Junead Khan jailed for plot to kill U.S. troops

May 13, 2016 Article

A delivery driver who plotted to kill U.S. troops based in England by staging road accidents to lure soldiers from their cars and then attack them with knives and possibly a home-made bomb was jailed for life on Friday.

In a message to a suspected accomplice in Syria, Junead Khan, 25, a supporter of the Islamic State (IS) militant group, told how he had missed an opportunity to kill Americans on his rounds in Bedfordshire, Norfolk and Cambridgeshire in central and eastern England.

“When I saw these U.S. soldiers on the road it just looked simple but I had nothing on me or would’ve got into an accident with them and made them get out the car,” he wrote.

In sentencing at London’s Kingston Crown Court, Khan, who was convicted last month of preparing terrorist acts and planning to fight with IS in Syria, was jailed for life and told he would serve at least 12 years in prison.

His uncle Shazib Khan, 23, who was also found guilty of planning to join IS, was given a 13-year jail term.

Police said they had recovered British and U.S. flags stolen from a diner near Junead Khan’s home in Luton, north of London, which they believe were potentially to be used for a symbolic act during the attack.

“Junead Khan’s ambition was to attack an innocent U.S. soldier on our streets. He sought inspiration from terrorist videos, bomb-making guides and contacts in Syria,” said Commander Dean Haydon, head of London police’s Counter Terrorism Command.

The post Junead Khan jailed for plot to kill U.S. troops appeared first on Faith Matters.

Categories: Jihadi, Junead Khan, Kingston Crown Court, Shazib Khan, terrorism, US Troops

‘I Have Changed’ Robinson Sees Hijabs Abound After Sadiq Khan’s Win

May 9, 2016 Article

Tommy Robinson Outdoes Himself in the Buffoonery Stakes

Not to be outdone in the ‘there are Moozlims‘ everywhere paranoia of far right extremists, Tommy ‘I have Changed’ Robinson, decided to put his toe in the sewer of anti-Muslim bigotry through his Twitter account. His involvement can only be described as an epic fail in the world of the Twitterati.

Failing to realise that he was targeting the wrong woman, he decided that Muslim lifestyle magazine Producer and Emel Founder, Sara Joseph, was in fact Saadia Khan, the wife of London Mayor, Sadiq Khan. Not to be outdone in the circulation of the graphic placing Sara and Saadia as being the same woman, (now with a Hijab), Tommy decided to put out the graphic in the hope that it would persuade people that the ‘Islamic take-over’ of London’s Town Hall has begun.

Hey, who cares, when one Muslim woman looks like another huh? Or maybe it was that in the rush to spread fear since ‘Moozlims’ have taken over the Mayoralty, they now had a secret plan to Islamize all of the of State institutions. This view that Muslims are secretly taking over is truly what far right sympathisers.

Robinson may truly believe this stuff, even though we think that he secretly knows that this not true. Alas, he has built his platform on anti-Muslim bigotry. So why really change?

In his blind hatred Tommy can’t tell the difference between Saadiya and me.
Malice knows no boundaries it seems. pic.twitter.com/jGBkdsND4U

— Sarah Joseph (@SarahIJoseph) May 8, 2016

The post ‘I Have Changed’ Robinson Sees Hijabs Abound After Sadiq Khan’s Win appeared first on TELL MAMA.

The post ‘I Have Changed’ Robinson Sees Hijabs Abound After Sadiq Khan’s Win appeared first on Faith Matters.

Categories: EMEL, London Mayor, mayor of London, News, Saadia Khan, Sadiq Khan, Sara Joseph, Tommy Robinson, Tomy Robinson

Historic mosque reopens in Banja Luka in Bosnia

May 8, 2016 Article

Thousands of Muslims gather in the Bosnian city of Banja Luka to celebrate the reopening of an historic mosque destroyed during the country’s war.

The spire of the Fehadija mosque soars above the Bosnian city of Banya Luka, as the Muslim call to prayer echoes through the air.

This city is now mainly Orthodox Christian, but thousands of Muslims from across Bosnia have gathered to celebrate the reopening of this historic structure.

It’s restoration is a symbol of the slowly healing rifts between the country’s various ethnic and religious groups, according to outgoing Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davatoglu.

The video highlights Turkey’s ourgoing Prime Minister, Ahmet Davutoglu as saying

“Bosnia-Herzegovina, with all its nations, its Muslims, Catholics, Orthodox and Jews, is one body, one heart.”

