Hizb ut-Tahrir trying to covertly influence sex-ed policy


by Sunny
17th July, 2009 at 5:23 pm    

Activists from the extremist group Hizb ut-Tahrir are covertly trying to influence the government’s consultation on sex education. Furthermore – they are being aided by Islam Channel, which has given them plenty of free airtime without revealing their affiliations.

Here’s the background. The government is holding a consultation on Sex & Relationship Education (SRE). In response, two Hizub ut-Tahrir activists have set up SRE Islamic – more on their blog here – which specifically aims to “educate” Muslim parents about the consultation and encourage them to protest.

Democratically, there’s nothing wrong with what HuT are doing. And yet one of the main organisers of SRE Islamic is brother to Jallaludin Patel – a former head of the UK chapter of Pizza HuT. They are also very similar to the BNP in their ideology (religious supremacism instead of racial supremacism) and tactics (putting on a moderate face).

HuT are also a deeply homophobic and anti-semitic organisation and their members have been convicted in other countries for distributing racist literature. In the UK they have tried a lot in recent years to scrub out their racism, albeit unsuccessfully.

Unsurprisingly, and given their unpopularity amongst Muslims, their literature so far has pointedly avoided mentioning any links to HuT, though it’s plain to see on their blog. What HuT actually want is separation:

We believe Muslim children need sex education, but this has to be age appropriate and based on an Islamic framework.

Sources tell me that SRE Islamic, spearheaded by Yusuf Patel (brother of Jalal Patel) have held over 30-40 events, many around the Rochdale area. This is classic HuT tactic – jumping on a polarising and emotive issue to build their own base and support.

What’s even worse is that they’ve been interviewed on Islam Channel (see here) and yet the interviewer completely avoided mentioning their HuT affiliations. This is the sort of journalism Islam Channel like to do eh?


              Post to del.icio.us


Filed in: British Identity,Islamists,Moral police,Net Campaigns






27 Comments below   |  

Reactions: Twitter, blogs
  1. pickles

    New blog post: Hizb ut-Tahrir trying to covertly influence sex-ed policy http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/5199


  2. ana

    RT @pickledpolitics: Hizb ut-Tahrir trying to covertly influence sex-ed policy http://is.gd/1CtUB » Ace, the Muslims are now at it too!




  1. Ahmad — on 17th July, 2009 at 5:33 pm  

    Not so covert, if you read the about us link.

    http://sreislamic.wordpress.com/about-us/

    And also their report that they gave out at the seminar in London said they were affiliated.

    When asked about this they said this is not an official HT campaign, but they didn’t want to hide their affiliation in case they were accused of being ‘covert’.

    If you look at the list of events on their blog, not one of the 40 or so mentioned was in Rochdale, but I know one was held there.

    Their message has been, become school governors, participate in your children’s school and take part in the consultation. Rather innocuous if you ask me, not the sort of cloak and dagger that we are used to on PP.

    I just think you ought to check your facts first.

  2. marvin — on 17th July, 2009 at 6:34 pm  

    I thought I was on a Facebook for a minute, I was looking for the “Like this” button!

    Good reporting Sunny. Perhaps the media will pick up on it on a couple of weeks. Or maybe not. This where political blogs excel.

  3. From the Spittoon — on 17th July, 2009 at 6:59 pm  

    Hey, we covered this on the Spittoon ages ago. Even got lovely pictures of all the HuT nutters.

    http://www.spittoon.org/archives/1486
    http://www.spittoon.org/archives/1517

  4. Ravi Naik — on 17th July, 2009 at 7:16 pm  

    And yet one of the main organisers of SRE Islamic is brother to Jallaludin Patel – a former head of the UK chapter of Pizza HuT.

    You do not need to bring his brother to make the Hut connection. Yusuf Patel says he belongs to HuT.

    HuT are also a deeply homophobic

    Isn’t moderate Islam homophobic as well?

  5. Shatterface — on 17th July, 2009 at 9:26 pm  

    ‘Isn’t moderate Islam homophobic as well?’

    Lets ask munir, he’s our self-appointed Islamic authority (apparently).

    Keep god out of the bedroom – his beard tickles.

  6. munir — on 18th July, 2009 at 12:37 am  

    Shatterface

    ‘Isn’t moderate Islam homophobic as well?’

    Lets ask munir, he’s our self-appointed Islamic authority (apparently).

    Shatterface I simply relay the orthodox Islamic position- you seem to believe this is less closer to the truth that a bunch of ignorant non Muslims like Douglas Clark who havent reached the level of a 5 year old in their knowledge speculating what Islam does or doesnt teach. Jahil Murakab indeed.

