Child sex grooming by Muslim gangs in the U.K.

Jon MC

 The number of cases of Muslim gangs grooming young white girls has reached the point where serious questions are being asked as to the reasons behind this particular crime.

What is remarkable is that these questions which, previously, would have been unasked – due to the precepts of political correctness – are being asked publicly and serious answers demanded.

A further point is that it is now permissible to actually couple the words “Muslim” and “sex-grooming” in a sentence – that is, it is permissible to state that Muslims have committed these crimes. For non-U.K. readers it is worth pointing out that up until perhaps six months ago the Muslims carrying out such acts were called “Asian” in the U.K. media to camouflage the identity of the perpetrators. This, naturally enough, did not sit too well with the Hindu, Sikh, Chinese and other “Asian” groups within U.K. society who felt – with considerable justification – that they were being condemned by association; which is, itself, dreadfully non-PC of course. Those who value free speech (with all its risks of offence) over obfuscation and (if you’ll pardon a mixed metaphor) verbal legerdemain, must be amused to see those that support PC-think so neatly and deeply impaled on the horns of a dilemma created by PC-think in the first place.

 The reason for writing this special is not in fact the trial and conviction of yet another Muslim child-sex-grooming gang (see here) on May 14^th 2013, but rather three subsequent press pieces across which I came.

On May 16^th, in this article in the Daily Telegraph (Do read, please) Dr Taj Hargey, imam of the Oxford Islamic Congregation states that the actions of Muslim grooming gangs are “bound up with religion and race” because all the men – though of different nationalities – were all Muslim and they “deliberately targeted vulnerable white girls, whom they appeared to regard as ‘easy meat’, to use one of their revealing, racist phrases”. He added that “in mosques across the country” (Britain) a doctrine “that denigrates all women, but treats whites with particular contempt,” is preached, “They encourage their followers to believe that these [non-Muslim] women are habitually promiscuous, decadent, and sleazy; sins which are made all the worse by the fact that they are kaffurs or non-believers. Their dress code, from miniskirts to sleeveless tops, is deemed to reflect their impure and immoral outlook. According to this mentality, these white women deserve to be punished for their behaviour by being exploited and degraded.”

There was much else in the article, but the above gives the flavour and thrust of his comments.

What is notable is that, for the first time in the U.K. a Muslim Imam has gone very publicly “on the record” in stating that (paraphrasing Shakespeare) “something is rotten with the state of Islam”{1}. A further point to note is that Dr. Hargey is an Imam in Oxford – the same city in which the latest batch of Muslim child-sex-groomers operated, therefore one might assume that he is speaking from direct experience of such attitudes.

 The second source was a piece on the BBC Radio four “Sunday” program, 19.05.2013.

Below is a transcript of the piece. Let me acknowledge that any errors in transcription are mine alone. I also include some commentary on the various views related in the piece.

 Edward Stourton: “Attitudes to this area [sex-grooming] are changing among Muslims in Britain, Kevin Bouquet‘s report begins with the views of Julie Sadhiki of the Islamic Society of Britain.”

Julie Sadhiki: “I would be the first to say that I have not done enough, or felt that I should make it a priority of mine to do enough about this in the past and I accept that and so I will do whatever I can now to make that much better going forward.”

KB: “Last week Julie Sadhiki helped launch ‘the community alliance against sexual exploitation’. She says that while only a tiny minority of British Pakistani men are involved in crimes of grooming, to ignore them would be to fail the victims.”

JS: “we really want to work very closely with people of different faiths, civic groups as well as the authorities to learn lessons and pick out what things have maybe gone wrong, but also what things are working well – and also really raise awareness, I think people are not really necessarily fully aware of how horrific the abuse has actually been.”

KB: “Asghar Bukhari is a [leading] member of the ‘Muslim Public Affairs Committee‘”.

