ITV News, Delivery driver Junead Khan found guilty of planning terror attack against US military in UK, 1 April 2016 "A delivery driver from Luton has been convicted of preparing to carry out a terror attack on an RAF base in East Anglia where US military personnel are stationed." Tech themes in this story.
Showing posts with label UK. Show all posts
Showing posts with label UK. Show all posts
Friday, 1 April 2016
Tuesday, 1 March 2016
UK spying laws
Independent, UK spying laws: Government introduces law requiring WhatsApp and iMessage to break their own security, 1 Mar 2016
Monday, 3 August 2015
Monday, 1 June 2015
When Akala called out Britain�s racism on Frankie Boyle�s show
MAD respect to this brother!
Tuesday, 9 December 2014
Jail for Leeds thug who threw can of alcohol over Muslim woman
AN ISLAMOPHOBIC thug who threw a can of alcohol over a Muslim woman and her child as they walked along the street has been sent to jail.
Kravier Freeman hurled foul-mouthed racist abuse and threatened the woman with a butcher�s knife during the incident in Leeds.
Leeds Crown Court heard that the victim was a young white woman who had converted to Islam and married a Muslim man.
Freeman targeted the 21-year-old as she walked past his home on Berkeley View, Harehills, on July 5, this year.
Freeman, 31, was out of prison at the time of the incident and had been drinking heavily throughout the day with others.
The victim was walking home with her son after getting food from a takeaway at around 8.30pm.
Nick Addlington, prosecuting, said Freeman approached the woman and said: �Why are you with a p***? Why are you wearing those clothes? You are not a Muslim!�
Freeman then followed her down the street and called her a �Muslim bitch� before throwing the can of alcohol over her and her child.
The woman asked Freeman why he was behaving like that and he replied: �Because I hate Muslims.�
Freeman then produced a sliver butcher�s knife and began waving it around as children stood close by.
He then said: �Watch what I am going to do when your husband comes out.�
Police were contacted and went to the house. Mr Addlington said there was a �total lack of co-operation� from anyone at the party despite what had happened.
They arrested Freeman and seized the weapon. Freeman was returned to prison after the incident.
He pleaded guilty to racially aggravated assault, affray and possession of a bladed weapon in a public place.
Nick Hammond, mitigating, said: �This was on anybody�s account a thoroughly unpleasant incident.
�It is right to say that this defendant is thoroughly embarrassed about what has happened. He cannot explain why he did what he did. The fact that he was heavily intoxicated is no excuse. It is an aggravating feature.�
Mr Hammond said Freeman had apologised to the victim and pleaded guilty to the offences at an early opportunity.
Jailing him for 12 months, judge Ray Singh said: �You behaved in a vile, nasty and racist manner. For a Muslim to be doused in alcohol � we can only imagine what was going through her mind.�
Wednesday, 3 December 2014
Man, 80, accused over acid attack on ex-partner, 20
WTF is wrong with these men?! :(
A young care worker has described how she suffered disfiguring burns to her face and neck in an acid attack allegedly orchestrated by her former partner, who was 60 years her senior.
Vikki Horsman, 20, told a jury she screamed in pain and glimpsed her blistering face and neck in a mirror as she stumbled back from the doorstep after the assault before dousing her face with cold water from the kitchen tap.
Horsman said the acid, which she claimed was thrown by a man wearing a hood and a bandana as a mask, caused �instant burning, piercing pain�.
The prosecution claims Horsman�s former partner, 80-year-old Mohammed Rafiq, planned the attack with 25-year-old Steven Holmes, who allegedly carried it out, and a third man, Shannon Heaps, 23. All three deny causing grievous bodily harm with intent.
It is alleged that the assault at a house in Tividale, West Midlands, took place in April after Horsman split up with Rafiq because she saw him as controlling and jealous.
Wolverhampton crown court heard that Horsman began to rely on Rafiq after her parents died. He bought her a car but she said he began to accuse her of cheating on him and put pressure on her to convert to Islam and change her name to Aleena Rafiq. Asked by Anthony Warner, prosecuting, if she had been happy to convert, Horsman replied: �Not particularly.
