UK Moves to Criminalize Islam(ism)

99902897-david-cameron

It’s easy to slam all the nonsense about Islamic extremism as willful denial and the notion that Islamism is something separate from Islam, rather than the political implementation of Islam through Islamization, as delusional.

But this is potentially a quite important step. For the first time, a major Western country is moving to criminalize a variant of Islam. And that’s an interesting precedent.

The UK is separating a part of Islam (based on specific characteristics, e.g. a worldwide Islamic state, approval of violence) that the religion shares as a whole. And it’s doing this by classifying it as a political ideology… rather than a religion.

That’s a good thing. Yes, this isn’t an actual ban. But it is a declaration that it is unwelcome and is to be treated the way that “right-wing extremists” like the EDL are. That is going to have plenty of invisible consequences especially on the policing level. Assuming that it’s truly implemented.

The UK isn’t going to suddenly go full Angola. Even Angola isn’t going full Angola. But these represent three important steps

1. Classifying a form of Islam as an ideology rather than a religion

2. Taking legal steps to move it out of the public square

3. Making that classification based on characteristics that Islam overall shares

That’s a base for something much bigger.

It would be premature to make too much of this right now. Cameron is worried about his political prospects and European leaders have a tendency to talk big going into elections before scampering away… but this does look like it was workshopped through the bureaucracy. That means it may actually turn into policy.

The British government said Wednesday it needs new powers to help combat the spread of violent extremist Islam, including administrative authority to ban groups and restrict the movement and behavior of alleged recruiters.

A special task force of senior ministers set up by Prime Minister David Cameron reported Wednesday, recommending new quasi-judicial authorities and defining Islamic extremism as “a distinct ideology that should not be confused with traditional [Muslim] religious practice,” according to a statement from Mr. Cameron’s office.

The report also recommends the government work with Internet providers in Britain to get them to block access to sites based abroad that carry material “illegal under U.K. law.”

The new powers recommended for use against extremist recruiters would be similar to the controversial “anti-social behavior orders” introduced in 1998. Such orders are imposed by local magistrates on hooligans and other reckless youths — banning them from being in places like malls or parks, associating with certain people and exhibiting behaviors like swearing or playing loud music.

Anti-social behavior orders can be imposed “on the balance of the evidence.” By contrast, criminal sanctions can be imposed only after conviction “beyond a reasonable doubt.”

That last part is rather important. It makes it possible for the authorities to begin harassing people because everyone knows what they’re up to.

The move is part of a sweeping package of measures drawn up by an anti-extremism task force set up by David Cameron after the death of Drummer Lee Rigby in Woolwich.

In its initial report to be detailed to Parliament today, the task force will also propose new internet filters to block extremist websites and extended powers for watchdogs to shut down charities suspected of being fronts for extremist groups.

‘I want to see an end to hate preaching in Britain,’ the Prime Minister said.

As well as new civil orders against extremists – dubbed ‘Tebos’, or terror and extremism behaviour orders – the Government is to consider the case for another new type of order to ban groups which ‘seek to undermine democracy or use hate speech, when necessary to protect the public or prevent crime and disorder’.

Both types of order are to be based on a new definition of extremism which specifically includes a ‘distorted interpretation of Islam’.

It identifies Islamist extremism as a distinct ideology which should not be confused with traditional  religious practice. This ‘distorted’ view argues for a global Islamic state and against ‘liberal values such as democracy, the rule of law and equality’, and tells people they cannot be both Muslim and British.

This “distorted view” just happens to be Islam. And if the UK government just blindly classified Islam as a political ideology to be repressed… that puts him on the same line as Russia’s Vladimir Putin.

Cameron made the announcement in China, which like Russia, has government clergy and clergy not sanctioned by the government who are subject to all sorts of government sanctions. Europe is slowly drifting toward that solution. It’s not a real solution since it does not address the demographic issues, something China can afford to ignore, but it’s a potentially important step.

The task force includes Home Secretary Theresa May, Deputy Premier Nick Clegg, Minister for Faith Baroness Warsi, and has taken advice from police and intelligence chiefs.

