The outcome of the Batley investigation is a surrender of liberal principles

Posted: Thu, 27 May 2021 by Stephen Evans on the National Secular Society website

As an investigation into the Batley Grammar affair concludes, Stephen Evans says we should recognise the censorious precedent it has set.

Earlier this year a number of teachers were suspended after an image of the prophet Muhammad was used in a lesson to initiate a discussion about blasphemy at Batley Grammar School in West Yorkshire.

Pupils were forced out of school as angry protesters gathered at the gates demanding action against one of the teachers for 'offending' "the whole Muslim community". Some protesters accused him of stirring up anti-Muslim hatred.

The school's head teacher apologised "unequivocally" and sought to placate the protestors by saying the use of the image was "totally inappropriate". Meanwhile, one teacher and his family were forced into hiding after receiving threats.

An independent investigation launched by the academy trust behind the school has now concluded. It's found that the image was used for an "educational purpose" to benefit students and was not used with the intention of causing offence. The suspensions have been lifted – and rightly so.

Everyone's primary concern should be for the safety and wellbeing of the teacher at the centre of this and his family. We should hope they can now move on and rebuild their lives. I would be surprised if the teacher returns to the school.

But we should also recognise that the investigators have given the protesters what they craved by imposing a de facto blasphemy code on the school.

The executive summary of the investigation says: "It is not necessary for staff to use the material in question to deliver the learning outcomes on the subject of blasphemy; or any such images of the type used… in any trust RS lessons, or any other lessons."

Nobody claimed it was "necessary". But if you're teaching about blasphemy and freedom of expression, you may reasonably think the most effective way of exploring this subject involves using images that have caused controversy. You may also think that if you don't show them, pupils will look them up on the internet anyway, and the best environment for this learning is a teacher facilitated discussion. Teachers appreciate the diversity of their students and can foster civility to ensure students learn about sensitive topics in authentic, sensitive, engaging and meaningful ways.

On a fundamental point, the outcome of this investigation represents a capitulation to the mob. The reason this school and others won't use such resources again is not because they aren't educationally justified, but because they don't want to cause offence. Not because they aren't conducive to learning, but because of the threat of disruption and violence. This is how a de facto blasphemy law works.

Right from the start, the National Secular Society urged the government to take the lead on this issue. We warned that treating it as little more than a local dispute would leave the investigation more vulnerable to pressure from assertive, intolerant religious voices.

And that has now happened. The outcome of the investigation has been influenced by unreasonable religious demands and intimidation and threats from religious extremists.

In many ways, the trust's response is a clever fudge. It endeavours to conciliate between the various parties by offering them all something, while selling out on liberal, secularist principles. It says it's committed to "ensuring offence is not caused". This is a route to censorship that sets a very dangerous precedent.

And the outcome of this local investigation will inevitably affect teachers' ability to do their jobs across the country. One trainee teacher at Manchester Metropolitan University who expressed concern over the weak response to the Batley Grammar affair and said he would be willing to use images of religious figures in class has already been called to a 'fitness to practise' meeting.

Teachers have been given the message that they should censor themselves. And that message could be relevant on any other number of sensitive subjects where well-organised and vocal groups could take offence.

When the incident first happened the Department for Education said it was "never acceptable to threaten or intimidate teachers", adding that schools are "free to include a full range of issues, ideas and materials in their curriculum". With fundamental principles at stake, the government should now launch its own investigation into the handling of the affair and consider how we got ourselves into the position where religious extremists have a veto on which resources teachers can use in the classroom.

But instead the DfE has simply said "parents, families and the local community" should "recognise the findings of the investigation" and "welcome and support" the trust's plan to "strengthen its oversight of the curriculum".

Everyone will understandably want to move on from this now. But before we do, we should recognise that an Islamic blasphemy code has been quietly imposed. Teachers' and pupils' freedoms have been sacrificed to appease offence takers.

The outcome of the Batley affair is another damaging chip away at the fundamental right to free expression and inquiry.

Additional note - Friday 28 May

The NSS has today written to the DfE about this. The letter urged the department to investigate the handling of the protests outside Batley Grammar School.

It added that the investigation should consider the wider context of religious fundamentalism being imposed on schools through protests and intimidation, and ask what can be done to protect and support schools in such situations.

*********************************************************

Teacher cleared in Prophet Muhammad image row

A teacher who was suspended after showing children a caricature of the Prophet Muhammad can return to the classroom.

Protests were held outside Batley Grammar School after the teacher showed an image during a religious studies lesson in March.

An independent investigation found the teacher did not intend to cause offence by showing the image.

The school said it would offer more guidance and training for staff.

The image was shown on more than one occasion to students during lessons earlier this year, the investigation found.

In an executive summary of the report, the trust said teaching staff "genuinely believed that using the image had an educational purpose and benefit".

But the trust said it recognised that using the image did cause "deep offence" to a number of students, parents and members of the school community, adding that it "deeply regrets the distress" caused.

'Suspensions lifted'

A spokeswoman for the Batley Multi Academy Trust said the school would put the recommendations from the report "into practice immediately".

She added: "The findings are clear, that the teaching staff involved did not use the resource with the intention of causing offence, and that the topics covered by the lesson could have been effectively addressed in other ways.

"In the light of those conclusions, the suspensions put in place while the investigation was under way will now be lifted."

The National Education Union said it was "pleased the correct decision has been reached" following the lifting of the suspension.

A Department for Education spokesperson said parents, families and the local community should "welcome and support the trust's comprehensive plan to strengthen its oversight of the curriculum".

**************************************************************

SPECTATOR: In praise of the Batley binmen

by Brendan O’Neill

If you need someone to support your right to freedom of speech, forget the teaching unions. Don’t look to the commentariat. And don’t even bother with the Labour party, many of whose younger, angrier members will often be found in the ranks of cancel-culture mobs calling for someone or other to be erased from polite society for having blasphemed against a trendy new orthodoxy.

No, it’s the binmen you want to turn to. It’s the nation’s fine refuse collectors who will back you up when your liberty to speak is being pummelled.

Consider the case of the Batley Grammar schoolteacher who was suspended for showing his pupils an image of Muhammad during a religious studies lesson. Alarmingly, that teacher is still in hiding, fearing for his life. He has received death threats simply for doing what all good teachers should do: challenge their students to consider difficult moral questions.

The supposedly liberal establishment behaved shamefully in response to the demonisation and harassment of the teacher. Batley Grammar itself, in the face of angry protests outside the school gates, suspended him. The school essentially ‘threw him under a bus’, the teacher’s family said.

The teaching unions stayed almost entirely schtum about the case for ages. ‘It would not be appropriate to make any further comment’ while the school is investigating the incident, said the National Education Union. Not appropriate for a teaching union to comment on the fact that a teacher had received threats to his life and is now, according to his father, ‘devastated and crushed’, an ‘emotional wreck’?

In which case, why do teaching unions even exist?

The political class wasn’t much better. Tracy Brabin, then the Labour MP for Batley, now the Mayor of West Yorkshire, praised the school for dealing swiftly with this incident that had caused so much ‘offence' and 'upset’. She essentially sided with the protesters who wanted a teacher punished for blasphemy — these days referred to as ‘offence' and 'upset’ — rather than with the teacher and his right to free expression.

But not everyone has turned their backs on this persecuted teacher. Enter the binmen of Bury. Shaming the intellectual elites, these workers have taken a principled stand on behalf of the teacher and his right to free speech in the classroom.

The Bury branch of Unite, which represents refuse collectors, has put forward a motion championing the Batley teacher. The emergency motion, submitted for consideration at the National Conference of Trade Union Councils in June, urges all unions to back the teacher.

The motion points out that England’s blasphemy laws were formally abolished more than a decade ago and insists there should be no ‘dogmatic restraints’ on our right to discuss religious matters, including Islamic matters.

The proponent of the motion is Brian Bamford, secretary of Tameside Trade Union Council and a retired electrician. He says:

‘This is a motion which has come in from binmen, from ordinary working people… Freedom of expression is very important. I don’t feel guilty in any way for taking a stand on this issue.’