Monday, 21 April 2014
Happy Muslims, angry Puritanical Muslims.
Excellent Commentary by Adam Deen. I have to say I loved the video and it was great to see him in it.
The viral video Happy Muslims by The Honestly Policy seemingly caused some controversy and apparently not solely due to my poor dance moves. Many have questioned why I, and others, chose to participate in the video and what our �objectives� were. So, despite some reservations, I�ve decided to weigh in�.
My decision to take part was motivated by a desire to show mainstream Muslims as ordinary people, who can have fun and who have a sense of humor, away from the usual headlines sadly so typically associated with our community. At a time of heightened islamophobia and suspicion, I hoped the video could contribute to rehumanising Muslims. Far too often, Muslims are represented in the media for all the wrong reasons. An extensive body of literature and research indicates that on the whole, the images and discourse relating to Islam and Muslims in mainstream Western media tends to be overwhelmingly negative. These negative Muslim stories consequently affect wider society�s perception of the Muslim faith and its beliefs. Some would argue that the effects of such demonization have been the Muslim community being seen as a foreign body within wider society, or as the �other�. This phenomenon of reducing minorities to the �other� is nothing new of course. History has its fair share of stories of one group dehumanising another group. One cannot help but think that the constant negative portrayal of Muslims and charges of Muslim exceptionalism, have reduced Muslims to a less human alien minority within the West. The Happy Muslims video was in a way, an attempt to dispel the negative perception by presenting Muslims in a manner far removed from usual depictions, specifically, happy, smiling and having fun.
The reaction to the video by the majority of Muslims has been positive. But to no one�s surprise, Puritanical Muslim preachers have been outraged by the video (although to be fair, it really doesn�t take much), expressing hard line verdicts to excite the Islamic sentiments of the ignorant. According to such individuals, the video was a clear violation of Islamic law, specifically such actions as dancing are deemed to be �Haram� ie: a prohibited act. Of course, no matter the noble intentions behind the video, the means do not justify the ends. But can one make such a claim and condemn the video and those who took part? When engaging with Puritanical Muslims, one discovers there really is little substance to their claims. Often Puritanicals ask for evidence to deem a given action �Halal�, or permissible. Although this gives the impression that one is being true to the faith, the question is based on a false premise, namely that�every action is Haram until sharia permits�. E.g of a question, I had someone ask me �where is the evidence during the Prophet�s time, of the women of Medina dancing publicly?�
This is a completely topsy turvy way in which do deduce �Hukm� , Islamic rulings, not to mention the fact it leads to absurdities. It�s analogous to the notion that one is guilty until proven innocent! While it should be noted that this principle is true for Ibadat, i.e. acts of worship, it is not the case for anything else.
This is a completely topsy turvy way in which do deduce �Hukm� , Islamic rulings, not to mention the fact it leads to absurdities. It�s analogous to the notion that one is guilty until proven innocent! While it should be noted that this principle is true for Ibadat, i.e. acts of worship, it is not the case for anything else.
The correct view regarding fiqh (jurisprudence) of actions is �Every action is halal (permissible) until texts restrict�. Thus, the onus is on the Puritanical Muslims to find the evidence to deem dancing �Haram� or impermissible. What constitutes evidence?
Scholars of jurisprudence were very wary of labeling something as Haram. The Quranic verse warms against those who forbid what God has made lawful [66:1]. Thus, anyone who takes it upon him or herself to deem something forbidden must have evidence, which must be �Qati�, definitive, to justify such a claim.
Essentially there are two undisputed sources of evidence in determining Islamic law, the Quran and Sunnah (sayings, actions and consent of the Prophet peace be upon him). The �Qati� nature of evidence is also determined by two factors, sound epistemological status and unambiguous meaning. With regards to the former, the Quran is always considered sound whereas the hadith can vary depending on the grade of narration, or the �Isnad�. With regards to unambiguity of meaning, both verses and hadith can be ambiguous in meaning. Hence, why traditional Islam has a diversity of opinions on the topic of music and entertainment. So my challenge to the detractors is this, where is the clear-cut or definitive evidence to deem the video �Haram� or impermissible?
