This will fuel !!!

It wasn't only Straw who was stirring trouble. On the 7 o'clock Channel Four News, while covering the event, Alex Thomson mentioned a Muslim-run dairy in Windsor which has been subject to racial attacks.

He concluded his report by saying, "The fact that a small industrial plant in a largely prosperous town in the Home Counties can ignite such tension tells us much about Islam in Britain today."

(You can see a video replay of the newscast on the C4 News page entitled, 'Troubled Veils')

I emailed him to complain about the manner in which an Islamophobic attack had been projected as a problem about Islam. Why didn't he make the rather more obvious connection between the attack and the growing wave of racism, xenophobia and cultural intolerance affecting whites in Britain today?

He replied, denying what he had said, trying to suggest that it was I who was prejudiced.

Fortunately, I have his statement word-for-word from the video replay and clearly Thomson is lying. This is not the first time that I have picked him up for making seriously misleading comments about Islam and I have now sent a copy of my complaint to various media-monitoring organisations. I also intend to report him to the European Union for a breach of human rights.

The effects of 'dumbing-down' has led to not-very intelligent reporters like Thomson being given major newscasting roles. He may be dumb but he's sly as hell and a liability to race relations in this country.

I urge everyone who reads this to listen to the newscast and make their own complaints to Jim Gray, C4 News Editor at jim.gray at itn.co.uk
2006-10-06 07:00:25

The point to be noted here is that jack straw feels unable to communciate if he cannot see the mouth and face, then the question arises was Mr.Blunkett ignoring his constuitents since he was not seing physically as he is blind.

so has mr.straw has forgotton that we live in a country were we are told you are free to live your life how you see fit, is it not the womens human right to dress how she likes.

it is ok for women to be nudists, it is ok for her to wear revealing clothes, it is ok for women to get drunk and have sex as with as many people a she wishes, but when a women wants to cover herself it is bad, truly these are the handyworks of satan as evangelical christains say.

sadly what we are seing is villification and demonisation of muslims lead by policiticans and the media especailly sky news, i would have thought Mr.Straw would understand what is hapeening as this is exactly how jews were villified and demonsied in germany.

I believe Jack straw has the right to look at someone's face when he talks, like everybody. With all respect, I personally hate to talk to someone and not be able to look at his face. I think he is right when he says that veil, or any other religius symbol or costume/behave puts a limit to others. I love what they are doing in France. No religius symbols or veil or anything wich points out religius believes. Human being are naturally intollerant; this means christian as well as muslims. The only difference is that you can see mosques in Rome, not to far from St,Peter's but you will never see a christian church in Mecca or Medina. We don t care, that's not a big issue. but tell me only one thing: why you pretend to live your way in wester countries and you also pretend us to live your way in muslim countries ?

so, in brief, what rights do I have ?

Regards.

If he is free to ask the question, surely it is ok to answer it

You attached the political reasoning part, which even if it is true, may be more about how do we as a community ask each other difficult questions, where tolerance works both ways.

I dont know enough about your culture and religion to comment on the use of viels, but i refuse to stop asking questions just because they might offend.

I have no religious beliefs, but find attacks on anyone's beliefs as abhorrent, including mine

Does Jack comments suprise anyone? Let be honest Old Zionist Jack has had his A** licked clean for so long by Muslim in Blackburn that he really feels immune to anything. There's would be a solemn irony in respect of Mpac actions in the last election exposing Jack but this issue and the person who has bought it to the forefront really shows the level of hate they have for islam and the levels they will goto to insult Muslim Women.

It amazes me at how the likes of Jack Straw wants to show everyone that he believes that Muslim women are oppressed by wearing the veil. He is of course not the only one for the media take great pleasure in reporting about forced marriages in Islam and we often hear people comment on the lack of birth control amongst Muslims. All very negative things. I wonder how many people know that many Orthodox Jewish women shave off their hair, rather than keep it covered, and instead wear wigs. I was quite shocked when I learned of this practice whilst nursing in a hospital in London used by many of these ladies. I wonder if this is their interpretation of keeping their hair covered, for many see the beauty as being in a woman's hair. I certainly think I would feel more oppressed if I had to shave my head than by wearing a veil. I have also seen many Orthodox Jewish ladies walking with their husbands and children and judging by the ages of the children, birth control is also not a common practice.

If we are going to have people, especially M.P.'s highlighting the 'differing' practises of one community, then please let us be fair and discuss the differing religious beliefs and practises of all communities living in our country.

We should ask Jack Straw how many telephone conversations he has everyday without seeing peoples faces or if he always demands to see their face on a video phone? Or is it just Muslim women's faces he would like to see? The fact is that policitians conduct more conversations on telephone than face-to-face and this stunt is only aimed at regaining the headlines after the Tory Conference. Muslim women are an easy target, he thinksssss.........

Muslims wake up, you have no one to blame but yourselves, proaction nor reaction. When you have Muslims like Salma Yakoob, during the Ramadhan period calling a Muslim heclker an idiot (the John Reid incident in London last week), despite observing the rituals of the Ramadhan period, is she suggesting that this man was going against the freedoms that are afforded to all citizens under an open democratic society.

To female muslim; with all respect, you are the only one who didn t tell the name, why ? should I introduce my self as Christian man or white man ?

yawn....another mountain out of a molehill...

To Mike

Sensible comment, I think not. Sorry if you find it boring. Go back to sleep, you obviously need it.

MUSLIM WOMEN have actually drawn negative attention to themselves, everytime some statement about Muslims is made, non-Muslims use this as an excuse to portray Muslim men as the oppressors, and Muslim women storm into all the TV News studios defending their rights without actually understanding the real consequences.

