The Truth is Out There

Throughout history, notable events have occured when people have found a way to challenge the status quo often by opposing (even breaking with) social customs and the law. I'm not on that level of opposition so in some respects, I am to blame for developing a sense of 'switchedoffness'. I should challenge what is not right or what conflicts with my inner beliefs. I have the power of protest because of where I live and should use it, I remind myself. I was raised in a democracy and presumably I have the freedom of speech that others don't. Privileges that make me fortunate as well as responsibilities that come with those privileges.

And yet a few days back, I sat through a very uncomfortable meeting on the matter of 'extremism'.  You know, the whole argument about anti-establishment information being drip fed into young minds by anti-state agents. Typically, Islam comes up (in truth, isn't Islamic ideology what this is all about?) though they throw in the other objectionable - right-wing Nazi-sympathy - (a late addition to the topic) as some kind of neutralising factor so that the Muslims in the audience don't feel that they are under seige.

It's true; extremists exist. And they do much damage - take a look at Syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Nigeria etc. There must be a counter narrative to challenge blinkered thinking - a free education system that allows people to make up their own minds in these places - sometimes backed with counter actions (intelligence). But on this occasion I sat through this meeting, democracy, freedom and all, and I felt like the most disempowered person there is. I remained silent, unable to speak up but also torn between what I know/feel is happening to what I am being told. My problem is that continually, the freedom to speak out in protest of government policy, to voice an alternative view, is being marginilised under the weight of the media that cherry picks its commentary when reporting major world events. Remember, they filter the news for us and as most people passively consume, we don't often think about the after effects.

Why is it that the popular counter narrative to extremism (headed by the likes of Malala Yousafzai etc.) now feel like the conflict of an old establishment with its own less-than-benevolent interests against newer forms of protest against them? Why is it, that despite my clear revulsion at the tactics employed by militants (Taliban, Boko Haram* etc.), I think that there is an argument that they should be part of the dialogue for building long term peace? Why is it that I just don't trust the media, the motives of governments driven by capital interests and their third world stooges when they claim that they are fighting for 'freedom' and 'democracy'?

Damn it. I live in a democracy, but dare I speak in favour of something that runs counter to the popular narrative, then I'll be lumped with the extremists that I object. Despite the hundreds of TV channels, most converge at the same place. And despite the millions of websites, the vast majority again, spout a narrative that has been predecided. Dare anyone seek an alternative view? IPs are tracked, web-searches are indexed and profiles are built. It begins, over time, to erode one's confidence to speak up and certainly affects my confidence in state instutions. I'm reluctant now to believe in much of what I'm being told and have learned the art of silence. Extremists/counter-extremists; I don't think that we are in a safer, better world, but not for the reasons that we are told. In a way, my freedom of thought is my most precious freedom, but it is isolating and useless without the freedom to speak up.

The truth, as they say, is out there.

 Image: The Haunted Man

*Read here for an alternative on the Nigeria situation: 'Dear World, Hashtags won't #BringBackOurGirls'

Laylat al-Qadr لیلة القدر‎

We have indeed revealed this (Message) in the Night of Power:
And what will explain to thee what the night of power is?
The Night of Power is better than a thousand months.
Therein come down the angels and the Spirit by Allah's permission, on every errand:
Peace!...This until the rise of dawn!
—Sura 97 (Al-Qadr), āyāt 1-5

Read more about Laylut al-Qadr here.

Ramadhan Kareem

روژه د ټولو نیکمرغه شه
Ramadhan Kareem 
Blessed be this month to all. 

