Disappointing from Snow

Jon Snow, considered one of the more thinking broadcasters, has said that Muslims are not integrating in a Sunday Times article.

His evidence is that we are practising our religion more:

We were attempting to delve behind the results of the most comprehensive survey to date of Muslim opinion in Britain. Conducted by NOP for Channel 4’s Dispatches, one of its most startling results suggested that Muslim integration into British society has effectively come to a halt.

Immigrants have usually tended to become more secular and less religious than their parents by the second generation. But the survey shows Muslims have gone in precisely the opposite direction.

And call the anti-terror police:

It is generally assumed potential radicals come only from deprived areas, but Modood confirms that the well-off and educated are drawing away just as much. Many youngsters from Bradford are going to university and in a sense having it both ways — benefiting from this country’s facilities but taking with them core beliefs that sometimes lead to separateness.

Indeed, a 19-year-old Muslim studying biomedicine at a London university explained that the very fact of his education had led him to think the way he does. At one point I asked him and his two friends: “You’d like me to become a Muslim, wouldn’t you?” They said I’d be much better for it, and talked about the positive aspects of converting.

More at Pickled Politics from Sunny who reckons we disagree on everything.

There was a similar point to Snow's made by a former US Navy Lieutenant Commander M. Zuhdi Jasser in the Washington Post:

On June 18, the New York Times ran a story by Laura Goodstein, "U.S. Clerics seek a Middle Ground," which highlighted the "moderate" work of Sheikh Hamza Yusuf and his colleague, Imam Zaid Shakir. The bulk of this typical story discussed platitudes regarding the personal struggles of these American Muslim leaders and positively anticipated their development of a moderate Muslim seminary. However, nowhere did the New York Times delve into a genuine critical analysis of whether there was a central conflict in the ideology of the Zaytuna Institute, the school mentioned in the New York Times piece, and that of America. Yet, the piece ended with this alarming quotation from Mr. Shakir: "He still hoped that one day the United States would be a Muslim country ruled by Islamic law, not by violent means, but by persuasion." The imam further stated, "Every Muslim who is honest would say, I would like to see America become a Muslim country," he said. "I think it would help people, and if I didn't believe that, I wouldn't be a Muslim. Because Islam helped me as a person, and it's helped a lot of people in my community."

Not only is this a blatant endorsement of Islamism (theocracy) over Americanism (anti-theocracy), but this imam labels anti-Islamist Muslims dishonest. The radical Islamists are rabidly anti-American from their fear of pluralistic liberty. They are too insecure to give Muslims or any citizens the opportunity to be free and to choose to sin or not. Can mainstream American thought afford to be naive and uncritical about this central theme of Islamist movements? Radical or moderate, regardless of the packaging, the goal of Islamists is to create a Muslim theocracy. Abraham Foxman of the Anti-Defamation League responded with clarity in his June 23 letter to the New York Times: "Religion flourishes in America because we have no imposed religion, as the founding fathers designed. Imam Zaid Shakir's hope for an America ruled by Islamic law is fundamentally un-American. Our hope is that he is an aberration and that moderate Muslim voices will prevail."

Hamza Yusuf and Zaid Shakir would normally be labelled as 'sufis' who Martin Bright regards as not 'Islamists'. As I've said before, I fail to see the difference and would be grateful if anyone could elucidate.

John Ware finished his recent Interpal film with the scary prospect of Shaikh Yusuf Qaradawi bringing "ideas" to Europe.

UPDATE: Snow's documentary on this went out last night. He has caused controversy by suggesting that not having lots of unmarried sex is un-British. See more at Pickled Politics, and Forceful and Moderate who commented on it.

UPDATE II: Now seen the documentary. Probably the worst film I've seen on British Muslims, and there's a lot of competition. At times I thought Snow had beamed back to the 1970s (partly to do with his fashion sense) and was commenting post-immigration on how different the wogs were.

Could do a line-by-line fisking of it, but am too despondant after recent events. I think the central problem was that Snow interviewed Muslims to prove his poll findings. Those are just poll findings, but need explanation. The fact that Muslims pray, get married, don't drink is not proof of anything. Snow's analysis after each interview was "extremist, no, seperate, yes". The documentary could have done with different analysis and explanation of the results, rather than just his. As such, it was biased.

Comments

[naveen]

why is it disappointing?
John Snow is exactly right and has painted a true picture of the failure and indeed inability of Moslems to integrate into European society. This is not surprising as Moslems are not European people and cannot become so. The entire responsibility for this lies with politicians who permitted mass Third World immigration into the West and the descent of unassimilable people into a society which never consented to have them. The result is just as John Snow presented it and the native population are beginning to resent their presence.

[Abu Abdur Rahman]

So you are saying, "naveen", that racist Indians like you, whose families originate from India, ie the Third World, should be sent back? After all, you are not a European are you, with a name like "naveen"? :-)

Sounds fair enough to me, at least in your individual case. ;-) So yes, let's all start a collection to send "naveen" back to his village...

