Verbal and physical abuse directed at an individual because of his/her religious affiliation is logged as a racist assault it was discovered today, it appears there is no mechanism for reporting Islamophobic attacks or abuse. Little wonder then that press outlets can boast that instances of Islamophobia in Ireland are rare!

In an age where Paki, raghead, ninja and other such terms are euphemisms for hatred toward Muslims, it behooves the Irish government to address this glaring inconsistency if it is truly serious about tackling religious hatred. We commend existing measures to curb antisemitism, but wonder why no such mechanism, in a society that sees all its citizens as equals, exists to deal with the rising hatred and resentment being enacted toward Muslims.

Benedict XVI claimed that legislation introduced by Labour to end discrimination “actually violates natural law” because it stopped worshippers remaining true to their beliefs. Rather than making society more equal, the Government’s new rules limited religious freedom, he said.

His strongly worded intervention in British politics comes after leaders of both the Roman Catholic Church and the Church of England clashed with Labour over its Equality Bill, which they fear will make them admit homosexuals to the priesthood or face prosecution for discriminating against them.

Last week MPAC.ie pointed out the civil partnership bill being introduced here will also impinge on the ‘freedom of conscience’ of religious adherents by forcing them, under pain of offense, to submit to the repugnance of a union between two sodomites.

We commend the Pope for his courage in this matter, sadly if anyone was waiting to hear any similar condemnations from our so-called representatives in the Muslim community, they will be waiting. Our leaders are not known for their courage or willingness to condemn, after all that’s not ‘hikmah’ in their opinion. What must they make of the Prophet’s condemnations and the punishment enjoined within an Islamic state?

Narrated Ibn ‘Abbas: The Prophet cursed effeminate men; those men who are in the similitude (assume the manners of women) and those women who assume the manners of men, and he said, “Turn them out of your houses.” The Prophet turned out such-and-such man, and ‘Umar turned out such-and-such woman.

Narated By Abdullah ibn Abbas : The Prophet (pbuh) said: If you find anyone doing as Lot’s people did, kill the one who does it, and the one to whom it is done.

Narated By Abdullah ibn Abbas : If a man who is not married is seized committing sodomy, he will be stoned to death.

It was narrated that Ibn Abbaas said: “The Prophet Muhammed (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “… cursed is the one who has intercourse with an animal, cursed is the one who does the action of the people of Loot.”

Ibn Abbas and Abu Huraira reported Allah’s messenger as saying, ‘Accursed is he who does what Lot’s people did.’ In a version…on the authority of Ibn Abbas it says that Ali [Muhammad's cousin and son-in-law] had two people “burned” and that Abu Bakr [Muhammad's chief companion] had a wall thrown down on them.

As a community we are the ones who lack hikmah when we permit the scurrilous, lily-livered so-called leaders to continue in their positions of responsibility while they refuse to condemn clear kufr. Shame on us.

Walk into any store in Dublin and the likelihood of seeing a Muslim woman covered in the mandatory jilbab and hijab is as likely as seeing a pink elephant fly. Even less likely is the hope of seeing a bearded Muslim male sporting the mandatory loose and above the ankle clothing. The question is why?

I ask this question as Anjem Choudary has been castigated in the UK press for having the misfortune of being on social welfare, the insinuation being that such individuals have no right to an opinion, much less to voice that opinion, yet he is an extremely capable and erudite individual. Why is he not working?

It’s all too easy to simply say that such people don’t want to work and in my own personal experience that’s simply not the case at all, especially for Muslims. There are numerous ahadith (sayings of the Prophet) that speak of the blessings of labour and at the same time decry begging, and there is an unspoken shame attached to those who are not working. Yet with all the shame attached to not working, there are sadly Muslims who have no jobs.

Since I finished my business degree, I’ve been to numerous interviews. I suspect I get the interview because I use my ………. name and not my convert name but the interviewers can’t seem to hide their shock and even hate when they see me – I have a long flowing beard and wear my baggy trousers above the ankle. Even before I speak, they’ve profiled me and the questions that follow simply confirm my suspicions. Visible Muslims it seems are not welcome.

Two other Muslims in my degree class are now considering emigration and even though I grew up in Ireland, my mother came here from ……… when I was five years old, I too may have to consider emigration. The shame of not working is difficult enough, but the depression and humiliation of being on the receiving end of hateful discrimination is changing me and I don’t like what I’m becoming.

