Ashok Kumar, Marsha Singh, Parmjit Dhanda, Virendra Sharma, Khalid Mahmood, Sadiq Khan, Mohammed Sarwar, Shahid Malik and Keith Vaz.
What do all these nine men have in common other than being MPs?
The answer: They all voted in favour of holding terror suspects for 42-days without charge in the Government's razor thin victory last week.
Much has been made of the nine vote majority the Government used to scrape through their controversial extension of our terror laws and in particular the fact that they were only able to do so thanks to the nine Democrat Unionist MPs who voted with the Government amid allegations that they had been "bought off".
But despite the fact that the vast majority of those who will see their right to habeus corpus suspended in the coming years will almost certainly be British Asians, virtually every single British Asian MP voted for the Government.
I can't take credit for spotting this - page two of the excellent Eastern Eye newspaper this week "names and shames" the MPs and quite rightly asks the question: "What's the point of these MPs?"
They quote Massoud Shadjareh, chair of the Islamic Human Rights Commission, as saying: "This is one of the reasons why Asian youth, in particular Muslims, are alienated from the political system. They are not there to address their needs but are tools of the establishment."
According to Eastern Eye the only Asian male MP to vote against the government was Shailesh Vara (Con).
Now correct me if I'm wrong but I would have thought that if ever the Government looked likely to pass laws that would invariably see white voters locked up for weeks on end without charge, I'm sure white voters would expect their democratically elected MPs to protect their rights.
Had those nine MPs voted against the Government, "persuading" the Northern Irish MPs would not have been necessary in the first place.
If we want young disaffected Muslims to start engaging with the mainstream political process , it might be worth having MPs who vote for the good of their constituents once in a while.
While personally against the 42 days I find this an outrageous article. The assumption seems to be that Asian MPs only represent Asian constituents, that 42 days is targeted at Asians only (though the faces I've seen of those convicted seem to include an over representation of those of black Africans/black West Indian descent). Further the inference is that white MPs don't care about Asian concerns and voted for this as it wasn't likely to impact white constituents.
As David Davis exemplifies this is about the British liberties developed through a thousand years of struggle, that apply equally independent of skin colour, religion or gender. I assume his opponents believe that security is a concern equally serving constituents independent of those factors.
Racial/religious politics needs to go into the dustbin of history but articles like this support separatism.
Posted by: Ted | Saturday, 21 June 2008 at 03:16 PM
Yes, you bleeding heart liberal, the "alienation" of British Muslims is all our fault, as usual. If it's not our foreign policy, then it's our refusal to allow sharia a foothold in British law, our cultural "misunderstanding" about female genital mutilation, honour killings and underage marriage, or something else from a host of supposed grievances. But it's never the fault of radical imams, divisive Saudi-backed organisations or the cult of victimhood, is it? No, that would be placing responsibility on individuals, which won't do. We have never been so willfully blind as we are today.
Posted by: JD | Saturday, 21 June 2008 at 04:37 PM
we don't got to India/Pakistan/Saudi etc and demand to be heard. What is with this thing about Britain? The fact is if you are born here you can claim citizenship but it does not make you British until you live by British cultural values. Don't compare it to USA or Australia and New Zealand as these are new countries that are made for large immigrant population - even though the indigenous peoples have suffered as a result. But if you are in Britain then I am sorry we do not have to kow tow to any values that do not tie into our own - LIVE WITH THAT ! We are a very old country with Saxon/Norman/Celtic/Viking roots - we are not a Pakistani/Indian/Chinese/Bangladeshi Islamic/Hindu Sikh country. We can tolerate many peoples but we do not have to chnage our cultural values for anyone.
Posted by: loppo | Saturday, 21 June 2008 at 04:45 PM
People need to differentiate between culture and religion. In regards to JD's post, this view of women being inferior, genital mutilation and so forth is something which is against the values of Islam. As with all religions it depends on interpretation, however aspects of the religion and the culture it can brings has great potential to work with and support mainstream British values. The 42 detention infringes on human rights beyond belief, as does Guantanamo bay. The success of such impeding laws only serves to show the death of justice for all people of this country. Where do you draw the line?
Posted by: Aj | Saturday, 21 June 2008 at 05:05 PM
Crux of argument: Brown MPs should vote how Brown people think (and they think in one way only). If not, they're Uncle Toms.
The seconddary view of course is that these people can't hold these views legitimately - that anyone who claims to do so is a liar. They are bad men and they know they are bad (cowards, even).
Is it any wonder that I, a young man, feel isolated from your pathetic and insulting reasoning? Grow. Up. You. Clot.
