Islamophobia Watch

"The BNP says make no mistake: the spread of Sharia law into the urban badlands where police have lost control of the streets is the thin end of the wedge for first creating a parallel legal system for Muslims, who will then consider themselves above the law of the land, and then attempting to terrorise the rest of the country into accepting its imposition on them."

BNP news article, 30 November 2006

Rally against the BNP in Barking and Dagenham

Unite Against Fascism (UAF) is calling a counter rally and protest against the fascist British National Party's (BNP) rally in Central Park on Saturday 9 December. We need as many anti-fascists as possible to show opposition to the BNP. The BNP will be hoping that the acquittal of Nick Griffin and Mark Collett earlier in November will galvanise their activists. The BNP has 12 councillors in Barking and Dagenham.

Further details on UAF website

Last month Tony Blair said the veil row was part of a necessary debate about the way the Muslim community integrates into British society. He said the veil was a "mark of separation" which makes people feel uncomfortable. But Charlie Taylor, deputy head of Turton high school arts and media college, Bolton, does not share the politicians' concerns. "I should know about face covering," he laughs from behind a generous beard. "Communication is more than just facial expression; mostly you know whether pupils are taking something in from what they say and how they say it. We don't see the veil as an issue here."

For the past two or three years, a small but growing number of Turton's female Muslim sixth formers have chosen to wear the niqab – which covers the face – and staff have chosen to respect their choice. These students are not retiring violets. Indeed, they are among the feistiest students in the sixth form. Like many young women who have taken up the niqab in the UK, they wear it proudly, an outward sign, they say, of their deep faith, and a statement of their cultural identity.

Turton, in the largely white, northern suburbs of Bolton, close to the Pennine foothills, is the last place one would expect to find students wearing the niqab, given that most schools in northern towns, even those with a largely Muslim intake, allow students to wear the hijab (the headscarf), but stop short of the veil. But Turton's sixth form of 500 draws from diverse cultures, and John Porteous, the head, is proud of the mix: "I think, increasingly, Asian heritage students and particularly Muslim girls are attracted to the sixth form because they find it a sympathetic place to be."

All of Turton's upper sixth Muslim girls – whether veiled, headscarf wearers, or bare-headed – who agreed to speak to The TES regard themselves as fully integrated into British society. They also respect each other's choice of dress, believing it expresses their differing piety. They were all taking A-levels and plan to study for careers ranging from optometry to politics. Their dress, they say, is about their faith and cultural identity, not about wanting to be separate.

TES, 1 December 2006

"A shocking report today exposes the grip Islamic law now has on British society. Honour killings, polygamy, child marriages and mutilation are revealed in the study by Islam expert Dr Patrick Sookhdeo, director of the Institute for the Study of Islam and Christianity. The findings come after the Daily Express told yesterday how secret courts are meting out Islamic justice and creating a two-tier legal system.

"The report outlines areas where hardline sharia law conflicts with Britain’s justice system and warns of attempts to include parts of Islamic law in British law. It says: 'Since sharia has some regulations which relate to non-Muslims such changes in British law could impinge on non-Muslims too. They would affect individual human rights of freedom of choice and the religious freedoms of both Muslims and non-Muslims'."

Daily Express, 1 December 2006

As we've noted before, you'd have thought the media would steer well clear of Sookhdeo since this self-proclaimed "expert" on Islam got the Sunday Telegraph into legal trouble by calling for one of the most reputable English translations of the Qur'an to be banned (see here, here and here). But there is evidently no end to the demand for ignorant bigots who are prepared to feed the anti-Muslim frenzy of the right-wing press.

"Home Office staff are free to be members of the Islamic extremist group Hizb ut-Tahrir, it was revealed yesterday. Those working in the department responsible for immigration and homeland security do not even have to declare membership of the fanatical organisation, the Government admitted. This means Home Secretary John Reid has no idea how many of his staff hold the group's radical views and he has no means of monitoring their activities.

"The revelation – in a written parliamentary answer – comes after Home Office IT manager Abid Javaid, 41, was found to be a member of Hizb ut-Tahrir, which supports a worldwide Islamic state run under hardline Sharia law and has refused to condemn last year's London bombings [sic – see below]. Shadow Immigration Minister Damian Green said: 'This is really shocking. It is a dereliction of duty for them not to find out how many more Hizb ut-Tahrir members are on the Home Office payroll'."

Daily Mail, 1 December 2006

"We would like to make it absolutely clear that we believe there was no justification whatsoever for the attacks on civilians in London on July 7th 2005. Islam does not allow the killing of innocent civilians as occurred in London."

Hizb ut-Tahrir press conference statement, 31 July 2005

"You've undoubtedly heard the expression, 'comparing apples to oranges'. The expression is used when someone attempts an invalid comparison of things. This is exactly what today's Christian-bashing world does when it attempts to compare militant Islam with biblical Christianity. The two are clearly incomparable.

"Recently, the stark differences between Mohammed's Religion of the Sword and Christ's Golden Rule have been clearly displayed. When Amish school children were murdered in Pennsylvania, prayers and forgiveness were the order of the day. How different was this from flying 'fatwas' and exploding suicide bombers, which our world has become accustomed to expect every time some Muslim gets looked at sideways?"

Florida Baptist Witness, 30 November 2006

The Federal Bureau of Investigation has agreed to pay Oregon lawyer Brandon Mayfield $2 million as part of a settlement for wrongfully arresting him in connection with the 2004 Madrid terror attacks.

