Our Announcements

Not Found

Sorry, but you are looking for something that isn't here.

Posts Tagged Bigotry

Sara Khan’s Inspire and Donald Trump up for Islamophobia awards By Saira Khan

Sara Khan of the so-called counter extremism organisation Inspire

Inspire’s Sara Khan, US presidential candidate Donald Trump, Channel 4 News reporter Cathy Newman and the BBC sitcom Citizen Khan are among the nominees for the 2016 Islamophobia awards.

The event on March 5 is organized by the Islamic Human Rights Commission and features a satirical awards ceremony where those who’ve been the most Islamophobic over the past year are rewarded for their efforts.

The event aims to subvert Islamophobia through comedy while simultaneously addressing a serious and significant issue in a creative manner.

The awards are split into four separate categories: UK, International, News/Media and Film/Book/TV Series. Nominees were submitted by the general public who had the chance to chose who they felt had displayed prominent symptoms of Islamophobia.

ISLAMOPHOBIA AWARDSFamiliar names crop up in the “UK” category with the likes of David Cameron and last year’s “Overall Islamophobe” winner Theresa May but there are new faces too with appearances by OFSTED head Michael Wilshaw and the “counter-extremism organisation” Inspire.

Reasons cited include Cameron’s alienating rhetoric, May’s police-state policies and Wilshaw’s suggestion to ban face veils in schools.

Nominees in the “International” category are literally spread across the globe with the inclusion of Burmese politicians Aung San Suu Kyi who has ignored the persecution of the Muslim Rohingya minority in the region; Republican candidates Donald Trump and Ben Carson who have both been comfortable attacking Muslims during their respective campaigns for president; and the government of Tajikistan where police have shaved nearly 13,000 people’s beards and closed more than 160 shops selling traditional Muslim clothing in the past year.

“News Media” features last year’s clear winner Fox News; Sky News’ Kay Burley for her easy and direct dismissal of the suggestion that what she was saying was both racist and Islamophobic; and journalist Cathy Newman for her infamous incident with an unfortunate South London mosque.

This year also sees numerous television series nominated in the “Book/Movie/TV” category as well as Glenn Beck’s latest book and the newly-released movie “13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi”

 

Winners will be highlighted during the spoof awards ceremony which will be taking place on Saturday, 5 March 2016 at The Clay Oven in Wembley. The ceremony will be accompanied by live entertainment and stand-up comedy.

The general public can purchase tickets here and they can vote for who wins here.

 

 

2016 UK: ISLAMOPHOBIA AWARDS NOMINATIONS:

David Cameron
Maajid Nawaz
Katie Hopkins
William Shawcross
INSPIRE
David Coburn
Mona Siddiqi
Theresa May
Metropolitan Police
Michael Wilshaw

INTERNATIONAL:

Donald Trump
Ben Carson
Charlie Hebdo
Bill Maher
Marine le Pen
Karamay, China
Geert Wilders
Aung San Suu Kyi
Rupert Murdoch
Tajikistan

NEWS & PRINT/ONLINE MEDIA:

Daily Mail
Fox News
The Sun
Ann Coulter
Isha Sesay and John Vause; CNN
Cathy Newman
The Daily Caller
Breitbart
Sam Harris
Kay Burley; Sky News

MOVIE/BOOK/TV SERIES:

Homeland
13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi
It IS About Islam: Exposing the Truth About ISIS, Al Qaeda, Iran, and the Caliphate by Glenn Beck
Tyrant
The State of Affairs
Citizen Khan
Arrow
Marvel’s Agents Of Shield

, , , , , ,

No Comments

Burkini by Ifitikhar Ahmad, London School of Islamics Trust

Burkini-vs-Wetsuit2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Burkini

 

Iftikhar Ahmad

London School of Islamics Trust

We have to fight terrorism shall we send air force to bomb isis ? No .Shall we send aid to the rebels ? No. Shall we decrease number of immigrants ? No . What shall we do sir ? BAN BURKINI . It’s part of western society who can’t seem to stop objectifying women. Look around its everywhere. U get paid more to take ur clothes off, and fined for wearing more clothes.
It’s ok for Nuns to chill on the beach full clothed but not Muslim females? Absolutely disgrace! Glad to hear of this being suspended!
 
