Imtiaz Ameen: As a British Muslim, I believe we must act in Syria for moral, strategic and symbolic reasons

Imtiaz Ameen was Conservative candidate for Blackburn at the 2005 general election, is a former councillor in Dewsbury and writes a regular blog. 

Last week Paul Goodman discussed the potential effect military involvement by the UK government would have on Muslims in this country. At the time it seemed inevitable that Britain would be involved with the US and other allies in some form of action against the Syrian regime for its use of chemical weapons.

However, the decision taken by Ed Milliband and the Labour Party to oppose the PM’s motion in Parliament supported by some Tories and Liberal Democrats means that as things stand Britain will not participate in any military action but watch from the sidelines as other nations act. In the worst case scenario we as a nation will be turning a blind eye to genocide and even more deadly use of chemical weapons against its own people by the Syrian regime.

Will this decision, branded by some as a great victory by Parliament against the Executive mean that Muslims in this country will be euphoric and praise Ed Milliband’s actions or view his behaviour with contempt and deem them as political cowardice?

I believe that it will be the latter and the decision to not involve Britain in any military action for the genocide of 1400 mainly Muslim people will undoubtedly be regarded as a very poor one by British Muslims for reasons set out below.

Imtiaz Ameen: Islam4uk's planned march through Wootton Bassett must be banned

Imtiaz Ameen was Conservative candidate for Blackburn at the 2005 general election and is a former councillor in Dewsbury, where he will be standing for the council again in May. Writing as a British Muslim, he explains why Islam4uk's proposed march through Wootton Bassett should be banned. Click here to read his blog.

The decision by the extremist group Islam4uk to plan a march through the streets of Wootton Bassett is an act of deliberate provocation not designed, as alleged, to honour "innocent Muslims" killed in the conflict in Afghanistan - but simply to antagonise people who have had the decency to regularly honour returning soldiers killed in battle.

The proposed march is distasteful propaganda which all right-minded people, regardless of the religious affiliation, will abhor. And on this occasion, the Home Secretary must exercise some of the numerous powers at his disposal and prevent it from taking place.

Islam4uk is a marginalised and potentially dangerous group of Muslims led by the notorious Anjem Choudary which, among many things, attacks the “polytheistic anathema that is democracy” and declares  Muslims who actively participate in the democratic process as out of the fold of Islam. Its members, however, are more than happy to live within such a system and enjoy its benefits including the right to protest.

Imtiaz Ameen was Conservative candidate for Blackburn at the 2005 general election and is a former councillor in Dewsbury, where he will be standing for the council again in May. Writing as a British Muslim, he explains why Islam4uk's proposed march through Wootton Bassett should be banned. Click here to read his blog.

Imtiaz Ameen: It was not in my name that Geert Wilders was refused entry into the UK

Amtiaz Ameen was Conservative candidate for Blackburn at the 2005 general election, is a former councillor in Dewsbury and writes a regular blog. From the perspective of a British Muslim, he argues here that - whilst disagreeing with his views - Geert Wilders should have been allowed into the country yesterday and agrees with his sentiment that it was a "very sad day" for British democracy.

In refusing entry clearance to the Dutch MP Geert Wilders, the Government has scored a soft own goal. It should have allowed Mr Wilders into the country and let him speak at the event organised by Lord Pearson and Baroness Cox at the House of Lords where his film Fitna was also to be aired.

Fitna supposedly is a criticism of Islam in which verses of the Quran are recited before extracts of speeches by alleged extremists inciting violence, which are followed by clips of terrorist atrocities committed around the world. The film, in short, is Mr Wilders' interpretation of Islam, and anyone who watches it can judge for themselves how scholarly and accurate he has been in his analysis.

When I viewed the film, my initial reaction was that Mr Wilders had been as guilty in his selective use of verses from the Quran as the Islamists who, out of context, use the Quran to justify indiscriminate killings of innocent people. No doubt he and others would disagree, but we are all entitled to our opinion.

That debate has now become a sideshow, with the topic surrounding Mr Wilders becoming one relating to freedoms of expression and speech in which all Muslims are shown as intolerant by the calls of some, such as Lord Ahmed, to prevent Mr Wilders from entering the UK. I’ve no doubt that if Mr Wilders had attended the event, and overzealous claims of incitement not been made by Lord Ahmed, there would have been no story as Fitna has been readily available on the internet for several months.