AB: “You infer that certain members of the Muslim community must say ‘We must do more’ and that ‘there is a problem’; but what exactly are they asking us to do? What do they want average Asians or Muslims to do in this Country? Do they want us to become vigilantes and start to kick down peoples’ doors? It’s not like these pimps or paedophiles announce their activities in the local mosque or in the local town centre. The problem with Muslims coming out and saying that it is a problem within the Muslim communities is that they are playing right into the hands of the Islamophobic narrative. They are almost endorsing from within that the Muslim community has a problem and that we are to blame, when clearly that is simply unfair and unjustified.” (Emboldened words reflect AB‘s emphases, not mine.)

JS: “Well, I don’t sign up to that, because I think, look, I have a duty and a responsibility as a Muslim, but really as a citizen, as a mother, to look at these crimes and really see how horrific they’ve actually been. To constantly be focussing on ‘Islamophobia’, I think is actually very, very unhelpful. I’ve seen other people make similar comments and I’ve rebutted those as well. Yes, we acknowledge that there are issues – I do think that ‘Islamophobia’ is real, but I certainly would never use that in cases like this to stop me from getting involved and doing what I can to help.”

 Commentary. The words of Julie Sadhiki are to be welcomed. In all crime it is always a “tiny minority” who are involved, but it is good to hear someone at least acknowledging that there is a problem with sex-grooming and that it’s consequences are “horrific”. On the other hand Asghar Bukhari’s statement is full of ironies, he says: “ Do they want us [Muslims] to become vigilantes”. Sadly, Muslims are already acting as “vigilantes” in the U.K. – only such vigilantes are bothered more about people drinking alcohol or women not dressing Islamically (which only reinforces Hargey’s point about the attitudes of Mussalmen to non-Muslim women) than they are about sex-grooming gangs,. Bukhari then goes on to infer that the real problem is Islamophobia and that, by implication, there is no problem within Muslim communities and that to suggest that there is, is “clearly …simply unfair and unjustified.” Sadhiki offers little in reply to Bukhari beyond noting the prevalence of the “denial strategy” by Muslim speakers and we can see that, once raised, the Islamophobia canard still acts as an effective bar to clear and critical thinking, since Sadhiki fails to rebut or even reject AB’s claims.

KB: “To try to find an answer to Asghar Bukhari’s question, as to what can ordinary members of the [Muslim] community do about child-grooming, I went to west Yorkshire and met up with Shakeel Aziz who is a youth worker… Tell me a bit about the Pakistani community here, how long has it been established?”

SA: “The Pakistani community has been in Keighley since probably the early 1960s, and there is a ‘chain migration’ which means that up until this day there are still [members of] the Pakistani community migrating here from Pakistan.”

KB: “What would you say has been the reaction to the reports of gangs of people grooming young girls, what have the people made of that?”

SA: “The reaction from the community has gone from absolute disbelief through disgust to a real shock which has sent [sic] through the whole community.”

KB: “well we’ve come now to an old converted primary school where Shakeel helps to run a youth project. Now one of the subjects that Shakeel and the other staff have been talking to the young lads about in recent times is this whole subject of grooming…We’ve arranged to meet a few of the young lads who come here.”

[Young lad speaking: At the project] “normally the staff is saying [sic] to us about child sex-grooming and, err, and our views on it. As Pakistani Muslim men, we know it’s wrong. We all get generalised as ‘groomers’, [but] it’s not just a Pakistani problem. Nine out of ten ‘groomers’ are white men. In the media there’s an over-representation of Pakistani men.”

[Another young speaker]: “They need more backing to provide funding to projects that are actually groing out and doing workshops where they deliver them into schools, the local community, the local mosques and educate the youth that this is not something from Islam.”

