Iain Hall's SANDPIT

Home » Ethical questions » Abortion » The left and Islam…

The left and Islam…

We in Australia have a much smaller, and far less militant Islamic community but there is no reason to believe that the experience in the UK will not be replicated here at some time in the future. The interview with Dr Bari, the leader of the Muslim Council of Britain struck me as exhibiting exactly the sort of line about Islam, terror and society taken by your average minion of the left so I present for your consideration a few thoughts about what he says in the piece from Britain’s daily Telegraph.

There is, in his view, no such thing as Islamic terrorism.

“Terrorists are terrorists, they may use religion but we shouldn’t say Muslim terrorists, it stigmatises the whole community. We never called the IRA Catholic terrorists.” Dr Bari thinks Jonathan Evans, the head of MI5, made the extremists’ job easier by giving a bleak picture of the threat on the eve of the Queen’s Speech.

I think it is creating a scare in the community and wider society. It probably helps some people who try to recruit the young to terrorism. Muslim young people are as vulnerable as any others. Under this climate of fear they will begin to feel victimised.”

Daily Mail

Sounds like the typical Leftist line to me but lets look further into what this man advocates to make British society more welcoming to Muslims.

Sir Salman Rushdie should never have been knighted, he says. “He caused a huge amount of distress and discordance with his book, it should have been pulped.”

Gee this sounds  like a very censorious attitude to literature, what’s next  burning of any book that is critical of Islam? So why stop at the books, why not burn the authors as well*?

The MCB was criticised for boycotting Holocaust Day but he says he did not mean to offend Jewish people: “It should be inclusive, commemorating all massacres.”

But the holocaust was not just a massacre now was it? It was an attempt at genocide and the victims were the Jews. So should we be surprised that a Muslim organization want to down play or even deny that six million Jews were killed by the Nazi’s? After all Islamic anti-Semitism wants to paint the Jews as the leaders of a vast international conspiracy and how can they propagate that notion if the Jews are seen to have been victims of evil rather than masters of it?

According to a recent report by the Policy Exchange think-tank, the bookshop at the east London Mosque, which Dr Bari chairs, stocks extremist literature.

“The bookshops are independent businesses,” he says. “We can’t just go in and tell them what to sell … I will see what books they keep, if they have one book which looks like it is inciting hatred, do they have counter books on the same shelf?”

So according to this chap Salman Rushdie’s Books should be pulped but books advocating radical or fundamentalist Islam are OK in the bookshops of Britain’s Mosques. Am I the only one that sees a huge hypocrisy here?

In Dr Bari’s view, suicide bombers are victims as well as aggressors. “I deal with emotionally damaged children,” he explains. “Children come to hate when they don’t get enough care and love. They are probably bullied, it makes a young person angry and vulnerable.

“The extreme case could be suicide bombers, it is all they have … The people who become suicide bombers are really vulnerable.”

Although he stresses there is no justification for suicide bombing – “killing innocent people is completely forbidden, Islam is very emphatic on that” – he says British foreign policy has driven Muslims into the arms of the extremists.

Is it just me but is this bloke have a bob each way here? On one hand he say’s that suicide bombing of “innocents ” is wrong in Islam and then he say’s that the west is to blame because of its foreign policy. I actually think that if he really thought that the Jihadist were wrong he would be making the case that NOTHING justifies such acts of bastardry.

British people could, in his view, benefit from arranged marriages. “I prefer to call them assisted marriages,” he says.

Why should anyone accept that the person that you marry will be chosen by anyone other than yourself?  Why should an immigrant group expect to impose their notions of family upon the people who have welcomed them? What follows from a tradition of arranged marriage, except the comodifacation of children and evils like “honour killing”?

“Alcohol is the worst drug long-term,” he says, and adds that the Government should consider banning drinking in public places, as it has done with smoking.

Although I neither drink nor smoke I ask why should a religious group seek to impose their notions about these intoxicants upon the greater society?

Dr Bari believes Britain would benefit from a little more morality: “Religion has principles that can help society … Sex before marriage is unacceptable in Islam … On adultery and living together we should try to go back to the religiously informed style of life that helps society”

Islam and it’s followers have a big problem with the flesh, sensuality and sexuality. And while I do think that unrestrained promiscuity is not a social virtue the paranoia about sex that is evident in Islam is going too far in the other direction and the end result of that becoming the social norm is a society like Iran where women can be hung for the evil crime of being raped.

Abortion should also be made more difficult. “By the time a foetus is 12 weeks old our religion says that the child has got a spirit

This is another issue where my leftist friends are wilfully hypocritical. They are so keen to advocate for abortion on demand with out restriction yet I bet they would turn a blind eye to Islamic criticism of abortion.

” Homosexuality is “unacceptable from the religious point of view”.

Those who bat for the other team face the rope in many Islamic cultures . Yeah like we can always do with more of that* 🙄 . What is sad is that the same lefties who will chide conservatives like me for our attitude to the Gay agenda will be just as strident in defending any aspect of Islam. Even this one.

Is stoning ever justified? “It depends what sort of stoning and what circumstances,” he replies. “When our prophet talked about stoning for adultery he said there should be four [witnesses] – in realistic terms that’s impossible. It’s a metaphor for disapproval.”

While my more pedantic friends from the left will no doubt say that this shows that modern Islam does not support the brutal treatment of adultery. They are missing the point that under Islam any adultery of sexual indiscretion is seen as a criminal matter when under our notions of individual freedom and a secular society no expression of our sexuality (between consenting adults) should be criminalized. Yet we will still find the average leftist citing any criticism of Islamic attitudes on this issue as examples of xenophobia or even racism.