Imtiaz Ameen: Straw is wrong on the Muslim veil

Imtiaz Ameen is a Councillor for the Dewsbury South Ward. He was the Conservative parliamentary candidate in Blackburn at the last election and is now on the priority list.

It’s just as well Condoleeza Rice didn’t wear a veil otherwise Jack Straw would have had a serious problem discussing important international affairs with her.

A silly and absurd statement? Absolutely, and that’s what I thought when I read Jack Straw’s extraordinary comments regarding the Muslim veil.

In Blackburn at the last general election, most of the Muslim vote was conjoined at the ballot box with Jack Straw who was seen as the friend of Muslims, and as someone who understood their religious sensitivities. For this reason alone when I read Straw’s comments I was perplexed to say the least.

Straw believes that wearing the full veil is bound to make better, positive relations between communities more difficult, because he sees the veil as a symbol of segregation. Not only is this a dangerous assertion especially in the current climate but is also inconsistent with the liberty and freedom Jack Straw sought to impose on the people of Iraq and Afghanistan as Foreign Secretary.

In a free society we cannot dictate what people choose to wear except in selective and controlled environments such as schools, hospitals and the workplace. Outside of the controlled environment, everyone is free to dress as they please. There is no universal dress code for being British; equally there is no dress code which symbolises anti-Britishness – yet that is what Jack Straw seems to suggest. He feels that if a Muslim woman chooses to wear a veil which also covers her face, she is choosing not to integrate into society. He completely misses the point. What Straw fails to understand is that a Muslim woman covering her face will do so in front of all men except her immediate family, regardless of whether they are Muslims, not as a sign of segregation but out of modesty – that is her prerogative and something she chooses to do.

Secondly, no matter how detrimental it maybe, in a free society we cannot force anyone to ‘integrate’ if they refuse to do so. This is a problem which is vexing all political parties who are desperately seeking satisfactory solutions but for which there is no quick fix.

There are as many non-Muslims who refuse to integrate with Muslims as there are Muslims who refuse to integrate with non-Muslims. I see this on a daily basis in my ward. The challenge in a free society is to build better relations between different groups to ensure future generations as well as existing ones are more accepting of each other and are prepared to live in a friendly and cordial environment – it is not to dictate dress codes or allow pre-existing prejudices to be casually aired especially by those who hold power.

What is most disturbing is Straw’s intransigence in that he asks for a Muslim woman to show her face if she is going to meet him, and if he is to do his duties as her MP. If as an elected councillor I refused to deal with a person who wore a cross, or a skull cap, was wearing a turban or had a Rastafarian hairstyle would I be encouraging debate on integration or displaying my irrational prejudices and abusing the power granted by the electorate?

Imtiaz Ameen: Engaging with British Muslims - the losing battle

Imtiaz Ameen is a Councillor for the Dewsbury South Ward. He was the Conservative parliamentary candidate in Blackburn at the last election and is now on the priority list.

Unless moderate Muslims and politicians engage in dialogue with young British Muslims, the Islamists seeking to radicalise and recruit them to their cause will win the argument.

Does Britain’s foreign policy have a detrimental effect on the mindset of British born Muslims or is there no causal link between radicalisation of young British Muslims and Britain’s involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan? This is one of many questions surrounding the issue of radicalisation of young British Muslims that has been discussed at great length by Government Ministers, opposition politicians, journalists, political commentators and vexed the Muslim community. Many including Government Ministers religiously state there is no causal link between extremism in Britain and foreign policy but Muslims simply don’t believe them. They argue that while there is no justification, excuse or explanation for violent crime and terrorist activity, Britain’s foreign policy gives ammunition to those who want to radicalise young British Muslims, and acts as a potent catalyst.

The majority of well established moderate Muslim organisations argue that what is happening in Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon and of course Palestine is being allowed to adversely affect British Muslims, to such an extent that some Muslims are prepared to engage in extreme acts of violence either as revenge, as an expression of anger and as part of a wider Islamist ideology which seeks the establishment of Sharia rule across the world. Whichever view of foreign policy impact is taken, it is a debate that will vociferously continue in the next few years.