Beyond the veil: London's burka wearers go on the defensive

Last month, Tory MP Baroness Warsi withdrew from making a speech defending the burka on international TV; an independent girls school in Tower Hamlets was vilified for including it as part of its school uniform; pop star MIA turned up to a Los Angeles awards ceremony wearing one, and two high-profile public debates on its significance were staged by the Institute of Ideas in London. Yesterday, Cherie Blair, whose sister Lauren Booth recently converted to Islam, stoked debate by declaring her support for women who choose to wear the headscarf (though she does not support covering the face).

But just what is it about the burka and the niqab — two types of face veil, the terms are often used interchangeably — that has so captured public and political attention?

Statistics on the number of women who wear the niqab in Britain are difficult to verify. Belgium has reportedly recorded 215 burka wearers and France estimates the number at anywhere between 367 and 2,000 of its five million Muslims.

But, anecdotally, the burka on the streets of London has become more common. Knightsbridge is home to plenty of wealthy Arab women who wear the veil in public, while in pockets of east London, some Muslim women work and travel almost unnoticed in niqabs. But does that really mean the city is becoming more “radicalised”?

Shaista Gohir, executive director of the Muslim Women's Network UK, is unconvinced: “No. The niqab, in the first place, is a minor phenomenon. Yes, Muslims are displaying their identity more overtly since 9/11 and 7/7 but they've also come under heavier political scrutiny. The veil has almost become a spiritual and physical shield.”

Gohir is one of the few Muslim women I've met who defends the right of any woman to wear what she pleases but who also admits that “the niqab is a barrier to communication, community relations and integration”.

Belgium became the first European country to outlaw the burka and French legislation now dictates that it is a criminal offence “to conceal one's face in public”.

But a report published last month by the think-tank Civitas suggests that in Britain at least, the veil should be accepted as part of a modern British way of life and be judged by practicality, not ideology. In contrast to Italy, Spain and the Netherlands, where state bans are being considered, the Civitas report (titled Women, Islam and Western Liberalism) recommends that unless the veil physically “hinders a citizen's ability to perform their public civic duties”, women alone should determine what they wear.

It's a point made repeatedly by the scores of Muslim women in London I interviewed.
At Friday prayers in the East London Mosque, dozens of women and girls from Somalian, Bangladeshi, and Pakistani heritage arrive in a diverse array of Islamic dress.

A group of teenage Bengali-speaking girls, all wearing hijabs (headscarves), skinny jeans and high-street dresses, giggle in a collective huddle when I ask why they choose to wear the headscarf. “'Cos we're Muslims,” says 16-year-old Zainab Zaman, suppressing a “durr!”. “And you can tell that instantly. That's our identity, it's who we are.”

Mishal Akhtar, 23, a part-time hijab wearer who works for a fashion magazine, believes wearing a headscarf can “actually be a bit punk. In your teens, in London, it's fashionable and cool — it's another accessory. It also marks you out and makes you belong at the same time. So yes, the appeal is really obvious.”

Fatima Barktulla, 31, a cheery pregnant mother of three boys who was born and grew up in Hackney, elaborates: “I started with the hijab, but when I got married I wanted to wear the niqab … It isn't a rejection of society, or an attempt to be different. It's not a political statement either.”

Does she feel it might be perceived as such? “No woman I know who wears a niqab is doing it to make a huge point. It's a personal, spiritual conviction. And I know that the niqab is a virtuous option and it is not obligatory.”

Barktulla, an Arabic studies lecturer, says that taking up the veil simply allows her to feel closer to God. “It doesn't contradict my being British either,” she insists. “I love this country — it's my home. Mine and my husband's parents come from India but it's alien to us.

People ask whether we wouldn't be better off living in an Islamic country' but it's only because we're brown-skinned and not part of the indigenous population. What would you say to the white English convert whose family has been here for centuries? Where would they go?”

Modesty in Islam is key for both men and women. But most Islamic scholars agree that the adoption of the full-face veil among Muslim women is more to do with culture than religion. Its purpose is to diminish a woman's sexual allure.

Yet perversely, it is arguable that by wearing one a woman is defining herself as little more than a sexual object. While in Riyadh a burka would go unnoticed, in London, a veiled Muslim woman attracts attention. I ask Barktulla if she doesn't feel that wearing one here contradicts its purpose.

“It's a different type of attention though,” says Barktulla. “On a day to day basis, it's really not that problematic. I don't think people stare at me in London any more.”

Does she place any legitimacy in Angela Merkel's recent comments about the failure of multiculturalism? “If multiculturalism really is a genuine desire to allow people to express themselves in their different ways, then it works,” she says. “If the idea was to allow immigrants to have their traditions and hope their kids would be wholly assimilated, then it doesn't. I don't think that was the idea though. This is a liberal democracy.”

Amoola Ismail, a 26-year-old British- Somalian care worker whose beautifully made-up eyes are all I can see over our coffee in Aldgate, agrees: “The irony is that when people get hot and bothered about Islam and criticise it for oppressing women and forcing them to cover up, they forget that removing any woman's individual right to choose makes them oppressors too.”

Ismail believes it's not just patronising but chauvinistic for the debate on burkas to be conducted in the press and among politicians without involving the women who actually wear them. “We're not delicate little creatures,” she scoffs. “We don't need to be saved. We need to be heard if they want to take this debate seriously and stop using it as a weapon to attack Islam.”

Not everyone sees the issue as a “clash of civilisations”. “We are a new culture here,” says Dr Riffat Majeed, a GP from Watford. “We're very British Muslims. I don't identify as being Pakistani like my parents. Our generation is taking advantage of the fact that we're living in the information age. When you grow up in the West, you question everything. You want to find out who you are, where you fit in. Having doubts and getting answers to those questions is perhaps why we're more religious than the first generation.”