    Im not an Islamic authority -Im not a scholar or even a student of knowledge though in respect of PP its a case of “in the kingdom of the blind…”

    To say “is moderate Islam homophobic” you first have to define what you mean by “moderate Islam” and by “homophobic”

    As mentioned on the previous thread sodomy is a major sin in Islam (be it homosexual or heterosexual)
    This doesnt mean that homosexuals should be treated unkindly or harshly since they are still God’s creation.

    To summarise – the Muslim who commits homosexual acts is still a Muslim albiet a highly sinful one- since they have disobeyed what the Quran says

    The person who says homosexual acts are lawful (whether or not they themselves do them) is a non Muslim since they have denied what the Quran says

  7. munir — on 18th July, 2009 at 12:48 am  

    Shatterface
    “Keep god out of the bedroom – his beard tickles.”

    Ah yes our Islamic expert Shatterface actaully believes Islam teaches God is a corpereal anthromophic entity – except that this belief is considered the gravest and the only unforgiveable sin(shirk/idolatry) in Islam -comparing God to his creation- and renders the holder a non Muslim

    From Aqida Tahawiyya

    9. He is different from any created being.

    34. Anyone who describes Allah as being in any way the same as a human being has become an unbeliever. All those who grasp this will take heed and refrain from saying things such as the unbelievers say, and they will know that He, in His attributes, is not like human beings.

    38. He is beyond having limits placed on Him, or being restricted, or having parts or limbs. Nor is He contained by the six directions as all created things are.

    http://www.livingislam.org/o/t-aq_e.html

    You believe God should be kept out of politics and out of the bedroom – whish areas do you believe religion should be “allowed” to talk about?

  8. Shatterface — on 18th July, 2009 at 12:49 am  

    ‘To say “is moderate Islam homophobic” you first have to define what you mean by “moderate Islam” and by “homophobic”’

    Well, by homophobic, I mean something like this:

    ‘As mentioned on the previous thread sodomy is a major sin in Islam (be it homosexual or heterosexual)’

    Thanks for the help.

  9. Shatterface — on 18th July, 2009 at 12:52 am  

    ‘Ah yes our Islamic expert Shatterface actaully believes Islam teaches God is a corpereal anthromophic entity – except that this belief is considered the gravest and the only unforgiveable sin(shirk/idolatry) in Islam -comparing God to his creation- and renders the holder a non Muslim’

    Actually, I think god’s just a fairy tale cave men and small children themselves to explain the weather.

  10. Shatterface — on 18th July, 2009 at 12:57 am  

    How about blow jobs, munir? Can I stick it in somones’s mouth? How about if he just gives me one off the wrist? How about if we are just wrestling in a non-sexual way but I get a ‘broner’?

  11. munir — on 18th July, 2009 at 12:58 am  

    Shatterface

    “Well, by homophobic, I mean something like this:

    ‘As mentioned on the previous thread sodomy is a major sin in Islam (be it homosexual or heterosexual)’

    Thanks for the help.”

    In which case the answer is yes

    But you are of course being a hypocrite and an extremist – you are saying that people must accept and agree with everything homosexuals do or be “homophobes”

    This would like you saying people must agree with all aspects of the Islamic religion and what Muslims do or be “Islamophobes” or agree with evertying in Christianity or be “Christianophobes” or not disagree with anything action Hindus do or be “Hinduphobes”

    Is a person who thinks Muslims who believe Prophet Jesus (peace be upon him) is a prophet and not divine are commiting a grave sin an Islamophobe? Or a person who doesnt accept Guru Nanak as a Prophet a “Sikhophobe” ?

    By your logic yes

  12. munir — on 18th July, 2009 at 1:02 am  

    Shatterface are you Muslim?
    Since these laws apply to Muslims.

    Ive already answered these questions previously. I dont want to be an “idiotphobe” so Ill do it again

    Any sexual act between people of the same gender is forbidden. Between heterosexuals, who are permitted to marry each other, it is permitted within marriage.

  13. Shatterface — on 18th July, 2009 at 4:12 am  

    ‘Shatterface are you Muslim?’

    No, which is why I suggested we ask you what Islam’s views on homosexuality might be.

    That way you couldn’t accuse us of putting words in your mouth.

    ‘Any sexual act between people of the same gender is forbidden. Between heterosexuals, who are permitted to marry each other, it is permitted within marriage.’

    And again, you’ve simply demonstrated the fear and hatred that lies behind religious attitudes to sex.

  14. Shatterface — on 18th July, 2009 at 4:17 am  

    ‘This would like you saying people must agree with all aspects of the Islamic religion and what Muslims do or be “Islamophobes” or agree with evertying in Christianity or be “Christianophobes” or not disagree with anything action Hindus do or be “Hinduphobes”

    No, because those beliefs are just superstition, whereas the ‘belief’ that people of the same sex can love each other is a verifiable fact.