[Editor note: this article was constructed from an email we received, names and nationalities have been removed. There is a problem here in Ireland where visible Muslims (those who will not compromise their deen to suit the kuffar) are being actively discriminated against. This constructed story highlights the plight of many university graduates who must watch with humiliation as their largely non-educated, non-Muslim counterparts are given preference over them. With the removal of many organisations who fought for equality and minority rights there is a real danger of inculcating a seeming acceptance of discrimination, where outwardly religious adherents are made to suffer for having the audacity of wearing their religion on their sleeves. This is what non-Muslims mean when they say religion is something private, this is what they want when they speak of removing religion from the public sphere.

We have argued before that the right to insult and gratuitously offend religious adherents is a slippery slope toward discrimination, ostracization and marginalization and no good can come of the aggressive and insidious campaign by secularists and atheists in Ireland. It is but another in a long line of thinly veiled attempts by fanatical secularists to remove religion and by extension religious adherents from the public sphere and it must be rigorously opposed.

Consider the implications of your silence for a moment.
1. Fundamentalist Atheists secure the right to gratuitously offend and insult Muslim beliefs
2. The right to insult becomes ingrained in the psyche of the nation and soon the ridicule of Muslims begins.
3. This impacts on the community as Muslim children are made to feel deficient and different because of their beliefs.
4. This then has a negative effect on educational attainments, leading to a cycle of deprivation in terms of social skills and employment opportunities.
5. The result, an ostracized, marginalised and stigmatized community.

In the 1930’s another organization believed they had the right to gratuitously offended and insult a community of religious believers. They daubed the shops and homes of these people with offensive slogans and forced them to wear yellow stars just so everyone would know that such people should be offended and ridiculed. Soon after, having stripped that community of humanity, having cast them as the ‘other’, the stage was set for their destruction.

Aggressive secularism would seek to cast you as the ‘other’, those to be ridiculed, laughed at and mocked – and then!

The work by the Open Society Institute (OSI), an independent think-tank, looked at the social integration of Muslims in 11 West European cities. It calls for improved efforts to tackle discrimination.

The report offers a series of snapshots from: the Netherlands (Amsterdam and Rotterdam), Belgium (Antwerp), Germany (Berlin and Hamburg), Denmark (Copenhagen), the UK (Leicester and London), France (Marseille and Paris) and Sweden (Stockholm).

In the Kreuzberg neighbourhood of the German capital Berlin few Muslims identified themselves with their nation – not because they rejected German values but, it says, because society still sees them as “foreigners”. New laws forbidding the wearing of visibly religious symbols or clothing in schools have had a detrimental impact, it says.

In the Netherlands recent controversies like the assassination of the film-maker Theo van Gogh by a Muslim extremist have “convulsed public opinion”. Muslims, it says, have “become scapegoats for public anxieties over security”.

In Rotterdam’s Feyenoord district, which has a high concentration of immigrants, attempts to create a more mixed society by allocating housing differently have been legally halted on discrimination grounds. Muslims there say they feel that the bar for measuring how well Muslims integrate is “constantly raised” and anti-Muslim sentiment and even violence has increased across the country.

The findings and recommendations include the following:

1.Among Muslims surveyed, 61% have a strong sense of belonging to the country and 72% a strong sense of belonging to the city;
2.The majority of Muslims eligible to vote did vote in local and national elections;
3.Many Muslims who are not EU citizens remain disenfranchised, particularly in Germany and France;
4.Half of Muslim respondents reported experiencing religious discrimination over last 12 months;
5.Muslims are almost three times more likely to be unemployed than non-Muslims;
6.City officials must strive to maintain areas that are ethnically and religiously mixed, and ensure that discrimination is not a barrier for Muslims when choosing where to live;
7.Cities should foster an inclusive city identity – Amsterdam, Antwerp and Copenhagen have run such campaigns successfully;
8.The EU should collect accurate data on minorities and encourage equal treatment in education, housing and other services;
9.The EU should enable cities to exchange information and best practices about collecting educational data on minority students

Source: BBC

MPAC.ie Comment: It’s time for Ireland to prove its commitment to equality, no more excuses. If social inclusion means anything it must be implemented without discrimination.

A cursory look at various publications reveals the startling claim that there is no religious discrimination in Ireland. In fact, the 2009 UNHCR Report of religious freedom cites Ireland as being somewhat exemplary, with ‘few reports of societal abuses or discrimination based on religious affiliation, belief, or practice’. These findings however run contrary to the reality that is Ireland and far from the pristine picture of harmony and societal indifference painted in many publications, discrimination is all too evident from the top down.

