An Open Letter to Ruth Kelly

Posted by Iftikhar on May 30, 2007 - 22:01

According to Ruth Kelly, approved citizenship lessons may be introduced in Muslim schools and supplementary schools to eradicate extremism and violence in Muslim communities. Muslim schools help to strengthen community cohesion, not undermine it. This is the reason why all Teachers Unions do not like to see the rapid growth of Muslim schools after 9/11 and 7/7. According to a world wide survey, Islam was found to have little to do with radicalization or antipathy towards western culture. The war on terror has radicalized Muslims around the world to unprecedented levels of anti-American feeling. The wealthier and better –educated were more likely to be radicalized. This is a climate of growing mistrust between Islam and the West. Muslims are a group causing very little terrorism in Europe, while at the same time; Muslims are much more likely to be arrested on suspicion of terrorism. There were 498 incidents in eleven EU countries in 2006. The truth is that only one out of 498 terrorist attacks was carried out by Muslims. But the Western and especially British media are not interested on reporting such incidents. More than half of Muslims were arrested on suspicion of terrorism.

The native children need citizenship education as well as Islamic education because they have no respect and are reluctant to tolerate those who are different. Government figures revealed that the number of pupils suspended from schools for racist abuse rose nearly one-third in a year. The schools are reluctant to report racist bullying because they do not want their schools to gain a reputation for having racist problems. Blackburn and Burnley were identified as being among the country’s most divided areas, where racial tension is very high. The wholly negative attitudes towards Islam in the West have a very long history and have a palpable feel more than ever at the moment. Islamophobia is alive and well. The mass media, popular culture and the leading forces in world politics are all mostly hostile to and in their representations of Islam, and Muslims. British right-wing target Muslims as the new “enemy other”. Muslims in Britain are disempowered, disenfranchised, disenchanted, disaffected groups at the margins of economy, society and polity. Identification with Islam is strengthening among young generations of Muslims, both as a reaction to racist hostility as well as a desire to understand Islam. The brutal colonial history, combined with racism which endemic in the host country, this creates an atmosphere of mistrust.

It is the state schools as well as British media and politicians, creating a sense of intolerance in all walks of British life. There is a tendency in the Western media to portray Islam in a negative way. The media stirs up fear and prejudice towards Islam and reinforce the image of Islam as the enemy. The Western media is stoking up fear of Islam and rely on “simplistic notion of the battle between cultures.” Lord Falconer’s speech to the National Association of Head teachers’ has many contradictions. He talks about freedom yet he wants to take this freedom from Muslim students. He talks about tolerance yet he encourages intolerance towards Muslims. Jack Straw, Phil Woolas, Bill Rammell, David Davis and the list is endless of the politicians that have created an atmosphere of fear and demonisation towards innocent Muslims. The speech reinforces the discrimination towards Muslims legitimised by the Government and the Lord Chancellor.

The number of racist statements has increased dramatically in Europe. The number of racist statements reportedly grew by between 25 and 45 Percent in France, Netherlands, Britain, Italy and Belgium. In one EU country, racism increased by as much as 70%. According to EUMC, the increase can partly be attributed to easier procedures for reporting racism and more publicity on the problem. A leader of the Freedom Party said, if Muslims want to stay in the Netherlands, they should tear out half of the Koran and throw it away and they should not listen to the Imams. Islam is a violent religion. Third World War has begun. In the past he voiced his fear of a “tsunami of Islamisation in the Netherlands”. Islam is depicted as a threat to Christian identity. It has produced an advertisement showing an Islamic Crescent above an ancient church with these words: ‘This is the true hidden desire of Muslims’. The interior minister of Austria called for the banning of hijab-clad teachers and asserting that 45% of Muslims defy assimilation. In Belgium, the editor of Het Velb insulted the local Muslim community by referring to it as a breeding ground for thousands of Jihad candidates. Deep in the European subconscious is the memory of a war with the Muslims. How Sicily was lost, how half of Spain was conquered and finally how Constantinople was conquered on Tuesday, May29, 1453, a date that lives in infamy. It was the end of Christianity in Turkey and that was to become Istanbul. Brussels launches sermons about gender equality, though it should be remembered that Turkey gave women the vote before Belgium.

The British Government has continued to create an atmosphere of hatred and fear since 7/7 towards Muslims. Ant-terror laws, indiscriminate arrests of innocent Muslim youths and demonising Muslims that dresses in certain way. It is the mainstream Britain which needs to integrate more with the Muslim way of life, not the other way round. One can learn hospitality, tolerance and generosity from Muslims.