Bush and Blair, immediately after the invasion of Afghanistan, (who incidentally did not attack the US on September, 11), declared that Afghan women had been liberated because they were now walking the streets of Kabul, Jalalabad, Kandahar and other major Afghan cities without their (Blue) Burkhas. This is another lie that was really for the West's consumption; Bush and Blair have tried this tactic on before and are going at it again. This is just a Political ploy that excites the natives of these western lands but has no real basis or point.

The WEST is attempting, and succeeding one should add, in a very subtle but intelligent manner the portrayal of the Muslim Man as the problem, this reinforces the basis for the "War on Terror", the continued and illegal Occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, the killing of innocents including little children.

There are much more important issues to deal with, reaction to the "covering up" of women is a non-issue, Muslim Women have every right and continue to do so irrespective, and so this does not change anything actually. Deal with real issues, access to jobs, housing, equal rights, equal consideration and not "tolerance", no attacks on Iran or North Korea, no Peace-keepers for Sudan, justice for Palestinians, permanent shelter for families in earthquake areas of Pakistan.

excellent article, however i would criticise the muslim community some what people have very strong reactions to this sometimes at the expense of other issues we should be more concerned about events in palestine, Iraq and even windsor (!) yet from some these do not solicit such strong reactions...yet many brothers and sisters are quick to defend only the niqab issue so ardently..

Can we get our priorities right, what about the thousands upon thousands of children who will be sleeping in extreme winter conditions in Pakistan without shelters that should have been built by the Aid Agencies who happily took our money and have done nothing one year on.

Its his opinion. He is wrong. He has a right to an opinion though as an individual. However, as a high ranking government official he should be smarter. Muslims would do well to ignore him here.

Everybody has a point of view, but it would be a good idea if we can email jack straw personally about our thoughts.

Lets stop whinging and do something constructive!

mashallah sis female woman communication

thats a very nice post, makes so much sense

well done :)

I find the whole ideology behind the veil insulting and offensive to me as a woman. I believe modesty is a highly overrated virtue. I put greater value on kindness, generosity and respect. However, while abhorring the misplaced ideology behind the veil, I respect the right of those women foolish enough to want to wear it to do so. I expect in return that Muslims should not rush to feel victimised when somebody dares to offer a criticism of their way of life.

Does anyone can tell me what is the difference between Islamic Human Rights and Human rights ?

Ruggero,

When people use the expression 'Human Rights' in the UK they do so referring to the Human Rights Act 1998, which transposes the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) into British domestic law.

These rights apply to anyone who happens to be on UK soil, even tourists, so for a Muslim in the UK there is no difference between 'human rights' and 'Islamic human rights' the law, as interpreted by the courts, is the same for everyone regardless of faith.

'Islamic Human Rights' is a term that sometimes refers to the Cairo Convention on Human Rights In Islam.

This came about due to criticism from predominently Islamic countries that the Universal Declaration on Human Rights failed to take into account the cultural and religious context in which people in Islamic states lived. Some criticised the universal declaration as 'a secular understanding of the Judeo-Christian tradition'. It was signed in 1990 by 45 foreign ministers.

The Cairo declaration enshrined principals of Sharia into its text. For example that 'There shall be no crime or punishment except as provided for in the Sharia'.

There are many similarities between both decalrations, such as the prohibition of torture. However, in the respect of Sharia the Cairo declaration is irreconcilable with ECHR and the Human Rights Act, both of which rule out the death penalty.

Issues regarding freedom of speech also conflict between the two conventions. The Cairo declaration states 'Everyone shall have the right to express his opinion freely in such manner as would not be contrary to the principles of the Sharia.' Under ECHR the freedom of speech principal 'may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society'.

In the UK the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006 is one such restriction upon free speech. Under the 2006 Act the restriction on incitement to religious hatred does not include anything '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.'

So for example in an Islamic nation is might be acceptable to punish a person for 'ridiculing' the Prophet Mohammed, in UK law this would be acceptable provided that the person concerned did not intend to promote 'hatred'. Of course only a court could interpret the law in any given situation.

ruggero the diffrence is in islam there are certain rights which are scared and cannot be changed by men at their whims.

like if you kill unjustly then you shall be killed in turn,today we have laws which say you can be a serial killer and we will not kill you, what kind of justcie is this.

today we have lying deceitful policiticians using lies to invade and kill hundreds of thousands of humans with impunity, they are excused by man made laws but under islamic law they would be bought to book and executed if found guilty.

islamic human rights cannot be negated like man made laws,today in holland it is ok for people to have sex with twelve year olds, maybe in the future they will vote to say killing ill peopel is ok, where will this stop.

Jane I think your point if we dissect it it 100% right. It is the right of a woman to choose and dress how she pleases, this is what is so offensive in this instance a Woman has chosen to cover herself in this way No man can impose this dress code on a woman. So why should someone dictate what she can and cant wear? Would you not be outraged if a man asked a woman to remove a cardigan or jumper so he could get a better look? Tacky description but its the crux of the issue RESPECT THE WRITE OF PPL TO WEAR WHAT THEY WANT

To Ruggero

In my view the Islamic Human Rights are rights given to all of mankind by God. The right to life, the right to earn, the right not to be tortured when you have been captured by ememy forces.

Like in the time of the prophet when prisoners of war were captured they were treated like royalty. If you don't believe me read the biography of the prophet Muhammed (pbuh) Not that the Sun Newspaper or sky news will ever mention that.

hi jane i find it very insulting and offensive when women wear skimpy tarty clothes and look like prostitutes and call girls, i find that very insulting when oor british kids wear silly clothes and the parents tolerate garbage and paedofiles have a rave time

i find that more insulting that a veil

I think the time for debate and dialog are narrowing to a close, Nazi England is on the Horizon. "Rank hatred has appeared from their mouths, what their hearts conceal is far worse!" [Quran].

