Showing posts with label Atheists. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Atheists. Show all posts

Sunday, 22 March 2015

False Equations

In the recent days a well known Islamophobe joined the Social Media’s mass medium of Twitter. This has been welcomed by the so called man of science and reason, Richard Dawkins, who no longer promotes either the science or involves himself in a reasoned debate. Instead his mission in life seems to be to acquire funding from suspect funders and then to distribute those funds to groups and individuals actively promoting Islamophobia. Why wouldn’t Richard Dawkins welcome Ayaan H Ali to Twitter, the medium he has exploited to make inflammatory and hateful sometimes racial statements. The 140 characters limit is also an excuse to not to make a reasoned argument. He also supports anonymous troll accounts which are overtly and crudely racist and Islamophobic but he calls them satirical.
The other person who welcomed Ayaan is Maajid Nawaz, a PPC for the Liberal Democrats and the Chair of Quilliam foundation. He responded to the tweet by Sam Harris, encouraging people to follow her and Maajid quickly obliged. Maajid also endorsed Ayaan H Ali’s article in the Wall Street Journal and the forthcoming book. Some people believe that Ayaan H Ali already had an account under the name of Secular African. This account had Islamophobic, hate and racist agenda. It openly promoted hate of Muslims and especially of Arabs and supported Israel, especially during the attack on Gaza, when it relayed IDF propaganda. No wonder she has voiced her desire to convert to Judaism. This account also incited Hindus against Muslims, during the Indian election, and supported Narender Modi with a desire to get him to follow back.
Ayaan H Ali has been criticised for her comments that incite violence against Muslims and support suppression of their rights in Europe and North America. This criticism hasn’t just come from Muslims, but Atheiests and Academics alike. In light of the above mentioned, her desires to convert to Judaism is understandable. This, however, conflates with her stated position of being an atheist. We, however, shouldn’t be surprised as other New Atheists like Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins, have also shown soft spot for Judaism, Christianity and Israel.  While Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris may have a chance of being accepted in the Jewish state, Ayaan H Ali, however has no chance of being accepted. She should look at the racist attitudes of Israelis towards African Jews and immigrants and the recent comments by Bibi Netanyahu in the Israeli elections.
In her article in the Wall Street Journal Ayaan H Ali promotes her book and gives the impression that she is arguing about the reformation in Islam. She claims that the Christianity and Judaism had already gone through this process of reformation and that it has only brought good to the humanity. About the Christian and Jewish reformation in Europe she says:
“because their faiths went through a long, meaningful process of Reformation and Enlightenment, the vast majority of Jews and Christians have come to dismiss religious scripture that urges intolerance or violence”
She also says that
Their religious beliefs exist in an uneasy tension with modernity—the complex of economic, cultural and political innovations that not only reshaped the Western world but also dramatically transformed the developing world as the West exported it. The rational, secular and individualistic values of modernity are fundamentally corrosive of traditional societies, especially hierarchies based on gender, age and inherited status.
The reformation is something Maajid Nawaz has also been talking about. He also wants a debate in the Muslim communities and argues for a British Islam. However, most of his debates have been with the New Atheist community and he ends up agreeing with them. He promotes Quilliam’s Osama Hasan as a scholar who even issued a Fatwa on the issue of British Muslims going to help or fight in the Syria conflict. If anything, this tactic has backfired as the number going there have increased not decreased. It seems that most of these travelers were neither religious nor previously known for extreme or violent behavior. This undermines his claims of Islamism and ideology being behind this trend.

Anyway coming back to the issue at hand, has the reformation really stopped the violence and is it the driver behind the modernity. The history suggests that there is little evidence in support of such claims. While it did bring some periods of stability and peace, in the long run it caused more death and destruction then any time before. It replaced religious fervor with nationalistic jingoism and superiority politics. The debate about reformation was really about the power of the established church and personal and nationalistic views of the ruling classes. There were some sincere reformists like the German reformist, Martin Luther of the protestant movement, his views were rejected by the English king who wanted his own reform and head the Church.     
As far as the violence and religious intolerance is concerned, the reformation did not stop the Spanish inquisition, which lasted for nearly 440 years. It seems that non violence and religious intolerance only applied to the various factions of Christianity not the Muslims or Jews, who were forced to convert to Christianity.  Those who didn’t convert were killed or expelled. That is just one example of religious violence and religious intolerance that has continued after the reformation.  
This intolerance and violence continued during the colonialism era, which subjugated people of other religion, race and colour. This was fully supported by the Church and sometimes even the scientific community. The reformation did not stop the slavery of Africans and all the brutality which came with the trade or stopped transportation of Indians to other continents. It did not stop the brutal treatment and genocides of the indigenous people of Americas or the Australia.
The reformation and enlightenment did not prevent the world WWI or WWII or the genocide of the Jews in Europe. The Jews in Europe had experienced massacres and expulsion throughout the reformation and enlightened period. The only safe place they ever had was in the Muslim communities in and outside of Europe. The wars against communism were also tinged with the religious zealot as wars against the unbelievers who had closed churches. The same rhetoric was applied to support Afghans against Russia and which formed the basis for establishing the Mujaheddin army which later turned into Taliban and Al-Qaida.