Commentary. Aziz states that the attitude of the Muslim community ranges from outright denial of any problem, (c.f. Bukhari above), through disgust to shock. Although I do not doubt for a moment either Aziz’s sincerity or determination to fight the attitudes within the Muslim community that lead to such acts, the comments of one of the young speakers suggests there is a considerable way to go. He says: “Nine out of ten ‘groomers’ are white men.” which implies a degree of denial. Ironically, whilst it would be unfair to infer that that means that 10% of “groomers” are Muslim, given that (according to figures from the Muslim Council of Great Britain) 2.7% of the England and Wales population is Muslim and therefore about 1.4% is Muslim male, that still suggests that the crime of “grooming” is more prevalent within the Muslim community than elsewhere. A second charge is that “In the media there’s an over-representation of Pakistani men”, which is fundamentally untrue in that the U.K. press reports all such grooming crimes – which in turn reinforces the inference that this particular crime is more prevalent within the Muslim community. Finally it is perhaps worth noting that these young men consider themselves to be “ Pakistani Muslim men” rather than British-Muslims – which suggests a certain disconnect and lack of integration into British society, an echo of the “Muslim/Kaffir” divide promulgated by Islam perhaps.

KB: “I’m with Iman Ali Askhamani, he’s director of an organisation called ‘Street’. Tell me, what is ‘Street’?”

AA: “Street works with young people who are at risk of violence and criminality and we work with young men from all backgrounds. What we are identifying increasingly is something called a ‘crisis of masculinity’ where young men are increasingly reverting to violence as a way to resolve issues and also where there is a profound disrespect culture towards women.”

KB: “But the people responsible for this sort of crime [child sex-grooming] don’t necessarily go to mosque, they don’t necessarily go to the youth projects; how do you reach them?”

AA: “What we find is that a lot of these individuals do lead a double life; one part of their life is a very respectable life where they do come to the mosque and they do engage in cultural activities in the community, and then there’s, like, a really hidden double life that they have involving this really, kind of, evil behaviour. So it’s important to get messages out their to get people to recognise that wrong behaviour is wrong and secondly that if they are being, in any way, pulled towards this behaviour that they can get the support that will channel them away from involvement in such gangs.”

KB: “ Ali Askhamani’s group is organising special sermons in every mosque in the Country on the last Friday of June, focussing on the safety of children [and] condemning sexual grooming. But he emphasises that this is not just a Muslim problem; pimps and perverts come from all sections of society. Hillary Wilmer agrees, she’s the director of ‘Pace‘ – ‘parents against child exploitation’. She said it would be a mistake for parents to fear one community more than any other.”

HW: “Hopefully most [people] would acknowledge that this is a tiny criminal minority within that [Muslim] community. It is not fair to blame a whole community; but, on the other hand, we should not bury our heads in the sand because there are cultural issues to address and what we’re so delighted about at the moment is the number of people from within that community who are standing up and saying ‘we’ve got to address this’. What we would like is for the majority white community also to take responsibility for things that go on in our culture which are really unhelpful and which lead to this sexual exploitation not being recognised for what it is.”

Commentary: Ali Askhamani is honest enough to admit that many (young) Muslim men lead double lives in that they attend the Mosque and behave like “good Muslims” on the surface, yet are “evil” underneath. (Note: commentary on the teachings of Islam viz-a-viz women follows in a later segment. Neither am I concerning myself with how a “good Muslim” should behave according to the Islamic canon of scriptures.) Again, however “he emphasises that this is not just a Muslim problem; pimps and perverts come from all sections of society” which is of course true, but such statements also seek to minimise the degree to which sex-grooming is prevalent within the male Muslim community. Hillary Wilmer makes a very interesting, and guarded, point in saying “the majority white community [must] also to take responsibility for things that go on in our culture which are really unhelpful and which lead to this sexual exploitation not being recognised for what it is.” she could be meaning one of two things: either she is referring to the fact that the fear of being labelled “racist” and/or “Islamophobic” has acted as a massive deterrent to the Police, Social workers etc. actually identifying Muslim gangs; or she means that white people must take responsibility for the grooming done by whites. Both interpretations are equally valid (“white” society failed to identify Jimmy Savile and other sexual predators for decades for example), but it is a pity that she felt the need when talking about a “sensitive” matter (Muslim feelings) to obfuscate as she did.

