How to defeat the far right – join them in attacking Islam

“Bravo to Anne-Marie Keenan for drawing attention to the difficulty of effectively debating issues involving Islam. Any objective reading of Islam’s texts, or study of its founder, or observation of the conduct of its more enthusiastic devotees raises serious doubts about this ‘religion of peace’.

“Unfortunately, drawing attention to those doubts is very difficult. For example, for years I have been writing letters to newspapers. Letters that critique Christianity, its Bible and its historical figures often get published and, in turn, Christians get to make robust criticisms of us atheists. And so it should be.

“Letters that critique Islam, on the other hand, are routinely edited or dropped altogether. One can say what one likes about Jesus, but not Muhammed, it seems.

“Until the media overcomes its fear and ends this double standard, important issues that have very real, and damaging, effects on people’s lives will not be addressed.

“Meantime, the far right, who are not afraid to criticise Islam, will exploit this and continue to grow.”

Letter in the Scotsman, 30 August 2008

‘End the silence over Islam’

“Am I alone in my disquiet about our government’s courtship of the Scottish Islamic Foundation? In the 1970s, young women like me embraced multiculturalism; we were engaging with our oppressed sisters everywhere around the world. Or so it seemed at the time. Where are we now? And why are we so effectively silenced?

“Why do we have nothing to say about a sharia credit card? Have we really forgotten what sharia law means for women? While English clerics debate the pros and cons of introducing an element of sharia law into their legal system, where are our voices in this debate? Do we seriously think it won’t happen in Scotland? Look at their website. It’s happening already.

“What do we think about the headline ‘Muslim sprinter wins Olympic sprint dressed head to toe in hijab’ (from the Scottish Islamic Foundation website)? Or of Al Jazeera talking to Nicola Sturgeon, the deputy first minister, about a ‘Scottish division’ of their TV station. Why on earth would they want a Scottish division? I need to know.

“I am not opposed, in principle, to any of these, but I am opposed to the suffocating, politically correct silence that now surrounds any criticism of organisations such as the Scottish Islamic Foundation. We need to bring this debate into the open. I don’t fear the debate; I fear the silence.”

Letter in the Scotsman, 29 August 2008

Scottish Islamic Foundation hits back at critics

Scottish Islamic FoundationThe Scottish Islamic Foundation (SIF) has hit back at criticism about the support the organisation has received from the Scottish Government.

Osama Saeed, the interim chief executive of SIF, is an SNP candidate for the next Westminster election and believes this has been at the root of press attacks on its funding arrangements.

The government insisted the £210,000 grant given to constitute the group in March and further aid of £190,000 under the Race, Religion and Refugee Integration Fund had been recommended by independent assessors under proper procedures.

Mr Saeed said accusations of favouritism were inaccurate given that other organisations working with Muslims also received grants from the fund, including some groups with strong Labour Party links.

The SIF had no permanent staff yet but strict appointment procedures would be followed, said Mr Saeed, pointing out at board level and among volunteers there was cross-party representation.

A statement from SIF cited public support from a range of individuals and groups, and added:

“There are a tiny handful of people who have been engaged in what others in the wider community are seeing as misinformed or jealous sniping. However, as has been demonstrated, we have the support and backing of imams and mosques around the country; the umbrella bodies of Muslim organisations in Scotland and the UK; Muslim students and many others.”

Among those quoted in support of SIF was Amar Shakoor of the Strathclyde Police Muslim Association, who said: “I would like to congratulate SIF and their team and wish them every success in the future to promote Islam and work with the Muslim community in an effort to foster better understanding of all faiths in Scotland.”

The Herald, 11 August 2008

‘A third of Muslim students back killings’

Almost a third of British Muslim students believe killing in the name of Islam can be justified, according to a poll. The study also found that two in five Muslims at university support the incorporation of Islamic sharia codes into British law.

The YouGov poll for the Centre for Social Cohesion (CSC) will raise concerns about the extent of campus radicalism. “Significant numbers appear to hold beliefs which contravene democratic values,” said Hannah Stuart, one of the report’s authors. “These results are deeply embarrassing for those who have said there is no extremism in British universities.”

The report was criticised by the country’s largest Muslim student body, Fosis, but Anthony Glees, professor of security and intelligence studies at Buckingham University, said: “The finding that a large number of students think it is okay to kill in the name of religion is alarming. There is a wide cultural divide between Muslim and non-Muslim students. The solution is to stop talking about celebrating diversity and focus on integration and assimilation.”

Sunday Times, 27 July 2008


See the FOSIS press release which quotes Faisal Hanjra, President of FOSIS, as stating: “This is yet another damning attack on the Muslim community by elements within the academic arena whose only purpose seems to be the undermining of sincere efforts by mainstream Muslim organisations to tackle the threat of terror which wider society faces. The report is methodologically weak, it is unrepresentative and above all serves only to undermine the positive work carried out by Islamic Societies across the country.”