History tells us that in the newly independent countries, after breaking the shackles of colonialism, from Algeria to Yemen, enlightened, secular and socialism leaning leaders emerged. However, one by one those leaders were got rid of. These leaders were undermined by the west by overtures to the military and by supporting religious parties, saying to them socialism conflicted with Islam and religion. Leaders such as Nasser, Bhutto, Sukarno to name few. Lets look at Pakistan, which gets special mention in Ayaan H Ali's article and probably the book. In 1960's and seventies Zulifqar Ali Bhutto established a political party which overtly said in its manifesto that Islam is our religion and Socialism is our politics. The party won by landslide in open and fair elections. During the elections and the party rule, US and other western countries supported the religious parties. Their was a queue of western ambassadors, lead by US,  to visit his the humble residence of Jamat Islami scholar and leader Mowdudi. Bhutto was replaced with a Military ruler, who did introduce some Islamic law.  
  
Lets not forget the war, which in the absence of proof of sated reason, can only be described as a war motivated by religious beliefs of Tony Blair and George Bush. The other recent examples are the Apartheid in South Africa and the current occupation and siege of Palestine by Israel and her apartheid and racist systems. Even the Prime Minister of Israel made openly racist comments to scare his fellow Jews and to get votes. Netanyahu and his administration is known for making anti Muslim and anti Arab statements to justify their wars on Gaza. These attitudes of intolerance, racism and religious hatred are inherited from their homeland of enlightened Europe and the North America. I sometimes wonder if today’s Jewish community is being used by the Zionists, be that Jews/ cultural Jews, atheists or Christians to cause havoc in the Muslim countries.
In Europe these Zionists of all kind are building alliances with the neo-cons and neo-Nazis against the minorities and the Muslim communities of Europe and the North America as well as against Russia. This has created the atmosphere of fear and uncertainty in the migrant and Muslim communities. However, I remain fearful that if the history is to repeat itself the Jewish community will be as much of a target as the other minorities and Muslims. This fear is based on the perceptions, as pointed out by Trevor Phillips, of Jews being rich and powerful. Such myths had previously resulted in massacres and genocide in Europe.  The most intolerant of Muslims are the New Atheists also known as the new Humanists and secularists. They suppose to be the enlightened and reasoned ones but most of their rhetoric is neither reasoned nor enlightened. 
Ayaan H Ali’s article gives an idea about her forthcoming book. She claims that she is not against all Muslims and hope that Muslims will reform the religion themselves. She, like the President of the United States, wants to keep all options on the table to confront Islam/ Muslims. This includes the option of force, in other words option of violence which is not very tolerant, reformed or enlightened. Other new Atheists, like Sam Harris, also hold the same views.
The reality of the reformation is that all Christian sects agreed on the divinity, Christ and Bible being untouchable. In other words the foundations of the Christianity remained out of bounds of the reformists. The same applies to the claimed Judaism reformation. However, Ayaan want to attack the core foundations of Islam by attacking the Prophet (pbuh). Without whom there would be no Islam and Muslims today. Anyone who is attacking the core foundations of a religion is not sincere about discussion dialogue or considered reform but purveyor of doom and violence.
The other crazy thing she has come up with is the ‘Madina Muslims’ and ‘Mecca Muslims’. She claims that the Mecca Muslims are more peaceful than the Madina Muslims. The reasons she gives for this is that the Madina Muslims were involved in wars while the Mecca Muslims were peaceful. This shows her total ignorance of the beginnings of the Islam and the life of the prophet (pbuh). She seems to have swallowed the scripts provided to her by the Islamophobe Industry. The facts are as below:
The Prophet (pbuh) emigrated to Madina, due to the violence and threats to him by the idol worshippers of Mecca. He was invited by the Muslims of Madina and other Muslims who had migrated on his advice. When the idol worshipers plotted to assassinate him, he also migrated to Madina. When the leaders of the idol worshippers learnt of the failure of assassination attempt they felt humiliated. They then attacked Madina in their attempt to assassinate the Prophet (pbuh). They attacked Madina on several occasions but every time they failed. This does not fit her description of peaceful and non aggressive people.  
Clearly Ayaan H Ali’s narrative does not fit the facts. By her logic the people and tribes of Mecca, who tried to assassinate the Prophet (pbuh) and attacked Madina on several occasions were docile and pacifists. The fact is that before they embraced Islam, the Meccan Tribes were aggressive warriors. They became peaceful and devout because of Islam not despite of Islam. The people of Madina were always peaceful and provided sanctuary to the migrants including the Prophet (pbuh). Today there is no difference between Muslims of Mecca and the Muslims of Madina. Like 1.6 billion Muslims of the world of all colours, races and nationality, they all try to practice their faith peacefully.
Ayaan H Ali, in her piece for WSJ, states that the Christians and Jewish communities of Madina were told that they could retain their faith if they paid a special tax. She alleges that all others were told either to convert or die. This is a pure fiction. The tax applied to all non Muslim communities. The fact is that the initial attacks by Meccans on Madina did not affect the others as Muslim numbers were low and could easily be targeted. However, as Muslim numbers grew, due to the conversions, the attacks started to affect all communities. However, as only Muslims were defending against these attacks and Meccans had started to approach other groups to spy and collaborate, there was need both for funds and to counter these tricks. Therefore, non Muslims were asked to pay a tax as contribution to the cost of defending and as a declaration of loyalty.     
Ayaan H Ali's, like many other, is trying to rewrite the history of Islam and create another label to divide Muslims. She says that she was raised as a Meccan Muslim. Her hostility towards Islam and Muslims and her rhetoric of inciting wars and violence belittles her own argument and factitious and facile theory.     
  