Majeed believes Muslim immigrants in the Sixties and Seventies, practised “a more cultural form of Islam”, whereas now their offspring are better-informed and more observant. Majeed has worn the hijab for 13 years and a jilbab (a full-length cloak) for almost the last decade, inspiring her mother to do the same. I ask if she ever feels restricted by her self-imposed uniform — whether she misses dressing up?

“It's not like you get locked away and you're like an old woman; I still dress up. We have a lot of family and social dos. Women are segregated outside of close family events so I get my hair done, have my nice outfit and jewellery on but I don't resent my choices. It hasn't limited me, it feels natural.”

Maryam El Hajbi, a 24-year-old British-Moroccan researcher working for the anti-extremism think-tank Quilliam, believes the bigger problem is “the way in which the debate has become politicised. The niqab has been taken out of context and is being used as an ideological tool, an excuse to talk about immigration, integration or the failure of multiculturalism.”

El Hajbi finds it difficult to understand the feminist position that many veiled women maintain on account of the niqab making them feel empowered, but respects their choice. “A state ban would be totally counter-productive. The only real issue is where women or girls — such as at the school in Tower Hamlets — are forced to wear it.”

The Madani School for Girls has so far refused to speak to the press about its policy — niqabs for pupils aged 11-18 are mandatory on the journey to and from school.

The headmistress, Mrs Amra Bone, tells me it might be time to set some facts straight: “First, this policy has been in place since 1991, when the school was set up,” she explains. “It's not new. Second, the uniform was already under review and subject to potential change before [the press attention]. The girls don't have to wear niqabs in school and lots of them don't put them on until they reach the school gates.”

Mrs Bone admits she doesn't personally agree with the niqab but she says the school will continue its review with staff, students, parents and its management committee and will not be pressured by headlines.

Even so, the controversy around the veil remains. A guest at a debate on religious tolerance at the Battle of Ideas conference last weekend, said the sight of women wearing them in London made her feel violently sick. Another questioned whether moral relativism and liberalism were acceptable excuses to ignore the so-called “threat [burkas] pose to civil society”.

Whether one agrees with the choice London Muslims make (when they do choose) to cover their faces or not is irrelevant; protecting the freedom to allow that choice is a basic tenet of British life.

source

'Sexual predators': Gang of Asian men weep as they are jailed for total of 32 years for abusing white girls as young as 12

A gang of Asian ‘sexual predators’ were jailed yesterday for abusing white girls as young as 12.

The five men preyed on their victims over several months and threatened them with violence if they refused their advances.

One of the men branded his victim a ‘white bitch’ when she resisted, while a second smirked: ‘I’ve used you and abused you.'

The men, all British-born Pakistanis, attacked the four girls in play areas, parks and in the back of their cars, Sheffield Crown Court heard.

They gave them gifts and introduced them to their friends. The girls were abused so frequently that after many months it ‘became a way of life’.

The girls, who were being monitored by social services, were eventually rescued by police and removed from their homes amid growing concerns for their safety.

Two of the men wept in the dock yesterday as they were jailed.

Judge Peter Kelson QC told them: ‘I’ve listened to the backdrop of some of you sobbing – I have to say your weeping cuts no ice with me at all.

‘You had what you regarded as your fun, now you will take your punishment.’

The five, Umar Razaq, 24, Razwan Razaq, 30, Zafran Ramzan, 21, Adil Hussain, 20, and Mohsin Khan, 21, were found guilty of a string of sexually related offences against the girls, one aged 12, two aged 13 and one aged 16.

Ramzan was found guilty of raping the 16-year-old girl in her own home, and the other four were found guilty of sexual activity with a child.

Umar Razaq was jailed for four and a half years, while the judge gave Razwan Razaq 11 years.

Ramzan was jailed for nine years, and Hussain and Khan both received four years. All five were placed on the sex offenders register. Three further men were cleared.

The attacks took place in Rotherham, South Yorkshire, during 2008, the court was told. Khan, a mortgage adviser who owned a BMW, described his victim as a ‘little stick’ who looked as if she had not reached puberty.

Despite this he told her he loved her and would spoil her like a ‘princess’.

During the seven-week trial the jury were told how the men drove around the streets looking for girls. The teenagers believed they were in relationships with the much older men.

On one occasion Umar Razaq tried to pull the clothes off one of the 13-year-olds.

When she resisted he pulled her hair and called her a ‘white bitch’.

On another occasion Umar introduced the girl to his brother Razwan who had sex with her in his car.

Afterwards he told her: ‘I’ve used you and abused you.’ When Ramzan was asked by police what age he was attracted to he later replied: ‘As long as they are not too young and they’re legal, that’s it.’

The authorities were alerted after some changes were noted in the behaviour of the victims and they were removed from their homes.

Joyce Thacker, director of Rotherham’s children and young people’s services, said the girls were under child protection plans following family breakdowns or other issues with their behaviour.

‘When we pieced together a map of what was happening we stepped in very quickly to move these girls to a place of safety outside Rotherham,’ she said.

‘It started off as a grooming exercise by the men who became friendly with the girls, gave them gifts and introduced them to their friends.

‘When they got used to being abused it just became a normal way of life for the girls. It is akin to self-harm.

‘It was very dangerous. The girls could have faced death if the men weren’t getting what they wanted.’

She said the girls’ parents bore some of the responsibility but they were in a difficult position and at a loss to do something about their children’s ‘alternative’ lifestyle.

Detective Sergeant Dave Walker, who led the inquiry, said: ‘One was only 12 when she met one of the men and started smoking cannabis and drinking and coming in late at night.

‘As it escalated the defendants were becoming more aggressive to the girls.

‘We basically have a group of young men who think it is all right to abuse young girls and they just groomed them and isolated them from their families.’

All four girls are now back in mainstream education. The three youngest are taking GCSEs and the eldest is at college.

Mr Walker added: ‘We don’t know what the future holds for them but it will be a lot better than it was.

source

Why I love Islam: Lauren Booth defiantly explains why she is becoming a Muslim

It is the most peculiar journey of my life. The carriage is warm and my fellow passengers unexpectedly welcoming. We are progressing rapidly and without delay. Rain, snow, rail unions, these things make no difference to the forward rush.