A Hundred Types of Prayer

 صد گونه نماز

امروز چو هر روز خرابیم خراب

مگشا در اندیشه  و برگیر رباب

صد گونه نماز است رکوع است و سجود

آن را که جمال دوست باشد محراب

 Today, like every day, we are ruined, ruined.
Don't open the door of worry, but take up the rubâb,
There are a hundred kinds of prayer, bowing, and prostration
It is the beauty, dear friend, of the mehrab

Maulana Rumi

Image: zawaj.com

Murder and Apology

In the hysteria and media vulturism that has surrounded the murder of Lee Rigby, I still feel that this post comes too soon. The family of the dead soldier needs time to grieve, the space to support each other and to make sense of the situation. The media is not as forgiving however and sensationalism grabs the headlines. Much as I try to resist being drawn in, eventually I feel that I should also voice a comment.

I'm at odds with the media adopting extreme views, but I'm also at odds with jumping on the bandwagon of apology or justification. These are not appropriate responses. Lee Rigby was murdered in cold blood, in a most gratuitous and savage manner by assailants who had somehow been dehumanised. That act of absolute unashamed brutality, the immediate events leading up to it and the delayed response of the authorities should be under the media and investigative microscope. For the same reasons, I made a decision not to comment on the Boston attacks the Woolwich murder has led to Muslims being rolled out onto the social media platform to apologise or distance themselves from acts of terror (murder). This is a type of approval seeking and constant apology is something that I do wish to entertain. Frankly, I sense inferiority when this has to happen and I'm bored with it. Murder of someone innocent is murder. It is heinous and it deserves a just punishment. That is true if some white Norwegian is behind this or some deranged  men on the streets of London are behind this. Individual acts like this simply do not represent all the members of a society. It creates an unnecessary pressure to be apologetic. Would we also call it murder if the innocent are killed by soldiers in combat? That perhaps is a rhetorical question, though it is one I could come back to in a future post. Right now, this apology by the BBC's Nick Robinson - where the killers in the Woolwich murders were described as having a 'Muslim appearance' - has the sad potential to be almost comic.

Read Areeb Ullah's take on this.

Image Source: Real Street

Day Of Ashura

Yaum Al Ashura (Day of Ashura) marks many important events to Muslims, both Shia as well as Sunni. Many Sunni Muslims, for example, observe a voluntary day of fasting to observe the day that Prophet Moses (AS) freed the Israelites from the bondage of the Egyptian Pharaoh.

Along with this Muslims also remember this day as one of the most tragic events in Islamic history. Yaum Al Ashura (Day of Ashura) commemorates the Battle of Karbala (in present day Iraq) on the 10th of Moharram (61 AH).

The battle marks the conflict between a small group of supporters and the family of Imam Hussein ibn Ali, son of Ali ibn Abu Talib and grandson of Mohammed (PBUH) and a much larger military detachment from the forces of Yazid I, the Umayyad caliph, whom Hussein had refused to recognise.

Hussein and all his supporters were killed, including Hussein's six month old infant son, Ali al-Asghar ibn Husayn, and the women and children of Hussein's house were taken as prisoners. The dead are regarded as martyrs by Muslims, and the battle has a central place in Islamic history and is frequently referenced in  Islamic literature.

The events leading up to the tragedy at Karbala are at the heart of the schism that followed between the early Muslims. Even today, we are not free from the divisions; so whilst they exist and sectarianism continues to hurt the Muslims; let us remind ourselves that Moharram is both the blessed first month of the Muslim calendar and an official month of peace. 

اختر مو مبارک

Eid Greetings

Tor_Khan تور خان

The Marriage of Mohammed PBUH and Aisha RA

In this climate of hysteria, I've taken this article by Myriam Francois-Cerrah from the Guardian. It makes a key point on a recurring criticism non-Muslims have of Islam. The article gives an important insight:

Writing about Muhammad, the prophet of Islam, the Orientalist scholar W Montgomery Watt wrote: "Of all the world's great men, none has been so much maligned as Muhammad." His quote seems all the more poignant in light of the Islamophobic film Innocence of Muslims, which has sparked riots from Yemen to Libya and which, among other slanders, depicts Muhammad as a paedophile.

This claim is a recurring one among critics of Islam, so its foundation deserves close scrutiny.