Posted by: David | Saturday, 21 June 2008 at 05:43 PM
AJ, I understand what you're trying to say, but how can you state that genital mutilation, etc, is against the values of Islam? Why, then, is it that only overtly Islamic nations have such abhorrent practices? And they all justify it with references to the Koran, the Hadith, etc. There is no consensus about what constitutes "Islamic" values, as there is no Pope but overlapping schools of jurisprudence, so it seems that anything goes.
I agree with you about 42 days and Gauntanamo, but these are profoundly different. We do have the opportunity to redress these issues. The next US administration, regardless of party, has pledged to close Gauntanamo and we in the UK could have halted 42 days if the Labour/DUP politicians were not so cowardly. This, however, is not an option for us with the many excesses of the dominant strain of radical Islam.
Posted by: JD | Saturday, 21 June 2008 at 10:20 PM
Wow! The writer did not mean to provoke racial tensions,but with the comments it seems like he did, Mr. JD found a very good reason to express his racial hatred that seems to have been simmering for centuries, the only thing is that now he has found a good reason to, How lovely it feels when you find a glorified reason to hate! Good progress! British people are moving forward , he should be happy that the Asians Having Political power are tamed and docile enough to think like Govt when they have to, But I would agree with the person whose comment appears on top and thank God(or Thank Jesus to please the Britts) That I do not live in UK where the Population is so full of hatred ,only wishing that their courts think like them too.
Posted by: Syed T | Saturday, 21 June 2008 at 11:48 PM
British people are not full of hatred; we are probably the most liberal country in the world to our diasvantage and to everyone else's advantage
Posted by: lorrie | Sunday, 22 June 2008 at 12:20 AM
Well done Syed T, just continue to focus on anything other than the problem itself. That'll get you far. I've lived in five countries and have very diverse friends, so I'm not some narrow-minded xenophobe devoid of worldly experience. By the way, disliking a religion is not racism as far as I'm aware.
Posted by: JD | Sunday, 22 June 2008 at 02:12 AM
I'm Asian, of Indian background, and I'm not a Muslim. The idea that I should vote on the basis of my race is utterly offensive. I also find the Islamic Human Rights Commission offensive when they peddle their bigoted form of Islamism lite as a political ideology and try to foment divisions in society. Stop trying to boil up rhetoric about 'Asian youth' --- for a start, very few Sikh or Hindu youth even want to be associated with 'Muslim Asians' these days. They find the special pleading and pandering to Islamist rhetoric and racial politics stupid.
Posted by: Paul | Sunday, 22 June 2008 at 04:00 AM
Quite right 'Loppo', you Brits don't have to change your cultural values for anyone. Which is why I'm constantly disappointed that you guys are changing your cultural values (and your political and economic ones) to suit America.
Posted by: Golam Murtaza | Sunday, 22 June 2008 at 08:51 AM
well America the big country even though it is largely an immigrant population including Brits on the Mayflower etc etc but of course people from lands all over the world it still has its constitution etched out of British philosopher John Locke's works and the laws of Great Britain and the religious idelas and ethics; if you want to know why we are so close to America it is because we share the same cultural values and principles dating back 400 years. It is the same with Afghanistan and Packistan; Australia and New Zealand; many Meditteranean countries; China and Taiwan...the list is endless. Those countries do have fundamental differences but they are linked in their cultural identities. There is no 'racism; in this observation, it is merely the fact.
Posted by: loppo | Sunday, 22 June 2008 at 10:27 AM
It is scandalous that the British Government does not provide free passages to whatever culturally desirable heaven the disaffected and deeply offended Islamists choose.It is cruel to keep them here.
Posted by: Straight Talk | Sunday, 22 June 2008 at 10:53 AM
@ Straight Talk.
The "desirable heaven[s]", that these people will love to go to, as you so eloquently claim, tend to be teeming trigger happy western (and very much christian) soldiers hell bent on destroying anything that moves. Or would this be another case, and very coincidental one at that, of selective vision?
Posted by: Mrs George Bush jnr | Sunday, 22 June 2008 at 11:13 AM
Curious idea(selective?) about Pakistan( Land of the Pure) and Saudi Arabia ,that they are full of "teeming trigger happy western (and very much christian) soldiers ". Or did I miss something?
Posted by: Straight Talk | Sunday, 22 June 2008 at 11:45 AM
As someone of Indian heritage I'm sick of being labelled 'Asian.'Journalist are quite happy to distinguish between the various european cultures and nationalities and yet, out of laziness perhaps, fail to distinguish the real differences between those from the Indian sub-continent. I have nothing in commom with a Pakistani or Bangledeshi Muslim. As a atheist I have very little in common with hindus. The very idea that just because I share the same colour skin as someone else I must also share his or she opinions in nonesense.
