‘If you don’t like it here… go back home’

17 02 2008

I really hate it when I get into discussion with certain people about what being a Muslim means to me… the discussion often concludes with one sentence, and more than often since Dr Rowan William’s comments. ‘If you don’t like it here, go back HOME.’ Go back home, where? I don’t have a ‘back home’. I find this kind of response annoying more than offensive because of ignorance and narrow mindedness involved, and that coming from people depicted as the most progressive and civilised people on earth. I am not shy to discuss what I believe in, and I dont’t have a problem presenting it to people as an alternative way of life, why can’t people do the same? I don’t know.

If we were to explore the idea of going back home, which unlike me, most immigrant Muslims living in the West can do so…would it solve anyones problem? Well, not really. Most Muslim countries which have abundance of resources are run by tyrant despotic rulers installed and supported by the West working to secure those resources for the West. Regimes changes only occur when the Western interests are at risk of being fulfilled, one dictator is simply replaced by another and sometimes at the cost of thousand of innocent lives such as in Iraq and Afghanistan. Most problems of the Muslim world, however complex, can sometimes be narrowed down to the presence of these idiot rulers and their puppet regimes working against Islam and Muslims in cahoots with the Western rulers. And when any neo Islamic party termed ‘Islamist’ comes close to power even through fair electoral process, who feels the first itch? Sometimes it seems almost impossible for Muslim world to free itself from the shackles of Imperialism/colonialism and the constant interference from the West to be able to decide its own political destiny.  So what are they suppose to do? Perhaps, it would sound reasonable to send people back home if they were going to bring back their own troops, stop interfering in their lands and allow them to live however they wish to. But that I don’t see happening, not when this hypocritical theory of ‘one law for all’ will soon be applicable to the world.

Regardless of all that, the ‘if you don’t like it here, go back home’ attitude clearly highlights the strength of ideas people hold and their views towards minorities. Muslims are accused of being emotional, ready to explode the minute their faith is questioned, but didn’t those accusers explode with emotions of anger at the speech made by Dr Rowan Williams? Is it understandable for people to react in such way? Isn’t it clear that it is not only some Muslims, but narrow-mindedness, ignorance, intolerance very much prevails in the West too?

Advertisements

Actions

Information

28 responses

17 02 2008
Shahrzad

I know what you mean. I could not expect something better from kind of Rowan Williams. But sometimes i see the same reaction by some muslims, when you critisize something in the west while you’re living there, they tell you:”‘If you don’t like it here… go back home.”

It’s much more annoying to hear this from a muslim mouth.
I strongly believe that muslims are slave. It is new kind of slavery in the world (you read in my V day article.) when muslims’ mind are fed with American garbage.
I read in the news that Kuwait government wants to use Israel as nuclear shield for their country. Somewhere else i read that Qatar minister of foreign affairs wants to meet Israelis “hiddenly”. Most of them have hidden agendas. And they make people’s life fiancially stable. So they never protest.
I think muslims need a true motivation, like the story of Ashoura. There should be a true definition that what’s meaning of fitnah and islamic movement. So they dont go through wrong ways of interpretation of deen, like of Al Qaeda fell in. ( There is a book by Murtaza Mutahari name as “Islamic movements”. That discuss Islamic movements in muslim countries like the like of “Muslim Brotherhood” in Egypt. )

I also think what west hates about islam is “Elastic Islam”. Islam is hanif. Mean it’s bendable. “hanif” means can bend. So islam is elasic.
It means we muslims have the sirat elmustaqim as the reference and centre of belief.
but when we follow islam we must be flexible enough to recover from the wrong we do. we sometimes come out of the siraat and go wrong ways. as long as we have the reference in our system we should be able to recover back to the right path.
If we r plastic then when we do wrong, we break off.
So islam allows for deviations and it is what those guys in the west hate it. Bcs true muslims can be sure of their life pattern and islam always gives them way to come back..

17 02 2008
Tia

I agree Shahrzad, there are some Muslims who also have this attitude, and they are the same Muslims who like to bury their heads in the sand pretending everything is ok, when it is not. I am a citizen of this country, I pay taxes and I contribute to society like every other citizen, so why don’t I have the same right to criticise the government and its policies?