[George Carty]

Naveen: This is not surprising as Moslems are not European people and cannot become so.

Does this mean that Bosniaks, Kosovars and Albanians are not European? If so, what are they?

[naveen]

Bosniaks, Kosovars and Albanians are not European either. They are left overs from the Ottoman Empire.They are Moslems and Bosnian Moslems are originally Turkish hence Asian and non European.

[George Carty]

No, the Bosniaks were originally followers of the Bogomil Christian heresy, who largely converted to Islam after the Ottoman conquest.

Your suggestion that Bosniaks are "Turks" is actually the same line taken by Milosevic's propagandists to justify his ethnic cleansing...

[Perla Zhemchuzhina (No longer a European...)]

The Magyars (Hungarians) also have their origins in Asia. What about people from places such as Sicily and Southern Spain, who have some Arabic background, if you go back far enough?

What about European converts to Islam?

[NAVEEN]

The Spanish and Italians have a strong European heritage and majority European blood.The Arabs were driven out of Spain and Italy. The Magyars are one small people resident in Hungary who are aliens and settled there. They do not make up the majority of the Hungarian people who are a European Caucasian race.

European converts to Islam should leave and live in Islamic countries. Islam is the antithesis of the West and the two cannot live together. The last 2 jihads resulted in the expulsion of Moslems from Europe, first from Spain and secondly from Vienna.

The Moslems which we are talking about are Asian, African and Arab immigrants who most certainly do not belong in Europe in any form. They do not share the common racial characteristics or cultural heritage.

[Perla Zhemchuzhina (No longer a European...)]

Magyars make up a majority of the population of Hungary, and also form sizeable minorities in Romania, Croatia and Slovakia. It is absurd to refer to them as "aliens." They have been settled in that region for about one thousand years!

If you are in favour of European converts to Islam emmigrating to majority-Muslim countries, how do you feel about the presence of Christian Arabs, Africans and Asians in Europe? (And by the way, are you encouraging European converts to emmigrate to places where they don't share the same "common racial characteristics" or "cultural heritage?")

What is "common European blood," anyway? If we go back far enough, everyone is of mixed heritage in some way or another.

[James Fletcher Baxter]

Consider:
The missing element in every human 'solution' is
an accurate definition of the creature.

The way we define 'human' determines our view
of self, others, relationships, institutions, life, and
future. Important? Only the Creator who made us
in His own image is qualified to define us accurately.

Many problems in human experience are the result of
false and inaccurate definitions of humankind premised
in man-made religions and humanistic philosophies.

Human is earth's Choicemaker. Psalm 25:12 He is by
nature and nature's God a creature of Choice - and of
Criteria. Psalm 119:30,173 His unique and definitive
characteristic is, and of Right ought to be, the natural
foundation of his environments, institutions, and re-
spectful relations to his fellow-man. Thus, he is orien-
ted to a Freedom whose roots are in the Order of the
universe.

- from The HUMAN PARADIGM

[naveen]

Most of the Hungarians are not Magyars and your reasoning about all humans being mixed is liberal nonsense. The majority of the British poulation are Anglo Saxons and Celts. Christian Arabs, Africans and Asians do not belong in Europe. They are not Western caucasian people. However the fact that they are Chrsitian puts them ahead of others as they are have already adopted the Christian tradition of the West.

There is no such thing as a successful multi ethnic society - never has been and never will be.

[ainelivia]

Seem to have gotten way off track here.

If none of the commentators, tv, journalists etc meet are doing, in your opinion "a good job", then why don't you approach Channel 4 or BBC 2 and do your own documentary?

[Perla Zhemchuzhina...still a member of the master race?]

If most of the Hungarians are not Magyars, then what are they? "Magyar" is the Hungarian word for "Hungarian" (Singular: Magyar, Plural: Magyarok). The Hungarian word for Hungary is "Magyarszag." It is generally accepted that the Hungarians (Magyarok) originated from an area east of the Ural Mountains.

And Christianity didn't originate in the "West." It originated in the Mid-East.

Finally, I don't have many kind words to say about America, which happens to be a multi-ethnic society, but I don't think that we can accuse them of being unsuccessful. After all, they have been quite successful in inflicting damage in the Middle East, no?

[naveen]

I am not saying that Christianity originated in the West. If you read my posts you will see that i have stated that it originated among the Jews in Israel. The first Christians were Jewish converts and the first Churches were in Jerusalem and Antioch. However it was Constantine the Roman Emperor who made Christianity the religion and culture of the Roman Empire and the basis of WEstern civilisation. And it was Christianity which gave the Roman Empire its enduring legacy. Hence Christianity is a Western religion and Church headquarters are in Western countries.

The USA is a country which is dominated and ruled by whites. Ariel Sharon famously stated that it was ruled by the Jews which is not far off the truth. The success of the USA is due to its European heritage and peoples. As Third World immigration increases, it is doubtful that the USA can maintain its pre-eminence. Japan is an example of how homogeneity brings astounding success.It is not possible to maintain a First World country with a large population of THird World people.

