Category Archives: UK

‘Mega-mosque’ succumbs to Islamophobic campaign

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Controversial plans to build Europe’s biggest mosque close to the London Olympics site have been halted, The Times has learnt.

Tablighi Jamaat, the Islamic sect behind the proposal, is to be evicted this week from the East London site, where it has been operating illegally a temporary mosque and had planned a complex that would accommodate 12,000 worshippers.

The Muslim Council of Britain said that the group had fallen victim to “unfounded hostility and hysteria”.

However, another Muslim organisation last night welcomed the move. Minhaj-ul-Quran, which advises the Government on how to combat youth radicalisation, said that a mosque should be a “community effort” and not the initiative of one group with extremist links.

Times, 18 January 2010

Elsewhere in the online version of Times, Ruth Gledhill devotes a puff piece to Minhaj-ul-Quran.

MuQ, for those who are unfamiliar with it, is a much smaller, more liberal rival to Tablighi Jamaat. They run a mosque in Forest Gate where they have some local influence. When all the hysteria kicked off about the Tablighi so-called “mega-mosque”, MuQ set up a front organisation, Sunni Friends of Newham, and joined the campaign against it. They were cited by right-wing opponents of the Tablighi plan to show that Muslims were hostile to it too. Admittedly, after a while MuQ appeared to have thought better of forming an anti-Tablighi bloc with racists, and it looked like they had dropped their public opposition. But evidently not.

The reason why the Times is boosting MuQ, in my opinion, is that it’s part of the right-wing agenda of promoting Sufism as some sort of fluffy, harmless alternative to political Islam. In the case of MuQ this is particularly bizarre, as in Pakistan almost all tendencies within Islam (apart from the Tablighis, ironically enough) engage in party politics. MuQ have their own political party there, the Pakistan Awami Tehreek.

Ed Balls accused of ‘double standards’ over mosque schools

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Schools Secretary Ed Balls has been accused of refusing to ban Islamic schools from smacking children for fear of upsetting Muslim “sensitivities”.

Mr Balls was last week urged to close a legal loophole which gives teachers in Britain’s estimated 1,600 schools associated with mosques the right to smack children – even though it is banned in other schools. He refused, prompting claims that he is allowing an alleged “culture of physical abuse” in some of the mosque schools – or madrasahs – go unchecked.

Smacking is banned in all State and private schools. However, it does not apply to madrasahs, where pupils usually study in the evenings or at weekends, because the ban exempts schools where children attend for less than 12.5 hours per week.

Lib Dem schools spokesman David Laws, who is spearheading the campaign to close the smacking loophole, said: “The Government needs to legislate to protect children – not leave an opt-out simply because it fears some ethnic or religious backlash.”

He was supported by Labour MP Ann Cryer, who said it would be “bonkers” if the Government did not act. She said: “I suspect people are frightened of upsetting the sensitivities of certain members of the Muslim faith.” She denied she was biased against Islamic schools and said classes run by “strange Christian sects” should also be covered by the smacking ban.

A spokesman for Mr Balls’ department denied that his refusal to change the law was based on fears of upsetting Muslim opinion. “We have no evidence the law is being abused or that children are being abused in these circumstances,” he said.

Mail on Sunday, 17 January 2010

If there are any double standards here, they are on the part of Ann Cryer, who is not proposing that the law should be extended to cover Sunday schools run by the Church of England, for example – only to classes run by mosques and “strange Christian sects”, which she evidently regards at the religious equivalent of Islam.

As you might expect, the Mail article has been approvingly reproduced over at Jihad Watch.

UKIP chief Nigel Farage calls for burka ban

Posted on by Bob Pitt

The burka and other face-covering veils worn by Muslim women should be banned, the UK Independence Party says.

Ex-UKIP leader Nigel Farage, who leads UKIP’s 13 MEPs in Brussels, told the BBC’s Politics Show they were a symbol of an “increasingly divided Britain”. He also said they “oppressed” women and were a potential security threat. But Schools Secretary Ed Balls said it was “not British” to tell people what to wear in the street, and accused UKIP of indulging in “unpleasant politics”.

UKIP is the first British party to call for a total ban, after the BNP called for it to be banned in Britain’s schools.

Mr Farage said: “I can’t go into a bank with a motorcycle helmet on. I can’t wear a balaclava going round the District and Circle line. What we are saying is, this is a symbol. It’s a symbol of something that is used to oppress women. It is a symbol of an increasingly divided Britain.

“And the real worry – and it isn’t just about what people wear – the real worry is that we are heading towards a situation where many of our cities are ghettoised and there is even talk about Sharia law becoming part of British culture.”

A “different” culture was “being forced on parts of Britain and nobody wants that”, added Mr Farage, but he denied the policy was an attempt to grab votes from the BNP, insisting it had “nothing to do with the BNP”. “There is nothing extreme or radical or ridiculous about this, but we can’t go on living in a divided society,” he told The Politics Show.

