Islam, the West: Integration and assimilation

‘Many concepts of the (true, eternal) Islamic world-view, such as the notion of accountability, and the injunction to consult (shura) the population, can be used to lay the foundations of democracy in Muslim societies, and in modern complex societies can be argued to require democratic forms of organisation and operation in order to function’
(excerpt, with thanks, ‘Contemporary Issues’, No-Nonsense Guide to Islam, 2004, 2007)

The politician posited (to UK Muslims and other new immigrants) that 'the right to be in a multicultural society was always implicitly balanced by a duty to integrate, to be part of Britain’. The assumption, it seemed to one Muslim writer, that 'integration was a one-way street'…. whereas there were 'many things that the rest of the country could learn from Muslims'. Integration now seemed 'the only show in town' and multiculturalism had joined political correctness as a favoured target 'for those who felt Britain was disappearing before their eyes.'
(excerpts, article, Muslim writer, UK national newspaper, December 2007).

Some Muslims (in USA) fear losing themselves to Western culture. ‘My uncle built a cultural wall around his house and family. When I arrived in America, relatives warned me to befriend only good, hijab-wearing girls and that befriending young Americans was bad. I could not agree. My friends are wide, no angry Arabs,’ said a Muslim woman. ‘I do not wear hijab, or pray conventionally. But I truly believe I am honest, have integrity and have peace in my life’.
(excerpt, conflation, USA blog response by Muslim girl, critical but pro-Islam, 2006)

Integration says, ‘I am grateful to be accepted here. I accept the laws of this country and the ethos, as best I may now understand it, and if I have complaints, I will work through the traditional courses of objection so as to obtain lawful satisfaction.’ And segregation is the accepting and living in a country, but deliberately choosing the course of a parallel, non-integrating section of the various communities. From 1970 onwards in the UK, so 500 or so larger mosques have been established, and another 900 other smaller mosques and gathering-places. The bigger mosques range from palatial new-built to more modest refurbished older buildings. Other gathering-places for Muslims in local communities can be mere rooms in a house. And only some ten per cent of imams preaching were born in the UK. Only ten per cent speak English as a first language. All these imams not born here, not speaking English with a degree of fluency are considered deeply conservative and qualified only in the traditional Islamic curriculum. This madrassa training has changed little for decades even 100 years. (exerpts, broadcast Report on Islam, UK, July, 2007). So, ‘It would be hard to imagine a better way of preventing British Muslims (en masse) integrating into the wider, modern society around them’. Or of ‘driving them into the embrace of more world-wise (single minded?) extremists. Such imams can have little or no understanding of the difficulties OR opportunities facing British Muslims, particularly the young.” (excerpt, article, UK national Sunday newspaper, July 2007) Such imams are cheaper than the home-grown, English-speaking and educated variety. But we are told, by government and several Muslim organisations that ‘things are changing’. Greater integration must occur as young Muslims spread into indigenous environments.
(excerpt, conflation, several emails, website sources, November 2007)

"Previously until 9/11 there was a natural integration, or desegregation - you entered a new culture and local community, over time you were accepted, no one openly questioned your right to be there, within that community, even if you did rather kept to yourselves. This was voluntary integration. Under democracy you even got to elect your own ethnic councillors, your young people learned the local patois, your businessmen flourished, your teachers became more educated. Your religion was not understood, most of you dressed rather differently, and your women were almost 'invisible', but these were matters for your concern. That was the Western way of tolerance. Now it has changed. The hideous but brilliant 9/11 strike saw to that. Religious extremism and violence - though present in earlier decades - meant that the in-rush of immigrants and multiculturalism was looked on with suspicion and with fear, particularly in the case of Muslims. Unquestioned multiculturalism became overturned. Your 'Middle Way' depends on the Islamic resurgence giving in more to integration than defending the medieval within its religious framework. Or the West will find many ways to sideline the strict Muslim religious culture."
 (email from friend to author, January 2007).

MUSLIM WATCHDOG FOR BRITAIN

Some 1,500 Muslim mosques in the UK, small to large, were asked in December, 2007 to co-operate with a ten-point ‘code of conduct’ initiated by MINAB UK. The initiative, prompted by calls from the UK government after the July 2005 bombings in London, aims at encouraging good practice and combating extremism in British mosques, other centres and schools. This Mosques and Imams National Advisory Board, a self-regulatory body - a community watchdog - has been founded by an alliance of the Muslim Council of Britain, the Muslim Association of Britain, the British Muslim forum and the Al-Khoei Foundation. This initiative is the start of consultations on the first draft standards (since large numbers of Muslims began entering the UK 35 years ago. author) for spreading good practice in the governance of mosques, educational institutions and centres (madrassas) for the training of Imams and religious scholars. (The author comments that a knowledgeable friend emailed him, warily) ‘Yes, good, but do not get your hopes up; the task is immense, and the British government will be sloppy. The top tens of thousands Muslims out of 300,000 professional adults - doctors, dentists, lawyers, entrepreneurs, financiers, lecturers, civil servants - have been pressured by 9/11, by 9/5 and by perceived modest threats by the Government to lead the way within their communities. But do not expect them to round-up potential extremists, nor to crack down hard on mosque 'elders' to obey. Islam does not yet have hierarchical leaders voted into power. MINAB is made up of influential mostly-professional Muslims, but not voted democratically into power. The mass of Muslim elders running the mosques, a hundred thousand, are older, conservative and possibly do not even understand what democratic-Britain is talking about; they also have little real contacts with youngsters as a 'class' within Islam, as more are simply not attending mosques. Those of extremist intent can go about their business virtually unhindered, though since July 2005 they have to go more surreptitiously. Few Muslims - unless Western-oriented, employed professionally and mixing socially with ‘Westerners’ - will dare speak out or give up extremists. A Brit convert lecturer and author said recently (2007) that Muslims in local mosques were as bad as any Brits in an organisation - quirky, ego-led, dogmatic, opinionated, and rather pathetic over their internal politics, jousting for position, power and influence. Do not expect miracles, the threat to Britain from internal, extremist Muslims will be around a long time. Mass immigration from central and eastern Europeans has now changed the equation and seriously weakened the British government's intent and capabilities to seriously influence and control Muslims. They will, mostly, three-quarters, just go on as they have these 30-40 years: religious but not necessarily deeply spiritual, brainwashed by religiosity; harmless enough - but segregated, aliens in our midst. Truly, as one commentator said: What Britain - this is a new country?’
(excerpts, conflations, journalist comments, UK newspapers after the announcement, also friends to author, December 2007)

It is a daily routine for Muslims such as me, 32 years living in the UK, to be called terrorist and stones thrown at me. Any Muslim who commits an act of terrorism may think he is ‘doing a service to Islam’ but he (she) is wrong. It is a very bad and shameful service to Islam, for which we innocent Muslims are suffering all the time. I’ve travelled (and worked professionally) in more than 50 countries, and have always found the British people the most tolerant and hospitable in the world. As a British citizen now, I have pledged my total loyalty to this great nation.
(excerpt, conflation, Letter, UK national newspaper, July 2007)

"The politician posited (to Muslims and other new immigrants) that 'the right to be in a multicultural society was always implicitly balanced by a duty to integrate, to be part of Britain. The assumption, it seemed to one Muslim writer, that 'integration was a one-way street'. Whereas there were 'many things that the rest of the country could learn from Muslims'. Integration now seemed 'the only show in town' and multiculturalism had joined political correctness as a favoured target 'for those who felt Britain was disappearing before their eyes."
(excerpts, article, Muslim writer, UK national newspaper, December 2007)