Bamford says an NEU official contacted him and asked him to consider withdrawing the motion. Apparently the official told him the motion ‘risks inflaming what is an extremely sensitive and very complex situation’. An NEU spokesperson said: 'It is a sensitive issue and the NEU did ask for the motion to be withdrawn. With every viewpoint that is expressed our members face yet more public exposure.'

Got that? Binmen and other working-class union members want to express support for a teacher who has been hounded into hiding for a supposed speechcrime, and a teaching union official is reportedly saying to them, ‘Please don’t do this’. This is bonkers.

These binmen have shown us what true solidarity looks like. Their support for the Batley teacher is in keeping with the best traditions of working-class activism. They saw someone being harried and silenced merely for displaying a religious image and they’re not having it. More power to their elbow, and their motion.

They have also shown up what passes for the liberal establishment these days. Too many people in positions of power treat freedom of speech as a negotiable commodity rather than as a core principle of democratic life. Too many turn away — or nod along — as people are shunted out of polite society merely for criticising Islam, or asking questions about transgenderism, or making an un-PC joke. Get 12 weeks for £12

Plus a free bottle of Digby Fine English fizz

Many so-called liberals now consider the right not to be offended to be more important than the right to free expression. So when they saw that fuss outside Batley Grammar, they instinctively sided with the right of the protesters to glide through life without ever having their religious beliefs called into question, rather than with the right of a teacher in a pluralistic democracy to use his freedom of expression to challenge and enlighten his pupils.

Thankfully, there are still people, like those Bury binmen – and of course like the Free Speech Union – who understand that no one has the right not to be offended. Who understand that freedom of expression is more important than any individual’s feelings or any religion’s diktats? Binmen for Free Speech — it’s exactly the campaign we need right now.

Written by Brendan O’Neill

Brendan O’Neill is the editor of Spiked, the online magazine.

CommentsShare Topics in this articlePoliticsSocietybatleybatley grammarbinmen

Binmen kick up a stink in aid of Batley teacher

by Camilla Turner, Daily Telegraph, Education Editor

When a teacher was suspended from his school after showing a picture of the Prophet Mohammed in class, he reportedly felt as though he had been “thrown under a bus”.

The National Education Union (NEU), was accused of failing to stand up for its own member after it did not immediately condemn the threats of violence and intimidation he faced in the wake of the row.

But now, the Batley Grammar School religious studies teacher has found unlikely support from a Bury branch of Unite, which largely represents binmen.

Brian Bamford, secretary of Tameside Trade Union Council, has submitted an emergency motion for the National Conference of Trade Union Councils in June to champion the cause of the suspended teacher.

The motion urges the NEU and all other unions to support the teacher and to publicly condemn those demanding his dismissal.

It notes that blasphemy laws were abolished more than a decade ago, and adds that “dogmatic restraints” should not be imposed on the religious education curriculum.

Mr Bamford is also secretary of Bury Unite commercial branch in the North West, which represents binmen across the borough, and the motion’s wording had to be approved by the branch committee before being passed up to the Tameside TUC which it is affiliated to.

"This is a motion which has come in from bin men, from ordinary working people," said Mr Bamford, a retired electrician who has been active in the trade union movement since the 1970s.

“As far as I can see, staying silent goes contrary to what we believe in at our branch, and especially in the trade congress.

“We are affiliated to the Orwell Society and freedom of expression is very important. I don’t feel guilty in any way for taking a stand on this issue.”

Mr Bamford claimed that an NEU official attempted to pressurise him into withdrawing the motion on the basis that it was “unhelpful” to draw further attention to the issue.

He said he was phoned by the official who asked him to "reconsider" the motion since it "risks inflaming what is an extremely sensitive and very complex situation" for members.

Mr Bamford was told that the NEU has an obligation to the “wider community in Batley" and that any further attention on the matter would "set back quite sensitive negotiations".

But he said he has no intention of abandoning the motion, adding that the school curriculum should not be “dictated by an indignant mob” who congregated outside Batley Grammar School just before the Easter break.

“We are troubled that a teacher can be suspended following protests about his teaching methods and use of materials,” Mr Bamford said.

“We are outraged that the teachers involved are being challenged for trying to broaden their students' horizons and encourage their critical thought.

“We don't believe that the determination of the use of teaching resources in a school should be influenced by people taking offence, and using intimidation and threats.”

Batley Grammar School sent pupils home early for the Easter holidays and issued an apology after a group of Muslims gathered at the gates to protest. The headmaster announced that the religious studies teacher had been suspended while the school looked into what happened.

The 29-year-old teacher and his family went into hiding after reportedly receiving death threats in the wake of the protests. The academy trust that runs Batley Grammar School announced at the end of March that it would carry out an “independent” investigation into the context in which the cartoon was shown.

A by-election has been triggered in Batley after Tracy Brabin stepped down as MP when she was elected as West Yorkshire's first metro mayor.

Ms Brabin, 60, replaced Jo Cox as Batley and Spen MP in a by-election in 2016 after Ms Cox was murdered by a far-right extremist. The seat will be seen as a key test for Labour after the party lost the Hartlepool by-election to the Conservatives earlier this month.

An NEU spokesperson said: "It is a sensitive issue and the NEU did ask for the motion to be withdrawn. With every viewpoint that is expressed our members face yet more public exposure."

They added that "speculation is unhelpful, not least for our members who the NEU are fully supporting throughout this investigation and will be doing so beyond the investigation".

************************************************************************

Government 'not interested enough' in Batley Grammar School Prophet Muhammad row, says NSS

The National Secular Society has accused the Dept. of Education of 'washing its hands' of the investigation

by Connor Teale YORKSHIRE LIVE

11:28, 4 MAY 2021

Government ministers have been urged to do more to ensure an investigation into the use of a caricature of the Prophet Muhammad by a teacher at Batley Grammar School is not "unduly influenced" by local imams.

The chief executive of the National Secular Society (NSS) has claimed the Department for Education (DfE) has "washed its hands" of the teacher who has been suspended following the row.

And officials at the DfE have also been accused of not doing enough to ensure the probe will examine whether the school was right to immediately suspend the teacher in question, reports The Telegraph.

To get the latest email updates from Examiner Live, click here .

Stephen Evans, chief executive of the NSS told The Telegraph: "This is a bit of a test case for how these things are handled, that’s why it is important.

"Here we have a teacher in fear of his life, in hiding and suspended from his job – yet there is nothing to indicate the materials were not handled correctly.

"We are concerned that the Department for Education doesn’t seem interested enough given that the outcome of this will have national implications. They have washed their hands of it."

Angry protestors descended on the school on Carlinghow Hill in March to demand the teacher responsible for showing the cartoon during a religious studies lesson be sacked.

The school's headteacher, Gary Kibble, issued an 'unequivocal apology' in the aftermath of the protests and announced the teacher in question had been suspended.

Reports suggested the teacher at the centre of the row went into hiding due to "fearing for his life".

The events prompted Batley Multi Academy Trust to appoint a panel, led by an independent barrister, to carry out an investigation into how the material came to be used in class. The probe is now underway.

***********************************************************

The Dept. of Education must show leadership when religious hardliners turn on schools

Posted: Thu, 06 May 2021 by Stephen Evans ON NATIONAL SECULAR SOCIETY WEBSITE

The start of an investigation into the Batley Grammar affair raises questions over the government's willingness to ensure assertive religious voices don't dictate what happens in classrooms, says Stephen Evans.

A few weeks ago, Batley Grammar School suspended a teacher who had showed a cartoon of the prophet Muhammad in a lesson, as protesters gathered outside its gates. The teacher was forced into hiding, and the case generated widespread publicity.

The school's priority seemed to be ensuring that loud voices in the local Muslim community weren't offended. This was also true of many public figures who took an interest in the case. Politicians and pressure groups lined up to denounce the use of a cartoon in a lesson. Often, they appeared more concerned about the use of a cartoon than the safety of a teacher and the prospect of mob rule dictating what could be taught in a school.

Now the academy trust behind the school has announced that an investigation has opened into the affair. This provides an opportunity to hear what happened in full, and to learn lessons. The trust has said the investigation will be led by an independent barrister with "significant education experience" and "no prior connection with the trust or any of its trustees or employees", which is encouraging.

