Cameron: Muslims must be taught English, believers in shariah are like the BNP
David Cameron's managed to undo his good work in the space of 24 hours:
Likening Muslim extremism to the ideologies of the BNP, he stated: "We must mobilise the instruments of public policy to draw people away from supporting such ideologies. The BNP pretend to be respectable; but their creed is pure hate. And those who seek a sharia state, or special treatment and a separate law for British Muslims are, in many ways, the mirror image of the BNP. They also want to divide people into us and them. And they too seek out grievances to exploit."
I've already blogged at length today so for commentary please refer to some of my previous comments on shariah here and here.
The press release goes onto the issue of language:
Warning that multiculturalism has been manipulated to favour a divisive idea - the right to difference - Mr Cameron stressed the need to bring people close together, and pressed for Muslims to be taught English. He said: "We've got to make sure that people learn English, and we've got to make sure that kids are taught British history properly at school. I believe that the Government should redirect some of the money it currently spends on translation into additional English classes. This would help people integrate into society and broaden their opportunities."
How many Muslims can't speak English? Apart from the elderly, In reality they do so - with the appropriate regional accents. I can't understand why he's seriously raising this as a problem.





Sure, citing Sharia is a straw-man argument, but there are two inescapable facts here:
1) Most Britons don't see Shariah as you do, and neither do they see its benign side (on interest rates or mortgages) as you do.
2) I don't think there has been a proper debate within the Muslim community/intelligensia (I'm giving a London example here) on Shariah law and its relevance (or lack of) in the UK. When people such as Zia Sardar write about it, people start criticising as if he's just been blasphemous. I believe Yusuf Smith had something along those lines. Unless you confront the 'Chavlims' who think, without really thinking about it, that 'Da cliphate would be a good idea innit' then you're going to see this cropping up.
When I use 'Chavlims', I refer to the council-house kind who cropped up in Jon Snow's earlier doc What Muslims Want, spouting off about how a Caliphate would be great without knowing the full intricacies.
Admittedly, such conversations are not easy. Its difficult to have a rational conversation about the stupidity of the Khalistan project, but you're a "community leader" Osama, step up! ;)
Posted by: Sunny | 29 January 2007 at 10:28 PM
Sunny, I do agree. There has been a lot of misrepresentation of the shariah issue by both sides. The balanced view has not been put forward, but its mainly because most Muslim orgs would take the view that it is not an issue. There has just been no need to educate about shariah, caliphate etc because it's such a distant thing, far removed from current priorities. The idiocy of the Cameron position is now it's going to force people to come out and talk about it. I'll hopefully be posting more on this later.
However, when proper views on shariah have been put forward such as in my Guardian article linked to in the post, the comments editor of the newspaper gets hounded for having the temerity to open up such a debate. If there's no space for discussion then I'm sure you can see it's hard to get the proper views across.
Posted by: Osama | 30 January 2007 at 08:38 AM
Even "intelligent" Muslims still pop down the kutub and pick up a copy of Doi's "Shariah: The Islamic Law" and think this Muslim version of the Napolean's civic law code is the real macoy! But then not so many kutub's are going to stock works by people like Khaled Abou El Fadl because, despite being a Madrassa trained scholar of some repute, he has committed the crime of becoming a professor of law at UCLA and is thus 'Western' (despite being one of the world's foremost authorities on Shariah). And that's before we start on the sectarian nature of kutubs. It aint just the chavlims who are the problem. Some of the supposedly 'educated' Muslims (i.e. middle class) are just as dogmatic and empty headed and small-minded as the chavlims. They are simply more articulate when it comes to spreading their nonsense!
Wasalaam
Yakoub
Posted by: Yakoub Islam | 30 January 2007 at 09:17 AM
"Unless you confront the 'Chavlims' who think, without really thinking about it, that 'Da cliphate would be a good idea innit' then you're going to see this cropping up. When I use 'Chavlims', I refer to the council-house kind..."
This is just disgusting - pure, unadulterated class prejudice and snobbery. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Posted by: bat020 | 30 January 2007 at 10:29 AM
Sorry Sunny I should have added that even if there isn't enough knowledge out there, it ill-behoves someone aspiring to be PM to comment on a matter from a position of such ignorance.