BBC News, 17 January 2010

See also UKIP news report, 17 January 2010

Government restores links with MCB

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Daud Abdullah, Muhammad Abdul Bari, Inayat BunglawalaMinisters have restored official ties with the Muslim Council of Britain despite its refusal to remove a deputy leader accused of supporting attacks on British soldiers

Tory MP Paul Goodman said: “It is a surrender to extremism by a bunch of politicians who are scared witless over losing their seat and are prepared to compromise real cohesion and real integration in order to appease an organisation that remains tainted.”

Daily Mail, 16 January 2010

The Spectator reports this as “The government caves in to the Muslim Council of Britain”.

‘Mosque on Christian site’ story was fake

Posted on by Bob Pitt

An internet story claming a mosque was being built on a Christian-run centre has turned out to be fake.

More than 1,500 people protested on a Facebook page opposing ‘plans’ to demolish the YMCA building, in Lisieux Way, Taunton, to build “a giant mosque”.

A YMCA spokesman said he was aware of the Facebook group and concerns about the future of the facility, which hosts sports, activities and meetings, including Islamic worship. He added: “We’d like to reassure the community there are no plans to demolish Taunton YMCA.”

Fr Julian Lawrence, Taunton YMCA chairman of the board, said: “The rumours are completely false and somewhat spurious. Maybe they’re more to do with the originator’s attitude towards Islamic worship on the site.”

Somerset County Gazette, 14 January 2010

Why HT should be suppressed, according to Shiraz Maher

Posted on by Bob Pitt

“There is a real danger with allowing the group to operate freely. Although it subscribes to a non-violent philosophy, on occasion its words may have inspired terrorist activity.”

Shiraz Maher in the Times, 15 January 2010

This comment piece accompanies the report “Senior member of extreme Islamist group Hizb ut-Tahrir teaches at LSE“. The reference is to Reza Pankhurst, who is a research student and graduate teaching assistant at the London School of Economics.

The shock-horror impact of the report is rather undermined by the revelation that HT “states on its website that its ‘political aim is the re-establishment of the Islamic Caliphate as an independent state’. It says that it rejects forcing change ‘by means of violence and terror’.” Not to mention the quote from an LSE spokesperson regarding Mr Pankhurst: “No concerns about his conduct have been raised with the school and we are not aware that he is a member of any proscribed organisation or has broken any laws or LSE regulations.”

The Evening Standard, for its part, weighs in with an article headlined “LSE’s Islamist teacher ‘groomed suicide bomber for Tel Aviv attack’” – an accusation for which it provides no evidence whatsoever.

Update:  See “Standard and Mail pay damages over suicide bomber slur”, Press Gazette, 28 July 2010

Nazir-Ali: Muslims must accept Judaeo-Christian values

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Nazir Ali 2The Rt Rev Michael Nazir-Ali, the former Bishop of Rochester, said the country must never again repeat the multicultural experiment of recent decades. He also called for an end to the segregation of Muslims in British cities, which he warned provides a breeding ground for extremists.

“Not only is there over-crowding, especially of metropolitan areas, but social, educational and medical services are placed under increasing strain and there is always the concern about jobs and housing for the indigenous population, particularly from its poorer sections.

“The question, however, is not simply one of numbers but also of the quality of would-be immigrants. One of the missing features of the mass immigration of the 50s and 60s was any concern for the congruence of such immigration with the values, culture and language of the host country. We must never again allow this to happen.”

The bishop admitted some immigration would be necessary, particularly with an ageing workforce, but added: “All would-be immigrants should be willing to adapt to living in a context shaped by traditional British values, which have been largely derived from the Judaeo-Christian tradition.”

Daily Telegraph, 15 January 2010

Who supports the ban on Islam4UK?

Posted on by Bob Pitt

BMSD protest

Well, not the Muslim Council of Britain, who have issued a well-reasoned statement, “Ban groups if they break the law, not on the basis of media hysteria“. But support for the government’s stupid move comes from the Quilliam Foundation, the British Muslim Forum and the Muslim Women’s Network – all of whom are in receipt of state funding.

Backing for the ban also comes from Shaaz Mahboob of British Muslims for Secular Democracy. Remind me, weren’t BMSD the organisation that protested against Islam4UK last October brandishing placards reading “Free speech will dominate the world: All may speak their minds”? All except those who BMSD decides are not entitled to free speech, it would appear. The BMSD demonstrators urged us to “laugh at those who insult freedom”. However, their response to the ridiculous Anjem Choudary isn’t to draw attention to his comic potential but to support a state ban on his group.

Via ENGAGE

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Mohammed PatelMuslim and Sikh groups are challenging a ruling which bans amateur boxers from the ring if they have a beard.

The Amateur Boxing Association of England (ABAE) recently ruled that all fighters had to be clean shaven to allow cuts to the face to be seen. It came after Mohammed Patel, a 25-year-old bearded Muslim boxer from Bolton, was stopped from competing last January. At the time, ABAE rules stated only Sikh fighters were exempt, so the Bolton Council of Mosques challenged the ABAE on Mr Patel’s behalf.

But the ABAE then ruled all competitors had to be clean shaven, a decision both Muslim and Sikh groups want reversed, particularly as professional fighters have been allowed facial hair for more than 20 years.

BBC News, 13 January 2010