Mayors do mot have the right to ban Burkinis. France’s highest administrative court ruled.
The Council of State’s ruling suspends a ban in the town of Villeneuve-Loubet, near Nice, and could affect cities around the country that have prohibited the full-length swimsuit.
 
I’m fascinated to hear from those decrying this decision exactly what they would do if local authorities decided to ban an item of their clothing and engaged policemen to force them to take it off in public? Hiding behind the nonsense that the Burkini defies France’s secular culture is just pathetic. There is nothing outwardly religious about it as the police proved by their own incompetence yesterday in failing to distinguish Burkinis from similar dress worn by women with no allegiance to Islam at all. The court has ruled quite correctly according to law. Let’s hope that’s an end to it. I am proudly a reactionary person is to defend the common good and the good of society I am in favour of Burkini in Europe
 
French authorities have been criticised for imposing the ban, after photographs were published this week of police fining Muslim women wearing headscarves on beaches. It has peaked fierce debate on freedom of religion, women’s rights and the integration of France’s Muslim community. The ban was imposed following a series of terror attacks in France by Islamist terrorists.
 
Opinion polls suggested most of the French public supported the bans, which Muslims claimed targeted them unfairly.
 
John Dalhuisen, Amnesty International’s Europe Director welcomed the court’s decision.
 
“By overturning a discriminatory ban that is fuelled by and is fuelling prejudice and intolerance, today’s decision has drawn an important line in the sand,” he said in a statement.
 
“French authorities must now drop the pretence that these measures do anything to protect the rights of women. Rather, invasive and discriminatory measures such as these restrict women’s choices and are an assault on their freedoms of expression, religion and right to non-discrimination.”
 
“These bans do nothing to increase public safety, but do a lot to promote public humiliation. Not only are they in themselves discriminatory, but as we have seen, the enforcement of these bans leads to abuses and the degrading treatment of Muslim women.
 
A long time ago, in Europe, a Catholic woman had to cover her hair when entering a church. Also, before nuns were liberated, they had to wear habits! Very restrictive and ridiculous! The French then didn’t make a big deal out of it as it was A RELIGIOUS RIGHT!
 
Long before France attempted to colonise parts of Africa and the Middle East, there was a battle, in 732, at Tours, when an Islamic army, led by Abdul Rahman, tried to colonise all of France, and to force every French person to convert. The French drove them back to Spain, with much bloodshed. So, naturally, they have a reasonable amount of distrust for anything Muslim. After the battle of Tours, France was “ruled” for 1,000 years or so by the Church of Rome, and the “aristocracy”, until the revolution of 1793, when the people decided that no religion or royalty would ever hold sway over the elected government. That`s it, and the laughable attempts by Islamists to justify dress codes mandated by their “prophets”, is just, laughable. Thank you. Banning the Burkini by the French govt. is not the issue but telling me that France is a secular country after the banning of the Burkini is the big issue. This is hypocrisy and we know it.
 
 
European immigrants to Australia, New Zealand, Canada or even the USA did that they took their religion, culture, language and customs with them and then forced the indigenous people to behave like them!! The French government is doing exactly what ISIS and the other terrorist groups want. They want the French government to segregate and discriminate against Muslims, to create a us and them society. Well done France, bowing to terrorism. How many attacks were carried out by French Muslim women in Burkinis? 
 