Edward Stourton: “We’re joined now by Dr. Taj Hargey, who is the Imam of the Oxford Islamic congregation and Sheikh Ibrahim Moghra, who organised a conference on this issue for the Muslim Council of Britain. Good morning to you both. [Replies]. Dr. Hargey, in what sense do you think the religious background of [Muslim] men in a case like this pre-disposes them to commit this kind of crime?”

Dr.H: “Well it is the mood-music from the mosques and madrassas [Islamic, in particular Koran, schools] that has got a ‘drip-drip’ effect over many decades that says that women of another culture, another race, especially British women who are ‘immodestly’ dressed and who are, therefore, impure and immoral – that they are ‘fair game’. They [mosques and madrassas] don’t say that directly, but they juxtapose the Muslim women wearing the Hijab and Niqab, the headscarf and the face-veil [and say] ‘of course our women are better, other women, by the unspoken sub-text, are not so good’ and I think this is what we need to address. I think we cannot bury our heads in the sand and say that this issue does not affect the Muslim community – it does. Most of the perpetrators, whether in Rochdale, Telford, Derby or wherever are Muslim men and whether they are Pakistani or Eritrean doesn’t really matter, what is important is that they are Muslim. So where do they get this idea about women? Where does this misogyny and patriarchy come from?”

ES – interrupts: “And your answer to that question is very clear, it come from the mosques?”

Dr. H: “Not just from them, but from the madrassa, from the community – it’s pervasive! Just to blame the mosques would be unfair, but I think we need to examine Islamic Theology and especially certain fatwas and so forth that denigrate women, that patronises them, that regards them as chattel, as possessions. For example, Saudi Arabia – looked on as the so-called ‘leader’ of the Muslim community [worldwide] – they don’t even allow their women to travel unaccompanied by male relatives. So we have a whole mind-set that needs to be combated. I think what we are trying to do is solve the problem at the end of the production line, it’s never going to work. We need to go the beginning of the production line and see how women are objectified in Muslim society.”

ES: “Sheikh Ibrahim Moghra, two very clear points: the first being that that’s the message that comes through in all sorts of ways in the Muslim community and the second that that’s directly related to this kind of case. What’s your response to those charges?”

IM: “I totally disagree with much of the assessments [sic] and analysis of Dr. Hargey. The mosques and the madrassas would be the last place where encouragement would be taught for sexual misbehaviour.”

ES interrupts: “That’s not what he’s saying. He’s saying that a view of women comes across, which leads to…”

IM interrupts: “the teachings of Islam in the Theology of Islam is very, very clear: sexual relations can only be between a male and a female who are married to one another. The fatwas that are issued are very, very clear about that and this idea of suggesting that a distant Country is influencing us here in how our youngsters behave on the streets is absolutely, err, something very difficult to connect with this issue. The example of women not being allowed to travel alone, I’m just thinking [that] if these young girls who have been exploited and who have been pounced upon had been accompanied by a male then they would have been safer. But let’s not go into the situation of distant Countries. For me the issue here is really what can we do now to ensure that this menace is eradicated from our societies and our communities.”

ES interupts: “forgive me, but you did not quite address the point, or at least I did not think you did, which was not to do with the teaching on sexual relations in Islam, it was to do with the attitude to women that comes across in all sorts of different ways.”

IM: “Well, let me share with you what Islam teaches about the attitude that Muslims should have towards women: there’s very, very categoric teachings within the Quran and within the Hadis traditions that the woman is to be honoured, that the woman is to be given respect and dignity. We cannot allow cultural practices to be packaged as if they were Islamic teachings. There is Islam and the teachings of Islam which is very clear [and] there is cultural behaviour which is to be condemned because it does not fit with the teachings of Islam.”

ES: “Let me bring in Dr. Hargey there. Your response to that?”

