Nick Cohen is wonderful on Livingstone and certain parts of the left:
The useful label ‘the
pseudo-left’ has been knocking around the internet political blogs
since 11 September, and it is high time it was brought into the
mainstream media. It’s a shorthand description of the spectacle of left
moving to the right, often to the far-right, and embracing
obscurantists, theocrats and, in the case of Saddam Hussein’s Iraq and
its Baathist ‘insurgents’, classic fascists.
The
pseudo-leftists are still on the left because they believe in leftish
policies of tolerance and social justice at home. They are pseuds
because their principles flip as soon as they leave Heathrow. All that
the left has opposed since the Enlightenment become acceptable, as long
as the obscurantists, theocrats and fascists are anti-Americans and as
long as their victims aren’t Western liberals.
…….
As inevitable as
betrayal is award-winning hypocrisy. In the name of anti-racism,
Livingstone perpetuates the stereotype of the Muslim as a
death-obsessed, woman-hating, queer-bashing cheerleader for suicide
bombers. In the name of multi-culturalism, he talks as if something in
the water supply of the Islamic world, or maybe an obscure genetic
mutation means that one billion people actually want to be ruled by
priests.
The
joke of it all is that if the British government or a European or North
American government were to recommend the execution of homosexuals or
the enforcement of Christian belief by death sentences on apostates,
Livingstone would be taking to the streets to protest. But when the
same policies are proposed by brown-skinned leaders he shakes them
warmly by the hand and invites them into city hall.
As I dimly recall Nick has posted at Harry’s Place on this subject and Norm of that Blog has also been vocal in his detestation of how leftish values have been distorted in this manner. As you probably know I don’t share some of those basic values, being more on the libertarian end of the argument, but that doesn’t stop me applauding those who fight the good fight against the fascist theocrats.
Nick also mentions Peter Tatchell, something of a hero of this blog, and his response to Livingstone re his support for Qaradawi. The link he provides doesn’t actually go to the document mentioned, so here it is in full, below the fold. Ken has a lot more to apologise for than his comparison of a Jewish reporter to a concentration camp guard.
Mayor’s
Dossier on al-Qaradawi Distorts the Truth
This 10-point summary refutes key
claims by the Mayor of London in defence of his invitation to the
Muslim cleric Dr Yusuf al-Qaradawi last July to City Hall.
In response to the Mayor’s embrace of
Dr al-Qaradawi, a coalition of London community groups requested a
meeting with the Mayor to express their concerns. The Mayor refused
to meet them, so they issued a briefing citing al-Qaradawi’s
anti-Semitism, homophobia, misogyny and support for other
human-rights abuses.
The Mayor responded with a
counter-dossier that included factually untrue claims in defence of
Dr al-Qaradawi and grave misrepresentations concerning the London
community coalition.
To expose the Mayor’s distortion
of the truth, we present this 10-point refutation.
In this 10-point summary, all
quotations are taken directly from Dr al-Qaradawi as published on the
website that he supervises, http://www.islamonline.net.
They are presented on this website in English, so there can be no
question about the accuracy of the translations.
It is also important to note that not
only are the documents used on the website with Dr al-Qaradawi’s
permission, but he is also the chief scholar who supervises the
content of the website.
“Our goal is for this site to be
worthy of your trust. To reach our goal, a committee of the major
scholars throughout the Islamic world, headed by Dr. Yusuf Qardawi
(sic), was formed. Its role is to ensure that nothing on this site
violates the fixed principles of Islamic law (Shar’ia).”
See:
http://www.islamonline.net/english/aboutus.shtml
It is our hope in providing this
document that those concerned with the truth about al-Qaradawi can go
to the source material themselves, see for themselves and judge for
themselves.
These are just 10 examples of
misrepresentations and distortions in Ken Livingstone’s reply to
the London community coalition briefing submitted to him on Dr
al-Qaradawi. There are many more, but 10 is more than enough to
digest.
In his own words, Dr Yusuf
al-Qaradawi supports:
-
The killing of homosexuals to keep
society pure -
The killing of Apostates – those
who have rejected Islam -
The killing of all Israelis –
including civilians -
The mutilation of women’s
genitals
1.
LIVINGSTONE’S CLAIM:
The Mayor claims Dr al-Qaradawi is one
of the Muslim scholars who have done the most to combat socially
regressive interpretations of Islam on issues such as women’s
rights.
THE TRUTH:
Dr al-Qaradawi supports the killing
of people who have turned away from Islam (“apostates”).
In a fatwa issued in June 2003
concerning organ donation, Dr al-Qaradawi stated: “it is not
permissible to donate it to an apostate as he is no more than a
traitor to his religion and his people and thus deserves killing.”
