« December 2006 | Main | February 2007 »

January 31, 2007

Britain Berserk: Zero to Counter Islamophobia

This is a good quote on what changes in school syllabi will mean for all of us:

''Children will be taught race relations and multiculturalism with every subject they study –from Spanish to science – under controversial changes to the school curriculum announced by the Government. In music and art, they could have to learn Indian and Chinese songs and instruments, and West African drumming In maths and science, key Muslim contributions such algebra and the number zero will be emphasised to counter Islamophobia...''

 And this blogger dissects the politics of Islamophobia:

''I know that people such as Swedish historian of religion Matthias Gardell claim that Islamophobia is perhaps the greatest threat to democracy in the Western world today. Personally, I subscribe more to the view of Hugh Fitzgerald of Jihad Watch that “‘Islamophobia’ is a word concocted to intimidate those who are rightly troubled, and more than troubled, by what they have learned of Islam largely through the observable behavior of Muslims not only in the West, but around the world.”

 

January 30, 2007

Sharia state advocates mirror image of BNP

Conservative Party leader David Cameron, yesterday, delivered a major speech on British multiculturalism. It was part of a series of speeches on the subject from Jack Straw and Tony Blair to David Cameron, though not coordinated as they did so independently of each other. British society needs more leaders to come out and simply state the problem, as Cameron did yesterday. He noted how extreme rightwing British National Party and those advocate Sharia state in Britain are two sides of the same coin:

"Those who seek a Sharia state, or special treatment and a separate law for British Muslims are, in many ways, the mirror image of the BNP.''

''Young white men are told, 'the blacks are all criminals'. Young Afro-Caribbean men are told, 'the Asian shopkeepers are ripping you off'. Young Muslim men are told, 'the British want to destroy Islam'.''

Read more on David Cameron's 'Bringing down the barriers to cohesion'.

 

January 29, 2007

Living Together Apart: British Muslims & Multiculturalism

Policy Exchange has released the results of a major new survey of the attitudes of Muslims in Britain and the reasons behind the rapid rise in Islamic fundamentalism amongst the younger generation. The authors of Living Apart Together: British Muslims and the paradox of multiculturalism’ conclude that the growth of Islamism must be understood in relation to political and social trends that have emerged in British society and suggests that the way the Government is responding to Islamism is making things worse, not better.

Some highlights of the report are:

>> 74% of 16-24 years old would prefer Muslim women to choose to wear veil or hijab, compared to only 28% of 55+ year olds.

>> 7% of Muslims ''admire organisations like Al-Qaeda that are prepared to fight the West''. 13% of 16-24 years old agreed with this statement, compared to 3% of 55+ years old. 

>> 59% of Muslims would like to live under British law, compared to 28% who would prefer to live under sharia; 37% of 16-24 years old would prefer to live under sharia, compared to 17% of 55+ years old.

>> 86% of Muslims feel that ''my religion is the most important thing in my life''.

Lead author of the report, Munira Mirza, said:

“The emergence of a strong Muslim identity in Britain is, in part, a result of multicultural policies implemented since the 1980s which have emphasised difference at the expense of shared national identity and divided people along ethnic, religious and cultural lines.”

 

January 28, 2007

A British Muslim manifesto for 2007

Today I discovered this website where author Tahir Abbas blogs. This is a summary from his manifesto for British Muslims:

When Islam came along, women got less freedom but plenty of rights. Today, here in Britain or in the wider Arab world, Muslim women have little to feel confident about. In the current climate Muslims cannot flourish without half of the Ummah in chains.

Only one in five Muslim who can work that do work, we are significantly under-represented. Work is not just about incomes so one can afford luxury items but it is a social, cultural and intellectual sphere of activity which builds upon the ‘capitals’ people have.... much here is also to do with self-employment, under-employment and long-term health problems.

I cannot emphasise enough the importance of Muslim men and women actively engaging in the political sphere, as without it there is little hope in making an impact on policy and practice.... By remaining outside of politics, there is no recognition of the concerns that people face, there is no suggestion of actively consulting such disfranchised groups, and there is no suggestion of working together to determine positive outcomes.

