Category Archives: Right wing

Canada: government drops plans to ban veiled voting

Posted on by Bob Pitt

The federal government has no plans to move forward with proposed legislation to force veiled women to show their faces when voting, the minister of state for democratic reform said Thursday.

Dmitri Soudas, a spokesperson for Prime Minister Stephen Harper, confirmed the government still supports the idea of forcing voters to reveal their faces, but said the bill doesn’t have opposition support. “The bottom line is even if we were to proceed with legislation, it would be voted down immediately,” Soudas said.

The government introduced the bill in October 2007, a month after an Elections Canada ruling allowed Muslim women to vote with their faces covered by burkas or niqabs during three Quebec byelections. That decision infuriated the government, and Harper accused Elections Canada of subverting the will of Parliament, which several months earlier had unanimously adopted legislation beefing up voter identification requirements.

CBC News, 26 June 2009

Harry’s Place debates the ‘burka ban’

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Harry's Place logo

We’ve rather given up responding to the appalling Harry’s Place over the past couple of years, mainly because keeping up with the Islamophobic posts on that particular blog would be a full-time job in itself.

However, if anyone needs convincing of the culture of anti-Muslim bigotry that pervades that obnoxious site, it’s worth scrolling through the comments on their recent “Berks and Burqas” thread.

Continue reading →

Express links veil to terrorism, calls for ban

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Ban the BurkhaIt is a city that has found itself at the heart of the debate about ­Muslim extremism after providing a home to three suicide bombers who brought devastation to London in the July 7 2005 attacks. And in Leeds yesterday the number of women clad head-to-foot in burkhas provoked anger among growing numbers who believe they should be banned.

Groups of Muslim women dressed in the restrictive robes refused to comment on their personal reasons for wearing the garment which continues to cause controversy. And even though they were walking along a busy street among shoppers and workers, most refused to be seen engaging with a non-Muslim man in public.

Leeds has a fast-growing Muslim population of at least 40,000 – double the number of 10 years ago. Locals say that since the 7/7 attacks in July 2005 – three of the gang hailed from Leeds – there has also been a increase in the number of Islamic women choosing to wear the burkha, much to the anger of many of the city’s inhabitants.

German-born au-pair Chantal Manzal, 23, has been living in Leeds for a year but returns home next month. She said yesterday: “I cannot believe what I have seen in Britain. In Germany the burkha is hardly ever seen but here I see women wearing them whenever I go out. I find them really scary.”

Hairdresser Sarah-Jane Martin, 21, said: “There is no doubt these terrible things should be banned immediately. It is a sign of oppression against women and on those grounds alone, in this day and age, they should be outlawed.”

Businesswoman Marcia Booth, 37, said: “There is no more prominent sign of female oppression by men than the burkha. I find it so demeaning and whenever I see these women hiding themselves away my blood reaches boiling point and I just want to scream at them.”

Daily Express, 24 June 2009

See also ENGAGE, 24 June 2009

How to ban the veil?

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Answer: find some co-operative Muslims who will agree with you, and promote their views as representative of the community. That way you neatly deflect accusations of racism. So we have the Express asserting that “both Muslims and non-Muslims” advocate a ban, while the Daily Mail wheels out Saira Khan, who writes in terms that could just as easily be found on some far-right website:

“In hardline Muslim communities right across Britain, the burkha and hijab – the Muslim headscarf – are becoming the norm…. Thanks to fundamentalist Muslims and ‘hate’ preachers working in Britain, the veiling of women is suddenly all-pervasive and promoted as a basic religious right. We are led to believe that we must live with this in the name of ‘tolerance’.

“… the growing number of women veiling their faces in Britain is a sign of creeping radicalisation, which is not just regressive, it is oppressive and downright dangerous. The burkha is an extreme practice. It is never right for a woman to hide behind a veil and shut herself off from people in the community. But it is particularly wrong in Britain, where it is alien to the mainstream culture for someone to walk around wearing a mask.

“So what should we do in Britain? For decades, Muslim fundamentalists, using the human rights laws, have been allowed to get their own way…. For the sake of women and children, the Government must ban the wearing of the hijab in school and the burkha in public places….

“My message to those Muslims who want to live in a Talibanised society, and turn their face against Britain, is this: ‘If you don’t like living here and don’t want to integrate, then what the hell are you doing here? Why don’t you just go and live in an Islamic country?'”

