"While dictators rage and statesmen talk, all Europe dances — to The Lambeth Walk."

Friday, 8 May 2009

British Muslims Don't Feel Integrated

You can file this one in the 'no sh*t, Sherlock' category.

A new study shows that only one in ten British Muslims feels integrated into society - which apparently compares quite unfavourably with France and Germany (which are obviously harmonious paradises when it comes to their Muslim citizens).

The report was carried out by the 'Coexist Foundation' which is an 'interfaith think tank':

'The sizeable proportions of the populations classified as isolated show that interfaith dialogue will require significant efforts from all concerned parties.'

Yes, my first thought upon reading the results was that more effort was required in the field of interfaith dialogue - presumably that will also require quite a substantial transfer of funds from the Treasury to the Muslim community?

The study also found that almost two thirds of British Muslims are 'dissatisfied with their living conditions'; again, I don't mean to be cynical but what are living conditions like in the average Muslim country? Obviously so good that all the Muslims polled happen to live in Europe...

Presumably the appalling living conditions for Muslims in Britain are the reason so many still choose to come here, even ignoring such countries as Italy and France to do so?

Now, maybe I shouldn't mock - according to the study, which interviewed over 500 Muslims from each country face to face, 77% of British Muslims 'identify with Britain', which is apparently a greater percentage than the population at large.

Then we get to the meat of it - many wish to integrate further but are held back by 'harsh economic reality':

Pollsters said Muslims in Britain suffer from economic difficulties.
Dalia Mogahed of the Gallup Centre for Muslim Studies said: 'This shows that many of the assumptions about Muslims and integration couldn't be more wide of the mark. British Muslims want to be part of the wider community and to contribute to society.
'However in many cases it is a harsh economic reality that holds them back and stops them from realising their full potential.'

We all suffer from economic difficulties. Most people want to do things but are held back by 'harsh economic realities'. These aren't reasons, they are excuses, and I imagine a demand for more money lies somewhere at the end of them.

Because when it comes to issues of immigration and integration, it is always someone else's fault. My initial reaction upon reading this was simply to wonder why Muslim immigration is still permitted if it is hard to integrate the Muslims already here?

Would it be racist to suggest that a few (thousand) more visas stamped 'entry denied' might solve this problem more effectively than 'interfaith dialogue'?

Preventing new arrivals would aid integration much better than throwing cash around. But then, studies like this are designed to make this an issue for which everyone bears some responsibility, rather than looking at the folly of mass immigration directly.

We go on:

There were divisions between Muslims and the rest of the population over religious symbols. More than half of the general population think that the removal of women's face veils is necessary for the Muslim minority fully to integrate into society.

However most Muslims believe in the veil and only 12 per cent think it has to go in order to achieve cohesion.

In other words cohesion will be achieved, according to Muslims, as their values and symbols are imposed and become the norm. Look at the story I posted Wednesday about Halal-only KFC branches in Muslim areas, or the East London hospital which banned pictures of churches. New examples crop up pretty much daily.

Dr Muhammad Abdul Bari, Secretary General of the Muslim Council of Britain said: 'I hope the findings of this poll will bring about a qualitative contribution to the discussion on British Muslims. For too long, we have been subject to cynical opinion masquerading as fact.
'British Muslims are very much part of this nation’s cultural, social and economic fabric. But naysayers will want to tell you otherwise, and will wish to drive a wedge between fellow Britons. We must all collectively challenge their received wisdom.'

No, Dr Bari, for too long the debate about immigration and particularly the possibility for the integration of large numbers of Muslims has seen facts which aren't salient to you and your agenda dismissed out of hand as the ranting of fascists.

Are you seriously expecting me to believe that people such as myself who tell the truth about Islam and oppose mass immigration are more responsible for 'driving a wedge between Britons' than, say the 7/7 bombers?

That's quite an extreme example - so here are two others, both taken from the news today.

1) A Muslim dentist faces disciplinary action after refusing to treat women who weren't wearing the hijab and adhering to a strict Islamic dress code.

Omar Butt, brother of a radical spokesman for al-Muhajiroun, refused to register women and their families with his NHS practice unless they agreed to wear the headscarves - which he even offered to provide.

He even put a sign on the waiting room wall to that effect, and cornered one Muslim man and told him he should treat his wife according to strict Islamic law.

This is the second time he has been reported for such conduct.

2) A Muslim man, Mohammed Ali, killed two Algerian-born sisters living in Birmingham in an attack so brutal the knives snapped in their bodies and he had to re-arm himself twice. One of the girls' bodies was stabbed more than 30 times in an attack described as 'brutal' and 'frenzied'.

One of the sisters was his 'on-off' girlfriend. The prosecutor said:

'He had used violence of the most brutal and depraved kind and he had killed two young girls.'

The motive?

'In this case, it's likely that there will be overlapping motives - anger, control, base male brutality and a significant sexual dimension,' the lawyer said.

Warning jurors that some of the photographs taken by police inside the flat were distressing, Mr Crigman invited them to look at one showing the sisters' bodies lying on a bed.

Each of the victims was naked from the waist down, but an item had been thrown over their lower bodies, the court heard.

'It's not a case of him being provoked - it will be a case of him not getting something he wanted or something not going his way... or losing control of the relationship, as he probably was at this time.

'This man knew exactly what he was doing - so in control was he that in the course of these attacks on these two girls, he broke off to rearm himself.

'He launched the attack with fists and maybe feet and then he got a knife and he used it and he broke it... and he went to get another knife and he broke it.

'He went and got a third knife and he used it until the girls were dead.'

So, although they've very carefully avoided using the word, what we have here is an honour killing.

Such tales must do 'social cohesion' the absolute world of good.

1 comment:

Dr.D said...

People who cover their faces, whether men or women, are presumed to be up to no good. It is fundamental. Even a camel driver should be able to understand that, if they tried (if they tried).