10-21-2006, 02:15 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>West awakens </b>
Pioneer.com
Lookback | Utpal Kumar
Straw's remarks were expected to enrage the Muslim community in general, but what came as a surprise was the stand taken by educated Muslim women in the West. Most of them regarded the veil as a "means of expression", rather than "oppression"
<b>When Ray Honeyford, former principal of Drummond middle school in Bradford, suggested in 1984 that "Asian pupils" should "learn English" and "a bit of British history", he was called "racist" and a thorough investigation was ordered against him by the then Margaret Thatcher Government.</b> Twenty-two years later, in October 2006, when Jack Straw, Leader of the House of Commons, urged Muslim women to remove their burqa, as wearing it made "better, positive relations" between communities more difficult, no less than 53 per cent of Britons supported him. More significantly, 57 per cent believed that Muslims have a responsibility to do more to fit into mainstream society.
Straw's remarks were expected to enrage the Muslim community in general, but what came as surprise was the stand taken by educated Muslim women in the West. Most of them regarded the veil as a "means of expression", rather than "oppression". It is difficult to comprehend the reasons that made them prefer such a shackled dress code that had been vigorously resisted by their Afghan counterparts during the Taliban regime in Afghanistan. How can one justify the demand of Sultaana Freeman who filed a religious discrimination lawsuit against the State of Florida for revoking her driving licence because it carried a niqab-wearing photograph? No less weird was the demand of a British teacher to take classes in a niqab.
Had such protests occurred in the pre-7/7 era, the Government might have bent backwards to appease Muslims. But times have changed and so has perceptions in the corridors of power. Prime Minister Tony Blair confirmed this change of mindset when he "fully supported" the decision of the Kirklees Council to suspend the Muslim teaching assistant who had refused to remove her veil at work. He further put his stamp on the death of unidimensional multi-culturalism in the UK when he reinforced Mr Straw's statement, saying that the veil was a "mark of separation". Mr Blair, at the same time, established the fact that the "contentious" views of Jack Straw, Ruth Kelly, Phil Woolas, among others, were not just individual opinions, but part of a well thought out decision. Today, it is expected of all those who settle in the UK to relate to mainstream British society.
What caused this change of heart, thus marking the beginning of end of "multi-culturalism" in the UK? Till 7/7, when the London Metro became the target of jihadi fury, Britain provided space to "revolutionaries" under the illusion that they would martyr themselves elsewhere. This understanding seemed to have worked well in the beginning. But as early as 1988, Salman Rushdie anticipated the crisis when he wrote in The Satanic Verses of a Khomeini-like "bearded and turbaned imam" in London, a "loathed exile (hoping to) return in triumph" to his homeland.
Britain, however, continued to ignore the fundamentalist crescent of Islam probably out of what one Western commentator called "White guilt" for all the "old sins of racism, imperialism and colonialism". Worse, it even assisted the process of ghettoisation of the Muslim mindset.
Sheikh Bakri, a self-confessed spokesperson of Osama bin Laden's "International Islamic Front for Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders", acknowledged in 1996 that he was living on social benefits from the British Government of "nearly £300 a week". He confessed: "Islam allows me to take the benefit the system offers. Most of the leadership of the Islamic movement is on (state) benefit."
<b>The British obsession for appeasing Muslims - touting "multi-culturalism" - was quite blatant during the Shabina Begum episode.</b> In 2002, Shabina, a student of a Muslim-dominated school with a co-religionist principal, discarded the modest salwar-kameez uniform for a head-to-toe gown. When the school authorities objected, her brother threatened to drag them to court. Though the law lords finally accepted the school's decision, the British fixation with "multi-culturalism" got unveiled, as none less than the wife of Prime Minister Tony Blair led the propaganda in favour of Islamic fundamentalists. So much for "multi-culturalism"!
<b>If Muslims are facing Islamophobia in the West, partly it's they themselves who are to blame. After all, according to a Pew global survey, 81 per cent of British Muslims considered themselves Muslim first and British second</b>. Interestingly, it is second only to Pakistan where 87 per cent of people showcased a similar mindset. Moreover, a recent poll found that over 10,000 British Muslims believe that suicide attacks on civilians in the UK are justified under certain circumstances. What is, however, more disconcerting is the fact that about 16,000 British Muslims "actively engage in or support terrorism", of these "some 3000 have been trained at Al Qaeda camps in Pakistan or Afghanistan". It is, therefore, hardly a surprise when 53 per cent of Britons regard Islam as a "threat to Western liberal democracy" (if a YouGov survey in Daily Telegraph is to be believed) and demand greater integration of Muslims with the rest of society. With the awakening of British society, a paradigm shift in the perception of the powers-that-be should not come as a surprise.
