Vox Africa’s recent debate on Islam and terrorism appeared on its flagship programme The Hot Seat, with Akintayo Adetokunbo-edmund chairing in an urbane but assertive manner.
Four participants – Tommy Robinson of the English Defence League, Paul Armstrong of the Association of British Muslims, Abdullah Al Andalusi of the Muslim Debate Initiative and the BNP’s Carlos Cortiglia – initially resembled a lively Question Time or Newsnight panel (except that neither could have hosted this debate because Akintayo (right) is something the BBC doesn’t possess: a genuinely impartial chair).
Then the Muslim Public Affairs Committee’s Raza Nadim joined by phone with a prolonged ad hominem attack on Robinson which Akintayo had to curtail by calling “Raza!” in a raised voice. It was something he had to repeat throughout, and to his credit he never lost his composure in the face of the cleric’s rants.
Armstrong and Al Andalusi are sophisticated European converts to Islam and beneficiaries of 3,000 years of Western culture. So I’m glad Nadim was there to show the pan-African channel’s viewers the uncompromising vehemence with which beard-and-burqa imperialists replace debate, victimising diverse communities which turn to English Defence League as a bulwark and final pressure-valve.
Despite the BNP’s elected politicians, the debate centred around the EDL and its concerns, so that a programme entitled Is Islam was synonymous with terrorism turned to Muslim paedophile gangs. With concerns about, for example, the sale of seven-year-old girls for marriage in Niger (legal under Sharia law), it seems our struggle is the talk of Africa.
Akintayo ended by giving both sides food for thought, reminding Tommy that Nigeria’s Boko Haram kill Muslims as much as Christians; and asking Nadim whether it’s right for Muslims to come to Great Britain from overseas and tell their hosts how to live. I’ll watch The Hot Seat again.
Gerry Dorrian
300 words
Click here to watch the debate
or watch below:
Is Islam synonymous with Terrorism? Tommy... by EDLrelated
Why don't you read the article on Niger you quoted, again.
ReplyDelete'In a country where laws are regarded as a colonial imposition decades after independence from France, Mrs Soumana explained that the legal age for marriage is 15 for girls and 16 for boys'
Doesn't seem like theres Shariah law there - plus the legal Age for sexual consent is 13 in Spain, and 14 in Japan. Why don't you criticise them?
Seems someone here may have a prejudice against Islam..tut tut...300 words, yet not one truth to be found.
Anonymous, many Sharia lawyers worldwide agree that a marriage can be contracted from the birth of a baby girl.
ReplyDeleteThe sexual age for consent in Great Britain is 16, but that hasn't stopped men turning up with 9-year-old wives in Islington, London.
I oppose those imperialists who have demonstrated against democracy and for wholesale imposition of Sharia in my country, especially when those who came here from abroad faced opposition to their project in their own countries. Inevitably, there can be a "halo effect" when whole communities of Muslims fail to raise their voices against men marrying girls when they are still children. Is this prejudice? You tell me.
"Sharia lawyers worldwide agree that a marriage can be contracted from the birth of a baby girl"
ReplyDeleteThat's patently false, and you know it. Anything that could remotely come close, is a betrothal - which, I might add, is not binding on the girl to accept once she reaches the age of maturity. Secondly, African and European tradition believes in Betrothals, so don't come here like it's some alien concept - it ain't.
As for 'The sexual age for consent in Great Britain is 16, but that hasn't stopped men turning up with 9-year-old wives in Islington, London.'
Yeah, it hasn't stopped white, black and other people having casual sex with young girls. Heck, children are starting to have sex with each other around that age. And don't talk to me about that rubbish, when British culture promotes the sexualisation of children (just look at the fashion shops for kids). And I'm not the only one who has noticed it.
The only imperialists I see, are those who tell other people what to do (i.e. you). Let people live as they want to live, as long as no one is forcing you to do anything, it ain't your business.
In essence, mind your own business.
Anonymous, I'm telling nobody what to do, I'm simply raising concerns on a blog. If you find what I write so offensive, you're perfectly free to click the webpage away and go mind your own business.
ReplyDeleteYou're right that people of all ethncities abusse children; what I and my many associates are saying is that what is defined in child abuse in the UK is hard-wired into Islam as practiced by many people in this country, both British-born and immigrants.
I'm happy to let people live as they want, provided they do not harm the innocent - in this case, children. You will see Abdullah Al Andalusi in the video above defending marriage to somebody who is "biologically a woman" - he does not seem to be bothered by the thought that this category includes many young children. It all boils down to Akintayo's comment asking whether it's right for people to come to a country and try to tell their hosts how to live. For an increasing amount of people the answer to that is "no".
You take offense with Abdullah's defense of (consentual) marriage to women who come of age biologically - but you haven't proved us with a criteria of what a child is.
ReplyDeletePlease define what you consider a child. Tell us all where the it intellectual maturity, a sense of responsibility, age, biology, or british law?
Give us a objective definition, before you arbitrarily go round dictating to others what they can or can't do.
OK anonymous, here's three things I hope you will think about:
ReplyDelete1)in Great Britain sex with a girl under 16 is a crime.
2)Under common law in England and Wales, the concept of consent is meaningless in ANY area when applied to anybody under the age of 13.
3)If you support the right of grown men to have a "consensual" sexual relationship with young girls, I suggest you have the courage to say so at your local social services office, sexual health centre or police station.
I am not arbitrarily dictating to anybody. I was a psychiatric nurse for many years and saw the harm that sexual relationships can do to children. And by sexual relationships in relation to children, this generally means abuse. A girl does not change from being a child one day to being the potential property of a man the next because that day she has her first period: she is not the slave of her biological processes. Women fought long and hard to win rights such as this, and if we let predatory males take our society backwards then we do not deserve to be called a civilised society.