When a tabloid newspaper reports that a ‘Muslim hate mob’ is daubing abuse, can we believe them?
The Independent publishes another extract from the pamphlet Muslims Under Siege: Alienating Vulnerable Communities, by Peter Oborne and James Jones.
Category Archives: UK
BNP leader Nick Griffin pays respect to killed activist
British National Party leader Nick Griffin visited North Staffordshire yesterday to pay his respects to the partner of activist Keith Brown. His visit marked one year since Mr Brown was killed by a neighbour.
And after commiserating with Julia Barker, he spent time with local party officials planning a national BNP rally scheduled for Stoke-on-Trent next month. Mr Griffin also thanked them for turning the city into “the jewel in the crown of the BNP”.
Mr Barker, of Uttoxeter Road, in Normacot, was stabbed to death on July 6 last year, by his Muslim neighbour Habib Khan, following a long-running dispute. Khan was convicted of manslaughter by reason of lack of intent and is still awaiting sentence.
Mr Griffin said: “Despite the manslaughter verdict we still regard Keith’s death as murder and we need to highlight how the police and criminal justice system fails to properly investigate such racially-motivated crime. We are expecting large numbers of people from around the country to converge on the city for the rally on August 9 when we shall be touring the estates and visiting large parts of Stoke-on-Trent.”
It is quite clear that racism – and anti-Muslim racism in particular – is absolutely central to the BNP’s political appeal across the country. Consequently, anti-racism has to be equally central to the anti-fascist movement.
Yet there are still those who try to avoid recognising this self-evident fact. A discussion article by Nick Lowles in the June 2008 issue of the anti-fascist magazine Searchlight, for example, argues that: “A cursory look at where the BNP is gaining support shows that race is not necessarily the dominant issue that it was in Oldham, Burnley and Bradford. There are very small non-white communities in Stoke-on-Trent, Barnsley and Nuneaton and Bedworth.”
How does this in any way demonstrate that racism is not still the defining factor in the rise of the BNP in those towns? It’s well known that le Pen’s Front National won support in areas where a high proportion of the inhabitants were of North African origin – Marseilles notably – but also in areas where the white “indigenous” French population was in a large majority. In both areas the FN campaigned on the basis of racism, winning votes by inciting hatred and fear of migrants.
Similarly in the UK, just because there is a small proportion of non-white people in a particular area it doesn’t mean that racism ceases to be central to the BNP’s appeal there. Indeed, in such areas racism can sometimes become a more effective mobilising ideology for the far right than it is in multi-ethnic towns and cities, because the white majority, having little direct experience of social interaction with members of minority non-white communities, are more susceptible to racist stereotypes and can be convinced that their culture and identity are under threat from an influx of “aliens”. Five years ago the BNP managed to get a councillor elected in Broxbourne on the basis of a scaremongering campaign about the town “filling up” with asylum seekers, when in reality there wasn’t a single asylum seeker living in Broxbourne.
Stoke-on-Trent may well contain “very small non-white communities” (at the time of the 2001 census, 95% of the population was white and only 5% non-white, while even the most ethnically mixed ward – Hanley – had a 76% white population). However, as is detailed in Peter Oborne and James Jones’ excellent new pamphlet (pdf) Muslims Under Siege, this hasn’t prevented the BNP from acquiring its base of political support and nine councillors …
“… in large part by fighting a vicious anti-Muslim campaign. Stoke has one of the lowest employment rates in the country since the pottery industry collapsed. The BNP have sought to link this decline to Muslim immigration. Their leaflets have shown a montage of pottery kilns, smiling white housewives and a church tower, with the caption, ‘HANLEY 70 YEARS AGO’. A second montage alongside showed silhouettes of mosques and a photograph of women in veils (taken in Birmingham) – one giving a V-sign – with the caption, ‘Is this what you want for our city centre?’
“Other campaigns have focused on planning issues over mosques – a flash point elsewhere too. The BNP accuse the Labour council of cutting special deals with Muslim groups in exchange for support. The BNP protested that the Labour majority council was renting a plot of land to Muslim developers for just £1 a year, amid suggestions that it could be sold to them for £72,000. The BNP even made an offer of £100,000 on the land. The mayor of Stoke, Mark Meredith, told us that these peppercorn rent deals are done with all community groups, and that in this case a plot of land that has been lying idle for decades will be put to good use and regenerate the area….
“The determination to scapegoat Muslims has meant they even champion animal rights, targeting halal food as inhumane in a campaign that BNP Councillor Michael Coleman admitted to us was not their natural territory.
