Teacher fired for saying most suicide bombers are Muslim

Link:
Source Link

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Teacher sacked over religion row
A supply teacher has been sacked from a secondary school following complaints from Muslim pupils.

Andrew McLuskey was sacked from Bayliss Court Secondary School in Slough after a Religious Education lesson discussing the pros and cons of religion.

Pupils at the predominantly Muslim school claimed Mr McLuskey said most suicide bombers were Muslim.

But he rejected the allegation and said the school was too quick to sack him without giving him right of reply.

"Very unjust"

He expected to complete an eight week contract at the school - but was sacked after only several days.

"I feel it's very unjust," he said.

"I think I should've been given the chance to respond to the allegations and not in effect be ejected from a job without the chance to defend myself."

The school authorities denied they were being heavy-handed and said their first priority was pupils' welfare.

"I don't think it's important what I think," said the school's deputy head teacher Ray Hinds.

"It's what the pupils think that were in the classroom at the time. And they were very upset."

[edit on 4-2-2007 by Retseh]

I dont like this teacher how can I get rid of him....I know make allegations against him that are bound to get rid of him without debate.

According to this the pupils run the school..."I don't think it's important what I think" says deputy headmaster. It's what the pupils think".
So the pupils couldn't have been lieing, making it up?

I think he should of been allowed to give his side of the story, im not saying he's innocent but its giving a message to the pupils there, accuse someone of being 'anti-muslim' and they will be got rid of without question...imagine what will be happening when they get a job.

EDIT - The link above isnt working anymore, new one

news.bbc.co.uk...

[edit on 4-2-2007 by lemox]

i read about this the other day....they shouldnt have sacked him IMHO.
Lets face it, he was right. It might have been a tad insensitive, but the statement he made was right

[edit on 4-2-2007 by geek101]

Firing teachers for teaching fact. What will we think of next?

Originally posted by CaptainLazy
Firing teachers for teaching fact. What will we think of next?

seriously

Originally posted by CaptainLazy
Firing teachers for teaching fact. What will we think of next?

My sentiments exactly

I suspect there is more to this story than has been reproduced here.

Looking at what has been posted we have no idea of the detail or reasons behind the school's position on this.

It's easy to claim or imply that the kids in the class are/were lying but it's not really a sustainable claim if, under detailed questioning, they are all telling the same story.

Who knows, maybe the guy had already been repeatedly told that it was a policy from the School Governors (perhaps due to sectarian sensitivities) that this topic was to be avoided and not to be discussed (for any particular reason)?

The teacher made a big mistake . . . bringing an issue that is politicized so much, an issue that have the UK nation fighting a war in the middle east in the wrong country and the school was predominately muslin.

He could have say instead that all sucide bombers are Muslin radicals that would have been a better approach.

Originally posted by marg6043
The teacher made a big mistake . . . bringing an issue that is politicized so much, an issue that have the UK nation fighting a war in the middle east in the wrong country and the school was predominately muslin.

He could have say instead that all sucide bombers are Muslin radicals that would have been a better approach.

Why the hell does he have to sugar coat the truth? He told it the way it was.Most suicide bombers are muslim, in fact, I cannot remember the last suicide bomber that was not a muslim so that should tell you something.

Originally posted by XphilesPhan

Why the hell does he have to sugar coat the truth? He told it the way it was.Most suicide bombers are Muslim, in fact, I cannot remember the last suicide bomber that was not a Muslim so that should tell you something.

Perhaps because they are children after all . . .mostly muslin and no even high school children . . .

As a former teacher of elementary and junior high is a lot that you have to either never bring the subjects or like you said sugar coated.

Certain topics are tabu in grade schools.

BTW I was a Spanish teacher and historical facts about the origins of language were part of the class curriculum.

Originally posted by marg6043

Perhaps because they are children after all . . .mostly muslin and no even high school children . . .

As a former teacher of elementary and junior high is a lot that you have to either never bring the subjects or like you said sugar coated.

Certain topics are tabu in grade schools.

BTW I was a Spanish teacher and historical facts about the origins of language were part of the class curriculum.

Sorry Marg but purely for factual acccuracy I will point out that Baylis court school is a Secondary school (High School) I used to live in Slough and it is a part of the UK where about 60% of the populace is of Pakistani and Indian decent, 10% black and 30% white. Tensions between Muslims and the rest of the comminity has always been high. There has also been a long going rift between Muslim and Sikhs that often turned the high street into a battle ground on a friday and saturday night, this was the case in the late 90's.

Talking about Islam in religious education in slough schools was like walking on eggshells. ( A bit like critisising American foreign policy on ATS )

This teacher was a supply teacher and propably came from another area, he would have been able to have said what he said in 99% of British schools he just got unlucky. This is just another case of political correctness gone mad!

