Category Archives: UK

West didn’t incite Islamic extremism, Blair says

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Blair and BushIslamic extremists have no real grievance against the West, former British prime minister Tony Blair says, and Western democracies should stand up and say so.

Mr. Blair said that, faced with terrorism and extremist rage, liberal-minded Westerners sometimes assume that “there’s something that we should be doing, or have done, that is causing this.” In fact, he told a lunchtime audience in Toronto yesterday, extremism is the result of an internal fight over the future of Islam, not any crime or injustice perpetrated by the West against Muslims. “The truth is that they have no sense of grievance against us,” he said.

If democratic countries want to defeat extremism, he said, they have to be ready to say that it is more than the extremists’ methods they abhor. “It is the presumed sense of grievance. It is the idea that we are the cause of an injustice.”

His comments got a round of applause from a sold-out audience in a downtown ballroom. Tickets to the event, An Afternoon with Tony Blair, co-sponsored by The Globe and Mail, went for $400 each.

Globe and Mail, 18 January 2008

Posted in UK

Why Muslims back Ken

Posted on by Bob Pitt

“Livingstone is a genuinely popular figure in London, including among the capital’s 700,000+ Muslims. The mayor of London has a long and proud record of opposing racism and prejudice against minorities. And frankly, who can blame them for being a bit wary of a Tory opponent like Boris Johnson with his public references to black people as ‘piccaninnies’ with ‘watermelon smiles’?”

Inayat Bunglawala replies to Martin Bright and Shiraz Maher.

Comment is Free, 18 January 2008

Reconsider voting for Ken says Bright

Posted on by Bob Pitt

martin_brightIn his New Statesman blog Martin Bright offers his justifications for presenting an anti-Livingstone “documentary” for Channel 4 which can only aid Tory candidate Boris Johnson’s campaign to replace Ken as London mayor.

Regular readers of Islamophobia Watch will be aware of Bright’s politics. He accuses a section of the Left of forming an alliance with “fascism” ( i.e. with representative Muslims organisations like the MCB or the British Muslim Initiative) and to combat this he advocates an alternative alliance between the “real Left” (i.e. people like himself and Nick Cohen) and the Islamophobic hard Right. So a de facto bloc with Boris Johnson is much what you would expect from Bright.

However, it’s only towards the end of Bright’s blog post that we get to the meat of his argument against the current mayor. Bright writes:

“Livingstone was widely criticised when he invited the Egyptian radical scholar Yusuf al-Qaradawi to London in 2004. Peter Tatchell, the veteran human rights activist, was one of those who objected to the visit. His words should be food for thought for everyone considering voting for Livingstone this year: ‘I’ve been a very strong supporter of Ken Livingstone for nearly 30 years … I think overall he has been a good mayor for London but I do think there are a number of issues where he’s made some monumental misjudgements. When I questioned the rationale and the ethics of inviting Yusuf al-Qaradawi to London, the relationship with Ken Livingstone suddenly changed … Ken took the view that because I didn’t agree with him inviting to London someone who is anti-Semitic, homophobic, misogynistic and who justifies terrorist suicide bombings, because I opposed that, I was an Islamophobe’.”

Bright tells us piously that “I could think of nothing worse than to support Johnson”. However, in an election where the only possible alternative to Livingstone is Johnson, people intending to vote for Livingstone should reconsider doing so, according to Bright, on the grounds that Ken welcomed a leading scholar of Islam to City Hall.

Unlike Bright, his co-thinker Nick Cohen at least has the honesty to present that argument clearly and openly.

Update:  See “Martin Bright’s mythical dragons”, Salaam Blogs, 18 January 2008

Pasquill explains himself

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Derek Pasquill“It would be fair to say that when I started working in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office unit dealing with engagement with the Islamic world at the beginning of 2005, I did not have a great deal of knowledge about British Muslim politics. I had no particular reason to question the office’s process of engagement with Muslim groups….

“It is impossible to overstate the effect of the London bombings. I was really shaken by the events of 7 July and they played a huge role in informing my thinking. I took a holiday in August and devoted it to reading up on political Islam and, in particular, the ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood, Egypt’s main Islamist group. The dominant view at the FCO was that it was a moderate organisation with which the UK could do business. My reading suggested otherwise, and I gradually became convinced of the totalitarian nature of its ideology.”

