“A religion of separation is, arguably, the Islamic vision that dominates Dewsbury”, claims Andrew Norfolk.
Category Archives: Right wing
Ban It! says the Express
Pressure was mounting last night for veils to be banned in Britain – just as they are in some Muslim countries. And rebels plotting fresh court protests were given a blunt warning by lawmakers: “Carry on, and we will bar you.”
The threat came amid a public outcry over the costs being racked up by teaching assistant Aishah Azmi as her lawyers, funded by taxpayers, continued their fight for her right to wear a veil in class. Daily Express readers responded in massive numbers to a poll on the crisis, with 99 per cent calling for the veil to be banned in schools, increasing pressure on the Government to act.
A ban would see Britain following many of its European neighbours, along with predominantly Muslim countries like Turkey and Tunisia in outlawing traditional Islamic headscarves in public schools and buildings.
Tory MP David Davies urged the Government to examine what other countries had done to discourage or outlaw the wearing of the full veil in public. “We should give it serious consideration too. It’s been banned in many countries, including Muslim. The time may have come for us to consider the same thing,” said the MP for Monmouth. “Tony Blair was right to say that it is a mark of separation. And what worries me is that it’s a way of subjugating women.”
Labour MP Ann Cryer, whose constituency in Keighley, West Yorkshire, has a large Muslim population, said she feared the high-profile Azmi case could spark a welter of copycat legal action by militants. And if that happened, she warned, legislation may be needed to enshrine in law a ban on veils being worn in classrooms and other civic buildings – which could mean on-the-spot fines and the withdrawal of state benefits.
Mrs Cryer said it was “totally unacceptable” to wear a full veil in front of young children and said an outright ban would be needed if people kept “pushing the boundaries” over the issue.
Right-wing press rails against Aishah Azmi
Aishah Azmi seems determined to pursue her warped agenda against the Church of England school that employs her all the way to the European Court – and the taxpayer will have to foot the legal bills.
Is it too much to hope that moderate Muslims will see what really lurks beneath this woman’s veil: not a victim with a genuine grievance but a politically motivated extremist who is doing terrible damage to their standing in the eyes of the long-suffering British public?
Editorial in the Daily Express, 20 October 2006
The bridge of her nose was all that could be seen of bolshie classroom assistant Aishah Azmi. Yet she was handed £1,100 of our money for refusing to remove her veil in school. She then had the gall to lecture US on integration.
What a ludicrous travesty of justice and common sense.
Why was this troublemaker prepared to remove the veil in order to get her job – but not after? How did the tribunal conclude she was a victim when she was the one who moved the goalposts? What message does this damaging ruling send to moderate Muslims who staunchly oppose the veil?
And how on earth could the panel be sure it was really her behind the black shroud covering her from top to toe?
Editorial in the Sun, 20 October 2006
The cult of victimhood has a new heroine. Aishah Azmi, the classroom assistant who insisted on wearing her niqab when in the presence of men (though not, apparently, when she was interviewed by a man for the job) has been awarded £1,100 for “injury to her feelings”.
Kirklees council had had the temerity to tell her to remove the veil when teaching because pupils said they found it hard to understand her. Mercifully, her claims of religious discrimination and harassment were thrown out. Yet that is unlikely to prevent Miss Azmi and her “supporters” proclaiming this as some sort of victory in an undeclared Holy War.
It is nothing of the sort. The wearing of a veil is a political and cultural statement, not a religious one, and the sooner this is more widely recognised, the less likely it will be that we have a repeat of this nonsense.
Editorial in Daily Telegraph, 20 October 2006
Muslims can never conform to ‘our’ ways
“Ministers appear whimsically to be shifting from the multi-cultural society towards an integrated one. They are whistling in the dark if they think that will play well with the followers of Islam in our midst. Muslims are rooted in their faith and it governs the way they live. It is the only faith on Earth that persuades its followers to seek political power and impose a law – sharia – which shapes everyone’s style of life…. It is vain to say: ‘Well, if they come here, they must conform with British society and its easy ways’. Muslims will not do that. Their religion forbids it.”
Bill Deedes in the Daily Telegraph, 20 October 2006
‘Muslim veil shouldn’t be worn in West’
“Speaking as an American: no Sharia law, no veils. If you’re here, be American. You don’t have to conform. You just have to give up the urge to be separate and apart and unwilling to assimilate like the rest of us.”
US TV talkshow host John Gibson adds his ten cents to the veil debate.
Mad Mel goes ‘behind the veil’
“On the Moral Maze last night, which discussed the place of religious symbols such as the Muslim veil and the Christian cross in public life, one of our witnesses was Nai’ma B Robert, a convert to Islam who wore the niqab or full-face veil. She spoke well, although I thought naively, about how she chose to wear the niqab as an ‘act of worship’ – naively because she was unwilling to face up to the political purpose of the veil and its role as a symbol of the jihad which is used to recruit more people to the cause of Islamising society and to demoralise and intimidate its victims. That is why not just the niqab but also the hijab has been banned from public places in Turkey and Indonesia.”
