Category Archives: UK

Michael Burleigh and Taj Hargey on the Swiss referendum

Posted on by Bob Pitt

In the Daily Mail Michael Burleigh opines: “The Swiss have been forced to recognise that many of their people are worried about Islam’s unquestioned, undemocratic encroachments into Western society. And unless our own Government now takes note and instigates a rational but robust debate on the subject, we can expect far more trouble ahead.”

Over at the Times the inimitable Taj Hargey assures us that the ban “does not infringe the religious liberty of Swiss Muslims. Minarets remain emblematic of mosques in the Muslim heartlands but there is no theological reason why houses of worship in the West have to incorporate such towers”.

Indeed, according to Hargey, if there is a rise in bigotry against Muslims across Europe they themselves are primarily to blame: “Only when Muslim immigrants and converts in Europe reject the twisted ideology of a fundamentalist male clergy will the chief causes of anti-Muslim prejudice in Europe recede.”

Submitting anti-Muslim actions to a ‘Jewish test’

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Jonathan_Freedland“It’s a crude reaction but it’s the first one I had on hearing that the Swiss had voted to ban the building of minarets on mosques – the same reaction I have to the increasingly-frequent stories like it: how would I feel if this were not about them, but us? How, in other words, would I react if this latest attack were not on Muslims but on Jews?

“It’s crude because no two situations are ever exactly the same, and Muslims and Jews have different histories – in Switzerland and everywhere else. But it’s useful, allowing the testing of any proposition against an almost instinctive yardstick of decency.

“So how would I react if the Swiss voted to restrict the way synagogues are built? With horror, of course. Indeed, the mere hint of such a proposal in the heart of Europe – given the blood-soaked history of the 20th century – would send a shudder down the collective spine. That reaction alone would tell me that, on this proposal, there was only one decent place to be – against it.

“Or take Jack Straw’s campaign against the niqab in 2006. He and his supporters made what they hoped was a subtle, nuanced case against women wearing the full veil, but my first thought was much simpler. What if a government minister told ultra-orthodox Jewish men that, in their full beards, it was hard to tell them apart, or that he disliked the custom that commands ultra-orthodox Jewish women to cut off their hair, covering their heads with either a wig or a hat? No matter how subtle or nuanced his reasons, I would feel that this was, at best, an act of bullying directed at a vulnerable minority or, at worst, the first step towards something much more menacing.”

Jonathan Freedland at Comment is Free, 1 December 2009

Ed Balls takes on Tories over HT

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Writing in the Daily Telegraph, Ed Balls responds to the Tories’ demand for a ban on Hizb ut-Tahrir, accusing them of feeding the anti-Muslim propaganda of the right-wing press and aiding the far right:

“… whatever the political and media pressure – politicians cannot and should not make organisations unlawful simply because they find their views offensive and deplorable without the necessary evidence. Nevertheless, David Cameron and Michael Gove continue to call for Hizb-ut-Tahir to be banned – without providing the evidence and ignoring the legal advice Ministers have received.

“Last week, they renewed this attack by making a series of allegations about two independent Muslim schools which they claimed had not been inspected by Ofsted and were in receipt of public money from the anti-terrorism budget, which was being used by Hizb-ut-Tahir to promote extremism.

“Even if these allegations were correct, it would have been reckless to raise these very serious and sensitive issues in the highly charged atmosphere of Prime Minister’s Questions. The fact that these allegations turned out to be false is deeply irresponsible. David Cameron was reduced to saying his wider point was right: that two schools with some alleged connections to Hizb-ut-Tahir had received some public money.

“Forget that both schools are properly registered and inspected. Forget the fact that in all Ofsted’s inspections, no evidence has been found that extremist or anti-semitic views are being taught. Forget that the only public funding these schools have received is from their local councils to provide free nursery places for local three and four year olds.

“Predictably David Cameron’s false allegations generated tabloid headlines such as: ‘Extremists benefit from state funding’ and ‘£113,000 aid to fanatics who want to kill us’. But at what price? Parents and children being told that ‘fanatics’ are teaching their children – presenting a propaganda victory for both extremists in the Muslim community as well as Islamaphobic and racist organisations on the far-right.

“We all know how difficult it is for a country like ours to tackle the extremist threat effectively. We have to be vigilant and investigate every potential threat. But we also have to be responsible and work with the law-abiding Muslim community. If we bandy around accusations regardless of the facts, and take action regardless of the evidence, we will just end up alienating the very communities we need to help us tackle extremism.”