Derek Pasquill explains his decision to provide Martin Bright with the internal FCO documents which formed the basis for Bright’s pamphlet When Progressives Treat with Reactionaries, published by the right-wing think-tank Policy Exchange.

New Statesman, 17 January 2008

Islamophobia Watch backs Harry’s Place shock

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Blimey. There’s a post on Harry’s Place we can agree with – this one by Rupa Huq, who lays into the Bishop of Rochester. And also into the likes of Shiraz Maher. Taking up a Times article in which Maher stated that “Nazir-Ali’s observations are not only valid, but don’t go far enough”, Rupa writes: “Articles with headlines like ‘Muslim Britain [sic] is becoming one big no-go area’ will be music to the ears of the far right but white liberals scared to offend insist on calling them ‘brave’.”

Coincidentally, Shiraz Maher has a piece in the current New Statesman, presumably commissioned by the magazine’s political editor Martin Bright, which attacks the Muslims who signed a letter endorsing Ken Livingstone’s mayoral campaign.

In all seriousness, Maher attaches significance to the “finding” by the right-wing and woefully misnamed Centre for Social Cohesion that a large number of signatories were associated with the Muslim Council of Britain – a situation possibly not unconnected with the fact that the MCB is the largest umbrella group for Muslim organisations in the UK, with over 400 affiliates. Maher accuses the mayor of “pandering to the Arab-centric agendas of pressure groups” – when in fact far more of the MCB’s affiliated groups have connections with South Asia than with the Middle East.

Who and what is the Policy Exchange think tank?

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Policy Exchange (1)“The welcome failed prosecution of Foreign Office civil servant Derek Pasquill under the Official Secrets Act has inadvertently shed light once again on the Policy Exchange think tank.

“Pasquill had leaked government documents to the Observer newspaper concerning links between the Foreign Office and various Islamic groups. Journalist Martin Bright, who moved from the Observer to the New Statesman magazine, had used these documents in his pamphlet, ‘When Progressives Treat with Reactionaries: The British State’s flirtation with radical Islamism’, published by Policy Exchange.

“Bright applauded ‘the Tory progressives at Policy Exchange’ for publishing his work, which was billed as a denunciation of the government’s alliances with ‘a reactionary, authoritarian brand of Islam’, in favour of looking to ‘real grassroots moderates as allies’.

“In fact, the modus operandi of Policy Exchange follows a well-trod path. Ever since the 9/11 attacks, sections of the British political establishment and the media (like their counterparts in the US) have followed a sustained, and at times virulent, Islamophobic campaign that has demonised Muslims. Conducted under the banner of opposing Islamic extremism, its political objective has been to defend the neo-colonialist policy of pre-emptive war and occupation embarked upon by the American and British ruling elite.”

World Socialist Web Site, 16 January 2008

Head of racist group to bash Islam at congressional briefing

Posted on by Bob Pitt

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) today called on Rep. Paul C. Broun (R-GA) to add a balancing perspective to an upcoming congressional briefing on Islamic finance that features a presentation by the head of a racist anti-Muslim group.

Broun recently circulated a “Dear Colleague” letter inviting fellow representatives and their staff to attend the briefing, titled “The Truth Behind Sharia/Islamic Finance,” on Thursday in the Rayburn House Office Building.

Rep. Broun’s invitation letter claims Islamic finance “violates U.S. laws” and “has supported Islamist extremists and sponsors of terrorism.” The afternoon briefing features two individuals known for their hostility to Islam and Muslims.

One of the presenters, David Yerushalmi, is the president and founder of the Society of Americans for National Existence (SANE), a group that has advocated imposing prison terms for “adherence to Islam” and questions whether women and African-Americans should be allowed to vote.

In February of last year, Yerushalmi’s group offered a policy proposal that stated in part:

“Whereas, adherence to Islam as a Muslim is prima facie evidence of an act in support of the overthrow of the U.S. Government through the abrogation, destruction, or violation of the U.S. Constitution and the imposition of Shari’a on the American People…It shall be a felony punishable by 20 years in prison to knowingly act in furtherance of, or to support the, adherence to Islam.” (The final reference to “adherence to Islam” has since been changed to “adherence to Shari’a” in the text.)

