| Submit your comments on this article | |||
| Britain | |||
| Muslim "activists" picket UK school | |||
| 2004-01-29 | |||
| Muslim activists picket a school in Luton as the dispute over the hijab arrives in Britain. A bitter theological debate which has split schools across Europe is now threatening to engulf a small secondary school in Bedfordshire, north of London. At Icknield High, a school on the fringes of Luton, pupils were running a gauntlet of Muslim activists, who thrust leaflets into their hands condemning their teachers as heretics. The row stems from the headmasterâs decision to ban hijabs, headscarves worn by Muslim women. Icknield High is the only school in the country to have banned them. Keith Ford made the ruling when the parents of a prospective pupil asked whether their daughter could attend school wearing one. The issue had never arisen before: though about one-third of the schoolâs pupils are Muslim, the overwhelming majority of them are male and the handful of girls had never broached the matter. News of Fordâs decision, which is rooted in the schoolâs strict âno hatsâ uniform policy, quickly reached the local branch of al-Muhajiroun, a radical Muslim group. Within days, community activists had condemned the school as racist and the local Labour MP was urging a rethink. On Tuesday, as the schoolâs governors held a meeting to discuss the issue, Muslim parents were threatening to take their children away from the school, while non-Muslims were urging the governors to resist the pressure. Geoff Lambert, chairman of the governors, said that the school was keen to resolve the issue, one way or the other. âWe just want to get it sorted,â he said. âWe donât want it dragging on. The problem is that, if we decide to change our policy on uniforms â which is effectively what we are being asked to do âthen we need to do so to cover all such eventualities. For that, we need good advice from the Commission for Racial Equality.â The school serves an area containing one of Britainâs largest Muslim communities. Political activists claim that the proportion of local Muslim girls wearing hijabs has risen sharply over the past decade, from 2 or 3 per cent to nearer 50 per cent. Sayful Islam (24), who has led al-Muhajirounâs picket of the school, said that the rise was due to Muslims becoming better informed about the key tenets of Islam. His campaign, which he has entitled âSending Your Children To The Slaughterhouseâ, urges Muslim parents to spurn the values of secular schools â the âslaughterhousesâ â and instead induct their children in Islamic institutions. He said the debate, which is raging in France sparked by legislation outlawing religious clothing in schools, is likely to spread across Britain. âThe only difference is that France is blatant about its secularism, whereas Britain is more discreet,â he said. âPrince Charles would be stoned for adultery in a purely Islamic state, yet here he is head of the Church. The two values systems can never co-exist.â
Abdul Mahim Malik, chairman of the Luton Race Advisory Forum, said that he opposed the ban but objected to the way that Muslim activists had exploited it. âIt is bad for racial harmony, it is against the UN Charter and it helps extremists by exposing rifts in the community,â he said. Margaret Moran, the Labour MP for Luton South, urged the school governors to lift the ban to calm local tensions. âThis seems to have got out of hand,â she said. âAl-Muhajiroun are only interested in creating divisions in Lutonâs community.â
| |||
| Posted by:TS |
| #20 Sue Bob- I'm not sure about England, but at my school students can't wear any sort of scarf (including headscarves) and no, Orthodox Jews cannot wear their Yarmulkes.(sp?) |
| Posted by: S 2004-1-29 10:30:01 PM |
| #19 "which is that Muslims should not arrested and prosecuted when they break the law" Whoops, I meant that they SHOULD be arrested. |
| Posted by: Sue Bob 2004-1-29 9:39:30 PM |
| #18 I don't understand this focus on headscarves. Why is wearing a headscarf a problem. It seems peripheral to the real issue--which is that Muslims should not arrested and prosecuted when they break the law. If they intimidate students--that's disorderly conduct--haul their butts to jai. If they rape--arrest and prosecute them. If they intimidate and threaten other Muslims to force them into sharia--arrest and jail them. If they try to take over the ghettos where they live and force sharia on everyone--roll the tanks in and declare martial law. But stop piddling with girl's scarves. Does this "no hats" policy mean that orthodox jewish students can't wear their little hats? |
| Posted by: Sue Bob 2004-1-29 9:33:15 PM |
| #17 Do these girls wear their headscarves during physical education? |
| Posted by: Mike Sylwester 2004-1-29 5:57:33 PM |
| #16 Nimrod? Napoleon? Zoprg? Murat? Damn, them little guys are fast, but luckily stupid. Remind them that we are going to the pool tomorrow and they will need clean towels. |
| Posted by: Nuss Ratchett 2004-1-29 5:53:06 PM |
| #15 11a5 Not quite sure about the need to have a full sanhedrin. I do know there is a famous saying that a (national) court that delivers more than one death sentence in a generation is a "bloody court". To which another rabbi responded that if the court followed that advice, murder would spread. Clearly the rabbis of the Talmud would be considered "moderates" on the death penalty, seeing at as useful for deterence, but disliking vengeance, and wanting it to be used more or less sparingly. Certainly at that point it was applied ONLY for murder, and not for all murders. Retaining Adultery (and idolatry for that matter) as theoretically capital crimes has other implications in Jewish law however - for example you can break any jewish ritual law in order to save an innocent life, BUT NOT a law that is a capital crime. Thus you could violate the shabbas to save a life, or steal, but you could not murder, commit adultery, or idolatry. |
