Salma Yaqoob poses the question.
My answer, for what it’s worth, is – almost certainly not, Cameron was just making a pitch for Muslims’ votes. After all, this is a man who has attacked multiculturalism on a number of occasions. A 2006 speech by Cameron, which repeated the familiar Cantle-inspired cliche about multiculturalism resulting in communities leading “parallel lives”, was reported under the headline “Ban Muslim ghettos”.
In delivering his speech, Cameron clearly had in his sights a domestic audience, wooing the Sun and the Daily Mail, both of which, in calling for the disciplining of Muslim communities, have promoted a crude British nationalism based on uncritical support for the armed services and military interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan. (Only the day before, the Daily Mail had carried a feature attacking two Birmingham Muslim councillors, Salma Yaqoob and Mohammed Ishtiaq, for refusing to participate in a standing ovation for a British soldier awarded the George Cross for bravery in Afghanistan.)
But Cameron’s speech was also intended to send a clear signal to the United States and the European center-Right that Britain would no longer pursue different ethnic minority and race policies from its European counterparts. In particular, Cameron was showing his support for Angela Merkel and her German Christian Democrat party’s idea that security and cohesion are brought about not through integration and pluralism, but through monoculturalism and assimilation into the dominant Leitkultur (lead culture).
Cameron’s speech was reported as a trailer for the up-and-coming government counter-terrorism review and Lord Carlile’s review of the Prevent strategy. And it is here that Cameron indicated to a German security audience support for the German intelligence services’ approach to the compartmentalisng of Muslim organisations into ‘legitimate’ and ‘illegitimate’, with greater surveillance of those deemed ‘illegitimate’. In his speech, Cameron promised that the British government would no longer fund or share platforms with Muslim organisations that, while non-violent, were also a part of the problem because they belonged to a ‘spectrum’ of Islamism. While those who openly support terrorism are at the ‘furthest end’ of this spectrum, it also includes many Muslims who accept ‘various parts of the extremist world view’ including ‘real hostility towards western democracy and liberal values’.
In this, what should be feared is that Cameron is indicating that the government’s review of counter-terrorism policy has been greatly influenced by the approach taken by the German intelligence services (Verfassungsschutz) which has at its base a distinction between legitimate and illegitimate Muslim organisations coupled with the most widespread system of religious profiling in Europe.
Liz Fekete analyses Cameron’s Munich speech.
“Although he has not named names, it seems clear that some of the most effective opponents of al-Qaida influence in Muslim communities in the UK are set to be reclassified as extremist and subversive.”
Bob Lambert replies to David Cameron.
Muslims and migrants are being used to distract people from the planned chaos implemented by this unpopular coalition. It is politicking of the worst kind.
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown replies to David Cameron’s speech.
One of the Birmingham councillors who snubbed a George Cross hero is embroiled in a new row after being accused of wishing to see people stoned to death if they do not follow a strict Muslim way of life.
Coun Salma Yaqoob was criticised when she refused to take part in a standing ovation for Afghanistan veteran Lance Corporal Matt Croucher. Along with Respect Party colleague Mohammed Ishtiaq, she remained seated in the city council chamber as everyone else in the room rose to give guest of honour L/Cpl Croucher a spontaneous round of applause.
The protest led prominent Liberal Democrat councillor Martin Mullaney to accuse Coun Yaqoob of wanting to see Britain become an Islamic republic. He also suggested that she would have risen to applaud a suicide bomber.
Writing on the Re-Stirred website, Coun Mullaney claimed: “If Coun Yaqoob had her way, she would be implementing Hadood Law, with hands cut off and stonings.” He went on: “I can only assume that if one of the failed 21/7 London suicide bombers had been in the council chamber, Coun Yaqoob would have been demanding the council applaud the failed suicide bomber for their past heroic actions.”