Islamism means political Islam, and it is wrong to conflate Islamism with Islam. A former Mujahideen, who fought the Russians in Afghanistan 20 years ago, has said ‘The terrorist killings in New York, Madrid and London were wrong. They were indiscriminate, un-Islamic and based on ideas abstracted to the point of insanity’. He was Islamist then, but murderous now? No. The concepts are complex. Even ex-Islamists seem confused. Ed Husain condemns Islamism as totalitarian but later allows for ‘moderate Islamists’. What sort of brain-crash is a ‘moderate totalitarian’? I doubt it could even walk. Distinctions matter, because the way out of this mess (and it is a mess, fuelled by ignorance, stupidity, corrosive prejudice and lethal weapons) is to clarify and discriminate, rather than hurl abuse at anyone who goes near a mosque. It is culturally dim for us, Westerners, to form confident opinions about people based upon how they look and what we’ve heard they think. Nonsense abounds on the ‘causes’ of terrorism, but it is hard to argue that alienation does not channel potential foot soldiers towards radicalisation.
(excerpts, conflations, article UK national Sunday newspaper, criticising London speech well-known anti-Islam author, November 2007)

He abhorred extremism in all its forms. ‘And thus We have willed you to be a community of the Middle Way’ was a Qur’anic verse he quoted often, explaining that in Islam, there was no room for revolution, only evolution. He was the conscience of thinking Muslims. It is easy to imagine him approving of the peaceful yet vigorous activism of American Muslims in defending the tenets of their faith, and striving to bring a balance to American society. He would in particular have invested high hopes on Muslim youth for their idealism and their ability and eagerness ‘to think and to reason’.
(excerpts, conflation by author, from website article on Muhammad Asad, writer, diplomat ,by Hasan Zillur Rahim, September 1995)

The Australian government is targeting radical Muslim clerics and activists to head off potential terror attacks. Mainstream Muslim leaders have pledged loyalty to Australia and her Queen, but the government has made it clear that extremists will face a crackdown. (At last it had sunk in that) the idea of Australia being a multi-cultural community had served only to dilute Australian sovereignty and Australian national identity. It had to be accepted that Australia is a secular state, and its laws are made by parliament. Muslim clerics, teaching that there are two laws governing people in Australia, one Australian law and another Islamic law, speak falsely. Those not accepting parliamentary law, independent courts and democracy, but prefer Sharia law - then go to another country practicing it. Even radical clerics with dual citizenship could be asked to leave. ‘If our values are not your values, if you want a theocratic state, then you basically should clear off,’ a government Minister said on national television.
(excerpts, conflations, various government statements, in Australia, June/July 2007)

More than half the Muslims in Britain interviewed in 2005 (by a modest Poll) were optimistic about the future of their children in Britain, while only three in 10 were pessimistic. Britain 's Muslim population is estimated at 1.6 - 1.9 m, with 1.1million over 18, meaning more than half a million may have considered the possibility of leaving (because of the terrorist bombings). Older Muslims were more uneasy about their future, with 67 per cent of those 35 or over having ‘contemplated their future in Britain’. Some 57 per cent of Muslims criticized scholars and leaders for failing to root out extremists, compared to 68 per cent of all Britons. Some nine in 10 Muslims interviewed believe violence has no place in a political struggle, according to the poll. Half of Muslims thought that they needed to do more to prevent extremists infiltrating their community. . A statement issued by over 40 leading mosque imams, muftis and scholars representing all sections of Muslims in Britain stressed that ‘there can never be any excuse for taking an innocent life’. The British Muslim Forum issued a fatwa on July 18 signed by more than 500 British Muslim scholars dismissing suicide bombings as ‘vehemently prohibited’.
(excerpt, UK national newspaper report, on Poll, Britain, after 2005 bombings 2005)

"We support the need for better integration of Muslims in Britain - but not at the cost of losing our Islamic identity. We remember the example of the Jews in Germany in the 1930's who integrated and assimilated into German society and thought they were Germans. They were made scapegoats. They were unable to resist because their were 'integrated' and 'assimilated'. They died asking why it was happening to them. If a particular political party has its way, we will have to sign up to a Muslim Charter, like good little boys and girls so it can be said that we are behaving well and have integrated. It will end with us being told what parts of the Qu'ran we can read."
(excerpt, email response to Muslim article, website, UK national newspaper, January 2007)

There has to be a debate (in Britain) about citizens (coming to settle from abroad) living in a predominantly Christian country, and what is their duty to fellow citizens. Other groups (than Muslim) - Hindus, Sikhs, Jews and Buddhists - are able to practice their faiths without demanding the religious landscape of Britain be altered. They also show a willingness to debate issues. The aggression shown by some Islamic groups (and one-viewpoint voices. author) means that no real debate can take place as on subjects deemed ‘too sensitive’ eg terrorist acts, honour killings, death for apostates, polygamy, Sharia law, the subjugation of women, forced marriages, and fatwas for alleged insults. Appeasement will never be an adequate solution.
(excerpts, letter, UK national newspaper, January 2008)

Integration does not mean giving up your religion, culture, ideals or principles. It means accepting that you have a positive role to play in the society you are a member of. We have some fantastic values in the Muslim community, and integration will show UK society our values. We need to make efforts to be productive Muslims and thus productive members of society. The 'Muslim community' in the UK is possibly the single biggest reason why we are in this position (of being criticised) and the sooner we disband the shackles of the 'community institution' the better. In turn this will bring greater understanding and harmony (Muslims and society). It is all most Muslims want.
(excerpt, email response to Muslim article, website, UK national newspaper, January 2007)

The distance between mainstream society and Muslim sub-cultures can be striking (in the Netherlands). A newspaper poll showed (extrapolated) that more than 60 per cent of Dutch-born citizens believed Muslim immigrants (shown to approve) anti-American terrorism should be ejected. Commentators interpreted the poll as spelling out, ‘The Netherlands does not accept anti-Western fundamentalist attitudes. Integration means adapting to a humanistic tradition, separation between church and state, and distancing oneself from the (extreme or habitual, old) norms and values of one’s motherland’. (the book’s author said) ‘At long last, a stunning and welcome affirmation of the Dutch people’s basic commitment to democratic values had been publicised strongly’.
(excerpt, conflation, book by American on living in Western Europe, 2003)

The EU has admitted paying for Iranians to attend Courses at European universities and paying into a Poverty-Alleviation programme in Iran. Ahmadinejad wants to wipe Israel off the map, but EU taxpayers are training Iranian nuclear physicists. It is beyond belief that EU taxpayers are also paying for ‘poverty relief’ in one of the world’s richest oil-producing countries because Iranian money is stolen and billions squandered in the drive to develop nuclear weapons. It is EU appeasement. ‘We need dialogue with Tehran’ says the ‘High Representative for Foreign Affairs’ as he admits the policy had had ‘No success at present’. The EU demands Iran respects basic human rights while Iran carries out more executions. Instead of appeasement we should be supporting the brave Tehran University students who for five days (in early February 2008) risked their lives demonstrating and demanding regime change.
(excerpts, conflation, Stevenson MEP, EU Brussels, February 12, 2008)