The mosque was originally built by Ottoman rulers in the 16th century but was demolished during the Bosnian was in 1993 and its stones scattered.

Experts said they were able to find 70-percent of the stones for the rebuilt structure.

But as difficult as that was, it could prove to be easier than bridging the rifts that still divide the country, according to former Serb Republic president Dragan Cavic.

The Serb Republic President and Banja Luka resident, Dragan Cavic, said,

“The next thing that will happen is we will be rebuilding the trust, but it will take more time to do that.”

But Banya Luka now has the soaring spire of the rebuilt mosque to show that difficult goals can be achieved.

The post Historic mosque reopens in Banja Luka in Bosnia appeared first on Faith Matters.

Categories: Ahmet Davutoglu, Banja Luka, Bosnia, Dragan Cavic, Fehadija mosque, News, Orthodox Christians, Serbs

Never Again Should Such a Torrid Campaign Be Run for the Mayor of London

May 6, 2016 Article

The Conservative Mayoral campaign that has been run fixating on extremists and past associations with extremists may well have put off voters from listening to the public policies of Zac Goldsmith. Zac Goldsmith himself is a man who cares about issues affecting communities and is someone with a genuine desire to make a positive change for communities. Yet the campaign placed around him may well have also damaged his public reputation in the way that it constantly sniped at past events in the life of Sadiq Khan. It gave the impression of Goldsmith as being aggressive and playing to the lowest common denominator, of placing extremism with a Labour Muslim Mayoral candidate with no real tangible evidence.

Stories even went back to 2004, as a way of placing a question mark in the minds of voters, as though he was somehow secretly ‘one of them’. What ‘one of them’ meant was left to the reader, though it was a subtle attempt to suggest that people could not trust Sadiq Khan.

It looks like the people of London have rejected the attacks and the negative campaigning against Khan’s character. Also, let us be honest and say that whilst associations which politicians had should be questioned since they are in the public eye, the constant focus on who Khan met sometimes over a decade ago showed that the Tory campaign was solely based on pressing the button on extremism and Khan. They were playing to this core campaigning theme with little regard of the damage that it was doing to its image in Muslim communities. We believe that this will have short and medium term implications for the Conservatives as many Muslims remember and associate this campaign with them. This in itself is sad since this Conservative Government has ben strong on tackling anti-Muslim prejudice and ensuring that this is pushed through at a national and local level. This should also not be forgotten.

We hope that such a campaign is assigned to the past. It is clear that Londoners have rejected the negative campaign and in significant numbers. We also welcome the new Mayor of London and hope that he unites Londoners rather than dividing them.

The post Never Again Should Such a Torrid Campaign Be Run for the Mayor of London appeared first on TELL MAMA.

The post Never Again Should Such a Torrid Campaign Be Run for the Mayor of London appeared first on Faith Matters.

Categories: campaign, mayor of London, Muslim, Opinions, Sadiq Khan, Zack Goldsmith

Anti-immigrant AfD says Muslims not welcome in Germany

May 1, 2016 Article

Members of the anti-immigration party Alternative for Germany (AfD) on Sunday backed an election manifesto that says Islam is not compatible with the constitution and calls for a ban on minarets and the burqa.

Two other core points came out from the Party’s debate on Islam. These included members rejecting a call for dialogue with Muslims and attendees backed a manifesto that is highly critical of Islam.

Set up three years ago, the AfD has been buoyed by Europe’s migrant crisis, which saw the arrival of more than one million, mostly Muslim migrants, in Germany last year. The party has no lawmakers in the federal parliament in Berlin but has members in half of Germany’s 16 regional state assemblies.

Opinion polls give AfD support of up to 14 percent, presenting a serious challenge to Chancellor Angela Merkel’s conservatives and other established parties ahead of the 2017 federal election. They rule out any coalition with the AfD.

In a raucous debate on the second day of a party congress, many of the 2,000 members cheered calls from the podium for measures against “Islamic symbols of power” and jeered a plea for dialogue with Germany’s Muslims.

“Islam is foreign to us and for that reason it cannot invoke the principle of religious freedom to the same degree as Christianity,” said Hans-Thomas Tillschneider, an AfD lawmaker from the state of Saxony-Anhalt, to loud applause.