[edit on 5/2/07 by Jimmy1880]

Originally posted by Jimmy1880
Sorry Marg but purely for factual acccuracy I will point out that Baylis court school is a Secondary school (High School) I used to live in Slough and it is a part of the UK where about 60% of the populace is of Pakistani and Indian decent, 10% black and 30% white.

Thanks for correcting the school level

I guess that if he was teaching wars in history, I guess he could have made the comment as part of the teaching, but I guess you know better than us what is the situation with muslins in your country.

It seems that is very volatile.

"Most suicide bombers are muslim"

As others have stated, we don't know the context or exactly what was said. On a related point though, Lets stop all this "he was just telling the truth" bollocks. If you know your history, most suicide bombers are shintoist. China has a long and well documented history of suicide bombing which predates and exceeds the current middle eastern conflict.
And, Unlike the current spate of middle easter suicide bombings, Shinto philosophy unlike Muslim theology, actually condones the act.

Originally posted by marg6043

Thanks for correcting the school level

I guess that if he was teaching wars in history, I guess he could have made the comment as part of the teaching, but I guess you know better than us what is the situation with muslins in your country.

It seems that is very volatile.

No probs Marg

But yeah parts of the Uk are very volatile, there are quite a few medium to large towns in the UK that are putting it crudely "Islamic settlements" ie. Slough, Hounslow, Bradford (There were mass race riots here not so long ago)

IIn the 60's & 70's there was a huge influx of Commonwealth citizens India, west indies, Pakististan. Alot of the Pakistani's were muslim, they created there own communitys and segregated themselves from British community's this reaction was helped by alot of Racism (Not anti Muslim, Anti brown people) These days those communities have gotten so large that the White British have been forced out. Incidences of racist attacks against whites has grown especially after the invasion of Iraq.

I must say this is not an overly widespread problem but in these immigrant dominated towns it is a major issue.

I do feel for this teacher. In this case I think it's fair to say

"IGNORANCE ENCOURAGED"

If most teachers taught the truth they would be fired. This is why there are so many people home schooling their children

But it's not true. Most suicide bom,bers aren't Muslim, and Most muslims would reject the few who do bomb as being actual Muslims.

Many suicide cults stem from christianity, does that mean that mass suicide is intrinsicly linked to christians ?

There are tthree issues here.

1: The validity of what he said ( which is currently in dispute )
2: His reasoning for saying it ( other than a sudden massive bout of stupidity )
3: The context and inflection of what was said ( which we simply don't know about )

Originally posted by Jimmy1880
parts of the Uk are very volatile, there are quite a few medium to large towns in the UK that are putting it crudely "Islamic settlements" ie. Slough, Hounslow, Bradford (There were mass race riots here not so long ago)

- There have been periodic episodes of unrest, it's true
(usually provoked by people like the BNP deliberately trying to stir trouble)
but "mass race riots" is, IMO, a gross exaggeration.

Surely a 'mass race riot' would be something encompassing thousands, but we have never seen anything like that, not since the 1980s
(and those sort of numbers would be highly debatable for then too).

Alot of the Pakistani's were muslim, they created there own communitys and segregated themselves from British community

- No,
They did what always happens with every new influx of immigrants; they end up, almost always, in the cheapest, most run down & worst parts of town, ghetto-ised.
It's nothing new and it certainly isn't anything like much of a conscious 'choice' to be separate.

(New immigrants arriving and settling in Mayfair, when, hmmmmm? )

These days those communities have gotten so large that the White British have been forced out.

- You'll find that the idea of the 'indigenous population' leaving the worst areas of town is, eventually, very common too and certainly not a case of 'forced'.

Population movement is hardly unusual, it happened with the Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe in the east end of London.
First they end up ghetto-ised in the crappiest parts of town and gradually they make good and/or their kids do and leave to be replaced by whoever comes after them (in the case of the east end it was Asians).

It's anecdotal so it's hardly conclusive but the number of times I met ex-Londoners in Kent or Essex talking about how they'd chosen to leave London because there were now 'too many blacks' was sadly tragic.
But that wasn't a case of actually being forced out at all.

Incidences of racist attacks against whites has grown especially after the invasion of Iraq.

- Well you might think it's that but IMO a far more realistic view is that 2nd and 3rd generation Asian lads aren't prepared to keep their heads down and suffer the racists who abuse them.

Of course this now means we see instances of idiot Asian lads acting like a mirror of their previous tormentors and sometimes innocent white youths being attacked on occasion.