“The BNP told us on our recent visit that they are about to launch a new nationwide anti-Muslim campaign from Stoke. The launch pad for this new era of hostility will be the sentencing of Habib Khan, who was charged with murdering his neighbour, Keith Brown, a BNP activist. Brown is to be promoted as the first ‘BNP martyr’.”
And this, according to Searchlight‘s leading theoretician, is a town where “race is not necessarily the dominant issue” in the rise of the BNP!
What explains this peculiar blind spot on the part of Nick Lowles? Some of us might point to Searchlight‘s traditional reluctance to mount an ideological and cultural challenge to racism within the white majority community. Plus, of course, the Zionist politics of Searchlight‘s leadership makes them resistant to campaigning against anti-Muslim bigotry in co-operation with the representative organisations of the community who are the victims of that bigotry.
Misreporting Muslims
As tonight’s Dispatches shows, the media’s coverage of Islam alienates and demonises a vulnerable British minority.
Mehdi Hasan at Comment is Free, 7 July 2008
Watch ‘Dispatches’ tonight on Channel 4 urges Respect
Don’t miss tonight’s Dispatches, on Channel 4, 8pm, which is billed as a counterblast to rampant Islamophobia.
It is presented by Peter Oborne, who has also written a pamphlet on the question. Oborne is a conservative commentator, which means that his intervention against what he calls “Britain’s last remaining socially acceptable form or bigotry” is therefore all the more newsworthy.
Salma Yaqoob, Birmingham Respect councillor, said:
“This is a very welcome pamphlet by Peter Oborne and it was pleasing to see his piece in the Daily Mail. While there is a deluge of negative images and reports about Muslim communities – as a study this week by researchers at Cardiff University has again detailed – there are voices speaking out. Tonight’s Dispatches programme on Channel 4 at 8pm looks set to be another powerful intervention.
“We in Respect are especially pleased by these developments as we see building a broad coalition against Islamphobia as critical to pushing it back.”
Letters from today’s press
In the Independent, responding to Peter Oborne’s excellent article, Kate Francis condemns violence against Muslims but goes on to oppose the “blanket application of the pejorative term ‘Islamophobic’ to anyone who has voiced concerns about the long-term capacity of Islam to coexist successfully in a secular state where the rights of women are protected by law. As a feminist, I have deep concerns about this, as I do about any group (religious or otherwise) that appears to enshrine misogyny in its cultural values…. it’s no wonder that writers are prefacing their comments with ‘I am an Islamophobe’ and ‘Count me in’.”
Another correspondent, one Dominic Kirkham, writes: “The remark of Shahid Malik that British Muslims now felt like ‘aliens in their own country’ (4 July) is problematic…. In seemingly every area of cultural contact, however open and welcoming, Muslims choose to distance themselves from the generality on the basis of ‘their religion’. Unless they themselves are prepared to question the arcane prejudices that lie at the root of ‘their religion’ they will continue to feel like aliens in normal society by their own choice.”
And here’s Shaaz Mahboob, of British Muslims for Secular Democracy, in the Daily Telegraph:
“The assumption by Lord Phillips (report, July 3) that interpretations of Sharia could become an alternative form of conflict resolution for British Muslim communities will merely result in further alienation and segregation. Only hardline groups, such as the Muslim Council of Britain and the Sharia Council, have been demanding the introduction of Sharia as a parallel justice system. In a democratic society, paying heed to, and endorsing the views of, minority but vocal pro-segregation Muslim groups is nonsensical, and could be disastrous for a cohesive society.”
‘Remarkably little animosity’ towards Muslims, says Mad Mel
Bigotry and hatred against Muslims? According to Melanie Phillips “… there is remarkably little animosity towards them, considering the fact that, according to the head of MI5, there are currently some 2000 known British Muslim terrorist suspects – and in reality probably twice that number – and that according to opinion polls, hundreds of thousands of British Muslims would support terrorist violence against British institutions.”
UK Muslims and dogs … what’s the fuss?
As the frenzy over Muslims’ stance from a police plan to use sniffing dogs in public places keeps making headlines across the UK, British Muslims affirmed that the fuss is actually about nothing, since their religion does not forbid using dogs for security reasons. “There is no harm in using trained dogs for security purposes,” Mufti Dr Shah Sadruddin, of Jamiatul Ulama UK (the Council of Muslim Scholars), told IslamOnline.net.
The controversy erupted late last month, with the newspapers reporting that some Muslims had raised objections over being searched by the explosive-detecting animals at train stations. The issue turned into a public debate a week later, with reports that Scottish Muslims are protesting an advert publicizing the police’s new non-emergency telephone number for picturing a puppy. Scottish Muslims have rebuffed the report, stressing that a picture a dog is not offensive to their religion.
