Dhimmitude in the UK: Police chief attacks terror labelling of Muslims

From The Guardian, with thanks to Ali Dashti:

A police chief whose force has increased its special branch to cold war levels in the fight against terror appealed yesterday for a more mature public debate on the threat from extremists.

Colin Cramphorn, the chief constable of West Yorkshire, called for an end to use of the misleading terms "Islamic" or "Muslim" to describe supporters of violence against the west....

The slur on the country's overwhelmingly law-abiding Muslim population risked alienating a significant community which had no sympathy with violence and as much of a stake in defeating terror as everyone else.

Mr Cramphorn is in charge of policing a sensitive area in the run-up to the general election, with the far-right British National party fielding its leader, Nick Griffin, in the West Yorkshire town of Keighley. Mr Griffin is to answer police bail in Halifax early next month. His arrest followed secret BBC filming of a BNP meeting in Keighley at which he called Islam "an evil, vicious faith".

Mr Cramphorn, who uses the word "jihadist" to describe groups such as al-Qaida, said Islamophobia threatened precisely the intelligence work needed to contain the real threat of terror attacks. The security forces needed the eyes and ears of everybody to help their work, and to understand what radicalised people such as the British "shoe bomber" Richard Reid.

Well, I use the term "jihadist" too. After all, the Muslim warriors we are facing themselves explain that they are fighting a jihad. The Arabic word for them is mujahid, or, in English, jihadist. But it is ridiculous to call them jihadists and then turn around and deny the existence of "Islamic terrorism." Jihad only has any meaning in the context of Islam. If they are jihadists, they are committing violence, or approving of that violence, in the name of Islam. It is not "mature" to notice this, or point it out? And how exactly does Mr. Cramphorn (Matthew Arnold complained over a century ago about the ugliness of English names -- "Higginbotham! Stiggins! Bugg!" I see they haven't improved) propose to fight against an enemy he refuses to identify properly?

What's that, Cramphorn? This nomenclature offends the "the country's overwhelmingly law-abiding Muslim population"? I see. Well, please explain one more thing to me: how is it that in this overwhelmingly law-abiding population, Al-Muhajiroun, a jihadist group of Islamic terrorists, came to be Britain's largest Muslim group?

| 9 Comments
Print | Email this entry | Digg this | del.icio.us |

9 Comments

This guy's obviously got a Cramp in his . . oh, never mind.

A friend of mine was standing in a long line at the airport right after 9-11. Everyone was grumbling and one fellow was going on and on about how it was all the fault of the airlines. My friend spoke up and said, "No man, it ain't the airlines - it's the (expletive deleted) Muslims!" No one spoke. Embarrassed staring at the ground.

The airlines, or the US government for that matter, are much easier and more satisfying targets to blame because it gives us a sense of control. We can change our government, we can't change jihad.

Last night I fretted Grace Allen-style that before the behind yet under the vast above, the world is in tears and tomorrow is Tuesday.

And then I wake up to find your quick Shandean swerve or excursus into onomatology, i.e., Matthew Arnold on English proper names, and it makes my day, even if that day is Tuesday.

Hugh, the further to make your day:

"If we are to talk of ideal perfection, of 'the best in the whole world,' has anyone reflected what a touch of grossness in our race, what an original shortcoming in the more delicate spiritual perceptions, is shown by the natural growth amongst us of such hideous names -- Higginbotham, Stiggins, Bugg!" -- Matthew Arnold, "The Function of Criticism at the Present Time"

Enjoy.
Robert

Hugh I have no idea what your talking about but welcome back to the debate.

What this idiot Colin Cramphorn s trying to do is dissipate the tensions in Yorkshire. They got BNP there, and the local populace don't piss about with the words they use. Im all for avoiding attacks on innocents, if thats what he's trying to do.

But it can be difficult to distinguish between idiot moonbat behaviour and other more commendable behaviour.

Then again, seems to me like a moonbat, he said the Islamophobia word.

Good way to blind the public as to the real reason for the violence against the West. No, not Islam, people, for Islam is Peace. They're only expressing their anger at oppression by the nasty Americans and Jews. It's all motivated by politics, not religion. Yes, keep repeating that mantra: Islam is Peace, Amerika is bad, Jews are bad, Islam is Peace, ...

If Islamic Terrorists call themselves true and faithful followers of Islam, why can't we?

At last we have some common ground with these people!

There are two ways of looking at this story:

A. He's trying not to alienate informers within that community and this is just PC window dressing.

or

B. It shows that England is doomed.

Can I go for "A" please?

When the British media is talking about Jewish settlers nobody is worried that they will alienate the Jewish people in Britain, nor do they clarify that the vast majority of Jews don’t live in settlements, or when they are writing about people who attack abortion clinics they freely call them Christian fundamentalist without feeling the need to clarify that the majority of Christians are law abiding citizens. And when people read the news, neither the Christians nor the Jews get hysterical and demand an apology.

The real joke is that Mr. Griffin has a criminal charge against him for expressing his personal views about Islam.
Apparently, imams and anyone else can rail all they want against the Jews, the "religious right", and other Christians without "inciting religious hatred", but noone is supposed to criticize any aspects or sects of Islam.
The irony is that political correctness and the "inciting religious hatred" law purport to be promoting "tolerance", when, in actual fact, they actually shield some of the most intolerant and bigoted individuals(i.e. jihadist Muslims) from criticism, analysis, or scrutiny.