Clegg is well on the left and Warsi is a Muslim and has some suspicious ties. So I would like to see how this is actually implemented, but there is potential here.

  • Anukem Jihadi

    I have to slam it. I think “Islamism” may turn out be a label practically nobody will be silly enough to wear. I think it will just serve to legitimize the acceptance of Islamic practices and norms in the “greater society”.
    It’s typically British to ban things. That’s what the British do.
    They banned Doris Day’s songs. Now they’re banning Islam’s greatest hits.
    What could be more British than that?

    “It identifies Islamist extremism as a distinct ideology which should not be confused with traditional religious practice.” – Excuse me. Who is confused about Islam exactly?

    • Daniel Greenfield

      They don’t have to want to wear it.

      Once the criteria for what an Islamist is are laid out, e.g. support for a Caliphate, opposition to democracy, support for terrorism, it will cover all of Islam.

      • Suman Chakraborty

        Could not agree more.

      • Anukem Jihadi

        Well maybe.
        Are they going to put every mosque under surveillance? I think it’s just a matter of out of sight out of mind. This will silence voices of opposition as well which is what they’d much rather have in my opinion.

        • Daniel Greenfield

          They’re establishing precedent. Whether that will go somewhere I don’t know. There will obviously be a lot of pushback. I don’t think they’ll successfully silence them so it’s an escalation. And escalations can force you to commit to stronger tactics.

          • Anukem Jihadi

            I understand but the precedent cuts both ways. You could be right. I hope so.

      • Lanna

        Exactly Right…..Islam’s true nature never changes, it only deceives!

    • Suman Chakraborty

      Yup, typically British stand for ‘Banning things’ and islam stands for Freedom of Expression. Typical thankless pos.

      • Anukem Jihadi

        I don’t kid myself about the British Suman. They can’t stand against anything anymore. Not even honour killing.

  • Anukem Jihadi

    The culture follows the money and Cameron has already set sail.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      The Money Jihad is a big issue.

  • Texas Patriot

    It’s a big step in the right direction.

  • Johnnnyboy

    It sounds to me like they are trying to avoid admitting to there core mendacity , that somehow there is a sharp and identifiable distinction between different Islamic groups.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      Of course they don’t want to admit it. But they’re trapping themselves into doing it.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      If I go in to my optimist mode, I can take the position that it doesn’t matter as long as the legal definitions are used to crack down on the political activities.

      Put another way, the only reason we care about the deception campaigns is that it’s used to hide the problems rather than go after them.

      This development is no guarantee that they do it, but they’ve taken an important step and that is more important than specific terminology from a legal standpoint. Not that terminology isn’t important of course, but as long as they’re targeting the dangerous activities, the nuanced labels are a lot less important. It’s close enough.

  • Warren Raymond

    I wonder how this got past the curry princess. She will make sure that the teeth will be removed before it bites.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      It sounds like she was part of the committee. Which leads me to think that in practice this mau have been already neutered.

  • worldwatchman

    Excellent! Now, if only the free world would really grow a pair and deport ALL muslims from our countries. Then, people wouldn’t have to always watch when a muslim is around them. They will NEVER be accepted fully into any western culture. Deport them all. NOW!

    • blackyb

      I am thinking that is the only way to do this and preserve our country.

    • https://twitter.com/xarinatan Alexander ypema

      I love the part where you imply you’re living in a free country, last I checked you were allowed to express your own religious beliefs and other life decisions without governmental intervention.

      Muslims aren’t criminals, criminals are criminals. If they just happen to wave a muslim banner about doesn’t mean that all muslims are criminals. That’s like saying that all british are aggressive c*nts because there’s a bunch of hooligans picking fights with everything that casts a shadow.

  • truebearing

    Maybe the Brits are more aware of what this policies implies than they dare let on. Eventually, even the most obtuse should be able to realize that survival is at stake. I wish them well in their endeavor to rid Britain of Islam…I mean Islamists, of course.

  • thor42

    At least it’s a start.

    A very small, very *late* start, but still a start.

    It is very good that the word “ideology” is mentioned.

