This is a post I didn’t want to make. Yet the reaction (or more precisely non-reaction) by the British Police has made it inevitable.
Is anyone going to go to the dentist in the near future? Then beware: Muslim dentists have been incited by an imam to mistreat their gay patients. So maybe you should carefully double-check your dentist’s background.
But if you’d thought that it can’t get any worse than an Imam inciting Muslim dentists to mistreat their gay patients, you’d be wrong. You’d been off the truth by several miles.
Not one preacher but several of those imams who had visited London have a proven track record of preaching “death to gays”. But none of the imams was arrested for hate speech like everyone else would have been. The law is seemingly irrelevant as long as it is a Muslim transgressing it.
If you thought that the British Police is generally hesitant in taking action because of hate-crimes or hate-speech than again I have to prove you wrong. Police in Britain have arrested an elderly lady of 85 years for shouting outside a mosque, five men have been arrested after having set up a page on a social networking site asking for all Muslims to be thrown out of Wales, people have repeatedly been arrested for posting offensive messages on twitter. In this context “offensive” is defined as anything anti-Islam or anti-Muslim. This definition is also strictly applied during times of high tension like after the attack on the unarmed Lee Rigby by two Muslim savages (who by the way still have the guts to plead to not guilty).
So ask yourself what is the worse offence someone asking for a certain group to be removed from wales or someone demanding a certain group be killed. Yup, we all know the answer that British police will give.
But the best thing or the most ironic thing about the typical double standard employed is that British police official have said in the past that:
“The comments were directed against some part of the community. Such comments are not acceptable and they negatively affect the Bristol community”
Calls for gay patients to be mistreated and for gays to be killed in a gruesome way are certainly in no way directed against anyone and as such those calls surely wouldn’t negatively affect anyone in Britain. – Except for maybe a few gays but who cares about gays?
Muslims calling for lethal violence against gays, the police not bothering to do anything about and none of the self-proclaimed anti-fascist organisations like “Unite Against Fascism” (UAF) willing to stand up for homosexuals that’s hardly news for any gay residing in Britain.
But what comes as a surprise is the fact that it wasn’t the East London Mosque (which is known to nearly all LGBT residents as a place of notoriously vile and disgusting hate speech as well as its ties with terrorists) hosting the event but the Edmonton Islamic Centre.
Queer Impressions 
It kind of reminds me of Russia except that in Russia the whole situation’s even worse. Hate is indeed the most powerful weapon existing because it combines all of the bad in this world. Now this is a post, I personally didn’t want to come across to 😦
In the UK it is a mixture of hate & cowardice. Hate on the side those Muslims as mentioned in the text but cowardice on the side of the police and the councils. Neither the police nor the councils dare to interfere because they may be branded “racist”.
It isn’t the first time that this problem surfaced. London had problems like that before (see the linked Telegraph articles about the East London Mosque) yet there wasn’t a serious investigation made by anyone.
Another series of incidences I did not mention in the post was the labelling of parts of London das “gay free zones”. The BBC reported on the incidences but the wording could be considered hilarious if it wasn’t so serious. The gay-free zone stickers appear to spread a message of hate. (italics added). The BBC was also very quick to mention a few activists who did not wish to shift the blame to a specific community. (On the other hand I really do credit them for standing up to the stickers).
A British LGBT news website also covered the incidences but also found one gay/bi Londoner to state that he has so far been attaack three times by Muslim youth but also included another statement by someone who thought that it wasn’t Muslims behind the gay-free zone stickers.
But for the record police mentioned to identify the offender who is a Muslim holding funamentalist beliefs. There’s a good comment on the case which just led to a fine of £100.
Maybe before you start reading you could make a guess with which mosque the offender was associated…
So my hopes that the police would take all forms of hate speech seriously after the conviction in the gay-free zone case were smashed. But nevertheless I think that it is worthwhile to highlight such cases.
(Should someone from the political correctness front read this: I’m not applying that all Muslims are homophobes. The very same way that Alex didn’t want to say that all Russians are homophobes.)
Not all Russians are homophobes-you shall take t.A.T.u. for example-Yulia’s openly bisexual and Lena’s LGBT friendly. Some Russians are okay with that but the majority isn’t.
I am half Russian so I feel ashamed to have such background knowing something as cruel as this happens in there.
yes… I thought I made clear that I do NOT think that all Russian are homophobes. Not all Muslime are either. Unfortunately it appears that at least a very vocal portion is.
(on a related topic here are some thoughts from Christopher Hitchens. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNd1zTcvlC0] and as usual Hitchens makes some very good points)
As for your background: that is something you can’t be held accountable for. Not your ethnic or cultural background determines who you are as you just happen to have one. It’s your attitude that counts.
