Sunday’s Observer had a piece about a forthcoming book by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, entitled Faith in the Public Square. The main subject of the article is Williams’ criticisms of David Cameron’s “big society” policy. However, the authors also attribute to Williams some highly controversial views about the Muslim community:
Category Archives: Liberal
‘Muslim immigrants’ elected Galloway because of his ‘fundamentalist call’ for an end to war in Afghanistan
This is now Patrick Wintour’s Guardian report of George Galloway’s victory in the Bradford West by-election originally read:
“It appeared that the seat’s Muslim immigrant community had decamped from Labour en masse to Galloway’s fundamentalist call for an immediate British troop withdrawal from Afghanistan….”
This has since been changed to: “It appeared that the seat’s Muslim community had decamped from Labour en masse to Galloway’s call for an immediate British troop withdrawal from Afghanistan….”
Mad Mel as dance
“This is Islamophobic shit,” cried an angry spectator two-thirds of the way through DV8’s investigation of multiculturalism. I was later told that the intervention was a “staged performance”. If so, it was both exceptionally convincing and dangerously counterproductive, since I spent the rest of the evening wondering whether it contained a measure of truth.
Michael Billington reviews “Can We Talk About This?”, a show at the National Theatre in London created by Lloyd Newson.
Joan Smith on ‘intimidation’ of Islam critics
Joan Smith had an article in yesterday’s Independent on Sunday (“Strong religious belief is no excuse for intimidation”) on the theme of Muslim attempts to suppress freedom of expression. Her arguments have been enthusiastically endorsed by fellow liberal Islamophobe Nick Cohen on his Spectator blog.
Smith claims that there has been an upsurge in attempts to intimidate critics of Islam, and gives three recent examples:
Labour MP condemns Lib Dems’ Islamophobic council candidate
A North East Liberal Democrat council candidate has been accused of Islamophobia over comments posted on his Facebook site.
Dave Stones, who is standing for election to Redcar and Cleveland Council, reportedly suggested on the website that a pork restaurant and a topless bar should be built next to a mosque.
He has apologised for any offence caused, but Labour MP Tom Blenkinsop accused him of holding “clearly expressed Islamophobic views”. The Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland MP raised the issue with Commons leader Sir George Young.
Nick Cohen smears Stieg Larsson
Nick Cohen devoted his column in yesterday’s Observer to attacking Stieg Larsson, using the Swedish novelist and anti-fascist campaigner’s views on honour based violence to reinforce the thesis that “The far left’s record on women’s rights would make the Vatican blush with shame. Its alliances with radical Islam make it, at best, a misogynist force and, at worst, an active agent of oppression.”
Cohen asserts: “Larsson wasn’t a feminist – or not a consistent one. He wrote with real anger about the oppression of women with white skins. When others tried to do the same about the oppression of women with brown skins, he denounced them as racists.” As evidence of this, Cohen offers Larsson’s intervention in “the debate about the ‘honour killings’ of two Kurdish women in Sweden”.
Lib Dem’s anti-Islam rants: ‘Put pork restaurant next to mosque’
A Liberal Democrat candidate has refused to apologise for a series of shocking Islamophobic comments. Sick Dave Stones suggested a pork restaurant and a topless bar – named after Islam’s holiest city – should be built next to a mosque.
The would-be councillor, who is the party’s candidate for a by-election in Redcar and Cleveland on 19 January, said:
“Regarding the mosque being built near ground zero. I say let them build it. But then, across the street we should put a topless bar called ‘You Mecca Me Hot’ … and next to that a pork rib restaurant … Then we’ll see who’s tolerant.”
A critic of political Islam warns of ‘misguided’ West
The Huffington Post publishes a puff piece on crazed Iranian sectarian Maryam Namazie.
Time Magazine on the Italian veil ban
The thing about Italy’s proposed law to ban women from wearing veils that cover their faces is that it’s not clear what difference it would make.
Just like in France or Belgium, which have introduced similar measures, Italy does not have a large population of women who wear the burqa or the niqab, which cover almost the entire body and face. “In my 20 years in Italy, I don’t think I’ve seen ten women who wear the veil,” says Izzeddin Elzir, head of the Union of Islamic Communities in Italy (UCOII), the country’s largest Muslim organization. According to Elzir, most Muslims in Italy subscribe to a school of Islam that doesn’t require women to keep their faces covered. “In summer, there are more, because there are lots of tourists [from Arabic countries],” he says. “But here in Italy, we see few cases.”
The legislation, which was approved by a parliamentary commission on Tuesday, occupies a strange place in the Italian political spectrum, uniting the socially liberal left with the xenophobic right. (A similar measure was floated by the previous left-wing government.) If approved by parliament, it would close a religious exemption to previous legislation that prohibits anybody in Italy from donning garb that would make their identification impossible. The proposed law has the support of the Northern League, a populist political party that has built its electoral success by fanning fears in a country being changed rapidly by immigration.
The effort to ban the burqa has the support of human-rights groups, like the EveryOne Group, which campaigns for the protection of minorities. “The reason [the burqa] is worn is to hide the woman, to limit her expression,” says the activist group’s president Roberto Malini. But he acknowledges that on this matter, the group finds itself in strange accordance with the Northern League, which has sponsored similar legislation on the local level, including one in the city of Bergamo, where kebab shops were recently banned from the historic city center. “Everything they do is to seed the fear of Islam,” says Malini.
For Elzir of UCOII, to reject the bill is to stand for religious freedom – a devout woman should be free to cover herself if she wants. He adds that those women who are being forced to don a burqa by their husbands risk being confined to their homes if the proposal is made law. “We say we are for the liberty of all,” says Elzir. “If there’s a woman who is obliged to [wear the veil], let’s work together to help get her out of this situation. Let’s not make a law against her.” He believes the bill is more about politics than policy, a distraction from the bigger issues. “Our parliament should focus on issues that impact all citizens, not just one or two people,” he says. “The citizens of Italy need an answer to this economic crisis. And instead our parliament is studying whether our Islamic women should be covered or not.”
Indy joins Daily Mail in promoting sharia hysteria
“In this country, we don’t have Sharia courts – courts which turn a religious code for living into an actual legal system – but we do have at least 85 Sharia councils. And we have a growing number of people who are trying to turn whole areas, like Waltham Forest, into ‘Sharia controlled zones’, and who are sticking stickers saying things like ‘no alcohol, no gambling, no music or concerts, no porn or prostitution, no drugs, no smoking’ in shop windows, and saying that they will patrol the streets to enforce the Sharia code.”
Christina Patterson in the Independent, 3 August 2011