Village Journals
Resonate your identity with Naseeb journals. Express your opinions, share your thoughts, post your writings and connect with like minded people through the power of expression.
Resonate your identity with Naseeb journals. Express your opinions, share your thoughts, post your writings and connect with like minded people through the power of expression.
TV documentary on Muslims and violence in Britain
September 2007 edition of The Light
TV documentary on Muslims and violence in Britain
Review of Channel 4 production 'Britain Under Attack'
This was a one hour long programme broadcast on 6th August in the documentary series Dispatches by the U.K. broadcaster Channel 4 television. Since one particular aspect of this programme was billed in advance as exploring "the Koranic teachings that lie behind the concept of jihad", it was naturally of interest to a religious movement such as ours. The programme summary, which can be read on Channel 4's website, tells us that the reporter, Phil Rees, who is "an expert in Islamic violence", "meets the clerics who justify and encourage attacks on British soil and analyses the government?s response ? to de-politicise Islam and to silence radical views". He interviewed those Muslim representatives as well who believe that Muslims in the U.K. must live as law-abiding citizens.
Unfortunately, the impression created by the programme and the interviews was that the people preaching violence are well able to justify their stand from the Quran and are motivated by Islamic teachings while those advocating peaceful living are following some far-fetched interpretations of Islam. The text of the Quran was only quoted when the extremists' interpretations were being presented, as if it only contains teachings supporting their views and no verse supporting the opposite views.
I sent a note to Channel 4 commenting on this broadcast as below.
Comment note to Channel 4
'Dispatches', 6th August 2007, was highly unbalanced in that the presenter tried to provide legitimacy to the Muslim extremists? interpretations as being supported by the Quran. He failed to put any critical questions to the extremists regarding the meanings they were attaching to certain verses of the Quran. The programme ascribed a text to the Quran which does not exist in it. This stated: "Jihad is ordained for you". Nowhere in the Quran is such a statement made about Jihad.
A verse was quoted: "And the Jews will not be pleased with thee (O Muhammad), nor the Christians, unless thou follow their religion" (2:120). This relates purely to religious doctrines and beliefs. It has no connection with waging war against anyone.
Another verse quoted was: "And they will not cease fighting you until they turn you back from your religion, if they can" (2:217). This verse is speaking of the fighting against Islam by the Arab fellow-tribesmen of the Prophet Muhammad. It makes no reference to Jews or Christians but to Arab idolaters.
The programme covered the Muslim belief that all Muslims in the world are an 'Umma' and how this motivates Muslims in U.K. to fight for others in the 'Umma'. It was ignored that the Quran calls all humanity as one Umma as well! See 2:213 and 10:19. It was ignored that the Quran, three times, says that Jews and Christians have good 'ummas' within their ranks. See 3:113, 5:66 and 7:159.
The programme ignored that Islam requires Muslims to believe in and respect the Biblical prophets, the highest religious figures of the Jews and Christians, such as Abraham, Moses, David, Solomon, as well as Jesus. It ignored that the Quran accepts that Jews and Christians can receive salvation with God. See 2:62 and 5:69.
The presenter took the greatest pains to highlight weaknesses in the non-violent interpretations of Islam and to make the violent interpretations look as much legitimate and well-founded as he possibly could.
Perhaps the most disgraceful part of the programme was where the extremists were allowed, unchallenged, to claim that Islam allows them to tell lies to get visas to enter the country and, far worse, it allows them to attack and bomb the general public. The programme clearly suggested that these are tenable interpretations.
The programme simply provided misguided Muslim extremists with a platform to present their views about Islamic teachings as justified. The very final comment by the presenter expresses his insidious conclusion that support can be found in the Quran for all the atrocities committed by the extremists.
The presenter appears unable to understand that any teaching can be perverted. The Bible was used to support Apartheid in South Africa. The scientific theory of Evolution was used to support the Nazi ideology of creating a master race by exterminating inferior races. Does that mean that the Bible or science actually provided justification for these ideologies?