Dr.H: “Yea, with due respect, what the Sheikh is talking about is Muslim attitudes to Muslim women, not to non-Muslim women. This is the…[IM shouts Hargey down, ES intervenes to restore order, Dr. H continues…] And for the Sheikh to talk about Saudi Arabia as ‘some distant Country’ is very disingenuous. This is the Country that brings the Wahhabi type of Islam right to our shores here, so we can’t just dismiss that. But the issue here is how the Muslim society, whether it is the Imams, whether it is the mosques and madrassas or the elders – whatever – how they view women of the ‘other‘ – the Kafir women, the non-believing women. They are ‘fair game’, they are ‘easy meat’ because they are not fit [“proper”], the way they dress they are inviting this kind of thing in their [the Muslim men] minds.”

IM: “That is not true. Muslims have been living in this Country for six, seven decades or more and non-Muslim women have been dressing in the way they have been dressing throughout that time. So there is not an issue of Muslim men looking at non-Muslim women and the way that they are dressing to say they are ‘fair game’. The law is the law. You cannot, there is no space and room in the teachings of Islam where Muslims have got licence to abuse non-Muslim women just because of the way they dress, the way they live or whatever their lifestyles are. The bottom line here is that we have an issue in our Country where young women are being abused.”

Dr. H: “So why is that all the victims are non-Muslim? Why with young girls? There isn’t a single Muslim girl that’s been groomed and abused by a Muslim gang, so clearly there is an issue or race, religion, culture, whatever, and we should stop burying our heads in the sand and talking about the ‘wonderful hadith’ and what Islam says, because the reality is very different on the streets.”

ES then ends the piece.

Commentary: Dr. Hargey makes very clear statements (again) that there are problems with the attitudes inculcated by mosques, madrassas, Imams and Muslim society towards non-Muslim women in particular who are declared to be “impure and immoral” in comparison at least to Muslim women who dress modestly (Niqab) and act modestly (staying in their homes or being fully covered in public). Whilst acknowledging that there may be a “cultural” element at work here, Hargey also links these attitudes to Islamic Theology and Fatwas and the attitudes to women expressed in them. In other words, all “cultural” aspects aside, Hargey sees the problem as lying fundamentally with Islam itself.

Ibrahim Moghra responds in what I would call the typical Muslim way – he denies that Islam is anything to do with the issue and seeks to absolve it from any responsibility. Moghra states “the teachings of Islam in the Theology of Islam is very, very clear: sexual relations can only be between a male and a female who are married to one another. The fatwas that are issued are very, very clear about that”. Here Moghra is using Kitman{2} in that the “ the teachings of Islam in the Theology of Islam” not to mention the hadith are also “ very, very clear” that Muslim men can also have sex with “those whom your right hand possess”{3} which Islam has always known to mean female slaves – i.e. sex-slaves – from the examples of Mohammed and his companions (“Sahaba”). Moghra also states – quite outrageously – that if “these young girls who have been exploited…had been accompanied by a male then they would have been safer”, thus we can see that in Moghra’s eyes the exploitation was the girls’ fault for not obeying Islamic laws (or at least Wahhabi/Salafi versions thereof) – which is the position articulated by many orthodox Imams{4,5}.

Delightfully, Ed Staunton doesn’t let Moghra get away with evading the question by referring to Islamic marriage – this in itself is a departure from what would have happened in the recent past – and Moghra replies by saying how Islam honours and respects women. This is probably enough for Staunton who may not be that familiar with Islamic teaching, but as Hargey points out, Moghra is “talking about …Muslim attitudes to Muslim women, not to non-Muslim women” which annoys Moghra enough that he shouts Hargey down. Hargey’s next point is also telling: “Saudi Arabia… is the Country that brings the Wahhabi type of Islam right to our shores” which is a tacit statement that this form of Islam is “extremist”{5} in nature. He then explains how the attitudes of these types of Islam leads to their considering non-Muslim women as “fair game” and “easy meat”{4}.

