§ "There are plenty of private Muslim schools and madrasas in
this city. They pretend that they all preach tolerance, love and peace, but
that isn't true. Behind their walls, they force-feed us with repetitive verses
of the Qur'an, about hate and intolerance." — Ali, an 18-year-old of
French origin, whose father was radicalized.
§ "In England, they are free to speak. They speak only of
prohibitions, they impose on one their rigid vision of Islam but, on the other
hand, they listen to no-one, most of all those who disagree with them." —
Yasmina, speaking of extremist Muslims in the UK.
§ "Birmingham is worse than Molenbeek" -- the Brussels
borough that The Guardian described as "becoming known as Europe's
jihadi central." — French commentator, republishing an article by Rachida
Samouri.
The city of Birmingham in the West
Midlands, the heart of England, the place where the Industrial Revolution
began, the second city of the UK and the eighth-largest in Europe, today is
Britain's most dangerous city. With a large and growing Muslim population, five
of its electoral wards have the highest levels of radicalization and terrorism
in the country.
In February, French journalist Rachida
Samouri published an article in the
Parisian daily Le Figaro, in which she recounted her experiences during
a visit there. In "Birmingham à l'heure islamiste" ("Birmingham
in the Time of Islam") she describes her unease with the growing
dislocation between normative British values and those of the several Islamic
enclaves. She mentions the Small Heath quarter, where nearly 95% of the
population is Muslim, where little girls wear veils; most of the men wear
beards, and women wear jilbabs and niqabs to cover their bodies and faces.
Market stalls close for the hours of prayer; the shops display Islamic clothes
and the bookshops are all religious. Women she interviewed condemned France as
a dictatorship based on secularism (laïcité), which they said they
regarded as "a pretext for attacking Muslims". They also said that
they approved of the UK because it allowed them to wear a full veil.
Another young woman, Yasmina, explained
that, although she may go out to a club at night, during the day she is forced
to wear a veil and an abaya [full body covering]. She then goes on to speak of the
extremists:
"In England, they are free to speak.
They speak only of prohibitions, they impose on one their rigid vision of Islam
but, on the other hand, they listen to no-one, most of all those who disagree
with them."
Speaking of the state schools, Samouri
describes "an Islamization of education unthinkable in our [French]
secular republic". Later, she interviews Ali, an 18-year-old of French
origin, whose father has become radicalized. Ali talks about his experience of
Islamic education:
"There are plenty of private Muslim
schools and madrasas in this city. They pretend that they all preach tolerance,
love and peace, but that isn't true. Behind their walls, they force-feed us
with repetitive verses of the Qur'an, about hate and intolerance."
Samouri cites Ali on the iron discipline
imposed on him, the brutality used, the punishment for refusing to learn the
Qur'an by heart without understanding a word of it, or for admitting he has a
girlfriend.
Elsewhere, Samouri notes young Muslim
preachers for whom "Shari'a law remains the only safety for the soul and
the only code of law to which we must refer". She interviews members of a
Shari'a "court" before speaking with Gina Khan, an ex-Muslim who
belongs to the anti-Shari'a organization One Law for All. According to Samouri,
Khan -- a secular feminist -- considers the tribunals "a pretext for
keeping women under pressure and a means for the religious fundamentalists to
extend their influence within the community".
Another teenager of French origin
explains how his father prefers Birmingham to France because "one can wear
the veil without any problem and one can find schools where boys and girls do
not mix". "Birmingham," says Mobin, "is a little like a
Muslim country. We are among ourselves, we do not mix. It's hard".
Samouri herself finds this contrast
between secular France and Muslim England disturbing. She sums it up thus:
"A state within a state, or rather a
rampant Islamization of one part of society -- [is] something which France has
succeeded in holding off for now, even if its secularist model is starting to
be put to the test".
Another French commentator,
republishing Samouri's article, writes, "Birmingham is worse than
Molenbeek" -- the Brussels borough that The Guardian
described as "becoming known as Europe's jihadi central."
The comparison with Molenbeek may be
somewhat exaggerated. What is perplexing is that French writers should
focus on a British city when, in truth, the situation in France -- despite its
secularism -- is in some ways far worse than in the UK. Recent authors have
commented on France's growing love for Islam and its increasing weakness in
the face of Islamist criminality. This weakness has been framed by a
politically-correct desire to stress a multiculturalist policy at the expense
of taking Muslim extremists and fundamentalist organizations at face value and
with zero tolerance for their anti-Western rhetoric and actions. The result?
Jihadist attacks in France have been among the worst in history. It is
calculated that the country has some some 751 no-go zones ("zones
urbaines sensibles"), places where extreme violence breaks out from
time to time and where the police, firefighters, and other public agents dare
not enter for fear of provoking further violence.