Anthony Glees: Internment should be a policy option
“Academics should think the unthinkable. We should not be blinkered by political correctness. People need to speak up. They shouldn’t be made to be afraid. Increasingly universities are becoming mental corsets because of over-regulation. I’ve had universities threatening legal action, vice-chancellors calling for me to be prevented from doing research. And it’s these people who claim to be for freedom of speech.
“The legal profession has taken the European Convention far too far in a way that is inappropriate in a country that’s at war. The convention is deeply flawed. It was set up in 1948 and it is not right for now. At the moment we are at war, the fact that it is being fought in Iraq and Afghanistan conceals that fact. The law has been used to favour the perpetrator, not the persecuted. We need to think about how we should behave to people who consider us enemies, whether they are British citizens or people who are in Britain seeking asylum.
“Internment in the second world war is called MI5’s darkest hour, but internment was a very effective way of keeping the country safe from Nazi subversion. People say that the vast majority of those interned were Jews, and they would be the last people to act in a subversive way. In fact research shows that there were some Jews in Britain as agents of the Third Reich. Their families were in the hands of the Gestapo and they were blackmailed. And some say that internment in Northern Ireland made the situation better. Internment needs to be talked about. There shouldn’t be things that shouldn’t be considered – if they can help.
“The German equivalent of MI5 is called the Office for the Protection of the Constitution. Liberal democracy will be easily destroyed if we do not act against extremism. We give our enemies the weapons they need to destroy us. We need to be more mindful that there is a threshold that should not be crossed. Not everything is permissible. Wearing the niqab is saying we don’t want to be British. Forty per cent of British Muslims say they want to live under sharia law. That is unacceptable. They should go to a country with sharia law.”
Anthony Glees in the Independent, 19 October 2008
Want to wear the veil? Go and live somewhere else, says the Sun
Editorial in today’s Sun:
TONY Blair yesterday threw his weight behind Jack Straw’s call for Muslim women to drop the veil. The Prime Minister backed the school chiefs who suspended a teacher for refusing to remove her mask in front of pupils. The veil, he said, is a visible statement of separation and is “incompatible” with life in Britain, echoing Mr Straw’s earlier concerns.
Modern Muslim women agree the veil is a primitive throwback to an age when their oppressed sisters were treated little better than slaves. In benighted parts of the world, they still are.
Britain has a hard-won heritage of fairness and equal rights. It is the main reason so many migrants came here in the first place. Those who have taken advantage of such privileges must not be allowed to turn back the clock. It’s time to take a leaf out of Australian Prime Minister John Howard’s book. And tell extremists that if they want to live under Sharia law, they can’t live here.
Incitement to violence
“Where is this political opportunism taking us? Into the dark tunnel of national strife. The corrosive effect of the political and media onslaught against British Muslims is having its impact on all sections of society. What is claimed to be an assertion of free speech and democratic rights is rapidly becoming the demonisation of a community. Once they are dehumanised, who cares for their democratic, civil or human rights?
“Since John Reid demanded that Muslim ‘bullies’ must be faced down and Jack Straw declared the veil a ‘statement of separation’, ministers have fallen over themselves to make increasingly unbridled attacks on Muslims. The shadow home secretary, David Davis, has accused our communities of creating a ‘voluntary apartheid’ and colleges have taken action against veiled teachers and students. The tabloid press has declared open season on Muslims with one hostile front-page story after another.
“In practice this has amounted to incitement to violence. In recent weeks verbal and physical attacks on Muslims have surged alarmingly. Women have had their scarves ripped off. Mosques and Islamic centres in Preston and Falkirk have been attacked by mobs and firebombed.”
Daud Abdullah, deputy secretary general of the MCB, in the Guardian, 17 October 2006
Veil should be banned say 98% (of Express readers)
“Britons gave overwhelming backing last night to a call for a ban on full-face Muslim veils. Ninety-eight per cent of Daily Express readers agreed that a restriction would help to safeguard racial harmony and improve communication. Our exclusive poll came as ministers stepped up the pressure on Muslim leaders to demonstrate ‘real leadership’ in the fight against extremism….
“Communities Secretary Ruth Kelly dismissed claims that the Government was ‘demonising’ Muslims, insisting everybody had a part to play in responding to the extremist threat…. Culture Secretary Tessa Jowell said women who covered their faces were failing to take their full place in society. ‘The veil is a symbol of women’s subjugation to men,’ she said. ‘Women who are heavily veiled, whose identity is obscured to the world apart from their husbands, cannot take their full place in society’.”