Monday, February 09, 2009

Taxpayers fund the ‘Muslim Women Power List’

Can you imagine the Government funding a 'Christian Women Power List', and then splashing out hard-earned taxpayers’ money during a deep recession (or depression) to advertise it across central government departments?

And it is not only Christians who might be irked by this, for what of the ‘Sikh Women Power List’, or the ‘Hindu Women Power List’, or the ‘Jewish Women Power List’, or the ‘Buddhist Women Power List’. Not to mention the ‘Atheist Women Power List’ and the ‘Jedi Knight Women Power List’ (can women be knights?). And Cranmer won’t even bother asking about the ‘Men Power Lists’. Or the ‘Lesbian Muslim Women Power List’, or the ‘Gay Jedi Knight Men Power List’, etc., etc.

It may be a little more comprehensible if this were the 'Asian Women Power List', notwithstanding similar objections to those above. But it is incredible (or maybe it is no longer so) that the government-funded body charged with issues of equality – the EHRC – is sponsoring something called the ‘Muslim Women Power List 2009’.

The EHRC professes to be ‘working to eliminate discrimination, reduce inequality, protect human rights and to build good relations, ensuring that everyone has a fair chance to participate in society’.

Not with this sort of patronising and divisive initiative they aren’t.

Forgive Cranmer for being a little dense or backward, but how on earth can a competition which is limited to only the female adherents of just one religion be remotely concerned with matters of equality or the elimination of discrimination when there are no equivalents for other faiths? If it be true that Asian women suffer discrimination, where is the evidence that it is specifically Muslim women who suffer more than the Sikhs or Hindus?

The ‘Muslim Women Power List’ has apparently been established to commend ‘the achievements of Muslim women in business, the arts, media, voluntary and public sectors’. It aims to ‘raise awareness of their social and economic contribution to British working life and celebrate their success at a gala dinner at The Lowry Hotel on 24 March 2009’.

That’s nice for them.

If Cranmer’s readers and communicants want some amusement today, the List website is certainly worth exploring. There are so many ‘Easy Read’ buttons for information and forms that Cranmer is left wondering at the EHRC’s assessment of the average IQ of Muslims, or women, or Muslim women. In fact, if Cranmer were either a Muslim or a woman or both, (s)he would be inclined to make a formal complaint to the EHRC for patronising discrimination. Quite incredibly, they feel the need to specify the entry criteria:

To be part of the event, you must be
•a woman

You don’t say.

And they helpfully explain their sponsors and the event as follows:

We are called the Equality and Human Rights Commission. We work to make sure people are treated in a good and fair way.

We are having an important event called the Muslim Women Power List 2009.

The event will be on 24 March 2009 at a place called The Lowry in Salford, Manchester.

The event is to show all the great things that Muslim women working in Britain have done. We want lots of people in Britain to know about this.

We are looking for Muslim women who have done really well in their work to be part of the event.

They could be managers or people in charge. Or they could be people who work in other jobs and have shown they can do really great things.

We would love to hear from you if you are a Muslim woman and think you should be part of the Muslim Women Power List 2009 event.

We and a group of people called judges will look at the information you give us. We will decide if the person or people you have told us about can be part of the Muslim Women Power List 2009 event.

We will then tell you what we decide.

We look forward to hearing from you.

Thank you very much,

Kamal Ahmed

Group Director of Communications

Equality and Human Rights Commission
3 More London Riverside
Tooley Street
London SE1 2RG

Well, there is no doubt that Mr Ahmed (presumably no relation) got an A* in GCSE English with that lot of patronising, monosyllabic pap. He writes as though he would commend the achievements of Muslim women in English comprehension, let alone excelling in any other sphere. He continues with one of the other conditions for entry:

You can only send us back the form if
•the information on the form is true
•there are no discrimination claims against you. A discrimination claim is when someone wants to take another person to a type of court called a tribunal. This is because they think that person has treated them badly.

So now we have the PC-orthodox definition of discrimination: thinking you been treated badly.

The Chair of the Panel of Judges is to be Trevor Phillips. He will be speaking very slowly, in words of one syllable, in order that all the manifestly dense people attending may be able to comprehend (grasp) the nuances (very small difference in meaning) of his covert agenda (secret plans) for the advancement (promotion) of Muslim women over their Sikh, Hindu, Jewish and Christian (kuffar) counterparts (people extremely like Muslim women, but just not Muslim).

