Pandering to religious tribalism by Chris Sloggett.

EDITOR'S NOTE:

Chris Sloggett wrote the opinion piece below on the 2nd, July on the National Secular Society website.

********************************************8************************

VOTERS and politicians who value social cohesion and basic democratic principles should reject the trend of pandering to religious tribalism, says Chris Sloggett.

The recent events at Batley Grammar School are well-documented, but still shocking to recount. A loud group of intolerant Muslims gathered at the gates of a school demanding a teacher's dismissal because they objected to a resource he used in class. The school suspended the teacher and issued a grovelling apology. The teacher faced threats, and soon afterwards two of his colleagues were also suspended.

A local investigation has found that the resource which the teacher showed - a cartoon of Islam's prophet Muhammad - was not used with any ill intent. The teacher was nominally reinstated. But he and his colleagues can't return to work because they fear they could be attacked. Meanwhile the investigation has effectively enforced a blasphemy taboo on the school by saying the cartoon, or similar ones, shouldn't be used again.

The teacher at the centre of the row has been driven out of the area and into hiding. The mob that hounded him has got what it wanted. Other schools around the country will have taken note.

And the politicians have moved on. The Department for Education has called on parents to accept the outcome of the local investigation. The department and others have presented this as if it's some kind of reasonable compromise. But anyone who cares about teachers' freedom to do their jobs without facing intimidation and threats - on this issue or any other - should say what this is: a meek surrender to demands for censorship.

When the protests first broke out many politicians and commentators wrung their hands. Some called for calm, but the message was often that the main concern lay in the minutiae of a handful of teachers' decisions about how to present a particular lesson in one school.

The grubby Batley and Spen by-election, which limped to a close...., helped to highlight the price to be paid for this. When the issue came up during the campaign, mainstream candidates' responses smacked of fear, self-interest and short-termist thinking. They either doggedly avoided it or offered responses which were weak to the point of meaninglessness, as a piece from Batley by Dan Hodges in The Mail on Sunday highlighted this weekend. Meanwhile George Galloway spotted an opportunity to weaponise the issue to try to win over some reactionary Muslim voters, saying the school had "absolutely no right" to use the cartoon.

Did the politicians think their positions were right, or did they just not want to upset a perceived bloc vote? Either way, this collective wall of silence was alarmingly predictable. It's now a standard tactic to treat large swathes of voters primarily as members of various religious 'communities', and to appeal to them through the gatekeepers who claim to speak for them.

But this approach sends the message that religious identity groups can make increasingly unreasonable demands and nobody will dare to say no to them. In Batley, there seems to have been a widespread unspoken agreement that freedom of expression - the most important freedom which citizens in a democracy enjoy - could be treated as a commodity and signed away for electoral convenience.

Politicians should beware where the multi-communal game leads. If they rely on religious identity politics to shore up their support, they'll come under pressure to extend more privileges to particular religious groups. Others will organise along competing identitarian lines, or grow bewildered that politicians appear uninterested in them. The principle that we all enjoy equal citizenship and that politicians should seek to serve all of our interests will be further frayed.

There will also be fertile ground for bad actors of various stripes. The Batley and Spen campaign was marred by inter-communal tensions and intimidatory tactics, including homophobic intimidation aimed at Labour candidate Kim Leadbeater. More moderate and reasonable voices, such as a group of Muslim women who rejected the authority of a "loud minority" of Muslim men this week, faced an uphill battle to make themselves heard. Several far right candidates also spotted an opportunity to advance their agendas.

This ugly campaign should be a prompt to pause and reconsider. Indulging religious tribalism is risky and unsustainable. Voters and politicians who value social cohesion and basic democratic principles should unite against it.

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

Rolling In The Cess Pit by Les May

IN an article on the NV blog a couple of weeks ago I referred to something I wrote at the end of June 2020. I commented that having read some of the abusive posts directed at Priyamvada Gopal, who had posted a ‘tweet’ which said “I’ll say it again. White Lives Don’t Matter. As white lives”, I thought you would meet nicer turds in a slurry pit.

A long article by Brendan O’Neill on the Spiked Online website graphically describes the vile abuse directed at author J. K. Rowling. From the context it appears that it came via her Twitter account, which of course means the brave authors could remain anonymous.

My own experience of anonymous communications is somewhat limited. I had one letter from an unknown ‘Christian’ in 1970 after I wrote to the local paper saying that I did not think that the Muslim children at the school I worked at should be made to attend what was in effect a Christian oriented morning assembly. I had another in 2010 after I had the temerity to point out in the same paper that Canada Geese were in a nearby park because their staple diet was grass which they got from the lawns and not the bread which they got to the visitors. Short of blocking my letter box there was nothing I could do to prevent them being delivered.