| Posted by: liberalhawk 2004-1-29 5:39:14 PM |
| #14 And if they are allowed to wear the scarf, how long until the muslim guys use this as an excuse to commit rape against non-muslims to 'teach them hussies a lesson'.... |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2004-1-29 2:51:23 PM |
| #13 What surprised me most about this story is that the school let these radical islamists harrass the kids as they were trying to leave school. I'm sure the police know all about this group, they are the one who wanted to have the "Glorious 19 celebration" on sept 11 last year to honor the 9/11 hijackers. Restraining order time! |
| Posted by: TS 2004-1-29 1:54:36 PM |
| #12 the girls will probably be FORCED to wear the damn thing by the extremist in the community. All the French & Chiraq bashing aside, I hope he, and Europe in general, stick to their guns and NOT give in on this hijab issue. Here's why: In a society or country or civilisation where freedom and equality and human rights are exalted above everything else, pressuring someone to wear certain clothing or adhere to certain customs effectively negates the aforementioned qualities. In effect, this creates another class of people, living in the same society, but under different rules where freedom, human rights, and certainly equality do not necessarily apply, right from the start. This brings up the question, and I suspect this is what the French are concerned about: should religion be above the state, or the state above religion? It seems to me, if we are to protect the rights of everybody, including the right for a Muslim to choose not to wear the hijab, every religion must conform to the (secular) law of the land. |
| Posted by: Rafael 2004-1-29 1:47:32 PM |
| #11 --âWe are much more knowledgeable and aware of the Koran than we used to be and will assert our rights.â-- If you're so much more knowledgeable, Zanaba, then show us where the Koran and/or Hadiths specify headgear. Prove it and you've got a case. Some whacko issuing a fatwa in '81 because women's hair emits seduction rays doesn't cover it. |
| Posted by: Anonymous2U 2004-1-29 1:37:31 PM |
| #10 these people need to get with the program. you cannot emigrate to non-muslim country and expect thier adopted country to follow that book of lies - the koran. muslims should just stay in their own shit holes if they want to live in islamic country. if the school had a ban on hats it applies to all - regardless. don't like it go home or send your brats to an islamic school. fucking idiots... ok i got that out...can go back to work.... |
| Posted by: Dan 2004-1-29 1:24:33 PM |
| #9 Actually AHM, the 4th century would be an improvement for them - that was before Islam came to Arabia. From algebra to fatwa - go figure. |
| Posted by: Jarhead 2004-1-29 1:06:53 PM |
| #8 Above and beyond the issues discussed in the previous comments there is also the issue of whether the families of the muslim girls want them to wear the habib. If the school changes their policy and allowes habibs, then the girls will probably be FORCED to wear the damn thing by the extremist in the community. Now they have a valid excuse to go unswathed. |
| Posted by: rabidfox 2004-1-29 12:57:28 PM |
| #7 So let me get this straight..... The entirety of Faisal's response to this article is "oh yeah? what about the Jews?" I got news for ya, Faisie.... when in Rome, do as the Romans do. That, or go back 2000 miles and 1300 years to any one of a number of morally, socially, intellectually and culturally bankrupt arab countries in the Middle East. Muslims just seem to love to play the "victim." |
| Posted by: PlanetDan 2004-1-29 12:40:45 PM |
| #6 News of Fordâs decision, which is rooted in the schoolâs strict âno hatsâ uniform policy Sounds like he, unlike the French, has a sound reason for making the decision. You may disagree with having a "no hats" policy, but there it is. |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2004-1-29 12:40:04 PM |
| #5 People like Faisal are blight upon humanity. If these f*cking muslims don't like OUR f*cking rules, then please, leave our f*cking countries. Go back to the ass-backwards, 4th century, third world shit-holes that you came from! Just because you've got little dicks and have to abuse your women in the name of your pedophile, moon-god worshiping false prophet doesn't mean that we, as CIVILIZED people, have to put up with your barbarity. Keep the West beautiful, put a muslim on a boat! |
| Posted by: AllahHateMe 2004-1-29 12:36:30 PM |
| #4 Actually Faisal, no stonings are allowed without a meeting of the full Sanhedrin (LH correct me if I'm wrong). The sages have held that the death sentences in the Torah and Talmud are invalid until the restoration of the Temple and reconvening of the Sanhedrin. Therefore, the death penalty has been effectively abolished under Jewish law. |
| Posted by: 11A5S 2004-1-29 12:21:33 PM |
| #3 #2 Faisal Certain religions and cultures have evolved over time and no longer practice such barbaric customs. The Christians and Jews of hundreds of years ago may have been brutal, but they are not doing it NOW IN 2004 like your Islamic brethren. Please strap a bomb to yourself and rid us of your supidity. |
| Posted by: Unmutual 2004-1-29 12:19:16 PM |
| #2 hmmm.... whats the talmudic punishment for adultery??? stoning eh |
| Posted by: Faisal 2004-1-29 12:09:29 PM |
| #1 âPrince Charles would be stoned for adultery in a purely Islamic state, yet here he is head of the Church. The two values systems can never co-exist.â THEN GO HOME ***HOLE!!! |
| Posted by: remote man 2004-1-29 11:53:06 AM |