There should be more modesty too. “You shouldn’t be revealing your body so much that it can be tempting to other people. I hope my daughter wouldn’t wear a bikini but I also hope she wouldn’t wear a burka.”

As a father I don’t like the way that our children a sexualised by at ever earlier ages by the fashionistas and the purveyors of ” style”. But I also  have just as much difficulty with those who have an aversion to the flesh for religious reasons. I really hope that Dr Bari is being sincere here and not just mouthing what he thinks are the right platitudes because the followers of Islam do not have a good record when it comes issues of modesty and  dress, for women and girls in particular.

Dr Bari may be entirely sincere but then again it is more likely that what he is doing is relying on the same sort of equivocation and pedantry that so infest the thinking of your average leftist and If you look at the subtext of the whole piece  you will see that what he really desires is not to be part of western society but to remake it according to the template in the Koran. Then any notion of a secular society and an individuals right to worship (or not) as they please will be replaced with a theocracy and the strict requirement that we all pray all in the prescribed manner, at the prescribed times. Strangely the bastion of the secular atheism on the left don’t want to admit that the religion that they seem so keen to champion wants exactly that.

Cheers Comrades


* sarcasm warning


  1. marranci says:

    Interesting post! thanks.
    I have to say that I do not agree with Dr Bari. Yet I think that we are really forfeiting our liberal democratic freedoms for the fear of terrorism.
    I also think that the Muslims community is too much under the ‘magnifier’ of the mass media and this is creating indeed problems (check the number of articles written on Islam since 2001 and the number of films presenting Muslims as terrorists and so on).
    So, I think that Dr Bari has missed a very good occasion to say something useful.

    As far as Islam and sexuality is concerned, however, I have to say that your representation is not fully correct. The situation is much complex and there has been in the last 20 years radical (in all meanings) changes in how sex and sexuality have been understood by Muslims.

    A good book to read is Abdelwahab Bouhdiba Sexuality in Islam
    Best wishes

  2. Suburban Marxist says:

    “Yet I think that we are really forfating our liberal democratic freedoms for the fear of terrorism.”

    We are indeed…”ASIO and police have been accused of kidnapping a terror suspect and trespassing at his home at a court hearing at which charges against him were dropped.”


  3. Iain says:

    Thank you for your thoughtful comment Gabriele I know that Islam has been very much more under the media microscope since 2001 but I do tend to think that if it is not seen to be so virtuous as a result that you can’t lay the blame for that at the feet of the writers who have examined it and found it wanting.
    While I do understand why many in the Islamic diospria who live in the west may indeed feel rather besieged. I think however that Muslims who choose to live in the west have to realise that the western notions of individual rights that come before communal rights are not negotiable. So that when it comes to matters of sexuality and sexual display the followers of Mohammad have to come too terms with the more liberal attitudes that are the norm in western cultures if they want to live in the west.
    I will see if I can get the book you cite from my library because It is an interesting topic that warrants a bit more research.
    The particular story that you cite is NOT the topic here but all that I will say on it is the obvious, the fact that the police officers have stuffed up the case does not mean that the young man did not do as he admitted in the interviews, it just shows that the police have to make sure that not only is their case true in matters of fact but also that their process is beyond reproach.
    That you make the argument that you do is symptomatic of how wilfully blind to the threat of Jihadists you minions of the left actually are.

  4. Suburban Marxist says:

    “The particular story that you cite is NOT the topic here..”.

    But surely actual kidnapping and trespass are real threats to our ‘democratic’ society, rather than terrorist attacks that have yet to materialise!?

    It surprises me that many conservatives, while declaring themselves in favour of ‘small government’, fall over themselves in their willingness to allow the repressive institutions of the state more funding and power…

  5. Suburban Marxist says:

    “Justice Michael Adams accused an ASIO agent of kidnapping and false imprisonment and concluded that “oppressive conduct” by officers had influenced alleged admissions made by Izhar Ul-Haque.”



  6. Iain says:

    I tell you what SM seeing that you are so keen to talk about this story if you write a piece about it and send it to my email I’ll put it up as a guest post on my blog OK? You are very keen to have a go at the things that I write so let’s see what you can do. Then I’ll give you my opinion of this incident. Shall we say some thing between 600 and a thousand words? Provide the URL’s of any pictures you want to include and I’ll add those as well OK?

  7. Strider says:

    The comments about Sir Salman Rushdie are just so typical of people of his ilk. Whilst the Satanic Verses is, for the most part, a rather tiresome and tedious read, urging its pulping is not being done from literary critic motives, but from those of an islamofascist censor.

    This clown is playing the same old record as that muslim member of the House of Lords who ridiculously claimed that Rushdie had blood on his hands – because of the violent reaction of many islamofascists to his book.

    Give Rushdie a peerage, I say. That would put the cat among the pigeons.

  8. Suburban Marxist says:

    Oh dear…

    “A SENIOR counter-terrorism officer with the Australian Federal Police has testified that police were directed to charge “as many suspects as possible” with terrorism offences in order to test the new anti-terrorism laws introduced in 2003.”


    Thanks for invitation to post Iain but I’m somewhat ‘time poor’ at the moment. However I may take you up on the offer at a later date.

  9. […] moniker “Suburban Marxist” has made several attempts to divert a previous thread about the left and Islam on to the topic of this morning’s post, Izhar ul-Haque. So SM this one is for you […]

Comments are closed.

Welcome to the Sandpit

I love a good argument so please leave a comment

Please support the Sandpit

Please support the Sandpit

Do you feel lucky?

Do you feel lucky?

%d bloggers like this: