Where Unity Is Strength
Header

Sikh Victim of Racial Attack Incorrectly Identified as Muslim on Flagship Radio Show

The Network of Sikh Organisations (NSO) has made a complaint to the BBC following misleading comments made by a guest on BBC Radio 2.

On 19th January, Jeremy Vine interviewed members of the Jewish and Muslim communities following the Paris terror attacks.

He asked a guest: “Are Muslims in Britain under pressure now?” to which the responder talked of attacks on mosques and Muslims adding:

“This year, you know a man…..was stabbed in Tesco as someone shouted white power at the height of the Charlie Hebdo……tragedy.”

In a complaint to the BBC the NSO clarified the victim of the racial attack in Tesco was in fact a 24 year old Sikh man, not Muslim as the guest implied.

The NSO added: “Sikhs continue to be victims of hatred following Islamic terror attacks. This is nothing new – the first person to be killed in retribution of 9/11 was a Sikh; the first place to be attacked after the 7/7 London bombings was a gurdwara (Sikh Temple) in Kent. In America a ‘white supremacist’ gunman went on a rampage in Wisconsin and murdered six people in 2012, injuring many others including a policeman. There have been a number of violent attacks on Sikhs in Britain post 9/11.

It is routine for Sikhs in Britain to be referred to as ‘Bin Laden’ or ‘Taliban’. The Sikh turban and beard, has been conflated with the attire of Islamic extremists. Although the community faces growing prejudice and an inevitable backlash, the government has done little to reassure British Sikhs following the Paris attacks. It is therefore, critically important that the BBC present accurate facts to its audience. We request you urgently make a correction on air so the public is clear the victim was Sikh not Muslim.”

The NSO is waiting for the BBC to formally respond to its complaint.

 

Under-Secretary of State Sidesteps Lord Singh’s Question:

In a debate in the Lords, The Conservative Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Office Lord Bates, repeated the Home Secretary’s statement on the Paris terror attacks.

A number of Peers joined the debate in condemnation of the brutal murder of journalists from the satirical French magazine Charlie Hebdo.

Baroness Smith of Basildon raised the issue of British born jihadists returning from Syria, she said: “While some of those will have become seriously disillusioned and will have rejected radicalism, others will have returned to the UK more dangerous.”

Lord Davies of Stamford talked about steps to cancel or withdraw passports of British citizens enlisting in terrorist organisations. He asked: “Is there not a real danger that, if hundreds more people in this category come back to this country, the additional strain placed on our security services of monitoring them may be such as to create a significantly enhanced risk of an oversight at some point which could cost a lot of lives?”

Lord Singh of Wimbledon raised the issue of the boundaries of free speech, he said: “My Lords, much has been said since the attacks in Paris about the right to offend. If there is a right to offend, there is a right to be offended. People react to offence in different ways. Some will turn the other cheek, some will come out with expletives and some will resort to violence. Does the Minister believe that there is any merit in deliberately antagonising people?”

Although Lord Bates acknowledged the question posed by The Director of The Network of Sikh Organisations “goes to the heart”, rather than responding, he chose not to answer the question, reverting to another topic.

 

Skip to toolbar