"Placating terrorists"
Daily Mail
M. Phillips
[...] More than 30 Muslim groups, along with Muslim MPs and peers, demanded that the Government change its foreign policy in order to placate terrorists. This blackmail was followed by a demand from other representatives that a pair of Islamic religious festivals should become official holidays and that Islamic laws relating to marriage and family life be applied in Britain. These were not moderate attitudes.
In Australia, the government has adopted a robust approach to such extremism. It has said that those Muslims who want to live under sharia law should leave the country, and that Australian Muslim leaders need to denounce terrorism in all its forms around the world. Link
db: Nobody serious desires to 'placate terrorists' - however when British foreign policy dictates that this government stands by, encourages, our so-called 'partner' in the so-called WoT to bomb Lebanon 'back twenty years' in a systematic and comprehensive display of state terror - killing and maiming civilians on a massive scale including a high percentage of children - then it's clear that all MP's, not just Muslims, but all right thinking MP's have a duty to tell this government that Britain's status as poodle to the US neoconservatives, Christian right and Israel must not continue.
As for the writer's horror that some Muslims in this country seek recognition of Islamic laws relating to marriage and family life surely that is their right isn't it - to seek changes to the system in their favor? They need to build a case and win the argument through democratic means, but why should Malanie Phillips or anyone else be listened to when they are telling British Muslims what to think, or to dream? The key for those who seek these changes is that they adopt a democratic strategy to bring them about. They should be encouraged to do so - not censored - or threatened with 'deporation' - whereupon the debate and the strategy would go underground.
And lastly, until a fair and honest definition of 'terrorism' is thought up - one that includes state terror such as that meted out to the Lebanese - and one that does not preclude the right to resist an occupation purely because those resisting happen to be followers of Islam - then calls for universal condemnation by Muslims of terrorism 'in all its forms' is meaningless. And why restrict this solemn declaration to Muslims? Let's include governments too.
M. Phillips
[...] More than 30 Muslim groups, along with Muslim MPs and peers, demanded that the Government change its foreign policy in order to placate terrorists. This blackmail was followed by a demand from other representatives that a pair of Islamic religious festivals should become official holidays and that Islamic laws relating to marriage and family life be applied in Britain. These were not moderate attitudes.
In Australia, the government has adopted a robust approach to such extremism. It has said that those Muslims who want to live under sharia law should leave the country, and that Australian Muslim leaders need to denounce terrorism in all its forms around the world. Link
db: Nobody serious desires to 'placate terrorists' - however when British foreign policy dictates that this government stands by, encourages, our so-called 'partner' in the so-called WoT to bomb Lebanon 'back twenty years' in a systematic and comprehensive display of state terror - killing and maiming civilians on a massive scale including a high percentage of children - then it's clear that all MP's, not just Muslims, but all right thinking MP's have a duty to tell this government that Britain's status as poodle to the US neoconservatives, Christian right and Israel must not continue.
As for the writer's horror that some Muslims in this country seek recognition of Islamic laws relating to marriage and family life surely that is their right isn't it - to seek changes to the system in their favor? They need to build a case and win the argument through democratic means, but why should Malanie Phillips or anyone else be listened to when they are telling British Muslims what to think, or to dream? The key for those who seek these changes is that they adopt a democratic strategy to bring them about. They should be encouraged to do so - not censored - or threatened with 'deporation' - whereupon the debate and the strategy would go underground.
And lastly, until a fair and honest definition of 'terrorism' is thought up - one that includes state terror such as that meted out to the Lebanese - and one that does not preclude the right to resist an occupation purely because those resisting happen to be followers of Islam - then calls for universal condemnation by Muslims of terrorism 'in all its forms' is meaningless. And why restrict this solemn declaration to Muslims? Let's include governments too.
posted by exoplanet at 3:48 PM
<< Home