Women should be allowed to wear WHATEVER THEY WANT on the beach. Whether that be a bikini, a swimming costume, a skirt, leggings, a dress, pyjamas, trousers, a jacket, a coat, a jumper, a hoody, a Burkini! It’s their body so should be their choice whether to strip off or cover up. The West is fast becoming very oppressive and hypocritically doing the very thing it’s accusing other nations of. Whatever happened to tolerance, acceptance, equality and freedom? Leave innocent people alone. Fed up of this nonsense. I think forcing the woman to take off her clothes was wrong. A bit like forcing a Sikh to remove his turban. They should have explained the new law to her and given her a chance to leave the beach, or just face a fine. I am wondering how this law could be implemented in Australia as stinger suits and wet suits are not dissimilar to Burkinis. Will they be outlawed too?
 
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau defended the Burkini — an Islamic dress for swimming that covers the whole body except the face, hands, and feet — and stood for individual rights during a meeting with his ministers on Monday (22 August). He said that Canada did not like to seize personal rights and respected cultural diversity.
 
While speaking to media, the Liberal Party leader addressed the controversy swirling in France over a Burkini ban and said, “We should be past tolerance in Canada”. He added that the country could never think of a Burkini ban or any kind of prohibition that would affect any person’s individuality.
 
“In Canada, can we speak of acceptance, openness, friendship, understanding? It is about where we are going and what we are going through every day in our diverse and rich communities,” he was quoted as saying by AFP.
 
He also added that individual rights should be “at the top of public discourse and debate.”
 
Some policymakers in Quebec province of Canada had requested for the ban after 15 towns in France’s southeast banned Burkinis, but Trudeau dismissed the ministers’ call.
 

Societies which force people to dress a certain way cannot call themselves ‘democratic.’ This Burkini ban claims to protect “secularism” and ban “beachwear which ostentatiously displays religious affiliation.” My question: do you think someone wearing beach clothes decorated in Jewish religious themes would face the same fine and treatment? What a low hypocrite and disgusting country. No wonder why France is becoming almost a poor country and having millions of its own citizens immigrating to England, USA, Dubai, Canada seeking a better life.

 
Should we start dressing down anyone wearing a nighty and a shower cap because of “national security” This isn’t a law that targets criminals, or terrorists. This is a by-law that targets Muslims for not wanting to show skin. Which is ridiculous. If tomorrow in any country someone said “white people cant wear trench coats” because of the amount of American mass shooters who have worn one would be met with complete anarchy.

There is a thousand and one other outfits from different cultures that similarly represent the Burkini. This is state sponsored racism. No one seems to have a problem with Sikhs wearing turbans and rightfully so… You see this is borderline apartheid on the grounds of “national security” and “protecting western values” when in reality it’s just a way of segregating and disenfranchising those who are ‘different’ from us.
 
They have no problems with Sikhs, Jews, Buda’s etc… When it comes to Muslims, yes everybody is against them! Com on guys those are not our values, we were not raised like this, at least not in the US… We should all condemn these stupidities which divide us more than anything else and give terrorists more ground to recruit other ignorant people. This is really what the terrorists wants and the French are doing exactly what they want to segregate those Muslims and make them feel the society don’t want them although those ladies weren’t terrorist. This is how the terrorist wants and the French are doing exactly. Congrats and now many of those who got fined eventually will feel ashamed that society cant accept them for who they are… thus what do u think these people would do? God knows how they feel.. and just so u people know that many Muslims themselves are targets of terrorist too.
 
West must learn to respect and tolerate those who are different. Discrimination against Muslim practices, such as France’s recent stance against the Burkini, can have the opposite of the intended impact. In making Muslim communities feel threatened and under siege, discriminatory policies can make the narrative of extremists that the West is at war with Islam that much more appealing.
 