Wes Streeting, president of the National Union of Students, is also quoted as condemning the study: “This report is a reflection of the biases and prejudices of a right wing think tank – not the views of Muslim students across Britain. Only 632 Muslim students were asked vague and misleading questions, and their answers were then wilfully misinterpreted in order to fit this organisation’s own tawdry obsession with Islam.”

See also the Sunday Herald, which reports that Muslim students’ leaders in Scotland have dismissed the CSC’s research as flawed. Adel Daas, president of Strathclyde University Muslim Students’ Association, said: “What scares me is how this report is going to be used. It will be used to divide Muslims from non-Muslims. This is not working to bring communities together, it is trying to highlight the things that separate us from others, which is wrong. This study is going to cause more pressure, more separation, more issues and more problems.”

The Scottish Islamic Foundation also expressed reservations about the findings. Noman Tahir, a Glasgow University student who is also from the foundation, said of the Centre for Social Cohesion: “Despite the pleasant name, it has become increasingly apparent over the last few years that this organisation is less concerned about social cohesion and instead more apt at spreading vicious lies and hatred towards Muslims.”

Usman Anwar, a member of the Federation of Student Islamic Societies’ student affairs committee, said: “You can tell by the language the report uses throughout that it has a specific agenda to paint a bleak picture. We meet many students on a regular basis and our findings do not correlate with the findings of this survey. This report serves only to vilify Islamic societies and undermine the sincere efforts by mainstream Muslim organisations to tackle the threat of terror which wider society faces.”

See also the Sunday Times where Minette Marrin asks: “how can young Muslims fit into a liberal western democracy if they believe things that are intolerant, illegal and, in plain English, unBritish?”

Marrin offers a solution: “There must be no public recognition of religious associations as representatives of anything or anybody: not on campuses, not in student unions, not in government consultations or in parliament. So-called religious community leaders, or umbrella groups of religious bodies, must of course be free to associate as they like in private, in a free country, but publicly they must be ignored.”

The CSC report is available (pdf) here.

Update:  The YouGov poll asked Muslim students: “Is it ever justifiable to kill in the name of religion?” Only 4% agreed that it was justifiable “in order to preserve and promote that religion”, while 28% agreed with the view that it was justifiable “only if that religion is under attack”. This is where the “third of Muslim students back killings” headline comes from. In fact 53% agreed that killing in the name of religion is “never justifiable”.

Imagine a polling organisation asking students whether they think killing is ever justifiable in the name of their country. 4% say yes, in order to preserve and promote that country, 28% say yes, but only if that country is under attack, and 53% say never under any circumstances. Would the right-wing press report this as “one third of students back killings”? No, they’d report it as “half of students would refuse to fight to defend their country” and denounce the iniquitous influence of pacifism on university campuses!

In fact, it looks to me as though the YouGov poll revealed that the British Muslim student population holds much more moderate views than the Islamophobes of the Centre for Social Cohesion had anticipated, which is why they have to spin the results so dishonestly.

Scottish ‘Islamist terrorist’ wins appeal fight

“Scotland’s first Islamist terrorist today won the right to argue he did not get a fair trial. Mohammed Atif Siddique, 22, was jailed for eight years last October for a string of terror offences. He has always maintained his innocence.”

Herald, 23 July 2008

Well, correct me if I’m wrong, but if Mohammed Atif Siddique is indeed innocent – and Islamophobia Watch has argued strongly that he is – then he’d hardly be “Scotland’s first Islamist terrorist”, would he? Or has the Herald decided the result of the appeal in advance?

Muslims take police to task over stop-and-search procedures

Scottish Islamic FoundationScottish Muslims will today quiz police about “growing disquiet” over the use of anti-terrorist stop-and-search procedures in Scotland.

The Scottish-Islamic Foundation has set up a Question Time forum with the police to allow members of the Muslim community to express their feelings about heavy-handed questioning a year after stop- and-search powers were introduced across the UK in the wake of the Glasgow Airport car bomb attack.

There is concern that in some cases “suspects” are visited at home and questioned about internet sites they have viewed, fuelling fears that they are under surveillance. The foundation says that stop-and-search procedures should be strictly intelligence-led.

Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000, at the Home Secretary’s discretion, allows police to stop and search any individual acting suspiciously.

Although Scottish police have been using the power sparingly, it is claimed the approach has not been adopted by the London-controlled British Transport Police.

Herald, 22 July 2008

See also BBC News, 22 July 2008


 

Update: Over at the laughably misnamed Centre for Social Cohesion, Douglas Murray writes:

“On the BBC’s website yesterday, headlined ‘Muslim concern at stop and search‘ the site leads with the news that: ‘Muslims in Scotland have expressed unease about the use of “stop and search” procedures at Glasgow Airport.’ In any season this is a story likely to spread irritation among the British public….