Secularism gives space for religion while asking that religion not take over the public sphere. There is no contradiction here. As a faithful Muslim who had worked hard with others to restore a critical spirit to Islam, I can at once embrace Faith and promote a proper role for it (in the West). Despite an increase in threats to me, I am passionate about promoting democratic values over theocratic ones and universal rights over cultural relativism. Pluralism does not amount to ‘anything goes’. Tolerance of intolerance is a betrayal today of our basic and shared humanity.
(excerpt, conflation, activist Muslim on her weblog, 2006)

Free immigration (into Britain, 2007) and the commingling of races - we make our own future so blindly. Did you see that article? It spoke of too-quick ‘integration’ and ‘assimilation’? Apparently it is happening all the time in UK hospitals in 2007 - indigenous or ‘foreign’ but (only basically) English-speaking doctors need the ‘hospital pictionary’ to enable urgent and understandable discussion to take place between indigenous English-speaking doctors and newly-arrived ‘foreign’ doctors who have little English. Thus the modern NHS has devolved: to sign-language. Meanwhile patients suffer longer or might even die (there are no statistics) before the correct treatment takes place.
(email to doctor-friend to author, September 2007)

He is described (in 2002) as ‘the clean-shaven face of progressive Islam in Europe’. In unequivocal clarity, this Grand Mufti of Marseille assailed the rigidity and backwardness of Islamic fundamentalism after 9/11 and insisted the project to reform Islam would involve ‘a de-sacralisation of the whole of Islam’s texts, commentaries and the theological work around the texts’. The purpose was to ‘shape an Islam that preaches tolerance, respects diversity, supports separation of church and state, and embraces integration whole-heartedly and without hesitation’. (the book’s author said) ‘Yet he has an uncertain following, in a Europe where 16 Islamist organisations with suspected terrorist ties have been banned (2002-2003)’.
(excerpt, conflation, book on Islam in Europe, 2003)

Rational argument and free speech are simply no longer valued as an integral part of British life. But ideas must be debated and confronted. Evil flourishes mightily when it is ignored. One of the functions of a great debating society (such as the Oxford Union) is set up the scene where ideas can be proposed, tested, validated or invalidated. We should not kid ourselves we any longer live in a land of free speech. Muslims stood outside Westminster Cathedral with banners pronouncing ‘Jesus is the slave of Allah’ and ‘Islam will conquer Rome’. The police did nothing. But had I stood outside a mosque with a banner proclaiming ‘Rome will conquer Islam’ I would have been up before the Bench before you could say helmet and truncheon. Criminal law is now used to ban the expression of unpopular views (on one side only? this website’s author)
(excerpts, conflations, Columnist (Anne Widdecombe MP), UK national newspaper, November 2007)

(It was proposed in 2004 by a French government spokesman that)
France should introduce compulsory attendance by (new) Muslim imams on courses ‘to learn more of the country's language and culture’. They were to go to secular universities in 2005 onwards to learn the law, civics and history needed ‘to improve their capabilities over integration’. France, said the spokesman, ‘had always displayed a strong emphasis on cultural integration of immigrants’ and this would now be enlarged. Continuing education would be required of current imams, 75 per cent of whom were non-French citizens. One-third of the 1,200 imams in France, it was said, do not speak French. It was not acceptable - French imams in France should speak French, he said. Most of France's five million Muslims were of North African origin and many imams came directly from Arab countries. Further education over respect for the separation of church and state in France would be undertaken in universities, which would teach student imams about other secular subjects, needed to understand French society. Islamic institutes would provide the theology courses. French language courses for imams were planned for regions with the highest concentration of Muslims around Paris, Lille, Lyon and Marseille. Promoting moderate Islam through education had emerged as a key issue in several European countries following violent activities of extremists. The spokesman announced that a Foundation would also be set up to receive funds donated by Muslims abroad and (independently) distribute them for mosque construction in France. (This had arisen from the fact that) Rich Muslim countries such as Saudi Arabia had helped finance numerous mosques in France, but the ‘sponsors’ had demanded that the mosques hired imams schooled in its strict Wahhabi form of Islam. The influential Union of French Islamic Organisations (UOIF) has objected to the Foundation plan.
(excerpts, conflations, UK national newspaper report, December 2004)

FATWAS AND REASON
A Muslim teacher in West Yorkshire, UK, she demanded to wear her Islamic face veil in class, and the row about Integration or Not in school? went to the national news and an employment tribunal ruled against her. She said it was her religious right, but it transpired that she had received a fatwa (religious) instruction from a Muslim mufti cleric. His instruction: it is obligatory for women to wear the niqab veil in the presence of men not their blood relatives. There are several hundred muftis in Britain, the status entitling them the issue fatwas based on Islamic law. In effect, they are operating a form of Shar’ia law in OUR country, Britain. They are the advance form (of the enemy within) of Islam. The militant form of Islam will not integrate as its aim is to subjugate. Why do we tolerate this? We should deport them or lock them up until they swear loyalty to British law. To draconian for you? Well, remember, these muftis are committed, they are unable to listen to your reasonings.
(excerpt, conflation, viewer comment, online news report, October 2006)

My father was a first-generation immigrant from Pakistan who came to Britain 50 years ago for a better life. He worked hard and built up a successful business. As his eldest daughter I was expected to set an example and conform to his views and culture and eventually have an arranged marriage. Did I? Certainly not. I rebelled, to his disappointment and shame among his community. Did he kidnap, beat and murder me? No. But he did not speak to me for ten years. Although he did eventually accept that exposing his daughter to two very different cultures was inevitably going to cause problems. 30 years on, the situation is much the same. The second and third generation of children of immigrants should have ‘evolved’ to some degree by now. My mother is British and in Pakistan, when I was a child, wore traditional dress even a burka. She showed respect yet kept her own identity intact. It is now high time that immigrants accepted that - as they voluntarily chose to emigrate – they are now required to show flexibility, tolerance and understanding towards the ‘new’ culture. More so, they have to show a willingness to integrate. Honour killings? There is no excuse. Kill an ‘innocent human being’? Where is the ‘honour’ in that. Let it be realised.
(letter to Editor, UK national newspaper, January 18, 2008)

Questions on integration and assimilation once implied that immigrant Muslims into Europe, Canada, the USA would elect to adapt to their new country's norms and customs, grateful for being allowed into a 'new country' and the chance of making ‘a new, better life’. But New York 9/11, Madrid 2004, London 2005 brought many issues into sharp focus as never before about Islam and the West particularly. Anti-immigration sentiment and debates on the possibility even the impracticality of integration of different cultures have intensified. Rules are emerging to ‘encouragement’ (heading towards enforcement) of compatibility with 'Western values'. Still, Islamic extremists when not undertaking violent action are in group-action demanding Shariah law be implemented in western countries. The polarisation questions are: can Islam adapt voluntarily with Western norms in Western countries, though disagreeing with them in places profoundly, or can there only be confrontation, conflict and parallel-living, ultimately disastrous to 'both sides'? At the moment, there is stalemate: large numbers of Muslims are here, in the West, it is nonsense to 'send them back'. But they cannot be forced to integrate. Except by indigenous pressures. The Jewish, Hindu, Sikh communities have over time found a peaceful way. But can 'progressive', 'thrusting' (potentially eruptive) Islam….. the ‘religion of perpetual outrage’ ?
(excerpts, conflations, USA website and email to author from Canadian contact, January 2008)

It seems that UK imams are forced to bear the brunt of responsibility for the collective ills of the Muslim community, in particular the moral breakdown that has led to a handful from amongst us to perpetrate acts of horrific violence. It is, of course, necessary to examine the root causes behind the extremist tendencies in a minority of Muslims, but such an exercise must dispassionately address all the possible causes, including government policy and socio-economic factors. Without this unbiased approach, which is currently lacking, the targeting of Muslim institutions and traditions smacks of scape-goating by vested interests. Ideally all imams will speak English and be aware of the cultural sensitivities of the host society. However, the key requirement of an imam or religious authority is their level of qualification in the Islamic sciences and, of course, their religiosity. Many of the imams who have come from abroad have studied in some of the foremost madrasahs in the world and to have access to them in this country is a privilege not a threat. The fact is that mosques are increasingly employing assistant imams who are young, native English-speakers to complement the often more learned and experienced "imported" imams and slowly more sermons are being given in English. This process is one of natural evolution that will only progress with time. If the UK media and policy-makers really want to help imams be more effective then they should look to support them rather than work to undermine the authority of the very people that they are looking to for help in tackling extremism.
(excerpts, conflated, website article, Muslim writer, July 2007).

Autocratic (mostly religious?) regimes and their anti-democratic policies in the Middle East have played a part in creating Muslim extremism. Many sentences arise: Is Islamic democracy possible? A genuinely modern democracy must be built on secularism. A number of modern democracies are built on an inherently modern foundation. But there is no a priori (knowable independent of experience) moral framework about modern democracy? There is a distinct difference between secularism and secularisation. The Protestant theologian Harvey Cox (author, USA, Secular City 1965) said, ‘God is just as present in the secular as in the religious realms of life’. Secularisation is the process by which ‘certain responsibilities pass from ecclesiastical to political authorities, whereas secularism is an ideology based on the eradication of religion from public life. Secularisation implies a historical evolution in which the society gradually frees itself from ‘religious control and closed metaphysical world-views’. Secularism ‘functions very much like a new religion’ and is itself a closed metaphysical world-view.
(excerpts, conflation, book and Wikipedia, 2006, 2008)

One Western politician, writer has said that Christianity and Judaism have gone through ‘the laundromat’ (what an ugly expression) of humanism and enlightenment, but that is not the case with Islam. The agreement between zealots on both sides - Islamic and the ‘unbelieving’ – is that Islam and Western modernity can have no conversation, and cannot inhabit each other. But there are millions of Muslims who are at ease somewhere within the spectrum of the diverse possibilities of ‘Western-ness’. The Islamic world is now in the throes of its own reformation, and our Calvins and Cromwells are proving no more tolerant and flexible than their European predecessors. Islamic universalism is represented by the great bulk of ordinary mosque-going Muslims who, around the world, live out different degrees of accommodation with the local and global reality. Muslims return from the mosques in Cairo in time for the latest American soaps. There is no equivalent desire in the West to learn from and integrate into other cultures. The West is keener to export than to import, to shape, rather than be shaped. As such, its universalism can seem imperial and hierarchical, driven by corporations and strategic imperatives that owe nothing whatsoever to non-Western cultures, and acknowledge their existence only where they might turn out to be obstacles. Likewise, Westerners, when they settle outside their cultural area, almost never assimilate to the culture which newly surrounds them.
(excerpts, conflations, Faith in the future: Islam after the Enlightenment, A K Murad, Memorial Lecture Islamabad, December 2002)

LOBBYING GROUPS INFLUENTIAL
Islamic lobbying groups have been influential politically in the USA since before 2000, an East Coast journalist has reported many times. In fact, he has said, ‘dangerous Islamist militants’ (in the Muslim-American community) campaigned for soon-to-be President Bush. This went ‘almost entirely unnoticed’ with absence of criticism from Democrats. The Bush speech-writer said ‘We Republicans are very lucky – we face political opponents too crippled by political-correctness to make an issue of these kinds of security lapses’. Among the ‘requirements’ likely to gain Muslim-American voting support, advised Arab-Americans close to candidates, were the elimination of racial profiling at airports (aiming to weed out terrorists and suspects) and the use of ‘secret evidence’ drawn up against Muslims in counter-terrorism investigations and being used in court cases. Bush’s newly-found ‘elevated concern’ about these issues resulted in his endorsement by the American Muslim Political Coordination Council, an umbrella organisation speaking for major national Muslim groups. The endorsement meant thousands of votes for Bush in November 2000 prior to the closest and most controversial election in American history.
(excerpts, conflation, articles by national journalist based in New York, Spring 2004, Autumn 2007).

(This author, teacher in Europe recounts) At the school in Norway, I made friends with students from Muslim countries, easy-going and open-minded. They were ‘secularised’, that was why the administrators placed them in my class of 17 different countries, them, the apparent Muslims, and others from Europe and Asia - with me the sole American as teacher. We were educate to different levels, with a smattering of English – different from the many sexually-segregated, strict ‘Muslim only’ classes down the hall. There, women swathed in fabric, accompanied by male relatives (unbelievable!) My class was lively, irreverent, it was fun; we learned Norwegian language, folk ways and customs, inter-acted and gained: unexamined attitudes, assumptions bred by native cultures; we recognised foibles and follies of our human species. And we laughed, self-mockery, celebration of unlimited opportunity opening before us. From the other, strict Muslim-only, classes we never heard the sound of laughter.
(excerpt, conflation, book on experiences of Islam in Europe, 2003)

‘I was involved in some relief efforts in the Aceh province of Indonesia after the tsunami. I was told by a local Muslim on one occasion ‘Everything I’ve been told about you is a lie’. Many other western Christians had similar experiences. The Qur’an so over-reaches in painting Christians as depraved lunatics (and the local Imams do not seem to shrink back from adding to the hyperbole) that simple kindness on our part generated genuine shock among the populace there. My hope, of course, is that upon realizing that they have been lied to about one issue, they would begin to question where else they might have been deceived.
(reader emailed this response, to website commentary article on the Qur’an).

Everyone should sit down once a year and think how lucky they are to be British’. That was the UK immigration minister, as a debate about the nation’s values and ‘Britishness’ arose (with ‘citizenship’ schemes supposed to increase social cohesion and weaken adverse fundamentalism). An immigrant salesman, who came from Pakistan and settled here three years ago, said ‘All this talk misses the point - Britain does not have a clearly defined culture any more, which is not necessarily a bad thing’. A UK indigenous resident said, ‘We are unravelling as a country, I no longer even know what we have a common’. A recent African Muslim immigrant believed ‘Britishness is a hazy thing, the dictates of religion remain a far clearer and more precise identity’. The difficulty about Britishness, said a politician, is that so much of it is ‘unspoken’. Multi-culturalism, now in disrepute, proposed a common banner of unity but fostered difference and separatism in faith communities, he added. Muslim for instance had to ‘buy into’ a cohesive set of shared values. A 47 year old Sikh, whose mother settled here 50 years ago, said his generation were far less focused on places of worship and more outward-looking. ‘Far more immigrants have to learn to speak English, it is essential for integration and participation in wider society’. Old tensions and new tensions – can they be resolved? New tensions focus on British Muslims and violence. The Pakistan salesmen, mentioned earlier, said ‘I started meeting people from other cultures and I realised there was nothing to hate or fear, that we are all the same’.
(excerpts, conflations, news report, UK national Sunday newspaper, June 2007)