CAIR press release, 16 January 2008

How wrong of Oxford to still the call to prayer

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Central Mosque OxfordPhilip Hensher on the campaign against Oxford Central Mosque’s proposal to broadcast an amplified call to prayer:

“Of course, Oxford has quite a lot of calls to prayer already in the form of church bells, but this suggestion has raised the ire of local residents. Some claimed it was a matter of ‘community cohesion’ – rather a dubious notion if it leads to recommendations that minorities keep quiet, all in all.

“An academic told the paper ‘What an utter cheek to inflict this on a non-Muslim area of Oxford. Christian churches ring bells, but they are just a signal. The Muslim call is a theological statement.’ (In Arabic, I feel I should point out, so it’s not all that likely that the non-Muslim area of Oxford will be roused to technical disagreement with the muezzin.)

“Though I can’t claim any enthusiasm for the forces of organised religion, and don’t care for anything which increases the general noisiness of modern life, one does wonder why people are objecting so virulently. I very much doubt that the Oxford central mosque is a hotbed of anti-western hatred, and they themselves sound genuinely puzzled why such objection to one of their central traditions is so violent. Personally, not caring about or indeed understanding what the muezzin is saying, I find the sound one of the most romantic and wonderful in the world.”

Independent, 15 January 2008

Continue reading →

Phillips backs Bish

Posted on by Bob Pitt

The flight of the white middle classes from the inner cities is accelerating, the Government’s race relations chief has said. Trevor Phillips said so-called ”white flight” – an American phenomenon now increasingly seen here – was deepening racial segregation.

Mr Phillips has warned in the past of the growing polarisation of the country along ethnic lines. But his use of the emotive term ”white flight” will fuel the controversy triggered by the Rt Rev Michael Nazir-Ali, the Bishop of Rochester.

He said last week some Muslim enclaves were “no-go areas” for Christians and there was a need for greater integration. Mr Phillips, who chairs the Equality and Human Rights Commission, said the Bishop was right to raise the issue because white families were moving out of areas with high ethnic minority populations.

Sir Andrew Green, the chairman of Migrationwatch, praised Mr Phillips for confronting the evidence of “white flight”. “This is another courageous contribution from Trevor Phillips, who is clearly prepared to face the facts about the current strains in our society,” he said. “We would add – although he does not – that massive levels of immigration are a significant factor in this.”

Daily Telegraph, 15 January 2007

Shop bans head scarves and hijabs

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Whitegate Wines noticeShoppers wearing head scarves have been banned from a shop because the owner said they cannot be properly identified.

The ruling at Whitegate Wines off-licence and Convenience Store, Padiham Road, Padiham, includes those wearing the hijab – the traditional Muslim head wear. A sign on the door states: “Due to CCTV coverage all headwear must be removed before entering the shop.”

One customer complained after he sent his 13-year-old daughter in to buy a soft drink and crisps on her way back from school. He said: “She returned empty-handed. I then went in with my wife and she was told she would not get served. First we tried to explain that unlike a hoodie or a hat Muslim women wear the hijab for religious reasons. Then we tried to explain that if a bank accepts customers wearing a headscarf then shouldn’t that mean this shop should too? But the staff were having none of it.”

Owner Tom White said security was the overriding concern. “The police told us that a person is more identifiable if all the headgear is removed. So we have decided to implement the policy across the board so as not to favour anyone. I have also been told I am perfectly within my rights to do this. As you may understand shops such as ours are targeted by shoplifters and security is therefore a major concern for us. The policy has been in place for about a year and a half. In that that time shoplifting has gone down.”

When asked if any Hijab wearing women had committed any shoplifting in the past Mr White said, “No”.

Lancashire Evening Telegraph, 15 January 2008

And note the readers’ comments on the report. For example: “About bloody time someone has the guts to stand up to these people. You cannot walk into a bank with a crash helmet on or pay for petrol, so why should they be allowed to wear these Hijab. Am not a racist but if people want to live in our country then they should abide by our rules. When me and the wife go on holiday to places like Dubai we have to abide by their rules, ie no drinking alchohol. Lets get control of this country. Well done again Tom White.”