Well its egg on the faces of those who re-elected him. Not long ago Straw was drooling and begging for votes...and MPACUK were trying to make the residents who were voting him - to see for the PIG he is.

The guy is a dirty old man - he is sick in the head and needs putting away - the perv.He no longer holds the power seat and he is fully aware that Labour are going to loose the next election...what makes me laugh is where are the so called Muslim MP's in all this - they are probably getting planning permission to extend their terraced houses - since its not long when they have to hang up their suits.Had to get that of my chest. Thank u

The Orwellian issue that apologists for the veil, Jilbab, Burkha & other such tend to ignore, when claiming that opposition to such is `discrimination' is that in asserting their rights they ignore the issue of wether they would confer the freedom NOT to wear such to their daughters (& the issue of corresponding social pressure to conform)? If not, & given the protestations that one cannot/ must not do say anything which in any way is deemed insulting to religion (you can defferentially question but it would help if mentioning Mohammed to say PBUH `Peace Be Upon Him', which tends to scotch any notion of attempts at forensic analytical detachment with results uncomfortable to deal with & not pre-ordained), we can infer that there is at the very least a major tendancy in this direction, then the inexorable logic is an incremental/ Gramscian expansion of such, quantitively & qualititavely. From Hijabs, to Jilbabs, from veils to Burkhas. Where then lies freedom if we have such a process of default expansion of unchallengable principles which when consolidated brook no dissent & lead to the closure even of operas which target EVERY faith?
When the expansion of such closed thinking is adequately eclipsed from within the Islamic world generally, we might all rest easy that this really is just an issue of personal conscience.
This is not to deny that the neo con hyperfascists poised to blow the world to kingdom come (so that our Lord & saviour will ride to glory on a mushroom cloud to rapture up the elect & smite the rest of us) might possibly heighten sensitivity in this & every regard, merely to deny that such is part of any solution...

I feel sorry for you Jane as you obviously are happy to be exploited by man made fashion the majority of which is designed to expose female flesh. The veil gives a woman protection from the eyes of men and respect. If I had to choose, I would far rather wear a veil than a mini skirt any day.

The Muslims have a right to stand up for their beliefs and religion. It was Jack Straw opening his big mouth that started this whole debate. He should have known better, in fact I believe he has done it deliberately. I wonder what is going to happen whilst the media is focused on this. Perhaps Bush and Blair will attack Iran and then the veil will be blamed for that too.

PLEASE EVERYONE CONTACT THE SUPPORTER OF JACK STRAW AND THANK THEM FOR THEIR SUPPORT OF THE ZIONIST IN REMOVING THE VEIL.


Lancashire Council of Mosques
Bangor Street Community Centre
Norwich Street
Blackburn
BB1 6NZ

Telephone: 01254 692289
Facsimile: 01254 696124

Email: enquiries@lancashiremosques.com

Rory,

I read your post and followed your advice, going through the channel 4 newscast about the Windsor dairy mill. In all honesty, I didn't pick up any Islamophobic sentiment in what the reporter had to say, although I guess it's just a matter of opinion. Furthermore, after that report they even interviewed an MPACUK spokeswoman and listened to her defence of the veil.

Although I'm not going to submit any complaint on this occasion, I have to give my repsect to you for actually getting up and taking action. On this board, it is only your post that has had any real significance to me (no disrespect intended to others). There seem to be a lot of internet warriors here who see fit to put up messages stating the obvious, but to actually send out a few emails and make your protest known to the 'outside world' is another thing. I myself am guilty of sitting at home and just getting angry sometimes, so this criticism applies equally to me. Thanks to your posts, Rory, I'm going to make a little more of an effort to broadcast my opinions to those who really need to hear them. Nice one!

Londoner

I too am sick to death of being an apologist for Islam and having to justify EVERY one of my actions.

I am a proud muslimah. I wear hijab, and Inshallah hope that one day I would have the conviction enough to wear the niqab. I have every right to do so. I am all for freedom of speech but NOT freedom to insult.

I live and let live. So why can't everybody else. Apparently everybody else can do as they please, but muslims must justify every one of their actions, and be slated, criticised and humiliated for doing so.

Until we stand up as an Ummah and stand up for OUR rights, our right to wear hijab/niqab/jilbab, OUR right to educate ALL our youth, OUR right to freedom to practice our Deen, we will get walked over. Every Niqab and Hijab wearing woman the world over has my respect. Why? Because she shows dignity and modesty. And they are far more valuable assets than anything we can take from ANY other culture.

I HAVE MANY NON-MUSLIM FRIENDS AND I DO NOT OFFER ANY CRITISM OF THEIR WAY OF LIFE AS I PERSONALLY THINK IT IS RUDE AND DISRESPECTFUL OF THEIR CHOICES AND BELEIFS AND YET EVERYBODY CAN HAVE AN OPINION ON MY CHOICES AS A MUSLIM WOMAN- IT IS MY BUSINESS AND I SHOULD NOT HAVE TO JUSTIFY AND EXPLAIN MY DECISION
HOW DARE SOMEONE IMPOSES THEIR BELIEFS ON MUSLIM WOMEN- IF JACK STRAW FEELS UNCOMFORTABLE THEN HE IS THE ONE WITH THE PROBLEM AND NOT US IF WE CHOOSE THE VEIL.IT SEEMS MUSLIMS ARE AN EASY TARGET -I DON'T SEE ANYTHING IN THE MEDIA ABOUT OTHER ORTHODOX RELIGIONS AND THE CLOTHINGS THEY WEAR WHICH COULD ALSO BE PERCEIVED AS SYMBOLS OF SEPERATION.