Once again Moghra just denies the validity of Hargey’s statement and states that it is a problem affecting the whole Country – the implication being that Muslims are no worse than anyone else.

Hargey then points out that “all the victims are non-Muslim …There isn’t a single Muslim girl that’s been groomed and abused by a Muslim gang, so clearly there is an issue or race, religion, culture, [or] whatever.” and finishes up by calling out Moghra on his denial{6} saying: “we should stop burying our heads in the sand and talking about the ‘wonderful hadith’ and what Islam says, because the reality is very different on the streets.”

I find myself in agreement with Hargey in that whilst it is true that the majority of child abusers/groomers etc, are white (given the percentages in the population), sources strongly suggest that “Asian” men are disproportionately represented amongst the offenders.

A quick “head count” on the Muslim contributors to the piece shows that three out of five acknowledge that there is a problem whereas the remainder basically dismiss the concerns. Whilst this may well be the BBC aiming for “balance”, it strikes me as worrying that perhaps 40% of Muslim speakers still refuse to accept that Muslim grooming of non-Muslim girls takes place (at least to a significant degree).

This article, in the Guardian newspaper notes that “A 2011 study by the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre looked at the 2,379 potential offenders caught grooming girls since 2008. Of 940 suspects whose race could be identified, 26% were Asian, 38% were white and 32% were recorded as unknown. A report for the children‘s commissioner in 2012 found there were 1,514 perpetrators. Of these, 545 were white, 415 were Asian and 244 were black. The ethnicity of 21% of perpetrators was not recorded…Asians are roughly 7% of the population.” For the latter report, for those whose ethnicity was recorded these figures convert to (approx.) 45% white, 35% Asian and 20% Black.

We should not make the mistake, unlike the U.K. media, of conflating “Asian” with “Muslim”. It is likely that some grooming cases take place within other segments of the Asian population.

But, however you slice this, there is little escape from the fact that in those cases where ethnicity was recorded, 7% of the general population (Asians) account for between 26-35% of offences, call it ~30% on average, and this means that “Asians” are about four times as likely as the general population overall to groom children.

The Guardian article also points out that “Attempts to analyse the Asian figure further runs into problems. Just 35 of the 415 Asians are recorded as having Pakistani heritage and thus highly likely to be Muslim, and only 5 are recorded as being from a Bangladeshi background. The heritage of 366 of the Asian group is not stated in those figures.” What this actually means, however, is that in the 49 cases where the “heritage” of the perpetrators was recorded 40 are very probably Muslim (on the basis of their Pakistani/Bangladeshi heritage){7}, thus the Guardian’s usage of the words “Just” and “only” in relation to men of Pakistani/Bangladeshi origin is very tendentious (but also very PC).

Let me state straight away that the figures are too small to give genuinely meaningful results, but if this is extrapolated across all “Asian” grooming, it would mean that Muslims commit ~80% of such “Asian” crimes despite only representing ~39% of the “Asian” population. Again this shows that the crime of sex-grooming is more prevalent (approx. twice) amongst “Asian-Muslims” of Pakistani/Bangladeshi origin than the general “Asian” population. (This also ignores the presence of other Muslims within the “Asian” populations as well as those outside it.)

Thus it does not seem to matter how the evidence is presented (although perhaps I mean “sliced”), Muslim men are consistently shown to be more prone to the crime of child-sex-grooming than other groups whether we consider this in juxtaposition to the general population as a whole or limit it to the minority “Asian” section (which, as said, immediately disregards many Muslims in the U.K.).

How close the actual figures deduced are to the truth I cannot say (due to the woefully – and wilfully – inadequate recording of information), but link this clearly greater Muslim prevalence to what Hargey said about Muslim gangs grooming only non-Muslim children (though not all white{8}) and I do think that there is considerable cause for concern that the U.K. Muslim community has a particular problem with “groomers”, though since their victims lie outside that community, not with victims in their community, which probably contributes to the denial and dismissal.