MCB statement on Sarkozy’s support for veil ban

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Sarkozy Defies Universal Values as he tells Women What Not to Wear: French leader’s Burqa remarks are designed to whip-up further xenophobia against Muslims

The Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) criticised French President Nicholas Sarkozy’s intention to ban the wearing of Burqa – a garment worn by a minority of Muslim women in accordance with their religious belief. Reiterating its long established position that individuals must have the freedom to choose their attire on the basis of deeply-held religious beliefs, the MCB called upon the French President to desist from engaging in and promoting divisive politics towards its Muslim inhabitants. In this respect, the MCB echoes the US President Barack Obama’s caution that “it is important for Western countries to avoid impeding Muslim citizens from practising religion as they see fit – for instance, by dictating what clothes a Muslim woman should wear. We cannot disguise hostility towards any religion behind the pretence of liberalism.”

Assistant Secretary General of the MCB, Dr. Reefat Drabu said: “It is patronising and offensive to suggest that those Muslim women who wear the burqa do so because of pressure or oppression by their male partners or guardians”. She added: “Such suggestions can legitimately be perceived as antagonistic towards Islam. Instead of taking a lead in promoting harmony and social cohesion amongst its people, the French President appears to be initiating a policy which is set to create fear and misunderstanding and may lead to Islamophobic reaction not just in France but in the rest of Europe too”.

MCB press release, 23 June 2009

Update:  See also the Daily Telegraph, 24 June 2009

BBC supports Islam and attacks Christianity, claims former radio presenter

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Don MacleanOne of Radio 2’s most popular religious presenters has launched a stinging attack on the BBC suggesting the broadcaster is biased against Christianity. Don Maclean, 66, who hosted Good Morning Sunday for 16 years, said the broadcaster was “keen” on programmes that attack the Christian church.

He said programming chiefs were keen to take a “negative angle at every opportunity” in a way they do not with other faiths like Islam. He admitted that he was dismayed that the BBC recently appointed Aaqil Ahmed, a Muslim, as its new head of religious programming.

Mr Maclean said: “They’re keen on Islam, they’re keen on programmes that attack the Christian church. They seem to take the negative angle every time. They don’t do that if they’re doing programmes on Islam. Programmes on Islam are always supportive.”

The presenter claimed “the last thing we want is war on the streets” adding that “we need all the moderate Muslims to stand up and be counted”.

He added: “They’re all in private telling you how dreadful they think Islamic terrorism is, but they’re not forming together in a group and standing up against it. But it’s as big a threat as Nazism was in the 1930s when Germans stood back and didn’t stand up against that, and if they had maybe the Second World War wouldn’t have started.”

The presenter said when he had presented Good Morning Sunday he argued with bosses who claimed the show was a “multi-faith” programme. He added: “I said ‘No, it’s a Christian programme because the presenter is a practising Christian and this is a Christian country, so it’s a Christian programme’.”

Daily Mail, 22 June 2009

Veil is ‘not welcome on the territory of the French republic’ says Sarkozy

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Nicolas_SarkozyFrench President Nicolas Sarkozy has spoken out strongly against the wearing of the burka by Muslim women in France.

In a major policy speech, he said the burka – a garment covering women from head to toe – reduced them to servitude and undermined their dignity. Mr Sarkozy also gave his backing to the establishment of a parliamentary commission to look at whether to ban the wearing of burkas in public.

“We cannot accept to have in our country women who are prisoners behind netting, cut off from all social life, deprived of identity,” Mr Sarkozy told a special session of parliament in Versailles. “That is not the idea that the French republic has of women’s dignity. The burka is not a sign of religion, it is a sign of subservience. It will not be welcome on the territory of the French republic.”

A group of cross-party lawmakers is already calling for a special inquiry into whether Muslim women who wear the burka is undermining French secularism, the BBC’s Emma Jane Kirby in Paris says. The lawmakers also want to examine whether women who wear the veil are doing so voluntarily or are being forced to cover themselves, our correspondent says.

BBC News, 22 June 2009

For Yusuf Smith’s comments see Indigo Jo Blogs, 22 June 2009

Update:  See also ENGAGE, 23 June 2009

Muslims snub drive against BNP

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Well, so the Jewish Chronicle claims:

“Muslim interfaith activist Fiyaz Mughal is upset at the non-attendance of MCB representatives at a meeting held under the aegis of Faith Matters at Westminster last Friday. Mr Mughal – the Faith Matters director who was awarded an OBE in the Queen’s Birthday Honours – had invited 25 ‘key figures’ from ethnic and religious groups to discuss the way forward after the BNP had taken two seats in the European elections. The absence of MCB delegates was ‘disappointing because this was an opportunity to learn from other communities about dealing with a common enemy,’ he said.”

It’s only when you get to the bottom of the column that you find:

“An MCB spokesman said he was unaware of the invitation. He indicated that the council would consider becoming involved in the initiative if approached by the Board of Deputies.”