There simply isn�t clear-cut evidence to dismiss it as such. Puritanical Muslims have been at pains to find a verse or hadith to vindicate their outcry. Some have made desperate attempts to even use �Qiyas�, analogical deduction, which itself is indicative that there is no direct evidence to prohibit the video. One example I�ve heard cited refers to the Quran suggesting that the prophet�s wives shouldn�t over-soften their voices as to avoid desire within the diseased heart of strange men. (Qur�an 33:32) The �argument� goes: women dancing (like in the video) invokes desire in men, thus for the same reason, it should be prohibited. Putting aside that this verse is referring to the Prophet�s wives and even states, � you are not like any other women�, it is simply a false analogy. Had the dance moves in the video involved Muslim women pole dancing seductively then perhaps one could entertain the analogy, but what is clear in the video, is that the dancing was innocuous � with some simply walking with a rhythm or bopping their heads to the tune.
Are these Puritanical Muslim men seriously claiming that the video was too seductive? The attempt to make the Happy Muslims video some sordid affair says more about them than about its actual content to be fair.
More importantly, this quasi-Islamic reasoning can lead to reductio ad absurdum, whereby any innocuous act can be deemed Haram. And, it�s precisely this type of obscure �Islamic reasoning� that results in women becoming invisible in society. What about women walking in public, hosting a TV programme or even driving? It�s simply an abuse of Islamic teaching to universally prohibit acts which some have a fetish problem with. Once you strip away the layers of obfuscation, all you discover is a naked obsession with sex, women and control masquerading as religious devotion. Traditional Islam describes women, as well as men with an �awrah� (intimate parts) that must be guarded by the virtue of modesty. Puritanical Islam reduces women to nothing more than an �awrah�. Why should we even entertain the views of those who hold the opinion that women should be neither seen nor heard?
That said, given that the discussion is within the remit of fiqh exploration, if one wants to be charitable, one might allow the claim that some may deem the video �haram�. And yet, even this merely suggests a difference of opinion. What�s the consequence of this in terms of fiqh, responsibility and judgment? It means it can only be �haram� for those who deem it �haram�, and not for those who differ with that interpretation! To see it any other way would be a form of authoritarian fiqh tyranny, a problem Puritanical Muslims suffer from quite regularly, wanting to impose puritanical �Islamic opinions� on everyone else!
Of course, there have also been emotional appeals. Terms have been bandied around like �liberal� and �secular� and the appeasement of these �ideologies� allegedly by those who appear in the video. The problem here again, is that the argument is based on a false assumption. What is acceptable in Islam is not defined as the opposite of how non-Muslims live or by somehow being �anti-Western� (an odd term given that we are talking about British Muslims, ie �westerners�!). Also, despite the prevalence of such a belief, a view is no more Islamic simply because it is more restrictive. The more �liberal� opinion could well be the more Islamic; any restriction on something without warrant is fundamentally unIslamic. No to mention it crudely reduces every action to an ideological assertion. Dancing is not by definition an expression of an ideological creed.
The Happy Muslims video was an attempt to present a genuine picture of mainstream Muslims, but it has now become part of a broader move to push back against imported Puritanical Islam, the WalMart of Islam, that has dominated Muslim and Non- Muslim discourse for too long, masquerading as traditional Islam. Puritanical Islam is dead, long live Islam.
Sunday, 23 February 2014
The Truth About Islam And Female Circumcision/FGM
I was very disappointed to watch a video from Shaikh Haitham Al-Haddad in which he insists female circumcision is Sunnah and wajib. He mentioned ahadith, but does not elaborate on the fact that they are 'weak' he also mentions any form of female circumcision is illegal in the UK, but then does not tell people to refrain from it in fact encourages it by repeatedly saying its Sunnah. This is highly irresponsible.
Most of all at the end of the video he admits he hasn't done all his research and cannot discuss the degrees of female circumcision or some of its alleged 'benefits'. This makes the video a farce.