 
Muslims are not embracing western life’. What do we do? In our free time us English go down the pubs and get smashed, do the same in clubs, sleep with random people and as a result have the highest teenage pregnancy rate in Europe. Can anybody please tell me what integration means? other then speak English!!! The Jews did their best to integrate in Germany. They even took German names! Look how far it got them. If the Muslims try to integrate, the Germans/British will complain about the ‘pollution’ of their identity once again. I wonder how many English people were saying “Multi-Culturalism does not work” when they were busy invading and taking over other people’s countries!? India, the Africa, the Americas, Australia, to name but a few. I wonder how many English people are saying “Multi Culturalism does not work” when they are busy sunning themselves in the south of Spain, speaking only English, eating in English restaurants, drinking in English bars, and complaining that not all Spaniards speak English!? Monkey see? Monkey do? And what is English culture, anyhow!? Our football teams are full of foreign players and some are owned by foreign owners, Christian Church attendance has dwindled, we love our curries (influenced by Indian food), we holiday abroad often…so I really would like somebody to define to me what is English culture, these days. If you mean by integration going down to the pub with the lads, getting drunk, picking up a few girls, and then on Sunday maybe going to church – then I’m sure that Muslims will not integrate.
Iftikhar Ahmad
London School of Islamics Trust

, ,

No Comments

Donald Trump’s horrifying words about Muslims By Dean Obeidallah

Dean Obeidallah, a former attorney, is the host of SiriusXM’s weekly program “The Dean Obeidallah Show,” a columnist for The Daily Beast and editor of the politics blog The Dean’s Report. Follow him on Twitter: @TheDeansreport. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.

(CNN)Donald Trump’s words on Thursday detailing the revolting measures he’s open to imposing on Muslim-Americans literally sent a shudder down my spine.

A non-Muslim friend of mine tweeted: “This literally made me cry.”

Another tweeted: “I Will Stand Up For Muslim Citizens Because I Want Help When The GOP Come For ME.”

Dean Obeidallah
 
 

, , , , ,

No Comments

It is High Time for India to Discard the Pernicious Myth of its Medieval Muslim Rulers as ‘Villains’- By Audrey Truschke

 
 
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Aurangzeb Alamgir

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Great Emperor Aurangzeb Alamgir-Muslim History Distortions by Hindus in India

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
It is High Time for India to Discard the Pernicious Myth of its Medieval Muslim Rulers as ‘Villains’
By

Audrey Truschke

 
Whatever happened in the past, religious-based violence is real in modern India, and Muslims are frequent targets. It is thus disingenuous to single out Indian Muslim rulers for condemnation without owning up to the modern valences of that focus.
 
The idea that medieval Muslim rulers wreaked havoc on Indian culture and society – deliberately and due to religious bigotry – is a ubiquitous notion in 21st century India. Few people seem to realise that the historical basis for such claims is shaky to non-existent. Fewer openly recognise the threat that such a misreading of the past poses for modern India.
 
Aurangzeb, the sixth Mughal Emperor (r. 1658-1707), is perhaps the most despised of India’s medieval Muslim rulers. People cite various alleged “facts” about Aurangzeb’s reign to support their contemporary condemnation, few of which are true. For instance, contrary to widespread belief, Aurangzeb did not destroy thousands of Hindu temples. He did not perpetrate anything approximating a genocide of Hindus. He did not instigate a large-scale conversion program that offered millions of Hindu the choice of Islam or the sword.
 
In short, Aurangzeb was not the Hindu-hating, Islamist tyrant that many today imagine him to have been. And yet the myth of malevolent Aurangzeb is seemingly irresistible and has captured politicians, everyday people, and even scholars in its net. The damage that this idea has done is significant. It is time to break this mythologized caricature of the past wide open and lay bare the modern biases, politics, and interests that have fuelled such a misguided interpretation of India’s Islamic history.
 
A recent article on this website cites a series of inflammatory claims about Indo-Muslim kings destroying premodern India’s Hindu culture and population. The article admits that “these figures are drawn from the air” and historians give them no credence. After acknowledging that the relevant “facts” are false, however, the article nonetheless posits that precolonial India was populated by “religious chauvinists,” like Aurangzeb, who perpetrated religiously-motivated violence and thus instigated “historical injustices” to which Hindus can rightly object today. This illogical leap from a confessed lack of reliable information to maligning specific rulers is the antithesis of proper history, which is based on facts and analysis rather than unfounded assumptions about the endemic, unchanging nature of a society.
 