Birmingham Mail, 5 February 2011
See “Mullaney sinks into the sewer”, Salma Yaqoob’s website, 7 February 2011
Update: See “Moseley Lib Dem warned after labelling rival an Islamic extremist”, Birmingham Mail, 10 February 2011
Tooting’s MP has reacted furiously to David Cameron’s claim yesterday that multiculturalism in Britain has “failed”. In a speech in Germany, the Prime Minister said the Government should no longer tolerate and engage with extremist groups whose members did not believe in crucial western and British values.
But Sadiq Khan, Britain’s most prominent muslim MP who represents thousands who follow Islam in Tooting, claimed Mr Cameron was “writing propaganda for the English Defence League”.
Yesterday, Mr Cameron told the Munich Security Conference: “Let’s properly judge these organisations… do they believe in universal human rights – including for women and people of other faiths? Do they believe in equality of all before the law?”
In reponse to Mr Khan’s comments, Tory co-chairman Baroness Warsi called for an apology. She said: “For Sadiq Khan to smear the prime minister as a rightwing extremist is outrageous and irresponsible.”
The EDL are entirely a product of exaggerated media reporting of a small demonstration by a group of Muslim men who are widely despised by the Muslims themselves and have been for years, at least since they began their “Magnificent 19” campaign celebrating the 9/11 attackers. To talk of “having a debate” about race or Englishness or the supposed decline of English culture is to talk of giving in to baseless grievances fostered by the distortions published in the mass media, and allowing them to dictate policy on these matters. It must not be allowed to happen.
Yusuf Smith at Indigo Jo Blogs, 6 February 2011
Two homes in Luton were attacked late last night – their windows smashed and the word EDL painted on the front door – just hours after the English Defence League’s racist protest through Luton town centre. The houses are on the edge of Bury Park – where many Asian people live.
Mr Iqbal lives with his mother, brother and sister in one of the houses. He told Socialist Worker, “It happened at around 11.40pm. I was awake but about to go to sleep. I heard a crash and ran to the front of the house to find a brick had been thrown through a window. When I opened the front door, I saw someone had painted EDL on it. I couldn’t sleep – I thought they may come back.”
Thousands of far-right activists from the English Defence League descended on Luton yesterday for the biggest demonstration in the organisation’s 20-month history.
Coachloads of supporters from the group’s UK-wide “divisions” arrived from 10am and were joined by far right and Islamophobic groups from across Europe.
The EDL and police had predicted a turnout of between 5,000 and 7,000, but as the marchers arrived in St George’s Square in the town centre just after 1pm, it appeared that no more than 3,000 had turned out. Despite the smaller numbers there were minor scuffles at the train station as anti-racist protesters tried to prevent EDL supporters getting off trains.
More than 2,000 police officers from forces across the south of England escorted the EDL march from the station into the centre of Luton. Some fireworks and bottles were thrown, shops and businesses in the town were closed and petrol stations had been boarded up in what one resident compared to a “war zone”.
EDL leader Stephen Lennon, told the crowd they were part of a “tidal wave of patriotism” sweeping the UK. He launched a broad attack on Islam and the UK’s Muslim communities and said mainstream politicians were failing the working class.
See also UAF news report, 5 February 2011
David Cameron will today signal a sea-change in the government fight against home-grown terrorism, saying the state must confront, and not consort with, the non-violent Muslim groups that are ambiguous about British values such as equality between sexes, democracy and integration.
To belong in Britain is to believe in these values, he will say. Claiming the previous government had been the victim of fear and muddled thinking by backing a state-sponsored form of multiculturalism, the prime minister will state that his government “will no longer fund or share platforms with organisations that, while non-violent, are certainly in some cases part of the problem”.
In a major speech to a security conference in Munich, he will demand: “We need a lot less of the passive tolerance of recent years and much more active, muscular liberalism.”
He will say that “some organisations that seek to present themselves as a gateway to the Muslim community are showered with public money while doing little to combat extremism. This is like turning to a rightwing fascist party to fight a violent white supremacist movement.”
Cameron’s aides, aware the speech may prove highly controversial, refused to identify the organisations in his sights, but it is clear one target is the Muslim Council of Britain.