Muslims, the LGBT community and anti-hatred laws

Homophobic sticker Tower Hamlets2Julie Bindel, Paul Burston and the other signatories to the statement reported in today’s Guardian start from a position of understandable resentment that Mohammed Hasnath, who was convicted last week of posting up “gay free zone” stickers in Tower Hamlets, received such a light sentence, but they wilfully misrepresent the reasons for this.

They write: “There is a strong feeling that homophobia is being covered up, or ignored, in order not to ‘endanger community relations’. The paltry fine issued by the court lends weight to this fear.” The suggestion here is that it would have antagonised Muslims in Tower Hamlets if Hasnath had received a heavier sentence, and that the police and Crown Prosecution Service decided to charge him with a minor offence out of concern for the feelings of the Muslim community. No evidence is offered for either claim, because none exists.

Continue reading

LGBT campaigners target East London Mosque

Gay rights campaigners have urged mosque leaders in east London to ban homophobic clerics from using their premises, following a 21% rise in gay hate crime in the area.

Activists, including journalist Julie Bindel and Pride trustee Colm Howard-Lloyd, said some preachers at the East London Mosque and the London Muslim Centre had “created an atmosphere in which hate is socially acceptable; they have spread a message in which maiming and violence is the most dutiful, honourable, devout thing to do”.

Their concerns follow the £100 fine given to Mohammed Hasnath, who put up “Gay-Free Zone” stickers in the area; the case of Oliver Hemsley, who was paralysed from the neck down in August 2008 following a vicious attack; and Metropolitan police figures showing that gay hate crime had risen in the borough of Tower Hamlets – where the mosque and adjoining centre are located – from 67 attacks to 81 in a year.

Continue reading

Posted in UK

Herman Cain would require Muslim appointees to take a special loyalty oath

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnm0x3xeH_M

In March, former Godfather’s Pizza CEO Herman Cain burst onto the presidential scene when he told ThinkProgress that he “will not” appoint Muslims in his administration.

Under intense pressure, Cain’s campaign walked back the candidate’s words, saying that he would appoint “any person for a position based on merit.” However, the next week, Cain hedged his retraction, telling the Orlando Sun Sentinel that he would only appoint a Muslim who disavowed Sharia law, but that “he’s unaware of any Muslim who’d be willing to make such a disavowal.”

On the Glenn Beck Show today, the host asked the Georgia Republican about his refusal to appoint Muslims. Cain told Beck that he would be willing to appoint a Muslim only “if they can prove to me that they’re putting the Constitution of the United States first.” Beck followed up by asking if he was calling for “some loyalty proof” for Muslims. Cain said, “Yes, to the Constitution of the United States of America.” When Beck then asked “Would you do that to a Catholic or would you do that to a Mormon?” Cain told the host, “Nope, I wouldn’t.”

BECK: You said you would not appoint a Muslim to anybody in your administration.

CAIN: The exact language was when I was asked, “would you be comfortable with a Muslim in your cabinet?” And I said, “no, I would not be comfortable.” I didn’t say I wouldn’t appoint one because if they can prove to me that they’re putting the Constitution of the United States first then they would be a candidate just like everybody else. My entire career, I’ve hired good people, great people, regardless of their religious orientation.

BECK: So wait a minute. Are you saying that Muslims have to prove their, that there has to be some loyalty proof?

CAIN: Yes, to the Constitution of the United States of America.

BECK: Would you do that to a Catholic or would you do that to a Mormon?

CAIN: Nope, I wouldn’t. Because there is a greater dangerous part of the Muslim faith than there is in these other religions. I know that there are some Muslims who talk about, “but we are a peaceful religion.” And I’m sure that there are some peace-loving Muslims.

Scott Keyes at Think Progress, 8 June 2011

British couple challenge French veil ban

A Muslim husband and wife are using a British legal team to launch a landmark human rights challenge to the French ban on face-covering veils.

The couple are taking the French government to the European Court of Human Rights over its prohibition on wearing the niqab and burka in a case of importance across the European Union. They are seeking damages and a ruling that the ban on the full-face veil is “unnecessary, disproportionate and unlawful”. They also contend the blanket ban restricts their right to free movement across the EU.

The husband is a French national living with his wife and two children in the West Midlands. They are being represented by Robina Shah from the Birmingham-based Immigration Advisory Service, who has lodged their application with the human rights court in Strasbourg, and barrister Ramby de Mello.

Ms Shah said: “The case clearly is of importance to my clients. As a result of the ban they have had to leave their country of nationality, as the ban restricts their freedom of choice, and that of their daughters.”