                                                    

Friday, 9 January 2015

Freedom of Speech and Hypocritical Alliance

I had started to write this before the brutal, unnecessary and unjustified Murder of the French magazine Charlie Hebdo staff and 2 Police Officers. My thoughts are with the bereaved families and the French people of all persuasions. From the information available so far it seems that the attack by these criminals was motivated by revenge for the publication of cartoons of the Prophet Muhammed (pbuh).

From what I know about the life of the Prophet (pbuh), the perpetrators actions contravene the way he lived his life. He did not seek revenge or harm against those who had caused him pain and discomfort. I know that some of the Islamophobe Industry will disagree and will try to produce disputed texts, etc. However, that doesn’t change the fact that they are wrong.    

Speculations are a plenty on the mainstream media and of course the playground of the dark forces the Social media, to jump on the bandwagon and try to capitalise on the tragedy. The morality of these people and the hypocrisy of these people who demand that the Muslims community as a whole should condemn the actions of criminals, did not utter a word of sympathy towards the bereaved families. These are the people who would object to the abhorrent images published by the terrorist groups and then publish them on their websites and tweet them. These are the people who would claim a moral high ground but then defend the atrocities committed by governments. These are the people who create the fear of others and then claim that no such thing as Islamophobia

 That brings me to the topic I had originally started to write. On Friday 2nd January the Independent newspaper ran a front page article, about online Islamophobia and increasing Muslim hate incidents. After considering the matter over the weekend and it’s impact on the him, his organisation and his allies, on Monday 5th January Maajid Nawaz  Tweeted. Bearing in mind that Monday was the day when anti Muslim demonstrations were bring held in Germany , organised by a Neo Nazi group called, Pegida. While the demonstrations did not achieve any significant numbers in most of Germany and a large number of Germans came out in opposition, they did achieve attendance of around 18,000 in Dresden, an area with little or no immigrant/ Muslim population. The Germen Chancellor Angela Merkel condemned Pagida as haters. Wish our leaders had shown such leadership.

The 'timely' tweet by Maajid Nawaz was retweeted by the usual suspects. They included  the Atheists fraternity, Secular Fraternity, Ex Muslim Fraternity and various Islamophobes including the star pupil of Quilliam's academy of Counter Extremism, Tommy Robinson. Although there are different Titles of these Fraternities, often it is the same people who appear under different banners. Tommy Robinson openly supported the Pegida organised demonstrations and encouraged his supporters to attend. From Tommy's tweets is clear that not only that his supporters and EDL members attend the demonstration but as he boasted 'the lads made contact with the leadership'. So we can safely assume that the Dresden demonstration was not just attended by locals but also their affiliates from across Europe. Maybe that is the reason for the high attendance numbers. Of course our media like the BBC is incapable of doing the simple deductions.  