“But on reading through it emerges that the ‘Muslims’ expressing ‘unease’ at being searched at Glasgow airport are actually the Scottish Islamic Foundation (SIF). Readers might remember that this group was exposed last month, prior to its launch, as a Muslim Brotherhood-linked organisation….

“The iniquity of this is that the founders of the SIF can truthfully claim to represent almost nobody. But Salmond has been (to put it at its kindest) duped, public money has come rolling in, and next thing the BBC is willing to portray such an unrepresentative group as representative of ‘Muslims’ in Scotland.”

And in the comments section a supporter of Murray states: “Absolutely shocking. All part of the stealth jihad of course. The BBC has been infiltrated by muslim extremists right up to the highest level.”

Murray’s piece is crossposted at ConservativeHome.

‘Dangerous company’

Osama and Alex“This is Alex Salmond, First Minister of the devolved Scottish Executive embracing Osama Saeed, CEO of the Scottish Islamic Foundation (recent recipient of £215,000 from the Scottish executive) and SNP candidate for Glasgow Central.

“Mr Saeed is also an Islamic fundamentalist (read: EXTREMIST)…. Mr Saeed suggests that there is no reason the West should oppose the creation of a united Islamic state – the caliphate….

“It’s no surprise that Mr Saeed’s choice of political party is the SNP. What do the SNP want? To name but a few – Unilateral disarmament, pacifism (read – appeasement beyond ridicule) and the breaking of the greatest Western democracy, the only one in Europe that stood alone against Fascism, survived and won – the UK. From the mind of an extremist – it must make complete sense….

“Scotland has a First Minister that embraces a person whose very intention is to oppose Western Power.”

SNP Watch, 15 July 2008


And, disgracefully, this right-wing drivel is partially reproduced over at Labourhome, under the heading “Alex Salmond and Islamic Extremism“. As one critic points out in the comments: “this is politics of the gutter and gives our party a bad name…. It’s disgusting and I’m ashamed to see it on a Labour website”.

Nor is the “politics of the gutter” restricted to Labourhome. Over at Chris Paul’s Labour of Love blog the SIF is described as a “Salmond-funded ginger group for the Caliphate”. See also Glasgow South Labour MP Tom Harris’s blog, which approvingly quotes raving right-wing Islamophobe Dean Godson’s attack on Osama Saeed.

Update:  It has since been claimed that SNP Watch is run by one Ricky Simpson, who stood as a Labour candidate in Aberdeen in the 2007 council elections. Simpson himself has objected to our describing his attack on Osama Saeed as “right-wing drivel”, stating that he is in favour of “social democracy and redistribution”.

‘Muslims outraged at police advert featuring cute puppy’

PuppyA postcard featuring a cute puppy sitting in a policeman’s hat advertising a Scottish police force’s new telephone number has sparked outrage from Muslims.

Tayside Police’s new non-emergency phone number has prompted complaints from members of the Islamic community.

The choice of image on the Tayside Police cards – a black dog sitting in a police officer’s hat – has now been raised with Chief Constable John Vine.

The advert has upset Muslims because dogs are considered ritually unclean and has sparked such anger that some shopkeepers in Dundee have refused to display the advert.

Daily Mail, 1 July 2008

See also the Daily Telegraph, whose readers helpfully draw out the subtext to this story:

“Why are the police apologising for doing their job. This is just another case of kowtowing to people who do not understand the BRITISH way of life.”

“Stop all this namby pamby nonsence. As you say the British are a nation of dog lovers…. We are British and this is Britain. If you don’t like it leave.”

“what next no pictures of pigs in the butchers! We are supposedly living in a multi cultural country, but it seems that we are dominated by the views of the muslims and their communities.”

“OMG, im sorry but if you dont like what people in OUR country do then go away.”

“Who cares what the Muslims think/say. Really, what are they going to do about it? It’s our culture, our traditions, our beliefs.”

“This is absurd. Why should Britons change their culture to accomodate Muslims? … This political correctness will cause the downfall of your society. What happened to majority rule?”

“If muslims don’t like dogs – or any other facet of our national characteristics – then they should bugger off to Iran or some other Islamic wonderland. When will we stop pandering to these barbarians? Why have we let them in to our country at all?”

Update:  For Gabriele Marranci’s comments, see Islam, Muslims and an Anthropologist, 3 July 2008

Damned for trying to do some good

Osama Saeed replies to the Centre for Social Cohesion.

Sunday Herald, 29 June 2008

Update:  For the full version of the article, see Rolled Up Trousers, 30 June 2008

Osama also reples to the hysterical nonsense posted by Melanie Phillips on her Spectator blog, where she warned of the danger of Scottish Muslims establishing a “Caledonian caliphate”. As Osama observes: “This conspiratorial nonsense is very reminiscent of how Jewish people have in years gone by been demonised, you could call it the ‘Protocols of the Elders of Caledonistan’.”