The couple wish to remain anonymous, saying there is “considerable hostility” in both the UK and France to Muslim women who go fully veiled in public.

Asian Image, 9 June 2011

Court upholds Catalan city’s veil ban

A Spanish court has upheld a ban by a city on face-covering Islamic veils worn in municipal buildings.

In 2010, the city of Lleida became the first Spanish one to impose such a ban. But the Catalan regional Superior Justice Tribunal suspended it following an appeal by a Muslim association that claimed it violated basic rights.

The court ruled Wednesday that the northeastern city was within its rights to ban the clothing in municipal buildings for security and identification purposes. It also backed Lleida’s argument that the veils are discriminatory.

Other Spanish towns have taken similar steps but their burqa bans have yet to take effect.

Lleida’s one is largely symbolic since only about 3 percent of Lleida’s population is Muslim and very few wear face-covering garments.

Associated Press, 9 June 2011

Woman weightlifter fights to compete in hijab

Kulsoom AbdullahA 35-year-old weightlifter is battling to be able to compete in the sport she loves while wearing a hijab instead of the body-hugging uniform that’s required.

Kulsoom Abdullah, who was born in the United States to Pakistani parents, discovered weightlifting at her gym, Crossfit, in Atlanta in 2008. She entered her first open competition last year, and was thrilled to find out that she was actually pretty good in the competitive sport. She can lift 70 kilos (about 154 pounds) to her shoulders, and 60 kilos (or about 132 pounds) over her head, in a move called the “clean-and-jerk.” Last December, she qualified for the American Open Weightlifting Championships, which would have been her first national competition.

But when her coaches asked whether she would be able to wear her modified uniform – which covers everything but her face, hands, and feet – the organizers told told them no.

Abdullah talked to some lawyer friends, who told her that other athletes had won their bids to wear different clothing for religious reasons. So she tried again, this time personally writing to USA Weightlifting with her request, and asking the group if it could compromise on a uniform.

Officials with the group wrote back and said they had to follow the rules of the International Weightlifting Federation (IWF), which mandates collarless uniforms and doesn’t allow exceptions.

“I was really disappointed because I was really looking forward to it,” she told The Lookout. “I had never thought I would qualify at the national level.”

“It is like saying, if you are different, you can not compete,” she wrote on her web site. “I am not asking people to change, I am just asking to participate and be able to dress the way I do.”

Now, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a Muslim advocacy group, is taking up Abdullah’s cause, and trying to lobby weightlifting organizations to revise their rules in time for her to compete in a July national competition. CAIR officials are arguing that USA Weightlifting is in violation of the Ted Stevens Olympic and Amateur Sports Act, which forbids sports bodies from discriminating based on “race, color, religion, sex, age, or national origin.” Not allowing Abdullah to wear her hijab is discrimination, CAIR maintains.

The Lookout, 9 June 2011

Baroness Cox introduces anti-Sharia bill

A new Bill has been introduced to Parliament to tackle the problem of Sharia courts in England and Wales.

Under the Bill, it will become a crime punishable by up to five years in prison to falsely claim legal jurisdiction over criminal or family law. The Bill was introduced to Parliament yesterday by Baroness Cox.

Lady Cox said: “Equality under the law is a core value of British justice. My Bill seeks to preserve that standard…. I am deeply concerned about the treatment of Muslim women by Sharia courts. We must do all that we can to make sure they are free from any coercion, intimidation or unfairness.”

The Bill is supported by a wide range of groups, including The Christian Institute and the National Secular Society.

Christian Institute news report, 8 June 2011


Yes, this is the same Baroness Cox who, together with Lord Pearson, invited Dutch far-right racist Geert Wilders to the House of Lords to show his Islamophobic film Fitna – an event that prompted a supportive demonstration by the English Defence League. So the idea that Cox is motivated by concern for the rights of Muslims, whether women or men, is frankly laughable.

Quilliam calls for Lord Carlile to be appointed counter-terror tsar

Lord CarlileOver at his Independent blog Ben Chu draws our attention to the interesting coincidence that Quilliam and Paul Goodman have simultaneously issued a call for Lord Carlile to be appointed overseer of the Prevent counter-terrorism strategy.

Carlile is a Liberal Democrat, but he is notorious for rejecting his party’s line that defence against the threat of terrorism doesn’t justify attacks on civil liberties. As Chu points out, Carlile has been a vocal critic of the Lib Dems’ opposition to control orders. He has also condemned the European Court of Human Rights for ruling that terror suspects cannot be deported to their country of origin if they face torture there.

Chu observes that “Quilliam’s championing of the peer for the role of counter-terror tsar is not going to change the mind of those Muslims who regard the think tank with suspicion”.