Islam

Cairo The Facebook and Twitter revolutionaries are taking a beating at the hands of the Brothers. The results of Saturday’s referendum are now out and they point to a simple truth: the internet was fine as a tool for gathering a few hundred thousand youths in Tahrir Square; but it is largely irrelevant as a means of winning elections across large swathes of Egypt, where three-quarters of the 83 million population have no internet connection at all. On a massive turnout, and in the fairest vote in the country’s modern history, 77 per cent of Egyptians sided with the Muslim Brotherhood in saying “Yes” to a quick and dirty patch-up

If you find yourself on the same side of an issue as Iran, it is wise to think carefully what path you have chosen to walk. Today, an Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman condemned the foreign military intervention in Bahrain to confront the protests as “unacceptable.” To my dismay, I agree with what Tehran says; but, I suspect (and hope), for very different reasons. The grievances driving the Bahraini protests stem from years of discrimination by the Sunni elite of the Shia majority. Evidence of the problem is well-documented. Last year, Amnesty said that the Bahraini authorities had “failed to investigate alleged torture of detainees”. The State Department’s annual human rights

Nick Clegg’s speech in Luton today on extremism is a challenge to large parts of David Cameron’s remarks on the subject in Munich just last month. Indeed, even the venue of the speech can be seen as a rebuke to Cameron who was attacked for giving a speech on Islamic extremism on the same day that the English Defence League was marching in Luton. Cameron’s speech, which was one of the best of his premiership, argued that ‘the ideology of extremism is the problem’ and that terrorism’s ‘root lies in the existence of this extremist ideology’. In the key section of the speech, Cameron declared: “As evidence emerges about the

David Cameron’s speech yesterday was one of the most important he has given as Prime Minister. I’d urge you to read the whole text just to see how absurd some of the opportunistic, party political attacks on it have been. As I say in The Mail on Sunday, they’ll be a huge amount of resistance in Whitehall to the course that the PM is charting. But he is surely right that state money and recognition should not be going to any group that does not promote integration and believe in the liberal values on which this country is based. To do anything else would be fundamentally illiberal. A lot of

“State multiculturalism has failed.” Angela Merkel put voice to that sentiment last October. Now it David Cameron’s turn to do the same. In a speech in Munich today, the Prime Minister has taken a rhetorical torch to Islamic extremism. “Frankly,” he says, “we need a lot less of the passive tolerance of recent years and much more active, muscular liberalism.” It is, at the very least, a significant political moment. What Cameron is doing here – as explained by Charles Moore and Paul Goodman – is publicly signing up to a philosophy of the world. It is a philosophy that rejects the idea that extremism should simply be contained. Instead,