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
- There have been periodic episodes of unrest, it's true
(usually provoked by people like the BNP deliberately trying to stir trouble)

Funny how upon re-opening this thread I had anticipated seeing something akin to "it's the right wing tabloids fault", this time it appears to be "all the BNPs fault". Your accommodation of the left wing agenda and total blame of the right is truly comical, but regrettably not uncommon in the UK. Are you suggesting that Richard Reid attempted to blow up a plane because of the BNP or because they wouldn't serve him in the chip shop, or ditto the London bombers. Self flagellation (self as in white, not racist) will not appease Islamofascists, they can sense the weakness inherent in the traditional British attitude of appeasement, and they will continue to use that weakness against you, you will not defeat or defuse these people with tolerance.

- No,
They did what always happens with every new influx of immigrants; they end up, almost always, in the cheapest, most run down & worst parts of town, ghetto-ised.
It's nothing new and it certainly isn't anything like much of a conscious 'choice' to be separate.

Whoa, straight out of the Liberal handbook on underprivileged minorities. Take a look at the USA, the Indian and Pakistani communities here are totally diverse, diverse and very successful, not quite as successful as the Chinese population admittedly, but very successful and generally admired by caucasian US citizens nonetheless. I can only conclude that you have Muslim enclaves because that's how they prefer to live, providing them with a nice secular environment with which to foster hatred against a culture which they are isolated from, and therefore see as alien - voila, instant London bomber. Either that or it's the fault of the right wing tabloids of course.

(New immigrants arriving and settling in Mayfair, when, hmmmmm?

)

I would be interested to see if there are in fact more oppressed immigrants living in Mayfair than naturalized UK citizens. My last visit to London anecdotally suggests the former. New immigrants appear to go straight into subsidised housing, so I doubt that includes Mayfair.

You'll find that the idea of the 'indigenous population' leaving the worst areas of town is, eventually, very common too and certainly not a case of 'forced'.

For once we agree, since my home town of Phoenix now has such a substantial British population that they have opened up their own pubs. So now we have a British enclave, complete with George & Dragon, perhaps we should crack down before they impose their pacifist, gun hating agenda on us - where would they run to when the US has been "fixed"? They do however have a long way to go to catch up with the white South Africans over here, who are literally willing to do anything to emigrate. Emigration is an interesting social barometer for both your nations.

Well you might think it's that but IMO a far more realistic view is that 2nd and 3rd generation Asian lads aren't prepared to keep their heads down and suffer the racists who abuse them.

Hurrah for the bus bombers then, they're just sticking up for themselves. Racists (and right wing tabloids?) again huh, you really cannot recognise any wrong doing on the part of Muslims, or at least I have yet to see any evidence of such rational analysis.

Of course this now means we see instances of idiot Asian lads acting like a mirror of their previous tormentors and sometimes innocent white youths being attacked on occasion.

Wow, now you appear to be saying that while Asians are guilty of some instances of bad behavior, it's as a result of them mimicking their former tormentors, the white racists.

You may recall the recent plight of one of your fellow European nations after incurring the wrath of Muslims. The amazing part of the great Danish cartoon caper wasn't that Muslims immediately engage in acts of mob violence when things don't go their way. That is de rigueur for the Religion of Peace. Their immediate response to all bad news is mass violence. After an Egyptian ferry capsized recently, killing hundreds of passengers, a whole braying mob of passengers' relatives staged an organized attack on the company, throwing furniture out the window and burning the building to the ground. The 'Offense to Islam' ruse is merely an excuse for Muslims to revert to their default mode: rioting and setting things on fire. See also Bradford.


[edit on 10-2-2007 by Retseh]

Originally posted by Retseh
Funny how upon re-opening this thread I had anticipated seeing something akin to "it's the right wing tabloids fault", this time it appears to be "all the BNPs fault".

- Clearly you don't know much about the BNP's activities in the north of England.

Are you suggesting that Richard Reid attempted to blow up a plane because of the BNP or because they wouldn't serve him in the chip shop, or ditto the London bombers.

- Eh?

Where does this connect and come in?

The London bombers (like RR) have nothing to do with this issue
(other than perhaps it adding to a very general background feeling of alienation).

Whoa, straight out of the Liberal handbook on underprivileged minorities. Take a look at the USA

- The USA is nothing like the UK in this regard.

We are far smaller, far older and already have a far longer history of accommodating (at times with great difficulty) movements of population from the 'home Nations' and Europe.

I can only conclude that you have Muslim enclaves because that's how they prefer to live, providing them with a nice secular environment with which to foster hatred against a culture which they are isolated from, and therefore see as alien - voila, instant London bomber.

- You ignorance of how these things came to be in the UK is pretty obvious.

You'll find most if not absolutely all immigrant waves have been through exactly the same thing here.

They always end up in the cheapest worst areas of town, ghetto-ised. There's no "prefer" about it.

