We Have a Problem
So there’s a transcript of Panorama – very useful for those of us too far away to watch it.
Much food for thought. John Ware:
Extremism feeds off a conviction that Islam is a superior faith and culture which Christians and Jews in the West are conspiring to undermine. My journey through Muslim communities since the London bombings suggests their leaders have not acknowledged the extent to which these views are held in Britain.
He talks to Dr Taj Hargey, who runs a centre for what he calls ‘progressive inclusive Islam.’ Good luck, Dr Hargey, then.
Ad infinitum and ad nauseum, it’s there, it’s with us. We see it from the time you’re a child, you’re given this idea that those people they are Kaafir, they’re unbelievers. They are not equal to you, they are different to you. You are superior to them because you have the truth, they don’t have the truth. You will go to heaven, they will go to hell. So we have this from a very young age.
Ware asks Iqbal Sacranie if he would still expect the government of the day to put pressure on the publishers to withdraw it.
There is no law at the moment, sadly, that would enable me to pursue with a legal course of.. of seeking its withdrawal.
Ah yes, that is sad. Sacranie goes on:
We respect the freedom of expression but we expect freedom of expression to be exercised with responsibility.
Which means, we feel obliged to say we respect the freedom of expression but in reality we’re dead against it. Except for ourselves of course. To express our grievance when books like that get published.
As Rushdie said a couple of weeks ago, ‘If Sir Iqbal Sacranie is the best Blair can offer in the way of a good Muslim, we have a problem.’
In addition: Irshad Manji on Australian ABC TV’s Lateline last night.
http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2005/s1443671.htm
” … move beyond happy dialogue, beyond platitudes, and ask some pointed questions … ” Right on.
I oppose the Incitement to Religious Hatred Bill so I suppose I should accept that clerics have the right to describe other religions as pigs & monkeys, idol-worshippers, sick, degenerate, inherently inferior and destined for hell-fire.
I’ve said some pretty harsh things about religion in my time and will again (D.V.)but I generally try to have some point other than pure hate. However, I also don’t spit when I get excited, so maybe that’s just a difference in personal style.
What bothers me, and I know we’ve touched on this before, is the apparent belief, most recently exemplified by Madeleine Bunting in the Guardian, that;
a) It’s only ok for moslems
b) Pointing it out equates to Islamophobia
Fascist, racist rhetoric like this has been used before in Britain, most notably in the 30’s and 70’s. How you responded to it defined you politically. It still does. Can we stop pretending that those who excuse or support fascism (Islamo- or otherwise) are remotely ‘liberal’ or ‘left’?
Freedom of speech may mean letting people spout this venom. It doesn’t mean we can’t call them on it.
Useful link here on the wider motivations of Northern European born jihadists… from le monde Diplomatique http://mondediplo.com/2005/08/05terror
e.g:
“These radicals are not fighting for a specific national cause. They are part of the contemporary global jihad: Bosnia, Afghanistan, Chechnya, Kashmir and now Iraq. Their enemy is the US and the West in general. They are not fighting to establish an Islamic state in Iraq or Palestine. They are not concerned with solidarity networks or fundraising; nor are they involved in the conflicts and practical problems of Muslim populations in Europe. None of them is known to have been active in Muslim trade union, political or communal organisations. Those who have attended mosques have often done so under the patronage of fundamentalist organisations, such as Jama’at ut-Tabligh, which do not advocate political action. So the London terrorists of Pakistani origin did not go to Kashmir or Waziristan to fight the (nationalist) enemy. “