The attitude of some Muslims and particularly the Muslim rulers remind me of what Malik al-Shabbaz (Malcolm X) once said about the field Negroes and the house Negroes. Well, they are the house Negroes and this video below shows what they really are.

17 02 2008
Observor

I’ve been told to go home, if you dont like it several times, so I know what it feels like.

There are real problems in British society like the happy slapping culture, I mean what the hell is all that about? Two old men living in same place, when one has been dead for 8 years and the other mentally unwell lived with a dead house mate… until the neighbors kept complaining about the smell!! why were these two old men left alone and where were their relatives, friends etc? The growing gang culture, knife crimes, people being stabbed to death over some parking row are what people are really scared of. I think the media and responsible citizens need to take action to prevent and make their society safer before going on frenzy over suggestions of Shariah law.

People should be ready to receive criticism of their own laws before criticising other people’s laws.

17 02 2008
Sumera

Go home where exactly. I wonder the same thing. Its even said when you are being an average British citizen moaning about the tax taken off your wage, or the state of the NHS! But because you are ethnic or “Mozlem” they take it to another tangent.

What really irritates me is the Muslim singalong of “do hijrah” – to where?!? I don’t see a country worth doing hijrah too – they’re all so unbelievably screwed and have despots running them you’d be doing yourself a great dis-service by assuming Muslim country = bliss.

18 02 2008
Bubbles

The Islamophobes fear that UK will be the first western country to be Islamized without coersion and without violence. The archbishops statement is their worst nightmare coming true!

It is impossible to make Islam ‘acceptable’ by western standards without being a hypocrite. I find in my discussions with non-Muslims and sometimes ignorant Muslims that there is this tendency to get angry when you refuse to admit there there is something inherently wrong with Islam. I suppose that’s what leads to the ‘go back to where you come from’ statements and the like. People closing their minds to any possibility of re-assessing ingrained stereotypes. I wish there is a way to flog sense into people’s heads without violating their human rights.

I feel sorry for Muslims who have no home to go back to. Ah well, if it’s not one thing its another… like Sumera pointed out, home might not be such a happy place afterall. Weigh your evils and settle for the lesser one, I say.

18 02 2008
brnaeem

AA- Tia,

Good points, but you got me thinking. Imagine if the West did agree to cease all its mischievous intervention across Muslim lands. What would happen? I shudder to think of the chaos we would create on our own, upon our own. Sometimes I even think that their meddling is a blessing in disguise as its directing us to that more foundational step of starting with the self (since that is all we have control over nowadays).

If we ever got control of states, I seriously believe we would get sidetracked with power politics (to an even greater extent than now), neglecting the essential reformation of the self.

Its almost as if Allah (swt) is telling us to quit trying to gain success through the political solution and redirect your energies towards the crux of the problem – your depraved souls.

I’m working on a post on this exact topic.

18 02 2008
Tia

I completely agree Observor, there are serious issues in British society as you mentioned which deserve front page covering not something so insignificant blown out of proportion, you’d think Muslims are 40% of the population considering how much coverage they get.

Sumera I think some Muslims have taken the Islamic concept of hijrah out of context. There are some very lazy Muslims, isolationist, who do not engage or interact as oppose to ‘integrate’ with the wider community to be able to ascertain how much work is required. But if you have a hijra mentality, you are constantly justifying laziness with, ‘I’m leaving this crap hole anyway’.. but the fact is the minute they land at the airport of one of these so called ‘hijra’ places they realize there is no place like home.

Bubbles, haha Imagine if there was a way of flogging sense into people’s head, without violating their human rights, of course :p But this is it, there is immense pressure being applied on Muslims to accept the fact that Islam is something for Camels and beduins and has no role to play in the modern world. And there is the tendency of measuring Islamic rules according to the yardstick of secular man made laws, which usually ends up in Muslims rejecting some definitive laws of Islam because its not to their western taste. At the same time, our leaders and scholars have totally flopped instead of taking the front seat in facing these intellectual challenges they have left the Muslims unshielded.