To begin, consider the statistics. Most depend on Garda reports, and that perhaps underlines one of the key concerns. An Garda Siochana have unfortunately demonstrated an unwillingness to include all sectors of society within their force and depending on an organisation who themselves indirectly discriminate against Muslim females and male Sikhs, to mention two prominent concerns, for a reliable gauge of discrimination is questionable at best.

There is, to our knowledge, no known mechanism for reporting a religiously aggravated crime. A Pakistani man who has been beaten up and called Bin Laden in the process will have his case considered under the pretext of race. So too will a Muslim woman who has her hijab ripped from her head. None of these cases will be considered as religiously aggravated assaults – yet that is what they are. A consequence of this is that reports will simply highlight an increase in race attacks (which they have), but fail to address the real motive behind said attack – religious hate/discrimination.

Likewise, in the area of employment, the job sector is notable for the almost complete absence of visibly religious Muslims. Despite the fact that many of the youth are university graduates, it seems that an outwardly religious appearance precludes them from employment opportunities. We are presently aware of a number of Tribunal cases that seek to overturn this very apparent prejudice.

In addition to this, there is a complete absence of a Muslim minority presence within the government structure. And while the UK might be criticized for its tokenism in this regard, Ireland seems completely oblivious to this deficiency. Sadly many of the institutions set up to address discrimination and exclusion were the first to go once the recession hit, which does make one wonder about the government’s commitment to eradicating exclusion and discrimination.

What seems obvious is that if we are to tackle the growing problem of religious discrimination in Ireland, there must be a willingness to commit to change from the top down. It is wholly disingenuous to solely rely on institutions that actively discriminate to supply reliable data to assess the problem and this is why we are willing to work alongside independent bodies to highlight this growing phenomenon and hopefully eradicate it.

We want an Ireland of equals, where all of Ireland’s sons and daughters, be they Muslim, Jew or Christian can live and work free of discrimination and prejudice. Help us break down the barriers.

Swiss liberals are considering a new referendum to overturn the ban on building new minarets in the country, Sunday papers reported, as Libya’s Muamar Gaddafi warned the ban played into the hands of terrorists.

World

Club Helvetique, a group of over 20 Swiss intellectuals, will draw up an action plan to overturn the ban, which has drawn widespread criticism abroad and prompted hundreds of people to take to the streets this weekend in Zurich, Basel and Berne. “A new initiative is the most democratic way of achieving this,” constitutional lawyer Joerg Mueller told Sonntag.

Voters adopted the ban in a referendum a week ago, defying the government and parliament which had warned the right-wing initiative violated the Swiss constitution, freedom of religion and a cherished tradition of tolerance. Two complaints questioning the legality of ban had already been handed to Switzerland’s Federal Court, Sonntag said. Libya leader Gaddafi said the ban had done a great favor to al Qaeda militants, who would use it to attract recruits in a holy war against Europe, news agency SDA reported. “The activists are now saying: ‘we told you that they are our enemies…join al Qaeda and declare jihad on Europe ‘.”

Politicians from the SVP, Switzerland’s biggest party, and the conservative Federal Democratic Union gathered enough signatures to force the referendum on the initiative which opposed the “Islamisation of Switzerland.” Its campaign poster showed the Swiss flag covered in missile-like minarets and the portrait of a woman covered with a black chador and veil associated with strict Islam. “The Club Helvetique is an association of bad losers,” Sonntag reported SVP Vice-President Christoph Blocher as saying.

NO TERRORIST THREAT

The United Nations last week denounced Switzerland’s constitutional ban on building minarets as “deeply divisive,” “clearly discriminatory” and at odds with the country’s obligations under international law.

Foreign Minister Micheline Calmy-Rey said the Iranian government had summoned the Swiss ambassador to explain the situation. “I don’t know of any evidence of terrorist threats so far,” she said. “We are doing everything to prevent the situation from escalating.”

Switzerland, a country of 7.7 million, is home to more than 300,000 Muslims, mainly from Bosnia, Kosovo and Turkey, but has just four minarets.

Source: Reuters

In rejecting the right of religious minorities to employment within An Garda Siochana, the force’s “diversity champion”, Garda chief administrative officer John Leamy firmly believes, “Part of becoming a member of An Garda Síochána is that you leave your own personal beliefs outside…” It seems irony is lost on our boys in blue. Apparently our ’secularized’ society has no problems imposing its own set of ‘personal beliefs’ upon religious minorities.