You obvious desire to tie in "London bomber" with "immigrant" and "Muslim" is clouding your judgement.

I would be interested to see if there are in fact more oppressed immigrants living in Mayfair than naturalized UK citizens.......

...... New immigrants appear to go straight into subsidised housing, so I doubt that includes Mayfair.

- A tad contradictory?

For once we agree

- It was bound to happen sometime, how were you to know what I'd say?

Don't worry about it, it's not your fault.

Hurrah for the bus bombers then, they're just sticking up for themselves.

- Where are you getting this from?
Where did any of what I saidy equate to that, at all?

The "bus bombers" were all about the ME and the situation there, it's got precious little to do with 'living in the UK'.

Racists (and right wing tabloids?) again huh, you really cannot recognise any wrong doing on the part of Muslims, or at least I have yet to see any evidence of such rational analysis.

- You won't find me using such an absurd and sectarian broad brush.

Do I think it's ok for young men to react to racist attacks with attacks of their own?
No.
OK?

Wow, now you appear to be saying that while Asians are guilty of some instances of bad behavior, it's as a result of them mimicking their former tormentors, the white racists.

- Actually what I'm saying is that if you kick a guy in the nads for 40 years don't be too surprised if one day he (or his children) react.

This is what the racists have been encountering. Same as has happeend with various ethnic groups just about everywhere.

(and you can quit trying to pretend that the London bombing are directly related to this, they're not)

The 'Offense to Islam' ruse is merely an excuse for Muslims to revert to their default mode: rioting and setting things on fire. See also Bradford.

- Really.

Tell me all about all the Muslims in Bradford.

Please.

My dad lives within a couple of miles so I know the place reasonably well, I'm dying to hear how it looks from where you are.

Sacking people for expressing political views is one kind of authoritarianism; sacking people for stating facts is quite another.

I'm a strong believer the evolution of ideas and so denounce the concept of “offensive facts” as nothing but a speech tool of PC fascism-authoritarianism. In my view there are only "contentious facts"; and I do not believe in a democracy (even one ruled by a New Labour) that we should allow people to loose their jobs for expressing them; not so much “even in front of children” but rather “especially in front of children” as there are enough contentious facts from all sides of the political spectrum to make political interest and thought interesting; to lead to a changing of views as one grows up; and indeed the evolution of ideas (even if its only in ones mind its especially welcome for children).
The only time the evolution of ideas is disrupted and sometimes driven to a halt; is when parents, or in this case local education authorities shelter those growing up from a select proportion of the many other kinds of facts an adult mind will have to deal with anyway (as they develop).

Spuggy What! “most suicide bombers aren’t Muslim”? Guess you learn something everyday!! Now can you back it up by telling me how many suicide bombers in the last-year decade weren’t practicing Muslims?
Granted it's “in dispute” whether carrying out suicide bombing in the name of Islam is Islamic. But even if it isn’t, it doesn’t stop the fact that most suicide bombers are Muslim. E.g. You can lie, commit adultery, murder ect and still be a Christian. Because God apparently is forgiving (something both faiths share).
So what I'm pointing out is the perfectly obvious statement that “you can violate a religion and still practice it”. (Something dare I say your "PC mindset" just seems to have neglected).
It’s sinful and hypocritical maybe; but not enough to deny your identity (at least in most of the world’s religions) (and never mind say “99%” of other people’s minds)

Frankly even if we omit the parts of Islam that do clearly allow Holy War against infidels; people who do such things are merely guilty of additional things “outside of their religion?”. Therefore they may indeed be sinful Muslims, (just as there are many sinful Christians); but they're still Muslims nonetheless.

The only thing the teacher did not probably say next is that “most Secular Muslims are not suicide bombers.”
Even so I this does not make what he said incorrect; merely abridged; and in a debate (or developing mind) a key function is to bridge an argument.

Good Service?
I think this teacher served both the White and the Secularist Muslim populations of this country well by informing a classroom of Muslim kids that most suicide bombers are Muslim. This is because it is warning to the kids, in particular against fundamentalism (as on closure analysis this is the heart of the matter).
If any of those kids are fundamentalists (or have parents who are) then of course they will upset at hearing this fact. It upsets me too.

Therefore surely its actually a healthy sign, of a healthy political mind (something these kids are quite possibly less likely to have if the local authority fails to find someone who will warn of them of the dangers of their religion).
As someone who lives in a (on the whole) Christian country I am well aware of the dangers of Christianity: Going to Church on Sundays, not much sex, and being in favour of denying all ill people the health benefits of research on stem cells on religious grounds (this is just of few of the dangers of Christianity, I believe in America in can also involve voting for “The Moron of Washington”).