What do Muslims do in relation to culture? Not a lot, unless it is orientated with ‘back home’ initiatives. How is culture positively used by Muslims as a way in which to engage in dialogue, interaction, exchange or relations with others?....More effort needs to be made by people outside of London to engage with culture, and to explore what British cultures are akin to Muslim cultures...

When are Muslims going to realise that asking tough questions and about man’s and god’s laws is not heretical? ...We need to look forward, not back. Think positively, not negatively. Be progressive, not regressive. Be open, not closed.

 

 

January 25, 2007

English liberal, fundamentalist Islamist, French republican

Agnes Poirier -- writing in, yes, The Guardian -- is simply marvelous. She outlines why she opted out of Ken Levingtone's conference on World Civilisation or Clash of Civilisations?

''I agreed to participate alongside 30 or so other speakers. I was to debate "the right to religious dress" and "Multicultural London, does it work?" I asked who else was going to be on the panels, and was given two names but assured there would be more....''

''For the closing debate, they had perhaps thought it better to look fair. The multicultural London motion at that point included Jonathan Freedland, Tariq Ramadan and myself, and therefore offered three different points of view: in a nutshell, English liberal, fundamentalist Islamist and French republican.''

''Are you surprised that I define Tariq Ramadan as a fundamentalist Islamist? Perhaps you thought that, as an adviser to Tony Blair on multiculturalism and a visiting senior research fellow at Oxford, he represented the face of moderate Islam? Forget his reassuring manner. Read Caroline Fourest's remarkable study of his speeches and audio cassettes in which he asks young Muslims not to mix or marry outside their religion. Or note that he thoughtfully proposed "a moratorium on the lapidation of adulterous women". Yes, a "moratorium".''

Read her classic exposition of British multiculturalism.

 

January 24, 2007

Hitchens on demography and cultural masochism

Christopher Hitchens reviews Mark Steyn's America Alone:

Mark Steyn believes that demography is destiny, and he makes an immensely convincing case. He stations himself at the intersection of two curves. The downward one is the population of developed Europe and Japan, which has slipped or is slipping below what demographers call “replacement,” rapidly producing a situation where the old will far outnumber the young. The upward curve, or curves, represent the much higher birthrate in the Islamic world and among Muslim immigrants to Western societies.

Mark Steyn himself makes this profound observation of the role of demographics:

Why did Bosnia collapse into the worst slaughter in Europe since World War Two? In the thirty years before the meltdown, Bosnian Serbs had declined from 43 percent to 31 percent of the population, while Bosnian Muslims had increased from 26 percent to 44 percent. In a democratic age, you can’t buck demography—except through civil war. The Serbs figured that out—as other Continentals will in the years ahead: if you can’t outbreed the enemy, cull ’em. The problem that Europe faces is that Bosnia’s demographic profile is now the model for the entire continent.

And then Hitchens's own proposal, let's name it Against Islamism:

1. An end to one-way multiculturalism and to the cultural masochism that goes with it. The Koran does not mandate the wearing of veils or genital mutilation, and until recently only those who apostasized from Islam faced the threat of punishment by death.

2. A strong, open alliance with India on all fronts, from the military to the political and economic, backed by an extensive cultural exchange program, to demonstrate solidarity with the other great multiethnic democracy under attack from Muslim fascism. A hugely enlarged quota for qualified Indian immigrants and a reduction in quotas from Pakistan and other nations where fundamentalism dominates.

3. A similarly forward approach to Nigeria, São Tomé and Príncipe, and the other countries of Western Africa that are under attack by jihadists and are also the location of vast potential oil reserves, whose proper development could help emancipate the local populations from poverty and ourselves from dependence on Middle Eastern oil.

4. A declaration at the UN of our solidarity with the right of the Kurdish people of Iraq and elsewhere to self-determination as well as a further declaration by Congress that in no circumstance will Muslim forces who have fought on our side, from the Kurds to the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan, find themselves friendless, unarmed, or abandoned.

