Friday, March 30, 2007

Veiled Assistant Loses Appeal

Aisha Azmi has lost her appeal today. An employment tribunal had found that she had not been discriminated against, but she appealed the decision to the Employment Appeals Tribunal. She has now lost there too. Labour MP Shahid Malik told the BBC that he hoped Mrs Azmi would now "leave this alone. Having said that, she can still, and maybe has already, put in an appeal for unfair dismissal. This saga could continue".

Last year we revealed Ms Azmi's links to radical Islamist group Tablighi Jamaat (a group called "an antechamber to fundamentalism" by French intelligence). It later emerged that Azmi was wearing the veil under orders from her local Tablighi Jamaat Imam Mufti Yusuf Sacha.

EU's Non-Offensive Handbook

The Telegraph reports that the EU has confirmed that it has produced a confidential handbook telling governments what words they should avoid when describing terrorism. Among the words are "jihad", "Islamic" and "fundamentalism".

An official said:

Careful usage of certain terms is not about empty political correctness but stems from astute awareness of the EU's interests in the fight against terrorism. Terrorists exploit and augment suspicions.

Some British MEPs have hit out against this. Conservative Syed Kamall said, "It is this kind of political correctness and secrecy that creates resentment among both the mainstream in Europe and in Islam."

And UKIP MEP Gerard Batten said, "This type of newspeak shows that the EU refuses to face reality. The major world terrorist threat is one posed by ideology and that ideology is inspired by fundamentalist jihadi Islam."

Thursday, March 29, 2007

Terrorist Graffiti in Berkshire

Wokingham Borough Council was forced to remove a piece of graffiti in a shopping district of Woodley. A local newspaper reports that:

On Tuesday morning, a picture of a man with a grenade for a head praising suicide bombers had been stencilled on the side of Brighton's Newsagents in the pedestrian precinct.
It quotes a local resident saying, "It's totally disgusting and offensive. Words fail me, quite frankly. Who in this area is so full of hate that they feel they have to do this?"

Muslims Should Fly the Union Jack

A Conservative MP, Philip Davies, has said that Muslims should fly the Union Jack over their mosques. His statement was part of an early-day motion that was congratulating Australian Muslims for adopting the idea and expressing the hope that it will become practice in Britain too. He said that such a move would, "show everyone that those in the Muslim community are very keen to integrate and positively contribute to good community relationships in the UK."

Muslim leaders have complained that they are being singled out and that this idea is not suitable.

The point that Mr Davies is trying to make is that the impression given by Muslims in this country is that they do not feel a part of Britain. This gives rise to suspicion. And, frankly, Muslims have not done enough to convince the British public that they are opposed to Islamic terrorism. Sure we get condemnations, but we get condemnations of the police as well. We get denial of the causes of Islamic terrorism. We get people insisting that suicide bombers are not real Muslims, and that Islam means peace.

Before the war on Iraq we had hundreds of thousands of people (most Muslim groups included) marching to the message, "Not in our name". When did we ever see Muslims doing the same thing about Islamic terrorism?

It isn't nice being singled out but the community is singled out already by their coreligionists here and abroad. For as long as the Muslim community refuses to take a strong and public stand against Islamic terrorism, and for as long as it refuses to give its full backing to the police and security services, it will remain under suspicion.

MPACUK Confusing Jews and Zionists Again

MPACUK reports on an interview given by David Cameron for The Jewish Chronicle. The report itself accuses the Jewish Chronicle of trying to force Cameron to "pledge his love for Israel"; questions why Cameron, when talking of a future Palestinian state, didn't include Jerusalem in it; and slips in claims of apartheid for good measure.

Just as a side point, it should be noted that apartheid is the discrimination of some citizens based on race. Palestinians are not citizens of Israel and therefore their differential treatment isn't apartheid or even racist. The Arab citizens of Israel are treated the same as any other citizen.

Anyway, back to the main point. The MPACUK report includes the following line:

Zionist institutions such as The Jewish Chronicle...
It may not seem like much, but it again indicates that MPACUK uses the word "Zionist" in place of "Jew", or "Zionism" in place of "Judaism". This is a tactic used to conceal anti-Semitism as anti-Zionism. In the All Party Parliamentary Report into Antisemitism, they were accused of exactly this. In paragraph 141 it states:

The use of ‘Zionist’ as a replacement for ‘Jewish’ is common on the MPACUK website. The CST submitted evidence that in one explicit case of this the Talmud, a Jewish religious text written many centuries ago, was described as a “Zionist holy book”. The website also posed the question: “Is this the most Powerful and Racist book in the world?!”

Well, here is another explicit case. The Jewish Chronicle was established in 1841 and has been running non-stop since then. It predates Zionism and is obviously a Jewish institution not a Zionist one.

Tuesday, March 27, 2007

Council Given £50,000 to Tackle Extremists

Croydon Council has been given £50,000 by the government to tackle Muslim extremism in the borough. Deputy council leader Steve O'Connel is quoted as saying:

The Government clearly recognises that it is local communities who understand their own areas best. We all know that it is just a small minority of individuals who are out to cause trouble.

The aim of this project is to find new ways of working with our local Muslim communities to engage with them in a bid to prevent opportunities for vulnerable individuals to be drawn into extremism.

Let's hope it works.

Just for background purposes, the 2001 census indicates that the Muslim community in Croydon makes just 5.3% of the population of the borough. Croydon has the 41st largest Muslim community in England and Wales and the 22nd (out of 33) in London.