    Islam is *indeed* an ideology – “religion’ is a very small part of it. How small can be seen here –
    http://themuslimissue.wordpress.com/2012/11/04/statistical-islam/

    Quote from the above site – “Islam is 14% Allah and 86% Mohammed.”

    Given this, and given that Mohammad is held up as “the ideal Muslim”, *that* strongly argues for “cult” as a description of Islam, and that is accurate too.
    That’s why I call it a cult/ideology as it covers a *massive* number of things – things *far outside* the usual aegis of a “religion”.

    Anyway, the Brits NEED to realise, and realise FAST, that *Islam as a whole* is an ideology – not just the “violent bits” (and there are *lots* of those).

    What a pity that Spencer and Geller could have told the UK government *everything* they need to know about Islam, but no – in its BONE-HEADED stupidity, the UK government banned them from entry.

    I think that before long, they will have cause to hugely regret that move.

    - thor42

    • knowshistory

      no, it isnt a start. it is a subterfuge. the traitor class is stalling for time, trying to gull the betrayed population one more time as they are groomed for extermination.

      • Jesus rules

        The sooner the better so Jesus can come back and destroy every last one of the infidels.

    • quincyman

      I think it’s creating a base line point to start from… It’s being able to label some one a terrorist and arrest them .You need some basic criteria..

  • RationalFearOfTerror

    The British Task Force report defines Islamist extremism as “a distinct ideology which should not be confused with traditional religious practice (and)… is based on a distorted interpretation of Islam, which betrays Islam’s peaceful principles”.

    The trouble is prejudice against Other and therefore subsequent propensity for violence are set between approximately 0-4 years of age and they look so cute (it is not their fault it is called cultural conditioning), changing it after that has been found to be neigh impossible.

    Violently inclined preachers are a product of this developed prejudice without its formation, infant and child within the Islamic/Muslim culture, so called extremist preachers simply would not exist. Targeting them as adults is simply not going to stop the rising push for the Muslim ethical mean to align with the cultural foundation codex normative construct of Other. It is a short term feel good solution – it is very much like trying to keep growing numbers of coconuts from floating to the surface with just one hand – it is not going to work.

    Indonesian research has shown there is no ethical quantum leap between the fundamentalist and the terrorist. Therefore logic would determine no quantum ethical leap between liberal moderate and fundamentalist. There has to be an ethical construct which links all along the behavioral spectrum otherwise we would have to be talking about two completely different cultures based on diametrically opposed cultural foundation codex construct of Other.

    To say there is a distinct difference is rationally impossible because it means culturally the distinct class of extremist are not a part of the larger community nor have the ethical construct of Other been derived from it in anyway – it is absolutely impossible for such a state to exist. It would mean the so called liberal moderate parents of terrorists cannot claim they are not terrorists also because the culture which formed the child of which they are psychological integral within which they reside Islam (or as the taskforce has determined ‘Not Islam’) has formed the terrorist behavior – the task force report claim is this is not so, how can this be possible. It means the terrorist was born from a completely different family and culture – is this true?

    As well the extremists being so distinct, so contrasted as to be separate from the culture from which they have clearly originated from, they would not be allowed to move in or out of the so call liberal moderate fellow adherent’s cultural space for support in anyway – extremists and terrorists are determined by this report as not of the culture Islam – distinct (separate). Is this happening? No it is not therefore to claim extremists and terrorists are culturally ‘distinct’ is a false assumption.

    Extremists and terrorists know and can point to the exact justification and authorization for their ethics and informed actions from the Islamic cultural foundation codex of which liberal moderate exemplars are also self-avowed adherents.

    Any cultural foundation codex informs a cultural behavioral variance ‘spectrum’ along which the ethical mean moves in space and time to say there is an ethical ‘grand canyon’ separating the so called liberal moderate and the fundamentalist extremists is simply untrue. For it would proposes the ethical mean is static at a specific point within the cultural behavioral spectrum and not only that a miracle occurs a completely new cultural behavioral mean appears from nowhere to create a completely new fundamentalist extremist cultural ethic – it is absolutely insane reasoning.