5. Energetic support for all the opposition forces in Iran and in the Iranian diaspora. A public offer from the United States, disseminated widely in the Persian language, of help for a reformed Iran on all matters, including peaceful nuclear energy, and of assistance in protecting Iran from the catastrophic earthquake that seismologists predict in its immediate future.

6. Unconditional solidarity, backed with force and the relevant UN resolutions, with an independent and multi-confessional Lebanon.

7. A commitment to buy Afghanistan’s opium crop and to keep the profits out of the hands of the warlords and Talibanists, until such time as the country’s agriculture— especially its once-famous vines—has been replanted and restored.

8. We should, of course, be scrupulous on principle about stirring up interethnic tensions. But we should remind those states that are less scrupulous—Iran, Pakistan, and Syria swiftly come to mind—that we know that they, too, have restless minorities and that they should not make trouble in Afghanistan, Lebanon, or Iraq without bearing this in mind. Some years ago, the Pakistani government announced that it would break the international embargo on the unrecognized and illegal Turkish separatist state in Cyprus and would appoint an ambassador to it, out of “Islamic solidarity.”

These outlines of what can be also called Next Logical Steps in the War on Terror are from the same review by Hitchens of Steyn's America Alone.

 

 

January 23, 2007

Michael Gove: Birth of an Anti-Islamist Intelligentsia

The Croydonian reports from this year's major speech by a UK-based thinker and parliamentarian Michael Gove. His subject was The Birth of an Anti-Islamist Intelligentsia, organised by the New Culture Forum on 22nd January 2007:

''Christopher Hitchens has described the opportunistic alliance between ex Stalinists and Islamists. David Aaronovitch has also denounced it, as has John Lloyd who has argued that the Left needs to fight for as well as against and that Fascism, Communism and Islamism are all strands of the same totalitarianism.''

''And novelists of the Left have come out too – Ian McEwan who had denounced ‘morally selective outrage’, Salman Rushdie who has written of ‘paranoid Islam’ and Martin Amis. Amis wrote that the single most depressing event in the UK last year was the spectacle of white middle class protesters holding placards with ‘We are all Hizbollah’.''

A more detailed report on the speech is available at Conservative Home:

One of the most important contributions in the debate period of the evening came from Tory A-lister Sayeeda Varsi.  She made the simple but vital point that 'Islamist' may be an intellectually accurate way of describing the ideological misinterpretation of Islam by the extremists and terrorists but on many practical levels it was a confusing term.  Most people she said would not understand the difference between Islam and Islamist and assume that quite proper attacks on Islamism were attacks on Islam itself. Gove said he understood the concern, that he respected the faith of Muslims but did not have a solution to this naming issue.

 

January 22, 2007

Jade Goody, rising India & the missing debate

The British society had a good, meaningful and deserved debate over Jade Goody's rows with Bollywood actress Shilpa Shetty. Some key points to focus again:

* Shilpa Shetty's father has rightly pointed out that Jade Goody does not represent the British society. His daughter, during a scene in the reality show Big Brother, had wondered: ''is this today's UK?''

* The fact that the British rose up against Jade Goody's behaviour against Shilpa which can be described as bullying with racist overtones, show how far British society has come during the past half century. Jade Goody no longer is representative of the UK society; there is clear consensus against racism of any kind here.

* One question that remains is this: Had the reaction been so overwhelming against Jade Goody, had it not been for an Indian? India is a rising power and it may be a measure of this rise that the reaction against Jade was overwhleming. Ultimately, it were the Brits 82% of whom voted to evict Jade from Big Brother.

* During the week-long controversy on racism allegation, Channel 4 bosses kept denying what was obvious to the eyes of general public. The bosses kept saying that they did not think it was racism notwithstanding the rising number of email complaints to OfCom.

* One thing is clear and no one has asked so far is this: why OfCom has failed completely from coming out with even a statement? What is the role of OfCom in regulating media groups? Somebody needs to ask this question.

* One writer, an Indian, has written in The Times of India, raising a profound point: while Indians went on the streets to protest against Big Brother and expressed their views on racism row in Britain, this controversy failed to generate any debate within India over racism and casteism prevalent there.