This is a very interesting post. Are we living in the same London? radical Islam has a tendency of frustrating me. I’ve had enough of the police and society for not tackling this blatant discrimination!
@amediablogger
Thank you.
What do you mean with the “same London”? It’s at least not the city I live in 😉
I don’t think that “not tackling it” is a bit of an understatement. That implies that society (and by extension the police) just sit there and idly watch. But nearly everytime there’s a whistleblower or a critic he/she is accused of “racism” (esp. by the notorious pains of UAF & “hope not hate”). The only exception that that rule are people like Salmon Rushdie or Ayaan Hirsi Ali.
The other reflex – other than shouting “racist” – is to always emphasize that not every Muslim is like that. That’s just obvious that not every Muslim is like that and constantly repeating that theme is not going to help anyone. This theme has grown to such a farce that if you bring up the topic that Muslim terrorists have commited a crime to which some people have fallen victim some people don’t even ask about victim or their families, no they start reminding you that you shouldn’t generalise…
Another factor we can’t neglect is the media. There’s a general tendency to label Muslim offenders as “Asian”.
With this approach we’re not going to get anywhere.
I meant are we in the same Britain?
the two of us are very likely to be in the same Britain
Yes I agree. I want to ask this: how many dentists have applied the imams wishes? Also don’t forget there are some Christians that have refused to deal with gays for example the couple who ran a guest house and turned the gay couple away. Of course they faced legal action in the same way that probably a Muslim dentist would if they didn’t provide proper treatment to gays on the grounds of discrimination.
I haven’t heard of any dentists following that specific line of advice. The only one that came closer to it was the dentist refusing treatment to female patients unless they wore a hijab and refused to provide service to male patientss unless they remove their gold jewelery. Though I don’t know whether he has been removed from the NHS dental register but there has deinately been an investigation.
My criticism on both Muslim misconduct and society’s refusal to deal adequately with it is in no way meant or intended to excuse misbehaviour by other people. Of course there’s homophobia (and other forms of discrimination) in other segments of society. The individual victim is unleikely to care who brought about injustice but is more likely interested in getting the help & support required.
By my post and my examples in the comments I wanted to draw attention to the fact that there is a double standard in parts of society (incl the police) and was far as I understood your first comment you were agreeing with me on the point that police isn’t tackling some of the discrimination by Muslims (yet is very active tackling – let’s say less severe forms of – discrimination if they’re committed by other people). And along the lines of the police failing to tackle blatant discrimination I can’t help the impression that parts of the media are relatively reluctant to name or bring up a certain religion (but since I haven’t taken an objective count I may be mistaken there). This impression may stem from the fact that I only learned about the things taht go on inside the East London Mosque (links in main text)from The Telegraph. Neither the BBC nor the The Guardian covered it.
Then the case of Nahla Mahmood who is an Ex-Muslim and exercised her right of free speech including a TV appearance where she expressed favourably views of secularism & negative views of sharia. As was to be expected Nahla Mahmood was threatened with violence incl murder. One person threatening her was identified by name and was also residing in England. Mahmood hence reported him to the police but the police cautioned Mahmood(!) to not “anger” him any further instead of arresting him for threatening her life (see very last paragraph). This story which is not only a story of intimidation but again of complete police failure appears not to have been covered by the BBC, the Guardian or The Telegraph for that matter (the Telegraph made brief mention about the case but didn’t provide any detail). I’ve jsut specifically searched for “Nahla Mahmood [name of media]” but didn’t find anything.
I would have thought that this case where a person in the UK is threatened with murder just for non-violently voicing an opinion would make headlines, the aggrevating factor that the police not only completely failed and fails to uphold the law but even is so brazen to imply that the victim is at fault should make further headlines perhaps in combination with the demand that there should be another enquiry into the police.
Ive just looked for reporting by the Guardian on iddues like homophobia. Sure the guardian covered the initial story when LGBT activists asked that the East London Mosque stop inviting homophobic preachers. The Guardian forgot to mention why exactly some preachers were/are considered to be homophobic and ended its article with the nice promise of a mosque spokesperson. The Guardian nver revisited the issue where it may have found out that all the mosque’s promises were emtpy words.
The Guardian then only covered homophobia in professional sports and how to comabt homophobia in schools (which is important by all means but the teacher who reported was not working at a school in one of the “problematic” areas and this area was completely omitted.)
Then the Guardian was glad to report that there’s going to be less homophobia.