BrNaeem Ws. The chances of West dropping Capitalism for something else is unimaginable to me, so I don’t see the interventions ceasing. Even for argument sake, if it did happen and we were thrown in some Muslim country allowed to decide how we want to run it.. I don’t think it would have such a negative impact on our behavior. I strongly believe the missing component within Muslims is Ihsan and the strengthening and nutritioning of the nafs is absolutely mandatory to revival of Islam and Muslims. However at the same time I don’t believe politics or power struggle is something evil or bad – a view held by some religious people. Politics is very much part of our purpose as Muslims as it is to seek nearness to Allah because Allah (swt) has given us the trust of Islam and chosen us as witness over the affairs of mankind. It is also significant that the very people we look up to were also great politicians in its Islamic sense and fought for justice by challenging and accounting the rulers. Imam al-Hussain, Abdullah ibn Zubayr, Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam Malik, even likes of Imam al-Ghazali, Shaykh abdul Qadir Jilani, and more recently the Sunussis and Shehu Osman Don Fodio. I believe for the well being of Islam and Muslims it is essential that Muslim do not become politically secular nor dancing dervishes. But IA I am looking forward to your post 🙂

20 02 2008
Ijtema » Blog Archive » Deconstructing “Back Home”

[…] Tia objects to the common refrain spewed by Islamophobes, “if you don’t like it, go back home.” […]

20 02 2008
brnaeem

AA- Tia,

“the strengthening and nutritioning of the nafs is absolutely mandatory to revival of Islam and Muslims. However at the same time I don’t believe politics or power struggle is something evil or bad…”

I agree, but is there an order of priority between the two? Must one come before the other? Or should they be achieved in parallel?

20 02 2008
Shahrzad

Br Naeem,
Jihad against Nafs is Jihad al Akbar. But there is a Jihad al asqar which i believe come along the other jihad.
From a point of view that we accept islam as a perfect religion which extends to every aspect of life and sure politics is one of them.

Religion does not represent a condition that can be detached from life; like politics does not represent a limited condition in the affairs of humankind.

Also there is a hadith that prophet says:”“Whoever rises and does not concern himself with the affairs of the Muslims is not a Muslim.”
It is very strong word to say that he is not muslim.

We had a discussion here around politics and islam. You can follow the comments:
http://shahrzaad.wordpress.com/2007/11/03/the-new-hijab-in-iran/

20 02 2008
Hasmita

I think we need to stop kidding ourselves to think we are same as all other minorities. I grew up as a hindu and I never once found myself in a position where I was pressured to compromise my beliefs. Things changed when I became Muslim couple of years ago, it was just after the hijab row made me realize that they are not scared of the hijab what they are scared of is what it represents. The people they fought for hundreds of years are now right here in their doorstep, the Saracens are here.

I’ve also been thinking about attitude of some Muslims, don’t you think they are asking for too much? We know that we as a minority are protected as long as we keep our religion in our homes and places of worship like most other religious people. Cconsidering we live in a secular society we should know the limits and work within those. Don’t you think a Musilm woman joining the police force after going through the whole training and then refusing to shake hand with the Super (because he’s non-mehram) is taking the mick? She very well knew that as a PC she will have to man-handle criminals. What she going to do? ‘oh sorry Mr criminal, I can’t touch you because you are not mehram can you please put these handcuff’s on and walk behind me.’ How how about becoming teacher at a Christian school teaching English in Niqab and being offended for being asked to take it off. And what about your representing lawyer turns up to court in Niqaab. Isnt all that asking for too much?

Another reason for their frustration is their ignorance of Islam, I like what Shahrzad said about Islam beign Haneef (I never heard this term before) but it makes perfect sense. Because they don’t understand this, they believe under shariah they wouldn’t be allowed to practice most of what they believe in, and half of what Muslims are allowed to practice in the West.

20 02 2008
Sumera

I think brNaeem its always to practise things in parallel, as opposed in sequential form (one after the other)

Hasmita – I really do think some Muslim women take things a tad too far. I too agree with Shahrzad, Islam isn’t rigid, there is scope for discussion and change but people take that to mean “allowing evil Western forces to prod”

20 02 2008
Observor

I came across this article:

“You can only demand to be treated as an equal if you act like one.” –

Sr Yvonne Ridley

It is now two weeks since that turbulent priest, the Archbishop of Canterbury , dared to say there could be some room for Shari’ah law in today’s Britain .

I don’t think he could have foreseen the anti-Muslim backlash which followed – driven by groups with different agendas and motives.

There are those who portray themselves as cuddly lefties, secular socialists who believe it is fashionable to bash up Muslims.