Yet I have no idea how I came to be on board nor, stranger still, quite where the train is heading, apart from this: the destination, wherever it might be, is the most important place I can imagine.

I know this all seems gloriously far-fetched, but really it is how I feel about my conversion, announced last week, to Islam.

Although the means and mechanisms that brought me to this point remain mysterious, the decision will determine every aspect of my life to come as firmly as the twin rails beneath that exhilarating express.

Asked for a simple explanation of how I, an English hack journalist, a single working mother, signed up to the Western media’s least-favourite religion, I suppose I would point to an intensely spiritual experience in an Iranian mosque just over a month ago.

But it makes more sense to go back to January 2005, when I arrived alone in the West Bank to cover the elections there for The Mail on Sunday. It is safe to say that before that visit I had never spent any time with Arabs, or Muslims.

The whole experience was a shock, but not for the reasons I might have expected. So much of what we know about this part of the world and the people who follow Mohammed the Prophet is based on ­disturbing – some would say biased – news bulletins.

So, as I flew towards the Middle East, my mind was full of the usual 10pm buzz words: radical extremists, fanatics, forced marriages, suicide bombers and jihad. Not much of a travel brochure.

My very first experience, though, could hardly have been more positive. I had arrived on the West Bank without a coat, as the Israeli airport authorities had kept my suitcase.

Walking around the centre of Ramallah, I was shivering, whereupon an old lady grabbed my hand.

Talking rapidly in Arabic, she took me into a house on a side street. Was I being kidnapped by a rather elderly terrorist? For several confusing minutes I watched her going through her daughter’s wardrobe until she pulled out a coat, a hat and a scarf.

I was then taken back to the street where I had been walking, given a kiss and sent warmly on my way. There had been not a single comprehensible word exchanged between us.

It was an act of generosity I have never forgotten, and one which, in various guises, I have seen repeated a hundred times. Yet this warmth of spirit is so rarely represented in what we read and see in the news.

Over the course of the next three years I made numerous journeys to the occupied lands which were once historic Palestine. At first I went on assignments; as time went by, I started travelling in solidarity with charities and pro-Palestinian groups.

I felt challenged by the hardships suffered by Palestinians of all creeds. It is important to remember there have been Christians in the Holy Land for 2,000 years and that they too are suffering under Israel’s illegal occupation.

Gradually I found expressions such as ‘Mashallah!’ (a phrase of gratitude meaning ‘God has willed it’) and ‘Al Hamd illilah!’ (akin to ‘Halle lujah’) creeping into my everyday speech. These are exclamations of delight derived from the 100 names of God, or Allah. Far from being nervous of Muslim groups, I started looking forward to meeting them. It was an opportunity to be with people of intelligence, wit and, above all else, kindness and generosity.

I’m going to take a break here to pray for ten minutes as it’s 1.30pm. (There are five prayers each day, the times varying throughout the year depending on the rising and setting of the sun.)

I was in no doubt that I had embarked on a change of political understanding, one in which Palestinians became families rather than terror suspects, and Muslim cities communities rather than ‘collateral damage’.

But a religious journey? This would never have occurred to me. Although I have always liked to pray and, since childhood, have enjoyed the stories of Jesus and the more ancient prophets that I had picked up at school and at the Brownies, I was brought up in a very secular household.

It was probably an appreciation of Muslim culture, in partic ular that of Muslim women, that first drew me towards a broader appreciation of Islam.

How strange Muslim women seem to English eyes, all covered up from head to toe, sometimes walking behind their husbands (although this is far from universally the case), with their children around their long skirts.

By contrast, professional women in Europe are happy to make the most of their appearance. I, for example, have always been proud of my lovely blonde hair and, yes, my cleavage.

It was common working practice to have this on display at all times because so much of what we sell these days has to do with our appearance.

Yet whenever I have been invited to broadcast on television, I have sat watching in wonder as the female presenters spend up to an hour on their hair and make- up, before giving the serious topics under discussion less than 15 minutes’ attention. Is this liber ation? I began to wonder just how much true respect girls and women get in our ‘free’ society.

In 2007 I went to Lebanon. I spent four days with female university students, all of whom wore the full hijab: belted shirts over dark trousers or jeans, with no hair on show. They were charming, independent and outspoken company. They were not at all the timid, soon-to-be-forced-into-marriage girls I would have imagined from what we often read in the West.

At one point they accompanied me to interview a sheikh who was also a commander with the Hezbollah militia. I was pleasantly surprised by his attitude to the girls. As Sheikh Nabil, in turban and brown flowing robes, talked intriguingly of a prisoner swap, they started butting in. They felt free to talk over him, to put a hand up for him to pause while they translated.

In fact, the bossiness of Muslim women is something of a joke that rings true in so many homes in the community. You want to see men under the thumb? Look at many Muslim husbands more than other kinds.

Indeed, just yesterday, the Grand Mufti of Bosnia rang me and only half-jokingly introduced himself as ‘my wife’s husband’.

Something else was changing, too. The more time I spent in the Middle East, the more I asked to be taken into mosques. Just for touristy reasons, I told myself. In fact I found them fascinating.

Free of statues and with rugs instead of pews, I saw them rather like a big sitting room where children play, women feed their families pitta bread and milk and grandmothers sit and read the Koran in wheelchairs. They take their lives into their place of worship and bring their worship into their homes.

Then came the night in the Iran ian city of Qom, beneath the golden dome of the shrine of Fatima Mesumah (the revered ‘Learned Lady’). Like the other women pilgrims, I said Allah’s name several times while holding on to the bars of Fatima’s tomb.

When I sat down, a pulse of sheer spiritual joy shot through me. Not the joy that lifts you off the ground, but the joy that gives you complete peace and contentment. I sat for a long time. Young women gathered around me talking of the ‘amazing thing happening to you’.