Islam isn’t the sickness. It is the cure. It is one of liberty and equality. Secularists and followers of other religions regard Islam with something approaching panic. It is wrong to say that Islam has turned Osama bin Laden into a devil. It is the Secularist Western policies have turned Osama and others against the West. The world needs Islam to address the moral issues. America and Europe are wealthy, but they are morally impoverished. Broken families, drugs, booze, youth gangs, crime, neglect of children and the old, the sheer boredom of shopaholicism, terrorism, the inner-cities slums, materialism itself, are all the marks of a global society in decline. Children need to be taught to distinguish between right and wrong.
Iftikhar Ahmad
www.londonschoolofislamics.org.uk

Oh FFS, Iftikhar. Give it a rest, will you?

And when ye go forth to war in the land, it shall be no crime in you to cut short your prayers, if ye fear lest the infidels come upon you; Verily, the infidels are your undoubted enemies!

http://www.answering-islam.de/Main/Quran/Themes/jihad_passages.html
http://www.psywarrior.com/Goebbels.html

Iftikar always signs off with the londonschoolofislamics address.

Reading the responses to his posts there, however, it appears that the majority of readers consider him a pain in the arse.

Don't bother to reply, he doesn't even respond on his favoured site.

~
www.fabulousmother.com

Oh yes, by all means, because he never responds let's just brand him a crackpot pain in the arse and ave a spot of tea luv instead of calling this out for what it really is... see what happens...

Respond! I didn't even bother reading it.

“because he never responds let's just brand him a crackpot pain in the arse and ave a spot of tea luv…”

Dendrite – I said pain in the arse, not crackpot.

Iftikar spams dozens of sites with his opinion pieces about muslim schools. The first time he did it, I and others painstakingly replied and debated the issue at length, but the debate was amongst ourselves. Iftikar was long gone. He uses forums like this one to soap box his views with no intention of entering into a proper discussion. For me that makes him a pain in the arse and I’m not about to respond to the exact same issue all over again, just because he's sent another open letter round.

~
www.fabulousmother.com

and we hold exactly the same opinion about Iftikar on another site he posts on and I belong to - radio controlled foam models dot com.

jude

"Cacoethes scribendi"
http://www.judesworld.net

2Lou - I stand corrected that you said pain in the arse, not crackpot. And apologies for the sarcasm, it’s a liability I can’t resist.

Ugh… I was hoping my overall point above was that there is no dimension of painstaking reply, gentle intellectual debate, or proper discussion of views and opinion on this matter. Mr. Ahmad only cloaks his points in Western culture's contemporary vernacular of inclusiveness and diversity. Those preaching jihad either in the streets or behind the closed doors of your neighborhood mosques and Muslim schools should be deported, or better yet jailed, immediately.

If these people so despise Western culture, why do they live in it? Why don’t they exit? They are not a fit for Western culture and they readily admit it. Why should either the U.S. or Britain host this particular mutant strain of Islam with public services, health care, air conditioning, indoor plumbing, transportation, and all the other aspects of the always imperfect but always improving advanced civilization we have developed? They want to assume citizenship on their terms, get all comfortable with its goods and services, then change or destroy everything.

Attempting to establish a democracy in the Arab world was a tragic mistake and a crime. I heartily support the establishment of Islamic states. Let them live in the 12th century and try to get medicine for their kids and kill each other off with their centuries-old tribal vendettas and revenges. I’m all for the celebration of diversity and inclusiveness, but think it might be a good strategy to explicitly name and exclude those who would carve out our carotic arteries, but that’s just me, I might be insensitive…

I see you have your own axe to grind Dendrite. Instead of making insightful coherent arguments like the post above, have you tried cross posting moronic rants on multiple websites, it seems to be working out for Mr. Iftikhar.

"If these people so despise Western culture, why do they live in it?"

Because we have all the money and amenities? Because they have the courage of conviction to take something they see as corrupt and attempt to improve it?

Of course, their assessment of our culture is wrong and their moral convictions are wrong, and their methods are wrong. But that can be proved through reason and logic, rather than pretending that the very act of wanting to change or remove something you despise is an outrageous desire, or that moving out of the country is some kind of solution.