Further comments
To add to the comments sent to Channel 4, we can construct artificial examples of how a text from the Quran, as from any other book, can be misrepresented. For instance, someone could quote:
"O you who believe, surely of your wives and your children there are enemies to you, so beware of them." -- 64:14
Does this mean that Muslims are taught to look upon their wives and children as actually their enemies, and that Muslim husbands and fathers are on guard every moment in case their wives and children pull out swords to attack them with? Has anyone ever interpreted this verse in this way and acted accordingly? This verse would appear to be even more stern than the one often misrepresented which says: "O you who believe, take not the Jews and the Christians for friends" (5:51). At least, the latter verse only requires negatively that Jews and Christians should not be taken as friends, but the former positively declares that your wives and children may well be your enemies! The verse, of course, only warns against doing an act of wrong or injustice to favour one?s wife or children.
Covenant
A point covered during the broadcast is summed up as follows in its synopsis on Channel 4's website:
"Another belief which is central to many Muslims living in the West is the 'Covenant of Security' which prevents Muslims from attacking their home nation if they are offered safety and freedom to pray. Rees visits an Islamic Centre in Luton where young men are taught to accept and honour the covenant. ... In stark contrast, Rees meets an Islamic scholar who believes the British government has broken this covenant through its foreign policy in the Middle East so attacks can be theologically justified."
It is a highly negative view which suggests that Muslims are somehow ever-ready to attack their home nation of non-Muslims, but are just about held back by accepting a covenant of security with that nation, and the danger is that at any moment, for any reason, they may consider this covenant as breached and lash out at those around them. Firstly, the religion of Islam lays the highest stress on doing good to one?s neighbour, to whatever nation or religion the neighbour may belong. Secondly, as I said in my comments above, the Quran calls the whole of humanity as one Umma:
"Mankind is a single nation (umma). So God raised prophets as bearers of good news and as warners, and He revealed with them the Book with truth... " -- 2:213
A Muslim has a duty to that wider Umma as well. These teachings provide the basis for Muslims to live in peace with others around them.
While the programme was emphasising the importance of the concept of the Umma, "a notion of Islamic brotherhood which encourages Muslims to act on behalf of one another", it failed to ask the question: on what basis are the same extremists killing other Muslims every day in countries such as Pakistan? Had it raised this question, the answer by these people would have been another "breach of covenant" type of reply. They would have responded that the Muslims they are attacking have deviated from true Islam. Muslims disagreeing with them are, in their eyes, no different from non-Muslims.
One hadith quoted in the documentary was to the effect that the Muslim Umma is like one human body, so that if one part is ailing all other parts also suffer illness and pain. But this is true in another sense than the one meant in the programme. The part that is ailing consists of the advocates of violence and intolerance. As a result the rest of the Muslims are also having to suffer.
TV documentary on Muslims and violence in Britain
Review of Channel 4 production 'Britain Under Attack'
This was a one hour long programme broadcast on 6th August in the documentary series Dispatches by the U.K. broadcaster Channel 4 television. Since one particular aspect of this programme was billed in advance as exploring "the Koranic teachings that lie behind the concept of jihad", it was naturally of interest to a religious movement such as ours. The programme summary, which can be read on Channel 4's website, tells us that the reporter, Phil Rees, who is "an expert in Islamic violence", "meets the clerics who justify and encourage attacks on British soil and analyses the government?s response ? to de-politicise Islam and to silence radical views". He interviewed those Muslim representatives as well who believe that Muslims in the U.K. must live as law-abiding citizens.
Unfortunately, the impression created by the programme and the interviews was that the people preaching violence are well able to justify their stand from the Quran and are motivated by Islamic teachings while those advocating peaceful living are following some far-fetched interpretations of Islam. The text of the Quran was only quoted when the extremists' interpretations were being presented, as if it only contains teachings supporting their views and no verse supporting the opposite views.
I sent a note to Channel 4 commenting on this broadcast as below.
Comment note to Channel 4
'Dispatches', 6th August 2007, was highly unbalanced in that the presenter tried to provide legitimacy to the Muslim extremists? interpretations as being supported by the Quran. He failed to put any critical questions to the extremists regarding the meanings they were attaching to certain verses of the Quran. The programme ascribed a text to the Quran which does not exist in it. This stated: "Jihad is ordained for you". Nowhere in the Quran is such a statement made about Jihad.
A verse was quoted: "And the Jews will not be pleased with thee (O Muhammad), nor the Christians, unless thou follow their religion" (2:120). This relates purely to religious doctrines and beliefs. It has no connection with waging war against anyone.
Another verse quoted was: "And they will not cease fighting you until they turn you back from your religion, if they can" (2:217). This verse is speaking of the fighting against Islam by the Arab fellow-tribesmen of the Prophet Muhammad. It makes no reference to Jews or Christians but to Arab idolaters.