INTEGRATION YES, BUT…..
Integration can take place, but … the Muslim threat to Europe will continue, over the next 50 years. The time for talking has long stopped (since 2005) and the new era has begun. The United Kingdom is the home and birth-place of the Anglo-Saxon race and culture. New Labour (with its political and cultural attention elsewhere - author) is leading our country into dhimmi status (appearing in three generations hence – author). This is an envisioned statement – it may not come to pass. Dhimmis under Islam were and are still are in many places, allowed ‘to practice their religion’, subject to certain conditions, and to enjoy a measure of communal autonomy, and guaranteed their personal safety and security of property, ‘in return for paying tribute and acknowledging Muslim supremacy.’ (excerpt, Wikipedia website. author) If the Anglo-Saxon people of ‘Britain’ do not defend and protect their heritage, culture and identity then ‘Islam’, far stricter, tougher, political than Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, and Sikhism, will just fill the vacuum and inevitably destroy our past, present and future. The Anglo Saxon race of the British Isles is being sounded out, warned about not letting that happen. The time has come to stop being ‘racist’ against US ourselves, and allow us to defend OUR country, the culture which emerged in the first instance BEFORE Islam came into being. A new Political Party is needed to re-discover our new identity, complete with the protection of the Anglo-Saxon people of the United Kingdom paramount. Some say mediation channels have been exhausted. Some say no, the ancient British temperament will still openly offer integration and assimilation. The key is allowing Muslims their equal status and right to worship. And what ‘the Muslims in Britain’ especially their so-called ‘leaders’ concede. Unfortunately too Brits look askance at hijabs and niqabs, our freedom-loving women would never go for it, nor the ‘fashion industry’.
(UK respondent to an ‘Islam watch’ website article on ‘ Our cultural and spiritual heritage under threat’, June 2007)

That there are Muslims in Britain who do not integrate is certainly correct; it is conveniently forgotten that there are (strict orthodox) Jews, Hindus, Italians, Chinese who also do not integrate. As for Muslims being a cancer, the true cancer in our society is ignorance, lack of respect, disregard for others, sloth, gross usage of alcohol and drugs. These are destroying our communities and all ‘creeds’ and ‘races’ are guilty. I am a Muslim. I am British. I am proud of that. I admire this great nation. I join in, I give to charity, sing carols, go to Christmas parties, have friends of all colours and creeds. I have no wish or desire to see this nation become an Islamic state. There are those who do not want to integrate and there are many who do not wish for others to integrate. Some go out of their way not to help the integration of ‘outsiders’. Shame on them.
(excerpt, conflation, email response, Bishop’s no-go areas in UK article, January 2008)

Many of the socio-economic aspects of problems with the 'integration of Muslims' in the West are beginning to look like the United States of America before the Civil Rights Acts. Though there has been not much civil-rights activism, riots in Paris were classical riots, as we know them from Watts USA and Birmingham and Luton UK - products of special socio-economic and residential problems and patterns. Islam, truly, did not play a very major role.
(excerpt, review, major book release, spring 2006, on Islamic Challenge)

Western Muslims will play a decisive role in the evolution of Islam worldwide because of the nature and complexity of the challenges they face, and in this their responsibility is doubly essential. By reflecting on their (own) faith, principles and identity , they will they reflect the relationship that Islam must undertake with the industrialised, secularised societies, the modern world, its order and its disorder. Does the Islamic world have an alternative to offer (the West particularly)? Can it implement its new proposals? How should the debate be engaged in, between ‘civilisations’. The (alleged) ‘clash of civilisations’ and progressive, optimistic thinkers have rejected it. The ‘clash’ is not a reality but the ingredients that could lead to it are very present in current mentalities – lack of knowledge, simplistic and absolute caricatures, final judgments, conflicting political and geo-strategic interests. The debate must be conducted at a deep and serious level. Muslims bear a heavy responsibility to helping to avoid breakdown and ensure fair dialogue and reconciliation.
(excerpts, conflation, book conclusion, Ramadan 2004)

New York is the world’s most multicultural city. America’s genius is for turning immigrants into proudly integrated citizens. Muslims in America tend to be more affluent, more assimilated and more religiously moderate than their co-religionists in Europe. You have to give up separatism and embrace integration. When I moved to western Europe, in 1998, fundamentalist Islam became a daily reality to me. Islam generally speaking then offers a different picture. European Muslims are more likely to live in tightly knit religious communities (than their American counter-parts). They are more likely to adhere to a narrow fundamentalist faith, and to resist integration into ‘mainstream’ society. Turkish, Surinam, Moroccan and the Dutch Antilles. In the Netherlands, they remained largely un-integrated, after decades. In America, US-born children of ‘immigrants’ are American citizens. In the Netherlands, as an example, Dutch-born children of immigrants are ‘second-generation immigrants’. And in Germany. Not entitled automatically to citizenship. It reminds Americans of the ‘American black’ situation. We know ‘separate but equal’ is not a viable democratic option. It is a cruel delusion. It has not been learned in (Europe).
(excerpts, conflations, website article, Partisan Review, USA, 2002)

NIQAB, ATTITUDES, MODERN AMERICA
Today there’s a lot more at stake than public standards of dress. A niqab is when your body and face are completely covered. Some variations are slits for the eyes so the woman can see, but in Saudi Arabia this was not allowed so you had to wear a black chiffon scarf over the face so the eyes could not be seen through the slits - ‘I likened it to seeing through very dark sun glasses’. ‘Men must be protected from the fear of fitnah (temptation)’, they say. A woman must not display her charms, such as her chest, her shoulders, her stomach, her back, her arms, her neck and her calves; they must not become visible. (website, American woman, married to Muslim, 2007). I am a woman living in Minneapolis and we have had a huge influx of Muslim immigrants. When I used to live in Egypt, I did not mind, it was their country and their way of life, but back here in the States? No. Our government needs to stop importing these people.
(excerpts, conflations, views on 2006/2007 websites from modern Americans; these were e-mail responses to website report, mufti speech, Australia, October 2006)

The thesis under discussion is that there are a percentage of powerless, harassed, moderate Muslims who, if America wages war against and defeats the dominant radical Islam, can be nurtured into the leadership of a new, moderate Islam. Islam has always been warlike. There has never been a moderate Islam. If Islam has a historically abiding imperative, based in Islamic law (which under its own terms is sacred and unchangeable), to subjugate non-Muslim peoples, how can we Americans imagine that we have the ability to change Islam into a peaceful, liberal, tolerant civilization, the opposite of what it’s always been? There is the confusion between the phrase ‘moderate Muslims’ which carries the sense of an obligation to help the moderate Muslims as individuals, and the phrase ‘moderate Islam’ which carries the sense of an obligation to transform Islam as whole. He allows the plausible idea, of helping individual Muslims to escape from Islam, to be conflated with the utopian and insane idea, of transforming Islam itself. But now his categorical acknowledgement of the ‘sacred imperative of historical Islam to subdue the world’, the impossibility of his various scenarios, in which a 1,400-year-old warlike totalitarian religion is turned into something amenable to liberal democracy, becomes too evident to ignore.
(excerpts, conflations, website articles and arguments, Pipes and Auster, 2006)

