‘Muslim girl stoned to death under Sharia law’ claims Daily Mail

Posted on by Bob Pitt

A teenage Muslim girl was stoned to death under “Sharia law” after taking part in a beauty contest in Ukraine. Katya Koren, 19, was found dead in a village in the Crimea region near her home. Friends said she liked wearing fashionable clothes and had come seventh in a beauty contest.

Her battered body was buried in a forest and was found a week after she disappeared. Police have opened a murder investigation and are looking into claims that three Muslim youths killed her, claiming her death was justified under Islam.

One of the three – named as 16-year-old Bihal Gaziev – is under arrest and told police that Katya had “violated the laws of Sharia”. Gaziev has said he has no regrets about her death.

Daily Mail, 31 May 2011

Of course the article was immediately seized on by the English Defence League:

EDL Daily Mail stoning story

If you can stomach it, you can read the comments by EDL supporters here.

And the article provoked the usual succession of bigots into posting anti-Muslim comments on the Mail‘s own website:

“Would be nice to see some supporters of this faith speaking out against this all too common occurance.”

“In a recent demonstration by Muslims against the English, did I not see banners proclaiming ‘Sharia for Britain’.”

“How long before some idiot starts bleating about ‘Islamaphobia’ with reference to this news story? Im suffering from Islamaphobia myself I have a distinct aversion to young girls being brutaly murdered in the name of religion by cowards!”

“I wish apologists for the misogyny of ‘Islam’ would see how despicable their Sharia law is.”

“Another victim of the mysoginistic murder cult that is sharia law.”

“Where are the voices of ‘moderate’ Islam now? I can’t hear them, can you? Can anyone?”

“what a lovely religion NOT”

“Absolutely hideous! I am appalled that such behaviour is deemed justifiable under a law written over a 1000 years ago by uneducated warring idiots!”

“I hope the Archbishop of Canterbury is reading this he is rather a fan of sharia law as I recall, just shows how out of touch he is.”

However, there are several rather more informed comments that suggest the Mail‘s story of Sharia-inspired stoning is completely fabricated. For example:

“Daily Mail, stop lying and instigating hatred for Muslims! The original Russian article from Komsomolskaya Pravda of 28/05 does not mention any religious motives in this murder (I can provide the link to the original story). Katya wasn’t a Muslim. Katya Koren is not a Muslim name. There was no ‘three Muslim teenagers’ who ‘stones Katya’. there was just one mentally distrurbed boy of Muslim origin who hit her on the head once. He doesn’t know himself why he did it. People suspect because Katya rejected him. This has absolutely nothing to do with sharia, Muslims, religion etc. Who is making up such stories? You should be ashamed of yourselves.”

And: “The story is completely inacurrate. Katya Koren was a Ukrainian girl and she was an Orthdox Christian. That was not a stoning, but a cold-blooded murder by a psycho who happened to be from a mixed Ukranian-Tatar family. I am amazed, how things can be distorted.”

And: “This news, made by Russian propaganda apparatus, is provocation. Because the killer even has no any attitude to Islam. Katya is Russian, not Muslim. Boy is Slavic, but is adopted by Muslims. Ukrainian Internal Affairs Ministry Crimean Branch Press Chairperson Olga Bogoslavskaya said that murder is not motivated by religious belief. All world copied your news! Who will excuse?”

Also: “THE KEY FACTS: 1. Katya is an Orthodox Christian. 2. Bilyal is formally Muslim, just adopted by Muslim man 3. Bilyal is not religious, like his father, even didn’t go to mosque. 4. Murder is not done by stoning. 5. Internal Affairs Dep. announced that murder has no religious roots. 6. Such a news first appeared in pro-Russian media.”

See also “Katya Koren: Ukrainian beauty queen killed by disturbed classmate not Sharia law”, LoonWatch, 31 May 2011

Update:  The Mail has an new article on the case headlined “Was Muslim girl ‘stoned to death for taking part in beauty pageant’ actually murdered by a stalker?” Perhaps that’s a question the Mailshould have asked before it published the original inflammatory article. And the paper is still banging on about how “Sharia law prohibits women from taking part in beauty contests” – which, even if it were true, would hardly apply to Katya Koren, who wasn’t a Muslim.

Wilders trial: PVV leader repeats attack on Islam in closing speech

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Dutch politician Geert Wilders on Wednesday defended his anti-Islamic rhetoric during the final day of hearings in his trial for inciting hatred and discrimination. “The Netherlands is threatened by Islam. Islam is an ideology of hate and destruction. Islam threatens Western values and norms,” Wilders told the judges, the daily De Volkskrant reported.

DPA, 1 June 2011

The full text of Wilders’ speech can be read here.

Torygraph apologises to East London Mosque

Posted on by Bob Pitt

In January this year an article was published on the Telegraph website headlined “Extremist leader jailed for child abuse”. Readers were informed:

“A man has been jailed for a series of sex attacks on children committed while he was the leader of a Muslim extremist group and a teacher at a hardline London mosque. Ashraf Miah, 38, from Mile End, a former teacher at the East London Mosque, repeatedly molested the girls whilst they recited religious texts. The youngest victim was five and the oldest only seven.

“Miah was at the time the East End leader of the notorious extremist group Hizb ut Tahrir, which believes that voting and democracy is forbidden in Islam and wants to turn Britain into a sharia state….

“The court heard that Miah also taught at the hardline East London Mosque, controlled by the Islamic Forum of Europe, which also believes in turning the UK into a sharia state, though by different methods. The mosque has hosted many hate, extremist and terrorist preachers, including Anwar al-Awlaki, the al-Qaeda spiritual leader. Some of the victims were introduced to Miah via the mosque.”

The article has since been removed from the website and today theTelegraph published the following retraction:

“Our report ‘Extremist leader jailed for child abuse’ (Jan 20) wrongly said that some of the victims of Ashraf Miah, described in a court report as a former teacher at the East London Mosque, were introduced via the Mosque. We are happy to confirm that the Mosque has no record of him ever having taught there and that there was no suggestion at trial of his victims having been introduced to him there.”

Now, which Telegraph journalist do you suppose could have adopted such a slipshod attitude towards the basic facts of the case, with the evident aim of stitching up the East London Mosque? No prizes for guessing that it was of course Andrew Gilligan.

Update:  Gilligan complains that Islamophobia Watch has attacked him over “an incorrect news-in-brief item about the mosque in the Telegraph which I did not write”.

As it happens, I couldn’t find the news-in-brief report that appeared in the print edition of the paper so I quoted from the unedited version of the article as it appeared, under the title “Extremist leader jailed for child abuse”, on Gilligan’s Telegraphblog. This was the link to the article:

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/andrewgilligan/100072691/extremist-leader-jailed-for-child-abuse/

As you can see if you click on it, the link is dead and the article has been deleted.

It was, however, reproduced at the time on a number of right-wing Islamophobic websites, where it can still be found (for example here, here and here). Is Gilligan now saying that he didn’t have a hand in writing an article that he posted on his own blog?

Youth pleads guilty to posting ‘gay free zone’ stickers in East End

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Homophobic sticker Tower HamletsThe Telegraph reports that a youth named Mohammed Hasnath has been fined for posting up some of the offensive “gay free zone” stickers that appeared in Tower Hamlets earlier this year.

It is good that a conviction has been secured in connection with that disgraceful campaign, but it would be even better if the police could identify and charge the people who produced the stickers and gave them to Hasnath – as it is they, rather than a naive-sounding 18-year-old, who are the real villains of the piece.

Judging by the Telegraph report Hasnath was convicted under Section 4A of the Public Order Act, which criminalises the display of “any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting” with “intent to cause a person harassment, alarm or distress”. In his defence Hasnath stated that he was merely expressing his belief that homosexuality is a sin and had not actually threatened anyone – “it doesn’t say that I am going to punish them it just says what God says in the Koran”.

It will be interesting to see if those right-wing – and liberal – commentators who have defended Geert Wilders’ right to free speech will do the same for Mohammed Hasnath. You can bet they almost certainly won’t. Yet, just as members of the LGBT community should be able to go about their lives in Tower Hamlets without suffering abuse and harassment from homophobes, the Muslim community in the Netherlands should equally have the right to live in peace without a far-right politician inciting hatred against them. Freedom of expression is not absolute in either case.

Update:  It turns out that Hasnath wasn’t charged under Section 4A of the Public Order Act but under Section 5, which criminalises the display of “any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting, within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress thereby”.

Rainbow Hamlets have issued a press release criticising British Transport Police and the Crown Prosecution Service for not proceeding with a charge under 4A, which is a more serious offence. However, 4A requires the prosecution to prove intent, which is almost impossible to establish. (That is one reason why the law against incitement to religious hatred, which also requires proof of intent, is completely useless.) So, to be fair to the CPS, they drew the not unreasonable conclusion that a prosecution under 4A would be likely to fail.

Phyllis Chesler opposes Jewish-Muslim stand against European far right

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Phyllis Chesler and friendUnder the headline “Jewish and Muslim leaders urge European Union heads not to pander to extreme-right”, the World Jewish Congress reports on a meeting in Brussels of Jewish and Muslim representatives.

The joint declaration they adopted included the following passage:

“We are troubled by the growth of racist and xenophobic movements. We believe that individuals and organizations espousing such malign and hateful ideologies represent a grave threat to the fundamental European values of pluralism, democracy, mutual respect and cooperation….

“We wish to work together with all Europeans of conscience to put a stop to any group that espouses racist or xenophobic ideologies long before they are in a position to gain legislative or other power. We must never allow anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, xenophobia or racism to become respectable in today’s Europe. In that regard, we call upon all political leaders not to pander to these groups by echoing their rhetoric.”

Nobody outside of the far-right organisations being condemned here could object to that, you might think. You’d be wrong. Over at FrontPage Magazine Phyllis Chesler, the self-proclaimed “founding voice of the modern feminist movement”, writes:

“Why is a group of Jews trying to help Muslims … by appealing to European governments not to ‘pander to right wing forces’ which are, belatedly, beginning to gather in response to a Muslim population which is hostile to Western and European values, does not wish to assimilate, and is both separatist and violent?

“Had Muslims come in total peace these ‘right wing forces’ may have, indeed, been a reflection of European racism towards Arabs and dark-skinned ‘Easterners’. But the alleged ‘Islamophobia’ is not based on bigoted considerations of color, faith, or ethnicity; it is, rather, based on the increasing danger that Muslims pose to the stability and character of Europe.”

Update:  Still, Chesler does have her fans (even if they can’t spell her name):

EDL and Phyllis Chesler

University campuses are not ‘hotbeds of radicalisation’

Posted on by Bob Pitt

ENGAGE draws our attention to an interview in the Daily Telegraph with Nicola Dandridge of Universities UK, who rejects the view, promoted by the likes of Anthony Glees and the Quilliam Foundation and widely publicised by the right-wing press, that universities are training grounds for violent extremism among Muslim students.

Needless to say, James Brandon of Quilliam is on hand to rubbish Dandridge’s analysis: “Every week, radical Islamists on campuses around the UK preach a steady mixture of anti-western conspiracy theories and hard-line Islamist ideologies. At the same time, a steady stream of British Muslim university students are being convicted of a wide range of terrorist offences.”

But then, Brandon and his colleagues at Quilliam have made a comfortable living out of hyping up such threats, haven’t they?

Aussie bishop calls for withdrawal of ‘offensive’ Islamic billboards

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Jesus a prophet of Islam vandalisedA Catholic bishop has slammed controversial Islamic billboards for being “provocative and offensive” and he’s calling for them to be removed from prominent locations across Sydney.

The billboards carrying the slogan “Jesus: a prophet of Islam” were erected late last week in Darlinghurst, Rozelle and Rosehill. They have been paid for by Islamic group MyPeace, which wants to encourage Christians and Muslims to find common ground by raising awareness that Islam believed in Jesus Christ.

But Bishop Julian Porteous, from the Archdiocese of Sydney, says Christians believe that Jesus “is more than a prophet”. “He is the Son of God. He is acclaimed Lord and Saviour of humanity,” he said on Monday. “In Australia with its Christian heritage a billboard carrying the statement ‘Jesus A prophet of Islam’ is provocative and offensive to Christians.”

Bishop Porteous, whose comments come a day after the Darlinghurst billboard was vandalised, said it was important religions don’t antagonise others with “provocative statements”. “For the sake of preserving social harmony and respect between major world religions these billboards should be withdrawn, along with others which carry messages directly offensive to Christians,” he said.

But MyPeace organiser Diaa Mohamed told Fairfax he had received “overwhelmingly positive feedback from Christians, atheists, Muslims, everyday Australians” while the vandalism “validates the reason they went up in the first place”. And he said he wasn’t deterred from plans for similar ads – with such slogans as “Holy Quran: the final testament” and “Muhammad: mercy to mankind” – on buses travelling through the city and in the Hills district.

Bishop Porteous believes they are having a very different impact. “The campaign organisers profess the billboard advertisements are to inform but in effect they have provoked a response reflected in the vandalism we saw at the weekend,” he said.

AAP, 30 May 2011

Of course, Bishop Porteous wouldn’t condemn advertising hoardings reading “Jesus: the son of God” for offending non-Christians. But he does condemn as “offensive to Christians” an advertisement announcing Muslims’ respect for Jesus as a prophet. According to Porteous, Australia’s “Christian heritage” requires that minority faiths should refrain from publicising those aspects of their beliefs that conflict with the teachings of Christianity.

Wilders spoke out about ‘the gravest danger facing Western civilisation: increased Islamisation’ – lawyer

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Wilders in court (3)Dutch anti-Islam lawmaker Geert Wilders often “went far” in his criticism of the Muslim religion, but he never overstepped acceptable boundaries, his lawyer said in court Monday.

“He goes far, but he never goes too far,” lawyer Bram Moszkowicz told the Amsterdam district court where the flamboyant politician faces hate speach charges. “He doesn’t speak out because it’s funny. He speaks out over the gravest danger facing our Western civilisation: an increased Islamisation,” Moszkowicz told judges.

“Acts of terror have been committed… with the Koran in hand, in London, in Madrid,” he added, referring bombings in the two capitals. “If there’s a threat, Mr Wilders speaks out about it,” said Moszkowicz in the trial, broadcast live on Dutch national television’s website.

AFP, 30 May 2011

UCU conference to discuss motion defending students’ right to wear veil

Posted on by Bob Pitt

UCU logoStudents should have the right to wear religious attire, such as burkhas, in colleges and universities, lecturers will be told tomorrow.

Leaders of the University and College Union (UCU) will pledge their support for the right of people of all faiths “to wear the religious head-dress and other religious attire appropriate to their faiths”. The union argues that the move is essential to encourage participation in further and higher education among ethnic minority groups – particularly women.

Delegates will also debate an amendment condemning what it calls “the alarming precedent” of a UK college prohibiting students from wearing the veil in college. Burnley College in Lancashire took the decision last year on security grounds. In 2009, it had also refused a student permission to enrol at the college while she was wearing a veil.

The debate comes on the heels of the French government’s decision to ban the wearing of the veil in public – a move criticised by the union as evidence of increasing Islamophobia. Other countries, such as Austria, are said to be considering similar moves to France if the number of women wearing veils grows.

“Anybody should be free to wear what they choose to follow their beliefs,” said Alan Whitaker, president of the UCU. “That has been a principle of the union. We are a secular union but that doesn’t mean we’re anti-religion.

“We’re in favour of people’s freedom to practise any religion they choose, and to be able to follow the customs of that religion – and that includes what clothing they wear.”

Delegates will cite as further evidence of Islamophobia the Swiss referendum decision to forbid the construction of minarets on mosques.

A further amendment, tabled by lecturers at the London School of Economics, says that “an important principle of education is to combat superstition and prejudice”. The LSE lecturers stress that allowing people of all faiths to wear what they want would help to achieve this. The amendment adds: “People of all faiths, or of none, have the right to dress as they personally consider appropriate.”

Independent on Sunday, 29 May 2011

The UCU conference will also debate a motion from the union’s LGBT members standing committee which warns against rising Islamophobia, “deplores the recruitment of any LGBT people” to the English Defence League and calls for a united campaign “against the EDL, their actions and their message of hate”.