One of O’Neill’s concerns is the almost complete absence of people willing to publicly defend J. K. Rowling. He also took a few well aimed potshots at ‘Cancel Culture’ and ‘Identity Politics’. But it seemed to me that he was somewhat missing the point. If Rowling was distressed at what was being said about her on Twitter, the remedy was in her own hands, literally. All she had to do was switch off her smartphone or if that was too radical, delete the ‘app’.

Rowling, the footballers, Priyamvada Gopal and Sajid Javid are all in their own way ‘commodities’ where image matters. Keeping their names before the public is how they can both relish their present fame and make sure there they are putting something in the metaphorical bank for the future. Rowling may yet write another book; the footballers may think of taking a leaf out of the book of Lionel Messi and launch a premium fashion brand; judging by the Twitter post which led to the abuse Gopal evidently likes to be seen as ‘controversial’, and Sajid Javid is a politician who wants to be seen as ‘just like us’. He has learned the hard way that that there’s always someone who will make a grab the moral high ground if you dare use a word they don’t like.

It’s no use waiting for the government to solve the problems raised by social media by banning so called ‘hate speech’. If you find it unpleasant just stop it being delivered to your smartphone, because it will only hurt you if you let it and no one is forcing you to read it. This isn’t a ‘freedom of speech’ matter. None of the individuals I have used as examples would have the slightest difficulty in getting their voices heard in the UK media, something that cannot be said of the people who resort to vulgar abuse. I doubt the NV editors would turn down a piece on ‘transphilia’ by Ms Rowling.

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

Hitchens schools a Muslim on free speech

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.

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

Who Is Targeting Muslims? by Les May

YESTERDAY I was sent an image of a leaflet which seemed to be aimed at Muslims. It was headed ‘Vaccine Warning’ and ‘Vaccines = Poison’ and included ‘They are attempting to dismantle your family, your culture and your faith’. The person who sent it to me raised the possibility that it originated with a Far Right organisation attempting to sow discord and dissuade Muslims from gaining the protection afforded by the available vaccines. This seems a reasonable possibility as it contains at least some untruths about matters which might weigh heavily with followers of Islam.

For example: the vaccine contains animal products (not true), the vaccine has been cultured using aborted fetal cells HEK293 cells (not true), the vaccine will change your DNA (not true), Imams and Sheikhs have either been bought, paid or bribed to push the vaccine (no evidence is provided and I am extremely doubtful that this is true).

As my wife and I have been fully vaccinated and now have some protection against becoming very ill if we are exposed to the virus which causes Covid 19 and would like others to have the same protection, irrespective of their faith or lack of it, I quote below part of a more detailed statement which can be found at:

https://www.anic.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/AFC-Coronavirus-COVID-19-Vaccine-Fatwa.pdf

The Australian Fatwa Council consulted with Muslim doctors and medical experts who specialise in the field of vaccines and viruses seeking clarity on the composition of the Coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccine and its effects. The following was the outcome; The Muslim doctors and medical experts scientifically confirmed that the vaccines (specifically: Pfizer and AstraZeneca) do not contain any prohibited substances or ingredients and that they have met the clinical standards of the TGA (at this stage Pfizer vaccine only. Astra Zeneca TGA application for approval is in progress and is also expected to be approved by the TGA quite soon), deeming them safe.

Based on what was conveyed by the trusted Muslim doctors and medical experts, the vaccine for the Coronavirus (COVID-19) is permissible according to the Islamic law as there is no known religious harm attributed to being vaccinated nor does it contain any forbidden substances. The vaccine will be considered necessary if there is any possible risk of harm to other humans due to non-vaccination.

NV can no longer embed links in the text of articles. To use this link copy the full text of the link into your browser (Startpage, DuckDuckGo or Google) and search in the usual way.

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

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.

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

Rats And Lawyers. by Les May

QUESTION: What’s the difference between a rat dead in the road and a lawyer dead in the road? Answer: There are skid marks in front of the rat. Not a very nice joke, but a reminder that not every member of the legal profession always has the best interests of humanity at heart.

It appears that the largest supplier of textbooks to UK schools, the publisher Pearson, is halting further distribution of two books about the Israel/Palestine conflict published in 2020. The books concerned are not the original versions which were published in 2016 and 2017 and previously available to schools and others. The original text had been amended after a complaint from a group called UK Lawyers for Israel (UKLFI). The amendments were extensive amounting to more than 650 changes or more than three per page.