See:
http://www.islamonline.net/fatwa/english/FatwaDisplay.asp?hFatwaID=49276
Dr al-Qaradawi supports female
genital mutilation (female “circumcision”).
He says that, while it is not
obligatory, “whoever finds it serving the interest of his daughters
should do it, and I personally support this under the current
circumstances in the modern world.”
See:
http://www.islamonline.net/fatwa/english/FatwaDisplay.asp?hFatwaID=31397
Dr al-Qaradawi insists that a
husband must compel his wife to wear the hijab.
“It is unanimously agreed upon among
Muslim scholars that it is not lawful for a Muslim woman to uncover
any part of her body other than the face and hands (and the feet
according to some schools of jurisprudence). Hence, it is unlawful
for a woman to reveal her hair, or arms, or chest or legs before
non-mahram men. Wearing clothes that reveal such parts of a
woman’s body is completely forbidden. A Muslim husband is to order
his wife to wear hijab.”
See:
http://www.islamonline.net/fatwa/english/FatwaDisplay.asp?hFatwaID=108163
Dr al-Qaradawi sanctions domestic
violence in certain circumstances.
“If the husband senses that feelings
of disobedience and rebelliousness are rising against him in his
wife, he should try his best to rectify her attitude by kind words,
gentle persuasion, and reasoning with her. If this is not helpful, he
should sleep apart from her, trying to awaken her agreeable feminine
nature so that serenity may be restored and she may respond to him in
a harmonious fashion. If this approach fails, it is permissible for
him to admonish her lightly with his hands, avoiding her face and
other sensitive areas.”
See:
http://www.islamonline.net/fatwa/english/FatwaDisplay.asp?hFatwaID=7061
2.
LIVINGSTONE’S CLAIM:
The Mayor claims al-Qaradawi is
described as a supporter of terrorism, when, in reality, he has been
one of the most forthright Islamic scholars condemning terrorism.
THE TRUTH:
Al-Qaradawi supports targeting
Israeli civilians.
Sheikh Mohammad Sayyed Tantawi, sheikh
of Cairo’s al-Azhar University, said Monday that Islamic Shari’ah
law, “rejects all attempts on human life, and in the name of
Shari’ah we condemn all attacks on civilians, whatever the
community or state responsible for such an attack … We
disapprove of all those who justify attacks against children by
reasoning that the children will join the army when they grow up.”
Qaradawi, however, angrily disagreed.
He argued:
“Has fighting colonizers become a
criminal and terrorist act for some sheikhs?” He added that Israeli
society “was completely military in its make-up and did not include
any civilians. In Israel, men and women are soldiers,” added
al-Qaradawi. “They are all occupying soldiers.”
See:
http://www.islamonline.org/English/News/2001-12/05/article6.shtml
Qaradawi supports suicide bombing
(including by women).
“Thus, women’s participation in the
martyr operations carried out in Palestine – given the status of
the land as an occupied territory, in addition to a lot of
sacrilegious acts perpetrated by the Jews against the sanctuaries –
is one of the most praised acts of worship.”
See:
http://islamonline.net/fatwaapplication/english/display.asp?hFatwaID=68511
3.
LIVINGSTONE’S CLAIM:
The Mayor claims Dr al-Qaradawi opposes
“the repression of homosexuals”.
THE TRUTH:
In his book, The Lawful and
Prohibited in Islam, republished recently on IslamOnline,
al-Qaradawi says on the subject of homosexuality:
“Muslim jurists hold different
opinions concerning the punishment for this abominable practice.
Should it be the same as the punishment for fornication, or should
both the active and passive participants be put to death?”
He then defends that view by adding:
“While such punishments may seem
cruel, they have been suggested to maintain the purity of the Islamic
society and to keep it clean of perverted elements.”
He does not condemn the view – he
excuses it! The death penalty only seems cruel, he argues,
until we understand that it is actually necessary “to keep [Islamic
society] clean of perverted elements”.
See:
http://www.islamonline.net/fatwa/english/FatwaDisplay.asp?hFatwaID=100855
The rhetoric used in the rest of
al-Qaradawi’s article hardly supports the Mayor’s view that
al-Qaradawi “opposes the repression of homosexuals”.
Mayor Livingstone then points to the fact that Leviticus 20:13 also
calls for the death penalty for homosexuality, asking provocatively
whether that meant that the Chief Rabbi should also be excluded from
City Hall. But the Chief Rabbi did not write Leviticus, nor any
papers endorsing its modern-day application. In contrast,
al-Qaradawi’s condemnation of homosexuality comes from his own pen!
Additionally, al-Qaradawi and his colleagues recently launched a
blistering attack on the Gay Muslim group Al-Fatiha and tried to
block gay organisations from participating in a United Nations
meeting on HIV/AIDS.
See:
http://www.islam-online.net/english/News/2001-06/27/article4.shtml
4.