The New York Times reports that the FBI also apologized for its actions and agreed to destroy all materials collected during its electronic surveillance of Mr. Mayfield and secret searches of his home and office. Mayfield is also allowed to continue his lawsuit that challenges the constitutionality of the Patriot Act. He charges that the antiterrorism law violates the Fourth Amendment because is allows for government searches without first establishing "probable cause" of a crime.

Mayfield, an American-born convert to Islam, was put under government surveillance after the FBI mistakenly linked him to the March bombings. He was arrested in May 2004 and held for two weeks as a terrorist suspect, despite evidence from the Spanish government that he was not connected to the attack.

"The horrific pain, torture and humiliation that this has caused myself and my family is hard to put into words," said Mr. Mayfield, an American-born convert to Islam and a former lieutenant in the Army.

"The days, weeks and months following my arrest," he said, "were some of the darkest we have had to endure. I personally was subject to lockdown, strip searches, sleep deprivation, unsanitary living conditions, shackles and chains, threats, physical pain and humiliation."

Christian Science Monitor, 30 November 2006

A parody of anti-Muslim bigotry on a Washington, D.C., radio station drew support for treating American Muslims in a manner similar to how the Jewish community was targeted in Nazi Germany.

In his 630 WMAL program on Sunday, November 26, talk show host Jerry Klein seemed to advocate a government program to force all Muslims to wear "identifying markers." He stated: "I'm thinking either it should be an arm band, a crescent moon arm band, or it should be a crescent moon tattoo." Klein said: "If it means that we have to round them up and do a tattoo in a place where everybody knows where to find it, then that's what we'll have to do."

Some callers to the program rejected discriminatory treatment of Muslims, but others supported Klein's statements and even suggested that even more severe measures be taken against American Muslims. "Richard" in Gaithersburg, Md., said: "Not only do you tattoo them in the middle of their foreheads; you round them up and then ship them out of this country, period."

"Heath" in Upper Marlboro, Md., said: "I don't think you go far enough ... you have to set up encampments like they did during World War II like with the Japanese and Germans."

Later in the program, Klein revealed that his call for discriminatory actions against Muslims was "baloney." Klein said: "I can't believe any of you, any of you, are sick enough to have agreed for one second with anything that I have said in the last half hour."

Yahoo News, 27 November 2006

"Secret courts imposing draconian Islamic justice are operating across Britain. Last night politicians and religious leaders expressed outrage that sharia law is gaining an increasing foothold in our society. The hardline Islamic law allows people to be stoned to death, beheaded or have their limbs amputated.

"Critics insisted Labour was allowing a chaotic two-tier legal system to flourish in the name of political correctness. And legal experts warned that it meant the authority of British justice was being undermined.

"Sharia law dates back to the 10th century. In some countries women are stoned to death for adultery or giving birth out of wedlock and thieves can have both arms amputated. In Saudi Arabia, murderers, rapists and drug traffickers are publicly beheaded with a sword. The Islamic law also deals in all aspects of daily life including marriage and divorce.

"Yesterday experts insisted the Government had already allowed elements of sharia law to be introduced. The Treasury has brought in measures including interest-free loans and mortgages which comply with the Islamic law. But it was also alleged unofficial criminal courts are meting out their own justice.

"The scandal was outlined on BBC Radio 4's Law in Action programme which uncovered evidence that Muslims are using their own laws here."

Daily Express, 30 November 2006

For Osama Saeed's comments, see Rolled Up Trousers, 30 November 2006

About 80 people protested outside the Dutch parliament on Thursday against a recent government decision to ban Muslim burqas and face veils, the toughest ban thus far in Europe. Seven women clad in niqabs – a veil concealing the face except the eyes – and loose robes that covered them from neck to toes, and 20 women in headscarves gathered in front of parliament, which was to convene on Thursday for the first time after national elections were held last week. Around 50 supporters carried banners written with the phrases: "Before you judge me, try hard to know me" and "The first lesson of integration: the constitution is for everyone."

Earlier this month, the outgoing government agreed to a total ban on burqas and other Muslim face veils in public, citing security concerns. Critics said the move was likely to alienate and victimise the country's 1 million Muslims.

"Every time there is an election, the thing with the burqa comes up," said Aishah Bayrat, a 41-year-old teacher and mother of five. "The burqa is a religious thing, nobody should interfere with it." Clad in a black and blue niqab, 17-year-old Tamara dismissed official concerns that the robe would make it hard for people to identify the wearer or serve as a cover for criminals and terrorists. "What about Santa Claus? He can go out on the streets with his long beard and we can't recognise him."

Reuters, 30 November 2006

But Babar Ahmad and Haroon Rashid Aswat – another "terrorist suspect" whose appeal was rejected by the High Court – may be allowed to take their case to the House of Lords.

Guardian, 30 November 2006

The Islamic Human Rights Commission has stated: "The decision highlights the manifest injustice of the Extradition Treaty whereby innocent British citizens can be extradited to the US on the flimsiest of evidence. To date, not a shred of evidence has been produced against these men which would warrant charges being brought against them in the UK. In light of claims of the highest level of intelligence-sharing, IHRC finds it puzzling why evidence against the men, if it does exist, has not been passed on to British authorities in order to charge them in Britain."

IHRC Chair Massoud Shadjareh said: "Since Britain has some of the most comprehensive terrorism laws in the world, if there is any evidence against these men, they should be charged and tried in a British court. Without any evidence being produced, innocent British citizens will be subjected to an American criminal justice system which has done away with due process and legitimized torture in its 'war on terror'."

IHRC press release, 30 November 2006