A description of the process by which these two books were altered is given in a statement issued by the British Board of Jewish Deputies last September. It reads a follows:

After initial constructive conversations with Pearson, the Board of Deputies worked together with UKLFI [UK Lawyers for Israel] to produce thorough comments on both textbooks, which Pearson have received and acted upon. After detailed and lengthy process over a number of months, the books have now been published for students to use in the 2020-1 academic year. Board of Deputies of British Jews President Marie van der Zyl said: "We applaud Pearson for their openness to constructive feedback and willingness to revise these textbooks. We are pleased with the final material which gives a balanced and accurate portrayal of the Middle East conflict. I would like to pay specific tribute and thanks to UKLFI for their hard work on this project and their collaborative effort with us to get these textbooks to where they needed to be.”

The decision of the publishers to pause further distribution of the altered version came in response to an eight-page report by Middle East specialists Professors John Chalcraft and James Dickins, which found hundreds of changes to the textbooks overwhelmingly favouring an Israeli narrative and removing or replacing passages that support Palestinian narratives.

Below is an extract which forms the last two paragraphs of that report.

The revisions have changed the presentation of the facts in ways which bolster pro-Israeli narratives, and make pro-Palestinian narratives less credible. Explanations of the events recorded have also been treated in a selective manner, with potentially pro- Palestinian interpretations removed, and pro-Israeli interpretations augmented. The revisions exhibit troubling double-standards at a very basic level: potentially unjust Israeli actions are dealt with in the language of perception and controversy, while potentially unjust Palestinian actions are dealt with in the language of fact and objective certainty. The revisions also offer distorted definitions of key terms, such as Jewish ‘settlers’, and mislead students about matters on which there is a wide consensus, such as international law. The revisions direct students towards activities and interpretations that favour and explore a pro-Israeli narrative.

In sum, we have found the process to have been biased and the outcome misleading. The outcome is two textbooks that distort the historical record, failing to offer students a balanced view of the conflict. These books, we conclude, are not fit for purpose. School children should not be supplied with propaganda under the guise of education.

What we have here is an organisation of lawyers advocating for a foreign country. We also have the Board of Deputies, which does not represent all the Jewish people in the UK, trying to determine what is taught in our schools. This is just as reprehensible as the actions of those Muslims who are trying to do the same at Batley Grammar School. It also gives further credibility to those who believe that the motivation of those attacking Jeremy Corbyn were motivated not by concerns about anti-semitism, but by a desire to remove someone who was an advocate for the Palestinians.

You can find the full text of the report from which two short extracts are given above at:

http://www.bricup.org.uk/documents/GCSE_textbooks.pdf

There is a more detailed discussion at:

https://www.jewishvoiceforlabour.org.uk/article/textbooks-altered-line-by-line-at-uk-lawyers-for-israels-behest/

NV can no longer embed links in the text of articles. To use these links copy the full text of the link into your browser (Startpage, DuckDuckGo or Google) and search in the usual way.

“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.

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.

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

Mark Birkett: 'Community of Scholars & Satanic Verses'

Editorial comment: Mark Birkett has responded with the comment below and has tried to spell out the problems with regard to the Batley Grammar School dispute over the teacher who displayed the cartoon of the Muslim Prophet in his class on religous studies. Some of the Muslim parents took exception to this and are calling for the teacher's dismissal by gathering outside the school to protest.

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

Mark Birkett's view on the question of 'Blasphemy' & Islam:

'Yes, that's right. I'm curious as to the genuine motives of those parents who have called for the sacking of the teacher. I think that was clear in my comment below. But if not I'm happy to clarify it.

'I've been an anti-racist all my life. But the problem we seem to have, with this sort of reaction by some Muslim parents living in Britain, or indeed the murderous persecution of so-called 'blasphemers' in places like Pakistan or Saudi Arabia - is that challenging the Islamic faith gets conflated with racism. The two are not even remotely one and the same thing. Providing the intellectual space and the intellectual tools for all children to discuss these issues meaningfully is a major challenge for our society. We cannot keep pretending otherwise.

'The reasons for it being a challenge are many. For instance, we all know very well that there are many on the far right who delight in provoking Asians simply because it suits their racist beliefs. And many in such racist groups cynically use wider revulsion at some of the worst aspects of Islam (including its appalling attitude to women, homosexuals and apostates) to further that sort of racist agenda.

'Unfortunately, there are just as many within the Muslim community who completely fail to see how bigoted their religion is. Islam is by no means the only bigoted religion of course (if in doubt, read the Old Testament and / or the more blood-curdling threats in 'Revelations') but it is (in my view) the most murderous of all three Abrahamic faiths. It's certainly the only one that calls for murder in the case of apostasy (thou shalt believe in Allah .. or else).