  15. Boyo — on 18th July, 2009 at 8:11 am  

    Yawn. Yet another reason to follow the French model. ;-)

  16. Richard — on 18th July, 2009 at 2:42 pm  

    I dont know what all the fuss is about? aren`t muslims just furry faced cuddly christians with towels on thier heads? or am i missing the point?
    look at the facts folks!! please name any islamic republic in the world without conflict!! that should be interesting, or one islamic country where minority religions are actually tolerated, i have no wish do be a british dhimmi.

  17. Arif — on 18th July, 2009 at 3:14 pm  

    Anyway, back to the article.

    When I went to school I was one of the minority who was excused sex education classes.

    This is not because my family has any HuT affiliation.

    I have not been responsible for any teenage pregnancies.

    I don’t think there was anything disturbing about me not going to that particular class.

    I do think there is something disturbing about giving schools primary responsibility for inculcating social or ethical values – in terms of removing responsibilities from parents and wider society and loading too much on to institutions.

    Sex education is a minor part of that dynamic, though, and focusing on it alone is probably more a power issue than one of responsibility in this context.

  18. halima — on 18th July, 2009 at 3:51 pm  

    In many, many parts of America, sex education is also quite controversial. It’s not rocket science. Long before Christian fundementalism or Islamic HuT came along, people have had reservations about sex education – especially in mixed schools.

    Quite frankly, I think everyone pays if sex education is left late, but resistance to it. I would’ve thought that this is one thing HuT would agree with their secular counterparts? That teenage pregancies has opportunity costs and costs that come to early for young people.

    Interestingly the UK has the highest teenage pregnancy rate in Europe – and i don’t know whether this is on a downward or upward trend.

    Just out of interest, I wonder what sex education in an Islamic ( or Christian framework) would be? I guess it would be an abstinence model, no sex outside marriage etc etc. Or something I have missed?

    What kind of sex education do they do in Church of England schools? Does it have a religious framework or a secular one? How different would they be – say on messages around STDs?

  19. Clairwil — on 18th July, 2009 at 10:33 pm  

    Bloody hell I thought the Catholics up here were bad with their mad sex education of the condoms cause AIDS variety. Can’t we just boot religion out of schools and back into the home where it belongs.

  20. Sunny — on 18th July, 2009 at 11:30 pm  

    In many, many parts of America, sex education is also quite controversial. It’s not rocket science. Long before Christian fundementalism or Islamic HuT came along, people have had reservations about sex education – especially in mixed schools.

    I’m sorry, I don’t buy this. Especially if you mean that sex ed should not be taught in schools – regardless of whether HuT get involved.

    It is a fact that children have relationships at school etc and sex education is an important part of helping them become responsible, knowledgeable kids. It’s as important as teaching them science and maths.

    So even it were some nutjobs Catholic org raising objections – I’d tell them the same – they’re wrong. And as Clairwil said – keep religion out of school.

  21. halima — on 19th July, 2009 at 2:10 am  

    “I’m sorry, I don’t buy this. Especially if you mean that sex ed should not be taught in schools – regardless of whether HuT get involved.”

    Sunny. Didn’t say the above. I was merely stating a fact in the spirit of opening a debate about religion and sex education. Think you’ve mis-understood my comment.

  22. douglas clark — on 19th July, 2009 at 11:18 pm  

    munir,

    Any sexual act between people of the same gender is forbidden. Between heterosexuals, who are permitted to marry each other, it is permitted within marriage.

    As usual, according to you.

    I don’t deny that your holy book is open to that interpretation, I am just saying that you have to grow up and let it go. Though that would be a bit beyond a fundamentalist arsehole like you, wouldn’t it? And that is all you are munir, a fundamentalist idiot. Much like many Christians.

    You lastly ‘accused’ me of being married to an Indian woman, chance would be a fine thing. Now your cheap and nasty assumption is that I am a homosexual? Your arse is completely safe from me mate, whilst your stupid brain isn’t.

  23. douglas clark — on 19th July, 2009 at 11:28 pm  

    Or maybe it was the BNP tit that said I must be married

  24. douglas clark — on 19th July, 2009 at 11:31 pm  

    The point being, as Jai has said before, there in nothing to be seen between BNP thugs and the like’s of munir. They are both thugs, they are both evil and they are both a piece of shite.

  25. Naadir Jeewa — on 23rd July, 2009 at 9:08 am  

    The funny thing is, parents don’t seem to mind when an imaam attempts to give sex ed. to children at some evening class. Maybe because the metaphors they employ are hilarious.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Pickled Politics © Copyright 2005 - 2010. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.
With the help of PHP and Wordpress.