However, the remit of the investigation may give cause for concern.

In a statement announcing the start of the inquiry, the trust said it would "examine how certain materials, which caused offence, came to be used" in the lesson. It didn't mention - at least explicitly - the school's treatment of the affected teacher. Are the offence-takers still framing the terms of the discussion?

The National Secular Society has sought clarification from both the trust and the Department for Education that the actions of the school are within the remit of the investigation. None has been forthcoming. The DfE simply said the specific terms of reference are a matter for the trust and investigator. This isn't good enough.

Fundamental principles are at stake. Cultural sensitivity can't be allowed to morph into censorship. Teachers must have the freedom to broaden pupils' horizons and encourage them to think critically. We can't allow decisions about the appropriateness of teaching resources to be influenced by offence taking, intimidation and threats.

The outcome of this investigation will have national implications. This episode has already sent a damaging message on teachers' ability to encourage critical thinking on culturally sensitive issues.

That could easily be forgotten if this is seen as a purely local issue, to be negotiated between assertive imams - who claim to speak for Muslims as a whole – and the individual school or trust.

So the government needs to show some leadership. But the Department for Education doesn't seem interested.

The trust has a legitimate interest in finding out what happened and taking recommendations. But it's also in the public interest to ensure the actions of the school are investigated. Feeling the heat from angry protests outside the school gates, the school issued an 'unequivocal apology' to the offended, deemed the resources to be 'completely inappropriate' and threw its teacher under the bus. If we take this imam's words at face value, the school even gave the protestors a role in drafting its statement. We need to know why this happened.

It's worth considering that a thorough investigation of the Batley affair may raise awkward questions for the government. The Batley affair is reminiscent of events at St Stephen's Primary School in east London in 2018. Then the school decided that girls under eight shouldn't wear hijabs in school, and young children shouldn't fast during Ramadan, on the basis that it was detrimental to their health and learning. Muslim pressure groups such as MEND and the Muslim Council of Britain became involved and the school was bombarded with emails in response, with some abusing and threatening violence against staff. The school was effectively forced to back down.

The Department for Education failed to support the school and said nothing on the row.

Arif Qawi, who was forced to quit as chair of governors following the affair, said he was "flabbergasted" at the DfE's silence. He wrote to the then education secretary Damian Hinds, pleading for help, saying that he and the school's head teacher Neena Lall had been "victims of absolutely vile personal abuse on social media platforms".

"This lack of support and weak attitude will be very detrimental to the nation's children," he said.

The DfE was also slow to respond when Muslim-led protesters objected to teaching about relationships and caused substantial disruption for primary schools in Birmingham in 2019. And when it issued guidance on relationships and sex education that year, it required schools to "take children's religious background into account" in their teaching.

We need to be sure that extremist elements within our communities are not impeding teachers' freedom and ability to prepare all pupils equally for life in modern Britain.

When protesters turn up outside the school gates and initiate harassment campaigns, schools shouldn't be left to fend for themselves. That leaves them at the mercy of the mobs and vulnerable to pressure from assertive, intolerant religious voices.

At least in Batley, the DfE issued a statement saying it was "never acceptable to threaten or intimidate teachers" and "schools are free to include a full range of issues, ideas and materials in their curriculum, including where they are challenging or controversial".

But condemnation only goes so far. The government has broader shoulders than any individual school or academy trust. So if ministers really want to uphold those principles, they should start by ensuring – if nobody else will – that an investigation considers the Batley episode in full.

******************************************************************

NSS comment on iinvestigation into Batley Grammar School

THE National Secular Society chief executive Stephen Evans welcomed the support being provided to protect the safety and wellbeing of the teacher, and the appointment of an independent barrister, but has raised questions over the remit of the investigation.

He added: "For any investigation to inspire confidence, it must consider the school's handling of this affair and its treatment of the teacher – impartially and in full.

"It must also bear in mind the importance of upholding fundamental principles. Cultural sensitivity can't be allowed to morph into censorship. Teachers must have the freedom to broaden pupils' horizons and encourage them to think critically. Decisions about the appropriateness of teaching resources shouldn't be influenced by intimidation and threats.

"This affair has caused a great deal of disruption, turmoil and distress, and should be a reminder of the harm that can be done when society fails to stand up to religious bullying."

*****************************************************************

To live in a diverse society means to live with debate. Bring it on

Sun 28 Mar 2021

No one has a right not to be offended. All of us have a duty to challenge bigotry. These two claims are not just compatible, they are often interconnected. Today, though, many view these as conflicting perspectives. To give offence to other cultures or faiths, they argue, is to foment racism; to challenge racism, one should refrain from giving offence.

It’s a belief at the heart of the controversy engulfing Batley grammar school. The facts are still unclear. A teacher apparently showed an image of the Prophet Muhammad in a religious education class. Some parents have demanded the teacher be sacked, holding protests outside the school. The school has apologised and suspended the teacher involved. At the heart of the affair, the former Tory cabinet minister Sayeeda Warsi insists, is the issue of “child safeguarding”, of protecting children from racist bullying.

It is inevitable in plural societies that we offend the sensibilities of others. Where different beliefs are deeply held, disagreement is unavoidable. Almost by definition, that’s what it means to live in a plural society. If we cherish diversity, we should establish ways of having such debates and conversations in a civil manner, not try to suppress them. A structured discussion in a classroom, properly done, seems an ideal approach.

It is inevitable, too, that in pursuing social change, we often offend deeply held sensibilities. Many groups struggling for justice and equality – women, gays, non-believers – within religious communities cannot but be blasphemous. In this context, to accept that certain things cannot be said is to accept that certain forms of power cannot be challenged. Fighting for social justice, in other words, often requires us to offend others. The boundaries of speech are different in a classroom than in the world outside. Here, a teacher is dealing with minors, building a relationship of trust with them, encouraging them to think, and to think about issues that they may not have thought about or may not have wanted to think about.

But here, too, there is nothing wrong in discussing material that may offend or be deemed blasphemous. Some commentators, including Warsi, claim that pupils were shown a Charlie Hebdo cartoon depicting Muhammad with a bomb in his turban. The problem, they say, is not blasphemy but racism.

Whether this claim is true is unclear. Given that, in Paris, Samuel Paty, a teacher, was beheaded after a schoolgirl’s false claim, we should be wary of jumping to conclusions before knowing all the facts. Even if the story is true as reported, however, it does not imply that the teacher was misguided. Nor does it show that the class discussion was a cause of racism or bullying.

One can play a clip of a Bernard Manning joke, show an antisemitic cartoon or discuss a Charlie Hebdo cover in ways that heighten racist prejudices. One can also do each of these things in ways that allow students to think more deeply about the issue at hand and reduce racial or religious tensions. What matters is the manner and context in which the subject is approached. To simply insist that showing offensive material in the classroom is to exacerbate racism is a disingenuous means of manipulating “safeguarding” to limit what can be discussed.

One of the ironies of such controversies is that they serve to silence many Muslim voices and traditions. Virtually every press report on the Batley school controversy has claimed that there is an Islamic prohibition on the depiction of the Prophet Muhammad, as, indeed, does the “agreed syllabus for religious education” in West Yorkshire.

This is historically illiterate. There have been many Islamic traditions, particularly in Persia, Turkey and India, open to depicting Muhammad. Only in the 17th century did attitudes shift, particularly among Sunnis. In recent decades, reactionaries, both Sunni and Shia, have seized on prohibition as a means of strengthening their control over Muslim communities. To claim that “Islam prohibits depictions of Muhammad” is to take the most conservative views and present them as representative of Islam.

When we say that we live in a diverse society, we mean that it’s a messy world out there, full of disagreement and debate. That is something we should welcome, not fear, for it is such disagreement and debate that allow us to break out of our culture-bound boxes, to engage in a wider dialogue that can help forge a more universal language of citizenship. The question we should ask ourselves is not how to minimise such debates, but how to create ways of engaging in them more constructively.

**********************************************************

Kenan Malik is an Observer columnist

Muhammad cartoon teacher fundraiser under scrutiny by Tom Belger in 'SCHOOLS WEEK'

Mon 5th Apr 2021, 5.00

A fundraising campaign for the teacher at the centre of the Muhammad cartoon row is being led by an activist accused of stirring up local ethnic tensions.