LIVINGSTONE’S CLAIM:
The Mayor claims no Muslim group was
associated with the document.
THE TRUTH:
The Gay Muslim group Imaan were party
to the discussions all along. They dropped out only right at the end
due to internal politics and after the Mayor had offered them a
separate meeting to discuss their concerns.
Livingstone also favourably quotes a
condemnation of the London community coalition’s criticisms of Dr
al-Qaradawi from a discussion board on Imaan’s website. He claims
it was typical of Imaan’s views and fails to acknowledge that the
passage he quotes is from one person taking one position. He does not
mention that it was this one person, Bilal Patel, who posted 9 of the
22 posts in the discussion. Nevertheless, one of the other members
challenged Mr Patel, saying:
“If your objective is a dialogue
leading with, leading to acceptance by, the Ummah on behalf of Gay
Muslims, then sooner or later you are going to have to take on and
defeat the views preached by Imams such as Qaradawi …”
To which Mr Patel answered: “Agreed
about taking on Qaradawi’s views.”
Thus, Imaan’s
last-minute withdrawal from the London community coalition seems to
have been an issue of strategy – not, as the Mayor attempts
to persuade us, because they disagreed that Dr al-Qaradawi was
antigay or that he should not be challenged.
Furthermore, Ken Livingstone fails to
mention that he had previously been in correspondence with Imaan over
the al-Qaradawi issue and that they had criticised his decision to
invite Dr al-Qaradawi. His reply to them is archived on their website
here:
http://imaanlondon.f2g.net/KenReply.doc
The Mayor also chose to ignore former
Muslims and liberal Muslim involved in the coalition, many of whom
are political dissidents from Islamic countries and have suffered
death threats, beatings, imprisonment and torture at the hands of
fundamentalists.
5.
LIVINGSTONE’S CLAIM:
The Mayor claims that al-Qaradawi
stresses that female genital mutilation (FGM) is not required by
Islam.
THE TRUTH:
This is true, but the issue was never
whether al-Qaradawi thought FGM was compulsory. The issue is that he
personally recommends it, which he does:
“whoever finds it [FGM] serving the
interest of his daughters should do it, and I personally support this
under the current circumstances in the modern world.”
See:
http://www.islamonline.net/fatwa/english/FatwaDisplay.asp?hFatwaID=31397
6.
LIVINGSTONE’S CLAIM:
The Mayor says the coalition’s
briefing contains Islamophobic statements that are evidence of a
“conspiracy theory of Islam”.
THE TRUTH:
The London community coalition’s
briefing does not condemn anyone because of their race or faith.
Indeed, many of the coalition members are people of faith. Some are
Muslims.
The Mayor’s dossier does not
attribute quotations and allows the reader to believe they were made
by the compilers of the coalition’s briefing.
Livingstone quotes two statements from
the coalition’s briefing as evidence of an anti-Muslim conspiracy:
“The issue of the hijab was being presented as a first step on a
long path of religious duties culminating in ‘Jihad’ …”
and “This fake Islamic Hijab is nothing but a political prop …”
What the Mayor doesn’t say is that
these quotations are from, Abd Al-Mun’im Sa’id, director of the
Al Ahram Centre for Political and Islamic Studies, and the Iranian
author Amir Taheri respectively. But the Mayor’s dossier insinuates
that these quotations are from non-Muslim Islamophobes.
Far from being Islamophobic, the London
community coalition has right from the outset made clear its
objection to anti-Muslim prejudice; and that its criticisms apply
only to Dr al-Qaradawi (and not to Muslims in general).
The coalition’s al-Qaradawi briefing
states:
“We condemn all forms of prejudice or
discrimination against Muslim people, utterly and without
qualification.”
Additionally, the London community
coalition cited a petition delivered to the United Nations on 30
October 2004, signed by over 2,500 of the world’s leading Muslim
intellectuals from 23 countries. The petition names al-Qaradawi as
one of ‘the theologians of terror’, accusing him of ‘providing
a religious cover for terrorism’. These Muslim critics cannot be
dismissed as Islamophobes.
Many refugees from Islamist repression
in the Arab world condemn al-Qaradawi as an apologist for
“Islamo-fascism”. They accuse him of opposing democracy,
socialism and human rights. The apparently liberal opinions
al-Qaradawi espouses when he visits western capitals are just a
front, they say, designed to fool and seduce politicians like the
Mayor of London. His true beliefs are the hard-line fundamentalism he
preaches in Arabic to Middle Eastern audiences when no western
journalists or politicians are present.
Arab News points out that al-Qaradawi’s
gentle words in London "don’t match" the extremism he
preaches in the Middle East. Undeterred, Livingstone denies the
evidence and continues to side with al-Qaradawi against liberal and
left-wing Muslims.