The increase of homophobic violence in e.g. Tower Hamlets is of no concern to the Guardian, the problem that Tower Hamlets has fallen under control of Muslim extremist goes also unreported by the Guardian. I’m sure that I’ve at least seen a BBC report on the issue of rising homophobic crime in Tower hamlets. though of course the BBC also hosts a piece in which Muslims claim that islamophobic hate crime has gone up (even though police stats say the exact opposite but Muslims have apparently stoped reporting the crimes to the police) and that racist crimes are a particular concern in an area that not only has a large proportion of non-whites living there but also has been reported to be under control of muslim thugs.
Yes, of course the BBC reports on issues associated with Islam but the BBC also refuses to label muslim terrorists as terrorists. The only time the BBC has used the word terrorists to describe the terrorists in a Kenyan shopping mall was when quoting a Kenyan security official though the BBC made sure that it placed teh word and only that word in inverted commas.
According to the BBC the terrorists of 9/11 are only hijackers and Taliban leaders are only described by the US as “terrorists”. If you ask the BBC who could be more peaceful than top Taliban?
Wouldn’t you agree that there’s some odd reservation in using clear words on people who shoot unarmed & innocent shoppers in malls or who are members of the Taliban or who have managed to perpetuate the deadliest terror attack in US history?
Both The Guardian and the BBC are correct in clearly describing e.g. the BNP as racist or far-right. It’s clear and accurate. Though why is there than some reservation in other areas?
update: I did find more reporting by the guardian on homophobic hate crime but the bias continues. Note that the article provides a link on full coverage incl photo of Ruby Thomas the white & non-muslim perpetuator of a lethal homophobic hate crime. But the Guardian doesn’t seem to care much providing some more background info on who committed a homophobic hate crime which left the victim paralysed. The answer is that the perpetuator has a very muslim sounding name.
One would think that a homophobic hate which leaves the victim paralysed from neck down may be a reason for the guardian to write an extra article about the crime or the trial but apparently this isn’t important.
Wouldn’t you spot a certain tendency?
Hi Kim, sorry for my late reply. I have been reading very carefully what you have written. I do agree with the media bias points that you have raised. I am sorry but I cannot take any daily mail article as a source of “informed reading”. I agree that there is a certain tendency/style in reporting and also in dealing with this issue.
I think that homophobia should be tackled in a way that is productive and beneficial however, do you think it is necessary to label people as “Muslim” or “christian” or “whatever” and not just homophobic? I’m just saying.
I’ve written quite a lengthy replies so it’s only natural to take a bit of time to read that.
I’ve linked to the first article I could find on the topic of the dentist who refused treatment because of “dress code” violation. But the BBC also covered it.
How does one tackle homophobia in a productive way? Especially the kind of homophobia that leads to assault that occasionally leave people paralysed or dead. I really don’t know where to start there.
I think that if homophobia is clearly associated with a certain source (e.g. religion, national pride/nationalism, maybe racism/xenophobia if homoexuality is beleived to be from abroad) this causative source should be mentioned. Some of the homophobic Jamaican raeggae singers are clearly influenced by their Christian faith and I think that this shouldn’t go unmentioned (and then of course some of the world’s most famous homophobes who are homophobes because the bible tells them have been denied entry).
While all religions have the potential to be radical and extremist in contemporary Europa Islam has certainly the largest proprtion of fundamentalists among the followers. (If you look to other parts of the world this may well be different). With those fundamentalists we as a society not only need to challenge the fundamentalists’ homophobia but also sexism, antisemitism, anti-Hindu & anti-Sikh feelings. Muslim homophobia is just one part of muslim funamentalism but given fundamentlist muslim usually form closely-knit groups whith limited contact to other groups it may be better to challenge this lumped together.
The ex-muslims & British Muslims for Secular Democracy already started doing that but their efforts are undermined by politicel correctnes that has gone insane. And with the obstacle of this political correctnes running wild I am afraid that specific mention to Islam whenever Islam (or the interpretation thereof) plays a role in adverse actions should be made.
Hi Kim, yet again I have taken time to read your response thoroughly. In order to get my point across in how I think that homophobia can be tackled I shall first of all answer some of your questions and statements than make a few of my own.
You wrote “I think that if homophobia is clearly associated with a certain source (e.g. religion, national pride/nationalism, maybe racism/xenophobia if homoexuality is beleived to be from abroad) this causative source should be mentioned.”
