To believe in a European utopia before Muslims arrived is delusional

“It has become a Europe-wide habit to refer to Muslims in particular and migrants in general as though they are barbarians who must either be civilised or banished, before they pollute the egalitarian societies in which they were either born or now live. Lacking all sense of humility, self-awareness and historical literacy, Europe’s political class acts as though these communities not only manifest homophobia, sexism, antisemitism, political violence and social unrest, but also as though they invented them and introduced them to an otherwise utopian continent….

“Herein lies the problem with Enlightenment values, as they have been promoted in recent years. The values are fine. But those who champion them most fervently also do so most selectively. They embrace Muslim women campaigning against sexism, but ignore those fighting racism, Islamophobia or war. They attack Muslim fundamentalist homophobes on housing estates, but align themselves with Christian fundamentalist homophobes in the White House. They demand secularism and assimilation, but view every action by Muslims and immigrants as essentially foreign or religious.”

Gary Younge in the Guardian, 10 December 2007

‘Pat Condell at his brilliant, hilarious and topical best’

At least, that’s how the fascists of the BNP describe the latest anti-Muslim video from the National Secular Society’s favourite comedian. This one is on the Gillian Gibbons case: “Well, it’s another public relations triumph for Islam…. I bet they’re even laughing at this over in Pakistan.” Pakistan and its inhabitants, of course, being a byword for ignorance and backwardness.

But could Condell not at least give credit to the Muslim Council of Britain, I hear you ask, for their unequivocal condemnation of Gillian Gibbons’ arrest and conviction? But you’re forgetting, according to Condell the MCB are nothing more than “duplicitous, mealy-mouthed, unprincipled, terrorist-sympathising scum“.

Another day, another concocted anti-Muslim scare-story

Nurses told to turn Muslims bedsA hospital in northern England is playing down media reports saying that nurses have been ordered to stop normal duties five times a day to turn Muslim patients’ beds so that they face Mecca.

British tabloid newspapers reported Tuesday that at a hospital in West Yorkshire “overworked” nurses in the taxpayer-funded National Health Service were struggling to cope with the additional duties required for Muslim patients. Apart from moving the beds, the nurses also have to provide bathing water for pre-prayer ablutions, the reports said. The new duties were causing “havoc“, said the Daily Express, while the Daily Star said they were “creating turmoil” and quoted a doctor at the hospital as saying it was a case of “political correctness gone mad“.

In reaction to the media reports, the hospital issued a new statement on Tuesday, calling the coverage “entirely inaccurate”. “Nurses are not being removed from their duties to move patients’ beds towards Mecca,” chief nurse Tracey McErlain-Burns said. “Moving patients’ beds for prayer five times a day has not been suggested as part of this workshop and staff have not been ordered to do this.”

CNS News, 5 December 2007


It’s not just the right-wing media who swallow this nonsense. That standard bearer for scientific rationalism Richard Dawkins happily repeats it too: RichardDawkins.net, 4 December 2007

You can read the original Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust press release on which the whole fraudulent story was based, and the Trust’s reply to the distorted media coverage, here.

Opposing the mega-mosque … on the basis of bigotry and ignorance

Andy Armitage, former editor of Gay & Lesbian Humanist and the man responsible for its notorious “Sick face of Islam” issue (“redundant churches are sprouting onion domes and minarets. We are becoming strangers in our own land”), offers his insights into the dispute over the proposed Newham mosque:

“The ultra-orthodox Muslim group Tablighi Jamaat are behind the building. Among their adherents has been the Glasgow airport bomber, Kafeel Ahmed, the ‘shoe bomber’ Richard Reid and two of the 7/7 bombers…. And the fact that it could be stuck right in the middle of the British landscape is obviously worrying its opponents.”

Armitage warns that the building “could become Europe’s biggest mosque, with a capacity [of] 70,000 (according to last weeks Sunday Times), which is only 10,000 fewer than the proposed Olympic stadium only 500 yards away”. The Sunday Times article he links to is in fact from November 2005 – and the plans by architects Mangera Yvars to which the article refers have since been scrapped.

But don’t get the idea that the atheist Armitage is dogmatically opposed to all religions. Not at all. He’s happy to recommend the Christian Peoples Alliance website MegaMosqueNoThanks.com as “full of links and ideas for opposing the mosque”.