Douglas Murray and Anjem Choudary – two self-publicists help each other out

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Murray and Choudary

Over at Comment is Free, Douglas Murray of the Centre for Social Cohesion tries to defend his decision to debate Anjem Choudary at a meeting at Conway Hall, London, organised by an al-Muhajiroun front calling itself the “Global Issues Society”.

The meeting was cancelled following a confrontation over al-Muhajiroun’s attempt to impose gender separation, resulting in lots of publicity for both Murray and Choudary.

Murray claims: “We were sceptical of GIS from the start. We strongly suspected that they were some sort of front group. But we couldn’t satisfactorily confirm the fact. Despite our concerns, and our knowledge that it was a possible ambush, I gave them the benefit of the doubt and decided to attend the event in good faith.”

According to Murray, he went to Conway hall with the highest motives, intent only on defending “religious pluralism, women’s rights, gay rights, and actual diversity in society”. It is, Murray asserts piously, “possible to chip away at the mindset of radicalised Muslims – sowing seeds of doubt. Even if it is just one member of the audience who is receptive to the anti-totalitarian possibility it is vital to do this. It is the reason why I debate.”

Yeah, right. This is the same Douglas Murray who in 2006 told the Pim Fortuyn Memorial Conference: “All immigration into Europe from Muslim countries must stop…. Conditions for Muslims in Europe must be made harder across the board: Europe must look like a less attractive proposition.” Some defender of “actual diversity in society”!

Contrast Murray’s efforts at self-justification with Yayha Birt’s explanation of the CSC’s motives:

“the CSC says it acted in ‘good faith’ in accepting this invitation, an assertion that can’t be left unchallenged…. It seems probable that the CSC was more focused on highlighting their own campaign for a quick ban and burnishing their reputation as a scourge of radical Islam by playing up to al-Muhajiroun’s all-too-familiar tactics.”

Update:  See Yusuf Smith’s comments at Indigo Jo Blogs, 21 June 2009

Mel and Geert – spot the difference

Posted on by Bob Pitt

The enemies of reason sets a quiz.

You simply have to guess who said the following statements – Melanie Phillips or Geert Wilders.

1. “Socialists are the most inveterate cultural relativists in Europe. They regard the Islamic culture of backwardness and violence as equal to our Western culture of freedom, democracy and human rights. In fact, it is the socialists who are responsible for mass immigration, Islamization and general decay of our cities and societies.”

2. “The nation-wrecking ideology of multiculturalism and the Marxist redefinition of racial prejudice into racism – ‘prejudice plus power ‘– which have turned our society inside out are the product of the left.”

3. “Voters have been told in effect that there is nothing standing between national suicide on the one hand and racism on the other. If you don’t want the former, you are automatically branded with the latter.”

4. “And so, the voters have had enough. Because they of course realise that Europe is going in the wrong direction. They know that there are enormous problems with Islam in Europe. They are well aware of the identity of those who are taking them for a ride, namely, the Shariah socialists.”

5. “They are areas of very high immigration where the transformation of the ethnic, religious and cultural landscape has made indigenous inhabitants feel strangers in their own country — and yet they are told they are racist for saying so”

6. “Mass immigration, demographic developments and Islamization are certainly partly causes of Europe’s steadily increasing impoverishment and decay.”

7. “Above all else, we should absolutely refuse to countenance the spread of Sharia law, which is not only inimical to our own deepest principles but aims to supplant our own laws. Yet we are turning a blind eye to the steady Sharia-isation”

8. “Just like communism, fascism and nazism, Islam is a threat to everything we stand for. It is a threat to democracy, to the constitutional state, to equality for men and women, to freedom and civilisation. Wherever you look in the world, the more Islam you see, the less freedom you see.”

9. “The problem, however, is that it doesn’t understand what Muslim extremism is. Believing that Islamic terrorism is motivated by an ideology which has ‘hijacked’ and distorted Islam, it will not acknowledge the extremism within mainstream Islam itself.”

10. “Of course, there are many moderate Muslims. However, there is no such a thing as a moderate Islam. Islam’s heart lies in the Koran.”

11. “In the war being waged by radical Islamism against the west, such symbolism [as mosque-building] is of the utmost importance and significance. It is itself a strategic weapon of cultural and religious demoralisation.”

12. “We will have to close down all radical [mosques] and forbid the construction of any new mosques, there is enough Islam in Europe.”

Tricky, no? So there you have it – Geert Wilders and Melanie Phillips. One a dangerous extremist with vile views; the other a Dutchman with silly hair.