Merkel has said freedom of religion for all is guaranteed by Germany’s constitution and has said on many occasions that Islam belongs to Germany.

“ISLAM IS NOT PART OF GERMANY”

Up to 2,000 left-wing demonstrators clashed with police on Saturday as they tried to break up the first full AfD conference. About 500 people were briefly detained and 10 police officers were lightly injured, a police spokesman said.

The chapter of the AfD manifesto concerning Muslims is entitled “Islam is not a part of Germany”. The manifesto demands a ban to minarets – the towers of a mosque from where the call to Muslim prayer is made – and the burqa, the all-encompassing body garment worn by some conservative Muslim women.

Germany is home to nearly four million Muslims, about five percent of the total population. Many of the longer established Muslim community in Germany came from Turkey to find work, but those who have arrived over the past year have mostly been fleeing conflicts in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan.

Last month the head of Germany’s Central Council of Muslims likened the AfD’s attitude towards his community to that of Adolf Hitler’s Nazis towards the Jews.

Although the AfD aimed to broaden its political agenda during the congress, members hardly debated on domestic issues, such as taxation and social welfare.

The party’s leadership has proposed the introduction of an income tax bracket system and the abolition of inheritance taxes, which experts say would benefit high earners.

The head of Germany’s DGB confederation of trade unions, Reiner Hoffmann, sharply criticised the AfD’s programme.

“Their alternatives are nothing but simple, dull and inconsistent,” Hoffmann said in a speech at an DGB event in Stuttgart to mark Labour Day.

He said the AfD was not only conducting a hate campaign against refugees, but also aiming for a tax policy that was against the interests of workers.

The post Anti-immigrant AfD says Muslims not welcome in Germany appeared first on TELL MAMA.

Categories: AfD, Alternative for Germany, Angela Merkel, News

Lassana Bathily, the Paris Kosher Supermarket Hero Comes to the UK with Faith Matters

May 1, 2016 Article

Lassana Bathily saved many lives on that fateful day on January the 9th 2015. Unbeknown to him as he carried out his shop duties in the Paris Kosher supermarket, the establishment was about to be targeted by a young man who believed that his ‘Jihad’ was to target Jews as they shopped for Shabbath.

Amedy Coulibaly targeted the Paris Kosher supermarket for one reason and one reason alone. He wanted to kill Jews on behalf of the toxic narrative of Daesh or the so-called Islamic State. He was also friends with the two Charlie Hebdo killers and brothers, Said and Cherife Kouachi. The Kouachi brothers had wrought havoc to the streets of Paris through their murderous campaign which targeted satirists within Charlie Hebdo. They had also murdered Paris policeman, Ahmed Merabet.

The Paris Kosher supermarket was targeted after the Charlie Hebdo murders in the heart of Paris that so shocked the nation and which lead to a lockdown in the City. However, on the 9th of January, Amedy Coulibaly, who claimed that he was working on behalf of the so-called Islamic State or Daesh, entered the supermarket. Coulibaly rounded up some of the shoppers and ordered a cashier to bring up others onto the next floor where he had taken the hostages to. Some of those downstairs agreed to go up whilst Bathily advised others to use the goods elevator to escape.

However, the shoppers below did not want to risk an escape as they heard Coulibaly firing his weapon at those shoppers that he had rounded up. At this point, Bathily guided some of the shoppers into a refrigeration room and closed the lights so as to make it look as if there was no-one in there.

The Escape

Having made his escape through the elevator and a nearby fire escape, police held Bathily for over an hour, thinking that he was one of the terrorists. He was finally released and helped police map out the internal design of the Paris Kosher supermarket. This information was vital in saving lives and led to the end of the siege with Coulibaly being shot dead.

Four people died in the supermarket attack and Bathily also lost a close friend in the terrorist attack. Yohan Cohen died on that fateful day as he tried to save the lives of others and wrestled with the gunman, Amedi Coulibaly. He was murdered in cold blood for his efforts.

Bizarely, Coulibaly was Malian by heritage and Bathily is also of Malian heritage. Two people from the same country, one who sought to take lives because they were Jewish and the other trying to save lives because they were his friends and colleagues. One individual acted in the name of the Islamic State, whilst the other, (Bathily), says that his belief in Islam means that every life is precious. He desperately tried to save lives in the melee of the terrorist attack.