I do not think that the ethnicity etc needs to be considered actually. the fact that a hate crime has taken place needs to be addressed. If you read stonewall;s reports on homophobia you will notice that many of these incidents occur in the school playground and are part of bullying. I do not think that homophobic is necessarily a cultural determination/issue. As you point out the number of Islamic groups oppose to homosexuality which is fine but that does not suggest that just because they are against a sexual choice/decision/identity that they would go and do something awful. So i think it is unnecessary to finger point and lay blame on one community.
You then say this:
“While all religions have the potential to be radical and extremist in contemporary Europa Islam has certainly the largest proprtion of fundamentalists among the followers. (If you look to other parts of the world this may well be different). With those fundamentalists we as a society not only need to challenge the fundamentalists’ homophobia but also sexism, antisemitism, anti-Hindu & anti-Sikh feelings. Muslim homophobia is just one part of muslim funamentalism but given fundamentlist muslim usually form closely-knit groups whith limited contact to other groups it may be better to challenge this lumped together.”
I do not know if Islam has the largest number of fundamentalists among the followers but rather right wing groups that are rising up across all of Europe. I am sorry but but I still do not and cannot connect the lines to point at Islam as being a cause for homophobia in Britain. If we look at the population of fundamentalist muslims (who are what exactly? How do you define that? Please let me know if you can) and we compare that to the mass population I think we can agree that homophobia exists within British society and it is not confined to one religions/ethnic group.
However, I would like to end on one point, as I had started that homophobia should be addressed and tackled in a productive way. I personally think stricter rules with harsher sentences would qualify. Call me naive, but finger pointing in the name of religion is unnecessary. Yes there are parts of several communities that choose not to integrate within British society and these communities have contributed positively in Britain. Personally I think our judicial system is quite lenient when it comes to dealing with – or not dealing with – homophobia.
Hello Amediablogger,
the fact that a hate crime has taken place needs to be addressed.
where did I say anything to the contrary? I’m jsut the opinion that both need to be addressed.
If you read stonewall;s reports on homophobia you will notice that many of these incidents occur in the school playground and are part of bullying.
yes, and then you should put it in the context. Identify what is going on and if possible why it is going. Just addressing “there has been a hate crime” could be less effective than putting it into the proper context.
I do not think that homophobic is necessarily a cultural determination/issue
no, not necessarily. But where it is, it should be mentioned.
As you point out the number of Islamic groups oppose to homosexuality which is fine but that does not suggest that just because they are against a sexual choice/decision/identity that they would go and do something awful.
the GPA actually stated that around one quarter of anti-gay hate crimes are perpetuated by Muslims. (the article itself is about something else but it is mentioned in one line that Muslims are responsible for about one quarter of all homophobic hate crime)
One quarter (25%) of hate crimes is not the majority but considering that Muslims only consitute about about 4.8% percentage of the population in England & Wales (as of 2011) and 0.84% in Scotland (as of 2001, I didn’t find the 2011 data) Muslims are clearly overrepresented among the section of homophobic offenders. In fact overrepresented by the factor five (in England & Wales). As I’ve found no recent data from Scotland I wouldn’t want to make a prediction for Scotland.
I am sorry but but I still do not and cannot connect the lines to point at Islam as being a cause for homophobia in Britain.
okay, once again. Muslims are five times more common among perpetuators of homophobic violence than among the general poipulation. I will consider any other group which is also clearly overrepresented among homophobic offenders as a major source of homophobia as well.
Personal opinions among Muslims (which are not always mentioned to be sure) look equally dire. A poll failed to find a single British Muslim (out of a generous 500) who considers homosexual acts to be acceptable. Yes, there are Muslims who think differently but they’re a minority and such a fringe minority that they’re not found among 500 randomly selected ones. Yet it isn’t so hard to find Muslim supporters of Sharia in the UK (see below).
If we look at the population of fundamentalist muslims (who are what exactly? How do you define that? Please let me know if you can) and we compare that to the mass population I think we can agree that homophobia exists within British society and it is not confined to one religions/ethnic group.
a fundamentalist is someone who takes their religious scriptures literally and wants to impose his belief upon the general population.
Nowehere did I deny that other segments of the population are free of homophobia, all I did say was that Muslims are disproportionately homophobic.
considering the funamentalism of British Muslims: about 40% want to live under Sharia law. – I haven’t found any evidence that 40% of British Catholics wish to live under canonical law (like outlawing divorces) or that 40% of Hindus wish for the caste system to be introduced to the UK (if you have information on that let me know).
40% is still a minority but it is not a small or tiny minority. Do I need to give some more details as to why I am against sharia and ahy I absolutely do not want to see it anywhere?
I personally think stricter rules with harsher sentences would qualify.
sounds good.
Reblogged this on stand up against homophobia.