<b>Britain is a shinning example of how a liberal democracy turns to the advantage of Islamists, who use its freedom to advance their narrow interpretation of religion.</b> Aren't other democracies, including India, treading the same beaten track of indulging the minorities to live in ghettos? In India, the separatist trend has already taken deep roots, as was evident in the July Mumbai bombings that was executed by homegrown terrorists. The view is further reinforced when one witnesses several NGOs, political activists and separatists staging a pro-clemency movement in favour of Mohammed Afzal Guru, who masterminded the Parliament House attack. Missing the failure of Britain's "multi-culturalism" will be a monumental folly, especially for the future of democratic liberalism across the world.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Pioneer.com
Lookback | Utpal Kumar
Straw's remarks were expected to enrage the Muslim community in general, but what came as a surprise was the stand taken by educated Muslim women in the West. Most of them regarded the veil as a "means of expression", rather than "oppression"
<b>When Ray Honeyford, former principal of Drummond middle school in Bradford, suggested in 1984 that "Asian pupils" should "learn English" and "a bit of British history", he was called "racist" and a thorough investigation was ordered against him by the then Margaret Thatcher Government.</b> Twenty-two years later, in October 2006, when Jack Straw, Leader of the House of Commons, urged Muslim women to remove their burqa, as wearing it made "better, positive relations" between communities more difficult, no less than 53 per cent of Britons supported him. More significantly, 57 per cent believed that Muslims have a responsibility to do more to fit into mainstream society.
Straw's remarks were expected to enrage the Muslim community in general, but what came as surprise was the stand taken by educated Muslim women in the West. Most of them regarded the veil as a "means of expression", rather than "oppression". It is difficult to comprehend the reasons that made them prefer such a shackled dress code that had been vigorously resisted by their Afghan counterparts during the Taliban regime in Afghanistan. How can one justify the demand of Sultaana Freeman who filed a religious discrimination lawsuit against the State of Florida for revoking her driving licence because it carried a niqab-wearing photograph? No less weird was the demand of a British teacher to take classes in a niqab.
Had such protests occurred in the pre-7/7 era, the Government might have bent backwards to appease Muslims. But times have changed and so has perceptions in the corridors of power. Prime Minister Tony Blair confirmed this change of mindset when he "fully supported" the decision of the Kirklees Council to suspend the Muslim teaching assistant who had refused to remove her veil at work. He further put his stamp on the death of unidimensional multi-culturalism in the UK when he reinforced Mr Straw's statement, saying that the veil was a "mark of separation". Mr Blair, at the same time, established the fact that the "contentious" views of Jack Straw, Ruth Kelly, Phil Woolas, among others, were not just individual opinions, but part of a well thought out decision. Today, it is expected of all those who settle in the UK to relate to mainstream British society.
What caused this change of heart, thus marking the beginning of end of "multi-culturalism" in the UK? Till 7/7, when the London Metro became the target of jihadi fury, Britain provided space to "revolutionaries" under the illusion that they would martyr themselves elsewhere. This understanding seemed to have worked well in the beginning. But as early as 1988, Salman Rushdie anticipated the crisis when he wrote in The Satanic Verses of a Khomeini-like "bearded and turbaned imam" in London, a "loathed exile (hoping to) return in triumph" to his homeland.
Britain, however, continued to ignore the fundamentalist crescent of Islam probably out of what one Western commentator called "White guilt" for all the "old sins of racism, imperialism and colonialism". Worse, it even assisted the process of ghettoisation of the Muslim mindset.
Sheikh Bakri, a self-confessed spokesperson of Osama bin Laden's "International Islamic Front for Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders", acknowledged in 1996 that he was living on social benefits from the British Government of "nearly £300 a week". He confessed: "Islam allows me to take the benefit the system offers. Most of the leadership of the Islamic movement is on (state) benefit."
<b>The British obsession for appeasing Muslims - touting "multi-culturalism" - was quite blatant during the Shabina Begum episode.</b> In 2002, Shabina, a student of a Muslim-dominated school with a co-religionist principal, discarded the modest salwar-kameez uniform for a head-to-toe gown. When the school authorities objected, her brother threatened to drag them to court. Though the law lords finally accepted the school's decision, the British fixation with "multi-culturalism" got unveiled, as none less than the wife of Prime Minister Tony Blair led the propaganda in favour of Islamic fundamentalists. So much for "multi-culturalism"!
<b>If Muslims are facing Islamophobia in the West, partly it's they themselves who are to blame. After all, according to a Pew global survey, 81 per cent of British Muslims considered themselves Muslim first and British second</b>. Interestingly, it is second only to Pakistan where 87 per cent of people showcased a similar mindset. Moreover, a recent poll found that over 10,000 British Muslims believe that suicide attacks on civilians in the UK are justified under certain circumstances. What is, however, more disconcerting is the fact that about 16,000 British Muslims "actively engage in or support terrorism", of these "some 3000 have been trained at Al Qaeda camps in Pakistan or Afghanistan". It is, therefore, hardly a surprise when 53 per cent of Britons regard Islam as a "threat to Western liberal democracy" (if a YouGov survey in Daily Telegraph is to be believed) and demand greater integration of Muslims with the rest of society. With the awakening of British society, a paradigm shift in the perception of the powers-that-be should not come as a surprise.
<b>Britain is a shinning example of how a liberal democracy turns to the advantage of Islamists, who use its freedom to advance their narrow interpretation of religion.</b> Aren't other democracies, including India, treading the same beaten track of indulging the minorities to live in ghettos? In India, the separatist trend has already taken deep roots, as was evident in the July Mumbai bombings that was executed by homegrown terrorists. The view is further reinforced when one witnesses several NGOs, political activists and separatists staging a pro-clemency movement in favour of Mohammed Afzal Guru, who masterminded the Parliament House attack. Missing the failure of Britain's "multi-culturalism" will be a monumental folly, especially for the future of democratic liberalism across the world.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->