    Islam cultural foundation codex informs ALL of the Muslim cultural behavioral variance spectrum liberal, moderate, fundamentalist, extremist, terrorist. Not to be honest as Tony Blair said about this truth means you are always treating the symptoms and not the cause the actual Islamic foundation codex construct of Other.

    There is a very dangerous lie being promoted here that Islamic culture does not inform extremists and terrorists and that they have obtained ethics from a blank space, ‘Not Islam’. It is just not going to stand up to any reasonable evaluation as increasingly the broken bodies and lives keep rolling in.

  • edlancey

    Sorry Daniel but the presence of Clegg and Warsi will ensure that this is a talking shop that will achieve nothing – other than perhaps to help ward off UKIP in the local elections in May ’14 – once it has served that purpose it will be either kicked into touch or hang around dormant until it repeats the same trick at the general election in ’15.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      You may well be right. But I’m considering the possibility that they really do think this can work.

      • edlancey

        Hmmm.

        Clegg’s first reaction on an “Islamist” hacking off Lee Rigby’s head in broad daylight while happily babbling Koranic verses to the TV cameras (cut out of UK news broadcasts, natch) was to say that it was nothing to do with Islam.

        That sets a pretty high bar for whatever they may decide to proscribe.

        It is sadly inconceivable to me that it is anything other than a joke.

        However I hope you are right.

        • Daniel Greenfield

          As was Cameron’s and Boris Johnson’s, who surely knows better and has said so in the past.

          But I think they might like to quiet down the issue by trying to separate out the bad “Islamists” from what they think real Islam is.

          And if they’re stupid enough to believe their own nonsense, they may not realize the can of worms they’re opening.

      • DonnaTxx

        Islamic extremism is so firmly embedded in our communities it would create civil unrest if genuinely tackled. The Govt knows this.

        French and Russian intelligence has been warning them for years, yet they stood idle and allowed radical imams to enter Britain and preach in schools, colleges, prisons, mosques etc etc.

        Anwar Al Awlaki ex head of Al-qaeda and implicated in 9/11, plus other terror attacks was allowed to enter Britain and preach in Green Lane mosque, Birmingham.

        Let’s face it, our successive Govts have been complicit every step of the way.

  • knowshistory

    window dressing. an attempt by the “leaders” who have betrayed the west to islam, and would like to seem to be doing something right while they continue the betrayal. if the “leaders” of UK had any intention to stop the treason, they would not be “criminalizing” what is already pure evil, they would stop importing and supporting pure evil, and they would round up and send back home the evil they have imported, coddled, supported, and protected. do not again be deceived by traitors. it is way late to be slowly realizing that your population is in the final stages of extermination. it is past time to depose the “leaders” that have betrayed your country, your civilization, your society, and your kind. after giving the traitorous “leaders” the treatment they have prepared for their citizens, the islamic invasion can be properly addressed, and it wont be addressed by “criminalizing” “islamism”. it must be addressed by sending the invaders to some place they do not wish to destroy. i suggest mecca. or heaven.

  • Edgar Davidson

    Daniel

    To say that “Warsi is a Muslim and has some suspicious ties” is a bit like saying “Goebbels is a member of the German National Socialist Party who just happens to be close to Adof Hitler”. As “Faiths” Minister she is a major player behind this for two reasons:

    1. She genuinely wants to ban Anjum Chaudery’s overtly pro-Jihidast groups because she does not like the fact that Chaudery is very open and honest about what Islam is and what its aims are for the UK (although she is an Islamist supremacist she want a peaceful and gradual Islamist takeover of the UK). She also has a deep personal hatred of Chaudery because he has called her out and exposed her duplicity so many times.

    2. She wants to use the same leglislation to criminalize all “anti-religious hate speech” – in particular she wants to silence all blogs (which includes yours) that are critical of Islam.