Posted by: Osama | 30 January 2007 at 12:03 PM
This is just disgusting - pure, unadulterated class prejudice and snobbery. You should be ashamed of yourself.
I couldn't agree more, Bat
Posted by: James O | 30 January 2007 at 12:30 PM
I am a white christian with no particular understanding or knowledge of Islam.
It seems to me obvious that there is not the remotest possibility of sharia law or some kind on caliphate being set up in Scotland, where muslims are a small minority.
What disturbs me with Cameron and New Labour is there constant harping on about some amorphous but terrifying threat they recommend the rest of us see in Muslims.
Cameron's recent intervention and just about everything said by Reid and Blair heighten resentments and create a sense of division.They are intellectually bankrupt and invite a sense of alienation on the part of those they misrepresent.
The Muslim community, if that is a homogeneuous entity, should be left alone. What compromises my security is not a small minority of my fellow citizens who are overwhelmingly law abiding but stupid, pointless foreign adventures which end up providing a stomping ground and recruitment centre for terrorism.
Posted by: interested by-stander | 30 January 2007 at 12:50 PM
Sorry Sunny I should have added that even if there isn't enough knowledge out there, it ill-behoves someone aspiring to be PM to comment on a matter from a position of such ignorance.
C'mon Osama - ignorance breeds fear, we all know that. We have the MCB's Abdurjafar telling everyone on comment is Free that the sole reason for the existence of Sikhs is so they can kill all Muslims. Nice.... and he's near the top of the MCB food chain, what sort of stuff are other people thinking?
Yes the MPs are ignorant - but its our job to educate them about an area they've been thrust into and are frantically flailing about to get some bearings. Instead you're getting upset about the use of a word that has no relevance to the last 500 years. If skinheads were screaming - "we're coming in a crusade to get you" or something I'd understand.
So on the one hand you say you want to engage, on the other you start stressing about irrelevent points - is it any wonder dialogue is so bloody difficult?
Bat - shut up will you.
Posted by: Sunny | 30 January 2007 at 03:28 PM
Sunny, I think I've added a bit more to the debate than the c-word. And if you think it's ok for leaders of parties to make ignorant comments - no matter what the reason - then good for you.
Posted by: Osama | 30 January 2007 at 03:52 PM
'Bat - shut up will you.'
as usual, Sunny has resorted to insults and name-calling when challenged. Try and surprise us once by answering Bat's point would you Sunny?
Posted by: James O | 30 January 2007 at 09:43 PM
Sunny, I think I've added a bit more to the debate than the c-word
Where? You're only known in the context of the report as having been offended by the c-word.
Posted by: Sunny | 31 January 2007 at 12:35 AM
Do feel free to ignore Bat and James' point!
You really are quite naive when it comes to how the media portray a story. I've got more comments on my blog, let me dig out the address for you...
Posted by: Osama | 31 January 2007 at 09:16 AM
What strikes me most, if you look at the top of the post, is the similarity of pose between Cameron's picture and Osama's on the right-hand bar!
Posted by: Sohaib | 31 January 2007 at 03:14 PM
A scary thought - one them could be the next Prime Minister!
A new blog on the block I've just discovered from a friend - run by a groovy dude from Pakistan and a resident here in bonnie auld Scotia, would you believe!
The Fanonite
I've no idea what his real politics are though - whether he's a Hun-nite or a Tim-mite?
ps
what is David Cameron doing on the Star Trek transporter, and where is he being beamed up from?
Maybe, Tories are aliens after all!
Posted by: joe90 | 01 February 2007 at 12:03 AM
That is the bold Idrees, he's a good man, and it's good to see he's got a blog. Cheers for the tipoff Joe.
Posted by: Osama | 01 February 2007 at 01:37 AM
Osama, is Sohaib trying to infer that you are a "conservative" at heart, or a Conservative? :-)
Posted by: aineliva | 01 February 2007 at 08:45 AM
Sohaib - slap! ;)
Posted by: Osama | 01 February 2007 at 11:44 AM