Author: Ophelia Benson

  • Erdogan calls French bill on Armenian genocide “racist”

    The Turkish government argues that judging what happened in eastern Turkey in 1915-16 should be left to historians, and that the new French law will restrict freedom of speech.

  • NSS on LSE Student Union v principle of free speech

    “These statements by the Student Union are deeply shocking. They appear to be prepared to sacrifice the primary principle of free speech on the altar of claimed offence.”

  • Jesus and Mo on how not to offend

    We must ensure that everyone’s beliefs are protected. Well not quite everyone’s.

  • Ministry of Truth on manipulations of LSE Students’ Union

    A motion to limit voting rights at general meetings looks like another cynical ploy designed to head off any possibility of LSESU ASH rallying support.

     

     

  • Emergency! Everybody to get from street

    Great news! The LSE Students’ Union has another statement out. It’s another pip. It’s about an urgent EGM on Thursday – which I take to be an Emergency General Meeting (but perhaps it’s Electric, or Elegant, or Educational, or Elevated*). Emergency, emergency! Why I bet we can guess what that is…

    In light of recent events there will be two anti-discrimination motions being discussed and debated at an EGM this week, these are: No to racism – no to Islamophobia! and Stop Anti-Semitism Now.

    Guessed right.

    Stop racism no to Islamophobia! – in the form of a cartoon image of two guys having a beer on the Facebook page of a student group. That’s racism ‘n’ Islamophobia? No, but in studentworld, it’s so much like it that it’s worth punishing just the same.

    Union believes

    1. In the right to criticise religion,

    2. In freedom of speech and thought,

    3. It has a responsibility to protect its members from hate crime and hate speech,

    4. Debate on religious matters should not be limited by what may be offensive to any particular religion, but the deliberate and persistent targeting of one religious group about any issue with the intent or effect of being Islamophobic (‘Islamophobia’ as defined below) will not be tolerated.

    5. That Islamophobia is a form of anti-Islamic racism.

    Union resolves

    1.To define Islamophobia as “a form of racism expressed through the hatred or fear of Islam, Muslims, or Islamic culture, and the stereotyping, demonisation or harassment of Muslims, including but not limited to portraying Muslims as barbarians or terrorists, or attacking the Qur’an as a manual of hatred”,

    2. To take a firm stance against all Islamophobic incidents at LSE and conduct internal investigations if and when they occur.

    3. To publicly oppose actions on campus that are Islamophobic based on the aforementioned definition,

    4. To ensure that all Islamophobic incidents aimed at or perpetrated by LSE students either verbal, physical or online are dealt with swiftly and effectively in conjunction with the School,

    5. To work with the Pro-Director for Teaching and Learning and Deans to address Islamophobia and other forms of racism on campus and methods to alleviate it,

    6. To ensure that this definition is used to promote and enhance legitimate debate regarding the morality and legitimacy of international conflicts and oppose illegitimate acts of Islamophobia on campus.

     4 is good. 4 is very special. Debate should not be limited, but it will not be tolerated.

    5 too. A form of “anti-Islamic racism” – as if Islamic were a race. “A form of anti-Christian racism” – doesn’t work, does it. (Mind you, it might, in Nigeria or Egypt for instance. But are British Muslims being targeted the way Nigerian and Egyptian Christians are? Are they being blown up or shot down in large numbers? Not that I’ve heard.)

    1 under Union resolves is good too. Hatred of “Islamic culture” is a form of racism. So, what, then? Hatred of the way many Saudis treat foreign servants for instance, is that racism? Hatred of laws against “adultery by force” that allow a raped woman to be sentenced to 12 years in jail, is that racism?

    And then all the rest of it is good, because clearly the whole point is to lay the groundwork for sending the LSE ASH to Re-education Camp.

    Especially 6. “Let’s agree to accept our definition so that we can define anything we want to as Islamophobia and then proceed to pitch exquisitely self-righteous fits whenever we find some. Let’s punish us some cartoons, man!”

    * No: it’s Extraordinary. H/t Gareth Chan.

    Addendum

    www.youtube.com/watch?v=El03KPUeQc4

  • Spot the agenda

    The letter to the Guardian cited a survey.

    “Muslims deserve a better press than they have been given in the past decade.” And according to a recent ComRes poll, one in three people in Britain today believe that the media is responsible for “whipping up a climate of fear of Islam in the UK”.