I knew then I was no longer a tourist in Islam but a traveller inside the Ummah, the community of Islam that links all believers.

At first I wanted the feeling to go, and for several reasons. Was I ready to convert? What on earth would friends and family think? Was I ready to moderate my behaviour in many ways?

And here’s the really strange thing. I needn’t have worried about any of these things, because somehow becoming a Muslim is really easy – although the prac ticalities are a very different matter, of course.

For a start, Islam demands a great deal of study, yet I am mother to two children and work full-time. You are expected to read the Koran from beginning to end, plus the thoughts and findings of imams and all manner of spiritually enlightened people. Most people would spend months, if not years of study before making their declaration.

People ask me how much of the Koran I’ve read, and my answer is that I’ve only covered 100 pages or so to date, and in translation. But before anyone sneers, the verses of the Koran should be read ten lines at a time, and they should be recited, considered and, if possible, committed to memory. It’s not like OK! magazine.

This is a serious text that I am going to know for life. It would help to learn Arabic and I would like to, but that will also take time.

I have a relationship with a couple of mosques in North London, and I am hoping to make a routine of going at least once a week. I would never say, by the way, whether I will take a Sunni or a Shia path. For me, there is one Islam and one Allah.

Adopting modest dress, however, is rather less troublesome than you might think. Wearing a headscarf means I’m ready to go out more quickly than before. I was blushing the first time I wore it loosely over my hair just a few weeks ago.

Luckily it was cold outside, so few people paid attention. Going out in the sunshine was more of a challenge, but this is a tolerant country and no one has looked askance so far.

A veil, by the way, is not for me, let alone something more substantial like a burka. I’m making no criticism of women who choose that level of modesty. But Islam has no expectation that I will adopt a more severe form of dress.

Predictably, some areas of the Press have had a field day with my conversion, unleashing a torrent of abuse that is not really aimed at me but a false idea of Islam.

But I have ignored the more negative comments. Some people don’t understand spirituality and any discussion of it makes them frightened. It raises awkward questions about the meaning of their own lives and they lash out.

One of my concerns is professional. It is easy to get pigeonholed, particularly if I continue to wear a headscarf. In fact, based on the experience of other female converts, I’m wondering if I will be treated as though I have lost my mind.

I’ve been political all my life, and that will continue. I’ve been involved in pro-Palestinian activism for a number of years, and don’t expect to stop. Yet Britain is a more tolerant country than, say, France or Germany.


I’m well aware that there are plenty of Muslim women who have great success on television and in the Press, and wear modest but decidedly Western dress.

This is hardly a choice for me, though. I am a newcomer, still getting to grips with the basic tenets. My relationship with Islam is different. I am in no position to say that some bits of my new-found faith suit me and that some bits I’ll ignore.

There is a more profound uncertainty about the future, too. I feel changes going on in me every day – that I’m becoming a different person. I wonder where that will end up. Who will I be?

I am fortunate in that my most important relationships remain strong. The reaction from my non-Muslim friends has been more curious than hostile. ‘Will it change you?’ they ask. ‘Can we still be your friend? Can we go out drinking?’

The answer to the first two of those questions is yes. The last is a big happy no.
As for my mother, I think she is happy if I’m happy. And if, coming from a background of my father’s alcoholism, I’m going to avoid the stuff, then what could be better?

Growing up in an alcoholic household with a dad who was violent, has left a great gap in my life. It is a wound that will never heal and his remarks about me are very hurtful.

We haven’t seen each other for years, so how can he know anything about me or have any valid views about my conversion? I just feel sorry for him. The rest of my family is very supportive.

My mum and I had a difficult relationship when I was growing up, but we have built bridges and she’s a great support to me and the girls.

When I told her I had converted, she did say: ‘Not to those nutters. I thought you said Buddhism!’ But she understand now and accepts it.

And, as it happens, giving up alcohol was a breeze. In fact I can’t imagine tasting alcohol ever again. I simply don’t want to.

This is not the time for me to be thinking about relationships with men, either. I’m recovering from the breakdown of my marriage and am now going through a divorce.

So I’m not looking and am under no pressure to look.

If, when the time came, I did consider remarrying, then, in accordance with my adopted faith, the husband would need to be Muslim.

I’m asked: ‘Will my daughters be Muslim?’ I don’t know, that is up to them. You can’t change someone’s heart. But they’re certainly not hostile and their reaction to my surprising conversion was perhaps the most telling of all.

I sat in the kitchen and called them in. ‘Girls, I have some news for you,’ I began. ‘I am now a Muslim.’ They went into a huddle, with the eldest, Alex, saying: ‘We have some questions, we’ll be right back.’

They made a list and returned. Alex cleared her throat. ‘Will you drink alcohol any more?’

Answer: No. The response – a rather worrying ‘Yay!’
‘Will you smoke cigarettes any more?’ Smoking isn’t haram (for bidden) but it is harmful, so I answered: ‘No.’

Again, this was met with puritanical approval. Their final question, though, took me aback. ‘Will you have your breasts out in public now you are a Muslim?’

What??

It seems they’d both been embarrassed by my plunging shirts and tops and had cringed on the school run at my pallid cleavage. Perhaps in hindsight I should have cringed as well.

‘Now that I’m Muslim,’ I said, ‘I will never have my breasts out in public again.’

‘We love Islam!’ they cheered and went off to play. And I love Islam too.

Sweden alarmed by series of 'racist' shootings

A string of 19 unsolved shootings – all of which appear to be racially motivated – are sending shockwaves through Sweden's immigrant population.

Bejzat Becirov points to a large hole in the bottom corner of a window at the Islamic Centre, Malmo's largest mosque. "It was last year," he said, "New Year's Eve, and there were people in there, drinking tea and writing greetings cards. Then one of them felt a kind of rush of air, and splinters of glass on the back of his neck. The police later found a bullet embedded in a piece of furniture."

This is not the worst thing that has happened at the mosque. Mr Becirov, its director, also remembers an arson attack that caused severe damage in 2003. But the shot fired at the mosque late last year is now being re-evaluated. Could it form part of a wider series of unexplained attacks that the police in Malmo are now hoping the public can help solve?

The announcement last week by police that a string of unsolved shootings might be connected is causing deep concern in this city, where almost half the population has an immigrant background. The attacks that police are investigating have all taken place in the past year and have all been aimed at people who look as though they might be immigrants. Of those 19 shootings, one person has been killed and eight have been injured.

Shootings are not uncommon in Malmo - a lot of people here talk about how easy it is to get hold of a gun if you want one - but the police say there's been an escalation in recent weeks and that is why they decided to warn the public and ask for their help.

They have set up a special investigation unit and have brought in help from Stockholm.

Among those now working the case is a man expert in psychological profiling - a man it is hoped can get inside the gunman's head by looking at patterns of behaviour.

He also brings with him uncomfortable echoes of the past, because he previously helped bring one of Sweden's most notorious criminals to book.

That was in the early 1990s when a man armed with a rifle was stalking the streets of Stockholm shooting at immigrants.

His weapon was equipped with a laser sight and some of his victims noticed a spot of red light on their clothes shortly before they were shot. He quickly became known as Lasermannen, the Laser Man.

His name was John Ausonius. He is now serving a life sentence for his crimes, and is also the subject of a book by the Stockholm-based writer Gellert Tamas.

In a series of interviews in prison he spoke of how he felt inspired by a new right-wing party with a strong disapproval of immigration that had recently been elected to the Swedish parliament.

"He said that he felt a kind of moral and political support for what he did," remembers Mr Tamas.


Sweden had parliamentary elections last month, which resulted for the first time in the Sweden Democrats winning seats in parliament.

They too are calling for restricted immigration and they have an apocalyptic vision of a Muslim takeover in Europe.


"We should be quite clear about one thing," says Mr Tamas.

"We don't know who's doing the shooting, we don't know if it's one person or several people. We don't know anything about his or their motives".

"But we can look at the general atmosphere and here there are some similarities with the early 1990s. The first and most obvious is that we once again have a right-wing, xenophobic party in the parliament."

The Sweden Democrats deny they are xenophobic and have indeed put up a reward for information leading to an arrest in Malmo.

But there is speculation in the city that whoever is doing the shooting may in some way feel inspired by recent political developments.

Support for the Sweden Democrats was significantly higher in Malmo than the national average.

The police say it is going to take time to get results, that it is a complicated enquiry and no-one should expect a quick fix.

That will not be much comfort to the small group of men gathered in the twilight outside a small basement mosque in Rosengaard after evening prayers.

"We've been told not to be outside after dark," said one. "It's time to go home."

source

Pakistan in pictures: Bus to Jhelum

Tale of gay woman forced to marry to protect 'honour'

"I took off my hijab, and I threw it on the floor and my brother got really mad. It's the worst thing I could have done to offend my religion, aside from burn or tear the Koran.

"My mother, she kind of stood still, and started listening, and it was very liberating that she finally wanted to hear what I had to say.
"I told her about my sexuality and I said 'that's right, I do meet girls, and I love it' and I told her that she had been hurting me really badly, and I will never forgive her."

Now 20, Reviva - not her real name - recounts the day she finally came out to her family, her pupils flash and the flat, matter-of-fact delivery of her story-telling becomes briefly animated.
This, you realise, is the pivotal moment in a disturbing journey of self-discovery which encompasses family estrangement, exorcism, and attempted suicide.
Like hundreds of young men and women in Britain, Reviva was forced into marriage in spite of her sexual orientation, and still carries deep psychological scars from years of torment at the hands of her parents.

Rising trend
The government's Forced Marriage Unit (FMU) has received hundreds of calls from young gay men and women - mainly men - who fear they are going to be forced into marriage by their family, against their will.
This year, the FMU has dealt with 29 confirmed cases of forced marriage involving gay men and women. Last year, the unit offered support and advice to nearly 1,700 cases in total.

Just how many of those involved lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (LGBT) victims is unknown, because not everyone is willing to divulge their sexuality. However, it is thought this emerging trend is just the tip of the iceberg, as more gay men and women seek assistance.
When arranging to interview her for 5 live Investigates, we asked Reviva if she would like to bring a friend for support. But this attractive student, with a hint of Goth, opts to come alone, preferring to keep even her closest friends in the dark about her troubled past.

As she admits, "I'm unable to show emotion, I'm unable to trust people. The only person I really trust is myself. I am unable to be vulnerable with a person, I'm unable to feel a lot of things."
Born in the Middle East, but schooled in Britain, Reviva's difficulties began in adolescence when she became aware of being attracted to girls rather than boys.
"The first kiss I had, I was around 12," she recalls.
"It was always kisses in the playground, and kisses in the gym. With girls it was always perfect. It was always nice. It wasn't something I was ashamed of. It was beautiful."

Not for discussion
Aware that her parents had deep religious and cultural objections to homosexuality, Reviva gently tried to make them aware of her situation, but was quickly rebuffed:
"I tried to introduce it to them, because I knew it was a thing you don't talk about. It's forbidden. But once you mention 'homosexual' the discussion is over. You can't go into detail about it."
Far from accepting the situation, Reviva's parents set up weekly meetings with eligible bachelors - and reacted with violence when their teenage daughter refused to play along.

"The worst thing they tried was burning my hand on the stove. Anything they could grab, they'd hit you until you'd sort of pass out.
"They always tried to hit me where it couldn't be seen, to hide the scars. Because don't forget I was meant to get married, so I was meant to have skin that isn't damaged."

Reviva says she attempted suicide several times, knowing that she could never satisfy her parents, for whom she reserves an unmistakable venom.
While she understands the roots of their traditional views, her simmering anger betrays the belief that when all is said and done, her home should have been a refuge - not a place of emotional torture.