And then there are those driven by racism who see Islamophobia as the last legitimate refuge to peddle their race-fuelled hate.

But perhaps the worst are the political opportunists who use the politics of fascism to win popular votes and approval.

This is not the first time Labour has made the revolting decision to place the politics of religious identity at the centre of public debate, in the same opportunist way that Jorg Haider’s Freedom Party does in Austria and Pim Fortuyn’s List Party has done in Holland .

But let’s return to the latest outcry over Dr Rowan Williams’ speech. The reality was that he really tiptoed gently around the whole idea of Shari’ah in Britain .

Each sentence was delicately embraced with a huge qualification.

The reality, as most Muslims know, is that Shari’ah is already here and practiced in the way we eat, sleep, pray, marry and divorce … very much in the same way that orthodox Jewish courts operate.

The media and political reaction has been hysterical downright nasty: from the Sun’s declaration that Williams had “handed al-Qaida a victory”, to the BBC showing images of chopped off limbs to illustrate Shari’ah.

We should thank the Archbishop because what he has done is rip wide open a far more serious debate – and it is up to all of us to demand that this debate is confronted in an equally intellectual and thoughtful way.

The debate I am talking about is why equal rights for Muslims are being denied? Yes, Muslims, quite simply, do not have equal rights in Britain and in this incendiary atmosphere of growing Islamophobic intolerance things are going to get much, much worse.

Government Ministers like Phil Woolas have cynically jumped on the bandwagon. He created hysterical headlines about “Muslim inbreeding” with his comments about the health risks of cousin marriages among Pakistanis.

The way he spoke about the issue was as though some Frankenstein-like creatures were filling the baby wards in maternity hospitals around Oldham, Bradford, Burnley and Birmingham .

While many of us would not recommend cousins marrying cousins, it is a practice traditionally favoured by European royals. Perhaps Woolas should have gone right to the top on this issue and taken it up with The Queen.

May be he should have checked out Queen Victoria ’s family tree before putting his foot in his mouth!

But first, I would just like to remind Woolas, that the practice of marrying first cousins is perfectly legal in this country, so stuff him and his comments about elephants in the living room. If it is a huge problem then change the law.

The real elephant in this Government’s living room is the Islamophobia which is rife in government and establishment circles.

No wonder Muslims are feeling isolated and targeted – they are beginning to realize that no matter how hard they try to fit in, when it suits the politicians they will be dragged out and whipped.

I would like to remind Woolas, every time he opens his gob; some sister somewhere gets bashed up or verbally abused by some racist oik. And if he wants statistics as proof he should go to the Islamic Human Rights Commission.

What an odious, rancid little creep Woolas is.

Christians of any sect would be reeling if they were pilloried for their practices and traditions. (Can you imagine what would be said about Muslims if in any of our services we drank ‘the blood of Christ?’?)

And several Jewish friends of mine, some who lost grandparents in the Holocaust, have drawn parallels with the Nazi abuse their families received way back in the 1930s to the weight of the hostility thrown at Muslims today.

Leon Kuhn, an excellent cartoonist and illustrator told me last year that the Nazis began their propaganda against the Jews by publishing vile cartoons depicting rabbis as untrustworthy, dangerous subversives.

One of the biggest Islamophobes sitting in Government is Phil Woolas, who deserves further scrutiny in this column. He was the minister for race relations in the autumn of 2006 when he intervened in the row over the classroom assistant Aisha Azmi by calling for her to be fired.

Aisha was the girl who works a Nikab over her face whenever a male colleague entered the room, but by the time he and the media had finished you would have thought Aisha spent her entire teaching days in a full face veil.

This is the MP who during the last General Election stamped the Union Jack emblem on his campaign literature and highlighted ‘anti-white racism’ as a vital issue in his Oldham constituency.

His mates told him it was political suicide and that he would lose his marginal seat but in fact his votes increased and sent the anoraks in Labour’s spin machine into statistical overdrive.

They realized then they didn’t need to try and win back the disaffected Muslims who ditched Labour over Iraq and Afghanistan .

So instead of trying to bring them back into the fold, these cynical politicians opted instead to stir up racial tension as a means of appealing directly to the white working-class vote.

This nasty strategy has upset the Tories – this was their traditional territory!