Has anyone thought about the dangers to the wearer of the veil,when driving a motor vehicle, never mind the public on our roads, do they have sufficient all round vision for safety?
Aren't you also supposed to identify yourself in many situations eg. Public transport, the dhss, and when requsted to do so by a uniformed police officer!
Remember the furore when sikhs refused to wear a crash helmet when riding a motor bike? When did you last see a sikh on one?What next on the human rights agenda?

Rather than take the veil off, I think more women, muslim and Kaffir should be veiled. We should start with that Margaret Beckett.

Very Nive Posting!
Jazakallah khair

to Jane

It wasnt just anyone in the street that was offering their oppinion with regards to how muslim women should dress, it was a leading figure in the government, it was an mp for an area who has 30% muslim constituents.

This is just the next step in the direction of banning the muslim womens dress. It was engineered along with the media, Jack Straw knew what he was saying, and it is part of an agenda for the current islamaphobic government.

can anyone tell me why the Media is intrested to Islam and Muslims???
for the last few weeks we have the POP having a go at Islam and our beloved Prophet PBUH and I watched a BBC Panarama accused the Church of abusing children and I didnt see any fuss by the media, then it is Misbah, the little girl who choose to live with her caring fathere then her drug using mum, then it is the turn of PC Basha who stated that he can not guard those who are killing his family and bombing their country, and now it turn of that Donkey Jak who seems to be trying to look beter by hummilating thses Muslim girls ... what is going on???
why are they doing this???
can anyone answer it????

there is a demo 2mrw at (the 7th) in blackburn town hall, at 11. it is to get jack the lad sacked, muslim brothers and sisters show your support and voice your opinions and attend the demo.
Dont not ignore.

THANK YOU Blackburn Muslim for the email address ;

Email as below sent.


Aslaam Walikum

As i have closed my fast I have learnt that a sister has been attacked in Merseyside - what was her crime she was wearing a nikab. A non-muslim ripped it off her face and assaulted her.

Whether you and your committee members take any notice of this or not - but Straw has made an open statement to the non-muslims get rid of the Nikab and don't worry we as the Government will support you.

Let me leave you with something - on the day of Judgement - in the presence of Allah - The Almighty I swear that You as committee members will be held accountable for his actions.

In this world - This fools comments will haunt you - Your women will bear the sour fruits of his actions.

It's all about the rights of muslims, isn't it? You are so self-contained. Nowhere do muslims seem to recognise that they live in a country where in "British Culture" (remember that?) it is felt that if you conceal your face then you are hiding something. What about consideration for the majority? This country is not a muslim state, nor will it ever be.

This is not simply a matter of dress, as if you were deciding about wearing a blue hat or red shoes, it is about concealing one's identity. This makes people feel uneasy. Why can't you realise that?

"In all honesty, I didn't pick up any Islamophobic sentiment in what the reporter had to say, although I guess it's just a matter of opinion."

Hi Londoner and thanks for your encouraging comments. I too wondered how many others would trouble to make a complaint about a specific issue rather than to go on interminably airing their views.

What I, and others, found so offensive about Thomson's comments is that the way he put it, ie "tells us much about Islam in Britain today," actually turned the problem around making it sound like the problem is Islam rather than the state of Britain today!

Now, he might have done that through thoughtlessness or through bigoted thinking. But in either case his comments are inexcusable. Newscasters have a social responsibility for what they say and they must not be allowed to get away with mischievous statements like the one Thomson made.

It is up to all of us to make sure they don't.

Hey Zebigboss, when was the last time you left your binj drinkin, yobbo, perverse British culture behind when you visited Spain and other countries?, Remember that? I hope you can believe now your not living in a FREE country, so remember that too!

To answer some of the points made in response to me. Yes, women can wear what they like, whether they want to cover up completely or dress provocatively. It's every woman's right to choose.

Kathy - don't feel sorry for me. I enjoy my beauty. God (who I believe in) made me beautiful and to shine like a flower. Nobody exploits me - I'm a big, tough, powerful, outspoken and, yes, beautiful lady! I have respect from all I come into contact and don't need to hide myself to get that, and nor indeed do I need to flaunt myself to get it.

Romymujahadid - you have a problem in your attitudes to women. Try to look past a woman's appearance and see her as a beloved child of God, as we all are.

Sarah - no-one's talking about banning anything. Someone made a very polite suggestion in the spirit of debate.

Every woman - and every man - should have dignity and respect, regardless of what they wear.

And another thing that really annoys me. The way Muslims call ONLY their co-religionists "brother" and "sister"? I'm a Christian of the mild and friendly sort. I like to think all human beings are my brothers and sisters. Sometimes Muslims make me feel like a lesser person because I'm not Muslim.

Jack Straw is just another evil Bastard like many other MP's, he has doen this deliberatley!

JaneYou contradict yourself. First you say that the veil is insulting and offensive and then you say everyone should have dignity and respect, no matter what they wear. Which do you mean?

Muslims call one another brother and sister because they believe they are all of one family and it is also a mark of respect. They would not object to calling you sister or brother but they may fear a stranger's (non Muslim) reaction at being referred to as sister or brother. Try it next time you meet a Muslim and see how he or she reacts. A Muslim should not make you feel as you said 'a lesser person'. I actually find Muslims the most humble people I have ever met (and I have met many over the past 40 years).

zebigboss

Well your psuedo name tells it all to me but I want to ask where in 'British Culture' does consealing your face mean you are hiding something. The only relative thing I can think of is if you are perpetrating a crime and then the usual choice of covering is a balaclava, a mask or a pair of ladies tights. Perhaps it's the company you keep that gives you these ideas.

To Jane

As a British Muslim who spends most of my time with non-Muslims I understand your view point. You say you are big and beautiful and nobody exploits you.

But would you still be saying that if after a night out some maniac who has been feasting off your beauty all evening came out and followed you home and then (GOD FORBID) attaked you.