Visit to the UK Facilitated by Faith Matters

Lassana Bathily will be coming to the UK from May 27th to the 1st of June 2016. His visit is being organised and co-ordinated by Faith Matters and if you are interested in arranging an event, or a dinner or a working lunch, do get in touch with the Director of Faith Matters, Fiyaz Mughal OBE.

Let us honour this hero and make clear that the actions of murderers and terrorists will not shake our belief that collectively, we can and should protect our freedoms. Only by acting collectively can we stop those groups like IS from trying to drive a wedge between communities. Finally, and more importantly, let us honour those lives lost in the Paris Kosher supermarket on that fateful day. Their memory lives on.

You can e-mail Faith Matters on info@faith-matters.co.uk. Correspondence should be marked for Jane Smith.

Faith Matters was founded in 2006 by Fiyaz Mughal OBE on the basis of working with faith communities and to support better understanding, friendships and working relationships between both faith groups. It has undertaken interfaith, conflict resolution and historical projects in order to facilitate and nurture stronger relations between faith communities such as Jewish and Muslim communities.

The post Lassana Bathily, the Paris Kosher Supermarket Hero Comes to the UK with Faith Matters appeared first on Faith Matters.

Categories: Ahmed Merabet, Amedy Coulibaly, Charlie Hebdo, Daesh, Faith Matters, Islamic State, Lassana Bathily, London, Mali, News, Paris, Paris Kosher Supermarket, UK, Yohan Cohen

Islam not compatible with German constitution, says AfD party

April 18, 2016 Article

The anti-immigration Alternative for Germany (AfD) said on Sunday Islam is not compatible with the German constitution and vowed to press for bans on minarets and burqas at its party congress in two weeks’ time.

The AfD punished Chancellor Angela Merkel’s conservative Christian Democrats in three regional elections last month, profiting from popular angst about how Germany can cope with an influx of migrants, over a million of whom arrived last year.

“Islam is in itself a political ideology that is not compatible with the constitution,” AfD deputy leader Beatrix von Storch told the Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung.

“We are in favour of a ban on minarets, on muezzins and a ban on full veils,” added Storch, who is a member of the European Parliament.

Merkel’s conservatives have also called for an effective ban on the burqa, saying the full body covering worn by some Muslim women should not be worn in public. But they have not said Islam is incompatible with Germany’s constitution.

The AfD’s rise, which has coincided with strong gains by other European anti-immigrant parties including the National Front in France, has punctured the centrist consensus around which the mainstream parties have formed alliances in Germany.

Last month, the party grabbed 24 percent of the vote in the state of Saxony-Anhalt, surpassing even the Social Democrats (SPD), Merkel’s coalition partner in Berlin. The AfD, founded in 2013, also performed strongly in two other states.

The party’s rise has been controversial. Vice Chancellor Sigmar Gabriel, a Social Democrat, has said Germany’s far-right, led by the AfD party, is using language similar to that of Hitler’s Nazis.

Such accusations have not swayed the party from its anti-immigration course.

“Islam is not a religion like Catholic or Protestant Christianity, but rather intellectually always associated with the takeover of the state,” said Alexander Gauland, who leads the AfD in Brandenburg.

“That is why the Islamisation of Germany is a danger,” he told the Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung.

The post Islam not compatible with German constitution, says AfD party appeared first on TELL MAMA.

The post Islam not compatible with German constitution, says AfD party appeared first on Faith Matters.

Categories: AfD, Alternative for Germany, Angela Merkel, Beatrix von Storch, Burqa, face veil, muezzins, News

Success: Circulate the ‘Burn Your Local Mosque’ Graphic and You Will Be Arrested

April 16, 2016 Article

We have just received information that a case which Tell MAMA reported in, regarding the on-line circulation of a graphic entitled “burn your local mosque,” will lead to an arrest.

We have seen this graphic circulated previously by a number of people and we have been informed that the graphic image which depicts a mosque in flames, will lead to arrests.

We were notified that a police force took away the computer equipment of the perpetrator, who admitted to the crime offence of ‘publishing and distributing a Facebook post which is threatening, abusive or insulting to stir up and incite racial hatred.’ This is contrary to Section 19 of the Public Order Act 1986.

The perpetrator has been bailed and will appear in court for sentencing.

The post Success: Circulate the ‘Burn Your Local Mosque’ Graphic and You Will Be Arrested appeared first on TELL MAMA.