Cranmer is sorely tempted to bring a discrimination claim against Trevor Phillips for promoting such an anti-Sikh (...etc) event, for, by being excluded from this competition, they may think they are being treated very badly indeed. Such a claim would then leave the Chair of the Panel of Judges in contravention of the standards set for the entrants.


Blogger North Northwester said...

While I loathe this piece of PC victimology, in all its expense and gaudy mawkishness, in some ways I fear it does not go far enough.
Islam is a terrible religion for women - they are to be treated almost as badly as Jews and equally badly as non-believers.

Now if an equality and human rights quango would actually say, up-front, 'Islam is institutionally woman-hating and we're going to do something about it; not a mosque nor a bookshop in the land is going to escape the light of justice for Muslim women and your foul propaganda will be treated as if it were overtly racialist' then our tax pounds might be being spent wisely and for justice. As it it, it seems to be spineless posturing.

You ask,
"If it be true that Asian women suffer discrimination, where is the evidence that it is specifically Muslim women who suffer more than the Sikhs or Hindus?"

Your Grace, the evidence might be here:

9 February 2009 at 07:46  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Is nobody able to put Trevor Philips and his racist organisation in its place. Preferably by abolishing it and making the lot of them get proper jobs? Or just go and live somewhere else.

9 February 2009 at 09:01  
Anonymous susan said...

Now i know where the money goes which used to go to disabled people, i know because i have 2 deaf children and the help and funding that used to be there no longer is, and dont get me started on equality in the school and work place!!!

9 February 2009 at 09:10  
Blogger haddock said...

It will give the women something to do when the men are talking to the "Government's Ethnic Minorities Business Task Force."

9 February 2009 at 09:22  
Blogger Rebel Saint said...

Given the governments transgender equality rights (whereby I can alter my birth certificate to whatever gender I choose), I wonder if I can enter simply because I think I am a women and I think I am a muslim. I wonder how they will check what's under the burka or my orthodoxy?

Hmmmm ... I feel a plan coming on ...

9 February 2009 at 09:50  
Anonymous Pakistan Calling said...

Pakistan influencing British Politics.

Maybe you don't believe in BNP Policies but how about this.
Pakistan Calling all Muslims in the UK

9 February 2009 at 10:44  
Blogger Damo Mackerel said...

I wonder will the muslim women need permission from their male relatives to join this power list?

Anyway it's some laugh and just goes to show how pathetic quangos are.


9 February 2009 at 12:05  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's unusual that a book launch should threaten to split the Anglican communion, but the Archbishop of Canterbury is a man of special talents. Rowan Williams is about to encounter an impressive storm over his invitation to a group of Dominican friars, who are Catholic, to chant compline at Lambeth Palace. It will be the first time anything like it has happened there since the Reformation and, although most people find time works as a decent enough healer, there remain many who will be upset by the plan for the launch of Why Go To Church by Fr Timothy Radcliffe.

"It's a sad day when the Archbishop of Canterbury can decide to join in prayer with one of the orders that so viciously opposed the Protestant Reformation," says the Rev Dominic Stockford, a former Catholic priest now on the council of the Protestant Truth Society. "The Roman Catholic church still opposes the fundamental doctrines of the Church of England as expressed in its 39 Articles. The archbishop shows himself to be completely unsuited to the leadership of a Reformed Protestant denomination."

Dr Williams's September pilgrimage to Lourdes also upset some Protestant groups. It seems they're no more forgiving now.
- The Observer

9 February 2009 at 12:22  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You have to love "professional" racial equality people. They get so far up the backsides of their high horses they tend to forget that their message should stretch to EVERYONE.

Unfortunately, situations like this are endemic. As an example I had to smile at Liberty's highly voal and opinionated spokesperson, Shami Chakrabarti, on Question Time the other night. She was frothing at the mouth over Ms Thatcher's golliwog remark and managed to lump "Paki" in there as well. So far, so good. But the name calling flows both ways. For instance I object to being labelled as khuffar, Satan, devil, infidel, dead meat, legitimate target etc. What about my human rights to not be called troubling names? Am I less of a human being and not entitled to equality because I am white and British? The way this lot behave you'd think so wouldn't you.