IMMIGRATION, POLLS AND COMMENT
(How the public reacts to poll results affects indigenous citizens, Muslims and recent immigrants into the UK) Mixing headline-grabbing populism with serial administrative incompetence made it impossible to promote the merits of a fair and effective immigration system, was one UK journalist’s response to a late 2007 poll. The public had at last seen through the smoke and mirrors that had been New Labour government’s policy on this issue for a decade, was another comment, by the chairman of Migrationwatch UK (which commissioned a different poll). ‘They are very angry that they have not been consulted about such a fundamental change taking place in our society’. More than four-fifths of the public believed immigration in Britain should be cut substantially. And 85 per cent of people thought immigration was putting too much pressure on public services, and 54 per cent disputed the Government's assertion that those coming into the country had ‘helped the economy’, some 22 per cent denied it ‘strongly’. What drives economic migration into the UK? (asked an article in a UK national newspaper). A leading UK-based blog said a central feature of our lack of control over immigration was our membership of the European Union. It was therefore quite impossible even to begin to develop a comprehensive immigration policy (or any at all) as long as we were members of the European Union.
(EU Referendum October, 2007)

BRITISH ATTITUDES TO MUSLIMS
A poll by a UK university’s Centre for Intelligence and Security Studies found that the majority of British people are fair-minded and welcoming of Muslims. Extrapolating, nearly half (the non-Muslim adults) polled ‘dismissed the idea that Muslims in Britain suffer unjust criticism or prejudice’. But what they do not want is ‘the development of separate societies, of a Muslim Britain and a Christian Britain’.  Non-Muslim adults in Britain, also, are opposed to the way Muslim radicals are interpreting Britain’s liberal attitudes as ‘a licence to set up a separate state within a state’. Further extrapolation (of non-Muslim adults) finds that nearly half the (adult) population ‘ believe Muslims are claiming too much political power’ (for their 2 m community out of a 61 m total British population).
(excerpt, conflation, poll results reported in UK national newspaper, August 2007)

PRAAAD* TO BE BRITISH ! * Cockney speech
(Being proud of ‘Being British’ is not understood today, in these early years of the 21st century. Some say fairly recent Muslims and new immigrants have no idea about it – but why should they, when we indigenous citizens have forgotten? author) Liberty for this country’s subjects resulted not from tolerance, but in the Middle Ages from the struggle for dominance between states of the Realm. In the past, recent age, you couldn't find anyone more English than my mother. Born and bred in London, she was in and out of town during the Blitz. One night, she sat on a flat roof during a bombing raid, watching St Paul's light up in flashes. That must have been a night and a sight to make you certain where you belonged in the world. Let us put out more flags. Be more British. Be proud. It is not something we easily admit to in public, is it? It's the same as boasting, isn't it? What are they, anyway, these core British values that our Prime Minister has talked about? Inclusiveness, tolerance, respect. The more you look at it, the more like a party political manifesto it looks. They'll have the NHS in there soon. British liberty was the result not of tolerance, inclusiveness and respect, but of the struggle for dominance between estates of the realm: the Monarchy, the Church, Parliament, the Barons, the Judiciary. And the peasants, occasionally. They all secured victories, but none of them triumphed. Thus the state of British liberty existed in a state of dynamic tension between equally poised groups jealous of their rights, privileges and independence. The equilibrium now is being so disturbed. The political class is making a sudden and largely unrecognised bid for power, and is surging over the rest of us. They exist in burgeoning Quangos, Trusts, Authorities and Agencies all through society. But Britain also has a restless appetite for modernity. For 800 years, we've led the world in revolutions commercial, industrial, intellectual and social. And - shockingly - we might yet become the first police state in the Western world. Our future totalitarians will be most grateful to what this (New Labour) government has done over the past 10 years in laying down infrastructure they will not be able to do without in the future.
(excerpts, conflations, article, UK national newspaper, May 2007)

Regarding your Mohammed Salim (I gave up being a teacher, to earn more on Benefits) case in the UK, I’m certain you will not find a parallel case in the U.S. We’re not quite that far gone…yet. But about 50 per cent of the U.S. electorate is possessed of the lunatic notion that the European social-welfare state should be the model for America. The rest of us are aghast at what we witness across the Atlantic, especially in the U.K. What sort of strange death wish is drawing Britain into the surrender of its heritage and historic values? What is the prize in this apparent race to be first into the grave of Western European civilization? By American standards, one car for 13 people sounds like privation. The U.S. Census Bureau reports that 91 per cent of those in the lowest ten % of households, all of whom are officially poor, own colour TVs, 72 per cent own microwave ovens; and 55 per cent own VCRs. As our economist Thomas Sowell points out ‘Most of those working are not poor, and most of the poor are not working’.
(email from an American contact, commenting on a UK family story, UK national newspapers, February 2008)

The majority of Muslims, in Europe, are overwhelmingly secular in outlook.
They support core liberal values. They do not remotely conform to the popular stereotype of radical Muslims, whose compatibility with liberal societies is generally, nearly always questioned. The collective vision, cognition by Muslim-elders in Europe that 'they were in Europe to stay' triggered the recent conflicts. Muslims not to blame then ? Modern Muslims having more open, demanding, intransigent viewpoints beyond 'requiring acceptance of their actions' now.
(excerpts, conflations, reviews, book, Islamic Challenge, website of Conference in 2005)

The ‘essential minimum’ of being a true part of British society included ‘belief in democratic values, rule of UK Law, commitment to non-violence’ in acceptable political activism. (excerpts, conflation, spokesman, UK think tank report, 2008). The website declared that ‘certain types of integration, with the indigenous UK population, are forbidden to devoted Muslims: such as voting, cinema, swimming pool, night-clubs’.
(excerpt, website Islambase, 2008)

To remain a Muslim in the West is a test of faith, conscience, intelligence. We need to get involved. We must not short-change study of the Western world, history, cultures, collective psychology. We must apply in a positive way the Islamic principle of integrating all that does not contradict the prohibitions. We must be reconciled to the universality of Islamic values and stop considering ourselves a marginalized minority. We liberate ourselves from faults by developing a rich, positive and participatory presence in the West that must contribute from within to debates about the universality of values, globalisation, ethics, and the meaning of life in modern times. Religious education must encourage independence of mind and in-depth consideration of the application of Islamic principles in the West, and the meaning of being a European or American Muslim.
(excerpts, conflation, book, Future of Islam, 2004)

Grooming of vulnerable people (Muslims and non-Muslims) in the UK, for the purposes of violent extremism, will be the remit of a new government unit, set up by the Home Office in January 2008. It will sift through, act on intelligence gathered by police and security agents ‘in the field’. Identify, analyse, assess and act on is its remit. Vulnerable people will be targeted for help by Community leaders and authorities. Local and regional facilities which are potential ‘Meeting places’ for fanatics will be guided on how to identify potential ‘groomers’. Mosques will be helped, their libraries advised, University authorities warned, a Forum of Head-teachers set up to act on protecting children and linking with communities. On ‘Faith schools’ the Home Office proposes to spend money on ‘twinning’ schools of different faiths to spread understanding about all faiths.
(excerpts, conflated, several reports, UK national newspapers, January 2008)