* Nevertheless, it was good that Jade Goody was evicted from Big Brother. Her behaviour was certainly not of a mature individual --  being a mother of two, being a celebrity, being British, being from mixed race whose grand father was a Black man, she was supposed to display grace in the face of evil -- not otherwise.

 

January 21, 2007

Pipes tears apart Livingstone's multiculturalism

Jonathan Hoffman reports from the conference on World Civilisation or Clash of Civilisations, organised by Ken Livingstone in London where the Mayor engaged Daniel Pipes on 20th January:

[Pipes] began by going back to Samuel Huntington’s original “Clash of Civilisations” paper in Foreign Affairs in 1993. Huntington had warned that clashes between civilisations had become the greatest threat to world peace. He had identified eight civilisations - Western, Eastern Orthodox, Latin American, Islamic, Japanese, Chinese, Hindu, and African. But – Pipes said – there were many problems with Huntington ’s analysis. First, the civilisations he cited are not a political concept. Second, the thesis cannot account for violence within civilisations – he cited the Rushdie Affair. Third, it ignored agreement across civilisations. Fourth, it cannot account for changes over time, eg the increase in tension between the US and Europe .

“Can a world civilisation exist?” asked Pipes “No, not as Huntington defined it”. But a world civilisation was possible as a coalition against what he termed “barbarism”. He then defined what he called ‘Ideological barbarians’ – fascists, totalitarian Communists and most recently – Islamists.

Pipes... focused on three aspects of Islamism. One, it was attempting to extend Sharia law into new areas. Two, it divided the world into two – those who held the right religion and everyone else. Three, it’s totalitarian and anti-modern.

He went on to ask why some elements of the traditional Left (in which he included Livingstone) were so supportive of Islamism when they opposed other forms of totalitarianism. His answer was that they shared the same enemies. <<read a good report>>

 

January 18, 2007

200 years of abolition of slavery by Britain

This is a timely reminder by Jon Davies of the critical role played by Britain in abolishing slavery from the face of the earth. March 2007 marks the two hundredth anniversary of the Act for the Abolition of Salve Trade of 1807

There is a parallel here between the British role in abolishing slave trade in the 19th century and the American role in the War on Terror in the 21st century. Then the British empire sent Navy ships and boats to every parts of every ocean and blocked every sea route through which slave trade was being practiced. Similarly now, the United States has 'outlawed' the acceptance of Islamic terror, blacklisted terror charities, blocked international transfer of funds to terrorist outfits, posted its army and customs checks in every port and airport to ensure that Islamic terrorists do not pass unchecked. Jon Davies also reminds us the following:

No European, no Christian, now, needs telling how very wrong slavery and the slave trade were. We are aware that both individual slaves, and slave uprisings played a large part in the abolition movement - it wasn't all just us nice white folks. We are aware, too, that neither in 1807 nor in 1837, did slavery simply vanish because we the British said it should. After all, it wasn't until 1990 that the Organisation of the Islamic Conference announced that slavery was wrong... <<read more>> 

Islam uncritically accepted slave trade and every Muslim child knows that Prophet Mohammed brought home several black salves; for reasons of accuracy, let's accept that he also freed many of them. However, we do no see any concerted attempt in Islam to abolish slave trade as inhuman. However, in celebrating 200 years of abolishing salvery, let's celebrate the paralle between the British role then and the US role now in the War on Terror.

January 15, 2007

Contexting Gordon Brown's Britishness

A good punch from the blogger of English Rights Campaign:

''Gordon Brown made a speech about Britishness [what he really means is that he wants to be the prime minister]. This coming from someone who has done his best to encourage the destruction of English culture, values and nationhood. The English comprise 85% of the British.''

For an exhaustive surgery of Gordon Brown's Britishness campaign, read the Man in a Shed.

Or read the Lincolnshire Patriot's Excuse me Mr Brown?:

''Having jointly presided over 10 years of the systematic dismantling of Britain’s historic institutions, Brown is portraying himself as a champion of the Union and of Great Britain... As usual for Labour, the reasons are motivated purely by self-interest and power-grabbing politics.''