'The other oft-confused element in this quagmire is the false notion that there is such a thing as a 'Muslim' child. No child is 'born' a Muslim, nor Christian, nor Satanist. nor voodoo-ist ... nor any other religion or cult for that matter. They are just children, each of whom needs to be taught how to think, not what. Every child subjected to any religion presented to them as factually true is by definition being brainwashed. And teachers in our schools have an absolute duty to call a dead halt to that. They need to encourage children to question all such evidence-free thinking. To discenr the welcome aspects of religion (Thou Shalt Not Kill etc) from the wholly unwelcome (women are second to men etc). They need to be taught how to question and value satire too. And they need to be able to do so without fear that some idiot will decide that they need to be sacked for doing so (or far worse).

'Imagine if a teacher was suspended for discussing the impact Monty Python's 'Life of Brian' in a classroom? We'd see it as utterly absurd. Yet far too many seem to think Islam should have a free card here. It absolutely shouldn't. Satire is a vital part of a free democracy. It doesn't mean I think showing the (so-called) 'Prophet' with a bomb under his turban is in good taste. Nor am I blind to the fear that such cartoons might even encourage some children to grow up seeing all Muslims as terrorists. But that's the point. Discussion of these ideas, and the reactions that flow from them, is an essential part of every child's education. Far too many Muslim parents refuse to see that point.

'Muslims who think it's OK to threaten teachers who try to encourage pupils to think clearly about religions - including (I'd hope) getting to children to discuss the bigotry inherent in all of them - cannot claim sanctuary behind terms such as 'Islamophobia' - a term without the slightest moral or intellectual currency. All who live in this country - a nominally 'free democracy' - need to accept that satire (esp. in the form of cartoons) does not automatically equate to racism. Nor do they have the right to claim that 'blasphemy' has any place in a modern democracy either.

'It's very difficult to get these things right of course, and I'd never want to give the slightest succour or comfort to racists, but teachers being suspended for openly discussing the satirising of religion need to be protected and defended at all costs. If parents wish to silence such teachings, let alone perhaps pretend that the Charlie Hebdo murders were even remotely justified, then they truly don't belong in our free democracy. Those of us who can see the difference between these two approaches to discussing the role of religions need to be ultra-clear whose side we're on.'

Nothing To Gain, Everything To Lose by Les May

A JEWISH lady by the name of Jenny Manson had an interesting message left on her answerphone which went as follows, "You fucking Nazi bitch… You should burn in the gas oven. You dirty fucking bitch… Stinking, stinking swine… You deserve … to burn in acid." Even more interesting is that the police tracked down the caller and found him to be a middle-aged Jewish man. He was formally cautioned for the offence of malicious communications in May 2019.

Manson it seems is ‘the wrong sort of Jew’. Her crime is that as a co-chair of Jewish Voice for Labour (JVL) she draws attention to the fact that there is a diversity of opinion amongst British Jews both about the level of anti-semitism in the Labour party and about the behaviour of the government of Israel towards Palestinians.

In November she was interviewed by Kirsty Wark about the decision to readmit Jeremy Corbyn to the Labour Party. According the Jewish Chronicle there were ‘complaints logged with the BBC by Jewish campaigners angry at Newsnight’s decision to invite Ms Manson onto the show only a few weeks after the appearance of another leading figure in JVL Naomi Wimborne-Idrissi.’

Naomi Wimborne-Idrissi was suspended from the Labour party a few days ago. Her crime? There were complaints that she had made some members ‘uncomfortable’ perhaps because she had said, ‘The idea that Jewish people require for their comfort that whole swathes of subjects should not be debated by the membership of this party is insulting to Jewish people.’

The Labour party bars everyone suspended or investigated from sharing any details of their cases. But we do know that Wimborne-Idrissi is not the only Jewish member of the party to have been suspended or investigated on accusations of anti-semitism. The figure now seems to be more than twenty, and includes a significant proportion of the members of the JVL committee. Commenting on the psychological impact on Labour party members who have received Notices of Investigation. She has said: ‘It is Kafkaesque, You are not told who is accusing you. And you are not allowed to discuss it with anyone. So you receive this devastating letter – and are immediately isolated.’

We can gain some insight into what is going on from a comment made about her; ‘She can marry whomever she pleases and hold whatever ideological stance she finds attractive. Naomi Wimborne was free to marry a Muslim, and become Naomi Wimborne-Idrissi... But, given her life choices, is Naomi really in a position to talk publicly as if she is representative of British Jewish identity?’

Some people might find the comment implicitly offensive or suggest it verges on ‘racism’. But the real import of it, as with the complaints to the BBC about interviewing two members of Jewish Voice for Labour on Newsnight, is that it is an attempt to silence people who will not accept that the views presented in Jewish Chronicle and by the Jewish Labour Movement (JLM), are representative of those of all British Jews.