‘We want to set up an academy in the UK which will ensure that home-grown imams can be properly trained and accredited here. We want to do away with the need to import people from outside the UK ( ie Pakistan. author). We need to be very realistic and honest with ourselves - the majority of our imams lack the capacity to intellectually engage with our young people (in the UK). We need to help them build that capability. For too long there has really been no structure. I have seen people claim to be imams in mosques who could not even read or write’. These were comments by two Muslim leaders in the UK, from speakers for four Islamic bodies, when an independent self-regulatory Islamic body was set up in 2006. It aimed to ‘supervise mosques’ (some 1,500 of all sizes in the UK, representing a 2m Muslim population out of a 61m indigenous and other recent immigrant population). The nascent body released a document on the ‘Good practice guide for mosques and imams in Britain’. It lists the expected duties of imams and what services a mosque should provide, including a library, a cr?che and a prayer room with space for women. (The issue of imams training recently 2006 took central stage in several European countries. Major Swiss Christian groups pressed to establish a government-supervised institute to educate imams on the ‘liberal’ lifestyle in western societies. The German integration minister released a 20-point strategy recommending that imams coming to Germany should have knowledge of the language and society.
(excerpts, conflation, reports by Islam UK Online, and UK news agencies, June 2006)

The ‘community spokesman’ for the (unelected) Muslim Council of Britain warned about Britain taking on the hue of Nazi Germany, over its treatment of British Muslims. He gave the impression he was representing the moderate opinions of British Muslims. I for one refuse to believe moderate people of any persuasion would draw comparison between this country and Nazi Germany. There is no parallel and I question his mandate to speak for fellow Muslims. The public face of Islam in Britain needs no external intervention in its ‘demonisation’ as it appears to be doing a perfectly adequate job of its own – being ‘led’ by the MCB. This ill-conceived organisation is doing a disservice to the cause of integration and social cohesion. (excerpt, Letter to Editor, UK national Sunday newspaper, November 2007) Surely the comments made by the MCB spokesman must constitute some sort of offence for which he could be arrested? Comparing Britain (now) with the Nazis (then) was one comment, but he then believes Britain should allow arranged marriages, and ban consumption of alcohol in public places. Once more we have someone from another culture pontificating on how Britain conducts itself and suggesting that the laws of this country should be altered to suit this minority culture. British people abroad living on non-Christian countries particularly Muslim ones do not expect, propose that the rules of that country be altered to suit them. If he and others do not like the set-up in Britain….. let them go and live elsewhere. (excerpt, second Letter to Editor, same newspaper) Every-time these unelected, so-called ‘Muslim leaders’, imagining they are speaking for Muslims in Britain, open their mouths and they put their feet in them. Despite some of their words being fair under free speech, as this latest, they then go on to spoil it. A couple of years of silence, on their parts, would be appropriate, as would be free Muslim elections in the democratic fashion to secure a mandate to speak.
(excerpts, emails, friends to author, November 2007)

Many UK Muslims want to play a greater role in the British life, with a total of 40 per cent out of those polled saying they needed to do more to integrate into mainstream British culture. Some 62 per cent, from a random sample of 500 Muslims telephoned, said they numbered ‘a lot, or quite a few non-Muslim people among their closest friends’ and 35 per cent said they would consider marrying someone who was not a Muslim.
(excerpt, from the survey conducted November 15-21 in 2005 in several UK cities and towns)

INTEGRATION’S ANSWER QUESTIONED
The call for British Muslims to integrate grows louder (no more forced marriages, no more 'honour' killings, rule of UK law to be accepted). Contrary to the (alleged) negatives arising from living in a tightly-knit community, the positives are worth retaining however. The greater the integration (into wider British society) the weaker will become the sense of ‘Islamic community’. It is the third generation of British Muslims in their teens and 20's who now tarnish the Muslim reputation (Muslims are 2m total out of 61m population). It is these young people - so 'integrated' into white indigenous society - who have learned to emulate the worst characteristics ie drugs, crime and extremist behaviour. 'Integration' did not save them, it has re-created them. Integration must be for the best, not the lesser.
(excerpt, article, Muslim author, UK national newspaper, January 2008)

A UK national newspaper profiled leading Muslims in Britain. The report said the year (after 9/11) had been ‘been a testing time for Britain's Muslims’. The image of their religion has been tarnished by the September 11 attacks and loyalties to Britain put under strain by the war on Afghanistan. These are some comments made about one leader described as ‘a thoughtful advocate for moderate opinion in the face of an often hostile press and public’. He has pointed out that the vast majority do not share Osama bin Laden's notion of holy war, and did not condone Muslim Britons going to fight in Afghanistan. He remains fiercely critical of Salman Rushdie and the Satanic Verses, and has called on author and publishers to withdraw the book, although he has never endorsed the fatwa. He trained as an accountant in Britain before going into the family business, trading in agro-chemicals. ‘Islam is pivotal to my life. I try to reflect its values in my character and personality. As a way of life, it governs my day-to-day activities, it shapes my dealings with others and it defines for me how I can contribute to the good of society and keep myself and others from what is harmful and destructive. To improve relations between the Muslim and non-Muslim communities, we encourage Muslims to adopt an open, outgoing and unilateral approach towards social and community relations, no matter the negatives coming from any direction. There is simply no alternative except to exemplify Islam in our lives’.
(excerpt, profiles 2002, UK national newspaper)

The UK’s Archbishop of Canterbury was naive (somewhat proposing aspects of Muslim Sharia law might be incorporated into acceptance in UK law), but even the eminently sensible Bishop of Rochester (Michael Nazir-Ali, national newspaper) can’t get it right. He says, regarding Sharia law (and the Jewish Beth Din system): ‘People can use such rulings to inform their conscience and to submit to them voluntarily’. But to my understanding Beth Din does not hide away on severe physical attacks and injuries – these are police matters. The Bishop of Rochester’s comments surely open the way for say 50 or so Sharia courts to eventually operate in this country with his apparent ‘blessing’ because they are ‘voluntary’. There are apparently more than a dozen in action already. In the London area recently (reported, national Press) compensation of £10,000 was offered ‘voluntarily’ to a non-Muslim by an attacker’s extended family and accepted. Severe physical injuries from the fight hospitalised the young man attacked. The matter never came before a UK court, and the acceptance meant that possible imprisonment was avoided. The £10,000 was ‘proposed’ by the court of Muslim elders and scholars. If this is not ‘parallel’ law in action, what is?
(Letter to Editor, UK national newspaper, by friend of author, February 2008)

(The Sharia row in the UK, February 2008) The Archbishop (who is perceived as suggesting some Sharia law run parallel with British law) is reminded that it has taken generations for the various sects in the Christian Churches to come together without parts of Sharia law coming into the melting pot. His duty is to preach the Christian gospel and not be in politics. The laws of Britain may not be perfect, but they are based on Christian values and should remain so. It should be made abundantly clear, to those who may want to integrate Sharia into our legal system that the choice open is: enjoy our freedoms open to all citizens, embrace our legal system, or go settle somewhere else.
(excerpt, conflated, letter, UK national newspaper, February 13, 2008)

A poll in the USA in 2003, of all evangelist Christian leaders showed an apparent contradiction – 77 per cent had a negative image of Islam and saw it characterised inherently by (potential for) violence. Yet 79 per cent saw it as necessary to accept them into the American community and to protect the rights of Muslims. This conformed with national patterns in the populace in which a general poor opinion is juxtaposed with an acceptance of individual Muslims. The contradiction is tied to the fact that anti-Islamic rhetoric concerns itself mainly with religious principles and values, essentially the realm of philosophy or theology. The standard perception of Muslims is highly ethnically determined, for they are by and large perceived as members of an ethnic minority (in America) – Arab, Asian, Latino and so on, and not as ‘messengers of a world religion’.
(excerpts, conflation, book on Muslims in Europe and United States 2004)