I used to respect this scholar for his pro-voting/political participation stance but now this and his alleged statement �a man should not be questioned why he hit his wife, because this is something between them" has left me so depressed. It seems more and more men in our community are enemies of our women and advocates of patriarchy.
I would urge everyone to read this excellent article from my brothers and sisters at the Asharis Assemble blog. It is by far best resource/explanation about female circumcision/FGM from an Islamic perspective I have ever come across. As is the video posted at the top.
I hope other scholars and community leaders try to educate Shaikh Haitham or at least convince him to be more responsible and compassionate. He has done our community a lot of harm.
No man has the right to mutilate a woman, and to use our faith as justification is a grave sin and error. A woman is more than capable of thinking and acting for herself. I worry that Haitham Al-Haddad has many followers and they will be swayed to hurt their daughters.
Indeed he is undoing the good work of activist such as Fahma Mohamed.
Saturday, 21 December 2013
Dr. Abbas Khan: Inna Lillahi wa inna ilaihi raji'un
Inna Lillahi wa inna ilaihi raji'un. This is probably one of the most tragic things that I have ever had the misfortune to read. May Allah reward this brother in the hearafter for his good intentions and noble desire to help people and give his family patience to deal with such cruelty and tragic loss. Ameen.
SourceBritish doctor Abbas Khan has been "in effect murdered" by the Syrian authorities just days before his expected release from jail, Foreign Office Minister Hugh Robertson said.He said the death of the 32-year-old orthopaedic surgeon from south London was "at best extremely suspicious".Mr Khan was arrested last year in Aleppo where he was helping civilians.Syria's Deputy Foreign Minister Faisal Mekdad said Mr Khan committed suicide using his pyjamas to hang himself.He said the results of an autopsy proved this, and Mr Khan's body would be released to his family so they could conduct their own inquiry.One of Mr Khan's brothers, Shahnawaz Khan, said it was "a lie" and "pure fiction" that his brother committed suicide as he had written to his family saying he was looking forward to coming home and spending Christmas with them.
Tuesday, 26 November 2013
British Muslims Should Stand Up and Say It: There Is Nothing Islamic About Child Marriage
This is a column about Muslims and child marriage. I hesitated before writing it. When I pointed out the prevalence of anti-semitism and homophobia within British Muslim communities earlier this year, I was accused by some of my co-religionists of "selling out", of "fuelling Islamophobia".
I understand their annoyance. Why give the racists and bigots of the Islamophobic far right yet another stick with which to beat us?
The problem is that this particular stick is already in their hands. Child, or underage, marriage is very much a part of British society. And the inconvenient truth is that it is Muslims - not Christians, Jews or Hindus - who are responsible for much of it. There is no point pretending otherwise. Nor is it morally tenable to stand idly by as young girls in the UK are forced into marriages before they are physically or psychologically ready, against their will and against the law.
First, a bit of background. The legal age for marriage in Britain is 16. Yet, back in October, I watched ITV's Exposure documentary, 'Forced To Marry', in which two undercover reporters, posing as the mother and brother of a 14-year-old Muslim girl, called 56 mosques across Britain to ask whether they would perform the girl's marriage. Shamefully, imams at 18 of those 56 mosques - or one in three - agreed to do so.
The imam of a mosque in Manchester was secretly recorded as saying that performing such a marriage would "not be a problem". An imam in Birmingham, despite being told that the girl didn't want to get married, could be heard saying: "She's 14. By sharia, grace of God, she's legal to get married. Obviously Islam has made it easy for us... We're doing it because it's okay through Islam."
Let's be clear: two-thirds of the imams refused to perform such marriages, with many making it clear they "found the request abhorrent". But here's the issue: a third of them didn't. A third of those imams hid behind their - my! - religion: "We're doing it because it's okay through Islam." Frustratingly, many Muslim scholars and seminaries still cling to the view that adulthood, and the age of sexual consent, rests only on biological puberty: that is, 12 to 15 for boys and nine to 15 for girls.
