That the headline to an article in today’s Times. It comes as no surprise that the “imam” in question is that pompous, self-promoting nonentity Taj Hargey, whose speciality is giving support to attacks on the rights of his fellow Muslims.
In a letter to the paper (see below) Hargey opines that “no one, including women, has an unqualified right to dress as one pleases in public” and declares that a “Saudi-financed campaign” is responsible for some Muslim women deciding to wear the niqab:
“This Saudi-financed campaign is just another salvo in the battle for the hearts and minds of British Muslims. If Britain’s liberal and human rights industry fail to recognise this, we will all live to regret it.”
In his letter Hargey calls on the British government to follow the example of France and “outlaw this Wahhabi-Salafi inspired trend”.
The report of Hargey’s intervention, by Dominic Kennedy, carries the following postscript: “This article has been chosen as today’s Talking Point by The Times community team for the quality of the comments left by readers.”
Again, it is hardly surprising that the majority of those comments are vehemently opposed to the right to wear the niqab. As one contributor pointed out:
“A pretty one-sided debate for ‘Talking Point’. Of nearly 200 posts so far only 3 individuals apparently arguing from a libertarian viewpoint seem to agree with Shami Chakrabarti that it should be acceptable for Islamic women to cover their faces in public.”
Sample comments: “Yes. Ban it. And hurrah for Dr Hargey.” “Ban it and dissolve the ideology underpinning it.” “This monstrous instrument of human, specifically female obviously, enslavement should be banned immediately.” “Ban it. It’s terrifying. It could be a man or a woman under the black garb packing explosives, knives, machetes or firearms.”
Another contributor calls for Muslim men to be banned from public pools because many Muslim women don’t participate in mixed-gender swimming sessions: “If your women aren’t allowed in, then you shouldn’t be either.”
This is what passes for “quality” debate at the Times.