    Edgar

    • Daniel Greenfield

      1. Certainly. But it sets a precedent. Divide and conquer begins from within with factions shutting each other down.

      2. My blog would already be nearly illegal in the UK and any number of First World countries.

  • Anderson

    Is this really a step forward or just a diversion of our anger?
    If Cameron & Co are seriously considering giving a ‘Bond’ to the Islamic Bank (which apparently has links with terrorism) then surely He/They are part of the bigger problem (GREED).
    Will this new ‘policy group’ prevent Sharia law being implemented in this country? How about protests against our soldiers, our police, our Crown? What about deportation – will this be strengthened as well as immigration????

    These issues MATTER to the general public with regards to ALL extremists and breakers of UK Law.
    This is Great Britain and I would like to live in the ‘Great’ part of it if anyone knows where that is???

    • Daniel Greenfield

      It’s meant to be a diversion, like most gov policies on Islam, but it can have more significant consequences.

  • Johnnnyboy

    I am going to change the discussion here to US law because I have some comments I have wanted to make for a long time. I believe that in the United States law is underutilized in dealing with Islam.

    If I got my story straight, the Constitution of the United States limits freedom of speech in one area. You are not allowed to advocate the violent overthrow of government. Doing so is called sedition. Sedition laws have largely been abandoned because in the past they were implemented is so arbitrary a manner. Were we to implement the concept in law, some of the followers of Islam are guilty of sedition, and the Koran is a seditious document. Simply banning the Koran might not be the smartest move, but perhaps we should be discussing it in terms of sedition. One possibility would be to simply talk about the merits of banning it.

    Another consideration is that being a member of a religion does not relieve the individual from personal responsibility in following the law. When a leader advocates illegal activity and the followers act out, it should be possible to prosecute the leader under the Rico Statutes, whether or not it is a religion. (Charles Manson comes to mind) We should be at least considering the prosecution of religious leaders under the Rico Statutes when their followers act out violently.

    • Texas Patriot

      Deceptive Trade Practices is another area that needs to be explored. How many people who convert to Islam realize that they are subject to the death penalty if they ever change their mind?

    • Daniel Greenfield

      http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/842

      The Communist Party of the United States, or any successors of such party regardless of the assumed name, whose object or purpose is to overthrow the Government of the United States, or the government of any State, Territory, District, or possession thereof, or the government of any political subdivision therein by force and violence, are not entitled to any of the rights, privileges, and immunities attendant upon legal bodies created under the jurisdiction of the laws of the United States or any political subdivision thereof; and whatever rights, privileges, and immunities which have heretofore been granted to said party or any subsidiary organization by reason of the laws of the United States or any political subdivision thereof, are terminated:

      • pupsncats

        Daniel, you know the Communist Party is recognized by the government now as legitimate. Think how many in the party run for public offices around the country.

        • Daniel Greenfield

          I know.

    • knowshistory

      there are those of us who believe that overthrowing the government is the only way to stop the treason being committed against our population by the government, which is determined to exterminate us and replace us with enemy foreigners. i can see the sedition laws used against us patriots long before any such thing is even contemplated regarding our enemy invaders.

  • le

    It’s a start, Islim should be criminalized in America. All forms of this disgusting cult should be banned. Get rid of all the mosque and deport all of them back to their own country. No public prayers or teachings

    • John Staring

      Agree. Should also be banned in Australia too. Ship them out. Their loyalty in naturalisation ceremonies is a lie, they are only loyal to the ideology of Islam, which sanctifies lying to deceive “non-believers”.

    • Martin Ellacott

      Agreed…..fundamentalist Christians as well…..

      • pupsncats

        Agreed…atheism, liberalism, Progressiveism, Communism, and Socialism as well since none comport to valuing human life, human dignity, truth, morality, virtues, responsibility, and human rights and liberty.

  • Barbara Davide

    Hooray. Finally someone is wising up. If it walks like a duck…… Now you don’t have to deny your intellect. Deportation would also be a wise move.

  • quincyman

    Of course we know that could never happen here as long as we have a muslin in power.. Our own hussien

  • Angel Nova

    We will have this Islam problem unless Obama is gone. Three years is a long time and in the main time Muslims are multiplying like cockroaches.