It doesn't have to be this way. As is often the case, there is no single, immutable 'Islamic' view. As Usama Hasan, a reform-minded British Muslim scholar and former imam, argues:
"There was a rival view in Islamic jurisprudence, even in ancient and medieval times: that emotional and intellectual maturity was also required, and was reached between the ages of 15 and 21." The latter view, he tells me, "has been adopted by most civil codes of Muslim-majority countries for purposes of marriage".
The Quran does not contain a specific legal age of marriage, but it does make clear that men and women must be both physically mature and of sound judgement in order to get married. It is also worth clarifying that Prophet Muhammad did not, as is often claimed, marry a child bride named Aisha. Yes, I'll concede that there is a saying in Sahih Bukhari, one of the six canonical Hadith collections of Sunni Islam, attributed to Aisha herself, which suggests she was six years old when she was married to Muhammad and nine when the marriage was consummated. Nevertheless, there are plenty of Muslim historians who dispute this particular Hadith and argue Aisha was in reality aged somewhere between 15 and 21.
This isn't a case of 'liberal' Muslims v 'conservative' Muslims, either. Even the much-maligned Muslim Council of Britain has said it is "strongly opposed to [underage marriage] on the basis that it is illegal under the law of the land where we are living and even under sharia it is highly debatable".
Indeed it is. Afifi al-Akiti, an Oxford-based theologian trained in traditional Islamic madrasas across south Asia and North Africa, tells me that the vast majority of classical scholars throughout Muslim history agreed on a minimum marriage age of 18 - two years older, incidentally, than secular Britain's current age of consent.
So, how to explain the view of a third of the imams contacted by ITV? The influence of Saudi Arabia, and its decades-long export of a reactionary, retrograde brand of Islam, cannot be ignored. The damage that has been done to a nascent British Islam by pre-modern, Saudi- inspired, literalist dogma is incalculable. Consider this: in 2011, when the Saudi ministry of justice announced it might prohibit marriages involving girls under the age of 14, Sheikh Saleh al-Fawzan, one of the country's most senior clerics, issued a fatwa to allow fathers to arrange marriages for their daughters "even if they are in the cradle". To call such a mindset outdated or medieval would be a gross understatement. It's an endorsement of paedophilia, plain and simple.
It is also an apt reminder of why most countries, including most Muslim-majority countries, have minimum ages for marriage codified in law: to deter adults from exploiting children and to protect the most innocent members of our society.
"We have a moral duty to obey the law of the land," says al-Akiti. For adult men to try to marry young girls is illegal and immoral. But British Muslims have a special responsibility: to make the case that there is nothing Islamic about underage marriage, either.
Will this column be used by EDL-types to further their pernicious, anti-Muslim agendas? Maybe it will be, but I can't stay quiet. I'm the father of two young girls. When I hear of forced, underage marriages being carried out in the heart of major British cities, I think of my own daughters. And I feel sick.
This is 2013. Not 613. Or 1813. Child marriage is a form of child abuse. It must be stopped.
Wednesday, 30 October 2013
InshaAllah this evil man will die in prison, shunned by his entire community. Also the daughter must have known what what was going on she should have been punished accordingly.
A pensioner who repeatedly raped a deaf and mute girl he had trafficked into the UK to work as his domestic servant has been jailed for 13 years.
Ilyas Ashar, 84, brought the girl to the UK from Pakistan in June 2000 when she was aged around 10. She was beaten and forced to sleep and work in the cellar of Ashar's five-bed family home in Eccles, Greater Manchester.
Their victim, who had no family or friends in the UK and had never been to school in Pakistan or Britain, was taught by the Ashars to sign her name so they could steal more than �30,000 in benefits. She was made to work for the Ashars for almost a decade.
The girl was sexually abused from pre-puberty, Minshull Street crown court in Manchester heard. Ashar would routinely rape the girl in the cellar and other houses the family owned while she tried to fight him off.
Ashar was convicted by a jury last week of 13 specimen counts of rape, though the court heard that the abuse happened "many, many times more". He was convicted at an earlier trial of two counts of trafficking a person into the UK for exploitation, two counts of furnishing false information to obtain a benefit and one of permitting furnishing of false information to obtain a benefit.
