Islam” – headed up by the Muslim envoy who has been seeking the release of four Christian Peacemaker Teams activists in Iraq.

Ekklesia news report, 23 January 2006

Muriel Gray on the dangers of Islamic education

Posted on by Bob Pitt

“To conduct oneself properly as an adherent Muslim, one must obey the Koran and guidance of the prophet Muhammed. With regard to artistic endeavours, he was unambiguous about Allah’s will. It is haram (forbidden) for a Muslim to make a drawn or modelled representation of any animate living thing, as Allah’s creations must not be imitated by the hand of man. Trees, flowers and landscape are fine, say the scholars, but humans, birds and animals are out. It is also haram to make or listen to music for pleasure, or to dance for pleasure or artistic expression. It is haram to view filmed or theatrical images of entertainment or read ‘un-Islamic’ literature.”

Muriel Gray explains why a state-funded Catholic primary school in Glasgow, 90% of whose pupils are from Muslim families, should not be allowed to become a state-funded Muslim school.

Sunday Herald, 22 January 2006

Update:  For Osama Saeed’s response, See Rolled Up Trousers, 23 January 2006

Dutch immigration restrictions draw fire

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Dutch Immigration Minister Rita Verdonk’s recent anti-immigrant measures, including a rule to speak Dutch in public, drew fire from Muslim minority leaders as well as from her own party.

“Linking integration to speaking Dutch in the street is nothing but an attempt to turn a blind eye to certain realities on the ground,” Dris Boujoufi, the deputy chairman of the council of Muslim representatives in the Netherlands, told IslamOnline.net Sunday, January 22. “Immigrants of the second and third generations who were born, raised and taught in the Netherlands are yet unable to integrate though they speak Dutch.”

Verdonk told a meeting of her liberal VVD party on Saturday, January 21, that immigrants must comply with a national code of conduct by speaking Dutch in the street.

Her proposal drew immediate fire from some members of her own party. “I can’t see what would hurt the minister or others if I spoke Surinamese with a friend in the street?” asked Laetitia Griffith, a member of Amsterdam’s College of Aldermen which creates and maintains the city’s systems and policies jointly with the city council and mayor.

Islam Online, 22 January 2006