After the signal from Maajid his comrades sprung into action, including the self declared master of 'sarcasm' Richard Dawkins, who tweeted . His subsequent tweets were about religion not being a race and so on. He, however, failed to elaborate what he was trying to say. Was he trying to say that being Islamophobic or Anti-Semitic wasn’t racist or that it was ok to be anti-Semitic or islamophobic as it wasn’t racist. Only he knows what he meant but whatever it was, it was in defence of people like Tommy Robinson and anonymous twitter trolls like Jihadi Joe and Spellchecker. In the recent days the twitter accounts of both of these trolls had been suspended by the Twitter. Mr Dawkins took up their case and despite clear evidence of their bigotry he claimed that they were brilliant satirists like him. While he was successful in getting their accounts (not sure if he deserves the credit) he was criticised by most of the Atheist community for his support of the bigoted anonymous trolls.

This point by Maajid and others that the criticism of Muslims/ Islam is not racist, xenophobic or Islamophobic, has no logic except that that is their point of view. The fact is that long before Maajids’s conversion, this has been the stated position of Mr Dawkins and others like Bill Maher, Sam Harris and their followers. So it is not an original thought of the Chair Maajid, it is the next stage in his evolution.  The Lawyers Secular Society also responded to Maajid Nawaz’s tweet and published this  tweet  and published an article on their website. If we apply the logic of these lawyers then the term anti-Semitism could also be said to mean nothing, as Semite mean a collection of races of Middle Eastern region. Therefore, to use it as a term for the hatred of Jews is as illogical as their claim about Islamophobia.
   
The fact is that the Islamophobia is now an internationally recognised term to define anti Muslim hate, propaganda and to spread fear of Islam and Muslims. The failure to acknowledge this suggests that these people do not accept any form of rights of Muslims of protection from harassment, intimidation and violence. It is this attitude along with suggestion that Islam is an alien religion not compatible with the secular democratic values of the west is not only bigoted but dangerous. Then we are living in strange times when with the aid of CGI anyone could become a star, when a karaoke singer could become pop star with the help of technology and no original material, any man could become journalist with autocue and plagiarised material and anyone become politician by learning to dodge questions and quick answers without thought.

I was very much heartened by the Journalists, commentators and members of the public, interviewed by the BBC. Despite attempts by the BBC presenters provocative and divisive questions the interviewees were calm and calculated and refused to blame the religion or the majority of Muslim community for the dreadful action of murderers responsible for Paris massacre. Instead they were worried about the exploitation of the event by the Far Right organisations and were opposed to the Islamophobic and xenophobic tendencies of these organisations. BBC's own cultural correspondent Tzvetan Todorove, who happened to be French was interviewed for the BBC Newsnight. He said that he was worried that the murders will strengthen Xenophobic and Islamophobic attitudes in some quarters. He also eloquently pointed out that there was no such thing as absolute freedom in a secular democracy and citizens have responsibilities to the society. Today on the Question time Liberal Democrat voiced the same sentiment and said that in our democracy people have freedoms within the law not absolute freedom as some have been suggesting.

Therefore, the notion of absolute freedom to cause offence and hurt is a basic right of secular society is contradictory to the principals of the secularism. Then the new Secularism and Atheism has mutated into something un recognisable from founding principle. The new values are extremist tinged with hate, bigotry, xenophobia and of course Islamophbia. Their hypocrisy becomes clear when they say they want to maintain a Judeo-Christian culture. Not surprising as it is the same crowd acting under different banners. The true secularism  protects all religions and does not allow people to discriminate people or denigrate their rights, on the basis of their beliefs, culture and race. Furthermore, the promotion of the idea that Islam is an alien religion is also a false propaganda. The Islam as a religion belongs to these lands and shore like as any other religion / belief and so do the Muslims. Any belief other than that is bigoted, racist xenophobic and yes Islamophobic.

On the day of the French Murders the Islamophobic fraternity was very busy on the social media, Hundreds of tweets a minute were being fired. They were not only spreading hate they were demanding that the media should defy normal procedures and publish show offending cartoons. Not surprisingly these included known suspects like Tommy Robinson, LSS, Ex Muslims forum, Secularists, Atheists and of course BBC's own Nicky Campbell. BBC and other news channels interviewed hundreds of experts commentators from all around the world and of course they included Quilliam’s, Maajid Nawaz and Douglas Murray of The Henry Jackson Society and Gatestone Institute. These three organisations and above mentioned are most active in the Islamophobic activities and spreading hate and fear of Islam Muslims and fear of persecution in the Muslim communities and then clam there no such things as Islam phobia. BBC allowed Nigel Farage to get away with remarks that there was a fifth column in the midst of us. It was only Jon Snow of Channel Four who confronted him and Geertt Wilders about their xenophobic and neo Nazi stand. 