Vote to ban minarets wasn’t necessarily Islamophobic (it says here)

Posted on by Bob Pitt

SVP anti-minaret posterJoan Smith offers her profound thoughts on the result of the Swiss referendum:

“I don’t doubt that some people voted for the ban for racist reasons, but damning them all as ‘Islamophobes’ is an attempt to suppress entirely reasonable arguments about the role of religion in secular modern societies. Tariq Ramadan doesn’t use the word in his polemic but he does claim without qualification that ‘voters were drawn to the cause by a manipulative appeal to popular fears and emotions’.

“Corralling a wide range of people, many of whom disagree profoundly with each other, under one great Islamophobic umbrella is a familiar tactic but it’s not conducive to civilised discussion. If the debate about the powers demanded and enjoyed by religion – all of them, not just Islam – pops up in distorted forms in European countries, it is as much the responsibility of religious apologists such as Ramadan as it is the racist right….

“Any notion of universal human rights recognises the right of individuals to practise their religion, but that isn’t incompatible with believing that religion is divisive and seeks to exercise unelected power…. If you take that position, it’s perfectly reasonable to believe that public displays of religious symbols should be kept to a minimum, whether they take the form of crucifixes or hijabs. As Ian Traynor reports in today’s Guardian, the proposed ban on minarets in Switzerland received ‘substantial support on the left and among secularists worried about the status of women in Islamic cultures’.”

Comment is Free, 30 November 2009

Cf. Sholto Byrne’s comments on his New Statesman God Blog. He too notes left-wing and secularist support for the minaret ban, and observes that “it is part of the paradox of Western liberalism that its pluralism only extends so far, and that it is essentially intolerant of anything that does not stem from its own ‘definitive’ culture”.

Vigil at Manchester cemetery after Muslim graves damaged

Posted on by Bob Pitt

A vigil is to be held at Manchester’s Southern Cemetery after Muslim graves were desecrated for the third time in two months. The Unite Against Fascism peace vigil is due to take place at the cemetery on Barlow Moor Road, Chorlton at 1400 GMT.

Police are treating the latest attack, which happened between 20 and 23 November and left about 20 graves damaged, as racially-motivated. Headstones were also damaged on 29 September and again three days later.

Mark Krantz, from the Chorlton Unite Against Fascism group, said: “This attack is designed to hurt the living. It is meant to bring hurt, hatred, and division. Our response will be to build unity and solidarity.”

Rev Sarah Brewerton, from Chorlton Central Church, added that she hoped the vigil would show a united front against racism. “When you go to visit loved ones at a grave you are already in a distressed state. Even worse to then find the desecration,” she said. “We’re hoping to gain some act of solidarity with our Muslim brothers and sisters in the community here in Manchester, but also as a statement that this is totally unacceptable behaviour.”

BBC News, 29 November 2009

Swiss voters back ban on minarets

Posted on by Bob Pitt

SVP racist posterSwiss voters defied their Government and churches today and approved a ban on building minarets — reflecting an alarming hostility to a rising Muslim minority.

Fifty-seven per cent of voters in a referendum supported the direct democracy initiative, which ensured international embarrassment for Switzerland and a backlash in the Muslim world, upon which the country depends for exports.

A big majority of the 27 cantons supported the right-wing inspired move, with opposition strongest in the German-speaking part of the country, according to initial results. In Geneva, home to United Nations agencies, the voters rejected the initiative by nearly 60 per cent. Turnout was 53 per cent, a relatively low figure by the standards of Swiss democracy. Opponents of the measure saw this as a reflection of apathy among many voters who would not have approved of the ban.

The referendum was initiated by the nationalist Swiss People’s Party (SVP), the largest group in the federal Parliament, after residents opposed the construction of a minaret in Langenthal, north of Berne.

The “yes” is the latest act by European voters in support of anti-immigrant parties after electoral successes over the past decade by far-right groups in Austria, the Netherlands and France. A jubilant SVP insisted that the vote had nothing to do with intolerance, only with the imposition of Islamic politics and culture.

Ulrich Schlüer, an SVP parliamentarian who drafted the initiative, told The Times that he had been certain of victory because the Swiss had had enough of the Muslim community. “We are still at the beginning of the process. We compare our situation to Germany, France or England – the problems they have in their suburbs,” he said. “That is what we do not want here.”

Times, 29 November 2009

Meanwhile, the fascist BNP applauds Swiss voters for having taken “a daring and dramatic stand against the Islamic colonisation of their country”.