Critics allege that Aisha was just six years old when she was betrothed to Muhammad, himself in his 50s, and only nine when the marriage was consummated. They base this on a saying attributed to Aisha herself (Sahih Bukhari volume 5, book 58, number 234), and the debate on this issue is further complicated by the fact that some Muslims believe this to be a historically accurate account. Although most Muslims would not consider marrying off their nine-year-old daughters, those who accept this saying argue that since the Qur'an states that marriage is void unless entered into by consenting adults, Aisha must have entered puberty early.

They point out that, in seventh-century Arabia, adulthood was defined as the onset of puberty. (This much is true, and was also the case in Europe: five centuries after Muhammad's marriage to Aisha, 33-year-old King John of England married 12-year-old Isabella of Angoulême.) Interestingly, of the many criticisms of Muhammad made at the time by his opponents, none focused on Aisha's age at marriage.

According to this perspective, Aisha may have been young, but she was not younger than was the norm at the time. Other Muslims doubt the very idea that Aisha was six at the time of marriage, referring to historians who have questioned the reliability of Aisha's age as given in the saying. In a society without a birth registry and where people did not celebrate birthdays, most people estimated their own age and that of others. Aisha would have been no different. What's more, Aisha had already been engaged to someone else before she married Muhammad, suggesting she had already been mature enough by the standards of her society to consider marriage for a while. It seems difficult to reconcile this with her being six.

In addition, some modern Muslim scholars have more recently cast doubt on the veracity of the saying, or hadith, used to assert Aisha's young age. In Islam, the hadith literature (sayings of the prophet) is considered secondary to the Qur'an. While the Qur'an is considered to be the verbatim word of God, the hadiths were transmitted over time through a rigorous but not infallible methodology. Taking all known accounts and records of Aisha's age at marriage, estimates of her age range from nine to 19.

Because of this, it is impossible to know with any certainty how old Aisha was. What we do know is what the Qur'an says about marriage: that it is valid only between consenting adults, and that a woman has the right to choose her own spouse. As the living embodiment of Islam, Muhammad's actions reflect the Qur'an's teachings on marriage, even if the actions of some Muslim regimes and individuals do not.

Sadly, in many countries, the imperatives motivating the marriage of young girls are typically economic. In others, they are political. The fact that Iran and Saudi Arabia have both sought to use the saying concerning Aisha's age as a justification for lowering the legal age of marriage tells us a great deal about the patriarchal and oppressive nature of those regimes, and nothing about Muhammad, or the essential nature of Islam. The stridency of those who lend credence to these literalist interpretations by concurring with their warped view of Islam does not help those Muslims who seek to challenge these aberrations.

The Islamophobic depiction of Muhammad's marriage to Aisha as motivated by misplaced desire fits within a broader Orientalist depiction of Muhammad as a philanderer. This idea dates back to the crusades. According to the academic Kecia Ali: "Accusations of lust and sensuality were a regular feature of medieval attacks on the prophet's character and, by extension, on the authenticity of Islam."

Since the early Christians heralded Christ as a model of celibate virtue, Muhammad – who had married several times – was deemed to be driven by sinful lust. This portrayal ignored the fact that before his marriage to Aisha, Muhammad had been married to Khadija, a powerful businesswoman 15 years his senior, for 25 years. When she died, he was devastated and friends encouraged him to remarry. A female acquaintance suggested Aisha, a bright and vivacious character.

Aisha's union would also have cemented Muhammad's longstanding friendship with her father, Abu Bakr. As was the tradition in Arabia (and still is in some parts of the world today), marriage typically served a social and political function – a way of uniting tribes, resolving feuds, caring for widows and orphans, and generally strengthening bonds in a highly unstable and changing political environment. Of the women Muhammad married, the majority were widows. To consider the marriages of the prophet outside of these calculations is profoundly ahistorical.