Trivializing religious conviction that informs every aspect of a person’s being as a ‘personal belief’ is not only insulting it is positively discriminatory when used as a pretext to exclude. Religion is more socially defined than simply ‘personal convictions’ and its social and political force should not be underestimated.

An Garda Siochana’s discriminatory exclusion of religious minorities is deplorable, in the words of Dr Puri, “Certain communities are being denied a fundamental right of equal employment. If you do not recruit from one community, you are falling short of your commitment to diversity.”

Despite a much-vaunted drive to recruit minority groups into An Garda Siochana in 2006, as few as twenty-five immigrants had actually made it into the ranks as of Sept. 2008. Not only is this figure woefully under representative of the immigrant community, but it is also a damning indictment against an organisation that claims impartiality in its recruitment process.

Language was singled out as a barrier for many potential recruits; however, An Garda Siochana’s discriminatory uniform policy is also a potential barrier to the recruitment of minorities, particularly those in the Sikh and Muslim communities.

In 2007, a Sikh man, an IT professional in his 20s, began training to join the Garda Reserve. Having initially been welcomed with the turban, controversy arose when a senior officer warned the Sikh that the turban would not be permitted on duty. What should have been an opportune time to reassess existing conditions turned into a battle of wills with the London based Metropolitan Police Sikh Association (MPSA) commenting that the Irish “uniform policy was 40 years behind the United Kingdom” and accusing the Gardai of “racial discrimination”.

Unfortunately, An Garda Siochana appears to have a predilection for reneging on former commitments. As recently as September 2008 the Irish Times reported that the Gardai also went back on a previous commitment that would have seen the hijab allowed and practising Muslim women on the police force here in Ireland. In a detailed response Supt Kevin O’Donoghue, head of Garda press and public relations, said:

“The Garda Síochána has, historically, been seen as providing an impartial police service, policing all sections of society equally.”Accommodating variations to our standard uniform and dress, including those with religious symbolism, may well affect that traditional stance and give an image of An Garda Síochána which the commissioner feels the public would not want.”

What image would that be, an inclusive one?

How the Gardai can claim impartiality while maintaining a uniform that reflects a homogeneity that no longer exists here in Ireland is not only duplicitous, it is categorically dishonest. The Irish Hijab Campaign issued a succinct response to this disingenuous attempt by our impartial police force to sideline an extremely important issue:

“The claim of impartiality is naive at best, no public space is culturally neutral, and insistence on maintaining a dress code that reflects our past homogeneity simply marginalises and subordinates the values and norms of minority groups. It is not simply the case of one uniform for all; it is a cultural imposition and should be stringently opposed. The Garda uniform and any uniform for that matter should reflect the heterogeneity that is New Ireland. If a recruitment policy places one group at a disadvantage then that policy has indirectly discriminated. Indirect discrimination occurs when an organisation applies a provision, criterion or practice which ‘appears’ to affect everyone equally but which in fact puts some people from a particular racial/cultural/religious group at a disadvantage or has an adverse impact disproportionally on one group or other. Requiring Muslim females to remove their hijab, or Muslim males to remove their beards places an inordinate, immoral and unethical condition on their religious practice.”

While the Gardai may claim a desire for more immigrant recruits, until they remove all unnecessary impediments then their claim rings hollow. It is one thing to say you want something; it is something else to put the necessary measures in place to make sure it happens.

Play your part and Make equality a reality

On more than one occasion, those who claim representation of the Irish ummah have sought to actively downplay the legitimate concerns of ordinary Muslims by falsely claiming that ‘all is well’, that there are no problems, that we’re all happy little Muslims, grateful for the opportunity to live here.

The obvious disconnect between the utopia our so-called representatives portray to elected officials and the media, contrasted with the reality on the ground for ordinary Muslims makes one wonder whether we actually reside on the same planet.

To this we say; for those who speak little or no English and whose only experience of the realities of Irish life is what is watched on TV, to those who reside within the confines of a mini-state in Dublin 14 and rarely venture out, to those whose employment is secured by an Islamic emirate please do not presume to speak on matters you obviously know nothing of.

To government officials or media representatives seeking truth not platitudes, we encourage you to speak to the young Muslim men and women who fight daily for the right to practice their religion in the public sphere and all that it entails. Speak to the young children studying in schools that make no attempt to cater for their religious persuasion. Speak to the labourers and workers about the discrimination and exploitation they suffer – speak to the ordinary Muslims, not those who know nothing of these struggles and speak from the confines of their ivory towers.