Lord Pearson plays the Islam card to win leadership of UKIP

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Pearson with Pamela GellerA millionaire peer was elected leader of the UK Independence Party yesterday after putting “the growing threat of Islamism” and curbing immigration at the heart of his campaign. Lord Pearson of Rannoch, who defected from the Conservatives two years ago, comfortably beat four rivals to assume command of the anti-European Union party.

Lord Pearson, one of two Ukip peers, has protested that the “political class” is complacent about Islamism and claimed that some of “our people” were “strangers in our own land”. The 67-year-old former insurance broker invited the right-wing Dutch politician Geert Wilders in February to screen a controversial film about radical Islam. He has called for a zero net increase in immigration, arguing that the issue was the main concern for many voters.

Independent, 28 November 2009

Pearson has an admirer in Damian Thompson, who writes: “You may think that Ukip’s new focus on the Islamification of parts of Britain is a dangerous strategy. And so it would be, if the party was in other hands. But Lord Pearson is still essentially a libertarian Tory: he would never stoop to sending out dog whistles to wavering BNP racists. His campaign against uncontrolled immigration and Sharia will be rooted in a defence of liberal democracy of the sort that other parties are too gutless to make.”

The photo is of Pearson with another admirer, mad US Islamophobe Pamela Geller, who has hailed his election as “great news“.

BNP incites hatred over St Albans mosque plan

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Vicious leaflets aimed at keeping a mosque out of London Colney have been referred to the police’s harm reduction unit.

Police are now examining the British National Party (BNP) leaflets headed up “Do you want to live under an oppressive Islamic Sharia government?” as a possible incitement to racial hatred. The leaflets were delivered to homes in London Colney claiming a planning application to turn Cemex House in Barnet Road into a mosque ousewas part of a wider plot to turn St Albans into an Islamic city.

The man behind the leaflets is Danny Seabrook, 36, a divorced self-employed builder who lives in London Colney. He stood as a county council candidate for the BNP recently in Watford. He denies incitement to racial hatred saying the leaflets are “factual and to the point”. He went on: “A mosque would be out of keeping in the village. St Albans is a Christian city. You give an inch and they take a mile. They’ll have minarets up there next.”

Some of the propagandist language used in the leaflet includes accusations that politicians pander to Islamists’ every demand and the majority of residents want to keep the area as it is now.

County Cllr for London Colney, Chris Brazier, said: “This is detestable and I don’t think there would have been this reaction if the plan was to turn it into a Christian church. The BNP do seem to be targeting London Colney since they picked up 200 votes in the recent county council elections.”

Cllr Brazier conceded that he had received almost 100 letters from residents opposing the plans on legitimate planning grounds including traffic fears, narrowness of the access road, insufficient parking and noise. He maintained there was no suggestion of racism in any of the moderately-worded letters.

He said the application had aroused fears that such a large mosque would attract significant numbers of visitors from outside the area, raising traffic and parking issues for residents.

But Peter Trevelyan, acting for the London Colney Islamic Group which has submitted the application, said: “Having been frustrated in its search for suitable premises, the local community currently uses the parish meeting room on White Horse Lane once a week for Friday prayers. The main hall is small and inconvenient in shape and, with 50 people present, is cramped and over-crowded.”

He said prayers would take place five times a day but the principal focus for prayer would be at 1pm on Fridays when attendance varied between 40 and 50 men and a handful of women. The majority would walk to the site from homes and employment nearby.

But council officers have recommended to a planning meeting on Monday that the scheme should be approved because there would be adequate off street parking and no acceptable harm to highway safety or the free and safe flow of traffic.

Herts Advertiser, 28 November 2009

Via Lancaster Unity

Why Conservatives failed the test on Islamic schools

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Writing in the Independent, Richard Garner explains how the Tory leader’s attack on the Government has unravelled.

In the Sun, Ken Livingstone comments:

“Devious David Cameron blundered in smearing two Muslim schools as training grounds for terrorists. Encouraged by his swivel-eyed schools adviser, Michael Gove, he thought he could get a few votes by whipping up fear of Islam. What the Tories must realise is that the Muslims who left the villages of Pakistan and Bangladesh to come here and work did so because they wanted their kids to grow up with our traditions of democracy, law and fair play. All the opinion polls show British Muslims are as loyal to Britain and its values as those of us who have been here for 1,000 years. Our media should stop giving publicity to the few mad mullahs and their handful of followers. They no more represent British Muslims than 1999 nailbomber David Copeland represented the mass of decent and tolerant Brits.”