Gordon Brown, a man who comes from a nation where men wear tartan, pleated skirts; waded in to Jack Straw’s Nikab row with gusto has now upped the ante.

As Prime Minister he has banned the leading Islamic cleric Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi from entering the UK on the pretext he supported Palestinian suicide attacks during the Intifada.

Let’s look at the plain, cold facts. Sheikh al-Qaradawi, an 81-year-old scholar has been to Britain several times since the Intifada.

And, to be more precise, he was encouraged to come to Britain by the government after the Iraq invasion because of his opposition to al-Qaida.

No, the real reasons for the ban is two fold. First it’s another slap in the face to the Muslim community and therefore a vote winner. And secondly, the ban is enforced to punish him for his links with the Muslim Brotherhood, the most influential Islamist organisation in the Arab world and please the Zionist lobby.

The fact is when Qaradawi last visited the UK in 2004; the Board of Deputies of British Jews handed to the police a dossier of Qaradawi’s alleged statements and called upon them to prosecute him. It took the Crown Prosecution Service less than 48 hours to decide that there was simply no case against Qaradawi.

The only Labour politician who refused to bow to the pressure was Mayor of London Ken Livingstone who ignored the media frenzy and welcomed the sheikh.

The spokesman for the Liberal Democrat leader, Nick Clegg, has emerged with some credibility for his party when he said: “Many of Yusuf al-Qaradawi’s views are repugnant; the job of a truly liberal society is to defeat such abhorrent ideas by arguing forcefully and persuasively against them.”

An interesting question to now ask this Government is this: “Since you have banned Sheikh al- Qaradawi on the grounds that he promotes violence will you also seek to ban George Bush from returning to the UK ?” After all, this is a man whose lies have so far cost the lives of one million Iraqis and created more than four million Iraqi refugees.

Are we seriously going to enquire what the views of all visiting non-British nationals are on issues such as Israel and gay rights, before deciding to let them in?

The hypocrisies of this cowardly government – and Hazel Blears’ Department for Communities and Local Government in the main – are self evident.

Brown seems to ignore the fact that the sheikh has huge support and credibility across the Muslim world but the ban has made him popular with those rabid, little dogs from the right-wing think tanks who want to introduce a Gucci or Versace-style, designer style Islam.

Let’s not forget how the now discredited think tank Policy Exchange tried to use fake and/or forged documents to hoodwink a Newsnight investigation to demonise the Muslim community in Britain .

Thankfully, not all investigative journalists are asleep, and last October Newsnight’s editor Peter Barron ditched a so-called exclusive report on the Policy Exchange findings that claimed that a quarter of the 100 mosques their researchers had visited were selling hate literature.

Anyone who has not seen this report should go on to this thread and get the BBC’s version of events which expose the Policy Exchange – http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2007/12/disastrous__misjudgement.html

The enemies of Islam are circling and they want all Muslims to adopt an Islam which is servile to the West, an Islam devoid of Shari’ah, Jihad and Caliphate.

What have they got to fear from Muslims in Britain who simply want to uphold family values which were once held so dear in British communities before binge drinking, promiscuity and pill-popping became so commonplace?

There is no reason why Muslims can not contribute positively to Britain and elsewhere in the West without diluting their faith.

You don’t ask it of other communities so why single us out for special treatment other than we are not equal in your eyes.

That great Muslim martyr Malcolm X once said: Sitting at the Table doesn’t make you a diner, unless you eat some of what’s on the plate. Being here in America does not make you an American. Being born here in America does not make you an American.”

Now substitute America for Britain and give me the answer, Mr. Brown.

And to those self-elected Muslim leaders who sit in government circles I have a polite request: “Get up off your knees. You can only demand to be treated like an equal if you act like one.”

21 02 2008
akshaw

I beg to disagree on your analysis that all problems of Musilm world can be narrowed down to existence of bad rulers seems rather far fetched. The rulers of the West are not perfect, there are people making the case to charge Bush & Blair for war crimes and people have come out in masses to protest against their foreign policies. Furthermore, cash for peerages and other such scandals show the level of corruption that exists. Does all that hinder progression in the West?