Actually, the only axe I have to grind is with an ex-girlfriend. I am specifically addressing the jihad phenomenon, which incidentally, has been declared. So at what point do we take it somewhere near as seriously as the jihadists? When a suitcase of something is left in the NYC Subway or London Underground?

Salaam

LSI is interested in the education of Muslim children. Majority of them leave schools with low grades because state schools with monolingual teachers do not know how to teach standard English to bilingual children.

Muslim Children need state funded Muslim Schhols with bilingual Muslim teachers as role models. They will learn standard English to follow the National Curriculum and go for higher studies and research to serve humanity. They will learn Arabic, Urdu and other community languages to keep in touch with their cultural roots and enjoy the beauty of their literature and poetry. Is there any thing wrong with my proposal?

Where is this tender, heart rendering proposal in An Open Letter to Ruth Kelly? This is like written by two different people. If the British want to fund state sponsored schools with bilingual Muslim teachers as role models, that’s none of my business. If those role models are preaching jihad, that should be everyone’s business. I lost a very dear friend in the WTC and claiming billionaire nutcase sheik Bin Laden is a “victim” of secular Western policies tells me exactly what you are all about, my friend. I got half a mind to fly all the way over there and dot your eye. Just shut up, pay your taxes, keep the place clean, and respect the house you’re in.

Now your getting the idea, try starting multiple threads about that, most people have probably stopped reading this one.

"So at what point do we take it somewhere near as seriously as the jihadists? When a suitcase of something is left in the NYC Subway or London Underground?"

We've already had bombs on the London underground. And I attended, recently, the trial of a terrorist cell who were planning on blowing one up on one of the underground lines while it passed under the Thames, rupturing the basin and causing widespread flooding.

We *are* taking it as seriously as the jihadists. What we are not doing (one would hope) is becoming as bloodthirsty as them, to the point where we take action that is unreasonable and unjustifiable (Then again, I suppose with all the new terrorist laws, that isn't really true).

Preventing them from teaching in schools is a reasonable measure. Putting them in jail is a reasonable measure. But saying, "If you don't like it, get out," to all Muslims who have a problem with our culture is *not* a reasonable request.

Iftikhar:
"Is there any thing wrong with my proposal?"

Yes. This part:

"Muslim Children need state funded Muslim Schools."

Why? Bilingual teachers from their own culture, sure. But the state should certainly *not* fund any teaching that says Islam is the one true religion, and that sounds to me like the kind of thing a Muslim school would teach. I think it's far more desirable that Muslim children learn how to fit in with secular British society. If they choose to be religious, that's a matter for them and their families, not their schools.

"But the state should certainly *not* fund any teaching that says Islam is the one true religion, and that sounds to me like the kind of thing a Muslim school would teach."

Well, we have plenty of Church schools.

I don't see why we shouldn't have Muslim schools, too, if there's a demand for them.

Unfortunately, I think Iftikhar is as bad an advocate for Islam as our other friend Paul is for Christianity.

It's highly unlikely that many British people will support Muslim schools if they're being promoted by people who think Osama Bin Laden is misunderstood and that secularism is to blame for his behaviour.

It's a nation of secularists whose taxes would be paying for these schools, after all.

Okay, first of all, don’t anyone cringe now after seeing that I have posted to this forum. I am not going to take part in this discussion beyond this post. Well I might, but I doubt it. I’m sure you will be glad to hear that – lol.

I just wanted to say that, believe it or not, I am in agreement with most of what you have said here, and that I am pleasantly surprised that you really do believe the way you do. It helps me understand, I think, that you aren’t really against taking action in this “radical” Islamic struggle, and that your opposition is more pointed towards violent actions such as war. We disagree on that point, but I must say, I at least, have now a deeper understanding and respect for your point of view.

Paul. Who are you talking to?

You and all who have posted to this forum. Well most anyway, certainly not the forum originator.

Well mostly you, Jack Cade and others that I am familiar with and have been on opposing sides of discussions.

Bilingual teachers Ha! A good friend with many years teaching experience once had children from thirty different countries in her school.Islam itself as I understand it comes from more than one country . so which language would be made paramount and which view of Islam .The original poster is talking about the transmitting of one culture and point of view.Separate schools should never be state funded or even allowed until they can promote the dual citizenship of religion and loyalty
to the UK and western democratic values.

