Building Barriers in Britain

Dear Author,

You have identified the Aisha Azim phenomenon as follows:

She is one of a new generation of young veiled Muslim women who are the complete opposite of the expected stereotype of a meek, shy and submissive Muslim female who ventures out rarely. These women are arrogant, hostile and out to deliberately shock and provoke. Their behaviour is calculated to antagonise and draw some sort of a reaction from those around them. This is a group that has developed a pathological hatred for the very society in which they’ve been raised.

Any reasons why it has turned out to be so? And that too particularly in Britain? This sounds like the suffragettes. Shall appreciate your valuable comments as to the whys and the wherefores because it does indeed look like what you`ve described but have not ventured into an in-depth analysis.

Following the Iraq war the ruling Labour government can no longer rely on the Muslim vote


So that`s their number 1 issue: Iraq? Not their being left behind in most social measures..education, poverty etc etc.


It is the extremist views of those who cover their faces that cannot be tolerated in a free liberal society. They put on the pretence of challenging our Western society but try and engage in a conversation that questions their core beliefs and they soon turn hostile.


well said...Bears repeating...It`s NOT bigotry to expect muslims to tolerate free speech without threats to ``behead people who insult islam``..

Nice article, and to the point. The way it is handled by the Islamic Organizations is pathatic. In my opinion there are three points in this controversy.

First one is the question of personal choice. I am in favour of the personal freedom in this regard. If a women wants to veil herself, let it be her choice.

Second one is its link to Islam. Now that is where ignorance kicks in and poeple start to equate the veiling of face with requirements of Islam. There is no requirement in Islam that makes the women necessary to veil her face.

Third Point is the point of occupational requirement. Every sane person knows that teaching children in veil is hinderance, and the testimony of children proves it, on which the employer of the women in question took the decision to fire her. So, my opinion of freedom of personal choice in point one is subject to the occupational expediency. If her personal freedom is so dear to her, then please stay at home, because in veil children cannot understand you. Another example of personal choice vs. occupational requirement would be the question of drinking while flying. It is the matter of personal choice, whether a pilot drinks or not, but nobody wants to travel in a plane that is flown by a person who is drinking during flight. So, keep your personal choices out of the work area, if they hinders in proper discharge of duties.

I am amazed at the lack of sense and the level of ignorance with which so called Islamic organizations have made issue out of non issue. If they beleive so much in freedom of personal choices, then why women cannot still drive in the saudia, from where they are getting their money. Or on the other hand why they don`t press Mullahs of saudia to allow women in public who are wearing western clothing. Please do not be hypocrate and be a true muslim, as muslim can never be hypocrate.

good to see an article from a normal British Muslim calling his own spade a spade -- there is afterall light at the end of dark Islamist tunnel....that stupid Aisha Azmi should be made to aplogize to those school kids for scaring the hell out of them in that Halloween outfit on a normal non Halloween day.

there is another meateahead in Australia called Hilaly calling non Hijabi women `uncovered meat` -- what a stupid asshole and he is an Imam of a masjid -- good that the mosque suspended him for 3 months for insulting Australian womanhood in such a crass language.

Well good to see that the taming of the Islamist shrew has begun....

Does Aishah Azmi go to school with an accompanying mahram? If not, isn`t she violating Islamic law?

Where is the Taliban when you need them? The Taliban would be out there with stout sticks beating women who dared to step out of their homes without a mehram.

Man, the British government is stupid, not for allowing multiculturalism but for not taking it to the fullest extent.

Where are the Paki-bashing youth of Britain? Why aren`t they out in force raping Aishah Azmi and other veiled women? Aishah will have to bring in four Muslim males to testify to the act of penetration.... no DNA tests for you, beatch! And if she can`t find those four Muslim male witnesses, she needs to be stoned to death for adultery.

what`s wrong with you harimau -- your post is the crudest and the profanest I have ever read on the chowk -- there are times you are so lucid, reasonable and even show a glimse of good breeding and high Indian intellect -- and then there is a total melt down of your civility and your sense of propriety -- your post #5 is absolutely disgusting -- shame on you.

Ref nasah #6

[what`s wrong with you harimau]

Aishah Aziz wants to selectively apply the Koran... in fact, most of you even say that people who claim that the Koran requires the burqa are wrong and that the Koran requires only modest attire for women.

But if Aishah insists on shocking the sensibilities of Western society by wearing the burqa in inappropriate places, I am asking why she doesn`t follow the rquirements for a mahram to accompany her. I believe that requirement is stated explicitly in the Koran.

As to suggestions of rape, hey, I am just pointing out further consequences of the strict application of Sharia law for Muslim women.

Tough noogins.

#5/7 by harimau

Wah ... wah ... Harimau saheb. It`s a bit much for even a self-proclaimed ``Equal Opportunity Abuser`` as your goodself!

You ask, ``Where are the Paki-bashing youth of Britain?``, the answer is they were having a great time till the Skinhead busting Pak-gangs emerged in response and after a few skinhead skulls were cracked in Bradford and Birmingham, your heroes are now all hiding underneath their mama`s skirts without a peep.