What the records are clear on is that Muhammad and Aisha had a loving and egalitarian relationship, which set the standard for reciprocity, tenderness and respect enjoined by the Qur'an. Insights into their relationship, such as the fact they liked to drink out of the same cup or race one another, are indicative of a deep connection which belies any misrepresentation of their relationship.

To paint Aisha as a victim is completely at odds with her persona. She was certainly no wallflower. During a controversial battle in Muslim history, she emerged riding a camel to lead the troops. She was known for her assertive temperament and mischievous sense of humour – with Muhammad sometimes bearing the brunt of the jokes. During his lifetime, he established her authority by telling Muslims to consult her in his absence; after his death, she went to be become one of the most prolific and distinguished scholars of her time.

A stateswoman, scholar, mufti, and judge, Aisha combined spirituality, activism and knowledge and remains a role model for many Muslim women today. The gulf between her true legacy and her depiction in Islamophobic materials is not merely historically inaccurate, it is an insult to the memory of a pioneering woman.

Those who manipulate her story to justify the abuse of young girls, and those who manipulate it in order to depict Islam as a religion that legitimises such abuse have more in common than they think. Both demonstrate a disregard for what we know about the times in which Muhammad lived, and for the affirmation of female autonomy which her story illustrates.

 Taken from the Guardian

Innocence of Muslims

Two things. First, it would appear that we still need a 'bogeyman'. To be able to define our own values, it seems easier to be able to point to the values that make us nervous. Secondly, history is written by those in power and power today is in the collective hands of the 'western' media. Whether this is print media or the various forms of digital media - internet, television and so on; those who control the media undoubtedly have the greatest influence on collective thought. In a media climate where sensation sells and profits comes before anything else; nothing is really sacred.

As we have previously seen and have often discussed on these pages, Muslims are repeatedly cast as the 'bogeyman' in the current media narrative. We are easily portrayed as irrational, volatile and confrontational or hopeless victims trapped by faith and in need of liberal intervention to uplift us. It's a simplistic media view and is formed by the majority with power. 

It therefore surprises few then, that an obscure amateur film targeting Islam with ridicule should now be the focus of considerable public attention. Protests linked to the film in Benghazi, Libya led to an attack on the US embassy and the killing of the US ambassador and similar protests have taken a grip in many other major cities in the Muslim world, and here in London too.

The reaction by Muslims itself generates debates on whether a response that is a violent reflex action, is wise. Do Muslims themselves send out the right signals and is this in accordance with the commonly agreed teachings of Islam? Muslims, of course, are diverse and the truth is there is little chance of a uniform response - even at the individual level, we do not all respond in the same manner to the challenges that face us. However, there is a vacant space between the those in power and the Muslim masses, so I guess, it matters not. The film was a deliberate jibe and the violence in protest to the film was fairly predictable especially since many Muslims are frustrated by injustices - some internal and stemming from the societies in which they live and others external - anti-Islamism coming from a media machinery that continues to reinforce stereotypes and irreligiosity. I think left alone, Muslims are more than able to find their own way.

Ultimately the unequal relationship between the Muslim world and the west hurts Muslims the most. From where we stand this is likely to continue to be a long and protracted power struggle.

May Allah keep us all safe and in faith.

Letter to Blair Inc.

We seem to thrive on fear and this is especially true of what many 'westerners' think when it comes to what the Islamic world represents. Whilst the Islamic world has certainly had a past cultural glory when it made contributions to the arts, mathematics and sciences, even with this, there's the historical record of western prejudice against Muslims (see Orientalism). So whether one's opinions originate from a historic Christian set of values or a modern liberal or politically Eurocentric set of values, there is likely to be some point of difference/conflict with a given view in Islam. Adding to that the fear mongering, as in the interview here, and the type of responses that it provokes invariably there is a lack of a balanced and thoughtful judgement when it comes to Muslim-Christian (read 'western') relations.