I work with women who have been raped or sexually attaked by people after a night out, and yes they have all been dressed provocatively.

I am not saying that all men will look at a woman with lust and then attack them but most men do look at them with lust.

Women living in the west think it is good when they are the centre of attention. That attention could also get you the wrong kind of attention.

The women who dresses in hijab or niqab, they do not get the wrong kind of attention. When they engage with men they are treated with respect because the man has no distraction and he gets to know the woman as a person in her own right. If a woman who is dressed provacativley engages with a man he will see her as a piece of meat not an individual.

As for Muslims referring to each other as Brothers or sisters, that is an obligation of faith. The prophet Muhammed (pbuh) told us in his farewell speech " A white man is not superior than a black man, neither is a black man superior than a white man, we all return equally to God. You Muslim's are brothers to one another, and you have to be an example to the rest of mankind.
You will meet people who are your brothers in faith or your brothers in humanity.

So don't take it to heart when we refer to each other as brothers or sisters we mean you too

Can someone tell me why in Islamic countries non-Muslims have to conform to Islamic drees codes but in Western countries Muslims can wear clothes that are considerd offencive and be allowed to wear them. And in any case the Islamic womens' dress code is supposed to not draw attention to the women and in countries where all women have to conform it does. But in an non-Muslim country it does the exact opposite

"When in Rome do what the Romans do"

I am having a hard time relating to why offence has been taken by many Muslims at the mere suggustion that covering the face makes community relations more difficult. To me it is a true observation and not racist in any way...I believe Jack Straw has opened a much needed debate. It is by no means an attack on Islam, it's just common sense. People do not, and should not, have the right to wear what they please. If I wandered down to the local shops with a full face IRA style ski mask on, then decided to pop into my local bank I would attract attention. Even though I am a good person and would mean no harm to anyone I would no doubt intimidate virtually every person I met along the way. If I aproached you to say "good morning", how would you feel? Should I be allowed to do this under the premise that it is every persons right to dress how they please?

Peace.

One important question in all this debate:

Have there been any reported cases of non-Muslims being 'attacked' in any way, by a Muslim wearing niqab/veil??

Why does it concern the non-Muslim so profoundly..why is there a call to ban this attire?

This is yet another classic example of the non-Muslim showing off his prejudices and irrational fear to those of like mind!

Very sad that these people need to feel "normal" by obsessing with the Muslim issue on a regular basis!

Reminds me of the film 'Conspiracy Theory' where Mel Gibson's character, Jerry, could only feel 'normal' if he brought a copy of the book, "Catcher in the Rye EVERY DAY!

You wait, these non-Muslims, we hear about, will start to show signs of serious demented paranoia sometime soon!


Jokes aside, it's a mental condition with which they need help!

The Muslims who post here seem full of anger that Jack Straw has somehow failed to respect their customs. But they also seem to have no respect for the customs or sensitivities of non-Muslim Britons. Comments about "Nazi Britain", for example, are completely out of place. Many in the Muslim world actively supported the Nazis. See for example, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amin_al-Husayni. Britain fought them. Your rights to express your hate-filled opinions were won for you by the people you so clearly despise.

Uncle Jee- I have lived in China, Italy, and France and I speak the languages of all those countries as is only proper. Of course you should make an effort to integrate if you live in another country and I support that. Yet some people here seem to hate our country and everything it stands for. If they want to be that 'holy', why not move to Saudi?
For the record, I am not a binge drinking yobbo with a union jack tatoo.

Kathy- of course I can tell immediately who you are and where you live from your name- so what's the difference? For the record, my name is Michael.
Are you honestly telling me that if you see someone wearing a mask (in a bank for example) you will not think that person is hiding something?
The point is that our society is in danger of becoming balkanised. The veil is a symbol of separation and rejection, and is not as far as I know mentioned in the Koran. In short, it is political.

What kind of religion insists that women, who I suppose are also God's creatures, should cover themselves from head to foot anyway? And why can't we criticise it without being called Nazis?

to Thomas,

which Islamic country are you speaking about where non muslims have to conform to islamic dress codes? In UAE there are no such laws implied on non muslims, likewise in Bahrain, Qatar and Oman. Indonisia has no laws like that, neither Jordan, Syria, Turkey, Eygpt, Yemen, Morroco, Tunisia... I am thinking that there are 2 countries that spring to mind.....Iran or Saudi, and in Saudi its not imposed but westerners are asked to dress modestly.

However i didnt think that britain, centre of democracy would choose saudi as a model to copy. Britain harps on about freedom and democracy, Saudi does not. Besides westerners who choose to go and live in the middle east do so for the fat wage packet. They dont go out there on the promise of freedoms. On the other hand many a people have fled to the Uk because of the promise of freedom and Justice and democracy etc. This is UKs product. I think its faulty and becoming untrue.


To add to, where and when have British people applied 'when in rome do as the romans?' Spain has become the only home county to be able to guarentee a hot summer, with the good old british pub lunch to go with it. India?, well do we need to say any more, and further more the british expats in the middle east are anything but intergrateded with the arab society. The nearest they get is going to see a belly dancer. They have their own clubs and supermarkets and dont even bother to learn a few words in arabic. I have just returned from Yemen which is supposed to be one of the more stricter countries, but the westerners there sometimes out of their own morals and conformity, wear modest clothes, but if they wanted to wear shorts, they wouldnt be arrested, raped maybe, but not arrested.

Another point what really gets me is when people say, well if you dont like UK then leave, etc. My husband is Palestinian, and unfortunately his home land was raped and damaged by the British army supporting the Zionists. If Britian hadnt had been so greedy in the last century, there wouldnt be so many of us veiled women here, as we would be in our homelands, living comfortably.