It comes as a petition demanding the teacher’s reinstatement reached almost 70,000 signatures.

The staff member’s use of caricatures of the prophet in class sparked protests outside Batley Grammar School in West Yorkshire, thrusting it into the middle of a wider row over religion and free speech.

The school has now ordered an independent investigation into its curriculum after immediately suspending the teacher and apologising “unequivocally” over the materials used in RE lessons. The teacher involved is reported to fear for his life after death threats forced him into hiding.

An online fundraising page to help the teacher fight for his “job, reputation and security” secured more than £5,600 in donations within a day of its launch on Wednesday.

Creator Paul Halloran called it the “official fundraiser,” and said he was a family friend who had been asked to set it up.

But Halloran’s involvement in past local community tensions may risk further politicising divides over the issue.

Standing as a candidate in the 2019 local elections, Halloran faced claims from opponents across the political spectrum that he was stirring up ethnic divisions.

Halloran came third in the Barley West ward for the Heavy Woollen District independent party, whose only other local candidate Aleks Lukic was a former UKIP candidate.

Lukics led a controversial campaign to stop non-stunned halal meat being served in schools, with Halloran demanding the council reveal which schools did so.

Kirklees’ Labour council leader Shabir Pandor told the local Yorkshire Live news site their motives were “extreme and dangerous” accusing the pair of trying to “sow division” by politicising the issue.

Conservative leader David Hall agreed all meat should be pre-stunned to avoid animal cruelty, but condemned “those who would try to stir up community tensions” over the issue.

Halloran has also criticised the term “Islamophobia,” saying all racism should be called out. “I don’t see a lot in the Muslim community commenting on grooming gangs and terrorism…. Let’s not invent a word that will stop us debating those things,” he reportedly said, according to the Press local newspaper. He denied accusations of racism.

But Halloran told Schools Week he “wholeheartedly” rejected ‘far-right’ labels, calling them “nonsense” promoted by his political opponents to discredit him. He said he was a respected local man who belonged to no political party, and had friends of “all cultures and religions.”

But he said he remained concerned “the word ‘Islamophobic’ is used at time to stifle reasoned and respectful debate.”

Footage of protests outside Batley Grammar’s gates quickly went viral, catapulting the area into the headlines only a few years after the murder of local Labour MP Jo Cox by a far-right extremist.

Demonstrators’ anger over depictions of Muhammad, reportedly caricatures from French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, and the school’s apology for “inappropriate” RE materials quickly sparked a backlash against the backlash.

Many appealed for calm but the row sparked not only fierce rows over blasphemy, schooling, free speech and multiculturalism but also reported death threats. Conservative peer Sayeeda Warsi warned debate had been “hijacked by extremists on both sides.”

The DfE swiftly called the protests and threats “completely unacceptable,” and defended the inclusion of controversial curriculum materials. The teacher involved is reported to have been teaching about blasphemy.

National Secular Society chief executive Stephen Evans told Schools Week school leaders “shouldn’t allow blasphemy taboos enforced through intimidation to dictate their teaching.”

The school switched to remote learning amid the protests. The independent investigation will review the “context in which the materials [which caused offence] were used, and to make recommendations in relation to the Religious Studies curriculum so that the appropriate lessons can be learned and action taken, where necessary”.

An independent investigation panel will be appointed over the next fortnight, with the probe set to begin on April 12 and report “towards the end of May.”

,

****************************************************************

What Are Trades Unions For? by Les May

WHY has it taken a Tory MP, Brendan Clarke-Smith to point out that the primary function of a union, in this case the National Education Union, is to defend its members? He was referring to the incident at Batley Grammar School where a teacher was suspended, then the school's headmaster seems to have made a grovelling apology and protesters are demanding his sacking of the teacher who it seems has offended their delicate sensibilities.

It should not be a problem to condemn it and say it is wrong. I would assume there is some political sensitivity and perhaps [the NEU] is reluctant to stick its neck out. Given that its primary function is to defend teachers, you would have thought it would be prepared to say that 'threats are unacceptable.'

The Daily Telegraph reports that the MP, a former religious studies teacher, also said "political sensitivity" should not stop the NEU from speaking out to defend one of its own members, adding: I think you should immediately condemn threats and intimidation and violence, wherever you are across the political divide.

The Evening Standard reports the Archbishop of Canterbury as saying; In other words, exercise your freedom of speech, but don’t prevent other people exercising their freedom of speech. How nice it would be to hear that from all our MPs.

Teachers must be wondering why they have bothered to pay their union subscriptions all these years.

I do not ask for the right to offend anyone, I do assert my right to ignore the claims of anyone who says they are offended.

******************************************************************

Nothing new about cartoons which mock religion!

Posted on National Secular Society website: Thu, 08 Apr 2021 by Bob Forder

Religious leaders have long feared irreverent drawings that could challenge their authority. We should remember that amid the latest effort to prevent the use of Muhammad cartoons, says Bob Forder.

In recent weeks there's been another furious response to the use of Muhammad cartoons – this time in an educational setting, at Batley Grammar School in Yorkshire.

There is nothing new about cartoons being used as a device to poke fun at the religious. They have been a contentious source of blasphemy prosecutions and allegations ever since technical developments enabled their mass print production.

An early example is Leo Taxil's 'La Bible Amusante', which satirised what Taxil regarded as biblical inconsistencies and absurdities. G.W. Foote latched onto the cartoons in this book when he founded The Freethinker in 1881. He would undoubtedly have been encouraged by efforts to have Taxil's book banned in this country. From the outset Foote republished some of the cartoons as 'Comic Bible Sketches', although they were supplemented by others. More than anything else it was cartoons that made The Freethinker notorious and the reason the newspaper was such an immediate success in terms of its circulation.

At the same time, the leading US freethought newspaper The Truthseeker was publishing Watson Heston's cartoons (example below), which satirised biblical passages and celebrated US secularism and secular heroes like Thomas Paine. These were later collected together in books such as 'The Bible Comically Illustrated' and 'The Freethinkers' Pictorial Textbook'. These caused quite a rumpus, although little is known about Watson Heston.

Both D.M. Bennett (who founded The Truthseeker) and Foote were clear about the purpose of their cartoons. They reasoned that if you laugh at priests or ministers you can't take them seriously and they therefore lose authority. He had a point – and the same could be said for imams as for priests. I think this accounts in large part for the furious response in Batley.

Foote was eventually prosecuted for blasphemy (partly for the special 1882 Christmas number of The Freethinker, which was a cartoonists' feast). I include a copy of the cartoon from the front page (see main image). Other contents included a cartoon strip "A new life of Christ" and a particularly contentious cartoon "Moses getting a back view" with a quotation from Exodus "And it shall come to pass that I will put thee in a clift of the rock, and I shall take away my hand, and thou shalt see my back parts". The cartoon features a rather startled Moses staring at a pair of well-filled check trousers with a tear in the rear. None of this has me rolling around with laughter, but I can understand the furious response provoked in 1882 – and Foote's courage in publishing them.

Foote got a year in Holloway Gaol and was widely regarded as a hero and martyr in National Secular Society circles. It was this that ensured he became president when Charles Bradlaugh – the NSS's founder – resigned in 1890.

The Charlie Hebdo cartoons were published for similar reasons and are part of the same tradition.

There is, however, a significant difference between now and then. Those who objected in the 19th century were largely part of an elite which held a privileged position in society as a whole, embodied and supported by the established church. In some ways those demanding retribution in Batley can be considered amongst the least privileged in society and, for them, this is an issue tightly linked to their ethnicity and sense of identity.

This makes the issue far more complex and helps explain the disappointing woolly thinking, platitudes and fudge about the need to engage and listen that has crept in amongst what might loosely be termed the liberal left. But those condoning the dangerous and over-hasty behaviour of the Batley Grammar School governors and management really need to think again.

Secularism is a fundamental liberal democratic principle. The strength and success of liberal democracy rests not only on principles such as fair elections but also on the assumption that the political system accommodates all religions and beliefs with equal respect and access, apart from those intent on its overthrow.