The post Success: Circulate the ‘Burn Your Local Mosque’ Graphic and You Will Be Arrested appeared first on Faith Matters.

Categories: arrest, burn, Burn Your Local Mosque, crime, graphic, hate crime, mosque, News, online, Public Order Act 1986

How Trevor Phillips misrepresented ICM’s poll on British Muslims

April 14, 2016 Article

After much fanfare, What British Muslims Really Think, aired on Channel 4 last night, hosted by Trevor Phillips.

It promised “an extensive and rigorous survey to get a better understanding of British Muslims’ attitudes to living in Britain and British institutions”; but did it deliver on its promise?

One major problem was the arguments put forward by Trevor Phillips. On several occasions he misrepresented polling data. The first example concerns how social Muslims are with non-Muslims. He led with the stat that 56 per cent mix with non-Muslims outside of their home on a daily basis. Yes, it’s true that 21 per cent visit non-Muslims once a year, and the same figure never visit non-Muslim homes. Audiences were not told, however, that 17 per cent of Muslims have social visits from non-Muslims in their homes on a daily basis. That figure rises to 19 per cent on a weekly basis and a fifth on a monthly basis. Muslims polled by ICM make a similar effort to visit the homes of their non-Muslims friends on a daily, weekly and monthly basis.

Nor did Trevor Phillips seek to interrogate this question. He did not consider why some Muslims would not visit the homes of non-Muslims. Did he not consider the health of individuals? Disability or long-term health issues may limit social activities and visits. What of economic factors like the cost of bus fares in deprived areas limiting social mobility and activities?

Young Muslims were also more likely to have non-Muslim friends visit their homes on a daily basis. And social mixing also exists on social media platforms. These factors were simply ignored.

The ICM poll has its flaws but it remains a comprehensive look at the views of 51 per cent of self-identified Muslims in England and Wales. Nor did the poll explore the diversity of Islamic belief – were individuals Sunni, Shia, Deobandi?

Just over a fifth of Muslims polled make no effort to visit a mosque, and 17 per cent only attend on special occasions. This is not a measure of religiosity; but it speaks to how individuals interpret their own faith. The documentary failed to show the diversity of belief outside of liberal and conservative binaries.

Trevor Phillips drew a comparison between how Christians and Muslims understand their faiths. This matters in the context of freedom of expression. ICM’s data did show a clear divide between Muslims and the control group sample on blasphemy.

Responses in the control group were more in favour of publishing cartoons of the prophet Muhammad. A fifth of non-Muslims who rejected this position were Christian.

Opinions in the control group sample were even more divided on the question of publishing cartoons that mock the prophet Muhammad. Almost half said that publications should not have this right. And that included 32 per cent of non-religious people and 50 per cent of Christians.

His own analysis of the polling data allowed him to argue that policy makers had misjudged the aspirations of Muslim integration when compared to Hindu and Sikhs.

Difficult questions around women about obeying their husbands may owe to cultural conservatism given the over-representation of South Asians in the poll data. Phillips did at least seek some understanding of this question. One woman suggested that obedience in the context of pleasing God would suffice. How representative these positions are of course, are open to interpretation and insinuation.

It’s true that 35 per cent of 18-24 year olds also found polygamy acceptable. He did not inform the audience that 34 per cent of Muslims aged 18-24 did not find it acceptable. Disagreement on this issue grew with each age category until we arrive at the over 65s.

This pattern continued into the question of integration. Trevor Phillips gave weight to the small majority of Muslims who wish to lead a separate Islamic life. Yet he did not reveal that 49 per cent of Muslims want to integrate with non-Muslims in all aspects of life. And that is broadly true among British Muslims young and old.

Phillips goes on to speculate that 500,000 Muslims in Britain want to live parallel, separate lives. He does not afford the same level of speculation for the greater number of Muslims seeking total integration. This type of speculation appeared earlier in relation to sympathy for suicide bombings among four per cent of Muslims; but not for the one per cent of the control sample who also expressed sympathy.

A proclivity towards antisemitic tropes is a troubling finding. Yet British Muslims also expressed tolerance towards Jewish communities.

Phillips also made a confusing statement about the caliphate and ISIS. Just 7 per cent endorsed the principal of a caliphate. That figure drops to 3 per cent when asked if they support how ISIS established their violent version of a caliphate.