Due to my addiction to the News, Current affairs and politics, I had the misfortune to watch the Daily Politics Show today, hosted by Andrew Neil and Joe Coburn. The guests included two “opposing and respectful specialists” Maajid Nawaz and Douglas Murray. As expected there was no considered discussion but regurgitation of old rhetoric of Islam being responsible all atrocities in the West and Maajid Nawaz begging for funds. Furthermore these supporters of freedom speech were upset that Media had been using Muhammad Shafiq to comment on the Paris events.

This hypocrisy of advocating free speech while seeking to ban others from speaking has stifled the debate within the society the Muslim community and has given Islamophobes a free hand to spread fear and hate. By supporting and demanding bans in the Educational establishments, media, and public life, these people have created a vacuum of positive role models and have suppressed the free thought. Yes some people will have a point of view or an interpretation of the holy scriptures which is perverted but by banning them and driving them underground you deny the Muslim Community to challenge and debate such notions. The state sponsored censorship of thoughts and views is creating an atmosphere of fear and helplessness in the Muslim Community and this pressurised bottling of emotion is and will result in the undesired outcomes which we all want to prevent.

As it happens I also watched the late programme this week on the BBC where I had to suffer the ridiculous analysis of the Paris event by Andrew Neil. I was, however, looking forward to some sense of balance from the announced guest, David Aaronovitch. However, I was disappointed, because while advocating freedom of speech, David Aaronovitch promoted the idea, that those who don’t agree with his interpretation of freedom of speech, they can move to different countries. The hypocrisy is that even if some people move to different part of the world, they will still be subject to his long standing support for the interventionist policies. In other words you are not allowed to live a peaceful life whether they are in the west or in any other part of the world.

Then he suggested that Muslim should hold large demonstrations like they do when Israel commits atrocities in Palestine as though atrocities committed by state are equal to the murders committed by criminals. I didn’t see him organising or attending such demonstrations against Israel, which by the way were multi racial, multi faith and non faith individuals. Neither it seems he had the ability to organise demonstration of any kind. The heart of matter is that all those who are vocal in criticism of Islam and Muslims happen to be extremist supporters of Israel. These are the people who labelled demonstrations against atrocities in Gaza as anti-Semitic. These are the people who instead of promoting unity as a nation are promoting divisions.

Andrew Neil and David Aaronovitch wanted British media to publish certain cartoons from Charlie Hebdo to “spread the fear”. It would definitely cause the offence and spread the fear in the Muslim communities. While it is acceptable for people to cause offence, it is clear that people has a right to take offence otherwise what is the point. If people are not allowed to air that they are offended without fear, intimidation and bullying then where will that bottled pressure go? Muslims do not need to apologise for their beliefs and certainly do not need to abandon their country on the say so of some Journalists like Andrew Neil, David, Nicky Campbell or Politicians like Nigel Farage.     

Following are some of the tweets to give you a flavour and you decide which are racist, bigoted, xenophobic or Islamophobic or all in one.
http://mobile.twitter.com/TRobinsonNewEra/status/552803726772420608?p=v
http://mobile.twitter.com/TRobinsonNewEra/status/552783220962787328?p=v
http://mobile.twitter.com/TRobinsonNewEra/status/552574856001507328?p=v    

  