    The letter calls it a ComRes poll, but that’s just a brand name. What it really is is an Ahmadiyya Muslim Association survey, and to be exact, it’s an Ahmadiyya Muslim Association UK Islamophobia Survey. It’s not an impartial bit of research, it’s an agenda-driven poll.

    The poll was commissioned by one of the UK’s oldest Muslim groups, the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, in order to inform its plans to counter the tide of prejudice against Islam and highlight strategies to promote better community relations.

    The poll comes on the eve of Britain’s biggest annual Islamic convention which will see 30,000 members of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community gathering at a 220-acre site in Hampshire. Foremost on the agenda will be ways to build bridges between communities and spread the word that Islam means peace.

    That’s an agenda. The Ahmadiyya Muslim Association (it’s amusing that ComRes slipped and called it the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community) plans to counter “the tide of prejudice against Islam” – which is to say, it plans to persuade people that Islam is good. That’s an agenda. It wants to “build bridges between communities” (it’s been following Stedman!) and “spread the word that Islam means peace” – which is to say, it wants to persuade people that Islam means peace when in fact it means submission. That’s an agenda.

  • Say more good things about Islam please

    Another busy day for the shutters up.

    A bunch of Islamist bullies managed to get Salman Rushdie’s video talk to the Jaipur Literary Festival blocked.

    A bunch of Islamist bullies and some allies wrote a stupid letter to the Guardian demanding more friendly coverage of Islam in the media.

    Let’s take a look at that letter. (Martin Bright has been arguing with Sunny Hundal, who signed the letter, at Twitter for an hour or two. Sunny ended up saying he signs letters he doesn’t agree with, leaving Martin and also Padraig Reidy gobsmacked.)

    That letter is a dog’s breakfast.

    Over the past decade, a number of academic studies have indicated a worrying and disproportionate trend towards negative, distorted and even fabricated reports in media coverage of the Muslim community. Recent research at Cambridge University concludes that “a wider set of representations of Islam would signify a welcome change to reporting practices. Muslims deserve a better press than they have been given in the past decade.” And according to a recent ComRes poll, one in three people in Britain today believe that the media is responsible for “whipping up a climate of fear of Islam in the UK”.

    See what they did there? In just the opening paragraph? They jumped from “the Muslim community” to Islam to Muslims and back to Islam again. So what’s the demand? That all three get friendlier coverage? That Islam itself is somehow owed less in the way of “negative” media coverage?

    Yes, probably, but the idea is to make that more difficult to notice by throwing in mentions of Muslims and “the Muslim community” to dilute the mentions of Islam. Treating all three as interchangeable of course leads people to think they are, when in fact they’re not. Talking about “the Muslim community” leads people to think that all Muslims are much of a muchness, all think pretty much alike, all seethe at “negative” coverage of Islam, all demand more Islam-friendly media.

    An alternative inquiry is necessary to investigate what many regard as widespread and systematic discriminatory practices in reporting on Muslims and Islam in the British media. Victims – whether prominent or not – of alleged discriminatory media coverage have a right to have their testimonies catalogued and examined thoroughly by credible, independent assessors. Recommendations can then be made to improve ethical standards in the reporting of not solely the Muslim community but of all sections of society.

    There it is again – Muslims-and-Islam – treated as essentially the same, and inseparable, and both having rights and both being victims of widespread and systematic discriminatory practices. It’s a fundamentally theocratic idea.

    And then, some of the signers…

    Dr Muhammad Abdul BariChair, East London Mosque
    Dr Omer El-Hamdoon Muslim Association of Britain
    Moazzam Begg Cageprisoners
    Lindsey German Stop The War Coalition
    Robert Pitt Islamophobia Watch

    No thanks.

    Maryam did a post on this.

    Islamophobia is nothing but a political term used to scaremonger people into silence. [And yes I’m looking at you Islamophobia Watch.]

    Well I am sorry but no can do.

    You cannot attribute human qualities to a belief system or Islam and Islamism in order to rule out and deem racist any opposition or criticism.

    Just in case they didn’t know, let me repeat. Criticism, mockery, opposition to and even hatred of a belief Is. Not. Racism.

