My blog in The Times today.
Ahmadi Muslims challenge mainstream Islam
There is a palpably tranquil atmosphere in the Baitul Futuh Mosque in Morden, London. Hundreds of guests, including: MPs, Secretary of States and Senior Members of the Armed Forces, are slowly making their way into Western Europe’s largest Mosque – which can accommodate 10,000 worshippers – an impressive white building, donning a 16m dome and two lofty minarets. Continue reading
“What’s happening is extraordinarily serious. We’re in a very deep crisis,” Vince Cable, Business Secretary, said last night in the first of many startling admissions. Cable – speaking alongside John Denham, Labour MP and Caroline Lucas, leader of the Green Party – was speaking at a debate about the economy, business and tuition fees to a predominantly student audience in the House of Commons.
Cable’s use of the term “crisis” was not an isolated occurrence, however – he used it on several occasions throughout the evening. The increase in his vociferous rhetoric coincides, inexorably, with government’s fruitless economic strategy.
Oxymoronically, Cable said something else strange, too: “If we cut the deficit too fast we will fall of a cliff.” This self-deprecating statement by Cable doesn’t seem to hold up: the government clearly are attempting to cut the deficit too fast. Christopher Pissarides, who won the Nobel Prize in Economics in 2010, denounced the extent of Chancellor George Osbourne’s cuts and described them as “inflexible” in a New Statesman column last week. While David Blanchflower, the NS’s economics editor, wrote: “You [George Osbourne] must loosen fiscal policy and slow the pace of public spending cuts or you will push the UK economy over the precipice.”
But things soon became even stranger. Upon being asked by angry members of the audience whether the coalition are on the right track with regards to the economy, Cable continually evaded the question – but twice mentioned: “Gordon Brown and Alastair Darling dealt with the economy sensibly.” A statement Prime Minister David Cameron will undoubtedly disagree with.
Fellow panelist John Denham said: “They’re [the government] doing too little to stimulate growth. Most of the cuts are falling on women, women with Children in particular.”
Caroline Lucas said: Government policies are making things worse, not better. It’s counterproductive. She also described the government’s ubiquitous mantra that ‘we are all in this together’ as “insulting.” Lamenting that the poor are being hit the hardest.
Cable had no qualms about blaming the banks for the financial turmoil in our country. And upon being asked what will to be done about the ‘greedy bankers’, Cable said: “We have got banking regulation in place. We have now agreed, in principle, to break up the seven big banks.”
Yesterday, the latest figures from UCAS showed a 12% drop in the number of UK applicants applying to university this September. The Green Party – in an act of clever political posturing – have stated their support for a free education system. Vince Cable and Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg, however, have been vehemently criticised after breaking party pledges and deciding to treble tuition fees.
After sullenly mumbling that his party had taken a lot of stick for their decision to raise tuition fees, Cable was quick to emphasise: “nobody pays fees when they go to university. The system works in the form of a graduate tax. Public spending on universities is increasing with student support, maintenance grant and loan schemes. There is more money than less going into Universities!”
What he did concede was that: “The parties used the wrong [political] language” when deciding to raise the fees.
One of the final questions of the night came from a fuming student from Tower Hamlets who described the scrapping of EMA as “evil.” He also cited a survey in his local area, which purportedly showed how much distress the cancelling of EMA has caused students. His question was thus: “What possible justification can you [Vince Cable] give for getting rid of EMA?”
Cable said: “On EMA, I share a lot of the worries. Many young people are being affected by it. There is an impact but it’s not devastating.”
The government have claimed that there is no other option apart from their proposed austerity measures. Last week, the NS published the reports of nine leading economists who disagree. It seems, perhaps, as if Vince cable does, too.
With the large group of young people Cable had to face at the House of Commons last night – who reminded him that youth unemployment is nearing 1 million, and the increasing evidence that the government’s economic position is untenable – we may start to see real signs of discord within the coalition. We need a plan B and Cable knows it.
Omar Shahid is editor of Spin (spinonline.co.uk)
Twitter: omar_shahid
It’s all to obvious to most of us, apart from David Cameron and Barack Obama perhaps, that the war in Afghanistan has been a failure. Well, to be honest, most of the wars our country and the U.S. goes into ends in failure. Strategically, when the US, the world’s greatest military power, and NATO, the world’s strongest military alliance, can’t win against a poorly armed insurgency after a decade long war, then they have lost in terms of deterrence and prestige. Now is the time to pull out, unless of course, our leaders want our soldiers to continue being killed. And killed for what?
We are told the war was initiated to quell the terrorism emerging from Afghanistan, and to help the country become a more stable state. But as long as the country is occupied by foreigners, especially imperialistic foreigners, the status quo will never change for the better. The feelings of the Taliban towards its western occupiers, and that of the western countries towards the Taliban is mutual: they both see each other as a threat. The Taliban believe their country has been illegally invaded and is under constant attack by the ‘kuffar’ (disbelievers) who are sending drones into their country-killing scores of civilians in the process in the guise of ‘collateral damage.’ The Taliban in both Afghanistan and Pakistan also see their respective governments as the enemy who are working in conjunction with the ‘kuffar.’ And so their suicide bombings and indiscriminate killings of their own countrymen are aimed attacks on their on government in an attempt to further destabilise the establishment.