Wednesday, 31 December 2014

2014 The Year When, .....

Islamophobia became Institutionalised
2014 is the year in which world experienced both natural and manmade disasters. There is very little you can do to prevent natural disasters but prevention of manmade disasters like wars, is entirely feasible. However, they require courage determination and will to understand and change. It requires ability to learn lessons from past mistakes and history. It requires ability to resist the pressures by self interest groups and to stand up to the agitators. Unfortunately our political leaders and masters lack such courage, determination, understanding and ability to learn the lessons.  
It is shameful that in the year that marked 100th anniversary of the start of the First World War, we had to remember millions more deaths through wars, along with the lives lost in that war. To keep the populations on side, all wars require propaganda and disinformation to justify the sacrifices in blood and treasure. Especially, when politicians use the rhetoric of fight for decades, they need to have a scapegoat. Our politicians tread a fine line they don’t want unrest at home, so they play lip service to the minority communities while their actions give clear signal to the agitators to continue to spread hate. It seems that the politicians think its a price worth paying.
The mainstream media like the BBC plays its part as government’s mouth piece for propaganda. After all it is dependent on the government funding along with the licence fees, a tax we all must bear. Foreign and Commonwealth office uses BBC to spread propaganda throughout the world stoking fires of conflict, which create refugees. At the same time it continues to spread propaganda against the migrants, asylum seekers and minorities. Furthermore, BBC remains one of the major employers of asylum seekers to spread propaganda in their former home countries. As far as the minorities at home are concerned BBC fails to employ/ promote black and minority ethnic communities. The problem is so deep that comedian Lenny Henry openly came out to criticise BBC, Mainstream Media, and the entertainment industry of institutionalised racism.
The BBC Board and the Executive Board remains almost exclusively white and from the elite classes. BBC entertainment programmes remain exclusively for the majority community. It has failed to interests of the minority communities, not only the migrant communities but also the Celtic minorities of Scotland, Wales and Ireland and the regional communities of England. Despite moving some of its operations to the Manchester, the management stranglehold of the South and the privileged communities remains. It has failed to promote the role models for the minority communities instead it propagates caricatures of ridicule and sides with the hate preachers.  Despite remaining the public and taxpayer funded organisation BBC is exempted from the Freedom of Information Act. You might say that because of its secretive policies, procedures and agendas, BBC is the North Korea of the Main Stream Broadcast Media.  
The BBC kick started the Islamophobic year, by allowing Nicky Campbell to conspire with so called Humanists and probably also with the Chair of the Quilliam Foundation, Maajid Nawaz, to start the cartoon controversy. Since then it has conspired with the outside agencies and individuals to ban the voices of reason. It has bowed to the social media and twitter campaigns to block mainstream Muslim voices from appearing on TV. Social media campaigns have targeted many of the mainstream Muslims speakers commentators and writers. The campaign also targeted the various scholars in an attempt to pave the way for Quilliam Foundation to claim to be the only authoritative voice on Muslim issues.   
After the cartoon controversy media attention shifted towards the conflict in Syria and a sudden turn by the media from portraying British Muslims, who had gone to help refugees and support the fight against the regime, from humanitarians to branding them Jihadist, terrorists and threat to the UK security. There was very little investigative or probing journalism or efforts by the Media, the Government and her contractors, to assess or investigate the factors behind the attraction or reasons for the young teeage Muslims boys and some girls taking such drastic and life changing action. Instead a campaign to demonise the whole of the community commenced giving excuses to frame new regulations and creating new powers which will affect not only the minority community but the whole UK population.
Then came the so called Trojan Horse story based on a fake letter. The story ran and ran culminating in the ofstead inspections and reports. At that point institutionalisation of Islamophobia started to become clear. Despite the protests from the teaching community, pupils, the parents and the governing bodies, schools were downgraded and some put in special measures. These actions were contradictory to the Education Secretary, Michael Gove’s stated position of parental choice and free schools. It seemed a deliberate attempt to deny minority communities, the same choices available to others. Instead of offering solutions, such as support and training for the governing bodies the government’s actions seemed designed to stop minority communities from gaining the position of authority or having a say in the education of their children. We have seen this kind of attacks on Muslim authority figures in the Met and on an elected Mayor in London. 
In between we had the so called anti Halalification campaign on the media and social media. There was opposition to the Law Society’ guidelines on drawing up Islam compliant wills, now withdrawn. There were continuous efforts to link FGM, forced marriages, and honour killings with Islam. Also any criminal activity by a Muslim was disproportionately highlighted and linked to religion. There was a campaign to remove Islamic books and literature from schools. Although, books and literature regarding colonialism, slavery, etc remains available. We seem to be on a dangerous road to eliminate diversity of knowledge to having a monolithic state provided knowledge (similar to the system in the China and North Korea). It is dangerous because we now live in a global village and we need knowledge good and bad to interact with our neighbours.