In addition to Jewish Voices for Labour there are a number of other organisations, Independent Jewish Voices, Jewish Socialists’ Group, Jews for Justice for Palestinians, Manchester Jewish Action for Palestine, Free Speech on Israel, which are equally representative of the views of British Jews. The JLM organisation differs from these other Jewish organisations because it has what Jewish Voices for Labour has called a ‘profoundly Zionist orientation’ and seems to be unwilling to be in any way critical of the treatment of Palestinians by the state of Israel.

So anxious is JLM to control the narrative around accusations and definition of anti-semitism, and by inference around Labour’s attitude to the treatment of Palestinians by the state of Israel, that in April 2018 it asked for, and received, a guarantee that JLM would remain Labour's only Jewish affiliate, after suggestions that Jewish Voices for Labour might be allowed to affiliate.

The Jewish Chronicle has described JLM as a 'gathering-place for moderates concerned about the direction the party is taking under Mr Corbyn' and JLM has changed its rules to facilitate this by allowing non-Jews to have affiliate membership so providing a base for attacking him. But the fact that so many Jewish members of the Labour party have been accused of anti-semitism suggests to me that what we are seeing is Labour being the battleground chosen by the Zionist oriented JLM to drown out the voices of protest from other non-Zionist oriented Jews. Corbyn was a reluctant accessory to this; Starmer, Nandy, Long-Bailey and Rayner have jumped in with both feet and embraced it by signing up to the ‘Ten Pledges’ I have written about previously.

Is it not absurd that a definition of anti-semitism is being adopted by the Labour party which can be used against Jewish members on the basis of complaints made by other Jewish members and organisations, some of which like CAA, (Campaign Against Antisemitism) are utterly pernicious and adopt dubious tactics to discredit their opponents? Labour has nothing to gain and everything to lose by allowing this battle to be fought on its territory. Blackmailers always come back for more.

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

Lies, Damn Lies and Lies About Statistics

by Les May

AFZAL KHAN, MP for Gorton recently wrote, amongst other things, ‘Islamophobia is rooted in racism and is a type of racism that targets expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness’ and ‘We have seen during this Covid 19 pandemic that people of Muslim heritage have been disproportionately affected.’

The latter statement is complete bunkum because there is no evidence to support it. Kahn’s use of the term ‘Muslim heritage’ is an attempt to give credence to his claim that the followers of Islam form a distinct racial group and should be treated as such. This claim will no doubt come as something of a surprise to all the people who would identify as being Muslims in Africa and China and the Middle East.

The latest research, published only today, indicates that Black people are about twice as likely to become infected as White people and Asian people about one a half times more likely. It provides no statistics and makes no comment about ‘Muslim Heritage’, and no doubt Black and Asian people whose heritage is that of Buddhism, Christianity or Judaism, share an increased susceptibility to infection.

It has been speculated, and it is only speculation not an established fact, that this increased susceptibility results from multi-generational family structures, the nature of their employment and higher prevalence of co-morbidities in these two groups. Equally plausible are that it results from genetic differences or differences in behaviour.

What Kahn is trying to do is claim exceptionalism for Muslims, something which no other religious group in this country has. Roman Catholicism is frequently subject to criticism due to its views on homosexuality, divorce, contraception and abortion. What would your reaction be if Roman Catholics insisted that such criticism is a form of ‘racism’?

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

A Nasty Smell from the Pork Barrel by Les May

ONE might have hoped that now that the anti-semitism witch hunt has begun to subside in the Labour party we might see a period of relative calm punctuated only by the ‘left wing’ and ‘right wing’ knocking eight bells out of each other and in between these bouts there might have been a focus on the things that Labour needs to put right in this country. Things like the gross inequalities in income and wealth, which are linked to both differences in total life expectancy and length of life without disability, and the lack of social housing forcing people into the hands of a new ‘rentier class’ of private landlords.

Seemingly not, judging by a tweet from Rochdale Labour Group which seems eager to sow the seeds of yet another witch hunt, this time in the name of ‘Islamophobia’.

The definition they propose to accept runs as follows; ‘Islamophobia is rooted in racism and is a type or racism that targets Muslimness or perceived Muslimness’. Quite how anyone got from a religious belief, which is open to anyone to adopt, or not, as they so wish, to being a form of ‘racism’ is anyone’s guess. But then again logic does not seem to be a strong point for those who like to dabble in identity politics.