A message to Zara
Yes us brits are going demented with the msnner that some of your cohorts run down our culture and traditions. I should think you would be happy sharing everything that my parents and me have established over the centuries. I lost a 17 year old killed in France in WW1 and when I listen to you and others on this forum I wonder why we bothered.Isn't it strange that only you (muslims) have such problems, our patience is wearing thin!

Rambo:"Some of your cohorts run down our country"

Some Brits run down this country too!

The Far right and the double standards of Government foreign policy are very good examples of that!!

The problem with some Britains is they are so busy trying to find ways to poo-poo "foreign" elements in this soceity that the chip on their shoulders just becomes that little bit heavier!



No moderate Muslim is telling you how to dress, behave, or even how to think and quite frankly, it is seriously doubtful that any sane Muslim would want to "take over" this nation despite the showing off by a small section of Muslim radical groups, exaggerated by the media!

What we HAVE been witnessing are fanatical sections of some non-Muslim communities..using violence and hatred to make their "views known".

Why do you think people are leaving in droves and it isn't the "foreign problem" it's the DOMESTIC crisis that this country is falling into.

Just today we have reports of over-crowded prisons!Everyday there are cases of kidnapping and brutal sex crimes on woman and children..the crime rate has gone through the roof!

Be under no illusion, Rambo, this country has a LOT of it's OWN faults it should be adressing before it uses Muslims as a scapegoat!

We are 'encouraged' to use the democratic process to voice our concerns, which incidentally is the duty of every Muslim to(peacefully)solve any social or political problems where possible.

We are then told to "stop moaning" when we do! Every human being has issues it feels passionate about: for Muslims it is justice and the freedom to exercise their religious rights freely.

We don't demonstrate en masse demanding women to wear less revealing clothes or for pubs to be shut down and pork to be banned: that is your freedom and your choice, but as citizens of this country we also have rights to air our grievances if there is an issue of infringement on our religious or civil liberties.

Some protest peacefully and sensibly and others not so. Just like there are white British who are peace-loving and others who impose violence and aggresion to make a 'point'!

So, just to recap: this nation is reminded on a regular basis(just in case anyone decides to take an interest in OTHER important issues!) that the Muslim community are evil because of a MINORITY and then lamblasted when we protest peacefully, despite the fact that it was the media and government who called for the non-violent protest in the first place!

I call that 'taking the p***'!

Sorry, if that comes across as a little rude, but you see I am using my "democratic right to freedom of speech" while it (barely) exits!

/>We are demonised, discrimated and are regularly subjected to unfair and unjust physical and verbal abuse for the sins of others and you say YOUR patience is "wearing thin"

Please do not take the bad 'examples' of Muslims in this country, or anywhere else as 'ambassadors' of the religion!

There are good and bad in all walks of life and one has to learn how to take people as you find them!

If someone is courteous towards you, or is, at least not impolite, then it is only civil to return the gesture, irrespective of what community that person belongs to. If you choose to blindly discriminate against a person because you "don't like the look of them!," then sadly the problem lies with YOU!

While newspapers run lengthy editorials on how Britain "prides itself on democracy, freedom, multi-culturalism and decency" it has to stop talking and start putting those virtues into practice instead of using it selectively when it suits and ignoring it when it doesn't!

There is something else that all "great" nations lack patience and tolerance for and that is HYPOCRISY!

God forbid that this country should ever be openly discredited for ambandoning the very moral foundations it claims to adhere to!

Sarah:

Very nicely put!

If you are not a writer by profession, you should be!Have you thought about taking up Freelance Journalism? I think you would be a credit to the Muslim alternative perspective! God knows this country could do with it!

We know how powerful the 'pen' can be in making a point, the "free press" use it tirelessly, mostly to spit venom!

let's use it for truth and freedom of thought in a mature and responsible fashion, with the aim of integrating our ideas positively!

Sarah, where did you learn your history? In what sense was the former Palestine "raped" by the British army? Britain was never the colonial power there; she had a UN mandate. The exercise cost money and blood. We made nothing from it.

British soldiers were attacked and killed by Zionist militias. Would they have done that if the British troops were supporting them? We were caught in the middle, trying (and failing) to do the job the UN had given us.

Why don't you come out of your racist bunker and go to the local library? Read some other histories. If, after some research, you still feel we are your enemies, then have the dignity to move to a country where you feel the natives are your friends.

Frankly, I don't understand how you can live among us while feeling as hostile as you do.

To Tom,

The problem that arises from living in a democratic society is when the government acts, the people are held responsible for their actions, as they have voted for their respected leader. Many people in the UK deeply disagree with the ethos of the current government, and likewise there must have been many people who disagreed with past governments policies. By my mere mentioning that the British government have dirtied their fingers by sticking them into the pot of the unclean war tactics, doesn't mean I am hostile to the british as a whole, does it?

My view point of Palestine has been nurtured in the lap of a family who have been through so many hardships you wouldn't be able to contemplate, and in history, as you may understand, first hand evidence is more credible than reading a few books written in the 1980's on British Cruddy foreign policy of the 20th Century, except maybe if you include Lawrence of Arabia!!!

Yes, i do not deny the british soldiers were attacked and killed, even some were executed in cold blood by Isaac Shamir who was consequently elected as prime minister for Israel and welcomed into this green and pleasent land with open arms, which goes to show how much solidaritry British Governments show to their soldiers. Untill today this government shows support for that regime, the country who cost blood and money then and costs more blood and more money now. This is a point you should consider, so maybe it be better for you to join your local library and read something other than Jeffery Archer. With respect to your point of view, i think i have more concern to the british public than you as i criticise the country that killed British soldiers and our government who support them.

However much i could ramble on about this subject, I can't, as this is supposed to be about Mr. Spratt and his comments to the face veil.