I also believe the attitude of telling people to get lost for what they believe in is rather appauling. Thanks

21 02 2008
Tia

ws BrNaeem, there certainly is a level of priority between the two as one is about our own accountability and one about holding others accountable. The basic principle applies, we must account ourselves before accounting others. I would also suggest that this must correspond with the overall objectives of Islam i.e, Islam came to organise and set laws for various relationships, most prominent of those being individual’s relationship with God, individual’s relationship with other individuals and individual’s relationship with society. All of these are inter-linked, for example, we can’t strengthen our relationship with God when our interactions or transactions are not according to His laws because Imaan or taqwah only increases with obedience and actions not only zikr. In terms of Politics I would say it is Sunnah of our prophet and the Anbiyaa before him.

Shahrzad jzk for mentioning this hadith again, it truely defines what politics means to us. It is to sincerely look after the affairs of Muslims. It is also significant that the command of enjoining the good and forbidding the evil is constantly repeated in the Quran and Ahaadith as much as Salah and Zakah.

Hasmita, doesn’t the law guarantee us freedom of belief? People are constantly fighting for their rights under this pretext. Some hundred years ago homosexuality was not even talked about and now they can even get married, no one ever says they are asking for too much? Syeda Warsi has the nerve to keep repeating the only one example of Halal meat, but what she doesn’t mention is that it was demanded and obtained after years of campaigning, and not only that the supermarkets in Muslim dominant areas realised they were losing out on Muslim customers and began stacking up halal products.

21 02 2008
Tia

Sumera I had you as an advocate of women’s rights. Is it wrong to demand our right to be accepted for what and who we are in a society based on the idea of freedom for individuals?

Observor thanks for the article I couldn’t agree more with Yvonne.

Akshaw thanks for your input in this discussion. I would like to point out a fundamental difference between rulers in the West and those in Musim countries. Rulers in the west, however bad, they are accountabke to the people. In the Muslim world political dissent is met with long term imprionment, kidnapping, and in the case of butchers like Karimov or Musharaf massacring thier own poeple is norm. We can’t imagine Britain allowing one of the Arab countries to setup military base on British soil, to use its air space or war ships hanging around the channel? Nor can we ever imagine Brown carpet bombing Ireland for housing terrorists. Most Muslim rulers have not only allowed foreign military bases on their soil, they are involved in killing their own people.

23 02 2008
Hasmita

Tia the freedoms are not absolute, there are limits.

23 02 2008
Sumera

Tia there are limitations to “freedoms”, no society is completely free, nor is anyone completely equal, but at least we can try to be treated with equity which means give and take.

The issue of the niqaabi teaching assistant refusing to remove her niqaab in the presence of a male colleague – perhaps something she should’ve related to the head, picked a girls school to assist at – that incidence and her reaction was completely unnecessary. The other example of the female PC refusing to shake hands with male colleagues – completely nonsensical. When these issues come in the way of doing your “job” – a job I assume they knowingly get into therefore can’t be too “surprised” when asked to do things listed as part of the job description, then they should either learn to adjust or leave.

This isn;t about having the freedom to practise or to be accepted on the basis of who you are – its about knowing where the limitations are.

23 02 2008
Tia

Hamsita who decides the limits?

check this (although from two years ago, still relavent):
https://islamics.wordpress.com/my-opinions/islam-liberal-fundamentalism-and-limits-of-free-speech/

Sumera how much more can we give? We are giving everything that we can, if they are asking us to do away with our core beliefs, as much as it is not acceptable to us, ideologically it should be unacceptable to them. Similarly, non-Muslims under an ideal Islamic polity would know their rights, which are fixed, and when those rights are not protected they have the right to protest. In the West minorities laws keep changing time and time but for Muslims only.

The case of Aishah Azmi, as explained above in Sister Yvonne’s article, was blown out of proportion. She only wore niqab when a male member of staff walked in. Although I am not aware of the Muslim cop case, I agree if it is how you guys described it, than again I am anti Muslims joining police force anyway :p

As for limits, they have not been set and we should be the ones setting the limits in matters concerning us imo and not simply conform depriving ourselves of the basic right to demand.

24 02 2008
Sumera

The problem isn’t with core beliefs Tia, its with people’s interpretations of them. When you have brainwashed youth thinking physical jihad is obligatory on them and these kaffirs have to be obliterated to bring about an Islamic revolution then its little wonder that people feel uneasy and would rather curtail the freedoms of such individuals than allow them to do as they please much to the detriment of others. Most Muslim’s aren’t giving anything – except a bad impression.