[Perla Zhemchuzhina]

Naveen-Japan has an extremely low birth rate, and I believe that the population is already in decline. (If not, it will be very soon.) Even Japan will have to start allowing immigrants in, or the country and culture will simply cease to exist. (It is not well known outside of Japan, but there are already many immigrants in Japan, most of them doing low-skill positions that Japanese don't want to do...Have you ever been to Rappongi on a Saturday night? There is hardly a Japanese in sight!) I believe that your statement that homogeneity brings success is certainly true in many ways, but I think that realistically, it only brings success over the short term. Who knows what the situation will be in Japan in 100 years. Perhaps they will have been eclipsed by multi-ethnic nations like India and China. (I know that many people in the west tend to think of India and China as being monolithic entities, but they are nothing of the sort.)

By the way, there is ethnic diversity, even in Japan...there are the Ainu people that live in the north. They have a completely different ethnic background than the Japanese. (No one is sure of their background, but there is speculation that they might even be CAUCASIAN...) They have been subjected to discrimination in the past, and I think that they have mostly either died out or simply intermarried with the Japanese population, but a small population still exists.

[Yusuf Smith]

Naveen: all Hungarians are Magyars (except for various minorities like Gypsies and perhaps a few Germans and Slavs). Magyar is Hungarian for Hungarian and Hungary is in their language Magyaroszag.

[ainelivia]

Seems to be a lot of obsession here about "race"; what's pure and what's not? Thought that was a purely European concern? Perhaps not.

Anyway, wasn't this thread about JON SNOW being "disappointing"?

Oh and just one thing "NAVEEN" Christianity is NOT the basis for WESTERN Civilization/Culture. No, no, no. What university have you been studying at?

[navven]

Japan has no intention of importing Third Worlders and has created robots to solve its labour shortages. The Japanese know their success lies in their homogeneity and distinct racial characteristics and they are not about to destroy these. Most immigrants in Japan are not citizens as the Japanese award few citizenships to aliens. Most are doing menial jobs and are subject to deportation if they create problems.

Japan will never be multi racial and will in all likelihood remain Asia's premier country. Racial homogeneity brings success and this success is destroyed by alien immigration. No multi racial society is successful for long? Know any? And the chance of a chaotic disaster like India becoming a first world country is remote.

[George Carty]

All of the great Islamic states of the past were multi-ethnic empires. The Abbasid caliphate included both Arabs and Persians on an equal footing. Al-Andalus included Arabs and Berbers but was mostly indigenous Iberians, while the Ottoman Empire included Turks, Kurds, Arabs and many others.

Naveen, do you draw any link between Islam's explicit anti-racism (most Muslims feel primary loyalties to their clan or to the Ummah, but not to their ethnicity) is one of the main reasons for the Islamic world's backwardness?

[Perla Zhemchuzhina]

Has Japan invented a robot that pays taxes, in order to contribute to pensions?

[Perla Zhemchuzhina]

Has Japan invented a robot that pays taxes, in order to contribute to pensions?

[thabet]

Yes, I believe Nintendo plan to unveil it next year!

[joe90]

"Racial homogeneity brings success and this success is destroyed by alien immigration. No multi racial society is successful for long?"

- much as I dislike quoting human-monkeys !

So, oh wise human-monkey, can you tell us all the reasons for America's success in the world ?

Success by your own shallow standards, I mean, not mine -

Given the US is a country almost completely peopled by immigrants and incomers - the latest big batch coming from Central America, and quite soon, Spanish speakers are going to outnumber English speakers in the US!

And I have already pointed out - these two countries you select as examples of success (by your own standards), the last time they practiced the policy of Social Drawinism you advocate naveen, it was a total and complete catastrophe for both socities - a complete and utter disaster!

[George Carty]

Joe90, Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were not only very race-conscious, but also ferociously expansionistic. This combo leads to exceptionally murderous warfare - which was probably the main factor which doomed those regimes by provoking the formation of a huge opposing coalition.

I may find naveen's calls for ethnic cleansing repugnant, but I don't think he's advocating expansionism.

[joe90]

Excuse me pal,
America was expansionist as well - not only against the native First Nation Americans - but against the Britsin, the French and the Spanish Empires in the Americas -

- It stole Californian and New Mexico from Mexico ie half of all Mexico at the time

- It stole the Phillipines from the Spanish

- there was non-stop aggression against the Canadian border all through the early part of the 1800s

- even in 1880's it just marched into Hawaii Islands and just stole them off their rightful Queen -

[naveen]

Perla, have you never heard of the studies which have disproved the pensions argument? Studies from the USA, Canada and Holland have disproved the pensions myth. Immigrants age too and cannot offset a pensions crisis.The pensions issue was used to justify the imposition of mass Third World immigration in Europe.And it is a fraud. The Japanese were not stupid enough to buy it.