Many national authorities and much of the
media deny that such enclaves exist, but as the Norwegian expert Fjordman has
recently explained:
If you say that there are some areas
where even the police are afraid to go, where the country's normal, secular
laws barely apply, then it is indisputable that such areas now exist in several
Western European countries. France is one of the hardest hit: it has a large
population of Arab and African immigrants, including millions of Muslims.
There are no such zones in the UK,
certainly not at that level. There are Muslim enclaves in several cities where
a non-Muslim may not be welcome; places that resemble Pakistan or Bangladesh
more than England. But none of these is a no-go zone in the French, German or
Swedish sense -- places where the police, ambulances, and fire brigades are
attacked if they enter, and where the only way in (to fight a fire, for
example) is under armed escort.
Samouri opens her article with a
bold-type paragraph stating:
"In the working-class quarters of
the second city of England, the sectarian lifestyle of the Islamists
increasingly imposes itself and threatens to blow up a society which has fallen
victim to its multicultural utopia".
Has she seen something British
commentators have missed?
The Molenbeek comparison may not be
entirely exaggerated. In a 1000-page report,
"Islamist Terrorism: Analysis of Offences and Attacks in the UK
(1998-2015)," written by the respected analyst Hannah Stuart for Britain's
Henry Jackson Society, Birmingham is named more than once as Britain's leading
source of terrorism. [1]
One conclusion that stands out is that
terror convictions have apparently doubled in the past five years. Worse, the
number of offenders not previously known to the authorities has increased
sharply. Women's involvement in terrorism, although still less than men's,
"has trebled over the same period". Alarmingly, "Proportionally,
offences involving beheadings or stabbings (planned or otherwise) increased
eleven-fold across the time periods, from 4% to 44%." (p. xi)
Only 10% of the attacks are committed by
"lone wolves"; almost 80% were affiliated with, inspired by or linked
to extremist networks -- with 25% linked to al-Muhajiroun alone. As the report
points out, that organization (which went under various names) was once
defended by some Whitehall officials -- a clear indication of governmental
naivety.
(Link to website to see video.)
A more important conclusion, however, is
that a clear link is shown between highly-segregated Muslim areas and
terrorism. As the Times report on the Henry Jackson Society review
points out, this link "was previously denied by many". On the one
hand:
Nearly half of all British Muslims live
in neighbourhoods where Muslims form less than a fifth of the population.
However, a disproportionately low number of Islamist terrorists — 38% — come
from such neighbourhoods. The city of Leicester, which has a sizeable but
well-integrated Muslim population, has bred only two terrorists in the past 19
years.
But on the other hand:
Only 14% of British Muslims live in
neighbourhoods that are more than 60% Muslim. However, the report finds, 24% of
all Islamist terrorists come from these neighbourhoods. Birmingham, which has
both a large and a highly segregated Muslim population, is perhaps the key
example of the phenomenon.
The report continues:
Just five of Britain's 9,500 council
wards — all in Birmingham — account for 26 convicted terrorists, a tenth of the
national total. The wards — Springfield, Sparkbrook, Hodge Hill, Washwood Heath
and Bordesley Green — contain sizeable areas where the vast majority of the
population is Muslim.
Birmingham as a whole, with 234,000
Muslims across its 40 council wards, had 39 convicted terrorists. That is many
more than its Muslim population would suggest, and more than West Yorkshire,
Greater Manchester and Lancashire put together, even though their combined
Muslim population is about 650,000, nearly three times that of Birmingham.
There are pockets of high segregation in the north of England but they are much
smaller than in Birmingham.
The greatest single number of convicted
terrorists, 117, comes from London, but are much more widely spread across that
city than in Birmingham and their numbers are roughly proportionate to the
capital's million-strong Muslim community.
Hannah Stuart, the study's author, has observed that her work
has raised "difficult questions about how extremism takes root in deprived
communities, many of which have high levels of segregation. Much more needs to
be done to challenge extremism and promote pluralism and inclusivity on the
ground."
Many observers say Birmingham has failed
that test:
"It is a really strange
situation," said Matt Bennett, the opposition spokesman for education on
the council. "You have this closed community which is cut off from the
rest of the city in lots of ways. The leadership of the council doesn't
particularly wish to engage directly with Asian people — what they like to do
is have a conversation with one person who they think can 'deliver' their
support."
Clearly, lack of integration is, not
surprisingly, the root of a growing problem. This is the central theme of Dame
Louise Casey's important report of last December to the British government.