The Freethinker, 2 December 2007

More hysterical nonsense from comrade Namazie

Maryam Namazie’s so-called Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain offers its take on the Gillian Gibbons case. The MCB, which forthrightly condemned Ms Gibbons’ arrest and stated that it was “appalled at the decision of the Sudanese authorities” to charge her, is falsely quoted as saying it found the situation merely “embarrassing”, and is further accused of favouring the lashing of people who insult Islam, while the adoption of an utterly toothless law against incitement to religious hatred is equated with death threats against apostates:

“The CEMB notes that Islamic organisations such as the Muslim Council of Britain find the events in Sudan ’embarrassing’ – as indeed all supporters of the Shariah should. But they do so on the grounds that no insult to Islam was intended by Ms Gibbons. This implies that had an insult been perpetrated, it would have been deemed a crime and punishable according to the Shariah, which could have resulted in 40 lashes or worse. Recent death threats against apostates or the case of the Danish cartoons of Muhammad two years ago are some examples of how any criticism is deemed offensive or insulting. Islamists will not hesitate to use Islamic law where possible or other violent means to stifle such criticism. In line with this, they have been aggressively campaigning for a law on incitement to religious hatred in the UK, which will severely curtail freedom of expression.”

Maryam Namazie’s blog, 2 December 2007

Ehsan Jami works on film on Islam

AMSTERDAM –  Ehsan Jami, founder of the Committee for Former Muslims, has followed Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s example and made a short film about radical Islam, the Telegraaf reports.

The film entitled The life of Mohammed should be ready in February or March of next year and will cause more of a commotion than the Danish cartoons of Mohammed, the former Labour PvdA member says.

“I show how violent and tyrannical Mohammed was. This man murdered three Jewish tribes, killed people who left the faith, and married a 6-year-old girl, with whom he had sex when she was 9,” Jami says in comment on the contents of the 10-minute film.

Jami says it is a coincidence that Freedom Party PVV leader Geert Wilders is also working on a film on Islam at the moment.

Expatica, 30 November 2007

Maker of Undercover Mosque documentary considers suing police

The documentary maker cleared by regulators of misleadingly editing a Channel 4 programme about extreme Islamic preachers is considering legal action. David Henshaw, the managing director of Hardcash Productions which made the Dispatches film Undercover Mosque, said he was still “very, very angry”.

With the backing of Channel 4 he hoped to launch a libel action against the West Midlands police and a Crown Prosecution Service lawyer who was quoted in a joint press release accusing Hardcash Productions of “completely distorting” what some of the preachers were saying. The media regulator dismissed the complaint saying it was a legitimate investigation.

Guardian, 24 November 2007

See also National Secular Society news release, 23 November 2007

The politics of the veil

Politics of the Veil“‘A kind of aggression’. ‘successor to the Berlin Wall’. ‘lever in the long power struggle between democratic values and fundamentalism’. ‘An insult to education’. ‘A terrorist operation’. These descriptions – by former French President Jacques Chirac; economist Jacques Attali; and philosophers Bernard-Henri Lévy, Alain Finkielkraut and André Glucksmann – do not refer to the next great menace to human civilization but rather to the Muslim woman’s headscarf, which covers the hair and neck, or, as it is known in France, the foulard islamique.”

Laila Lalami reviews Joan Wallach Scott’s recently published book The Politics of the Veil.

The Nation, 21 November 2007

Pat Condell on the MCB and community relations

Pat CondellSelf-styled “comedian” Pat Condell, hero of the National Secular Society, delivers his verdict on the Muslim Council of Britain – “duplicitous, mealy-mouthed, unprincipled, terrorist-sympathising scum” – and helpfully outlines his prescription for promoting harmony between Britain’s diverse communities:

“You know what’s good for community relations? People who come to this country and adapt happily to our way of life, or if they find it’s not quite to their taste they piss off and live somewhere else. That’s really good for community relations. If you don’t like how we do things in Britain, get out. You weren’t invited here and you’re not wanted here.”

In the course of this latest rant Condell expresses indignation that he has become something of a hero among racists and fascists too. Now, why do you suppose that might be, Pat?

Video (if you can stomach it) here.

Is Islam good for London?

Is Islam good for LondonThe Evening Standard reports on yesterday evening’s discussion, organised around this question.

Rod Liddle is quoted as saying: “Islam is masochistic, homophobic and a totalitarian regime. It is a fascistic, bigoted and medieval religion.” He and Joan Smith argued the case for the negative. However, when you see that those presenting the case in favour included Ed Husain and Michael Burleigh, it would appear that Inayat Bunglawala was the only voice of reason in this skewed debate.

Video links here.

See also Inayat’s post at Comment is Free.