 

January 14, 2007

English National Ballet must not succumb to politics

No one is opposing protests and criticisms against views expressed by memebers of the British National Party or for that matter any other party; however if a member of the BNP also happens to belong to an artistic group, that person should not be prevented from doing what s/he has to do as an artist. That is why those who turned out to protest against the ballerina during her stage performance should have done outside the hall, not from inside the stalls in order to draw cheap publicity.

Simone Clarke's views as a member of the BNP have nothing to do with her performance as a ballerina. For now, the English National Ballet has done a commendable job by telling the critics of its professional responsibilities:

''It is not within our company’s mandate to express any political view, and any personal view expressed by one of our employees should not be considered as endorsed by the company.'' <<quick read>>

January 12, 2007

King, Queen, House of Commons... if you accept it....

These are some samples from a 10-month undercover investigation into Islamic extremism in British mosques. Some quotes from preacher Dr Ijaz Mian:

''King, Queen, House of Commons... if you accept it, you are a part of it.... If you don't accept it, you have to dismantle it.''

''So you being a Muslim, you have to fix a target. There will be no House of Commons. From that White House to this Black House, we know we have to dismantle it.''

''You are in a situation in which you have to live like a state-within-a-state - until you take over.''

''But until this happens, you have to preach, until you become such a force that the people just submit to you.'' <<read more here>>

 

January 10, 2007

January 20: Daniel Pipes comes to town

On January 20, Middle East scholar Dr Daniel Pipes will engage the leftist Mayor of London Ken Livingstone in a debate billed as "A World Civilization or Clash of Civilizations?"

The venue is Queen Elizabeth II Conference Centre, London. <<more details>>  

January 09, 2007

Multiculturalism roundup from weblogs

The Observer's Jamie Doward revealed -- unusually from a Guardian Group of newspaper -- that British citizens are being urged by Muslim preachers to ignore UK law:

Secret video footage reveals Muslim preachers exhorting followers to prepare for jihad, to hit girls for not wearing the hijab, and to create a 'state within a state'.

It has been alleged -- by bloggers -- that Britain has no culture. And an Englishman reacted:

English, not Europe first and last.  I am not an American nor Australian, well maybe just a little bit.  I am English not British.  I am English and not Multicultural!  I am English and not a Homosexual or hopefully any other perversion of English or Christianity. <<read more>>
 

Sarfraz Manzoor's writeup in The Guardian tittled, ''Britain should integrate into Muslim values'', drew attention. Sarfraz wrote eulogising child-parent role in immigrant families:

Whether the danger is religious extremism, drugs or crime, those involved are largely third-generation Muslims who are so integrated into white society that they are emulating its worst characteristics. Integration did not save them, it created them. 

Some points are valid insofar as they reflect on the decline of community, unlike in the US, in British society. However, Islam and Muslim values are not the way for simple reason that Islam does not permit individual liberty.

 

January 08, 2007

Challenges facing multiculturalism

This one from Michael:

''Where the ideas of certain cultures and religions clash with the fundamentally liberal values of human rights, equal status of men and women, and the ability to engage in civilized non-violent discourse and criticism, liberal values and ideas must necessarily trump and override culture and religious ideas to the contrary. In all circumstances, liberal values cannot and should not be sold out in the name of tolerance, diversity, or respect for illiberal values simply in the name of multiculturalism.'' <<read a good analysis here>>

Emergence of a New Anti-Islamist Intelligentsia?

If you are in London on 22nd January 2007, the place to be is here: The Attlee Suite, Portcullis House, Westminster, London SW1A 2LW, to hear Michael Gove MP, on Are we seeing the emergence of a new anti-Islamist intelligentsia?

''The British intelligentsia has traditionally been characterised by its adherence to the doctrines of multiculturalism, cultural relativism and internationalism....<<details here>>

Waterstones in multiculturalism muddle

This blogger, visiting a Waterstones bookshop, is justifiably horrified by British multiculturalism's grip over books: Waterstones had a tiny bookshelf with a label saying "books for everyone - by ethnic minority authors."

