Tuesday, February 24, 2009

Britain's Islamist underworld

Idiot Savant rightly praises the release of Binyam Mohamed who was allegedly tortured in Pakistan and Morocco before being sent to Guantanamo Bay. David Aaronovitch of the Times agrees with the release given the maltreatment of Mohamed, though he is sceptical about what Mohamed was doing, and is more concerned about appeasement of Islamists by the UK.

He quotes a former MI6 agent, Alastair Crooke:

Crooke's point seemed to be that we in the West could learn a lot from Islamism, since it was, in some ways, morally superior to our fly-blown, materialist, individualist societies. Islamism, as practised by Hezbollah, Hamas and President Ahmadinejad, was saying something profound “about the essence of man”. He went on: “It is not just about violence or a whimsical reaction to modernity, it is a new way of seeing our existence...” Islamists wanted “a society based on compassion and justice”.

As Aaronovitch says "Then a piece of apologia that would have impressed any old Communist: “There are many mistakes... the Iranians would admit this isn't the finished article.”"

Meanwhile, former Islamist Ed Husain is concerned that mosques in the UK are run by first generation migrants:

Britain's mosques are run by men who are physically in Britain, but psychologically in Pakistan. They retain their village rituals and sectarianism, and prevent the growth of an indigenous British Islam. And for as long as young Muslims are confused about whether they belong in Britain or elsewhere, we risk handing them over to preying extremists in our midst.

Meanwhile those training to be imams and elders are overwhelmingly in seminaries that are Islamist in outlook:

Of the 27 or so Muslim seminaries or dar ul uloom in Britain, 25 come from the austere, Deobandi tradition - the preferred school of the Taleban. So while British soldiers risk their lives in Afghanistan, in British Muslim seminaries we allow the teaching of intolerance, unequal treatment of women, religious rigidity, the banning of music and theatre, and an end to free mixing of the sexes.

So how less than dominant is moderate Islam then? Husain is concerned that UK mosques and government ignorance about them is providing an environment to foster Islamist bigotry.

The Daily Telegraph reported in the weekend that some Muslim schools in the UK teach kids to never befriend Christians and Jews, and ban music, chess and cricket.

Check out this school:

Al-Mu'min Primary School in Bradford is linked to the al-Mu'min journal, which carries material from schoolchildren. Its website teaches that Western culture is "evil", photographs are "an evil practice of the unbelievers", and that "the person who plays chess is like one who dips his hand in the blood of a swine".

But here's a sample of the Ofsted report: "Al-Mumin Primary School provides a good education for its pupils and ensures that they have good attitudes and a very good work ethic... The provision made for the spiritual, moral, social and cultural development of pupils is outstanding."

According to the local Telegraph and Argus paper in Bradford, the links have been taken down, but the school did not respond to queries. The al-Mu'min website is also down.

Of course, I firmly believe private schools can do as they wish, as long as they receive no funding or privileges from the state, but if they are fomenting treason, and promoting bigotry, shouldn't it be transparent? Shouldn't they be subject to scrutiny? After all, if the BNP wanted to set up schools that taught not to associate with non-whites, and promoted an ideology of cultural superiority (and denigration of others), you think that would be tolerated for one moment?

2 comments:

IftikharA said...

Most British Muslims are under 25. They suffer from Identity Crises, including Ed Husain, because they have been mis-educated and de-educated by state schools with non-Muslim monolingual teachers. Imams and Masajid have done a wonderful job by teaching Muslim children the Holly Quran and some basic Islamic traditions and rituals. But that is not enough. The first wave of Muslim migrants arrived with their cultures, languages and faith. Majority of British Muslims are from Pakistan and this is the main reason why majority of Masajid were set up by the Pakistanis with their own Imams from Pakistan who are well versed in Arabic, Urdu and Persian and lot of them also well versed in English. They deliver lectures in Arabic and Urdu and will keep on delivering in those languages. English is our economic language while Arabic and Urdu is our social, emotional and spiritual languages. I have been campaigning for state funded Muslim schools with bilingual Muslim teachers for the last 35 years so that Muslim children could be well versed in English, Arabic, Urdu and other community languages. They need to learn standard English to follow the National Curriculum and go for higher studies and research to serve humanity. They need to learn and be well versed in Arabic, Urdu and other community languages to keep in touch with their cultural roots and enjoy the beauty of their literature and poetry. But unfortunately, no body paid any attention to my proposal in the beginning. I set up the first Muslim schools in 1981 and now there are 166 Muslim schools and only ten are state funded. Less than 5 % of Muslim children are in Muslim schools while 96 % are still mis-educated and de-educated in state and Church schools with those teachers who are not role models for them. There are hundreds of state and Church schools where Muslim children are in majority. In my opinion all such schools may be designated as Muslim community schools so that young Muslim children could feel pride in their culture, languages and faith. Iftikhar Ahmad

www.londonschoolofislamics.org.uk

libertyscott said...

The state shouldn't fund education, and certainly shouldn't fund schools with any religious faith.

If parents want to indoctrinate their children then let them pay for it. Children DON'T need education to "serve humanity", they should serve no one - they should be free individuals who pursue their own enjoyment of life, and respect others to do the same.

I have no problem with any schools teaching children culture, literature, poetry and traditions. I DO dislike children being branded ANY religion when almost certainly no one has given them any education in other religions or the wisdom of atheism.

Nobody describes children as communist, fascist, conservative, liberal or libertarian - because they are not deemed to be old enough to make that choice. Why are they deemed old enough to have a religion, when the only reason they are "Muslim" or "Christian" is because it is all they have been surrounded with?