Escalating ordeal

In a desperate attempt to force the situation, her father even signed her away in an Islamic marriage to a man in another country, who she had never met.
Reviva, who was still at school, used her impending exams as a delaying tactic to ensure the relationship was never consummated and it was ultimately annulled.
Far from ending, her ordeal intensified. The troubled teenager was taken to her grandmother's house in the Middle East where, as she recalls with a chilling lack of emotion, her parents tried persuading her to take her own life.
"I was damaging the family honour. I was making the family looking like a modernised, westernised, filthy family. So what they wanted to do is get rid of what is damaging the honour.

"They put you in a room on your own, I don't get any food, or any water, and I have to just sit there and wait to die or kill myself."
To aid the process, a gun, a knife, and pills were left in the room, along with a can of petrol and a box of matches. In her view, Reviva says it would have amounted to murder, not suicide, should she have decided to kill herself.
"But I wasn't in a situation where I felt I have to end my life. Even if I was, I wouldn't have done it the way they wanted me to do it."
Her refusal to give in led to further action from her family, as they sought to "cure" her of her homosexuality.

"They tried a few exorcisms" she deadpans, as if having evil spirits cast out was nothing more extreme than a routine dental check up.
This intense young woman briefly lightens up and punctures her solemn tale with a vivacious smile:

"It isn't like The Omen, it isn't as dramatic. You lay on a prayer mat, and somebody who is very religious, will read several verses from the Koran.
"It's very frightening because everyone is scared of being possessed by something, and then you think 'maybe I am?' because I have desires and thoughts that my parents think are wrong."

After this morale-sapping ordeal, Reviva briefly tried to come to an accommodation with her parents' views and dutifully studied the Koran.

Break for freedom

Reviva's family then returned to England but not long after she found one-way plane tickets for her and her father and she realised he was trying to marry her once more - again, to a man she had never met.

She contacted the Albert Kennedy Trust - a charity which helps vulnerable LGBT teenagers seek refuge.
The trust has considerable experience helping LGBT victims of forced marriage and offers advice through its website, 'LGBT Forced Marriage'.
The Albert Kennedy Trust contacted the police and put them in touch with Reviva. Fearing for her safety, they gave her 15 minutes to gather her belongings and flee the family home.

Even then, there was a final dramatic twist as the young woman was taken hostage by her mother and brother, leaving the police to force their way in.
"They had to break the door and come in, because nobody was opening the door for them. And they went in, and my mother and my brother cornered me in the kitchen.
"My brother broke a glass to make sure I didn't leave the house alive. And they had to wrestle my mother and my brother, and… I was gone."
And so Reviva is free - or at least as free as anyone with her history can be.
Already many of the physical signs of her torment have started to heal, but mentally it will take much longer.

"The worst thing is the emotional side of it - knowing your parents think you're not worth anything.

"Scars always fade but knowing your parents hate you? That doesn't change."

source

Smiling woman stabbed MP Stephen Timms over Iraq war

A woman stabbed a London MP twice in the stomach in revenge for him voting for the war in Iraq, the Old Bailey heard today.

Muslim Roshonara Choudhry, 21, smiled before she plunged the knife into Stephen Timms, who thought she was about to shake his hand at a meeting in east London.

Choudhry, of East Ham, is charged with attempted murder but refuses to recognise the court. She has instructed her legal team not to attempt to seek a not guilty verdict.

Mr Timms told how the woman, dressed in black, had booked an appointment at his weekly Friday afternoon surgery in the Beckton Globe community centre.

“I was sitting and I rose to greet her,” he told the court. “At that point I thought she must have been coming to shake my hand. She looked friendly and was smiling,” said the Labour MP for East Ham and a former Treasury minister. “Then she lunged at me with her right hand and it struck me here (pointing to the left of the middle of his stomach). I think I knew I had been stabbed although I didn't feel it at the time. I cannot actually recall seeing the knife.”

The court heard that Mr Timms, 54, cried out “what are you doing?” but Choudhry remained silent. The MP went on: “She stabbed me twice and I retreated although I was still not absolutely certain I had been stabbed. I retreated to the gents', lifted up my jumper and saw a lot of blood.”

Mr Timms was taken to the Royal London Hospital for emergency surgery and has now recovered to retake his seat in the Commons.

Choudhry, of East Ham, has insisted on not entering the court and is receiving legal aid.

The jury was shown dramatic still photographs from the CCTV cameras of Choudhry approaching the MP with her left hand extended as if in a handshake but with her right holding the knife behind her bag.

As Mr Timms reeled backwards from the attack days after the May general election, Choudhry was grabbed by security guard Faizal Butt and the three-inch knife was wrestled from her hand by him and the MP's assistant, Andrew Bazeley.

When police arrived they found she had a second knife with a five-inch blade in her bag.

Interviewed by detectives, Choudhry admitted she had intended to kill Mr Timms and had taken the second knife in case the first had broken during the attack, the court heard. She said she “was not going to stop stabbing (the MP) until someone made me”.

Asked why she had carried out the attack, she replied “punishment” for Mr Timms voting in favour of the Iraq war. She had acted “to get revenge for the people of Iraq,” she said.

Choudhry has pleaded not guilty to attempted murder and two charges of possessing an offensive weapon in May this year. It is believed to be the first time in living memory that a defendant has banned her lawyers from asking for a not guilty verdict.

At a pre-trial hearing she refused to enter a plea so the judge ordered that a not guilty plea be entered on her behalf. The trial continues.

source

Imam Zaid Shakir: Voting is an Obligation

“…their heads like the swaying humps of camels…”

Sheikh Muhammad Muhammad Sâlim `Abd al-Wadûd

Abû Hurayrah relates that the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: “There are two categories among the inhabitants of Hell whom I have not encountered. The first are people who carry whips like the tails of cows and beat the people with them. The second are women, clothed yet naked, drawn to licentiousness and enticing others to it, their heads like the swaying humps of camels – they will neither enter Paradise nor even smell its fragrance, though its fragrance can be found to a great distance.” [Sahîh Muslim (2127)]
The meaning of the hadîth:

The Prophet (peace be upon him) describes in this hadîth two groups of people that will be among the inhabitants of Hell. We benefit from this, since it serves as a warning for us not to be like those people.