The programme covered the Muslim belief that all Muslims in the world are an 'Umma' and how this motivates Muslims in U.K. to fight for others in the 'Umma'. It was ignored that the Quran calls all humanity as one Umma as well! See 2:213 and 10:19. It was ignored that the Quran, three times, says that Jews and Christians have good 'ummas' within their ranks. See 3:113, 5:66 and 7:159.
The programme ignored that Islam requires Muslims to believe in and respect the Biblical prophets, the highest religious figures of the Jews and Christians, such as Abraham, Moses, David, Solomon, as well as Jesus. It ignored that the Quran accepts that Jews and Christians can receive salvation with God. See 2:62 and 5:69.
The presenter took the greatest pains to highlight weaknesses in the non-violent interpretations of Islam and to make the violent interpretations look as much legitimate and well-founded as he possibly could.
Perhaps the most disgraceful part of the programme was where the extremists were allowed, unchallenged, to claim that Islam allows them to tell lies to get visas to enter the country and, far worse, it allows them to attack and bomb the general public. The programme clearly suggested that these are tenable interpretations.
The programme simply provided misguided Muslim extremists with a platform to present their views about Islamic teachings as justified. The very final comment by the presenter expresses his insidious conclusion that support can be found in the Quran for all the atrocities committed by the extremists.
The presenter appears unable to understand that any teaching can be perverted. The Bible was used to support Apartheid in South Africa. The scientific theory of Evolution was used to support the Nazi ideology of creating a master race by exterminating inferior races. Does that mean that the Bible or science actually provided justification for these ideologies?
Further comments
To add to the comments sent to Channel 4, we can construct artificial examples of how a text from the Quran, as from any other book, can be misrepresented. For instance, someone could quote:
"O you who believe, surely of your wives and your children there are enemies to you, so beware of them." -- 64:14
Does this mean that Muslims are taught to look upon their wives and children as actually their enemies, and that Muslim husbands and fathers are on guard every moment in case their wives and children pull out swords to attack them with? Has anyone ever interpreted this verse in this way and acted accordingly? This verse would appear to be even more stern than the one often misrepresented which says: "O you who believe, take not the Jews and the Christians for friends" (5:51). At least, the latter verse only requires negatively that Jews and Christians should not be taken as friends, but the former positively declares that your wives and children may well be your enemies! The verse, of course, only warns against doing an act of wrong or injustice to favour one?s wife or children.
Covenant
A point covered during the broadcast is summed up as follows in its synopsis on Channel 4's website:
"Another belief which is central to many Muslims living in the West is the 'Covenant of Security' which prevents Muslims from attacking their home nation if they are offered safety and freedom to pray. Rees visits an Islamic Centre in Luton where young men are taught to accept and honour the covenant. ... In stark contrast, Rees meets an Islamic scholar who believes the British government has broken this covenant through its foreign policy in the Middle East so attacks can be theologically justified."
It is a highly negative view which suggests that Muslims are somehow ever-ready to attack their home nation of non-Muslims, but are just about held back by accepting a covenant of security with that nation, and the danger is that at any moment, for any reason, they may consider this covenant as breached and lash out at those around them. Firstly, the religion of Islam lays the highest stress on doing good to one?s neighbour, to whatever nation or religion the neighbour may belong. Secondly, as I said in my comments above, the Quran calls the whole of humanity as one Umma:
"Mankind is a single nation (umma). So God raised prophets as bearers of good news and as warners, and He revealed with them the Book with truth... " -- 2:213
A Muslim has a duty to that wider Umma as well. These teachings provide the basis for Muslims to live in peace with others around them.
While the programme was emphasising the importance of the concept of the Umma, "a notion of Islamic brotherhood which encourages Muslims to act on behalf of one another", it failed to ask the question: on what basis are the same extremists killing other Muslims every day in countries such as Pakistan? Had it raised this question, the answer by these people would have been another "breach of covenant" type of reply. They would have responded that the Muslims they are attacking have deviated from true Islam. Muslims disagreeing with them are, in their eyes, no different from non-Muslims.
One hadith quoted in the documentary was to the effect that the Muslim Umma is like one human body, so that if one part is ailing all other parts also suffer illness and pain. But this is true in another sense than the one meant in the programme. The part that is ailing consists of the advocates of violence and intolerance. As a result the rest of the Muslims are also having to suffer.