And in the case of Aishah despite it being dramatised, im sure she wasn’t only assisting children under the age of 7, and if Islamically a boy is considered an adult (physically matured) by 9 (I think?) what did she do then? Those who wear niqaab know in most Western countries they are limited in terms of the careers they can choose to pursue fully due to the social norms concerning face to face communication.

26 02 2008
Tia

Sumera doesn’t this argument mean we don’t have the right to resist even intellectually? They have the freedom to attack us, mock our beliefs, insult our prophet but the minute we stand up, there is need to curtail our freedom. A Muslim teenager can go down for thought crimes under the terror legislations, but a non-Muslim found with actual explosives with intent of use for terrorist purposes is only charged under a hundred year old explosives act. Isn’t it clear though that the idea of freedom is being used as open license to vilify Islam and Muslims? Furthermore, the idea of telling people to ‘go home’ and resorting to insult our beloved prophet (saw) proves that civility is not their cup of tea nor the language they understand.

26 02 2008
Sumera

Freedom of speech entails the “right” so to speak of airing your opinion, even if the opinion is warped, insulting or racist. But to engage in court trials over the content of a poem and render someone a potential threat when really it was a medium of expression does go against the vein of free speech. Being angry at the state and airing views about that has never been criminal – wanting to blow people up because they aren’t Muslim and glorifying it however is. The Lyrical Terrorist is/was like many other teenagers caught up with how “cool” jihad and beheadings are; she obviously is a few braincells short of a spark but for her age its not uncommon to have such sentiments.

We can see how the actions of a few have maligned an entire section of the community -so one cannot be entirely surprised at the reaction and treatment of Muslims today by non-Muslims, even if the treatment is obviously biased (as in the case you mentioned above). Thats not to say you become complacent and accept it; intellectually we haven’t been curtailed. We can still voice our opinion even if it sparks an outrage amongst people. But it has a lot more to do with how we voice these opinions and what the purpose of them are. If its just to create a bit of noise and wind people up, then its best left alone. If its to create understanding, and tolerance within a framework that will actually bridge gaps then that has to be an active step for Muslims and non-Muslims alike to take – and their objectives have to be similar for it to work and have a lasting effect.

28 02 2008
amal

So stupid totally agree with you , I mean go back home where? not just that , why is it the west is allowed to come in to ‘the so called muslim countries’ settle their and even demand for the adhan to be lowered , because the poor non muslims dont get enough sleep due to it . Pathetic and double standards.

5 03 2008
Observor

the action of the few is not justifyable but look, when some teenagers get pciked up and put in cell for overnight for apparently doing nothing or just hanging around, but some old lady watches them from their window and reports them to police. Why? because they happen to be asian maybe with wearing beard. That creates sense of concern amongst the other youth who all feel like victims and the anti-state feeling begins to grow deeper and deeper. Maybe here is the answer to the most wondered about question, who is radicalising the Muslim youth? Youth of other religion/cultures binge drinking and involved in ASBO are left alone to do what they like. Doesn’t that show there is already one law for one set of people and anoter for others?

8 03 2008
Tia

Sumera I agree. we have a huge responsibility to be sensible speaking in the language people understand, venting our anger through legitimate means and channels.

Amal, that goes to the same point I mentioned, who allows them to come and take over our lands? these rulers, I am sure the poeple in Muslim countries are not happy or welcome them with open arms.

Observor you do have a point, we can’t be in denial that there is something radicalising the Muslim youth. However, isn’t it our responsibility to provide correct solutions so our youth have intellectual and ideological basis for the thoughts they carry and vent their anger through the means available rather than to take law in their hands?

17 12 2008
Tauqeer

25 responses so far…:|

16 09 2012
Dont like Muslims

The Muslim faith has no place in Canada. We have a different way of life here. Its not about extremism. Too many Muslim customs just go against our traditional way of life in the west. It would be better if Muslims lived in Muslim countries. I do not care what they do in a muslim country.

9 05 2013
シャネル 新作

それは彼女が香水
の世界に足を踏み入れたとはありませんすべての香水シ
ャネルの今では世界的
に有名で最も人気のある作成した1921年だけだっ

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




%d bloggers like this: