Atheism as a cover for racism

Posted on by Bob Pitt

“I don’t much care if people think I’m thick because I believe in God. But what’s really nasty here – and it’s a part of a growing phenomenon – is the way religion is being used as a subtle code for race.

“Belief in God is alive and well in Africa and in the Middle East and declining in western Europe. Writing about the intelligence of religious believers has, for some, become a roundabout way of commenting on the intelligence of those with darker skins whilst seeking to avoid the charge of racism. Religion is being used with a nod and a wink, cover for some rather dodgy and dangerous politics.

“The BNP, for example, has started using religion as a category of racial designation so as to deflect charges of racism. For instance, they seek to defend something called ‘Christian Britain’. But what they really mean is ‘no Muslims’ – and that really means ‘no Asians’. The fact that these categories are not in any way equivalent does not detract from the message the BNP is sending by using them in the way they do….

“The debate between believers and non-believers – a debate that gets terribly hot on this site sometimes – is not made any more civil by the addition of this unpleasant inflection. Which is why believers and unbelievers (even those who think people like me are idiotic enough to have given their life to the great flying spaghetti monster) ought to unite against this way of thinking about our differences. ”

Giles Fraser at Comment is Free, 12 June 2008

Losing the hearts, upsetting the minds: Brown’s 42-day detention

Posted on by Bob Pitt

“Since terrorist threats today are presumed to be Islamic, this new distressful piece of legislation will increase the fear of Muslims, increase injustice and discrimination against Muslims, produce alienation among the British Muslim communities, but I suppose will not save one single life from a recondite terrorist attack. ”

Islam, Muslims, and an Anthropologist, 12 June 2008

Murad Qureshi on the Brian Donegan trial

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Murad and Mohamed Al Salamouni“Last week I was at Southwark Crown Court to observe the harrowing trial of Brian Donegan who last August launched a vicious unprovoked attack on the Imam of Regent’s Park mosque, Sheikh Mohammed El-Salamouni. Sheikh El-Salamouni was left lying on the floor of the mosque with horrific injuries and is now blind for life. In its symbolism to those in the Muslim community, the attack would be comparable for Roman Catholics to an attack on an archbishop at Westminster Cathedral. To add to the local community’s distress, the fall-out from the attack is that Imams from Al-Azhar University who have provided us with the Imams at Regent’s Park for many years could now leave London if the Egyptian authorities do not feel they will be adequately protected in London.

“It is of scant consolation to Sheikh El-Salamouni, but Brian Donegan will be imprisoned indefinitely in a secure hospital after he was declared insane by the court. His punishment and the fact he will spend the rest of life behind bars needs needs to be properly explained to the local community and users of the mosque, some of whom are concerned that the lack of a traditional ‘guilty’ verdict means Mr Donegan has somehow got off lightly. This of course is not the case. It would take the intervention of the Home Secretary for Mr Donegan’s sentence ever to be revisited – something I do not envisage happening and something I will do everything in my gift to prevent.

“I have written to Jacqui Smith the present Home Secretary to press home this fact and to emphasise to her that the likes of Mr Donegan must not be allowed to harm our excellent record of harmonious community relations here in London.”

The Qureshi Report, 11 June 2008

It is worth examining the context to the attack on the sheikh.

On 8 August the West Midlands Police and the Crown Prosecution Service accused the makers of the Channel 4 documentary “Undercover Mosque” of distorting evidence in order to portray UK mosques as centres of extremism. One of the mosques so portrayed was the London Central Mosque at Regent’s Park.

On 9 August the right-wing press denounced the police and CPS and weighed in behind “Undercover Mosque”. An angry editorial in the Sun declared that the programme was “in tune with authoritative surveys showing how young Muslims are being persuaded by imams and preachers to sympathise with terrorists” and called on the police to “crack down on the fanatics who really are trying to stir up murderous feelings by turning gullible young Muslims into killing machines”.

On 10 August Brian Donegan launched his vicious attack on Sheikh Salamouni.

‘Britain’s virtual caliphate takes shape’

Posted on by Bob Pitt

“Extremist Muslims are making ingenious use of the internet to create a ‘virtual caliphate’ in Britain, according to a scary report by a former Al-Jazeera journalist published today. The report – produced by the Centre for Social Cohesion, a dynamic new think tank – demonstrates a crucial paradox: that the UK’s most barbaric medieval religious creed [sic] is also its most modern, in terms of its understanding of technology.”

Damian Thompson at Holy Smoke, 11 June 2008

Muslim parents to blame for children turning to extremism

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Dr Farhan Nizami CBE, a key adviser on Islam to the Prince of Wales, accused British Muslims of failing to make sure their children learn to speak English or supporting them in their education. He said this leaves them alienated from mainstream society and exposed to being groomed by radical Islamic groups.

It is the first time Dr Nizami, the director of the Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies, which has links with Oxford University, has spoken out about the failure of Muslims to integrate with British society. His comments come just weeks after the Bishop of Rochester, the Rt Rev Michael Nazir-Ali, warned that radical Islam is filling the “moral vacuum” created by the decline of Christian values in Britain. Speaking to The Daily Telegraph, Dr Nizami said Muslims would never play a full role in British society until they improved their education, language and aspirations.

Inayat Bunglawala, spokesman for the Muslim Council of Britain, said: “There is really no question regarding the central importance of parents taking an active interest in the better education of their children. But we need to be cautious of putting too much blame on parents for the actions of their children. As we have seen in the cases of the 7/7 bombers and terrorists who have been convicted since then, many of them were extremely adept at deceiving their closest family relatives about their intentions.”

Daily Telegraph, 11 June 2008

See Azad Ali’s comments at Between the Lines, 11 June 2008

Ireland: intercultural adviser warns against hijab ban

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Banning the hijab or other religious symbols which are important to minorities is “likely to result in tension with those communities where no tension existed before”, according to the director of the State’s advisory body on intercultural affairs.

In a detailed intervention in the debate over whether Muslim pupils should be allowed wear the headscarf in State schools, Philip Watt of the National Consultative Committee on Racism and Interculturalism said most schools had already found their own “sensible and sensitive compromise” by allowing it to be worn provided the colour was consistent with the school uniform.

Mr Watt suggested that those advocating a ban on the hijab “may, or may not, have fully considered the consequences of such a ban, for example in respect of all religious symbols and obligations in Irish schools”. While much of the focus had been on the Muslim headscarf, other religious symbols were worn in Irish schools, including the Sikh kara (a bangle), the Sikh patka (a scarf worn by boys and young men), the Jewish kippah or skullcap and Christian crucifixes. The pioneer badge, the sacred heart and crucifixes are worn by some teachers.

“The banning of religious symbols or obligations solely aimed at one religious community or indeed all religious faiths is potentially discriminatory and likely to be tested in Irish law,” Mr Watt said. “In 2004 the French government considered the issuing of a ban on the wearing of the hijab in French schools, but after legal considerations decided that the only way that such a ban would be legal would be to ban virtually all religious symbols and obligations, including large crucifixes.”

Fine Gael education spokesman Brian Hayes and his Labour counterpart Ruairí Quinn said separately last week that they opposed the wearing of the hijab in the country’s secondary schools, though Mr Hayes made a distinction between State-run VEC schools and those run by religious orders, which decide their own rules. “There is enough segregation in Ireland without adding this to it. Segregating in this way is not helpful to Muslims and not helpful to anybody,” Mr Hayes said.

In yesterday’s statement, Mr Watt also sought to correct the impression that all Muslims are recent immigrants. Just under a third of the 32,500 Muslims in the Republic are Irish.

An Irish Times/ TNS mrbi poll conducted last week found that 48 per cent of people feel the wearing of hijabs should be allowed in State schools. Some 39 per cent disagree and 13 per cent have no opinion.

Irish Times, 10 June 2008

MCB joins coalition to oppose extension of pre-charge

Posted on by Bob Pitt

MCB banner“The Muslim Council of Britain joins human rights groups, a growing body of thinkers and policymakers dealing with our security, together with a large proportion of the British public who oppose the extension of pre-charge-detention. Any further extension of pre-charge detention risks being counterproductive, damaging community relations and undermining the UK’s moral authority around the world. We oppose terrorism in all its forms. We are all concerned about the right to security, free from terror, but this proposal serves to compound the problem, not resolve it.

“We do not believe that the government has made a convincing case for extending the pre-charge detention period from 28 days to 42 days. We are very concerned about the negative impact that this proposed legislation could have on relations between younger members of the Muslim community and the police. Of course it is right that we take proper precautions against the threat of terrorism, however, it is our view that this legislation will be counterproductive and will play into the hands of extremist groups,” said Dr Muhammad Abdul Bari, Secretary-General of the Muslim Council of Britain.

MCB press release, 10 June 2008

Friendswood principal backed in Islam flap

Posted on by Bob Pitt

About 200 Friendswood residents, divided over a junior high principal’s decision to let an Islamic group make a presentation to students last month, packed Tuesday night’s school board meeting as the governing body considered whether to ban any future religious presentations by outsiders.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations in Houston sought permission to address the mostly Anglo student body at Friendswood Junior High after a Muslim student was stuffed head-first into a trash can by a classmate. Principal Robin Lowe agreed to the 40-minute PowerPoint presentation on the basic beliefs of Islam, which drew howls of protest from some parents, talk radio hosts and Christian clergy.

Last week, Lowe requested and received a new central administration job because she felt the controversy made continuing at the junior high impossible, Superintendent Trish Hanks said.

Most who spoke Tuesday blasted the school board and Hanks for not supporting Lowe.

“I ask that you as a board take certain actions — reinstate Robin Lowe with a suitable and public apology,” said longtime Friendswood resident Tom Burke, drawing a loud burst of applause and whoops of approval from the audience. “Pledge to listen to the wishes of the large, but all too silent majority, and close your ears to the vocal minority. This community has been embarrassed. You can turn that around and make yourselves and your community proud.”

Other speakers, however, accused CAIR of having links to terrorism.

Houston Chronicle, 10 June 2008

See also “R-E-S-P-E-C-T: Religious persecution, not lessons in tolerance and diversity, should spark outrage”, Houston Chronicle, 7  June 2008

‘UK’s top Muslim’ backs 42 days

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Khurshid Ahmed“Britain’s top Muslim [sic] last night praised Gordon Brown and demanded MPs back new laws to hold terror suspects. Khurshid Ahmed, chairman of the British Muslim Forum, the UK’s largest representative Muslim organisation [sic], called for 42 days’ detention without charge. He said it was vital to protect the nation.”

Sun, 10 June 2008

Yes, that’s this Khurshid Ahmed.

For Yusuf Smith’s comments, see Indigo Jo Blogs, 10 June 2008

Update:  The Guardian Diary quotes Khurshid Ahmed as saying on behalf of the BMF: “We don’t support the extension. We have never supported it.”

Further update:  But see Khurshid Ahmed’s Comment is Free piece (originally given the misleading heading “The BMF opposes 42-day detention” and now retitled more accurately “Supporting tough measures”) where he writes:

“… our strategy was to campaign against the proposal while at the same time seeking concessions to secure a balance between the need to safeguard the security of the country and provide protection of civil liberties. The package of concessions reinforced by the proposal to compensate for the damage done in loss of opportunity, reputation and the accompanying stigma goes a long way in addressing our concerns. The legal process now proposed renders the use of these powers to very exceptional circumstances only. In these circumstances, by agreeing the package, we are acknowledging the severity of the threat to this country and playing our part in securing the safety of all our citizens.”

In other words, after the government made what it considered to be adequate concessions, the BMF did come down in support of 42 days. As Inayat Bunglawala observes in the Cif comments section: “I have to say that I have not actually come across many British Muslims at all who support the 42 day detention legislation.” So whose views does the BMF actually represent?

Robert Kennedy assassination – ‘the beginning of Islamic terrorism in America’

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Alan Dershowitz on the shooting of Robert Kennedy: “I thought of it as an act of violence motivated by hatred of Israel and of anybody who supported Israel. It was in some ways the beginning of Islamic terrorism in America. It was the first shot.”

Boston Globe, 5 June 2008

“Sirhan, a Christian Palestinian immigrant, said he was angry at Kennedy because he supported Israel in the 1967 war over the rights of the Palestinians. This was an instance of one Christian killing another Christian for political, not religious, reasons. Why does Dershowitz conflate Palestinian with Islamic, other than to spread fear of Muslims?”

Letter in the Boston Globe, 9 June 2008