ICM also justified the use of the word ‘sympathy’ in relation to violence and support for terrorism because it had appeared in other surveys. Yet again, our understanding of this vague term remains open to interpretation. Putting aside social desirability bias, a small minority of Muslims still expressed any sympathy for terrorism or violence.

Muslims (34 per cent) were also more likely than the control group survey (30 per cent) to report individuals to police if they suspected their involvement in terrorism in Syria. Yet this was not reflected in the documentary.

Other points missing from the documentary included that non-Muslims had also expressed similar levels of sympathy for violence against unjust governments. That also extended to use of violence against police injustice.

Muslims were also more likely to condemn the use of violence to protect their family. This is also true for non-violent radical groups. Nor were the desires or sympathies for violence among non-Muslims explored.

The poll does highlight some troubling and positive views among British Muslims. At times Phillips did highlight some nuances in the poll data – like the generational divide on LGBT issues.

Misrepresenting ICM’s poll data does not improve debate.

The post How Trevor Phillips misrepresented ICM’s poll on British Muslims appeared first on TELL MAMA.

The post How Trevor Phillips misrepresented ICM’s poll on British Muslims appeared first on Faith Matters.

Categories: anti-Islam, Britain, Caliphate, Channel 4, ICM, integration, LGBT hate, Media, News, Survey, Trevor Phillips

Why the latest poll won’t tell us what all British Muslims actually think

April 12, 2016 Article

Channel 4 commissioned ICM to poll Muslims in Britain on a range of issues from women’s rights to marriage equality.

But did the poll titled “What do British Muslims really think?” answer its own question? Polling British Muslims is a difficult and expensive task. It’s why YouGov avoided the Sun’s now infamous ‘1 in 5 Muslims’ poll.

ICM’s researchers picked 138 random Local Super Output Areas where Muslims make up at least 20 per cent of the population. This skewed the findings to areas with relative social deprivation. It also over-represented certain ethnic groups. Yet it still captured 51 per cent of the total Muslim population.

Of the 1,081 Muslims polled, 55 per cent were Pakistani. British Asians/Asians totaled 83 per cent of the polling data. Data from the last census revealed that British Asian/Asians totaled 67.6 per cent of Muslims in England and Wales.

The poll included just 11 Arabs and 16 white Muslims who account for 6.6 per cent and 7.8 per cent of Muslims in England and Wales.

Despite methodological issues it remains a serious poll.

As with previous surveys – Muslims identify with Britain at a higher rate than the national average. They also expressed greater attachment to their local areas. A vast majority believe that Britain was a good place for Muslims to live in, and 78 per cent said they would like to integrate into British life on certain topics.

Nearly a quarter supported the idea of sharia law operating in parts of Britain above British law. Yet what defines sharia law remains ambigious and open to interpretation. But as Dr Imam Mamadou Bocoum notes: ‘Shariah means a road that leads into Spring Water, which is nothing but to live in peace and harmony. Amongst the principles of the Shariah is to preserve and protect life, intellect, property, honour, lineage, and religion‘.

There was little support among the Muslims polled to establish a caliphate. Support for ISIS polled at just 3 per cent. Few blamed the police or government for girls travelling to Syria.

More than a third of Muslims polled would report individuals who they suspected of seeking to participate in terrorism abroad to police. A figure that stands above the control sample of 30 per cent. Nearly half would attempt to dissuade the individual.

On the subject of extremism, 47 per cent agreed that Muslims need to do more to tackle extremism. The data reveals that a vast majority of Muslims look to the government to tackle Islamophobia and fund special projects to help communities root out the causes of violent extremism.

Islamophobia is a concern in this context, even when 73 per cent thought that religious harassment was not a problem in their local area. Individuals may of course experience less discrimination within their own ethnic and faith communities. Or in a public setting disclose their experiences to strangers. Research also points to the fact that hate crimes increase in areas of deprivation.

The wider public had also expressed a wider concern for Islamophobia than the Muslims polled. Nor do we know what language the interviews were conducted in. So it’s possible that individuals may not understand a question that pertains to religious prejudice.

There was also an overwhelming desire to empower young Muslims and women in the decisions that affect them. And many felt that better leadership in Muslim communities would help address the causes of violent extremism. Just one in 10 sought information on current affairs from mullahs at mosques. And a fifth never attend their local mosques. But 72 per cent felt that their local mosque did represent their views.

