At last a secularist / humanist voice of reason

Sir_Bernard_CrickJust when it appeared that the secularist & humanist movement had fallen to the tidal wave of intolerance, racism and Islamophobia (see here and here), Bernard Crick writes in the Guardian:

“To work with those of other beliefs implies, of course, tact and courtesy to mute immediate criticism of what for the time and purpose at hand are irrelevancies. It is historically and psychologically foolish for secularists to believe that criticism of all religious belief is an effective way of combating violent fanaticism.”

Sir Bernard clearly understands that the racist attacks on Muslims by those claiming adherence to humanism and secularism are not acceptable.

This age of fanaticism is no time for non-believers to make enemies

When professors fail to do their homework

“Following the London bombings of 7/7 Salim Mansur, a newspaper columnist for Sun Media, stated with absolute certainty: ‘It is now abundantly clear the source of Muslim terrorism is situated within the body politic of Islam and its adherents, irrespective of how many times, on the one hand, some Muslim spokespersons try to obscure this reality and, on the other, politicians of whatever stripe for electoral purposes behave as ostriches with their heads in the sand.’

“Mansur should know better. As an academic and associate professor of political science, he should know from the outset that for any credible analysis you must get the facts right and stay away from provocative, self-serving rhetoric.”

Mohamed Elmasry exposes academic Islamophobia in Canada.

Media Monitors Network, 21 October 2005

Tolerance and diversity defeats separatism

By Murad Qureshi

Tribune, 21 October 2005

Among the stalls at this summer’s Camden Bangladesh Mela in London’s Regent’s Park, I came across one run – rather sheepishly – by Hizb ut-Tahrir. This is an Islamist political party that the Government is now proposing to ban. I found myself involved in an argument with them.

This is a battle of ideas that my family has been fighting for many years. In 1947 at the time of the partition of India my grandfather argued against the creation of religious states. Now it was my turn to argue against a cult that believes voting is haram, an act of disbelief, and that the return of the khalifah – an Islamic state headed by the caliph, the “successor” to the prophet Muhammad – is the only answer to every problem faced by Muslims in the modern world.

How can voting be an act of disbelief? Those such as members of Hizb ut-Tahrir, who insist that it is, claim it means participating in a democratic system that upholds the will of man over the will of Allah. For them, Islamic government is “God’s rule” and they reject democracy as “people’s rule”. They look to the political system established in seventh-century Mecca after the death of the prophet as the model that Muslims should aspire to and seek to recreate.

However, while Muslims regard the period of rule under the “rightly-guided caliphs” in idealised terms, as the best that human endeavours can achieve, it was also a period of dissent, rebellions and wars. Let us not forget that three of the four caliphs who succeeded the prophet were murdered.

Organisations like Hizb ut-Tahrir which forget this historical context are similar to those religious classes on the Qur’an where the sole emphasis is on the rote learning of Arabic letters. It is a method that leads to closed minds.

The formula that the only solution to the Muslim world’s problems is a return to the early days of Islam living under just rule through the khilafa state is of no help to Muslims confronted by the problems of today. The issues of contemporary politics are too complex to be simplified in this manner.

Even in the case of Muslim-majority countries, Hizb is vague about how existing nation states can be persuaded to cede power to their proposed supra-national khilafa state. Its programme is even more abstract in the UK, where Muslims are a small minority and prospects for the establishment of an Islamic state are non-existent.

Therefore, in practice, Hizb operates as a sect, making propaganda in order to recruit Muslims to their ideas so they can make more propaganda in order to win further recruits. Members are encouraged to turn their backs on mainstream politics in Britain and to reject the struggle for realistic reforms that will improve the lives of British Muslims.

Continue reading

The mystery of ‘Sid’

Mohammed Sidique KhanNasreen Suleaman examines the background of 7/7 bomber Mohammed Sidique Khan. It knocks on the head those ignorant theories, emanating from both the Right and the “Left”,  that multiculturalism resulted in segregration which then led to the adoption of the extremist views that produced the London bombings.