    • Starbrander

      Try Bug Spray….I Have Muzzles Taking Over My Neighborhood….I’ve Warned Them…If SHTF, I’ll Be Collecting Scalps

  • Angel Nova

    Cameron is a Dhimmi and cannot be trusted. A dhimmi is a second class Muslim.

  • centralparktarzan

    This is the same country that criminalize Catholicism…Nothing new here!
    Sit back …relax…and enjoy the ever changing power play!

  • senz

    the only way the government will completely solve this is getting rid of Islam as a whole

  • Martin Ellacott

    He’s just making noises that he may do something about radical Islam……it’s all radical as far as I’m concerned. I hope Farage and UKIP pound the shit out of the present Government and get Britain back on the right track Bye, bye, European Union. I lament what has happened to the land of my forefathers.

  • John Fryman

    UH OH! THIS WILL NOT STOP WITH ISLAM!
    This may seem like a good idea, but next thing you know there will be expansions of such restrictions & reductions of other freedoms! I wouldn’t let our condemnation of islam let us approve of more “bans”:

    “The report also recommends the government work with Internet providers in Britain to get them to block access to sites based abroad that carry material “illegal under U.K. law.”
    The new powers recommended for use against extremist recruiters would be similar to the controversial “anti-social behavior orders” introduced in 1998. Such orders are imposed by local magistrates on hooligans and other reckless youths — banning them from being in places like malls or parks, associating with certain people and exhibiting behaviors like swearing or playing loud music.”

  • Mark Schlager

    Destroy multiculturalism! Stop white genocide! Stop illegal immigration! Stop anti-white New World Order Governments!

  • ProquciProdesse

    As we know, it is a duty for ALL moslems to implement the Sha`ria wherever they reside and no moslem is allowed to live by any man made law wherever they reside, and this duty to implement sha`ria extends to the removal of any man made laws and replacing them with sha`ria. This is actually treason. However, if promoting and marketing sha`ria would be deemed extremist islamism, are the British Government stating that all moslems will be issued this “TEBOS”?. Basically speaking here, I think it is fair to say, that if the British government truly applies this law, then sha`ria would effectively become a criminal offence. Anyone who is preaching sha`ria would then need to be arrested. No mosque can operate and no imam can preach unless in strict adherence to sha`ria, therefore, the mosque cannot open and the imam cannot preach and in turn, moslems can only live by the sha`ria within their own homes.. This is would be explosive and will have massive far reaching effect and could quite easily see a huge huge conflict and confrontation resulting in massive civil disturbances and riots as I cannot see any moslem accepting anything like this without a damned good fight.

  • Lanna

    The UK made a big mistake bringing them in to work and they know it now!

  • Jack Williams

    It’s about time!!!!!!!

  • le

    They can be your best friend for years, but will kill you without a second thought when they are told to do so. Perhaps even a family member but they are all waiting for the call to kill people.

  • Tax-Planning

    Fighting Islam, OK, but not with new powers. How about treating every criminal the same? How about being colorblind with every social security applicant?

  • IftikharA

    The Prime Minister is reported to have said: “there are just too many people who have been radicalised in Islamic centres, who have been in contact with extremist preachers, who have accessed radicalising information on the internet and haven’t been sufficiently challenged”. This narrative will only add fuel to an already charged Islamophobic atmosphere.

    In spite of the odd references to other forms of extremism, the proposals and the words of the PM clearly single out Muslim communities and institutions, with an unsubstantiated assertion that extremists are radicalised at Islamic centres. Many are concerned that these proposals continue to view British Muslims through the prism of security, rather than as fully fledged members of British society.

    We agree that those who call for the murder of innocent civilians, as we saw in Woolwich earlier this year, and in other atrocities around the world, are indeed presenting a distorted interpretation of Islam. That is the red line that the vast majority in our community would have no problem in endorsing. We are concerned, however, as to who will be the judge of what a ‘distorted interpretation of Islam’ really is. At what point does opposition to a war based on one’s faith or values becomes an act or ideology of extremism? There are still muddled notions of what extremism really is.