This map shows the Muslim rape-gangs currently identified and prosecuted in the U.K. (~45 at the time of count).

By no means have all of these made the headlines. In fact a mere handful have had high-profile treatment in the Press – as always it depends what is deemed newsworthy and acceptable to print at any given time.

The U.K. Police are on record as saying that another 50 such gangs are under investigation (to be fair they do not state that all are Muslim).

In the face of such evidence, it is almost impossible, I suggest, for an un-biased observer (or perhaps I mean one not denying the evidence) to claim that there is no problem with child-sex grooming/rape gangs abusing non-Muslim girls in the U.K.

 Conclusion.

Depending on whether one takes a “glass half full” or a “glass half empty” position, the current situation is either encouraging or worrying. Personally, I find it is mixture of both (what that says about my particular glass I’m not sure).

On the positive side the topic of Muslim-child-sex-grooming has migrated, under a form of osmotic pressure, into the light of day and there is a growing awareness of the problem itself and the beginning of a positive series of steps to combat it from both within the Muslim community and outside.

Further, at least some Muslims are admitting that there is a clear religious component in the attitude of these gangs to “Kaffir” (non-Muslim) women and are beginning to challenge Islamic teachings on the matter.

Again, people like Hillary Wilmer seem to be hinting that considerations like political correctness and fears of being labelled “racist” or “Islamophobic” need to be over-ridden in such cases – as indeed they do – and this too is encouraging if it results in the climate of fear surrounding “Muslim sensitivities” being removed.

Dr. Hargey made the valid point that the highly negative attitudes towards the “other” – i.e. non-Muslims – is being promulgated by Wahhabi/Salafi Islam on which Saudi Arabia expends vast resources. Whilst I am not so sanguine as to those being the only “schools” of Islam that harbour such views, it is nevertheless encouraging to see such “fundamentalist” schools called out over the consequences of their teachings and it is only fair to acknowledge that there are strands within Islam that would repudiate such views. On the downside, it also has to be admitted that such “liberal” thinking is loosing ground steadily to the more “fundamentalist” aka orthodox schools throughout the Muslim world{9} at the present time. Thus it is perhaps a little ironic that “liberal Islam”{10} seems only to flourish only in the “kaffir” West – which merely reinforces the orthodox Muslims’ view that theirs is the “true Islam” of course and not the liberals!

On the negative side there are still many Muslim speakers (examples of whom are cited above) who are in a state of denial about the issue and insist that (at worst) Muslims are no worse than anyone else (which is contradicted by all the statistics above) and further that Islam is the cure not the cause.

This latter should not be a surprise given that Islam contains a doctrine called “Sitr”. According to this doctrine Muslims should “cover up” the sins/crimes of other Muslims{11} to protect the “honour” of Muslims individually and the Muslim Umma (community) generally. The reasons for this doctrine can be traced back to the Koran which teaches that Muslims are “the best community” of mankind (K.3:110) and that they are “superior” (3:139) to other people. Thus for the failings of the “most superior and best people” on the planet to be exposed – and in particular exposed to non-Muslims, whom the Koran characterises as the “lowest”, “vilest” etc. of living things – would be a matter of great shame and damaging to the “honour” of the Muslim Umma.

Again, in the Koran, Islam is extolled as the perfect religion (K.5:3), thus it is far worse, of course, if Islam itself was implicated in any shameful behaviours.

Given the above, one can readily see why so many Muslims react with “absolute disbelief” (in the words of Shakeel Aziz), perhaps more accurately with a refusal to believe, when any notion that Muslims are acting reprehensibly arises.

Given the competition for the “hearts and minds” of Muslim communities in the West between the orthodox and “liberal” forms of Islam, it will be of concern to all of us as to which wins.

At present the growing hatred of western civilisation on the part of some second/third generation Muslim Immigrants does not bode well for the outcome of this intra-Muslim Theosophical conflict. This too should be of concern for all.