A failure to understand this, and the freedom of speech it entails, is the real threat to us all, particularly the less privileged. Freedom of speech must entail a right to offend, however regrettable this might seem.

Sadly, the array of religious and community leaders (some self-appointed) assembled outside Batley Grammar School purport to represent a less privileged community. But giving in will simply enhance and protect these leaders' own status and position within their community, at others' expense, and run the risk of that community becoming further isolated from society at large.

**********************************************************************

Secular Society slams Headmaster Kibble

Editorial explanation:

Below we publish a letter sent from the Chief Executive of the NATIONAL SECULAR SOCIETY on March 26th, to Gary Kibble, the headmaster of Batley Grammar School, who confronted with a mob of Muslim parents who began protesting about a teacher at Batley Grammar School when had used a cartoon of the Islamic prophet Muhammad in a lesson on religous studies last month. This letter below draws attention to the unfortunate signal this sends out to those who wish to bully educationalists and to interfere in the culture of a free society, and to undermine the process of free expression.

*********************************************************************

Mr Gary Kibble, headteacher

Batley Grammar School

Carlinghow Hill,

Batley

West Yorkshire,

WF17 0AD

Cc Batley Grammar School Local Governing Body

Rt Hon Gavin Williamson CBE, Secretary of State for Education

26, March 2021

Dear Mr Kibble,

We are writing in response to the school’s actions following protests regarding the use of a cartoon of the Islamic prophet Muhammad. We hope, first and foremost, that the school’s first priority is the safety and wellbeing of the staff memberin question, in addition to the safety of other staff and pupils. The situation has disturbing echoes of the killing of Samuel Paty, the history teacher murdered by a Muslim fanatic who objected to his use of cartoons from Charlie Hebdo in a class about freedom of expression. We were disappointed at the school’s immediate response, which included the suspension of the teacher; an unequivocal apology for using a “totally inappropriate” resource; and withdrawing teaching on the associated subject.

We are further concerned by claims that this statement was in part written by a representative of one of the groups protesting. The protesters are clearly seeking to attempt to impose a blasphemy taboo which will restrict the freedom to teach. The ir bullying tactics appear to have succeeded. The school’s initial response was to acquiesce to religious demands. This was unfair to the teacher in question and will further fuel a climate of censorship brought on by demands to accommodate unreasonable, reactionary religious views. By issuing an immediate apology rather than defending the principle of free expression, one of the most precious pillars of our liberal democratic society, the school is siding with religious fundamentalists. Teachers should have a reasonable degree of freedom to explore sensitive subjects and enable students to think critically. Education should open minds rather than close them. Those responsible for our children’s education must therefore place a high value on the fundament al right to freedom of expression, which is applicable to ideas that may shock and offend as well as those which are received favourably.

Your actions have sent the opposite message to students. This incident is also likely to undermine teachers’ freedom to do their jobs, on any number of sensitive subjects, both within your school gates and beyond. It is patronising to assume that all British Muslims will take offence at the use of a cartoon. We urge you to keep in mind that the protesters who shout loudest are not representative of all Muslims. We understand that your school wants to promote cohesion and inclusivity. But this cannot be achieved by pandering to religious groups who wish to dictate what can and cannot be taught within the school. We ask for an explanation of the rationale behind your decisions on this issue. And as investigations are carried out into the matter, we urge you to uphold the vital principle of free speech and not submit to the unreasonable demands of those who seek to impose blasphemy taboos on society as a whole. We look forward to your response.

We are considering this an open letter.

Yours sincerely,

Stephen Evans

Chief executive, National Secular Society

“Farce”, education union funds Muslim charity that publicised Batley teacher’s name

FROM 'The Foxhole' website

1 April 2021

A teacher’s union has given £3,000 to a controversial Muslim charity linked to the Batley RS teacher’s ongoing suspension, the Telegraph reveals.

Batley Grammar School hit the headlines last week after angry members of the local Muslim community amassed outside the school’s premises calling for the teacher’s dismissal after he had shown his class images of the Prophet Muhammad. Caving in to pressure, the teacher was suspended and the school issued a grovelling apology.

Purpose of Life caused astonishment on the back of the events in revealing the teacher’s name. He and his family then went into hiding, fearing jihadist reprisals. The charity’s leader, Mohammad Sajad Hussain was invited onto Talk Radio and asked whether he did not think he had a responsibility to avoid inflaming the situation, having accused the teacher of “terrorism” and “insulting Islam”.

Asked five times by host, Julia Hartley-Brewer whether he thought showing images of the Prophet was worse than beheadings, Hussain only said no at the fifth and final time of asking.

Earlier this week, the father of the teacher said his son’s life was in danger. “Eventually they will get my son and he knows this. His whole world has been turned upside down. He’s devastated and crushed,” he told the Daily Mail.

The distraught father also said the school had thrown “him under a bus”. Purpose of Life continues to call for his sacking.

Now it has been discovered the union representing Batley grammar gave a generous donation to the charity, which then posted a video on social media thanking the now-disgraced union.

Reacting to the contribution made by its Kirklees branch, the National Education Union admitted the West Yorkshire charity should “never have published” the teacher’s name. The NEU spokesperson pointed out that Purpose of Life had “now withdrawn the name and apologised”, adding: “We would ask all media and all other organisations to refrain from naming names. We believe this to be a major breach of privacy with serious repercussions for our member.”

A spokesperson for the Charity Commission said: “We are aware of this matter. We have contacted the trustees of Purpose of Life for further information and their response to our regulatory concerns – this will inform our next steps. We cannot comment further at this time.”

Dr Paul Stott of freedom and democracy think tank, the Henry Jackson Society was much more forthright: “There is now a real question mark about the ability of the NEU to represent its members at Batley Grammar School. That the Kirklees branch of the NEU has funded an organisation that calls for the sacking of a schoolteacher for doing his job is lamentable.

“The NEU now needs to review the organisations it funds and works with to avoid a repetition of this farce.”

****************************************************************

Batley Grammar School capitulation

by Brendan O’Neill in The Spectator

The capitulation of Batley Grammar School has been a truly dispiriting sight. In response to protests by angry Muslims it has suspended a teacher for the supposed offence of showing a caricature of Muhammad to his pupils. This is an extraordinary act of moral cowardice. Batley Grammar has buckled to religious extremists, cravenly begging for forgiveness for something that ought to be perfectly acceptable in an institution of learning — encouraging young people to engage with and discuss controversial issues.

Everything about the Batley Grammar controversy stinks. It began when a teacher at the prestigious West Yorkshire school, as part of a religious education class, showed his pupils an image of Muhammad. Some Muslim groups that caught wind of this fact started stomping their feet. Mohammad Sajad Hussain of the Islamic charity Purpose Of Life said Muslims will feel ‘deeply hurt’ by the teacher’s behaviour and demanded that he be ‘permanently removed’. At 7.30am yesterday morning a group of mostly young men gathered at the school demanding that the teacher be sacked for the allegedly awful sin of displaying an image of the Prophet.

What happened next was staggering, even by the standards of today’s yellow-bellied culture of self-censorship. Batley Grammar’s headmaster, Gary Kibble, suspended the teacher — pending an investigation — and issued a ‘sincere’ and ‘unequivocal’ apology for the ‘totally inappropriate’ display of the Muhammad image. The school also put on hold the part of the religious-studies course in which the Muhammad incident occurred. And it is being reported this morning that the school has switched to remote learning, telling teachers and kids to stay home.

Forget the religious-studies teacher, who was only doing his job by encouraging his kids to confront all sorts of issues head-on. The true scandal here is the behaviour of the school. It has surrendered to religious intolerance. What next — Mr Kibble standing outside the school gates and flagellating himself for the blasphemous transgression of allowing an image of Muhammad to appear in one of his classrooms?

Bizarrely — but also predictably — the school has been cheered on by so-called progressives. Tracey Brabin, the Labour MP for Batley, says she is glad the school has recognised ‘the upset and offence’ it has caused and has now ‘apologised for the offence caused’. Well done for repenting — that’s effectively what Brabin is saying.