His wife, Tallat Ashar, 68, was jailed for five years for two counts of trafficking a person into the UK for exploitation and four counts of furnishing false information to obtain a benefit.
Their daughter, Faaiza Ashar, 46, who was found guilty at an earlier trial of two counts of furnishing false information to obtain a benefit and one count of permitting furnishing of false information to obtain a benefit, was given a 12-month community order with 300 hours of unpaid work.
Passing sentence, the judge Peter Lakin said: "You Ilyas Ashar and you Tallat Ashar did not treat this girl as a human being. To you she was merely an object to be used, abused and cast aside at will.
"You took full advantage of her extreme vulnerability. You exploited her physically, you exploited her mentally and you exploited her economically. There was throughout a distasteful undercurrent of violence and intimidation.
"All that she had in her life was the love of her family and her own human dignity. You two took that away from her. You consigned her to a life of misery and degradation."
He added: "Throughout these proceedings not one of you have shown any remorse. You are concerned with your own selfish, self-centred interests. You Ilyas and Tallat Ashar are deeply unpleasant, highly manipulative and dishonest people."
Tuesday, 15 October 2013
Why would anyone believe in the "Islamophobia industry"?
The Harlow Islamic Centre in Essex is an unassuming building. A former community centre, set back from the main road, it has seen various incidents of vandalism over the years; youngsters misbehaving, nothing out of the ordinary. That all changed on Sunday 25 August, when three young men visited the mosque in the middle of the night, prised open the shuttered doors and windows to spray insulation foam underneath, and set it alight. Only minor damage was caused, but there were no two ways about it: this was pre-meditated.
�It was a racist attack,� says Ajaib Hussain, chair of the centre. �They came to target the mosque.� Three young men have since been charged. The damage was reparable, but the impact of the incident can still be felt. Extra security cameras have been installed at the centre, and regular police patrols started. �Our community was shocked, sad, and afraid that it would happen again,� says Hussein. �But we are resilient. The support from Muslims and non-Muslims in Harlow after the attack has been overwhelming.�
What happened in Harlow was by no means unique. On 5 June, a mosque and Somali community centre in Muswell Hill, north London, was burnt to the ground by arsonists. On 18 June, the Masjid-e-Noor in Gloucester was set alight. On 23 May, the windows at Maidenhead�s mosque were broken. The list goes on.
Since the brutal murder of soldier Lee Rigby in Woolwich on 22 May, 30 mosques in the UK have been attacked. In the five weeks immediately following the attack, the monitoring organisation Tell Mama reported a further 250 anti-Muslim incidents against individuals.
This spike in incidents, coupled with the on-going political controversy over the niqab (face veil), has meant that the term �Islamophobia� has been hotly debated. High profile names such as the atheist Richard Dawkins have said that racism against a religion cannot exist (�It is not a race� Islam is a religion and you can choose to leave it or join it�). In June, journalist Andrew Gilligan wrote an article claiming that anti-Muslim hate crime was being exaggerated by �the Islamophobia industry�.
So what exactly is Islamophobia, and how useful is the term? The Runnymede Trust�s Commission on British Muslims gives eight components. These include seeing Islam as a monolithic bloc that is static and unresponsive to change; seeing it as the �other�, with no values in common with other cultures and inferior to the west; seeing Islam and Muslims as violent, primitive, and supportive of terrorism; seeing it as a political ideology; using hostility to Islam to justify discrimination against and exclusion of Muslims; and seeing such hostility towards individual Muslims as natural or normal. The definition was written back in 1997, and remains broadly in use today, used by organisations such as the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia.
The Commission on British Muslims was set up in the mould of a similar group focusing on British Jews, formed in 1992. The aim was to take anti-Muslim prejudice as seriously as anti-Semitism, and to establish active policy steps to tackle it. Against this backdrop, arguing that one can�t be racist against a religion seems irrelevant.
Fiyaz Mughal is the director of Faith Matters, an organisation set up to promote inter-faith dialogue that also runs the Tell Mama project. Launched 18 months ago with funding from the Department for Communities and Local Government, this project is mapping and reporting incidents of anti-Muslim hate crime.