A core aspect of the historian’s craft is precisely that we cannot assume things about the past. Historians aim to recover the past and to understand historical figures and events on their own terms, as products of their time and place. That does not mean that historians sanitize prior events. Rather we refrain from judging the past by the standards of the present, at least long enough to allow ourselves to glimpse the logic and dynamics of a historical period that may be radically different from our own.
 
Going back more than a millennium earlier, Hindu rulers were the first to come up with the idea of sacking one another’s temples, before Muslims even entered the Indian subcontinent. But one hears little about these “historical wrongs”
 
In the case of Indian Muslim history, a core notion that is hard for modern people to wrap our heads around is as follows: It was not all about religion.
 
Aurangzeb, for instance, acted in ways that are rarely adequately explained by religious bigotry. For example, he ordered the destruction of select Hindu temples (perhaps a few dozen, at most, over his 49-year reign) but not because he despised Hindus. Rather, Aurangzeb generally ordered temples demolished in the aftermath of political rebellions or to forestall future uprisings. Highlighting this causality does not serve to vindicate Aurangzeb or justify his actions but rather to explain why he targeted select temples while leaving most untouched. Moreover, Aurangzeb also issued numerous orders protecting Hindu temples and communities from harassment, and he incorporated more Hindus into his imperial administration than any Mughal ruler before him by a fair margin. These actions collectively make sense if we understand Aurangzeb’s actions within the context of state interests, rather than by ascribing suspiciously modern-sounding religious biases to him.
 
Regardless of the historical motivations for events such as premodern temple destructions, a certain percentage of modern Indians nonetheless feel wronged by their Islamic past. What is problematic, they ask, about recognising historical injustices enacted by Muslim figures? In this regard, the contemporaneity of debates over Indian history is crucial to understanding why the Indo-Islamic past is singled out.
 
For many people, condemnations of Aurangzeb and other medieval Indian rulers stem not from a serious assessment of the past but rather from anxieties over India’s present and future, especially vis-à-vis its Muslim minority population. After all, one might ask: If we are recognising injustices in Indian history, why are we not also talking about Hindu rulers? When judged according to modern standards, medieval rulers the world over measure up poorly, and Hindu kings are no exception. Medieval Hindu political leaders destroyed mosques periodically, for instance, including in Aurangzeb’s India. Going back more than a millennium earlier, Hindu rulers were the first to come up with the idea of sacking one another’s temples, before Muslims even entered the Indian subcontinent. But one hears little about these “historical wrongs” for one reason: They were perpetrated by Hindus rather than Muslims.
 
Religious bigotry may not have been an overarching problem in India’s medieval past, but it is a crucial dynamic in India’s present. Religious-based violence is real in modern India, and Muslims are frequent targets. Non-lethal forms of discrimination and harassment are common. Fear is part of everyday life for many Indian Muslims.  Thus, when scholars compare medieval Islamic rulers like Aurangzeb to South Africa’s twentieth-century apartheid leaders, for example, they not only display a surprising lack of commitment to the historical method but also provide fodder for modern communal fires.
 
It is high time we discarded the pernicious myth of India’s medieval Muslim villains. This poisonous notion imperils the tolerant foundations of modern India by erroneously positing religious-based conflict and Islamic extremism as constant features of life on the subcontinent. Moreover, it is simply bad history. India has a complicated and messy past, and we do it and ourselves no justice by flattening its nuances to reflect the religious tensions of the present.
 

Audrey Truschke is a historian at Stanford University and Rutgers University-Newark. Her first book, Culture of Encounters: Sanskrit at the Mughal Court will be published by Columbia University Press and Penguin India in 2016. She is currently working on a book on Aurangzeb that will published by Juggernaut Books.