The most popular choice for television news was BBC 1, and a vast majority got their news from social media accounts. Yet again, the BBC remained the most popular source for news online.

Discussions of attitudes towards homosexuality dictated a majority of media coverage. The poll found that 52 per cent dsaid they disagreed with homosexuality being legal in Britain, compared with 5 per cent among the public at large who disagreed.

For British-born Muslims, 27 per cent agreed that homosexuality should be legal. Almost a third said neither/nor and 38 per cent disagreed. But that figure requires a caveat since the total figure in the weighted and unweighted sample is below 500 people. Muslims born outside of Britain were more likely to disagree that homosexuality should be legal (a net disagreement of 68 per cent in a sample of 601 or 609 when factored against weighted and unweighted bases).

On the topic of gay marriage and allowing a homosexual person to teach, the data reveals slight differences between Muslims born in the UK and abroad. But the above caveat still applies.

Despite a proclivity towards antisemitic tropes, British Muslims were not hostile towards Jewish communities. ICM asked the control and Muslim samples to measure their feelings towards faith and non-faith groups on a thermometer. Oddly, views towards Sikhs were missing from the data. The control group survey were more likely to agree that antisemitism was a problem. Yet 44 per cent of the Muslim survey and 46 per cent of the control group did not consider antisemitism a problem in Britain today.

The control survey were far more likely to disagree (51 per cent) with the statement ‘Jews still talk too much about what happened to them in the Holocaust’. Yet 18 per cent did agree with the statement, compared to 34 per cent in the Muslim survey.

Confusion about deaths in the Holocaust in the Muslim survey may owe to ignorance, not antisemitism. As 55 per cent did not know the true figure. Just 14 people agreed that it was a myth perpetuated by Jewish people. The control group was not asked this question so it’s hard to make a direct comparison.

Muslims surveyed overwhelmingly had also rejected the right of individuals to publish pictures of the prophet Muhammad. But 12 per cent stated that it would depend on the nature of the pictures. Responses in the control group were more in favour of publishing cartoons of the prophet Muhammad. A fifth of non-Muslims who rejected this position were Christian.

Opinions in the control group sample were even more divided when it came to the question of publishing cartoons that mock the prophet Muhammad. And 44 per cent said publications should not have this right – and that included 32 per cent of non-religious people and 50 per cent of Christians. A measure of support from Christians may owe to a sense of Abrahamic solidarity or the UK’s own historic and abolished blasphemy laws.

Linda Woodhead, Professor of Sociology of Religion at Lancaster University, surveyed different faith groups in 2013. It found a variety of liberal and conservative views towards topics like abortion and homosexuality.

ICM also asked how often Muslims had mixed socially with non-Muslims in the past year. Again, what defines this social interaction remains open to interpretation. It was rare for Muslims to have had no social mixing outside of the home. Nor are social interactions defined by the boundaries of a person’s home. That applies to Muslim and non-Muslim alike. Yet the data does show that at least a fifth did host and visit non-Muslims friends at least once a week, and 17 per cent welcomed non-Muslims into their homes on a daily basis.

Trevor Phillips, the former head of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, who will present the Channel 4 documentary What British Muslims Really Think tomorrow evening, made a problematic statement on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.

Phillips stated that: “What we also found is that there is a correspondence between this desire to live separately and sympathy for terrorism. People who want to live separately are about twice as likely to say that they have sympathy for terrorist acts.” Yet the data reveals that just 40 people expressed sympathy for terrorist acts. Nor was there any effort to extrapolate the meaning from a vague term, as sympathy does not always mean endorsement. Phillips is overstating the opinions of a tiny proportion in the data set.

That rhetoric can also suggest that religiosity and support for terrorism are somehow linked, a point that misunderstands the nature of radicalisation.

ICM asked some wide-ranging, probing and sensationalistic questions; but to suggest it captures the breadth of Muslim opinion is not quite accurate. Yes, some issues to address but the real conversations must happen beyond this poll.

This post originally appeared on Religious Reader.

The post Why the latest poll won’t tell us what all British Muslims actually think appeared first on TELL MAMA.

The post Why the latest poll won’t tell us what all British Muslims actually think appeared first on Faith Matters.

Categories: British Muslims, Caliphate, Channel 4, homosexuality, ICM, ICM poll, Mamadou Bocoum, Media, Shariah, Trevor Phillips