Nor are we offered a working definition of ‘Muslimness’, which seems like a convenient oversight. Is it for example adherence to fasting between dawn and sunset during Ramadan so that believers can experience what it is like to be someone who is so poor that they have to go without food? Or is it cutting someone’s throat because they have been perceived as causing offence? Is it risking your life in a Red Crescent team trying to rescue someone from a collapsed building? Or is it detonating a bomb in a crowded building? As with every other religious faith some of its adherents are good and some are evil. Or as the line from the film ‘The Dynamite Man from Glory jail’ runs, ‘God uses some people, and some people use God’.

This definition has no legal status and to the extent that it can be seen as an attack on our freedom of expression, including the freedom to offend, it is unlikely that any court would offer support to any council, public body or company attempting to using it as a criterion for determining someone’s suitability for continued employment.

Rochdale Labour Group’s decision to announce this looks rather like an exercise in what our American friends call ‘Pork Barrel Politics’, intended to secure the loyalty at the ballot box of a particular group of voters. I look forward to Buddhists, Christians, Hindus, Jews and Pagans lining up to demand similar protection from criticism. And don’t forget the Vegan who wants his dietary choices classed as stemming from a religious belief!

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

Nigeria on the Brink? by John Wilkins

AS Nigeria reaches its 60th. year of independence on October 1st, I fear for its future. With a population of over 200 million people and endowed with incredible natural resources it has still become a failed state.

The blame currently lies with the Head of State and the Federal Government and the army and security services. However the source of its troubles go back to the British creating a new country out of a land with several hundred tribes and languages by drawing a line on a map.

After the horrors of the Biafran Civil War the country had a period of military rule, which stabilised the country and then moved to a democratically elected government. However the corruption now in Government and almost all walks of life has left a divided nation. Whilst millions live in abject poverty, vast wealth lies in the hands of a few. Throw into the mix religious differences which have resulted in more Christians being killed in the country than the whole of the Middle East over the last decade. There was even a massacre of more than 350 Shia Muslims in the northern city of Zaria in December 2015 by Federal troops. #1

There has also been a violent crackdown by the state on largely peaceful protests by Biafran separatists seeking their 'Right to self-determination' under Article 20 of the African Charter.

However the current President, Muhammadu Buhari (a Fulani), has allowed Fulani cattle herders to take their animals across huge swathes of farm land. Any resistance by locals has resulted in countless killings by the heavily armed herdsmen. The Federal Government takes no action, many would say it is using the Fulanis as an armed militia to subdue Christian communities in the Middle Belt and now deep into more Southern states.

Also one could view Buhari's poor record of eliminating the threat of Boko Haram #2 in the country is a ploy for greater Islamification of the country. They now have control of parts of northern Nigeria and claim it to be part of the Islamic Caliphate. Over 100 of the mainly Christian Chibok schoolgirls abducted in 2014 have not been returned to their families despite Buhari's pledge on gaining power.

An even more frightening development is the increasing number of Isis fighters and other terrorists coming through Nigeria's porous northern border. I understand this has being encouraged by Turkey over recent times. There is now friction with Egypt, which many terrorists travel through.

Most of the top posts both in Government and the army are held by Hausas or Fulanis. Although there are other ethnic groups represented in Government many do not raise these concerns, either through fear or bribery.

However protests from Muslim and Christian religious leaders, often say the same thing, that poverty and corruption are the twin evils in the country. One Muslim respected voice of reason was silenced recently, namely the former Emir of Kano Sanusi who was dethroned in March this year. Little wonder when he articulated such views as the following: He called for an end to child marriage, women empowerment, building more schools instead of mosques, and infrastructural development. Sanusi also called for population planning, and said that polygamy is increasing poverty in the region.

The country is now engaged in an economic row with Ghana with wrong on both sides. Ghana has been clamping down on largely Igbo traders they claim are not all acting lawfully and Nigeria has closed Western highway linking the countries which passes through Benin, a breach of ECOWAS rules (Economic Community of West African States).

I have spent three years writing to my MP, then Shadow Foreign Secretary and now the current one, to get our Government to exert some political pressure on the Nigerian state to unite the country rather than let it become another Rwanda but worse. The House of Lords debated the issue of violence in Nigeria two years ago warning of impending genocide. More recently 20 of the House of Lords have sent a plea to Baroness Scotland, Secretary General to the Commonwealth highlighting concerns over escalating violence in Nigeria. The letter quotes highly respected former Army Chief of Staff, Lieutenant General Danjuma, who says the armed forces are 'not neutral..... they collude in the ethnic cleansing....by Fulani herdsmen'.

I call on all Nigerians in diaspora to speak out. Altering the slogan of the Black Lives Movement, 'White Silence is Violence' to "Nigerians" Silence Equals Violence'.

#1 See Amnesty Report: “Unearthing the truth: unlawful killings and mass cover-up in Zaria,” #2 Boko Haram: the name translates colloquially as “Western education is sin”.