In this interview with The Telegraph, former British Prime Minister Tony Blair continues to peddle the same old fear with his opinions on 'militant Islam'. I am not going to deny the marginalisation and subsequent radicalisation of Muslims and nor do I excuse it. It is wrong in fact - but one needs to consider the historical relationships of the east and the west to understand why differing sides are often caught up in conflict. A deep misunderstanding and fear continues to inform the way Islam is perceived and both the west and the Muslim world need to self-reflect to consider how their own actions affect the other. I will say however, for there to be a meaningful dialogue that the major need for self reflection vis-à-vis the other should come from 'Christian' west, who must come to terms with their own historical bias and personal animosity.

This might have nothing to do with how he feels, but Tony Blair is a 'new' Catholic and without doubt, a career politician. He knows how to draw attention to the fears/thoughts of middle England and exploit them for his own purposes. I wonder, if many readers of commentators on The Telegraph interview realised that Tony Blair's sister-in-law, Lauren Booth, is in fact, a Muslim? (She spent time in Iran). Mr Blair, himself is now, a somewhat lacklustre international figure. He has, by all accounts, been a low-impact UN peace envoy to the middle east and all indications are that he has profited healthily from this 'unpaid' position. 

Just goes to show, that with a little manipulation, the old forms of hatred and bigotry surface in order to wage contemporary political battles.

Image Credits: ShaneBertou

روژه مبارک

په دی روژې مبارک مياشت باندي ټولو ته ډیره دعا  

Ramadan Mubarak to all.

تور خان

Rain, Rain; Go Away II

The way that it has been explained to me is that between 4.5 and 4.3 billion years ago when the Earth was just a mass of gas like the stars and our beloved sun, a combination of gravity and cooling pulled on the heavier elements to form a molten, volatile surface of proto-Earth. A pressurised mixed atmosphere of heavy elements formed and water molecules that did not escape the Earth's gravity cooled to form vapour clouds that fell as rain. These heavy element rains continued to cool and fall and in due time the water that did not vaporise at the same rate that it fell, formed the oceans, lakes and rivers. And within the primordial oceans and pools of water, about 4.2 billion years ago, there came life.

We have much to be thankful for because of the rain and scientists continue to state that water is the key element for presence of life on this planet ... It is the rain that waters the crops that feed the planet and it is the same rain that sustains the rainforests that help absorb the CO₂ that we produce in abundance. We cleanse ourselves with water, cool and warm our modern homes with it and we know clean fresh supplies of water are often a precious and scarce commodity. We need that cycle of rain to renew our supplies and I am grateful, as I have already stated.

... except the 2012 version of me is a little annoyed at having listened to months and months of gloom stories about the imminent drying up of British reservoirs. It is June, and we are having to face yet more wet Yorkshire days.

The rain was always something of a novel occurrence when it happened when I was living in Abu Dhabi, and arguably there was more need for a national Salat-ul-Istisqa (Prayer for Rain). In Yorkshire however, rainfall happens all the time and it is the lack of maintenance to the Victorian-era network of pipes (from which a third of the conserved water seeps before it reaches the domestic tap); not the lack of rain that should be the prime concern. Here, wet days = grey skies and living under a terminal blanket of grey = misery. Yes, I am not shy about saying, that I wished it rained less, and no, I don't think that just because we have a few days of sun that we are in the grips of global climate change. It irritates me to have to listen to that.

Michael Crichton's, 2004 techno-thriller, State of Fear came in for considerable scientific criticism mainly because it challenged post-modern scientific views on global warming. Whatever the truths, it is that 'state of fear' that is drilled into us every day about drought, impending shortages, freak weather systems and so on that seem to keep the British happy to remain at most ease when they are living under a constant blanket of rain.

Sure there are truths about water conservation where it is wise to listen to advice, but when it comes to the English and their sense of water panic, I have learned to not to always listen to popular opinion ...

Note: The title of this post is inspired by this post that I made in 2009. Here's another post where I express more disdain about the rain. Neither post, incidentally had anything to do with that favourite English pass-time for discussing the weather since neither posts were made in England. 