Yes the EHRC is patronising and partisan. And yes they are WRONG!

As a taxpayer I'm apalled that my money is being used in this way.


9 February 2009 at 12:38  
Blogger an ex-apprentice said...

One of Your Graces more amusing posts.
Some might argue it is not a subject for humour. Yet it is SO pathetic, it would be difficult to react in any other way.
And what a delightful photo (NOT Trevor Phillips).

9 February 2009 at 12:51  
Anonymous screechy mouse said...

RACISTS. (Hisssssss....)

Head wag, head wag, head wag.

Btw, Your Grace - I usually think your graphics are wonderful, but that one's horrible. You might have given the vile creature black eyes and dark ... well, I wish you'd covered it up a bit. Yuk.

9 February 2009 at 12:56  
Blogger Dave H said...

Maybe he didn’t want to exclude those whose first language isn’t English.

Even so, “We and a group of people called judges...” is patronising crap, and "If the information on the form is true” is practically offensive!

Notice how the polysyllabic word “discrimination” is nevertheless used. It’s plainly a high-priority word in ‘English as a second language’ classes. Disappointingly for a director of communication, Mr Ahmed has rather confused its' meaning: it’s the reason for the bad treatment that counts.

I can’t help but wonder if the greatest discrimination Muslim women experience in their lives comes from Muslim men. And if so would the EHRC try to tackle it?

9 February 2009 at 13:43  
Blogger Little Black Sambo said...

Isn't that a picture of Yasmin Alibhai-Brown?

9 February 2009 at 14:40  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sorry it will never work, Muslim women are viewed by their husbands as livestock, they are often butchered when young by so called "female circumcision" for no other reason than to please their future spouses who presumaby enjoy inflicting pain on their "beloved". Any Muslim woman who dares to gain qualifications in a professional field can not expect to progress beyond the status of wife & mother, or suffer the consequences. Thus no members ipso facto waste of our money, again!

9 February 2009 at 16:51  
Anonymous Shaven-headed tattooed knuckledragger said...

The very fact that this event is necessary is a clear demonstration that the inbred Ummah of predators, parasites and psychopaths is less than worthless, and worse than usless, and is a total liability on the rest of society.

9 February 2009 at 17:14  
Anonymous christian person said...

Wot abaht the YWCA then?
(And the YM, for that matter)

9 February 2009 at 17:15  
Anonymous christian person said...

Wot abaht the YWCA then?
(And the YM, for that matter)

9 February 2009 at 17:17  
Blogger Hugh Oxford said...

If Muslims don't want to be discriminated against then I suggest they give up their discriminatory, totalitarian, anti-democratic and apartheid ideology, or at the very least stop advertising it.

I get the impression that if New Labour had been in power in the late '30s it would have been a criminal offence to insult National Socialism.

9 February 2009 at 17:53  
Anonymous Voyager said...

I like the poster...I do hope that will be used to help Muslim women 'come out' of the shadows. This is an idea whose time has come - liberate Muslim women - teach them to read and write - English perhaps, maybe even would break the shackles and blow apart Muslim ghettoes.

It is clear Trevor Phillips wants to undermine the male dominance in Muslim areas and liberate Muslim women to be as matriarchal as the Afro-Caribbean women who have found they don't need men around for long to be empowered in the family way.

This should finally blow the lid of the Mosque Culture and inflame the Kasmiri peasants and their miscegenate cultural norms. I think this could be most interesting - turn Muslim family life upside down...and show them Western Culture Wars close up

9 February 2009 at 17:55  
Blogger Dissenter said...

Just five words




useful idiots

9 February 2009 at 20:47  
Blogger ZZMike said...

I may have read it here (my apologies if this is a repeat): Muslims hold their women in high regard. They believe every man should own one or two.

"We are called the Equality and Human Rights Commission. We work to make sure people are treated in a good and fair way."

"We and a group of people called judges ..." Great Caesar's Ghost!!! Does this "Commission" really believe it's talking to imbiciles? (Perhaps it thinks it's talking to Muslims.....) I last saw such writing in our schoolbook "Dick and Jane".

I've highlighted the two words of importance in this next sentence:

"We will then tell you what we decide."