When we speak on the phone, he tells me that it is difficult to say whether there has been a general rise in Islamophobic incidents over the last few years because monitoring started relatively recently. The Metropolitan police force is currently the only one in the UK to keep a separate record of anti-Muslim crimes. Tell Mama receives about eight reports every single day (compared with around two or three when they launched in 2011).
�It�s very clear that a high number of incidents are taking place against Muslims in general,� says Mughal. �National or international incidents � like Woolwich � really spike the number of instances that get reported. This effect is cumulative over time. Post-Woolwich, the base line of incidents has not gone back down to what it was. Base line has reset itself to another level. That�s the concerning bit.�
The range of incidents recorded by Tell Mama and other monitoring groups range widely: from attacks on mosques, to violence against individuals, to verbal abuse, to online hatred. When Gilligan took issue with reports that anti-Muslim hate is on the rise, his main points were that many of the incidents were online only, and that others � such as hijab snatching � were �non-serious�.
�The police response to the online world is simply unacceptable,� says Mughal. �We are not talking about minor cases. In one incident, a man had knives on his Twitter picture, and suggested he wanted to go out and �slash Muslims�. The police did nothing. There is a laissez-faire approach to online abuse. The Crown Prosecution Service does not enforce and review the law consistently, due to the changing nature of what is happening. Not is there the political momentum behind fighting anti-Muslim prejudice.� It is worth noting that concerns about how online abuse is policed are not unique to anti-Muslim hate.
While arson attacks and petrol bombs at mosques are at the most extreme end of the spectrum, smaller incidents still create an atmosphere of fear and distress. �When I speak to people up north, they say that if there is something negative in their local press about Muslims, in the next few weeks there�ll be an attack or something happening in the street,� says Akeela Ahmed, a member of the government�s working group on Islamophobia. �Sometimes these things are at a low level � flour thrown at the mosque, or graffiti. I don�t think it was until Woolwich that people at a national level took notice.�
Around 70 per cent of incidents reported to Tell Mama involve women wearing headscarves: a visual marker of their religion. Equivalent monitoring groups in France and other European countries note the same trend.
Amina Malik is a 20 year old medical student who lives in London. She has worn a headscarf since she was 13, but has never experienced many problems � until mid-September. On 16 September, a judge ruled that a woman had to remove her niqab (full face veil) in court. This restarted a heated debate about whether such coverings have a place in a liberal society and whether a more far-reaching ban should be introduced. �I don�t cover my face, only my hair, but I felt uncomfortable seeing negative headlines about Muslims and Muslim women on the front pages every single day for a week,� says Malik.
On 20 September, as she was travelling to her home in west London, she sat in front of two men on the bus. �They were having a loud conversation about how Muslims shouldn�t be in this country if they wouldn�t live by British values. I felt edgy but I didn�t say anything and tried not to draw attention to myself.� The two men got off the bus at the same stop as her. �I didn�t think anything of it and tried to walk faster. One of them shouted �fucking Paki� and I realised he was talking to me. They caught up with me and pulled off my headscarf from the back. I was so shaken that I just ran all the way home. I didn�t even stop to look at them.�
She did not report the crime. �There is a massive loss of confidence among Muslim communities,� says Mughal. Campaigners say that the police response to incidents against individuals falls far short, although at the most extreme end of the spectrum � where acts of terrorism are carried out against Muslims � it is far more efficient.
On 23 June, a group of worshippers arrived at the Aisha Mosque in Walsall to attend Friday prayers. They heard a loud bang, and thought that someone�s car engine may have exploded. One of the men looked underneath his car but didn�t see anything; they thought nothing of it. It was the next day that one of the men, back at the mosque, noticed a rucksack, and next to it, a device with wires attached to it. The imam called the police, who confirmed that it was an improvised bomb.