    Nor is it a violation of the rights of people who hold the belief. Holding a belief does not confer a right never to hear the belief disputed or mocked.

  • Jaipur: Islamist bullies block Rushdie video talk

    Announcing the cancellation, an emotional Sanjoy Roy said: “We have been pushed to the wall…Earlier today, a number of organisations came to us and threatened violence.”

  • Islamist misogyny on the rise in the Maldives

    Shadiya Ibrahim, a long-time campaigner for women’s rights, said the society was growing steadily more oppressive of women.

  • Bruce Gorton on bad times for free expression

    On the 11 of February, One Law for All is arranging a rally to stand up against this. Are you prepared to stand up and say “We give this kuffar the right to speak”?

  • It has come to our attention that you are wicked

    The LSE Students’ Union has put out a statement on its quarrel with the LSE Atheist, Secularist and Humanist Society. It’s a horrible little document.

    On Monday 16th January it was brought to our attention via an official complaint by two students that the LSESU Atheist, Secularist and Humanist Society posted cartoons, published by the UCLU Atheist, Secularist and Humanist Society, depicting the Prophet Mohammed and Jesus “sitting in a pub having a pint” on their society Facebook page. Upon hearing this, the sabbaticals officers of the LSESU ensured all evidence was collected and an emergency meeting with a member of the Students’ Union staff was called to discuss how to deal with the issue. During this time, we received over 40 separate official complaints from the student body, in addition to further information regarding more posts on the society Facebook page.

    Why? Why did they bother to collect “evidence”? (Meaning they looked at the Facebook page and nodded solemnly – yep, there it is – ?) Why on earth was an emergency meeting called (and who called it?)? An emergency? Because of a cartoon of Jesus and Mohammed having a beer? Why did they call an emergency meeting to discuss how to deal with the issue? What issue? Why did they think there was an issue? Why did they think it needed dealing with? Why on earth did they think it was up to them to “deal with it”? Who do they think they are? The Stasi? The Inquisition? The Taliban? What makes them think it’s any of their business that somebody has a harmless image on a Facebook page? Not images of women being raped and torn in half, mind, but of two guys having a beer. Who cares that they got “over 40″ complaints? No doubt there was a little knot of people running around in a frenzy of joy because somebody was listening to their pathetic bedwetting “complaints” but so what?

    It was decided that the President and other committee members of the LSESU Atheist, Secularist and Humanist Society would be called for an informal meeting to explain the situation, the complaints that had been made, and how the action of posting these cartoons was in breach of Students’ Union policy on inclusion and the society’s constitution.  This meeting took place on Friday 20th January at 10.30am. The society agreed to certain actions coming out of the meeting and these were discussed amongst the sabbatical team. In this discussion it was felt that though these actions were positive they would not fully address the concerns of those who had submitted complaints. Therefore the SU will now be telling the society that they cannot continue these activities under the brand of the SU.

    Oh doesn’t that sound like a festive occasion. The ASH members called in to be told that a harmless cartoon is in breach of Students’ Union policy on inclusion. The members bullied into agreeing “to certain actions.” The bullies, sexually aroused by all this power to tell people off, deciding it’s Not Good Enough and they’ll just jolly well demand more; so, now they will actually get to tell the society that they cannot. Ooh ooh ooh ahhhhhhhhhhhhhh. That’s those members told. How was it for you?

    The LSE Students’ Union would like to reiterate that we strongly condemn and stand against any form of racism and discrimination on campus. The offensive nature of the content on the Facebook page is not in accordance with our values of tolerance, diversity, and respect for all students regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, sexuality or religious affiliation. There is a special need in a Students’ Union to balance freedom of speech and to ensure access to all aspects of the LSESU for all the ethnic and religious minority communities that make up the student body at the LSE.

    Yes we get it you self-important puffed-up little shits: you’re good and they’re bad; you’re against racism and they’re totally racists; the content is offensive and you’re good; you’re for tolerance, diversity, and respect and they’re for offensiveness. We get it. You think free speech needs to be “balanced” with self-admiring “concern” for self-aggrandizing complainers about worked-up “offendedness” about a cartoon that’s about as “offensive” as an Eccles cake.

    Pfui.

    Update: I forgot to say: h/t Alex Gabriel.