Carried out under instructions of David Cameron, prime minister at the time,
"The Casey Review: A review into
opportunity and integration" identifies some Muslim communities
(essentially those formed by Pakistani and Bangladeshi immigrants and their
offspring) as the most resistant to integration within British society. Such
communities do little or nothing to encourage their children to join in
non-Muslim education, events, or activities; many of their women speak no
English and play no role within wider society, and large numbers say they
prefer Islamic shari'a law to British law.
Casey makes particular reference to the
infamous Trojan Horse plot, uncovered in 2014, in which Muslim radicals
conspired to introduce fundamentalist Salafi doctrines and practices into a
range of Birmingham schools -- not just private Muslim faith schools but
regular state schools (pp. 114 ff.): "a number of schools in Birmingham
had been taken over to ensure they were run on strict Islamic
principles..."
It is important to note that these were
not 'Muslim' or 'faith' schools. [Former British counterterrorism chief] Peter
Clarke, in his July 2014 report said:
"I took particular note of the fact
that the schools where it is alleged that this has happened are state non-faith
schools..."
He highlighted a range of inappropriate
behaviour across the schools, such as irregularities in employment practices,
bullying, intimidation, changes to the curriculum, inappropriate proselytizing
in non-faith schools, unequal treatment and segregation. Specific examples
included:
- a teachers' social media
discussion called the "Park View Brotherhood", in which
homophobic, extremist and sectarian views were aired at Park View Academy
and others;
- teachers using anti-Western
messages in assemblies, saying that White people would never have Muslim
children's interests at heart;
- the introduction of Friday
Prayers in non-faith state schools, and pressure on staff and students to
attend. In one school, a public address system was installed to call
pupils to prayer, with a member of the staff shouting at students who were
in the playground, not attending prayer, and embarrassing some girls when
attention was drawn to them because girls who are menstruating are not
allowed to attend prayer; and
- senior staff calling students
and staff who do not attend prayers 'k****r'. (Kuffar, the plural
of kafir, an insulting term for "unbelievers". This
affront reproduces the Salafi technique of condemning moderate or
reformist Muslims as non-Muslims who may then be killed for being
apostates.)
Casey then quotes Clarke's conclusion:
"There has been co-ordinated,
deliberate and sustained action, carried out by a number of associated
individuals, to introduce an intolerant and aggressive Islamic ethos into a few
schools in Birmingham. This has been achieved in a number of schools by gaining
influence on the governing bodies, installing sympathetic headteachers or
senior members of staff, appointing like-minded people to key positions, and
seeking to remove head teachers they do not feel sufficiently compliant."
The situation, Casey states, although
improved from 2014, remains unstable. She quotes Sir Michael Wilshaw, Her
Majesty's Chief Inspector, in a letter to the Secretary of State for Education,
which declared as late as July 8, 2016, that the situation "remains
fragile", with:
- a minority of people in the
community who are still intent on destabilising these schools;
- a lack of co-ordinated support
for the schools in developing good practice;
- a culture of fear in which
teachers operate having gone underground but still there;
- overt intimidation from some
elements within the local community;
- organised resistance to the
personal, social and health education (PSHE) curriculum and the promotion
of equality.
Elsewhere, Casey notes two further issues
in Birmingham alone, which shed light on the city's Muslim population.
Birmingham has the largest number of women who are non-proficient in English
(p. 96) and the largest number of mosques (161) in the UK (p. 125).
For many years, the British government
has fawned on its Muslim population; evidently the government thought that
Muslims would in due course integrate, assimilate, and become fully British, as
earlier immigrants had done. More than one survey, however, has shown that the
younger generations are even more fundamentalist than their parents and
grandparents, who came directly from Muslim countries. The younger generations
were born in Britain but at a time when extremist Islam has been growing
internationally, notably in countries with which British Muslim families have
close connections. Not only that, but a plethora of fundamentalist preachers
keep on passing through British Muslim enclaves. These preachers freely lecture
in mosques and Islamic centres to youth organizations, and on college and
university campuses.
Finally, it might be worth noting that
Khalid Masood, a convert to Islam who killed four and injured many more during
his attack outside the Houses of Parliament in March, had been living in Birmingham
before he set out to wage jihad in Britain's capital.
It is time for some hard thinking about
the ways in which modern British tolerance of the intolerant and its embrace of
a wished-for, peace-loving multiculturalism have furthered this regression.
Birmingham is probably the place to start.
Dr. Denis MacEoin is a Distinguished
Senior Fellow at the Gatestone Institute. He has recently completed a book on
causes for concern about Islam in the UK.
[1] Hard
copies of the report may be purchased via PayPal here. Essays, summaries etc. may be linked to
from here. An excellent
summary by Soeren Kern is available online here.
