But this week even I, even I, can see that for the British establishment Muslims are contemptible creatures, devalued humans. As I prayed before starting this column I felt tears stinging my eyes and my face was burning as if I had been slapped many times over. Do they expect me to turn the other cheek? Millions of other Muslims must have felt what I did. And some may well go on to do things they shouldn't. Their acts will intensify anti-Muslim prejudices and will be used to justify injustice. The cycle is vicious and unrelenting.
Oh my God. What's happened? What dreadful provocations, humiliations, indeed crimes must have been committed to bring forth such a pitiful and, it has to be said, inflammatory response?
1. G_____ B____ at the Chilcot Enquiry didn't utter 'a word of sorrow' about the Muslim children killed in Iraq.
2. A judge jailed some miscreants involved in the recent demonstrations against Israel's treatment of Gaza.
3. Geert Wilders was invited into the House of Lords by Lord Pearson of UKIP to show his anti-Muslim film.
A few observations, seriatum:
1. GB is one of the most unpopular PMs in history and isn't representative of much; he's also totally shameless; the majority of murdered Muslim children in Iraq would have been killed by other Muslims; the Iraq War and the military actions pursued in its aftermath weren't directed at Muslims per se.
2. These were deterrent sentences that seemed deserved to me, having seen video footage of the demo. Suck it up, Muslim or no: you break the law, you may be jailed.
3. Lord Pearson, a member of the British Establishment? No, not really. Anyway, as long as the law isn't broken people can say what they wish. If it's any comfort, Parliament has hosted many forms of offensiveness in recent weeks from a Liberal peer, who appears to believe in the anti-Semitic blood libel, to a Respect MP who defends the Iranian government's vicious repressions.
Nevertheless, for Y A-B these incidents amount to a 'licence to strip the rest of us [Muslims] of our humanity and inviolable democratic entitlements.' The British Establishment (them again) 'steal our human and civil rights and don't even try to behave with a modicum of honour during and after war. The same people call upon us to be more "British" but treat us as lesser citizens.'
I feel I could dupe and revise some of my criticisms last week of Daniel Johnson's Standpoint editorial, simply changing a few of the nouns. Have these people gone quite mad? Perhaps some form of religious war might be more popular than one would reasonably assume?