The Beeston of Khan’s youth was a largely white neighbourhood – and indeed he seems to have spent most of his time in the company of white English lads. Over the past few months I have spoken to many of those white childhood friends, friends who knew Khan as Sid, and they all tell a similar story.

Their accounts of Khan’s upbringing and character show a man who spent most of his formative years not really mixing with other local Muslims.

And, says Ian Barrett, unlike the other children of Pakistani parents, he was not under any family pressure to take an interest in Islam.

“The other Pakistani lads would have to go mosque because their families would say ‘You’re going to mosque.’ But Sid didn’t go,” says Ian. “He didn’t seem interested in Islam and I don’t ever remember him mentioning religion.”

Khan was, by all accounts, an exceptionally well integrated person. His anglicised name “Sid” was just one symbol of his willingness to take on a British identity.

BBC News, 19 October 2005

Islam, sex and the western left

An excellent article by Kola Odetola on why Muslim women, in particular working class women, are turning towards organisations that would be classified as fundamentalist in the West; Hamas, Hizbollah etc.

“Curiously missing from the western left’s narrative in the issue of women’s rights in the poor world has been the calamity wreaked upon it by neo liberalism over the last 20 years. While there’s a lot of talk of the poverty created by the colonisation of the third world by the IMF and World Bank, it’s rarely linked to the rise of Islamic consciousness in these parts of the world.

“The fact is the economic genocide perpetrated by the west on the poor world over the last two decades has generated industrial prostitution there on a scale probably unprecedented in the etire history of the human race. Faced with ruin, deafened with spurious western talk of women’s rights – from Africa to Asia, from Latin America, to ‘recently liberated’ Eastern Europe, most women from poor families can now only survive by selling their bodies to men, mostly wealthy most pro west males, in prostitution of one form or another of varying degrees of degradation. In the third world and parts of Eastern Europe, women are now the major bread winners, feeding their families, keeping a roof over their heads, clothes on their backs, by trading their bodies for the means of survival. Imperialism and its local acolytes have turned two thirds of the planet, the home of the overwhelming majority of the world’s females to one giant brothel, underneath the blazing neon lit legend, forever flashing – ‘Women’s rights’.”

Bush’s Islamophobic fantasy

“Most American must realize by now that President Bush will claim almost anything to justify the constantly escalating tragedy of his Iraq policy. So atop his long refusal to drop the implied linkage of Saddam Hussein to the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, Bush’s vision of an attempt to create a ‘radical Islamic empire that spans from Spain to Indonesia’ is not surprising…. The frightful terms with which Bush warns of rampant Islamism recall the ‘yellow peril’ that once obsessed U.S. opponents of immigration from Asia, and the tales of Mohammedan conquest that fueled the Crusades…. The Osama bin Ladens have not managed to take over a tiny Persian Gulf fiefdom much less an actual country in their regions of maximum strength…. The Islamic ’empire’ promises to be a storybook affair for many decades after Bush has left the White House.”

Editorial in the San Francisco Chronicle, reproduced by Muslim News, 14 October 2005

Cross party coalition says no consensus on anti-terror law

United CommunitiesOn the day the government published its anti-terrorism bill, a broad cross-party coalition met to challenge a number of the government’s proposals.

The coalition says that the concessions announced by the government do not go far enough so that in its present form the legislation will not command the cross party and cross community consensus which is essential for it to be successful.

The coalition brings together the Mayor of London, the Scottish National Party, the Liberal Democrats, Labour MPs, the Green Party, major trade unions, Liberty, lawyers, the main Muslim organisations, Sikhs, Christians, the peace movement and many others.

The coalition held its first meeting on Wednesday 12 October, at Central Hall Westminster with one of the broadest platforms ever brought together around a single issue. Around one thousand people attended the meeting.

GLA press release, 13 October 2005