The Mayor has denounced Peter Tatchell
as having "a long history of Islamophobia." On the
contrary, Tatchell has condemned the racism that consigns Muslim
people to some of the poorest housing and jobs in Britain. He has
also been a long-time supporter of the Palestinian struggle, a fierce
critic of the western invasion of Iraq, and he has backed the
campaign against the detention of Muslim suspects without trial in
Belmarsh Prison.
7.
LIVINGSTONE’S CLAIM:
The Mayor claims that Sikh groups
distanced themselves from the dossier because “no evidence was
produced by the authors to back up their claims that Qaradawi backs
forced conversion to Islam”.
THE TRUTH:
The section making that claim was
inserted by the Sikh groups themselves. It is their own claim, no one
else’s. If they do not have evidence to back it up, that is their
own failing. Livingstone makes it seem as if those claims were made
on behalf of Sikh groups but rejected by them, when the truth is that
the Sikh groups made those claims themselves and submitted them for
inclusion in the dossier, which was collaboratively compiled by the
various community groups involved.
8.
LIVINGSTONE’S CLAIM:
The Mayor claims Peter Tatchell cites
Islam as “uniquely reactionary” on lesbian and gay issues.
THE TRUTH:
Peter Tatchell is far better known
(some might say notorious) for his confrontations with the Church of
England, the Catholic Church and Christianity in general. He has been
quoted as saying (more than once):
“The Church of England is an
oppressive, homophobic institution. I think that any lesbian or gay
person who is a part of that Church, unless they are overtly,
actively campaigning to change things, are part of the problem. They
are helping to sustain that historic oppression of lesbian and gay
people.”
And even:
“The Bible is to lesbian and gay
people what Mein Kampf is to Jews.”
Such robust criticisms of Christianity
hardly support the Mayor’s claim that Tatchell believes Islam is
“uniquely reactionary”.
Nevertheless, it is certainly a fact
that today the worst abuses of lesbian and gay human rights occur in
Muslim countries under Sharia law.
9.
LIVINGSTONE’S CLAIM:
The Mayor claims the Gay and Lesbian
Humanist Association is sympathetic to Pim Fortuyn and is opposed to
laws against incitement to racial hatred.
THE TRUTH:
First, Livingstone quoted selectively
from an article in Gay & Lesbian Humanist magazine on Pim
Fortuyn. The article does indeed acknowledge that humanists share
Fortuyn’s worry that concessions to the Islamic religious lobby
will erode liberal values – that, after all is a concern of all
liberal secular humanisms. Dishonestly, the Mayor fails to include
the sentiments of GALHA’s Terry Sanderson – quoted in the same
article from Gay & Lesbian Humanist magazine:
“While we in no way support Pim
Fortuyn’s ideas on immigration, or see any connection between
immigrants and social decay …”
GALHA may agree with Karl Marx that
“religion is the opiate of the people”, but that hardly makes
GALHA a communist organisation. Similarly, just because an article in
the magazine acknowledges that gay humanists share Fortuyn’s
concerns about antigay attitudes in Islam, it is thoroughly dishonest
to imply that GALHA support the late Fortuyn’s political agenda –
especially since it is explicitly stated in the article that
GALHA does not.
Second, Livingstone claims that GALHA
opposes “the new law against incitement to racial hatred”
(our emphasis). But this is a lie. There is no new law against racial
hatred. The new legislation is against inciting religious
hatred. In other words, it is not about protecting people from
hatred, but giving religious ideologies a privileged protected
status.
GALHA, like many liberal commentators,
including the comedian Rowan Atkinson, opposes the new law of
“incitement to religious hatred”. It fears, quite
reasonably, that the law will stifle legitimate debate and free
speech about religion or criticism of religious views. Indeed, many
religious groups also oppose the legislation, including the Barnabas
Fund, the Christian Institute and the Evangelical Alliance.
10.
LIVINGSTONE’S CLAIM:
The Mayor claims the London community
coalition opposed his dialogue with “a leader of one of the world’s
great religions”, and even that the coalition opposed dialogue with
the Muslim community.
THE TRUTH:
No such call was ever made by the
coalition. The criticism of Ken Livingstone was over his red-carpet
treatment of Dr al-Qaradawi and his seeming endorsement of the
cleric. The London community coalition positively encourages the
Mayor to maintain a dialogue with all people, faiths and communities
– including Muslims. But the coalition also expects him to
challenge those who hold anti-humanitarian views and to not embrace
those, like Dr al-Qaradawi, who explicitly endorse human rights
abuses.
If you would like an
electronic version of this document (with clickable links), please
email brett@outrage.org..uk
with a request.
The document will also be
available online at:
http://www.londoncommunitycoalition.org/mayorsdossier-thetruth.doc
Leave a Reply