    Over the years, vested interest groups have campaigned against speakers who may be conservative, or whose words were ill-advised, but they are certainly not supporters or promoters of terrorism. Many in our community are concerned that the Government’s proposals have been influenced by these questionable elements.

    While exceptional events linked to Islam and Muslims as problems draw enormous attention and forcible and concerted action, little is done and even less willed to be done to combat Islamophobia, of word or deed, to tackle social exclusion, or to actively promote civic inclusion.

    Moreover, the idea of the state or police arbitrating theological ‘distortion’ is especially worrying. We are a diverse Muslim community, it would be inadvisable for the government to promote state-sponsored sectarianism.

    Following the tragic murder of Drummer Lee Rigby in May, the Muslim community was united in its condemnation and disgust at this action. They were joined by fellow Britons who stood firm in solidarity with each other. As I noted in a speech in June: “We look at Woolwich and are struck by the ways that ordinary people responded to this shocking event in extraordinary ways. The lessons from Woolwich lie less in acknowledgement of impending existential threats to our way of life, than in the demonstration of the resilience of our society.

    No amount of investment in counter-terrorism alone will prevent another attack, but investment in the strengthening of the resilience and capacity of our communities across the whole of our society – through the promotion of civic engagement, social cohesion, capacity building, voice, dignity and stake-holding, through the strengthening of our democracy and through democratic practice and social justice will go a long way towards making the values we all defend a reality for all. Investing in the resilience and capacity of our communities is the surest guarantee that we can stand up for who we are and what we believe in; that we can articulate our grievances without being accused of disloyalty and face up to those who seek to undermine our contribution to this society.”

    Endemic racism is infecting all walks of British society. It is a well known fact that British education is a home of institutional racism. The immigrant children are victims of bullying and racism. Muslim children suffer more than other children. Majority of them leaves schools with low grades or without any qualification. There is no arrangement for them to learn Arabic and Urdu languages making them cut off from their cultural roots. They suffer from Identity crises crucial for mental, emotional and personality development. According to s study report British teachers have no respect for Islamic faith and Muslim community. Muslim children need state funded Muslim schools with Muslim teachers for proper education based on their needs and demands.

    For the first time, academics are taking the issue of anti-Muslim attacks in the UK seriously. A recent report by Jonathan Githens-Mazer and Robert Lambert on Islamophobia and Anti-Muslim Hate Crime: a London Case Study shows how ‘contexts of fear and prejudice against Muslims are providing a basis for violence’. It distinguishes three groups as responsible: small bands of nationalist extremists, gangs with no particular affinities, freelancers acting out of prejudices imbibed from the media’s portrayal of Muslims as terrorists. And, for once in a report, the voices of the victims of such violence are centre-stage.

    This report is the first from a newly formed European Muslim Research Centre (EMRC) at the University of Exeter which has funding from Islam Expo and the Cordoba Foundation for a ten-year study of the lives of Muslims in towns and cities across Europe. And, hopefully, having this new centre making a pronouncement on anti-Muslim violence, certainly the most virulent form of racism in the UK today, may have the national impact that is needed. The report’s strength lies in the way it traces cases back to the unequivocal link between attack and motivation.

    There is absolutely no doubt that its authors are well intentioned and care deeply about this subject. However, there are a number of weaknesses in the report. Anti-Muslim violence is, of course, linked to a growth in Islamophobia. But Islamophobia is not just a body of ideas in a vacuum. It is connected to the war in Iraq and the war on terror and tied therefore to the state, its laws and executive decisions.
    IA
    http://www.londonschoolofislamics.org.uk

  • Lea

    This is a puny attempt at making a move towards addressing the pagan death cult called Islam in the UK. It may very well be used against the British too. Far stronger moves are required. Much stronger to prove that this is not a blanket rule to be used against all Brits but specifically targeted the Muslim population and the problems they create. Deportation and stop immigration and then strong force against people like Anjem Choudary and the likes. Yet nothing seems to be happening, its just fluff.

  • Bernie

    When will they ever learn,,,”A distorted view of Islam”….have you never read the Q’uran…the distorted view…is Islam. Look at its birth and history.