This talk of anti-Muslim bias in foreign policy – how do you square that one with Yugoslavia? NATO intervention was on the side of Muslims there and very rightly so. Surely you are not saying that only Muslims of a certain skin colour can have a ‘legitimate grievance’ (i.e a grievance that meets with the approval of the UK anti-war left).

I’m not for a moment saying that they are. All I’m getting at is that the fact that certain elements of the Muslim community, it would seem, feel that suicide bombing is legitimate (or worse, a response to a ‘legitimate grievance,’ with all the denial that implies) does not make their voice first amongst equals. ‘Trying to influence,’ is not the same thing as a God-given right to dictate policy. Nor should it be. To be honest Sunny, this comparison with the Vatican is skating a bit close to unthinking moral equivalence.

Sofia (33) – What is it makes you think that this is per se a racial issue? There are any number of white people, atheists etc who I would not want to spit on if they were on fire. I work with about a dozen of them. The point is that we all need to rub along together and make the best fist of it we can. Yes, I look to communities (or more specifically, sections of communities) to realise that civil society is not obliged to bend its knee to every whim. Society is open and I very much agree with billy (31). A great many are rubbing along together more than happily – mixed marriages are a great illustration.

I’m sorry, but what you are doing Sofia is making excuses on behalf of those who exclude them self. I certainly will not sit here and effectively be told that our society had it all coming because of Iraq.

I have no intention of indulging the more fanciful demands of many ‘communities’ (regardless of religion) in some faux sense of integration. I take people as I find them. And that is rather more than can be said of how I have been treated by any number of religious people over the years.

Billy I think that is a simplistic way of putting it

It really isn’t. It’s actually a very profound point that you just don’t wish to acknowledge.

“You just have to grasp it and stop making excuses” I’m trying not to vomit…

Why does an extended hand of friendship make you want to vomit?

work in a diverse workforce, yet no one in my office wished me a happy eid…and i work in london…supposedly multicultural…yet i wish my colleagues a happy christmas..so who’s making the effort?

You feel affronted because of that? Really, that is relatively trivial Sofia. There is no obligation for people to know everything about Islam, or whatever religion people follow, if they don’t want to. Good for them if they do. But it is not a signifier of prejudice if they don’t. Most people wouldn’t know when Yom Kippur of Hannukah is, let alone wish their Jewish work colleagues felicitations on the day, beyond a simple ‘Have fun’, yet I have never heard a Jewish person describe that as a sign of nascent marginalisation or disrespect.

And lastly the Vatican has never really stopped pushing its oar into our affairs. So British Muslims are hardly alone in trying to influence British foreign policy, are they?

MaidMarian’s point was “Governments can not and should not decide foreign policies on the basis of whether or nor a group of home-grown religious extremists and fanatics will decide to take umbrage and attempt to kill hundreds on public transport or wherever”.

He didn’t say anything about people lobbying peacefully. It isn’t an accurate comparison.

Billy, I agree with your point on integration but did not understand why you went on about defending muslim rights as I didn’t mention this, i spoke about everyone making an effort and not always placing the onus on one community and ignoring the very many challenges they face at both an internal and external level.

I wasn’t talking about the rights of Muslims. I was illustrating to you that British society, and white people in Britain, do meet ethnic minorities half way to integrate. The fact that there are so many mixed marriages, that there is such a large and integrated Indian community, that there are Jewish, Chinese, every single group in society, including Muslims, on a continuum of integration under a framework and society that has adjusted to the needs and sympathies of a plural population, because white people lobbied for that, white people in the media, in the legal profession, in politics, in trade unions, as evidence that white people in Britain, despite racism, ARE meeting black and asian and yes, Muslims, half way. The hand of friendship is extended to you. You just have to grasp it and stop making excuses.

Sure sure, but we’ve had a long tradition of people from specific parts of the world getting involved in foreign policy when it affects them.

British Sikhs here got intensely annoyed and lobbied the govt when the Indian govt invaded the Golden Temple in 1984. Many British Jews have always had an interest in what’s going on in Israel. We have parliamentary groups for various countries precisely for that reason.