Then we had the grooming cases and the reports which highlighted the failures of the care system, police and local authorities but the media remained fixated on the colour, race, ethnic heritage and religion of the offenders. In the year when well known faces mainly celebrities connected to the media in general and BBC in particular have been prosecuted and convicted of sexual offences and paedophile activity of the powerful and ruling classes is being investigated , it seemed convenient deflection  to highlight  minority and Muslim offenders. Then we have the Maajid Nawaz’s friend Tommy Robinson who continues to tweet his bigoted views against Muslims. His recent appearance at the Oxford Union clearly brought out the ugly side of Islamophobia and even those who campaigned for Tommy to appear at the Oxford Union seemed disappointed. However, the Islamophobes and some bloggers seem still willing to give him benefit of doubt and tweet and retweet his vile propaganda.
With the rise of the UKIP and the immigration debate, some individuals and organisations have started to move the debate of immigration towards Muslim migrants. Especially towards the settled communities and second and third generations who are born and bred in the western culture and are oblivions of the culture of the countries of their forefathers. This is where the xenophobia and racism meets Islamophobia and the racism of Islamophobes starts to come through.
Any Islamophbic review of the year can not be complete without the mention of the chief Richard Dawkins and his friends. As usual Mr Dawkins continued his Islamophobic tweets claiming it to be satire. He also continued to retweet stuff clearly recognised as bigoted by others. Here is an Article by Tom Owolade . Dakins friend Sam Harris continued on the mission of spreading Hate. His appearance on the Bill Maher show, where he was confronted by the actor Ben Affleck for his bigotory, made international headlines. Sam Harris found support from the obvious quarters but even he didn’t expect support from the Chair Maajid Nawaz of the Quilliam Foundation. Maajid Nawaz made few dollars in the process. After his failure to make any real money out of his encounter with the “ex-EDL” Tommy Robinson, Maajid Nawaz intend to make more money from this new relationship by writing a book about his encounter with Sam Harris.
Quilliam also provided one of the funny moment of the year by issuing a Fatwa against travel  to Syria. As though these young men knew the meaning of a Fatwa and what it stands for. Majority of the young teenagers who had gone to Syria did'nt have any deep religious beliefs or upbringing. By issuing a Fatwa, Maajid Nawaz and Quilliam exposed themselves to be an organisation without a clear idea how to relate, understand and tackle issues of young Muslims growing up with continuous demonisation and dehumanisation.of Muslims. This year Maajid Nawaz and Quilliam has moved the goal post again. They started with radicalised to extremist to Islamist to current position that anyone who believes in Islamic scriptures is a threat. This evolution reflects Maajid Nawaz’s journey from Hizbe Tehrir to the ideology of the ex muslims, atheists, humanist and now partnership with Sam Harris.   
The most worrying development in 2014 has been the Institutionalisation of Islamophbia by the government through its actions. After the spat with Mr Gove the Home Secretary, Theresa May started to act tough in her words and deeds. This year new legislation and regulations have been introduced, which have been framed to frame individuals leaving them no option but to plead guilty. In other cases the prosecuting authorities doesn’t need to prove anything except that the individuals had travelled to Turkey and possibly to Syria. This has already resulted in youngsters being jailed for unreasonably lengthy times.
Theresa May, who has ambitions to be the leader of the conservative party, made a dramatic announcement at the Party conference in September, to introduce Extremism Disruption Orders which would prohibit individuals considered to be extremist and hate speakers from appearing on Radio, TV, Protests and posting messages on the social media, without permission. Its telling that the opposition to the proposals came, not from the Muslim community but the Islamophobe community who felt that their hateful activities would come under scrutiny. People like Maajid Nawaz, secularists, atheists and humanists who had been demanding ban on Muslim speakers and those who had made career out of spreading hate and fear, suddenly became supporters of free speech. These people never raised a voice about loss of liberty and freedom of people on the bases of suspicion, alleged and perceived extremist activity and not actual crime. Suddenly they remembered the value of free speech.
On 26th November the Home Secretary Theresa May introduced the Counter Terrorism and Security Bill. The Bill is being fast tracked and could become law at the beginning of 2015. In summary the bill will powers to seize passports of people suspected of travelling to Syria etc, could exclude citizens from the country (It has a serious potential of abuse), move people from their hometown to another place. It would stop insurance companies from paying ransom payments. It would place statutory duty on the public institutions, including Schools, Colleges and Universities, to stop people from becoming radicalised. Even Nurseries for 2 Year Olds feel they will have obligations under the bill. The Bill directly contradicts the 1986 Education Act , which places a duty on the Universities, Polytechnics and Colleges to ensure freedom of speech. Furthermore, the Bill includes extensive powers regarding monitoring of social media and other communications. 

We musnt forget the assault on the Muslim operated charities. Charity is one of the main pillers of Islam and every Muslim must pay a certain amount from his/her income and assets to help those in need. Muslim charities are involved projects to provide safe water, sponsoring orphans, education and development projects all over the world including at home. They help refugees and victims of conflict from Palestine to Syria, Syria Sudan and Yemen. Because of their humanitarian work in the conflict zones, and pressures from the Israeli lobbies, they are being put under suspicion.     
So we welcome the New Year with new definition for the British Values which restricts right to freely speak, travel and communicate. Furthermore, the big society means, Employers and Landlords checking your immigration status and Educational and other Institutions restricting freedom of discussion, debate and learning. The Young Muslims are already facing an uphill struggle to obtain employment due to the stigmatisation by the hateful rhetoric and crude language used by the Mainstream and Social Media and now their travel, holiday plans will also be affected by the new powers of seizing passports and exclusion orders.
Happy New Year     

Monday, 30 September 2013

Zionism, Anti-Semitism and Islamophobia

David Aaronovitch wrote an article on Zionism and Anti-semitism, published in The Times on 26 September 2013. He tweeted: 
On feeling worn down by the drip, drip,of anti Jewish prejudice. My Times column this morning
Unfortunately his column was behind the pay wall but the article title ("Even without Israel, Jews would be a target"), however, his tweets, several promotional tweets by Unrepentant Jacobin and comments by Lucy Lips on Harry's Place , gave me the gist of the article contents.

In the article David Aaronovitch credits an Austrian Jewish journalist, called Theodore Herzl, as founder of Zionism. Apparently, after witnessing a "show" trial in Paris, Herzel came to the conclusion that Jews were not safe in non-Jewish countries.

David Aaronovitch wrote:
So all the things said about Jews when they were “stateless” is now said about them — about us, about me — in relation to Israel. Only now you say “Zionist” not “Jew”. But you apply it in exactly the same way. Divided loyalties, unwonted use of money and influence (beyond that exerted by any other group, natch).
David Aaronovith feels that the Jews and Israel are targeted by some people who hide their anti-semitism behind the term Zionist. I can empathise with his feelings of being picked upon because of his religion, be that he claims to be a Jew in name only. Few years back I myself would have agreed with him. However, today calling someone a Zionist, is not anti-Semitic. The answer lies in the final part of Simon Schama's series "The Story of the Jews", which David also mentions in the article. He probably missed the following statement from Simon Schama, "from the humble beginnings of a desire to live in a place called Jewish home where there was justice and peace, today Zionism is associated with extremist aggressive and expansionist designs of conquering Iraq, Syria and Jordan".

Zionism is no longer a Jewish term, today it has been hijacked by by non Jewish extremists, an amalgamation of New Atheists, New Sacularists, Racists, Neo-cons, Fundamentalist Christians, Islamophobes, Extremist Hindus, ... etc. They have their own sinister agenda, not dissimilar to that which targeted the Jews. Some of these new Zionists, who are also committed Islamophobes, claim to be on the left side of the politics. If they move away from the mirror, they will realise that they have gone so far to the right that they are in Fascist territory.

David Aaronovitch has every right to be offended if he is wrongly associated with the groups listed above. However, if he is aligned with these extremist groups, no matter how remotely, then he should take it on the chin and accept the genuine criticism of his views and not muddy the waters by calling it Anti-Semitic. The real vile propaganda in today's world is Islamophobia and it is not drip drip it is like a Hurricane. Its depressing, demoralising and deadly.

I think David Aaronovitch should watch Simon Schama's final part of " The story of the Jews" to understand the plight of the Palestinians and the Israeli/ Palestine conflict. He will also learn what real secularism looks like. Talking of history, starting with Romans 2000 years ago, Jews have been victims of Europeans. They have been exiled, expelled and massacred in all parts of Europe, Eastern and Western. At the same time they were protected in the lands where Muslims ruled, in Asia, Africa, Middle East and even some parts of Europe.

History is for historians to tell but what I have learnt is that Israeli history is littered with terrorism, expulsions, detentions, show trials and blood of innocents. With such history, there bound to be criticisms from the world. Such legitimate criticism can not be dismissed as anti semitism. David Aaronovitch should listen more to the secular and orthodox Jews who want to live in peace and oppose resorting to the Biblical and ancestral claims to occupy and colonise. Incidentally, Orthodox and secular Jews are the most outspoken critics of Zionism and aggressive policies of the West and Israel.

David Aaronovitch finishes his article with the following:
As for me, I have never been a Zionist. Nor committed to Israel. But I can tell you this. Every time I get one of those comments, or those e-mails, or those tweets or hear those insinuations, I begin to think, why not, David, why not? Why not wear the cap that so many are so keen to fit you out with?
All I say to that is, if few tweets, emails and comments can radicalise him, what will happen to those who face Islamophobic propaganda and those living with bloodshed, bombs and bullets day in day out.