 

, , , ,

No Comments

“Malala deserves Nobel Peace Prize” (for 2013)”: Angelina Jolie, but will the Nobel Committee overcome its hidden anti-Muslim/Pakistan bias? Edhi Sahib is a case in point!

Malala deserves Nobel Peace Prize: Angelina Jolie

 

Nobel Committee is heavily skewed and prejudiced against Muslims and Islam. Therefore, it stands to reason that they bypassed in 2012, Pakistan’s heroic daughter Malala Yousafzai. But, you never know that their conscience may be awakened, and Malala is recognized by them in 2013. She went against her tribal culture and spoke as a brave Muslim woman for the education of women in Pakistan’s tribal areas of FATA. For her vision and bravery, she received bullets in the head in return. The West did a lot of song and dance and lionized her or rather used her for their propaganda, mainly Zionist driven,against Pakistan and Muslim  societies at large. They made 180 million Pakistanis and 1.2 billion Muslims appear like Neanderthals or living in dark ages. Little realizing that Islamic societies have produced more women political leaders, Prime Ministers, Chief Executives, Managers, Business leaders, Doctors, Engineers, Soldiers, Journalists, and many professions, where women still face prejudice in Western societies. The West is still trying to play catch-up.

 

Status of Women in Islam:

The First Lady of Islam, Hazrat Khadija (RA) was literate business woman. She was also the Boss (in modern terminology) of our Holy Prophet (PBUH). She exported and imported goods from as far away places as Syria. Our Prophet(PBUH) handled her Import-Export business or cross national Trade!

Hazrat Khadijah R.A was the first wife of Prophet Muhammad P.B.you.H. She was the daughter of Khuwaylid ibn Asad and belonged to Banu Hashim Clan. 

Her contributions to Islam are numerous. She was the first person to convert to Islam. She trusted her husband and she consoled him whenever he was distressed about the reactions of the non-Muslims. She sacrificed her wealth to promote Islam. She also patiently bore the persecutions of the non-Muslims and aristocrats of Quraish.

She remain at the side of the Propher Muhammad P.B.U.H all her life and supported him in his mission. She died in the year 619. This year is known as the year of sorrow. This is because Prophet Muhammad P.B.you.H was deeply moved on her death. She was the favorite wife of the Prophet Muhammad P.B.U.H and he did not remarry until her death.

 

The Hollywood celebrity has joined the growing number of voices speaking in support of Malala. PHOTO: AFP

American actor and former UN goodwill ambassador for refugees Angelina Jolie has urged the Nobel Peace Prize awarding committee to give “serious consideration” to “brave” Malala Yousafzai.

The Hollywood celebrity has joined the growing number of voices speaking in support of Malala, the 14-year-old girl who was shot by the Taliban for promoting girls education in Swat.

In an article published by the Daily Beast, Jolie wrote: “I felt compelled to share Malala’s story with my children. It was difficult for them to comprehend a world where men would try to kill a child whose only “crime” was the desire that she and others like her be allowed to go to school.”

Jolie wrote: “Still trying to understand, my children asked, “Why did those men think they needed to kill Malala?” I answered, “because an education is a powerful thing.

“The shots fired on Malala struck the heart of the nation, and as the Taliban refuse to back down, so too do the people of Pakistan.”

She was of the view that Malala was proof that it takes only the voice of one brave person to inspire numerous men, women and children.

“As girls across Pakistan stand up to say “I am Malala,” they do not stand alone,” Jolie asserted in her article.

Lauding Malala for her feats achieved at such a small age, Jolie said: “As the Nobel Committee meets to determine the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, I imagine brave Malala will be given serious consideration.”

Published in The Express Tribune, October 18th, 2012.

 
 

, , , , , , ,

No Comments


Skip to toolbar