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

Charlie Hebdo & Prophet Muhammad cartoons

Al Jazeera 2/09/20:

Move comes a day before 13 men and one woman - accused of assisting the 2015 attackers of the newspaper - go on trial.

The French satirical newspaper whose Paris offices were attacked in 2015 is reprinting the controversial caricatures of Islam's Prophet Muhammad that the gunmen who opened fire on its editorial staff cited as their motivation.

The move was announced on Tuesday, a day before 13 men and a woman accused of providing the attackers with weapons and logistics go on trial on charges of terrorism on Wednesday.

In an editorial this week accompanying the offensive caricatures, the paper said the drawings "belong to history, and history cannot be rewritten nor erased".

The January 2015 attacks against Charlie Hebdo and, two days later, a kosher supermarket, touched off a wave of killings claimed by the ISIL (ISIS) armed group across Europe.

Seventeen people died in the attacks - 12 of them at the editorial offices - along with all three attackers.

The attackers, brothers Cherif and Said Kouachi, claimed their attack on the newspaper in the name of al-Qaeda. As they left the scene at Charlie Hebdo, they killed a wounded policeman and drove away.

Two days later, a prison acquaintance of theirs stormed a kosher supermarket on the eve of the Jewish Sabbath, claiming allegiance to ISIL. Four hostages were killed during the attack.

Blasphemy

The decision to republish the cartoons will be seen by some as a defiant gesture in defence of free expression. But others may see it as a renewed provocation by a publication that has long courted controversy with its satirical attacks on religion.

The caricatures re-published this week were first printed in 2006 by the Danish newspaper Jyllands Posten, setting off sometimes violent protests by some Muslims who found the depictions offensive.

The Prophet Muhammad is deeply revered by Muslims and any kind of visual depiction is forbidden. The caricatures were perceived as linking him with terrorism.

Charlie Hebdo, infamous for its irreverence and accused by critics of racism, regularly caricatures religious leaders from various faiths and republished them soon afterwards.

The paper's Paris offices were firebombed in 2011 and its editorial leadership placed under police protection, which remains in place to this day.

'Ignore'

Laurent Sourisseau, the newspaper's director and one of the few staff to have survived the attack, named each of the victims in a foreword to this week's edition.

"Rare are those who, five years later, dare oppose the demands that are still so pressing from religions in general, and some in particular," wrote Sourisseau, also known as Riss.

The president of the French Council of Muslim Worship (CFCM), Mohammed Moussaoui, urged people to "ignore" the cartoons, while condemning violence.

The suspects, who go on trial from 08:00 GMT on Wednesday, are accused of providing various degrees of logistical support to the killers.

The trial had been delayed several months with most French courtrooms closed over the coronavirus epidemic.

The court in Paris will sit until November 10 and, in a first for a terrorism trial, proceedings will be filmed for archival purposes given public interest.

National anti-terrorism prosecutor Jean-Francois Ricard dismissed the idea that it was just "little helpers" going on trial since the three gunmen were now dead

'Ignore'

Curious History of 'Ethnic' Politics in Rochdale

Editorial comment:  
Below are the contents of a post on the personal Blog
of the very notorious Rochdale Councillor Faisal Rana.
He is notorious because he managed to get a police
caution for voting twice at the local elections in 2018.
 As the Labour member for Spotland and Falinge he
insisted he ‘didn’t realise’ that casting votes in two
wards in the same council borough was an offence. 

In a tweet on July 22 Cllr Rana says:  

'Too few Black Asian Minority Ethnic [BAME]
councillors leads to bad decisions.'  

Yet some would say Rochdale has tended to be 

over-represented by Muslim councillors, and it is worth 

examining if this has been in historic terms healthy for

democracy and the moral status of the town.  

I say this because since the early 1970s I have had a close 

personal and political relationship with the Kashmir community 
in this town, and even accompanied a party of supporters of 
Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front supporters when in 1992 
they went to the House of Commons to appeal to get the support 
of Paddy  Ashdown, the then Lib Dem leader, in their conflict on

the Indian sub-continent between the Jammu and Kashmir 
Liberation Front (JKLF), and the India government.  
Worries have been voiced in Rochdale about the problems 
of the Indian sub-continent becoming too much of an issue 
in the town's politics.

Cllr Faisal Rana@FaisalRana48·Jul 22
Cllr Rana tweets: 'Too few BAME councillors leads to bad decisions.'