The American 'melting pot' referred to the process whereby 'immigrants of Italian, Jewish, Irish, German, French and other cultures' actually assimilated into the USA culture; they arrived, were taken in and accepted, learned the local patois American (English) language, and combined somehow to play a role, many a vital role, in making the USA the most vibrant, the most self-incentivised and the strongest in the world. But civil rights leaders today almost never use the term 'integration' nor 'assimilation'. For they have invented a litany of anti-immigration avoidance terms to encompass 'multiculturalism', 'disparate impact' and 'diversity' and 'race-sensitive'. The USA to its eternal credit, from before the turn of the 20th century, allowed 'equal access for all, the process of opening a group, community or place or organisation to all, regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, social class or religion'. The positive was always to 'the process of becoming an accepted member in the community'.
(credits for excerpts, conflations, due to American Heritage Dictionary and Wikipedia, December 2007)

I cannot repeat enough nor emphasize too strongly that the core of traditional Islam and its Sufi sects is deeply rooted and established within peace, tolerance and conciliation. The American president appeared in a US Muslim mosque to speak words of peace. Next to him were Muslims unfamiliar to the wider public. The most prominent were leaders in Wahhabi activities in America. It was a measure of their astonishing (duplicitous) success that they were given such a platform. Islam is not Wahhabi. Wahhabi is not Islam. Saudi Arabia is Wahabi. Saudi Arabia is the seat and financial core of Wahhabi terrorism. Wahhabi is an extreme fundamentalism obsessed with eradicating all who call themselves Muslim but who are not Wahhabi. The West is not Wahhabi so the West must also go. Daniel Pearl, Wall Street Journal reporter in Pakistan and Nick Berg, an American pursuing work in Iraq, lost their heads to Wahhabi swords. All Wahhabi, world-wide, abhor Shi'a. Regularly and routinely, Wahhabi kill Shi'a at every opportunity. Regularly and routinely, all Wahhabi everywhere attempt to obliterate the shrines, cemeteries, mosques of all non-Wahhabi Islam. The many Sufi brotherhoods, (which many see as) the community glue of Central Asia, enrage Wahhabi. Today, the core of traditional Islam, especially its more mystical sects generally known as Sufis, strongly maintain Islam's essential identity as a religion of peace. Wahhabi want nothing to do with peace, only dominance. The Wahhabi, similar to extremists of most religions, believe fervently that it is their dominion which God ordains. Deomundi, Deobandi versions of Wahhabi, are if anything harsher and more intolerant. Traditional Islam honours and respects The People of the Book, that is, people of other religions, especially other monotheists, Christian and Judean. For the West, USA, Europe, for Britain, wherein lies hope? The inspiring and inviting face of peaceful Islam (with its honest spirituality- author) could offer fresh and valuable contributions to Humanity. But there must be the tearing away of ‘the benign mask’ of Wahhabi-Saudi hypocrisy. For Westerners to miss such an opportunity would be worse than folly; it would be suicide. In defeating terror, today let us therefore clasp the hands of traditional Muslims, and recognize in them our cousins, our sisters, our brothers.
(excerpts, conflated, from commentary articles by Milo Clark, USA May 2004)

WEDDED TO EAST AND WEST
‘I am Birmingham,’ he answers when asked ‘Are you British?’ His accent proves it and he politely showed no resentment at my maybe impertinent inquiry. He graduated from Loughborough University with a degree in computer technology. He worked in London, then returned to Birmingham to get married, the city in which he was born and bred. He married the Muslim way at the local mosque. The families waited to celebrate until after the Ramadan fast. He is English in every way but shows respect for the faith of his fathers. At a traditional Muslim wedding, the food is no more that a courtesy, though lots of it, “offered as Islam requires to all travellers” (most guests came from near – but the basis of hospitality still applies). He admits that he worships less regularly than his father would wish. His father arrived in England in 1960, worked in a foundry, a hard and rough Black Country industry. He worked for a handbag and purse frame-manufacturer. He began as a labourer, retired as a senior foreman. He ‘attracted universal respect’ said the works manager. He has never wanted to live in an Islamic enclave, cut off from society. His son and he are ‘English’ and proud of it. He was born under the Raj but Muslim and proud of that. A prayer was being offered before the meal began – and this mix of modern Britain and ancient Islam was proved when someone’s mobile phone rang. Traditional again, the men and women dined at different rooms, the men in modern suits, their wives and daughters and friends in saris and salwar kameez. A mortgage adviser said she normally ‘dressed Western’. She used to believe in arranged marriages but hers had not proven a success. Next time? she would choose for herself. It was a minority opinion. The bride and groom had come together by arrangement of their mothers, and most women in the room supported the situation. The bride-groom, maybe in his office today, poring over the computer screen, bears a heavy responsibility. This nation’s hopes depend much on him (and his attitude and beliefs and clear-sightedness and balance) for a harmonious future.
(excerpts, conflations, article by Columnist, ‘In search of England’, UK national newspaper, November, 2007)

Integration, West, Islam, is to be defined as ‘a conformity (of immigrants) with the majority culture’; it is seen also as a vital security measure and a defence against dual-loyalty citizens.
(excerpt, Gallup Organisation report, 2006)

SCARF AND THE HAIRDRESSER
She, a Muslim girl, 20, applied for the hairdressing job. She had taken her qualifications in college. She had worked for one hairdresser already. She had applied for many others. This ‘boss’ seemed interested and invited her in for an interview. The boss’s salon specialised in cutting-edge, urban, punky styles. however the Muslim girl, to the boss, appeared in reality, ‘none of these things’. Imagine that the Muslim girl was thrilled at being invited for an interview. She turned up in a headscarf. When asked, she said she would refuse to take it off. The boss’s interest dissipated immediately: to her, the head-scarfed Muslim girl was ‘none of these things’. The Muslim girl, again, refused, hurt and afterwards, claimed £15,000 as she ‘is the victim of religious discrimination’. An ill-suited job applicant using her ‘faith’ (unproven - author) to extort money via ‘Britain’s Great Grievance Gravy Train’?
(conflation, columnist article, UK national newspaper, November 2007)

There are two million Muslims in Britain. Just under half were born here, that is a million born after 1970, thus making them say under 35-38 (to the understanding, this website’s editor 2008). A poll of UK Muslims mainly the younger generation revealed a concern that after the struggle to integrate of the first generation, new hurdles are now emerging for those who followed. Many participants felt they had made headway since the generation of their grandparents, and considered themselves British citizens. But they agreed there were still barriers. ‘Everything arising around the subject of terrorism means we are facing new problems now.’ However, ‘While it makes integration more and more difficult, I have broken barriers my parents weren't able to break’. Again, most participants felt it was an Islamic duty to learn the language and break down barriers. A fair point made was ‘This question of are we integrating? is a bit offensive to put the onus on Muslims. We could ask it of any component of British society. Don't we all have to integrate?’ Several regarded themselves as integrated even though they have no non-Muslims among their close friends. Another said ‘Integration doesn't mean 'become' rather it means being involved’. However, another said, ‘There are communities that do just stick to their own life. I've seen it with my own eyes. The first generation of our parents or our grandparents, some do not speak English although they have been here for 20 or 30 years’. They emphasised, compared with the earlier times, ‘The changing face of Britain means there are a lot of different types of Britishness’.
(excerpts, conflation, Muslim views on Integration in Britain, UK national newspaper poll, 2004)