So is it Labour policy to support the suspension of teachers who hold open, frank discussions about Islam? Does Labour support the punishment of public servants who are accused of engaging in blasphemy? We should be told. Many Labour voters in Yorkshire and elsewhere will be keen to know if Labour now backs the public shaming of people who are accused of holding blasphemous thoughts against Islam.

That’s surely the central point in all of this: Britain is not an Islamic country. We do not live under Sharia law. It might be a punishable offence in Islamic nations to make or display an image of Muhammad, but it isn’t here. So what is going on? Why has a teacher been suspended and a school reportedly closed over something that is perfectly legal and perfectly acceptable in an educational context: encouraging discussion of religious icons and controversies?

Batley Grammar’s capitulation will inflame religious intolerance. It will embolden those who believe they have the right to bully and silence anyone who ‘disrespects’ Islam. Moral cowardice is the fuel of contemporary censorship. It is the negative energy on which the zealous crusaders for speech-control feast and get fat. Every time a cultural institution, a publisher or a school yields to the demands of the easily offended, the arrogance of modern censorship intensifies and faith in liberty dims further.

The idea of ‘Islamophobia’ plays a central role in contemporary censorship in Britain. Batley Grammar is being accused by some of inflaming Islamophobic sentiments. This is a slippery way of conflating discussion of Islam with racism; of treating critical discussion about a world religion as a species of racial hatred. But of course, as everyone ought to know, it is perfectly possible to criticise Islamic ideas and even to ‘diss’ Muhammad without harbouring a single hateful thought against the Muslim community.

This controversy is more than dispiriting — it is chilling. The teacher has reportedly been given police protection. That isn’t surprising given that, just a few months ago, a schoolteacher in France was beheaded by a radical Islamist for also initiating a classroom discussion about images of Muhammad. In such a climate anyone who is whipping up opposition to the Batley teacher, or engaging in spineless apologetics for those who are, should be utterly ashamed of themselves.

This teacher needs our support. The school has failed to give him its support, so perhaps the Prime Minister will? Boris Johnson, teachers in 21st-century Britain should be free to engage mature pupils in discussions about Islam and Muhammad — correct?

Brendan O’Neill is the editor of Spiked, the online magazine.

What A Farce by Les May

A RECENT article in The Telegraph claimed that the Kirklees branch of the National Education Union (NEU) gave £3,000 to Purpose of Life, a charity based in West Yorkshire, which later published online the name of the teacher at the centre of the row at Batley Grammar School.

As well as accusing the teacher of 'terrorism' and 'insulting Islam', the group's chief executive, Mohammad Sajad Hussain, said that the charity would not work with the school again until the Religous Studies teacher is 'permanently removed'.

The Kirklees branch is, of course, the one ‘supporting’ the teacher through the disciplinary process initiated by the school. Quite why this NEU branch thought that this donation was an appropriate use of its members’ union fees is unclear.

**********************************************************

Blasphemy Laws By Stealth? by Les May

IN Great Britain the common law offence of blasphemy was abolished in May 2008. Which suggest that the recent BBC News headline ‘Batley Grammar School: Blasphemy debate leaves town at crossroads’ is not simply misleading but mischievous. For more than 150 years before that it had been restricted to protecting the "tenets and beliefs of the Church of England". It has not been missed as the last case in which anyone went to jail was in 1922 when John William Gott was sentenced to nine months hard labour for comparing Jesus with a circus clown. There is no record of whether God thought this was necessary.

A late amendment to the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006 contained a clause which reads "Nothing in this Part shall be read or given effect in a way which prohibits or restricts discussion, criticism or expressions of antipathy, dislike, ridicule, insult or abuse of particular religions or the beliefs or practices of their adherents, or of any other belief system or the beliefs or practices of its adherents, or proselytising or urging adherents of a different religion or belief system to cease practising their religion or belief system."

The legislation has been attacked by a number of Muslims on the basis that it is too rigidly drawn, and that the scope of the offence of incitement to religious hatred is too narrow. The amendment noted above was inserted after campaigns by religious and secular groups, and comedians and satirists who were concerned that as originally drafted the act to hinder free speech.

In an Australian case brought by the Islamic Council of Victoria citing the Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001, which applies to public behaviour not personal beliefs, the outcome was a statement agreed to by both parties which affirmed everyone's rights to "robustly debate religion including the right to criticise the religious belief of another, in a free, open and democratic society".

In a nutshell the actions of the teacher in the Batley Grammar School case were not unlawful in the UK. Had the intension been to vilify Muslims rather than to discuss blasphemy it would have fallen within the scope of the act.

The protests outside Batley Grammar School are an attempt to introduce a new blasphemy law by stealth.

***********************************************************************

Western liberals’ weakness on blasphemy is letting down Muslim dissenters

Posted on the National Secular Society website by Kunwar Khuldune Shahid on Wed, 31 Mar 2021

The hand-wringing in the face of a vicious campaign against a teacher sends a demoralising message to those fighting for free speech on religion globally and in British Muslim communities, says Kunwar Khuldune Shahid.

The Batley Grammar School teacher who has been suspended, and gone into hiding, after showing a caricature of Islam's prophet Muhammad in class last week, now understandably worries that he might be killed. While the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) worries that the teacher may have shown an image that "plays into" an "Islamophobic trope", and many on the Western left similarly wring their hands, it remains unclear if fearing for one's life over offending Islam also constitutes a phobia. Others, graciously, have responded by quickly condemning 'extremists on both sides', as if the defence of liberal principles were equivalent to Islamist intimidation.

After the satirical French publication Charlie Hebdo was targeted in a jihadist attack, the gruesome murder of its journalists was rationalised through the 'Islamophobia' that it was guilty of, for treating Islam like any other religion. When French schoolteacher Samuel Paty was decapitated after showing Charlie Hebdo's caricatures in school, 'Islamophobia' once again became the rallying cry.

At first it was a publication's act of satirising Islam that translated into asking to be murdered. Now it's teachers showing those cartoons in lessons on blasphemy that is translating into 'asking for it'. Next it may well be critics of this blatant endorsement of Islamic blasphemy laws in the West who might 'ask for it'.

This gruesome eventuality has long been a reality in Muslim-majority countries, where individuals have been killed for mere criticism of the blasphemy laws. A dozen Muslim states sanction death for blasphemy and apostasy, and 20 mandate prison sentences. The day the Batley Grammar School teacher was suspended, and left at the mercy of radical Islamists, yet another man was killed for blasphemy in Pakistan. Since then, over the past week, radical Islamists have initiated violent protests in Bangladesh demanding, among other means of institutionalised persecution, capital punishment for blasphemy against Islam. On Tuesday, a man was burnt to death in Nigeria for 'insulting prophet Muhammad'.

It is impossible to separate the Islamist blasphemy laws in Muslim-majority countries and the demands to silence critique, caricaturing and satire of Islam by Muslim minorities. It shouldn't need saying but it is actually possible to uncompromisingly defend the rights of minorities, and shield them from majoritarian groups, without mollycoddling them over regressive and often downright bigoted beliefs.

Similarly, drawing cartoons or mocking religious beliefs as satire, or exposing believers to ideas completely antipodal to their beliefs in critical learning settings, do not constitute persecution. An offence, or its gravity, needs to be universally applicable and cannot be determined by the reaction of a group. Otherwise, we're a Hindutva attack on a steakhouse away from equating beef cuisine with persecution of Hindus.

Sketches or depictions of Muhammad are no more prohibited in Islam than cow slaughter is in Hinduism; or more poignantly, no more offensive than Hindu wives outliving husbands was two centuries ago. Europe consumed centuries over 'religion wars' between Christian sects which found one another's beliefs offensive. The rise of a radical, and puritanical, literalist brand of Islam, impacting Muslim majorities and minorities alike, is a corollary of a similar sectarian warfare within Islam today.

Some interpretations of Islam have long incorporated the tradition of drawing Muhammad, which means that the ubiquitous claims masquerading as fact that 'Islam prohibits depictions of Muhammad' or that 'Muslims are offended' by such illustrations paints all Muslims with a monolithic, and arguably regressive, brush.

However, even if there is a 'true' version of religion that might uphold certain beliefs, and even if every single one of its billions of adherents were to endorse them identically, that still cannot be used as justification to suppress rights, including the fundamental freedom of speech. And the only legal asterisk on this right should be explicit incitement to violence.