It’s simple. America and Britain have invaded Afghanistan to counter the terrorism in the country. But what our leaders fail to realise is that the very reason why much of this terrorism exists is because they continue to stupidly invade countries and kill civilians. So we invade countries, to fight terrorism, which we have caused in the first place. It doesn’t make sense. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad summed it up nicely when he said: “They [America] created terrorism, and now all they want to do is fight it.”
Afghanistan has been an unstable country for decades with rival armed groups fighting for sectarian power. By the mid 1990′s, Afghanistan became divided into spheres of control. The Mujahideen, who fought the Soviet Union, and who later became the Taliban in 1996, have had their fair share of support from the USA, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. The U.S. backed the Mujahideen for obvious reasons. Saudi Arabia condone and encourage the Wahabi-like approach endorsed by the Taliban with their extremist version of Islam. And Pakistan, obsessed with their neighbours India, have often protected and aided the Taliban to counter India’s influence in Afghanistan.
Pakistan and America have a complicated relationship and the two countries often betray each other. Although Pakistan has received billions of dollars to help fight terrorism, they, in effect, abuse the role America have given them and often help to sustain and shape the Afghan taliban- undermining America’s mission.
The Taliban get recruits from ordinary afghans who want to avenge the killings of loved ones and who are fed up of the poverty, occupation and corruption endemic in their country- all exascerbated, of course, by the west. Britain and America are fighting a war they cannot win. Efforts would be better spent in the Arab countries, where the people are tiresomely fighting the tyranny of their oligarchic dictators. The $1million dollars to keep a single soldier in Afghanistan for a year is a waste of money. Bring the soldiers home! Although most of them will come back injured, mentally ill and suicidal…
by Omar Shahid
pictures from the Telegraph & Daily Mail
David Cameron’s party has a propensity to divide and rule, to blame the poor and to cause rifts within the various ethnic cultures which exist within Britian, so said George Galloway at a talk about multiculturalism I attended yesterday.
I heard David Cameron’s talk last month on February the 5th about multiculturalism where he said that “state multiculturalism has failed” and mentioned ”the existence of an ideology-Islamic extremism” and, to be honest, I was not shocked by it, neither did it make my blood boil. The reason for this was not because he was right, or what he said resonated with me, but because I have become accustomed to this sort of rhetoric in order to gain political points. His singling out of Muslims did not surprise me either – especially when Islamophobia is now ubiquitous, or in the words of Baroness Warsi: “Islamophobia has now become acceptable.”
Martin Smith from the Love Music Hate Racism campaign argued at the rally last night that Mr Cameron chose to give his speech about multicultalism in Munich, the hub of anti Muslim sentiment, “the day after Labour went above Mr Cameron’s party on the polls, and the same day the EDL marched in Luton. He is copying [Angela] Merkel, [Nicolas] Sarkozy and the Swiss government in their attacks against the Muslim community.”
One theme prominent throughout the night was the idea that a lot of the backlash we face within our country is a result of the demonisation of Muslims and the continuing bombing of their countries. Therefore, is it really a surprise when a small minority become angered and fight back? As George Galloway said: “If you go to war with Muslims abroad you will make war with Muslims at home.” The 7/7 London bombers said explicitly in their videos that what they are doing was because of foreign policy.
What particularly angered many people – not just Muslims, about Mr Cameron’s speech – was the fact that it was held on the same day as the EDL march against Muslims. Cameron’s speech, ironically, ended up strengthening the likes of the EDL and the BNP; and once you increase the popularity of these xenophobic, far right groups, multiculturalism will further disintegrate. Nick Griffin, leader of the BNP, gloated after Cameron’s speech that his party’s ideas are now entering the mainstream.
I am certainly not one to call Mr Cameron a fascist, a racist nor a xenophobe-like some of the speakers did at last night’s rally-but he, along with previous governments, have been much more tolerant of the different cultures and religions which exist within our society- as compared to other European countries. What I do take objection to, however, is the singling out of specific communities.
Islamic extremism does exist. But these irregular acts need to be treated as isolated incidents of criminality and not acts of terror by a religion as a whole. When the shootings in Arizona took place recently it was treated as an act of ‘insanity’ and not terrorism. Why should attacks by Muslims be treated any different?
As Mr Cameron closes libraries in areas which are predominantly black and asian, in the name of governmental cuts and multiculturalism, and as he continues to sell arms to autocrats who, as a result, suppress democracy, and oppose pluralism, he further espouses his double standards on multiculturalism.
One speaker from the East London Mosque said at the rally last night, that when his family first came to England, they suffered from an identity crisis-they didn’t know where they belonged. Wherever there lived, white people would move out, and when they did live amongst white people, they were often subject to ridicule and abuse. And therefore the asian and black community often lived with each other for safety reasons.
There is no doubt that Mr Cameron speaks from a position of vested interests, and if he was using multiculturalism as a euphemism for a attack on the Muslim community – as one speaker made clear – he was wrong in doing so. ‘Don’t let David Cameron divide us’ was the overall theme of the night. I agree. Our Prime Minister needs to be more careful in the future, if he is not, the cultural apartheid which still exists in our society today, will only be accentuated.
Omar Shahid