And lastly the Vatican has never really stopped pushing its oar into our affairs. So British Muslims are hardly alone in trying to influence British foreign policy, are they?

There is no inherent tension between integration and plurality – that message can not be repeated often enough.

On one level, part of the problem here is that integration in general and islam in particular is massively overexposed. There is an awful lot of good work and good integration going on and the media spotlight does not help. It goes back to the article. Any media coverage almost equates to a guilty verdict in the court of public opinion – it has to stop. Things like the Birmingham Post story are just unhelpful, not least because it is a total non-story.

For what it’s worth, I think that your messages are exactly the right ones.

platinum786 – Yes, it think it is legitimate to talk about terror in a discussion thread about preventing violent extremism. Those last two words being civil service euphemism for terrorism. It is odd that in your third paragraph there is no mention of non-believers.

At ist most basic, I don’t really want common ground between myself amd mass murderers thanks all the same.

You guys time after time ignore the fact that we have issues with foreign policy that need to change, which provide fuel for terrorist fire. It doesn’t give them a right to do what they do, but it does provide some common ground between them and normal people.

The difference between the common ground between a Muslim, a Christian and an Al Queda member is that the Al Queda member can’t manipulate Christianity and the Christians faith, mix it with their similar views on foreign policy and create a terrorist sympathiser. He can with a Muslim, potentially do that.

PVE or any funding for that matter, can help reduce the chances of young teenage muslims, when they are impressionable, being influenced by extremists.

And, no, it is entirely up to you to integrate.

I don’t agree with that totally, MaidMarian. I do think that we had to change from where we were in the 1980’s, when racist language and discourse was widespread and unchallenged, when the police regularly humiliated and were racist to black men on the streets. I do think we need to make sure we don’t regress from where we are now back to that point, and it’s not unreasonable that we make accomodation for most religious practise, that we don’t deny people equality of opportunity. We have to be aware that racism does still exist in differing forms, and that there are genuine moments of marginalisation and discrimination.

The irony MaidMarian is that we are talking as if there is a static situation here. ‘We’ is really ‘Us’. There is a large, growing and integrated Asian and Black middle class. People are diving in, including many Muslims. Integration is a reality. It’s just that some people are frightened of that.

As you said earlier, every single person should know that there is absolutely no inherent contradiction between full integration into British society and plurality. Any activist who doesn’t advocate for that is part of the problem.

That is the message that should be being hammered home to two audiences.

(1) to those bigots in society who say that you can’t be British and black/muslim/jewish/hindu/sikh/whatever.

(2) to all those individuals who are nominally part of minority groups who are fearful of integration and full participation in society.

The message needs to be strong and consistent and come from all levels. If there is to be a guiding light to any government policy of these things, this should be it.

‘Britain is not bombing Africa, or India, or the West Indies, nor is it backing states which are. ‘

If you piece together isolated details of the 2001 intervention in Sierra Leone, aid to Malawi, Kenya and Nigeria, attempted coup in Equatorial Guinea, speeches by Mugabe, you could easily make a perfectly plausible-sounding case that it was, that Britain hated black people and was plotting to re-enslave them.

Nobody that I know of is particularly pushing that line here, but if a group decided to do so, there is no obvious reason why they wouldn’t succeed. Facts don’t have a veto on small-group beliefs.

If you were Katie Holmes’ mum and wanted her to dump Tom Cruise, you wouldn’t get anywhere by quoting facts about clam biology.

Sofia (19) – I’m not altogether sure what white flight has to do with anything here. Take the Glasgow bombers – they were doctors. Employed, salaried (probably) respected community figures. We are not talking about the fringes of society here. And, no, it is entirely up to you to integrate. Billy’s earlier comment is about right on this point. There is a great big civil society out there, ‘outsiders’ can dive right in for me. I see no reason why those who exclude themself should have any flights of fancy indulged. It would be nice to have more of what used to be called community spirit, sure. But the ones is on individuals to dive in. I shed no tears for those who make no effort.