Ps. how can one be racist towards ones own race? Race has nothing to do with my viewpoint. Bad politics is more to the point.

Thanks for clearing up the brother and sister thing everyone - I genuinely feel a lot better about that one.

Kathy - no, I'm not being contradictory. I respect the woman no matter what she wears; I despise the ideology which says it's a good idea for women to be veiled. I hope that clears any confusion you had.

Raja - a woman should not need to be covered up to get respect and to have her sexual integrity respected. She should have that as her fundamental human right. Most Western men (I'm not putting them above non-Western men - it's just that I don't know many others) totally understand that and don't see provocative clothing or a woman being attractive as a green light to sexually harass or rape her. The vast majority of men are not rapists. I have dressed all my adult life in a typical Western way and never been raped. You shouldn't use that as a scare story, it just doesn't stack up. I've often been chatted up but not once, not once has the man pressed his attentions beyond the point where I'm comfortable once I've made that clear.

In terms of building bridges between communities, we all have some listening and learning to do. I appreciate that includes me, but it also includes many (not all) British muslims. Is it so hard for us to acknowledge the things that the other group does well? I'll start: I take the point someone made above that muslims are humble, gentle people. Any British Muslims who post on here willing to follow suit and state something about living in Britain that they like and something that our Western democratic society does well?

Sarah: You have been spun a web of racist lies. That you believe them, whatever your ethnicity, doesn't suddenly make them not racist, any more than it makes them true.

Saira Khan wrote in The Times this week that the veil is not a religious, but a political statement. We are not all so stupid, for all the tolerance so often mistaken by extremists for weakness, as to misunderstand that statement.

We will respect Muslim choices in dress and other peaceful matters. But we understand what those women are telling us. And we are free to tell them, as Jack Straw has done, that we have our customs and preferences too; that they are also worthy of respect, and that it would be polite - and prudent - to respect them.

Tom:


Sarah's post does not come across as racist!

Are you sure you just don't like her blunt approach to Britain's foreign policy and stance in Middle Eastern affairs?


If that is racist then surely that includes all Britains who share critisism on this country's foreign policy?!



As for Saira Khan: everyone is entitled to their opinion., but it seems that Ms. Khan has taken a rather cynical view on a preference to personal religious attire that she has obviously refused to examine in its entirety.

Perhaps she should interview the women in this country who wear the niqab and make her analysis based on reality, rather than fanciful distortions that only serves to appease the prejudices of sections of British society and possibly even her own!

Jane:

Thanks for your comments.

No, I don't know Ms.Khan, but the charge that Muslim woman wear the veil out of 'political defiance' would appear to be almost abstract.

From Tom's statement it would seem that Saira Khan is making a general assumption, based on what evidence?

Is this a biased PERSONAL view,or a conclusive critique formed on BALANCED investigation?


Mainstream journalism, especially those on the Rupert Murdoch payroll, make many a claim,but one needs to ascertain what is indeed factual and what is mere propaganda!?

P.S. Sorry didn't have time to reply to your other post, regarding the crucifix debate..will try to answer you later tonight.


Regards!

A few words about Saira Khan: she drinks, she never prays, she never goes to mosque, and furhtermore she is married to a kuffar.
Conclusion, she is an infidel, an enemy of Islam, and must be terated as such

Islam is portrayed in a negative light to those who lack in any knowledge of the religion. People like Jack Straw play an enormous part in this.I advise anyone who wants to make a negative comment about any aspects of the religion Islam should gain further knowledge and make sure their sources are reliable.The issue about the veil can be made simple. Every individual has a right to obey their religion even if it does not conform to society, beacuse it is their beliefs, and their accounting in the hereafter that counts.

Abu Ali al-Nejad

Your description of Saira Khan applies also to me. I drink. I do pray, but to the Christian God. I never go to mosque, and I think I'm married to a kuffar although I'm not quite sure what a kuffar is.

So how exactly should I be treated?

This country has had it, if I was younger I would be out of here ASAP. My family have worked hard all of their lives and I wonder "What for"? I am treated as a second class citizen (no make that third class!) Religion is going to bring this country down, just look around the world and tell me any conflict that is not fuelled by it.We have just about sorted out the IRA problem, and now we have got an even bigger problem, I am scared to go on a plane, a bus and a train, what a way to be in my own country!!!

Assalaamu alaikum, Just few more words and facts about Saira Khan and her ideas of being the "role model for moderate Muslims": 1- she openly drinks alcohol; 2- she shakes hands with men; 3- she never goes to mosque; 4- she is married to a kuffar (non muslim) !!!!

and her list of sins is by no means exhaustive.

In a few words, she is nothing but the worst enemy of Islam.

Kuffar means infidel, non-Muslim.The Holy Koran clearly states that a Muslim woman must NOT marry a kuffar, because this would be regarded as fornication, one of the most horrible sins in Islam.In some countries like Saudi Arabia this is regarded as an offence punishable by death, and RIGHTLY SO!!!Saudi Arabia might not be perfect, but at the moment it is the best available example of how a Ummah (a Muslim society) should work.Hopefully one day the whole world will become a huge Ummah, where non-Muslims will have a dhimmi status, that is the status of second-class citizens.The Holy Koran clearly states that this world belongs to Muslims, and not to infidels.And of course, when the Sharia Law applies on the whole planet, the likes of fasiqas and murtads (fasiqa = sinner, and murtad = leaver of teh faith)like Saira Khan will be the first ones to be stoned to death.I, for one, suggest that this odious creature be renamed Saira Harram (harram = sinful thing)Do the brothers and sisters in this forum agree?

Abu Ali al-Nejad:

You are not the most tactful person on God's earth it has to be said!

Instead of using so much hatred in your tone why do you not lead by example and talk to others in a calm fashion.