Beloved Allah

Beloved Lord, Almighty Allah
Aside from Whom there is nothing else
Please help us
To love Thee more.
Teach us to realize
That the sole purpose of Love is Beauty.
Bring us to know Thee as Thou art

And to find Thee in the one place
That is big enough to contain Thee
The hearth of Perfect Man.


Ameen.

Rumi

Moharram 1433: محرم ۱۴۳۳

As well as heralding the start of the New Year, Moharram محرم remains a month of remembrance and one of the four sacred months of peace. The Battle of Karbala that signifies the martyrdom of Husayn ibn Ali (RA) in 61 AH is marked during the 10 day period of remembrance that culminates with Yaum Al Ashura.

Moharram 1433

محرم ۱۴۳۳

ګران مسلمانان

ګران مسلمانان

مبارک شئ د اختر

International Day of Peace

21st September. Peace Day.

Dedicated to everyone. Click here to find out more.

First of all:

إنا لله وإنا إليه راجعون

 
There was another high profile assassination in Afghanistan on the eve of International Peace Day. There's a long history of 'blame' in the ongoing Afghan conflict, but right now, let us remember all those who have suffered. May Allah continue to inspire hope and determination to people wherever they may be in the cause for peace and reconciliation.

My feelings remain mixed about the some of the over-simplified representation of this day. I really want the day to have significance. The possibilities post-peace makes the struggle for it worthy of high priority attention. But somewhere I think two things on this website sit uncomfortably with me. Firstly, I not so forgiving of Europeans who overlook the fact that people in conflict zones need to have a full stake in their own peace. Don't get me wrong - every little bit helps, but peace is not something that can be delivered by the egos of pop star and celebrity appearances (who often seemingly miss the point). But the other question which arises, and one that I think is crucial, is the one that asks, "How can we have peace when the causes for disharmony and division are not part of the dialogue for peace?"

Theme continued in the next posting.

د اختر سلام

د وړوکي اختر په ورځ باندي ټولو ته ډیر ډیر سلام

 
الله پاک د ټولو مسلمانانوعبادتونه قبول کړي - امين

د اختر اُمبارک شئ

تور خان

Ramadan Prayers

رمضان كريم

Digital Technology: Diffusion and Revolution

continued from previous posting

Technology: Diffusion and Revolution

In 1996, 80 percent of the population in 50 Muslim countries did not have regular access to a telephone. By 2006, this proportion had dropped to 20 percent. The diffusion rates for other information and communication technologies are also high, generally higher than those in non-Muslim developing countries: between 2000 and 2010, the compound annual growth rate of internet users was 32 percent, compared with 24 percent for the rest of the developing world. See here.

Consider “doubling time,” a figure used by demographers to refer to the amount of time it takes for a country’s population to double. Applied to technology diffusion, this reveals rapid trends: on average, since 2000, the number of internet users in Muslim countries has doubled every 8 months.

Understanding technology diffusion in Muslim countries offers some insight into why current political leaderships are being challenged. Mounir Khelifa, a Tunisian literature professor, speaking to Reuters, explains that the uprisings were made possible by the emergence of a generation raised during this information technology age. Both the Internet and Satellite Television undercut the propaganda of state media, creating  the opportunity for people to develop their own consensus on their rights. 

The recent uprisings in the Arab world began with the death of Mohamed Bouazizi, a protesting Tunisian shopkeeper who self-immolated, which activated a cross boundary network of people exhausted by authoritarian rule. Within weeks, digitally-enabled protesters in Tunisia had deposed their dictator after a series of strikes, protests and a mass civil disobedience movement called the Jasmine Revolution. Satellite television and the social media allowed the trend to spread across the Middle East.  Even President Obama has identified technology as one of the key variables that enabled average Egyptians to protest. True, digital media alone didn’t oust Mubarak, but it did provide the medium by which calls for freedom have cascaded across the region.