You say: ``...rquirements for a mahram to accompany her. I believe that requirement is stated explicitly in the Koran....``

And since when have you Sir become an expert on Qura`an? Kindly quote where it is said so. Ever heard of women fighters in combat in Muslim armies? Or even the nurses? Were they all with `Mehrams`? You guys are just strawmen ...

Here we go. People want to know why the pakistanis of england has turned out to be what they are. Well, they are jobless, they cannot mingle with others because of religion.

So they become bombers, so they where the hijab to let every one knwo that they are muslims.

This is pathetic, the muslim cilture and identity is in their dress. It is showing others that they are different.

Hallo, how about some lasting human values, how about some education. Has islam produced any scientist. Well how can it, when oits only nobel laurette has been condemned in the land of the pure.

Has nay muslim country produced anything worthy for other humans.

Looking fior the reasons of muslim alineation, pathetic, read the book. It is all there. Ostriches who should live in the saudi deserts should not allowed into the cities of the world.

#9 by jay

Jay ... much of modern science can be bought off the shelf. It`s not a big deal. Exactly which science are you talking about BTW?

Aishah Azmi`s pix on the net are limited to showing her as a niqab gaal. However the local press in London had produced some pix of Ms. Azmi who wore jeans. Her pelvis was seductive to men and her chest is attractive with visible protrusion.

I dont know if she was wearing niqab since Mr. Straw said abt it or b4 that. In any case she dressed in a way that cant be called as modest coz of her display of pelvic shape thru jeans and display of protruding mammalian glands. Therfore she`s not dressed modestly.

So much was said abt niqab. I dont like to add anymore here.

Just ban religion!

I would like to see the fanatics who condemn the British for firing this madwoman from duties that she was most ill suited to because of her chosen dress code try to tell Turkey, a Muslim country, to lift it`s restrictions on the veil and the fez. A country that was an Islamic superpower for centuries decided to do away with this stupidity but no, rather than take the Turks` civilised approach to religion, some people from the rest of the Muslim world chose to look at the barbaric Arabs of Saudi Arabia as an example. It is particularly sad that a woman from South Asia, a region of refinement and culture in contrast to the uncivilised Bedou culture of the Middle East chooses barbarism instead of refinement and culture. And, she has supporters to egg her on in her self imposed imbecilicity.

A superb article and a fine voice of reason - congratulations, Farouk Taj. Thank you for a very well written piece.

Dear Farouq Taj, Zeemax, Nasah

Look man, England is England and not Pakistan or Saudi Arabia, so those Muslims who want to settle in any European country should follow the regulations and prevailing in that country that is the law of the land. The same applies for U.S.A and Canada.
My advice is to those Muslim women who wear Burqas(Viel) like Aishah Azmi is that they should stop wearing Burqas if they want to reside in that country. It is as simple as that. In Islamic countries such as Saudi Arabia, Iran and Pakistan even Non Mulsim women are compulsory forced to wear Burqas. There is no discount or concession. No body protests, why are Muslims are silent. Even the laws in Islamic countries are biased towards Non Muslims (viz, Hindus, Sikhs and Christians). For eg A MBBS Christian student from Lahore has filled petition in the Lahore High court, the petitioner alleges that Muslim who learn the Hafeez-E-Quran by heart are a given 20% more marks. The same cardinal principal doesn’t apply for Hindus, Christians and Sikhs for learning their religious books.

Iqbal Singh

I would like to challenge any Pakistani to correct me if I am wrong.

#14 by iqbal492

Iqbal, these are not the Muslims who want to settle in any European country and should follow the regulations and give up wearing Burqas like Aishah Azmi if they want to reside in that country. It is their country. They were born there.

Remember the first generation of immigrants never did that, but the 2nd generation does. Reason is that the first generation were economic immigrants, the 2nd generation are Brits, not immigrants. If Brits can have hair pins in their noses and cheeks with spiked hairdos and strut along Kings Road, and have decent jobs at the same time, so can the Burqas and Niqabs.

I saw the Aisha Azmi interview. She states no child had complained and she had been carrying out her duties perfectly with Niqab. So who did the Niqab scare? It wasn`t the children, it was the Islamophobic British establishment.

Besides, Britain is the last place on earth to talk about multi-culturalism when they had built their small island of a country into a global empire where the sun never set solely from colonies acquired with a shipping fleet with policies of strict cultural segregation from locals. Locals were `dogs` for them and still are. The first generation accepted that because it had no choice, the second one doesn`t. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, they`re running helter-skelter to achieve non-confrontational multi-culturalism. They must never forget that they owe their very existence of today i.e. not being swallowed up by first France and later Germany, to the economic strength they had gained from the very places Aisha Azmi`s folks come from.

Britain owes a huge debt to everyone of origins of the Jewel of The Crown.

contd....#15.........

Re the shipping fleet, it was the greatest error of Muslims that they never formed a merchant shipping or a naval fleet. I wonder why that was so. Even Tariq Bin Ziad`s invasion of Spain was on borrowed vessels sent by the rebel Spanish. It is even more surprising in that they were the ones who invented the sextant for navigation but never used it.

If Muslims had a naval force, there would have been none ... zero... colonizations in either India, or North Africa.