Again, to hold offended sensibilities as the limit of free speech is to not only fail miserably in understanding the very need for protection of such a freedom — since what is acceptable by all doesn't have to be guarded. It is also to constantly lower the threshold of what is 'offensive'. Even more critically, it can shield ideologues from countering viewpoints, which often is the raison d'etre of protests undertaken by those believing their ideas to be the ultimate truth.

Perhaps most pungently, endorsement of this censorship on the part of Western liberals makes it harder to normalise criticism of religion and undermines the fight against Islamic blasphemy laws that hang like a sword over millions in Muslim-majority countries. More than just an ideological regression on the part of the left, such upholding of Islamist ideas has even translated into European courts upholding blasphemy laws that many from Muslim majority countries are escaping from. And in acquiescing to the Islamist narrative in the garb of 'protecting Muslims', liberals in the West have not only abandoned dissidents in Muslim-majority countries, they have also helped facilitate regression of Muslim minorities in their own countries.

When the MCB's first ever female leader was asked questions that would be considered extremely basic for any other community, those otherwise unflinching in their quest for gender quality instinctively shouted 'Islamophobia'. Much of the western left embraces the MCB's calls for 'inclusivity' and 'care' when faced with cartoons. It showed less interest when, for example, an Ahmadi Muslim shopkeeper was killed in an Islamist attack in 2016 – and the Muslim Council of Britain's focus was declaring that 'Ahmadis are not Muslims'.

Shouldn't such marginalisation or violence committed for Islam, or the fear of one's life over cartoons on Islam, be the bigger concern here?

Shouldn't more energy be dedicated towards elimination of this widespread belief, codified in many Muslim-majority countries, but also preached in many mosques in the West, that blasphemy against Islam merits death?

One doesn't have to be a linguist to discern the contrast between statements issued by many Muslim community groups over killings in the name of Islam, and satire of Islam.

Indeed, Western liberals are complicit in facilitating these Islamic blasphemy narratives around the world. For, when states otherwise upholding free speech on religion start backtracking, those living in countries where blasphemy still mandates death will have little hope.

Kunwar Khuldune Shahid is a writer and social commentator based in Pakistan. The views expressed in our blogs are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the NSS.

Batley Grammar School suspended two more teachers amid row over cartoon of the Prophet Muhammad

By Benjamin Russell April 1, 2021 1:58 pm

Head teacher Gary Kibble announced that the unnamed teacher in his 20s had been suspended while the school investigated complaints by parents

The school at the centre of a row over pupils being shown a cartoon of the prophet Muhammed has suspended two other teachers, it has been reported.

One teacher suspended by Batley Grammar School in West Yorkshire has had to go into hiding with his partner and four children after receiving death threats over a Charlie Hebdo cartoon of the prophet being used during a religious studies lesson.

Head teacher Gary Kibble announced that the unnamed teacher in his 20s had been suspended while the school investigated complaints by parents, but it has now emerged that two other teachers were also sent home but this was not revealed to the public over fears of wider criticism.

Speaking to MailOnline, a source told how looking at blasphemy had been part of the curriculum, but Mr Kibble had not authorised showing of the cartoon.

The source said: “Two other teachers are also being investigated but the school has been trying to keep it secret because they don’t want attention being drawn to the fact that this went beyond the actions of one person.

“They were not in the class at time but were aware that offensive material was going to be used.”

The also confirmed that the image that a pupil complained about to his parents was from the French satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo and depicted the Prophet Muhammad wearing a bomb instead of a turban on his head.

They added: “Blasphemy features on the school curriculum and images have been used before by teachers. But not this one. This was the first time that this particular image was shown during a lesson.

“This picture was not part of the approved teaching materials and we do not know why the teacher chose it. This is why the head of the RE department is being investigated and another RE teacher because it appears, there were no proper checks in place.

“There is nothing to suggest that either of them used this particular image themselves in lessons, but they knew what was going on and it points to a breakdown in the system.”

It comes as a petition to reinstate the first teacher known to be suspended has reached almost 70,000 signatures.

The Communities Secretary, Robert Jenrick, said suggestions the teacher was in hiding were “very disturbing”.

Mr Jenrick said: “It must be right that a teacher can appropriately show images of the Prophet Mohammed.

“In a free society, we want religions to be taught to children and for children to be able to question and query them.”

He added: “I was disturbed to see scenes of people protesting out.side the school – that is not right

“We shouldn’t have teachers, members of staff of schools, feeling intimidated, and the reports that a teacher may even be in hiding is very disturbing.

“That is not a road we want to go down in this country, so I would strongly urge people who are concerned about this issue not to do that.”

The i has contacted the school for comment.

*******************************************************************

ASIAN VOICE: Petition for re-instating Batley Grammar School Professor

Tuesday 30th March 2021 09:05 EDT

A Batley Grammar School teacher who triggered protests after showing a cartoon of Prophet Mohammed is believed to be afraid that he and his family will be murdered, his father has reported.

The religious studies professor remains in hiding after receiving death threats and has told his family “it’s all over” and he will never be able to return to his job or his home, The Telegraph reported. The professor was described as a “terrorist” in a letter from one community leader. The West Yorkshire school sent pupils home last week and issued an apology after the parents of Muslim children gathered at the gates to protest.

The teacher’s father in a statement to The Telegraph said, “My son keeps breaking down crying and says that it's all over for him. He is worried that he and his family are all going to be killed. He knows that he's not going to be able to return to work or live in Batley. It's just going to be too dangerous for him and his family.”

In the meantime, a petition from a student of Batley Grammar School noted, “The professor was trying to educate students about racism and blasphemy. He warned the students before showing the images and he had the intent to educate them. He does not deserve such large repercussions. He is not racist and did not support the Islamiphobic cartoons in any manner." This has got out of hand and due to this, students have missed out on lessons because of "peaceful" protestors.

It further notes, “The issue is already nationwide. The professor has already apologised and has been suspended. Against all odds, students wish to make a statement and reinstate him back as a teacher in Batley Grammar School due to his pure intentions. Join with us and make a statement before this is a repeat of what happened to the teacher in France when he showed the same pictures.”

********************************************************

130 imams and scholars urge PM to condemn Batley school teacher

By

5Pillars (RMS) - 2 months ago

Over 130 imams and Islamic scholars have written to the Prime Minister urging him to condemn the showing of blasphemous cartoons to Muslim children at Batley Grammar School.

In an open letter to Boris Johnson, the imams and scholars say the incident was an attempt to incite hatred and Islamophobia whilst pushing forward extremist white supremacist ideology.

So far three teachers have been suspended over the incident which has led to widespread outrage within the Muslim community. On the other hand, right-wing media, politicians and civil society commentators have supported the actions of the teacher.

The letter was organised by the Muslim Action Forum. Below is the letter and list of signatories in full:

Dear Prime Minister,

We the undersigned British Muslim citizens and scholars are writing to express our unequivocal condemnation of the depiction of the caricature of our Holy Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him, by the RE teacher at Batley Grammar School. It is inconceivable that such a depiction in an RE lesson can be based on the notion of discussing “freedom of speech” or even a critique of the personality of the Holy Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him. It was prima facie, based on the usual attempt of inciting hatred and Islamophobia whilst pushing forward extremist white supremacist ideology, which inevitably creates chaos and anarchy.

The hallmark of any civilised society cannot be the freedom to abuse and provoke certain members of society. Current legal proscription of xenophobic, anti-Semitic, homophobic, and other language of incitement of violence, ensures that we all remain in the realm of civil society. Why is it then that hatred against Muslims and Islamophobia is so widely defended and accepted? Surely, in sowing such seeds of hatred, we only advance the vested agenda of a tiny minority of extremists on all sides, that seek to gain from any form of chaos and anarchy. Depicting the caricatures of the Holy Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him, will inevitably offend and provoke the feelings of 1.6 billion Muslims on this planet, and this cannot be unintentional or an act of a civilised member of society.

There are some who stand in solidarity with the teacher, guided by their blind hatred of the Muslim community in our country. They fail to understand how the love of the Holy Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him means more to every Muslim than everything else that is dear to them. In a world where many are self-centred, egotistical, and selfish members of society, they fail to understand how a man who lived over 1400 years ago can be more meaningful to over 1.6 billion Muslims than their own dear lives.

