Home Secretary Jack Straw's announcement that he asks Muslim women who come to his surgery to remove their veil as he finds it difficult to communicate when he can't see their faces has been rightly ridiculed.
Has he only just noticed that SUnC Blackburn, where he has been an MP for decades, wear the niqab? And does he not speak to people on the telephone or does he only phone people who have phones with cameras? Does he never listen to the radio?
But of course this was never about Jack Straw's surgery or the small minority of veiled Muslim women.
The number of Labour MPs and their hangers-on -like Trevor Phillips - who piled in behind his statement, revealed its actual purpose: it was a further attempt to isolate and demonise the Muslim communities, to blame the whole community for the actions of a few and to avoid, at all costs, the real reasons behind Muslim alienation from the British Government
the was in Afghanistan.
The debate opened up by Straw was followed by remarks by Ruth Kelly - so called Communities Minister
who has set up Commission on Integration and Cohesion. This was the same week that free ESOL classes for asylum seekers had been stopped!
Others joined in. Harriet Harman and Tessa Jowell, both using feminist language, argued that the veil is an oppressive religious garb demandea by men to dominate women and called tor women not to wear it.
Some journalists followed suit saying that Britain's tolerant and multicultural society had gone too tar, was leading ethnic groups (read Muslims) into separatism and extremist (read terrorism).
There were polls in newspapers, on the radio and TV all saying that it had gone far enough, 'these people must integrate or go home. It was a field day for racists of all kinas, but including some who should know better. "Get over it!'
Others defended the right of religious groups to wear their symbols.
Galloway's speech at the Respect AGM set the tone - if you find it offensive 'get over it!'
At the same meeting Salma Yacoob raised the problem of patriarchy and male dominance in Muslim communities, pointing out that some
do wear the veil because of male pressure.
But many have also adopted the niqab, the jilbab and the hijab as signs of identity and of opposition to a society that has made war on Muslims in Afghanistan and
LOaL does nothing
where many more women wear the niqab
than in Blackburn against Israeli tanks in the Gaza Strip, that took weeks to organise a ceasetire in the Lebanon.
At the Women Against Fundamentalism conference on October 21 - a meeting organised before Straw's remarks - there was some confusion about how a group formed in the wake of the attacks and issuing of a fatwa against Salman Rushdie because of his book Satanic Verses, should respond today.
I felt some of the organisers had not Taken sufficient account of the changed political context.
With Islamaphobia the acceptable face of racism, an equals sign between the war on terror with its resulting attacks on civil liberties and fundamentalist religions seems inappropriate.
But of course it is also inadequate simply to defend the right of religious practices, especially when some of these are clearly oppressive
The opportunism of some groups such as the SWP, where criticism of anything Muslims do, including wearing the nigab, is a no-no, does nothing to support those struggling against the impositions of religious practice.
On the other hand unless We should point to the government's alliance with the rulers in Saudi Arabia -you support the right of religlous pracuce, including wearing the veil, how can you argue with women that they
Women at the WAF conference pointed out that even multi-culturalism, always a poor relation of anti-racism, is now under allack. Il is being blamed for segregation, for lack of integration, even for fostering terrorism.
As Arun Kundnani points out, on the Institute of Race Relations website, if some communities are living and developing separately, this has nothing to do with their desire to do so. Rather it is the result of industrial decline and lack of employment opportunities along WILD institutional racism.
And calling for 'integration' when these areas are the most run down, nave the worst housing, and the least resources in schools, will further alienate those living there. It is called blaming the victims. Racist attacks
The stirring up of hatred against the Muslim communities is not just an attempt to divert attention from the government's policies abroad and their attacks on civil liberties at home, it is also being used to divide and rule. It is the cause of increased racism against many different groups.
Since 9/11 racist attacks -against all foreigners including Eastern European migrant workers, against black people in general but especially against Asians and Muslim - have increased dramatically.
Mosques have been stoned and firebombed; there have been attacks in the street on small children and women; attacks on mini-cab drivers. Such attacks from verbal abuse, to spitting, to murderous assaults.
Rather than blame the victims, as many in government and the media have done, we should point the finger at the murderous assaults unleashed in Iraq and in Afghanistan by our invasions of their countries. We should point to the barbaric attacks by Israel in Palestine, and against the Lebanon.
We should point to the government's alliance with the rulers in Saudi Arabia - where many more women wear the niqab than in Blackburn. Did Jack Straw ever make the point there when he visited as Foreign Secretary
ThaT couldn't communicate effectively with women wearing the veil? University of Portsmouth (personal capacity, Several weeks ago (see for example, The Guardian 16 October) it was revealed that the Government has secret proposals to force university lecturers to spy on students who have an Asian appearance' or are Muslim - with a view to reporting students who hold or were seeking to disseminate dangerous Islamist views.
This is the latest and one of the most vile attacks on democratic rights that has taken place in the name of the so-called 'war on terror'.
The proposals are particularly disgusting because not only do they violate the tradition of academic freedom and the free exchange of ideas on our university campuses, but they clearly represent and continue to propagate the racist climate of Islamophobia that the Government and media have fostered.
They also link into the provisions in the new Terrorism Act on making it an offence to 'glorify terrorism'. There is a very real danger that anyone on the left advocating Victory to the Iraqi Resistance', 'Victory to the Intifada', Victory to Hamas' and the like could face prosecution under these provisions, but in practice it is clearly those perceived to be Muslim activists who are most at risk.
They are also the opposite side of the coin to bans on Muslim pupils choosing to wear the veil to school.
What is taking place is the virtual criminalisation of any overt expression of a Muslim identity or militant antiimperialist ideas from an Islamist perspective.
There are parallels between the current situation and the fairly widespread support for Irish Republicanism and the Provisional IRA by left activists in colleges in the 1970s and
The overwhelming majority of the left in the student movement of the time advocated Troops Out and not uncritical support for the IRA (in much the same way as today the left advocates a similar approach to the Iraqi Resistance). This did not tie us programmatically to the Republican Movement let alone mean we were advocating the planting of bombs.
Though there was covert surveillance of Troops Out activists, and members of the Irish Community in Britain were harassed and indeed fitted up by the State, ultimately there was no attempt to ban Irish Solidarity activities on the mainland (though they did ban berets, sunglasses and finally the broadcasting of Sinn Fein spokespersons, albeit not voice-overs by actors!).
Today, through proposals that have a great deal of affinity with McCarthyism in Cold War America, the State is seeking to whip up a racist and anti-Muslim hysteria.
At Portsmouth, we are collecting signatures from staff and students for a petition to the University authorities calling on them to reject the Government's proposals publicly and to make clear that the University welcomes Muslims and students with family connections to Asia.
We are also calling on the University to guarantee that such students will not be spied upon by the University and that they will be protected from harassment and allowed to pursue their right to explore and debate ideas. This will need to be followed up by trade union and student union resolutions at campus level.
Clearly, the more trade union and student activists do now to protest against the Government's proposals the more likely it is they will be dropped.
But if they are implemented then the response must be for the unions to launch and properly support a campaign of non-compliance.
There must be full support for any lecturer or other members of a University's staff threatened with disciplinary action (or possibly even prosecution?) for refusal to spy on their students.
page 9 of the scan
FAIR
OUR so 2 -OUR KEEP
MIGRANT WORKERS,
KEEP GREAT BRITISH BETRAYAL