Technology: Politics of Change

And what of the sands? Where will they settle? It is difficult to know but what is already being called the Arab Spring, it is likely to lead to more political casualties. I remain cautious about what happens next - the western media is rather formulaic in its response and seems to feel that tomorrow the Arabs of the middle east will wake up as free citizens in fully established democracies or that militant theocracies will manoeuvre quick take-overs and send forth an army of radicals.

Nothing is quite certain and in no way am I ambivalent towards what is happening. I live here; I see it through a different lens and in particular, I think solutions need to be local.

There is much to be learned from this. Right now, I feel like I know two things. Firstly, in the modern world that we live in, we should not underestimate the will of people and the power that they have in tapping into the technologies available to them. Secondly, long term, brutal regimes and autocracies cannot survive; change will occur. The sands will continue to shift.

For further reading on Information Technology and Political Islam follow this link.

Multiculturalism: A Prime Minister Speaks

Nothing really changes. It seems that some people are never pleased, and others will pander to fashionable hysteria. It is the same today as it was yesterday as it was the day before and when I was growing up. Too many of us still need a fall guy; some-one to shift the blame onto; a bogeyman caricature; an enemy to help define ourselves.

Europe's uneasy relationship with the Islamic world is rooted in history and David Cameron speaks with rather common voice:

Under the doctrine of state multiculturalism we have encouraged different cultures to live separate lives, apart from each other and the mainstream. We have failed to provide a vision of society to which they feel they want to belong.

We have even tolerated these segregated communities behaving in ways that run counter to our values. So when a white person holds objectionable views – racism, for example – we rightly condemn them. But when equally unacceptable views or practices have come from someone who isn't white, we've been too cautious, frankly even fearful, to stand up to them.

Europe needs to wake up to what is happening in our own countries. We need to be absolutely clear on where the origins of these terrorist attacks lie – and that is the existence of an ideology, Islamist extremism.

At the furthest end includes those who back terrorism to promote their ultimate goal: an entire Islamist realm, governed by an interpretation of shariah.

Move along the spectrum, and you find people who may reject violence, but who accept various parts of the extremist world-view including real hostility towards western democracy and liberal values.

If we are to defeat this threat, he says, its time to turn the page on on the failed policies of the past. So first, instead of ignoring this extremist ideology, we as governments and societies have got to confront it in all its forms.

David Cameron's speech follows on the heals of Angela Merkel's "Multiculturalism Has Failed" speech in October of last year. So the man at the top of the ladder in British politics, the Queen's representative and the first man of Britain, also knocks "multiculturalism". Frankly, I don't think that Britain in anyway leads on the matter and the failure of multiculturalism must have much to do with Germany and Britain both having allowed downward signalling ghettos to exist - enclaves within their systems where migrants and their kin are forced into the outer edges of mainstream society. Add to that relative poverty and low opportunity and failure stares you right back.

Many, many societies, have people of different racial types, religious views, languages, shades and opinions and whilst no place is perfect, "multiculturalism" is probably not even a word in those places. People just soldier on with their work, their daily routines and get on with providing safety and security for their families. Multiculturalism exists in a day-in, day-out basis. It just is.

Has multiculturalism in Europe failed? Well since Europe is still riding on a past nostalgia, I'm not surprised at these kinds of speeches. It's a "blame" game, nothing else. I don't eulogise most politicians in the slightest, so fortunately I can dismiss Cameron's attempt at courting popular prejudice. For most politicians, even national leaders, I find believing that they can possibly speak without agenda, something of a challenge. But just so that Cameron is reminded - he is no Barack Obama. Barack "Hussein" Obama. You know, the African-American President with a Muslim family. But then again, Britain is no America - where immigrants, Muslims included, are the key components of the contemporary American melting pot.

Cameron and Merkel ...? Hang on to yesteryear. Stay in your little pasts.