Hewitt says ‘Muslim GPs breach confidentiality’

Healthcare Republic, part of Haymarket Medical Media, has a news item from Health Secretary Patricia Hewitt. Mrs Hewitt was speaking to the Fabian Society in London last week and told the audience:

Some women patients in some Muslim communities are feeling they can’t trust their own GP who is from the same community and knows their extended family.
If they go for particular situations, such as a sexual health problem or domestic violence, they fear they will share that information with other members of the family or community.

It is obviously hard to judge whether this is a problem solely in the Muslim community or not. Chairman of the Muslim Council of Britain’s health committee Dr Abdullahi Shehu told the website that, "reluctance to talk about sensitive issues with members of your own community is human nature; it’s not purely applicable to Muslims."

The Department of Health said that Mrs Hewitt had simply "recounted evidence from the Muslim Women’s Network on Health".

The fact that Muslim GPs were singled out implies that there had been no similar allegations from other faith groups. I don't buy into the inevitable claims that Muslims are being targeted by New Labour. If this was a problem in many close-knit communities Mrs Hewitt would have said so.

If what the Health Secretary has said is true then it indicates that there is a general feeling within the Muslim community that community comes before country which would be cause for concern. Nevertheless, no-one should get too worked up about this as these are, as yet, allegations and would only be anecdotal in any case.

Monday, March 26, 2007

Must See

A former British Islamic terrorist, Hassan Butt, has given a frank interview about the tactics used in Britain to recruit terrorists and raise funds. The interview was, of course, in America as we don't get such things in Britain. He reveals how Imams worked to radicalise young Muslims, how he convinced criminals to give a share of their money to terrorists in exchange for forgiveness, how money is sent to Pakistan without trace. This really is a must see; watch the full interview on this webpage. (via LGF)

Meanwhile, here are some extracts taken from the transcript:

What I've come to realize is that killing for the sake of killing, and killing in the name of Islam for the sake of killing, is completely and utterly prohibited. And there's a big disease, a big problem and a cancer in the Muslim world. And it's a very dangerous cancer, and it needs to be dealt with," he says.

"The position of moderate Muslims is that Islam has nothing to do with terrorism. Do you buy that?" Simon asks.
"No, absolutely not. By completely being in denial about it's like an alcoholic basically. Unless an alcoholic acknowledges that he has a problem with alcohol, he's never gonna be able to go forward," Butt argues. "And as long as we, as Muslims, do not acknowledge that there is a violent streak in Islam, unless we acknowledge that, then we are gonna always lose the battle to the militants, by being in complete denial about it."

Muslim Public Affairs Committee

MPACUK claims to be a "civil liberties group". However, its main focus is 1) to campaign against the way Mosques are run and 2) to demonise Israel wherever possible. It is anti-Semitism that defines MPACUK.

In 2004 the National Union of Students included MPACUK in a "no platform" order because of its anti-Semitism. In 2006 it emerged that MPACUK founder Asghar Bukhari had sent money and support for Holocaust-denier David Irving. He later claimed that he didn't realise that Irving was anti-Semitic.

The All Party Parliamentary Report into Antisemitism, published in 2006, had a number of paragraphs devoted to MPACUK. The report showed that they use the term "Zionist" in place of "Jew" to try and hide their anti-Semitism; one proof was an article which referred to the Talmud (a Jewish book) as a "Zionist" one.

The report condemned MPACUK for taking material directly from neo-nazi websites, spreading anti-Semitic conspiracies, and campaigning against an MP by claiming she was Jewish. The report said, "it is concerning to see the ‘accusation’ of being Jewish being used in such a way". (read the report here [pdf])

On this site we have reported on MPACUK's encouraging terrorism, declaring war and calling for the destruction of the state of Israel.

Sunday, March 25, 2007

MCB Guide to Tackling Extremism

The MCB has published an extract from an article by Inayat Bunglawala, assistant Secretary-General, under the headline, "How do we defeat violent extremism?". Here it is in full:

In short, a comprehensive response to violent extremism needs to involve greater vigilance on the part of all of us, a closer and more trusting relationship between local Muslim communities and the police, and a genuine reassessment by the government of some of its actions and policies overseas.
So, the MCB three steps to stopping violent Islamic extremism:

1) Everyone must keep an eye out.
2) The police must stop arresting so many Muslims (in order to have a "closer relationship").
3) Britain must surrender to the terrorists' demands and change foreign policy to suit them.

What is missing from the MCB's method of tackling extremism? Here are some suggestions:

1) An acceptance that Islamic terrorism stems from an ideology not foreign policy
2) An acceptance of the responsibility of Muslim leaders and groups to educate young Muslims.
3) An acceptance of the need to disabuse young Muslims of the lies concerning 9/11, Israel, The Holocaust and just about everything else.
4) An acceptance of the need to prevent radical clerics from poisoning the minds of young Muslims.
5) An acceptance of the fact that the police must do their job and that mistakes will happen.
6) An acceptance of the need to encourage Muslim integration into the UK culture rather than trying to establish their own mini-state.

In short, the MCB is turning a blind eye to the causes of terrorism and is simply handing over the list of demands from these terrorists to the government. So, when Ruth Kelley indicated that the MCB was not one of "those organisations that are taking a proactive leadership role in tackling extremists and defending our values", was she wrong?