When the Prophet (peace be upon him) says – “There are two categories of the inhabitants of Hell whom I have not encountered.” – he means that he has never encountered these two groups of people in the world, though he has knowledge by way of revelation from Allah that those people will be among the denizens of Hell.

With respect to the people who carry whips like the tails of cows and beat the people, al-Nawawî in his famous commentary on Sahih Muslim, says the description matches the youths employed in his day as police officers by the chief of police.

Its legal implications:

This hadîth is clear evidence for the prohibition of wearing skimpy or revealing clothing that does not properly what Islamic law requires to be concealed.

It is also cited by some scholars as evidence that a woman cannot wear her hair in a bun tied on top of her head. This matter, however, needs to be considered in greater depth.

The best way to understand textual evidence – especially when it comes to the legal implications of the sacred texts – is to examine the texts with the full implications of their meanings and their context to ensure that we have a clear and thorough concept of what the text is talking about. This comes after understanding each term and each phrase of the text on its own.

One of the best examples to illustrate the necessity of this approach is the hadîth where the Prophet (peace be upon him) describes the second of the categories of the inhabitants of Hell, saying: “women, clothed yet naked, drawn to licentiousness and enticing others to it, their heads like the swaying humps of camels…” [Sahîh Muslim (2127)]

In order to understand this hadîth correctly, we must have a full understand of what the Prophet (peace be upon him) is describing. If we neglect or fail to appreciate the implications of some of the words and meanings given in the text, then we will consequently fail to understand any aspect of the text properly.

When we consider this text in full, we discern that the Prophet (peace be upon him) is not discussing the heads of women as a topic on its own, nor is he discussing their clothing on its own, nor is he discussing their behavior in isolation.

From this, we must recognize that the Prophet (peace be upon him) is describing a type of woman – a type that is wanton and uninhibited in every possible way. Such a woman dresses improperly; she does not cover what Islamic Law requires her to cover. She is drawn to men and she actively invites their attentions. She employs the limbs of her body in provocative ways and displays her charms in the way that she moves.

It is significant that the hadîth describes the humps of camels as “flopping” or “leaning”. This is quite different from the customary styles that women usually use when they bind their hair atop their heads, where the bun or pile is strait on top of the head and not swaying from side to side.

We must also note that the hadîth does not refer to the hair itself but refers in more general terms to the head. This means that the hadîth is not just talking about the swaying of the woman’s hair, but rather to the way the woman holds and tosses her head in a provocative manner.

On the basis of this realization, we come to the conclusion – and Allah knows best – that the text is not actually prohibiting any particular hairstyle on its own. It is permissible for a woman to bind her hair in any way she wishes – even to pile her hair up and secure it atop her head – as long as she strictly adheres to the well-known dictates of Islamic Law in her dress and her conduct.

A woman must cover everything that Islamic Law requires her to cover when she goes out in public, including all of her hair. She must also be modest in her behavior and conduct. She should lower her gaze from men and not invite their attentions. This is what matters. If she carried herself in this manner, then she can any hairstyle she likes, as long as that hairstyle is not masculine. This is because the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: “Allah curses men who imitate women and women who imitate men.” [Sahîh al-Bukhârî (5885)]

And Allah knows best.


source

Knowledge Test on Religion

By: Dr. Habib Siddiqui

In the New York Times, Nicholas Kristof asked 13 questions to test knowledge of his readers on religion ("Test Your Savvy on Religion," October 9, 2010). The questions are:

1. Which holy book stipulates that a girl who does not bleed on her wedding night should be stoned to death?
a. Koran
b. Old Testament
c. (Hindu) Upanishads

2. Which holy text declares: "Let there be no compulsion in religion"?
a. Koran
b. Gospel of Matthew
c. Letter of Paul to the Romans

3. The terrorists who pioneered the suicide vest in modern times, and the use of women in terror attacks, were affiliated with which major religion?
a. Islam
b. Christianity
c. Hinduism

4. "Every child is touched by the devil as soon as he is born and this contact makes him cry. Excepted are Mary and her Son." This verse is from:
a. Letters of Paul to the Corinthians
b. The Book of Revelation
c. An Islamic hadith, or religious tale

5. Which holy text is sympathetic to slavery?
a. Old Testament
b. New Testament
c. Koran

6. In the New Testament, Jesus' views of homosexuality are:
a. strongly condemnatory
b. forgiving
c. never mentioned

7. Which holy text urges responding to evil with kindness, saying: "repel the evil deed with one which is better."
a. Gospel of Luke
b. Book of Isaiah
c. Koran

8. Which religious figure preaches tolerance by suggesting that God looks after all peoples and leads them all to their promised lands?
a. Muhammad
b. Amos
c. Jesus

9. Which of these religious leaders was a polygamist?
a. Jacob
b. King David
c. Muhammad

10. What characterizes Muhammad's behavior toward the Jews of his time?
a. He killed them.
b. He married one.
c. He praised them as a chosen people.

11. Which holy scripture urges that the "little ones" of the enemy be dashed against the stones?
a. Book of Psalms
b. Koran
c. Leviticus

12. Which holy scripture suggests beating wives who misbehave?
a. Koran
b. Letters of Paul to the Corinthians
c. Book of Judges

13. Which religious leader is quoted as commanding women to be silent during services?
a. The first Dalai Lama
b. St. Paul
c. Muhammad

His answers are:
1. b. Deuteronomy 22:21.
2. a. Koran, 2:256. But other sections of the Koran do describe coercion.
3. c. Most early suicide bombings were by Tamil Hindus (some secular) in Sri Lanka and India.
4. c. Hadith. Islam teaches that Jesus was a prophet to be revered.
5. All of the above.
6. c. Other parts of the New and Old Testaments object to homosexuality, but there's no indication of Jesus' views.
7. c. Koran, 41:34. Jesus says much the same thing in different words.
8. b. Amos 9:7
9. all of them
10. all of these. Muhammad's Jewish wife was seized in battle, which undermines the spirit of the gesture. By some accounts he had a second Jewish wife as well.
11. a. Psalm 137
12. a. Koran 4:34
13. b. St. Paul, both in 1 Corinthians 14 and 1 Timothy 2, but many scholars believe that neither section was actually written by Paul.