But wait - we have only to read the Signature:

Kamal Ahmed
Group Director of Communications

Beside that, it's apparent that they're using the word "Equality" in the Orwell sense - some of us are more equal than you.

Beside even that:

"...commends the achievements of Muslim women in business, the arts, media, voluntary and public sectors..."

Doesn't the Koran specifically prohibit women in business, in public, ... ?

I foresee a fatwa against Mr Ahmed, for being an infidel (de rigeur for many fatwas) and for trying to pull Muslim women from behind their burkhas.

Anonymous: "... a group of Dominican friars, who are Catholic, ..."

Who would have known? We must write a letter to the Times.

Voyager certainly has a good point. I have to wonder, though, if that's their intention. I doubt it's Mr Kamal Ahmed's intention.

There's an article about Mr Ahmed in an advertising/media-oriented website:

PROFILE: Kamal Ahmed

He himself is in a "Power Book" - from the article:

"Ahmed is a new entrant in the PRWeek Power Book - one of just eight non-white faces. So does he think the commission should be concerned about the ethnic homogeneity of the PR industry?"

I wonder if these "Power Book" things are anything like our "Who's Who in ......" books - which will make you a certified "Who" for a small consideration.

9 February 2009 at 21:03  
Blogger shergar said...

"Show us some ankle!"

9 February 2009 at 22:55  
Anonymous Shaven headed tattooed knuckledragger said...

Head teacher forced to resign after being branded racist for trying to axe separate assemblies for Muslims

9 February 2009 at 22:56  
Blogger John MacLeod said...

Good article, Cranmer, but the tasteless image of a scantily clad woman lets it down badly and is pretty offensive, to intelligent Christians as well as to Muslims. Please get rid of it.

9 February 2009 at 23:16  
Blogger Dr.D said...

What a great picture of that muzlim slut you led off with in this article!

Anonymous said, "For instance I object to being labelled as khuffar, Satan, devil, infidel, dead meat, legitimate target etc. What about my human rights to not be called troubling names? Am I less of a human being and not entitled to equality because I am white and British?"

When are the rest of you going to wake up to this? Or don't you object at all? Don't you see that you are being routinely slandered and yet you take it lying down while you bend over backward to appease these savages among you? You are certainly no longer the nation that built the great British Empire; you don't have the courage to do something like that!

10 February 2009 at 00:09  
Anonymous Adrian P said...

Trust your instincts.
Look around you, look at what they are doing and wake others up too.

Read,Digest, Distribute

They are Creatin an Empire, you are not invited


Sorry for shouting your grace..

10 February 2009 at 02:07  
Anonymous Just Smoke and Mirrors your Grace said...

The Elites War on us all

10 February 2009 at 05:16  
Blogger The Penguin said...

Go for it, Your Grace. Bring on the Tribunal.

The Penguin

10 February 2009 at 11:24  
Anonymous Alexandrian said...

Your grace, I find myself, not for the first time, agreeing with John Macleod.

10 February 2009 at 11:33  
Blogger ZZMike said...

While I see MacLeod's and Alexandrian's point, I can't agree that the photo is "tasteless" and "offensive".

It's been around a while - I remember seeing it last year.

It makes a point - the stark contrast between the way women are treated (by being burkha'd) in Islam and the West.

The "degree of coverage" is actually greater than what you'd see on any beach in Brighton (not to mention beaches in France).

My one complaint is that the caption is way out of place, and detracts from the message of the image. Surely you can find a version without that caption.

Adrian P: The makers of that video undertand the Agenda (which started with Gramsci, but seems to have been taken over by other Dark Forces): first undermine, then destroy: the family unit, the education system, and religion.

That done, the pieces are easily put back together in the New Order.

10 February 2009 at 16:46  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It is interesting that two powerful anti-Christ forces have come together at the same time, communism and Islam.
Communism denies Gods existence and is at war with all who worship Him.
Islam denies that Jesus is Lord and that He died on the cross as a sacrifice for our sins and rose again.

10 February 2009 at 19:24  
Anonymous church mouse said...

Yes, Anon. TY for pointing that out. And these two actually take pride in the label - they claim it gladly, for themselves.

I wonder: might that be the difference between earlier ages and the present? In previous times, enemies applied the label to people who may or may not have been...

11 February 2009 at 13:58  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older