  • LSE Students’ Union issues statement on ASH

    “The offensive nature of the content on the Facebook page is not in accordance with our values of tolerance, diversity, and respect for all students.”

  • Nigeria: police find bomb-filled cars in Kano

    Police said they found cars and vans filled with explosives in Kano three days after Boko Haram carried out a deadly attack there.

  • Seeing what you want to see

    Karen Armstrong tells us all, not for the first time, how swell Islam is.

    First, she tells us the problem. It’s that “western people” think Islam is “a violent and intolerant faith” but this is all wrong. Couldn’t be more wrong. Very very wrong. It’s the hajj what does it, you see. Religion is like ice skating, you learn it by doing it, so the hajj teaches people to do all the good things.

    The ancient rituals of the hajj, which Arabs performed for centuries before Islam, have helped pilgrims to form habits of heart and mind that – pace the western stereotype – are non-violent and inclusive.

    Which is why everywhere we look, or nearly everywhere, that’s what Islam is like – non-violent and inclusive. That’s what it’s like in the very home of the hajj itself, Saudi Arabia. Women; servants from Indonesia; women; infidels; women – they’re all totally included and kindly handled. That’s what it’s like in Pakistan, in Nigeria, in Sudan, in Afghanistan.

     

  • That’s how it’s done

    There was a time when Lego knew how to market to girls without treating them like idiots or aspiring princesses.

  • Too much conflation of being offended and being intimidated

    The LSE Student Union Atheist, Secularist and Humanist Society has told the LSE Student Union to take a flying jump. I should think so too.

    There are no reasonable grounds for the LSESU’s instruction because we are in no way violating their policies or byelaws. The cartoons on our Facebook page criticise religion in a satirical way and we totally reject any claim that their publications could constitute any sort of harassment or intimidation of Muslims or Christians.

    That there was no deliberate intention to offend is illustrated by the fact that the cartoons were posted only on the LSESU ASH page and not in other spaces. But even if some people are offended, offence is not a sufficient reason for certain artistic and satirical forms of expression to be prohibited. A university should hold no idea sacred and be open to the critiquing of all ideas and ideologies.

    We want to engage with LSESU and work with them further to resolve the situation, but not in a way that jeopardises the legitimate criticism or satirising of religious and other beliefs. That is a freedom which is indispensable.

    And the fact that the LSE Student Union thinks otherwise is appalling.

    Andrew Copson of the BHA commented:

    The officers of LSESU ASH have clearly been reasonable in their dealings with their union and it is clearly unreasonable for a simple satirical depiction of religious figures to be deemed tantamount to intimidation of religious students. The freedom to criticise all sorts of beliefs and hold them open to satire as well as intellectual critique is a vital generator of intellectual progress – something which universities should safeguard.

    Safeguard. Not discourage, not frown on, not scold, not try to terminate; safeguard.

    The AHS and BHA also announced that they were beginning an investigation of how Student Unions were approaching issues of free speech and offence in relation to religious and non-religious beliefs with a view to providing guidance to institutions. [Jenny] Bartle [president of the National Federation of ASH] commented, ‘There has been too much conflation recently of being offended and being intimidated, with the implication being that they are equivalent. Such an assumption is a potential threat to free speech and free debate, and we are concerned to address this underlying problem in the long term.’

    Good. Exactly so, and good.

    Go to Free Expression Day. Sign the statement – along with Jessica Ahlquist, AC Grayling, Richard Dawkins, Jesus and Mo Creator, Taslima Nasrin, Salman Rushdie, Southall Black Sisters, Peter Tatchell, Alom Shaha, Deeya, Farzana Hassan, Gita Sahgal and many many more. Good company.

     

  • Skeptic lawyer on the two sorts of limits to law

    The first concerns what one ought to do (with law). The second concerns what it is possible to do (with law). Principled v means-end.

  • Karen Armstrong says how great Islam is

    “The ancient rituals of the hajj…have helped pilgrims to form habits of heart and mind that – pace the western stereotype – are non-violent and inclusive.”

  • More on arrest of Indonesian atheist

    Official said that he had yet to decide whether Alexander would be dismissed from his post. “I told him that there was no place in this country for his beliefs,” he said.

  • Nick Cohen on how freedom goes

    The people the liberal mainstream lets down are liberal Muslims and ex-Muslims who need help in their fight against theocratic oppression.