Cllr Rana continues as follows:
'BAME councillors are hugely under-represented on councils'

A REPORT just out that BAME councillors are hugely under-represented on councils across the UK was depressing, if not predictable.
'Sky News reported that only seven percent of all UK councillors are from a minority ethnic background, which is half the percentage BAME people make up of the country's overall population (14 per cent). The report, by Professor Maria Sobolewska and Dr Neema Begum from the University of Manchester, highlighted for the first time the scale of under-representation in councils.
'They said under-representation on councils - where decisions are made on where money is spent - "creates a potential for perpetuating and reinforcing racial inequality and disadvantage."
'To those like me working in local government, it does not come as a surprise. All too often, an ingrained if unspoken prejudice exists in many Labour Party branches that BAME candidates cannot win in predominantly white seats. The selection process and selection meetings are poorly run and often loaded against minority ethnic minority candidates. How many branches, even today, meet on licenced premises discouraging many mumslim [sic] members from taking part? Even when a BAME member is selected as a candidate, it is likely to be in a seat that the party has little or no chance in winning.'

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

ROCHDALE'S HISTORY OF ETHNIC POLITICS

by Brian Bamford

RACIAL participation in the politics of Rochdale stems from the 1970s, when the then Rochdale MP Cyril Smith established a close relationship with the Muslim community.  This was later well documented in the book 'Cyril Smith: Smile for the Camera' by the now disgraced former Rochdale MP, Simon Danzcuk.*  For more than 20 years 1972 during the period Smith was in office as the local MP, the Asian community there continually supported the Liberals and the Liberal Democrats.  Only later after Liz Lynne, who succeeded Smith as the Rochdale MP, lost the seat to Labour in 1997 did the Muslims in the town begin to transfer their affections to the Labour Party.  After the now disgraced MP Simon Danzcuk, became the Rochdale MP in 2010 the links between the the local Asians and the party accelerated, and the Labour Councillor Faisal Rana has now been able to boast in a post on his Blog entitled:  'How Labour In Rochdale Is Becoming A More Inclusive Party.'
 

Councillor Rana writes:  'To those like me working in local government, it does not come as a surprise. All too often, an ingrained if unspoken prejudice exists in many Labour Party branches that BAME candidates cannot win in predominantly white seats. The selection process and selection meetings are poorly run and often loaded against minority ethnic minority candidates. How many branches, even today, meet on licenced premises discouraging many mumslim [sic] members from taking part? Even when a BAME member is selected as a candidate, it is likely to be in a seat that the party has little or no chance in winning.'

At present according to Carl Faulkner 'Rochdale Council has 12 ‘Asian’ councillors – that equates to 20% and is way over the Rochdale Asian population %.'

After he was elected Councillor Rana was cautioned for electoral fraud by the police for voting twice in the local elections.  Yet, he still retained his seat and has since been promoted.  When I spoke to another Rochdale Muslim councillor about the shame that Rana was bringing upon the Labour Party by his conduct I was told that he (Rana) has too much influence over the leader of the Rochdale Labour Party Alan Brett.

Despite what Cllr Rana and the community of scholars might say  'Ethnic identity politics' doesn't have a very noble tradition in Rochdale.

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

*  In his book about Cyril Smith, Smile for the Camera, co-written with a fellow Labour activist, Matthew Baker, Simon Danczuk details Smith's close relationship with the Muslim community in Rochdale, including the encouragement of electoral fraud amongst them, apparently. According to Danczuk, Cyril Smith "transformed politics in the Asian community and became a powerful voice," as they switched from Labour to Liberal en bloc, and Smith prevented people being deported as illegal immigrants and supported the building of the first mosque in the Lancashire town. Danczuk continues: "It was in this community that Cyril unquestionably had the biggest influence."

ALL ABOUT EID?

HEALTH Secretary Matt Hancock has wished the country a 'Happy Eid' the day after regional lockdown measures were brought in across the north of England.
The measures prevent anyone from mixing with people from another household in gardens, houses and hospitality venues in a bid to stop the spread of coronavirus.

Taking to Twitter this morning Mr Hancock said: "I want to wish all my Muslim friends in the UK & around the world a very happy Eid al-Adha.
"This will be a challenging Eid for many, and I am grateful for your continued efforts tackling #coronavirus."

Eid al-Adha runs from July 30 to August 3 this year and is widely celebrated across the world - marking Ibrahim's willingness to sacrifice his son as an act of obedience.


Saima Afzal, a community inclusion activist and Blackburn councillor, said the Government “left it too late” to impose the restrictions.
She said people in the Lancashire town had already been warned against visiting households when it became clear to the council that infection rates were on the rise.
Speaking to PA news agency, she said: “Why did the Government leave it so late? Two hours before Eid, giving them little time to reconfigure.”
She said she understood why the restrictions had to be introduced, stating the virus affected every community.
“The issue for me is the timing, it’s really unfortunate,” she said.

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