Pavlo Lapshyn, a 25 year old Ukrainian man, has subsequently been charged with planting the bomb at the Walsall mosque, as well as placing similar devices in Tipton and Wolverhampton. He was also charged with the murder of Mohamed Saleem, a 75 year old grandfather who was stabbed in Birmingham just weeks before the Woolwich attack
Zia ul-Haq, a representative of the mosque, is philosophical. �There was no damage, no people were hurt. This sort of thing has never happened before in our mosque. The community was concerned there could be a repeat, but we told them to be calm, vigilant, and watchful. Don�t overreact, and don�t point the finger towards any group or party. We don�t want to look at everyone suspiciously and have kept our open door policy at the mosque.�
However, just like the mosque at Harlow, extra security measures � such as an upgrade in the CCTV system � have been introduced.
�These incidents can cause polarisation,� says Ahmed. �At a local level � which is where these things play out � communities can be divided.�
The Walsall mosque chose not to point fingers, but the incident was not without repercussions. �After the attacks in Tipton and Walsall, there were people in Birmingham talking about the need for Muslims to defend themselves, to �man up�, to learn self-defence,� says Ahmed. �In addition to this very obvious, divisive impact of such attacks, there is a psychological impact on Muslim communities. Anxiety is increased. Every time there is an attack at a national level, like Woolwich, people automatically think �I hope it�s not a Muslim�. When you find out it is someone who calls themselves a Muslim, people � especially women � are wary about the repercussions. It does affect people�s confidence.�
Sunny Hasan is a 41 year old civil servant from Sheffield. She contrasts the simple racism of her childhood, when the refrain �Paki go home� was commonly heard, to more insidious forms today. �After 9/11 happened, people began to say �it�s you Muslims who are fundamentally responsible for the ills in society right now�.�
Like many British Muslims, she resents being held responsible for incidents of Islamic terrorism. �It becomes boring. You become this repeat mantra of formulaic responses. There is this nonsensical approach � �forgive us, it�s our fault, all Muslims apologise�. Actually, I don�t apologise for the acts of people who I don�t identify as Muslims, who have said very inappropriately that they are doing this in the name of Allah.�
It is difficult to say whether a rise in reported anti-Muslim incidents is because of increased awareness of the crime, or because of an actual increase in attacks. Campaigners point to the influence of far-right groups such as the English Defence League (EDL) in worsening anti-Muslim sentiment. A recent study by Teeside University found that EDL supporters were involved in 70 per cent of cases of online Islamophobic incidents. Certainly, the group provides a ready-made, if misinformed, narrative about Islam, with cherry-picked quotes and factoids for supporters to repeat.
But perhaps the most worrying fact is how mainstream some of these views have become. Back in January, former Conservative Party co-chair Sayeeda Warsi warned that there was a "misinformed suspicion of people who follow Islam � perpetuated by certain sections of the media.� Two years before that, she warned that anti-Muslim prejudice had �passed the dinner table test� and become socially acceptable.
Ahmed echoes this view: �There are things you can say about Muslims and Islam which you would not say about other communities, and other faiths.� A look at a selection of headlines and quotes bears evidence to this. �A quarter of young British people �do not trust Muslims�� (BBC News); �The real Islamist threat to Britain comes from mass immigration and multiculturalism� (Daily Mail). Many statements such as these, routinely seen in the media, would fall foul of the Runnymede Trust�s eight-point definition of Islamophobia.
It is not just the media that is at fault. �Politicians play political football,� says Mughal. �It is quite easy to turn to xenophobia in a time of austerity. Politicians say that the problem with cohesion is that the Muslims are not doing it right, and deflect from the very tough questions raised by the economic crisis, like a lack of investment in housing stock and jobs.�
According to the latest figures, there are more than 2.7 million Muslims in the UK, making up around 4.6 per cent of the overall population. The majority are settled, integrated, and proud to be British. Attacks on mosques or individuals may be relatively rare, but this is by no means a fringe issue. �My question is, where does the state actually want Muslim communities to go with these matters?� says Mughal. �Tell Mama was set up with funding from DCLG � if the police are not responding to us, what the heck! Who are they going to respond to?� When an entire community is routinely scapegoated in a supposedly tolerant society, it should be a concern for everyone.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)