The global coronavirus pandemic has taught us that there are issues within society in which we are one, we must care for each other otherwise we end up dying together. We need to cling onto those issues that help us to learn to live together and uphold common values to ensure a civilised society. The outcomes of the heinous acts of the teacher inevitably lead to shaking the fabrics of our society, greatly damaging social cohesion and harmony. We invite you as Prime Minister, the political head of our country, and as our fellow British citizen, to stand with British Muslims in the condemnation of such divisive actions. The reprehensible actions of the teacher are a call to action to all civilised members of our society to unequivocally condemn such intentional behaviour.

We welcome the actions of the governors of the Batley Grammar School to suspend not only the teacher in question, but also the other co-conspirators, who designed this attack on our civilised society. The whole of the British Muslim community shall critically observe the next steps that the school takes to ensure that justice is done.

Kind regards,

Shaykh Faiz Siddiqi, Muslim Action Forum

Imam Adil Shahzad, Bradford

Imam Khalid Hussain, Leicester

Shaikh Tauqir Ishaq, Nuneaton

Shaykh Zain Siddiqi, Birmingham

Shaykh Noor Siddiqi, Coventry

Shaykh Waseem Ahmed, Manchester

Mufti Wajid Iqbal, Bradford

Shaykh Mohsin Haveliwala, Bolton

Mufti Nizamuddin Misbahi, Blackburn

Mufti Muhammad Qasim Zia, Sheffield

Shaykh Shabaz Ahmed, Ashton-under-Lyne

Shaykh Zahid Sharif, Ashton-under-Lyne

Imam Muhammad Anis, Birmingham

Imam Husnain Yaqoob, Nottingham

Imam Muhammad Amir, Stoke-on-Trent

Imam Abdul Rasool Alwari, Preston

Maulana Muhammad Kaleem, Bolton

Mufti Muhammad Naseerullah Naqshabandi, Bolton

Shaykh Sayyid Muhammad Irfany, Bolton

Sayyid Muhammad Hamdani, Bolton

Shaykh Sayyid Muhammad Samdani, Bolton

Shaykh Sayyid Muhammad Zarkani, Bolton

Professor Muhammad Masood Hazarvi, Luton

Imam Mohammed Bilal, Peterborough

Imam Sudagar Hussain, Bradford

Imam Adeel Attari, Bradford

Imam Muhammad Adeeb, Stoke-on-Trent

Imam Qari Muhammad Ayub, Stoke-on-Trent

Maulana Atif Jabbar Haidary, Birmingham

Shaykh Muhammad Farooq Nazami, Birmingham

Imam Hafiz Muhammad Bashir, Birmingham

Imam Barkat Ahmed, Birmingham

Imam Hafiz Akhtar Ali, Southampton

Shaykh Sufi Arshad Mahmood, Leeds

Imam Hafiz Muhammad Ali, Southampton

Mufti Muhammad Saqib Qadri, Oldham

Mohammed Shafiq, Ramadhan Foundation, Rochdale

Imam Muhammad Qasim Qadri, Nottingham

Shaykh Naveed Jameel, Nottingham

Imam Muhammad Asrar, Nottingham

Shaykh Muhammad Naveed Ashrafi, Blackburn

Imam Hafiz Muhammad Ali, Warrington

Imam Hafiz Amjad Mahmood, Bury

Shaykh Qari Mohammad Tayyab, Manchester

Mufti Muhammad Qasim, Manchester

Imam Muhammad Ilyas, Manchester

Mufti Muhammad Rubel, Manchester

Imam Hafiz Muhammad Ozair, Manchester

Imam Hafiz Muhammad Omair, Manchester

Imam Hafiz Muhammad Yasin, Manchester

Imam Hafiz Muhammad Fahim, Manchester

Allama Hafiz Muhammad Zia, Birmingham

Maulana Muhammad Umar, Birmingham

Maulana Muhammad Zahoor, Birmingham

Syed Muhammad Riaz Barkati, Accrington

Imam Mobashir Iqbal, Manchester

Shaykh Muhammad Din Sialvi, Nelson

Hafiz Niaz Ahmad Siddiqee, Birmingham

Mufti Wali Raza Rizvi, Worcester

Imam Hassnain Raza Siddiqee, Birmingham

Imam Hafiz Faisal Javed, Birmingham

Imam Abbas Ashra, Newcastle

Shaykh Muhammad Yaseen, Birmingham

Imam Hafiz Zulkarnain, Leicester

Imam Muhammad Maruf, Eccles

Imam Hafiz Muhammad Iftikhar, Manchester

Shaykh Syed Munawar Hussain Shah Bukhari, Blackburn

Shaykh Syed Sajjad Hussain Shah Bukhari, Blackburn

Syed Talha Bukhari, Blackburn

Syed Usama Bukhari, Blackburn

Allama Nawaz Hazarvi, Peterborough

Shaykh Mufti Ansar ul Qadri, Bradford

Syed Muhammad Zafarullah Shah, Birmingham

Mufti Fazl Ahmed Qadri, Derby

Shaykh Pir Mohammad Dilshad Hussain al-Qadri, Leeds

Shaykh Pir Tayyab-Ur-Rehman, Birmingham

Allama Qari Mahmood Ul Hassan Farashwi, Walthamstow

Allama Nabeel Afzal Qadri, Coventry

Allama Mohammed Zahoor, Oldham

Imam Hafiz Ghulam Rasool, Black Country

Shaykha Rukia Bi Mahmood, Stoke-on-Trent

Ustadha Nz Shahid, Sandwell

Ustadha Tahira, Oldbury

Ustadha Shazia, Smethwick

Ustadha Zaib, Oldbury

Ustadha Naila, West Bromwich

Ustadha Ghazala, Tipton

Ustadha Nasrin, Tipton

Imam Muhammad Hafeez, Tyseley

Imam Sajid Mahmood, Walsall

Imam Hashmi, Dudley

Imam Hafiz Akram, Dudley

Imam Hafiz Shafiq, Tividale

Imam Hafiz Yaqub, West Bromwich

Imam Syed Nazir Shah, West Bromwich

Qari Muhammad Yunus, Tipton

Imam Hafiz Siddique, Oldbury

Imam Hafiz Muzammil, Tipton

Imam Hafiz Rayharn, Sandwell

Imam Hafiz Abdul Qadir, Blackheath

Imam Hafiz Abdulla Sultani, Erdington

Imam Hafiz Dilpazir, Erdington

Imam Hafiz Abdul Ghafoor Chisti, Birmingham

Imam Hafiz Allah Baksh, Birmingham

Imam Hafiz Muhammad Miyan, Manchester

Imam Hafiz Shabraz, Wolverhampton

Imam Yusuf Qamar, Lye, West Midlands

Imam Maulana Munawwar, Smethwick

Imam Qadhi Sajid Zaffar, Birmingham

Shaykh Mohammad Arshad Misbahi, Manchester

Imam Abdul Hafeez Aziz, Bradford

Molana Muhammad Islam, Birmingham

Imam Asim Hussain, Bradford

Mufti Qari Saeed, Newcastle

Allama Ayub Chishti, Blackburn

Allama Masood Qadri, Bolton

Allama Muhammad Husein Qadri, Bolton

Imam Subhanoor Chowdhury, Leicester

Allama Zafar Mahmood Farashwi, Manchester

Imam Qari Muhammad Aurangzeb, Manchester

Shaykh Sabir Ali, Bolton

Mufti Tahir Ali, Bolton

Imam Tayyub Ali, Bolton

Imam Azhar Ali, Bolton

Shaykh Syed Ghulam Dastgir Shah, Halifax

Sahibzada Junaid Akhtar, Birmingham

Allama Sajjad Razwi, Halifax

Syed Usman Ali al-Qadri, Bradford

Imam Hafiz Mohammed Razvi al-Qadri, Leicester

Nadir Muhammad, Centre for Muslim Policy Research, London

Imam Hafiz Uthman, Birmingham

Shoaib Malik, Muslim Action Forum – National Co-ordinator, Warrington