Did our Prophet(SA) address people with such venom? He used patience and dignity in his approach..even when he was ill-treated by his enemies.

People often come on this forum to learn more about Islam. This gives others the opportunity to address any questions they may have or get involved in mature dialogue.

Kindly debate in a non-aggressive manner.

Your tone can be very off-putting to other people.

Salam!

You are asking me how I know that Saira Harram drinks and shakes hands with men?
Did you not watch "the Apprentice" last year?
Actually she even hugged men !!!!
And her cuckolded husband said later that he was so proud of her !!!
I will not waste time on your speculation about my surname, which is REAL, and I am SUNNI.

Sister Zara, salam to you as well.
Sorry that you found my tone aggressive, sorry to have upset a sister, but I cannot shirk from my duty to defend Islam and condemn in the strongest terms snakes like Saira Harram who are undermining Islam by stealth and practicing harram in public.
Salam to all brothers and sisters in this forum.

You are asking me how I know that Saira Harram drinks and shakes hands with men?
Did you not watch "the Apprentice" last year?
Actually she even hugged men !!!!
And her cuckolded husband said later that he was so proud of her !!!
I will not waste time on your speculation about my surname, which is REAL, and I am SUNNI.

Sister Zara, salam to you as well.
Sorry that you found my tone aggressive, sorry to have upset a sister, but I cannot shirk from my duty to defend Islam and condemn in the strongest terms snakes like Saira Harram who are undermining Islam by stealth and practicing harram in public.
Salam to all brothers and sisters in this forum.

Assalaamu alaikum,

Long live sister Aishah Azmi, and may Allah (SWT) bless her for her steadfastness in her fight for her right to wear the niqab if she wishes so.
May Allah (SWT) grant her victory in her upcoming fight in the European Supreme Court.
Long live sister Shabina Begum, and praised be her battle against a Luton school to wear jilbab at school.
These are the Muslim sisters that we should regard as shining role models, not awful creatures like Yasmin
Alibhai-Brown and Saira Harram.
Did I make myself clear?

For those who have obviously misunderstood, of course the Saudi royal family is a bunch of corrupt thieves, Western-style playboys, and all the vilest things under the sun.

However, since teh Saudis are already used to Sharia Law, Saudi Arabia will be the first place on Earth where to start a real ummah when the current Saudi infidel government is overturned and all infidels are kicked out of the Holy Arabian peninsula and hopefully of the whole Middle East.

Sharia Law is the law of Allah (SWT) and the only future for the whole umanity.

I am not defending saira khan, infact she is damaging to the whole muslim sisters cause, however i believe you are not who you say you are from the inconsistences in your writings and the whole nature of your postings. You are just trying to make the non muslims of this post, i.e jane and others see muslims in a bad light. Saudi arabia, implimenting sharia! That is not true. The saudi arabia pick and chose laws from britain, america and islamic laws, so its nothing to do with sharia. A famous law in saudi is 'you are guilty untill proven either rich, american or british'.

Hi Amy,

Seems you just discovered your hatred of the veil..... Bit late!!!

Hi all
My (adoptive Italian) name is Francesca.
About myself: born in Britain from an extremely strict and extremely honour-fixated Sunni family of South Asian stock, when I turned 18 my parents brutally forced me to marry a man I immensely disliked, a vile control-freak who would all the time beat me up.
One day I ran off to a women's hostel, then after a while I went to Italy, where I met my current husband, a lovely, easy-going and educated Italian gentleman.
Not only he accepted straight away my decision not to embrace the Roman Catholic religion, but he also actively encouraged me to wear hijab and celebrate all Muslim holidays.
Our marriage has been blessed with 4 lovely kids.
I am saying those things so that you can understand where I come from in successive messages
In the next messages, more about topics like Sister Saira Khan, the veil, etc.
Sister Francesca

About hijab and niqab:
1- while the hijab is a Quranic requirement, the niqab is not.
2- moreover it is obvious that the niqab can be used in order to hide one's identity for criminal purposes.
3- in virtually all European countries it is forbidden to hide one's face, but unfortunately most of those countries, out of the most idiotic and lunatic political correctness, (including Italy, my adoptive country) have decided to make an exception for those women who profess to be Muslims.
THIS IS WRONG !!!
Why should there be a law for Muslims and another for non-Muslims?

And please note that in countries like Turkey and Tunisia the niqab is banned, and the ban is strictly enforced, AND RIGHTLY SO !!!

More on the next message
Sister Francesca

Dear Sarah

Sorry, why do you think that Sister Saira Khan is damaging to the whole Muslim Sisters' cause?
OK, she married a lovely white Englishman, who happens to be a
non-Muslim, so what (and BTW who says that a Muslim Sister cannot marry a
non-Muslim man)?
She is the bete noire of hatred-spewing mullahs and imams, so what?
She dares to speak the truth and make her voice heard agianst bigotry and prejudice, so what?
She may not be a saint and is not even my favourite cup of tea (since she is a capitalist and I am a communist and member of the Italian far-left party Rifondazione Comunista) but as a Muslim Sister she surely does not deserve all that flak.
Sister Francesca

Dear Sarah

Sorry, why do you think that Sister Saira Khan is damaging to the whole Muslim Sisters' cause?
OK, she married a lovely white Englishman, who happens to be a
non-Muslim, so what (and BTW who says that a Muslim Sister cannot marry a
non-Muslim man)?
She is the bete noire of hatred-spewing mullahs and imams, so what?
She dares to speak the truth and make her voice heard agianst bigotry and prejudice, so what?
She may not be a saint and is not even my favourite cup of tea (since she is a capitalist and I am a communist and member of the Italian far-left party Rifondazione Comunista) but as a Muslim Sister she surely does not deserve all that flak.
Sister Francesca