While I am appreciative of Kristof's attempt to clear many such commonly held misconceptions, especially about Islam, he made some errors with his answers. Here are my corrections:

1. Muslims pronounce their Holy Scripture as the Qur'an, which should have been used by the author for better accuracy.

2. Contrary to his opinion about Q. 2 there is not a single verse in the Qur'an that prescribes coercion in matters of religion. Allah (God of the Qur'an) leaves the choice to either accept or reject Islam to human beings, although He warns those that reject Islam as the final revelation with dire consequences in the Hereafter.

3. Kristof's remarks on Q. 5 vis-a-vis Islam are not accurate. While the Qur'an, like both the so-called Old and New Testament, does not explicitly abolish slavery, it is unique in providing the basis for emancipation from and elimination of slavery. See, for instance, the Surah al-Balad (ch. 90), verses 12-18, in which Allah says, "Ah, what will convey unto thee what the Ascent (rising to higher status in Islam, a sure recipe for entering Paradise) is: It is to free a slave, and to feed in the day of hunger an orphan near of kin or some poor wretch in misery, and to be of those who believe and exhort one another to perseverance and exhort one another to the deeds of kindness and compassion." And there are many such verses (see, e.g., 4:92, 5:89, 58:3.) and prophetic hadith (sayings) that required believing Muslims to freeing slave as a remission of their sins. The verse 24:33 says, "And if any of your slaves ask for a deed in writing (for emancipation) give them such a deed if you know any good in them; yea, give them something yourselves out of the means which Allah has given to you."

What is more revealing is that the Qur'an unequivocally makes it clear that no man, irrespective of his status (including a prophet), can enslave any other human being: "It is not (possible) for any human being unto whom Allah had given him the Scripture and wisdom and 'Nabuwah' (Prophethood) that he should afterwards have said unto mankind: Be slaves of me instead of Allah ..." [3:79] It is not difficult to understand why the Prophet of Islam, Muhammad (S), not only freed his slaves from his wife's side (Khadija) but also encouraged his companions to win their freedom. Muhammad (S) bought freedom of 63 former slaves, A'isha (RA) 67, Abbas (RA) 70, Abdullah ibn Umar (RA) 1000 and Abdur Rahman ibn Awf 30,000. It was these freed slaves of Islam that became the flag-bearers of Islam. Bilal, the Abyssinian, became the first Mu'addhin (caller to prayer) in Islam, a position next only to the Imam during the salat, one of the most important pillars of Islam. To break the aristocratic arrogance of the pagan time the Prophet's own cousin sister, born to Quraysh aristocracy, was married to his freed slave, Zaid ibn Haritha (RA). In his deathbed, Muhammad (S) appointed Usama (RA), the son of Zaid (RA), to become the leader of the expedition against the Byzantine Empire that had gathered a large army to attack Muslim territories to the north in Syria. Muslim history is replete with examples of freed slaves that became the rulers and marrying into kings' daughters and sisters.

The interested reader may like to read my articles "Anatomy of Racism" and "Islam and the question of slavery" that were posted elsewhere in 2005 and 2006, respectively.

As to Kristof's answer to Q. 10, many scholars have dwelt upon the subject of Muhammad's (S) treatment of Jews. It is a highly controversial subject. Suffice it to say that the prophet Muhammad (S) was more merciful to the Jews of Madinah than the prophet Moses (AS) was to his own community when they rebelled against him and committed blasphemous activities. The interested reader may like to read Dr. Rafiq Zakaria's book - Muhammad and the Quran, Penguin Books (1992).

Kristof's answer to Q. 12 also shows his misreading of the Qur'anic verse. No, the Qur'an does not endorse beating wife for insubordination. If the wife shows disloyalty and ill-conduct towards her husband, the recommended steps in sequence are - (1) verbal advice or admonition, (2) separating bed so as to suspend sexual relation, (3) have sexual intercourse (so as to win her over), and if that too fails to reconcile, then (4) a family council that is comprised of two arbiters, one from each family with the intention of setting things aright (4:34-35). [See, e.g., Al-Qur'an: a Contemporary Translation by Ahmed Ali, Princeton University Press, 1993] [Note also: The Arabic root word "daraba" being taken from the prosaic example "the stud-camel covered the she-camel." (Raghib, Al-Mufridat fi Gharib Al-Qur'an)] These verses were revealed in relation to the wife of a Muslim who complained to the Prophet (S) that her husband had beaten her, and she wanted retaliation. If beating of wives were allowed in the Qur'an then it could not have prohibited it by saying, "If a wife fears cruelty or desertion on her husband's part, there is no blame on them if they arrange an amicable settlement between themselves; and such settlement is best; even though men's souls are swayed by greed. But if ye do good and practise self-restraint, God is well-acquainted with all that ye do." (Qur'an, 4:128) See also the verse: "Do not retain them (i.e., your wives) to harm them..." (Qur'an, 2:231)

I am, however, aware of the fact that because of a misinterpretation with the Arabic word Adribu in the Qur'an (derived from the word 'Daraba' which has multiple meanings, depending on the context) some translators have mistakenly assumed that the third option means scourge, or light beating.

This discussion once again demonstrates that relying on a mistranslation in English or other languages rather than the classical Arabic of the Qur'an, in which the Islamic scripture was revealed, can distort the actual meanings intended for the verse. This problem is also quite acute with many old scriptures that are open to so many interpretations. Little knowledge on religion can actually be dangerous!

source