Posted by: Claude | Sunday, 22 June 2008 at 11:52 AM
Where were the articles written by, or on behalf of Asians when internment was imposed on the exclusively "white" population of Northern Ireland. Just a little more thought and a little less persecution complex might just help all you downtrodden Asians to see a bit more clearly.
Oh and just for the record this 42 day terror law will be aimed at terrorists whatever their colour; it just so happens that today's terrorists are Muslims.
As for Magna Carta, Habeas Corpus and all those ancient laws and rights that most people would have had to Google when David Davis brought them up, well kiss them goodbye if the Muslim terrorists get their way and create an Islamic state in the UK.
Posted by: toomsk | Sunday, 22 June 2008 at 12:02 PM
It isn't Asians suffering from a persecution complex. It's those whites who claim 'political correctness' stops them from saying what they really think, then going on to state all those things online and in letters to their local paper without suffering any repercussions whatsoever. Poor, oppressed wretches...
Posted by: Golam Murtaza | Sunday, 22 June 2008 at 01:48 PM
Golam Murtaza:
Well if anything, the Internet serves one useful purpose, it provides the freedom of speech that the law no longer allows, the freedom that has been restricted as a result of pressure groups, so really you should welcome the views of the majority of the people in this country and not just the sanitised version put forward by the "chattering classes".
You see the problem about restricting freedom of speech is that pressures build up and can explode in something no-one wants to see, best talk about what p***** people rather than let it build up and get out of hand.
If you moved in the circles that I do then you would be aware of the hatred (a word I could never have used 10 years ago) that accompanies every new Muslim demand. These people aren't the red necked eye bulging, right wing stereotypes that the liberal elite would have you believe, but normally left of centre Labour voters who for the first time in their lives are starting to vote for the Conservatives and even the BNP.
That's the situation that political correctness creates so carry on and mock and keep your head in the sand and just hope that everything will turn out for the best, just wish I had that sort of blind optimism.
Posted by: toomsk | Sunday, 22 June 2008 at 02:15 PM
Shouldn't you be reading the daily mail toomsk.
Posted by: YT | Sunday, 22 June 2008 at 03:50 PM
Simply giving the Ostriches a "heads up" on reality.
Posted by: toomsk | Sunday, 22 June 2008 at 04:07 PM
I don't know why these Asians don't go back to their country of origin if things are so bad for them in politically correct Britain...what do they want from us anyway? We can't win; what ever Britain does to accomodate them; allow them to build mosques all over the place and give them special laws and schools whatever, they are going to whinge and whinge and whinge. The fact of the matter is that they are not wanting to live in their own lands and make their own homelands a better place - when with their own people they can't run away fast enough. So better to come to Britain and complain about the white population; acccuse them of all kind of intolerance - because basically that is what they feel and practice against their own people. You don't see British people fighting eachother in their own land.
Posted by: Burt | Sunday, 22 June 2008 at 04:25 PM
No concession should be made to religion. People are entitled to believe what they want to believe but have absolutely no right to impose their beliefs on others, and that includes their own children. Every religion would die out within a generation if a law was brought in preventing parents from brain washing their children. End 'Faith' schools. If parents are so sure that their religion is the right one, then surely all they need do is live a their lives as an example, and if the childen see that example providing happy, contented adults then they will freely follow. All religion is just another ideology and deserves no special treatment and has no right to demand respect.
Posted by: Lisa | Sunday, 22 June 2008 at 04:39 PM
Hurrah to BURT. The Independent recently ran a story, saying RACISM REARS ITS UGLY HEAD IN CORNWALL. The headline should have read, SEPARATIST RELIGIONS REAR THEIR UGLY HEAD IN CORNWALL. And then the story could have continued with the truth about threats to life and the whole community from religious bombers, currently living in Plymouth and trying to kill people in Exeter!
Posted by: Bronwyn | Sunday, 22 June 2008 at 06:09 PM
"we don't got to India/Pakistan/Saudi etc and demand to be heard."
Perhaps not to India/Pakistan - are you mad...they've got nukes, and you never know with Johnny Foreigner, they might actually use them!
Instead, lets try the country next door!
Posted by: john doe | Monday, 30 June 2008 at 01:11 PM
And we have 'Bronwyn' justifying racist attacks against Asians in Cornwall. What a charming woman she is.
Posted by: Golam Murtaza | Thursday, 27 November 2008 at 07:24 PM