Sorry again, but I think the responses to this are diluted, far too generous/intellectual, and missing the important point. The original poster does not discuss “the transmitting of one culture and point of view” but sets up elaborate scenarios that amount to playing the race card in the classic propaganda style, complete with unreferenced citations of “world wide surveys” and invention of yet another thing you’d never want to be accused of - Islamophobia. Up above is a reference to Bin Laden’s “behaviour” as if he was a loud drunk or in some other way merely disorderly.

I wouldn’t have wasted time responding to this if the original poster didn’t essentially recommend a replacement of Western culture with Islam then finish with the predicable, telltale canonization of Bin Laden (affectionately, our Osama) and list problems that any complex society faces as “the marks of a global society in decline”. This type of rhetoric spew only hurts Muslims who live and work in good faith and is the real thing that causes and exacerbates the situation.

Ahmed at least sympathizes with jihad without a doubt, and maybe supports and advocates it. Whether he participates in financing it should be determined by an examination of his books, especially large sum cash transactions and wire transfers. I understand and appreciate the thoughtful, challenging, and measured responses here (especially Cade’s) but I have zero problem refocusing the point in a provocative and thuggish manner. The jihadists translate our dithering sensitivities into weakness (All that is necessary… for good people to do nothing). I am in perpetual disbelief and exasperation that we exited Afghanistan to invade Iraq (?!) and it seems like some would resolve this by arranging a pork chop luncheon with Bin Laden to negotiate peace in our times.

If Ifthicker had the courtesy to read some of the posts which as Lou points out we had painstakingly made on his first of many ranting threads he would read some good points which are being repeated again because he pays not the slightest bit of notice .

One point I made is that Church state schools actually save the taxpayer money. In the UK they pay 10% + of project costs (that's everything except staffing) - buildings, maintenence etc. for their schools. Many also donated their buildings for use as state schools and still own the buildings and grounds. So not only are they paying for 10% year-on-year running costs but in many cases it was the church who built schools for the state and not the other way round. I asked whether in the Islamic community there was similar structure to the church dioceses who could and would similarly subsidise their schools?

I got no reply.

jude

"Cacoethes scribendi"
http://www.judesworld.net

"I am in perpetual disbelief and exasperation that we exited Afghanistan to invade Iraq (?!) and it seems like some would resolve this by arranging a pork chop luncheon with Bin Laden to negotiate peace in our times."

I think you're only watching the short news bulletins.

We're very much still in Afghanistan and we're likely to be there much longer than we're in Iraq.

Not sure who's advocating negotiating with Bin Laden - whether or not we'd serve an insulting menu.

Negotiating with Bin Laden is clearly pointless as there's nothing that he wants that we could give him without destroying the entire structures of our secular, liberal (in the British not American sense) society - which are far from perfect but deliver many good things.

I do support Muslim schools if - as Jude suggests - they were funded and provided in a similar way to church schools.

I wouldn't want the state funding anything involving Iftikhar or other apologists for terrorism, though.

Sidebar:

Bukharinwasmyfa, I have only recently been faced with British secularism/liberalism. I am curious about your statement: …secular, liberal (in the British not American sense) society…

What in your opinion is the difference? I am trying to understand.

Or maybe this would take too much time and this may not be the forum.

Very roughly:

In the US liberal means left-wing - and generally involves a belief in bigger government.

In the UK and Europe it means giving top priority to personal liberty.

People who liberals in European sense range from people who are quite left-wing - and believe that the government needs to guarantee personal liberty for everyone by providing free education, health care etc - to people who are quite economically right-wing and don't believe that the government should do anything much other than preserve law + order and a welfare safety net.

Where most European liberals mostly agree - in theory, although often not now in practice - is they think government should leave people alone in the private lives.

Although many people on the moderate wing of the US Democrats would be considered liberal by European standards, when left-wing Democrats are described as 'extreme liberals' it seems quite ridiculous in Europe because many of the policies they advocate: higher taxation, strict gun control, affirmative action aren't liberal in the European sense.

Opposing NAFTA free trade laws and the WTO and supporting economic protectionism - as many left-wing Democrats and trade unions do - is the direct oppposite of the European understanding of liberalism.

People who support these kinds of US liberal positions would be classed as social democrats or democratic socialists in Europe.

An Open Letter to Ruth Kelly

Read Stories

User login

New forum topics

Who's online

Online users

Help Keep This Site Free

Who's new

An Open Letter to Ruth Kelly

Read Stories

User login

New forum topics

ABCtales Newsletter

Who's online

Online users

Help Keep This Site Free

Who's new