newspapers and Maryam and Monanewspapers

On a similar theme, this morning's Sunday featured a discussion between Professor Mona Siddiqui (of Thought For The Day fame) and Maryam Namazie from the Council of Ex-Muslims in Britain. 

As the Independent has been reporting, more than 200 individuals and human rights groups have signed a letter branding Mona Siddiqui's official inquiry into the role of sharia courts in the UK (set up by Theresa May) as a "whitewash" because of the appointment of an Islamic scholar (ie. Mona) as chair and two imams to its advisory board. 

Sunday is to be commended for featuring both sides of the argument though Ed Stourton unquestionably put tougher questions to Maryam than he did to his old Today colleague Mona (suggesting where his sympathies lay in the debate).  

I'm not sure that Maryam Namazie did full justice to herself here. Ed's points against her - that there were lawyers on the board (despite what she seemed to be saying), and that she might have waited until the inquiry actually began before voicing her objections and should instead welcome and encourage it - weren't successfully parried (in my view). 

Mona Siddiqui, however, didn't do herself any favours either. She sank in my estimation by quickly and repeatedly resorting to ad homs. 

She'd barely begun speaking before she described the criticisms as "arrogant". She then called them "arrogant" again later. And later still she called them "arrogant" again. (And she clearly meant Maryam).

Quite how she thinks such repeated insults help prove her suitability for the "chairpersonship" of the inquiry (as she kept calling it) is beyond me...

...and such 'not very nice' behaviour isn't what's expected from a Thought For The Day type (except, perhaps, for John Bell or Giles Fraser). 

newspapers and Look back in incandescent furynewspapers

When we first launched this blog we said we wouldn't try to be topical, always reacting to the latest news. In that spirit, I intend to go back to where I left off and bang on about last Sunday on Radio 4.

Broadly put, the station's early morning to mid afternoon' sweep of current affairs programmes - from Sunday at 7.10 to Broadcasting House at 9.00 and The World This Weekend at 1.00, combined with 'topical' editions of Desert Island Discs and The Food Programme - made for a very striking sequence, especially as regards the BBC's post-Referendum coverage.

Most of it went very strongly in one direction (with the exception of the repeat of John Gray's On Brexit edition of A Point of View, about which we've blogged before).

Sunday's post-Referendum coverage was wholly negative. It focused on the apparent steep rise in racist hate crimes since the result came in. Voices from the affected minority communities were heard from, expressing concern and fear. The two interviewees who discussed the issue - Bishop Richard Atkinson near the start of the programme and Rev Rose Hudson-Wilkin at the end of the programme - both linked these crimes to the tone of the (Leave) campaign.

Broadcasting House was mostly negative too. The early stages of the programme were dominated by a post-Referendum political discussion between (strongly pro-Remain) Edwina Currie and (strongly pro-Remain) Shirley Williams. Both were downcast about the result (especially Baroness Williams) and pretty acid about the political fallout. And the final stages of the programme were dominated by the wistful reflections of (strongly pro-Remain) Lord (Peter) Hennessey, who didn't want us to leave the EU. Ah, but here's the BBC's 'impartiality get-out clause!: One of the three paper reviewers was (strongly pro-Leave) Ruth Lea. So 'that makes it all right then'!

Desert Island Discs, recorded post-Referendum, featured the US ambassador to the UK, Matthew Barzun. Ambassador Barzun defended his president's 'back of the queue' comment (in support of Remain) and repeated the Obama administration's reasons for opposing Brexit - namely that Brexit wouldn't be a good thing.

The World This Weekend, with Mark Mardell, started out on a strongly anti-Brexit footing. First, Mark went to speak to the protesters on the the March for Europe - which, by reckoning, aren't the majority 52% (obviously), or even the minority 48%. They are the 0.17%. Why should TWTW have indulged them, and led with them?

Then came a near-quarter-of-an-hour interview with Tony Blair, who put both the anti-Brexit and the 'this referendum result could be overturned' cases. Mark Mardell began by asking him, "Who now speaks for that 48% who voted Remain?"

After him came a surprisingly short interview with Suzanne Evans of UKIP, It lasted three minutes. Mark began by asking her (and then asked her again) whether, as Mr Blair said. we should vote again if the public mood changes (as, he said, her side would have also said if they'd lost).

Now, of course, the question arises: Is using Tony Blair to advance a position really helpful to that side? I can well imagine hordes of BLiar-haters listening to that interview and hearing nothing but variations on 'I hate that man' humming around their heads throughout the entire interview.

Later playwright (pro-Remain) David Hare, spitting mad about the Brexit vote, and House of Cards author (pro-Leave) Lord Dobbs, barely expressing a view on that subject, discussed post-Brexit politics.

There were some vague shades of grey there, but the tendency on the whole was clear - and in the anti-Brexit direction.

And that's without even mentioning The Food Programme...

newspapers and Making no bones about transitioningnewspapers

The topics on this morning's Sunday were, as so often, largely redolent of left-liberal concerns:

(a) Putin and the Patriarch going to Mount Athos in Greece.

(b) transgender Christians.

(c) the Church of Scotland and same-sex marriage.

(d) a multi-faith choir which celebrates multiculturalism.

(e) a relic of St Thomas Becket going to England from Hungary.

(f) the faith of Nelson Mandela, and

(g) a dispute over the World Humanitarian Summit, with Medecins Sans Frontieres refusing to attend.

The bit on a fragment of a bone believed to have been part of the body of St Thomas Becket making its way over to England for the first time in more than 800 years (from Trevor Barnes) was interesting though. Its usual home is the Basilica of Esztergom [pictured above], Hungary�s most important Catholic church. During the heavy oppression of religion under Communist rule, a cult developed around the saint. He was seen as a symbol of resistance to an over-mighty state. (Maybe Brexit supporters could adopt it as their relic too).

On the subject of transgender Christians, I was fascinated at the way guest presenter (and former BBC South Africa correspondent) Mike Wooldridge conducted his interview with two transgender vicars - Rev Rachel Mann and Rev Christina Beardsley [both of whose surnames made me laugh, for some reason]. Rev Mann and Rev Beardsley both believe that being transgender and being Christian are wholly compatible things. 

Though a veteran BBC reporter (with well over 40 years of service for the corporation), Mike conducted the interview as if he was a Radio One Newsbeat reporter (or Stacey Dooley), brimming with understanding and concern for his guests (and their concerns) and sounded fluent in 'transgender-speak' ('transitioning', etc) throughout. 

He even described people who don't accept that being trans is compatible with Christianity as "those who have convinced themselves" that they are incompatible - a somewhat loaded way of characterising such religious 'conservatives'. 

I wish him well when he eventually transitions to being Michaela Wooldridge.