And he rightly asks:

''Is Salman Rushdie really only a good read for Muslims? (I'm joking here, by the way!) It is just insulting to suggest that people choose their books by their author's ethnicity (or gender for that matter).''

January 05, 2007

Mosque Funding: Italy shows the way forward

On the face of it, there is nothing morally or legally wrong with the foreign funding of mosques based in British and European towns and cities. Freedom of religion means that mosques should be free to obtain funds in order to maintain and run themselves. However, it's also true that European mosques are frequently falling into the hands of Islamic extremists.

Therefore, regulating their funding becomes relevant for the interests of the wider community in which they are based. Mosques must have transparent sources of funding. Italy has now shown a path to regulate funding of mosques. Italy's Interior Minister Giuliano Amato unveiled his plans today to monitor funding of mosques:

"I find the spread of mosques with cash from governments of other countries unacceptable... I want to understand who is financing what in our country." <<quick read>>

All European governments should follow the lead, especially the British government.

 

Cartoon protester convicted of soliciting murder

There are indications that British society and its institutions are becoming aware of Islamism and the threats it poses to the Western way of life. A British court today convicted 27-year-old Umran Javed of soliciting murder during a London protest against cartoons satirising Prophet Mohammed. 

Judge Brian Barker demostrated profound understanding of Islamism by rejecting Mr Javed's contention that his statements had been just ''slogans''. During the February 2006 protests, Mr Javed had shouted: ''Bomb, bomb Denmark, bomb, bomb USA.''

>>However, such responses should not be limited to Muslims. Not long ago, a sitting member of British parliament ''morally justified'' killing Prime Minister Tony Blair. George Galloway had the said the following to Q magazine when asked if assassinating Blair by a suicide bomber be justified:

"Yes, it would be morally justified. I am not calling for it - but if it happened it would be of a wholly different moral order to the events of 7/7. It would be entirely logical and explicable. And morally equivalent to ordering the deaths of thousands of innocent people in Iraq - as Blair did." <<read more>>

January 03, 2007

British multiculturalism -- a corporate ideology

Migrationwatch UK has exploded the biggest lie of the British government by researching that the economic contribution of immigrants to the UK society is a mere 4p per week to per person living here. Its report noted today:

''The benefit is, in fact, only 'very slight'. It amounts to only £2.10 a year - or £126m - for each of the 60m people living in the UK, and would buy only a third of a Mars bar each month. At the same time, according to the Government's own research, migrants send home up to £4 billion in remittances every year - money effectively lost to the UK economy.'' <<quick read>>

However the biggest service that Migrationwatch has done to British society is in the fact that it has unleashed a big debate on the issue. Another point to consider should be this: Has the British business engineered an ideology of multiculturalism in order to get itself cheap labour from the developing world -- and if yes, at what cost?

January 02, 2007

Culture it! Not all cultures are equal

I stumbled upon Michael Barone:

''[A]ll cultures are not equal in respecting representative government, guaranteed liberties, and the rule of law. And those things arose not simultaneously and in all cultures but in certain specific times and places--mostly in Britain and America but also in other parts of Europe.''

 

January 01, 2007

English & How to create ''ghettos'' in Britain

According to official figures, 2.5 million workers in Britain speak English only as a second language:

''The Department for Education figure applies to the working age population - 16 to 60 for women and 65 for men. But this total is unlikely to show the full scale of those who struggle to speak English.''

With more Romanians and Bulgarians arriving in in the new year, there is an increasing risk of linguistic ghettos coming up in British towns.

Time to disband the Muslim Council of Britain

It may be the time to work to de-recognize and disband the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB), a network of organisations -- mostly paper tigers with no representation of the larger Muslim community. Over the years, it has done more harm than good by defending ''Islam as a religion'' rather than working for the betterment of British Muslims. Similarly, those organisations who are working to improve the daily lives of British Muslims should now leave the MCB.

The government too is coming to its senses, as reports Dominic Casciani:

''[W]hile the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) remains the largest umbrella group, government is taking a keen interest in other small but growing organisations, such as the Midlands- and north-based British Muslim Forum.''


Hosting by Yahoo!