 Overall I think we in the U.K. are at present approaching a tipping point in the relations between Islam, Muslims and the rest of society. If these horrible cases of sex-grooming can be used as a spur to honest debate and openness on all sides then “Islamism”{12} will find the ground very infertile as Muslims stand up to refute it’s teachings; conversely, if Muslims persist in denial then Islamism may well win a significant victory.

Afterword.

Whilst writing this article the brutal killing of a British soldier as an act of Islamic terror took place outside the Woolwich Barracks, U.K. Muslim groups have been quick to condemn the killing and the U.K. Prime Minister (David Cameron) called it a “betrayal of Islam”.

Setting aside the usual insistence that “Islam is a religion of peace” on the part of both Muslim groups and the U.K. government (But let me be fair: there is a strand of Islamic thinking that says that because there is no Caliphate in present at the world there is no Islamic Authority competent to call for Jihad/terror. In this view such attacks are indeed “un-Islamic”.) – statements with which many Muslim terror groups around the world clearly and demonstably disagree, this attack points up a second element in attitudes and relations that needs to be dealt with.

Again, if Muslims are prepared to stand up in the mosques and madrassas and denounce such teachings the tide may be turned; if they are not, then denial and taqiyya{2} will continue as will the “radicalisation” (or orthodox indoctrination) of Muslims in the U.K. and the rest of the West.

A proper discussion of that is another matter, but I could not in all conscience pass over this example of Islamic terror unremarked.

Notes.

1. Hamlet (Act 1.Scene 4.90), Marcellus to Horatio: “something is rotten in the state of Denmark”.

2. Kitman: telling a half-truth. Taqiyya: lying. See here.

3. Koran 4:3,24,25,36; 16:71; 23:6; 24:31; 30:28; 33:50,52; 70:30.

4. This language, let us not forget, was paralleled in 2006 by Imam Taj El-din Hilaly of Australia in the infamous “uncovered meat” statement.

5. Islamic “extremism” is better understood as Islamic orthodoxy in that those sects which take all the Islamic canon (Koran, Sunnah and Sharia) seriously manifest what Western commentators erroneously call “extremism”. Such movements – e.g. Wahhabism and Salafism – are all “reformist” movements in the sense that they seek to return to the “pure Islam” of Mohammed and follow, as precisely as possible, in his ways – generally in the model of Medina which was the period in which (almost) all the intolerant and violent verses of the Koran were recited.

6. To be fair to Moghra, he is on the record in the Guardian article referred to above as saying he “wanted imams to use sermons to urge Muslims to report anyone they suspected of grooming and abuse [and that] reporting it is a civic and a religious duty.” But this is a rather anodyne statement since any decent citizen would do the same – without the urging of any “authority” religious or secular.

7. The rest of the Guardian article dances about with the idea of “Asian” perpetrators, rather than Muslim ones and thus neatly obfuscates (as perhaps would be expected from the Guardian) the religious aspect of the issue.

8. The Guardian points out the one “Asian” (Muslim) gang groomed an “Asian” child, but this still does not equate to Muslims grooming a Muslim girl. The only case of this of which I am aware pertains to the city of Leicester in which there was a case where Muslim men tried to groom a Sikh girl, but the Sikh community objected – violently. See here.

9. History shows us that periods of Islamic “reform” – by which I here mean liberalisation and moderation – are always followed by an “islamist” backlash when more literal (and violent) interpretations gain sway once more.

10. Let me add that I mean “liberal for Islam”, not “liberal” as might generally understand the term in the West.

11. To be fair I must note that repeat offenders are to be subject to Sharia law. Whether the implications of this are that the first offence(s) of child-grooming should be ignored and whether non-Sharia courts should be able to prosecute Muslims (in Islamic thinking) is beyond the scope of this article.

12. This is another word with many meanings. I mean it in the sense of “the ideology that seeks to fully implement the Koran, Sunnah and Sharia law on all people”.