Massoud Shadjareh, chairman of the Islamic Human Rights Commission in the UK, believes the issue of sniffer dogs “can be resolved with sensitivity. Some people might have problems praying after being sniffed,” Shadjareh said. “But I understand that trained dogs don’t need to actually make physical contact.”
For many Britons, the uproar over Muslims’ stance from dogs is totally taken out of proportion. “I’ve read some real bile aimed at Muslims over this – the internet is full of it,” Sandy Shaughnessy, 23, told IOL. “Everyone is asking why the rest of the white, civilised, free world has to accommodate these hateful Muslims. The reality is so different.” Shaughnessy says that the media has whipped up hatred against Muslims over the issue, while Muslims did not have the chance to explain their position. “Muslims don’t have the right wing media to magnify and manipulate a situation to such an extent. I don’t think it’s a massive problem, but it has escalated.”
Emdad Rahman reports. Islam Online, 6 July 2008
Inayat Bunglawala – apology
“On March 1, 2008 we published a front-page article under the headline ‘TARGET HARRY – British fanatics threaten him‘ concerning Prince Harry’s active service in Afghanistan.
“The article made reference to Inayat Bunglawala, who is a spokesperson at the Muslim Council of Britain. He has also advised the British government on ways of combating extremism among young Muslims.
“We now accept our article may have been understood to allege that Mr Bunglawala was a fanatical extremist who was inciting or would condone a terrorist attack on Prince Harry.
“There was absolutely no truth in these allegations. Mr Bunglawala did not, and would not, condone any attack on Prince Harry; on the contrary, he consistently made clear to the media that he wanted to see the Prince and his colleagues brought home, out of harm’s way.
“We apologise unreservedly to Mr Bunglawala for the distress and embarrassment we have caused him.”
Muslims after police raid: ‘We feel betrayed’
Two of the men at the centre of anti-terror raids say they feel “betrayed” by the police. Abu Bosher and Abu Saif had always thought they had a healthy relationship with the police, until their Stoke-on-Trent homes were raided on Tuesday. They are members of a group of young Muslims who have regularly manned stalls around the city for two years, preaching to passers-by and distributing leaflets and DVDs.
Police raided five homes this week as part of an investigation into a small group of people suspected of being involved in promoting violent extremist views, and radicalising vulnerable members of the community. But the men insist their activities have always been entirely legal and peaceful, and deny any links to terrorism or extremism. They say that as well as preaching Islam, they draw young people away from drugs and gangs, and encourage them to become better Muslims.
Abu Bosher, aged 24, of North Road, Cobridge, said he was shocked to find himself implicated with extremism. He said: “Why did they do this now? Why not two years ago? We have the same leaflets; we’re not doing anything different. So we’re asking them to produce the evidence.”
The group have become a familiar sight in Stoke Road, Shelton, and Waterloo Road, Cobridge, where they engage Muslims and non-Muslims in faith discussions. They say the fact they carry out their activities on busy main roads, in full view of CCTV, shows they have nothing to hide. Although they admit their discussions sometimes touch on controversial political issues, such as the war in Iraq, they deny preaching hatred or encouraging violence.
Mr Bosher added: “We disagree with the Government’s foreign policy, and we will debate with people on that, but they are free to disagree with us. We don’t want to force our views down anyone’s throat. The police come to our stalls regularly and take away our leaflets. I’m sure every police officer in Stoke-on-Trent has one. Some of them know us by our first names, so we don’t know why they’ve done this. We feel betrayed.”
Abu Saif, aged 17, whose sister’s Cobridge home was raided, said: “The police were welcome to come and speak to us at our stall, or come and look in my house. I would have invited them in for a chat and a cup of tea. But they came to my house at 7am, and knocked my door off its hinges. I think that’s disgusting.”
Fellow group member Abu Abdullah, aged 35, whose Cobridge home was not raided, said: “Muslims are being victimised and demonised in this country. We’re coming up to the anniversary of 7/7, and on previous anniversaries we found that Muslims were coming under increased scrutiny by the security services.”
‘Is cosying up to Muslim extremists the best way to defeat terrorism?’
The question is posed by Charles Moore, writing in the Daily Telegraph in response to the Lord Chief Justice’s recent speech on sharia law.
In the category of “Islamist extremists” who he claims have mistakenly been accorded respectability Moore includes the East London Mosque, the Mosques and Imams Advisory Board, Osama Saeed, Islam Expo … and even Shahid Malik MP!
He concludes: “So the solution to extremism is that extremists become the official representatives of Islam in this country. Islamist mosques, organisations and spokesmen will be treated as the true voice of Muslims (and woe betide those Muslims who disagree). Then we shall get a lot more sharia than Lord Phillips has bargained for.”