THE first museum in the UK to be dedicated to Sikh history has opened in Derby.
Hundreds of people gathered yesterday for the official opening of the National Sikh Heritage Centre and Holocaust Museum in Pear Tree.
The £25,000-plus project is the first in the world to showcase Sikh history from the perspective of British Sikhs.
It also looks at the Sikh holocaust, in which more than a million people lost their lives because of their faith.
The idea for a national museum came from the Sikh Community Youth Service in the 1980s.

It considered venues from all over the country but chose a former factory in Derby, owned by the Sri Guru Singh Sabha Gurdwara temple, because of the enthusiasm which had been shown by the city's Sikh community.
Gurmel Singh, one of the volunteers who helped to set up the museum, said he expected people from all over the world to visit the centre.
He said: "The people in Derby expressed such an appetite for this centre. All the funds have been donated by the community and they have put in a lot of time and effort to make it happen.
"We want Sikh young people to get a sense of their connection with Britain as Sikhs and the British have been interacting since the 1700s.
"I think this will become a major tourist destination for people all over the world."
The museum, which is opposite the Sri Guru Singh Sabha Gurdwara temple, off Prince's Street, features a collection of cannons, hand-held weapons and coins from the Sikh empire in 18th-century India and also memorabilia from the time of the British Raj.
There are soon to be interactive displays and a full educational section with a specialist library of more than 300 books.
There is also a collection of material addressing the history of Sikh persecution.
During the 18th century, Sikhs were outlawed by the Indian government and endured barbaric persecution for about 50 years.
In the wake of Indira Gandhi's assassination in India by two of her Sikh guards in 1984, thousands of Sikhs were slaughtered.
Mr Singh said: "The world is quite rightly aware of the Jewish holocaust but also the Sikhs have had an experience and it's almost an untold story."
The opening was attended by the Mayor of Derby, Councillor Barbara Jackson, and the MP for Derby South, Margaret Beckett.
Mrs Beckett, who released 300 balloons at the event and was wearing Sikh dress, said: "I think this is a tremendous thing that we now have in Derby. It's very important for the young people of the Sikh community to know about their origins and for others to learn about it.
"There's a tremendous tradition of working together

http://www.thisisderbyshire.co.uk/news/Country-s-Sikh-museum-opened-Derby/article-495424-detail/article.html

A ban on Muslim head gear in schools could spark a rift with minority communities, an intercultural affairs expert has warned.

Introducing rules against the hijab head scarf or other religious symbols is "likely to result in tension with those communities where no tension existed before," said the director of the State's advisory body on intercultural affairs, Philip Watt.

During the debate over whether Muslim pupils should be allowed wear the headscarf in State schools, Mr Watt, who sits on the National Consultative Committee on Racism and Interculturalism, said most schools had already found their own "sensible and sensitive compromise".

He explained that the majority of schools allowed the head scarf to be worn provided it was the same colour as the school uniform. [Link]

Multiculturalism debated in Quebec

QUEBEC and the defence of cultural traditions have long, and not always happily, been linked in the minds of Canada's English-speaking majority. Now Quebeckers are themselves seeing things from a majority point of view, bridling, in this context, at the claims of immigrants in their French-speaking province. An official commission, however, thinks the complaints are overdone.

Back in 2006 several unrelated incidents led some Quebeckers to think that too much was being asked of them in welcoming immigrants, and too little of the newcomers themselves. A Sikh boy went to court and won the right to wear a ceremonial dagger to school. A gym bowed to a request from Hasidic Jews to frost over windows so the Lycra-clad bodies of women working out wouldn't be visible to their nearby congregation. A man was asked to leave a pool so that a group of Muslim women could swim in private.

These cases were seized upon by a declining Montreal tabloid and by Mario Dumont, the popular young leader of an upstart conservative party. To defuse the issue, Jean Charest, Quebec's Liberal premier, set up the commission and asked two prominent intellectuals—Gérard Bouchard, a pro-independence sociologist, and Charles Taylor, a federalist philosopher—to chair it. This worked politically: Mr Charest scraped back for a second term, though Mr Dumont's party catapulted from four to 41 seats in the provincial parliament, becoming the main opposition.

After a year in which it held endless town meetings and received 900 written submissions, some inflammatory, the commission reported this month. Its conclusions were nuanced and moderate. The crisis was one of “perception”, in which the media had grossly distorted the controversial incidents, the chairmen said. To soothe both sides they made a long list of recommendations. They urge speedier recognition of foreign qualifications to make it easier for immigrants to get jobs (of more interest than cultural accommodation to most). They want the government to coax more of the 45,000-odd immigrants who come to the province each year to settle outside Montreal, in the rural regions where misgivings about migration are highest. And more should be done to ensure that migrants quickly learn French—and more Quebeckers learn English.

The report pleased immigrant organisations but not the original grumblers. They want more stress on making immigrants integrate and conform. “Does it mean that in our daycares, our primary schools and in all milieus we will have to hide our Christmas trees and Easter bunnies in the closet?” asked one of Mr Dumont's aides of a proposal that the Quebec government produce an annual calendar showing holidays of all faiths. No, is the answer. Mr Charest is enjoying a rare spell of popularity, and seems to have no intention of jeopardising it. Even before the report was released, he rejected its symbolic proposal to reinforce Quebec's secular image by removing the crucifix over the speaker's chair in the provincial legislature. [Link]

Clearly, all of Canada continues to struggle through multiculturalism issues and to define what it means to be a Canadian. Few countries have opened their doors to such a wide cross-section of immigrants as Canada and no city has embraced it more than Toronto.

We can be proud of our diversity, of our willingness to embrace a wide range of cultural and religious differences. Yet many of our recent newcomers still face bigotry, racism and job discrimination.

Canada is not at a point that has been reached in European countries like Britain, France and Germany where tolerance for minorities has eroded and riots have broken out. But our elected leaders, as well as every one of us, must remain vigilant to attacks on multiculturalism and ensure immigrants and minority groups are treated fairly and that their integration into Canadian society is as smooth as possible.

Instead of questioning multiculturalism, we should reaffirm the inclusiveness and tolerance that has made modern Canada a success.

Our diversity is a source of strength, not weakness. Millions of new Canadians have settled successfully in Canada over the last 100 years. They and their children are proof that multiculturalism works. [Link]

Quebecers strongly oppose almost any cultural or religious accommodation of immigrants and other minority Quebecers, according to survey findings published yesterday in La Presse. The findings are a sobering measure of the size of the problem Quebec faces and a clear indication that some political courage is going to be needed.

The poll results are dramatic: A hijab on the soccer pitch? 70 per cent of respondents are against. Turbans for Sikh Mounties? Nearly 80 per cent against. The kirpan? Female-only swimming? Male-only driving testers for Hasidic Jews? No, no, and no, by large margins.

People of common sense and goodwill can certainly disagree on many of these issues. But in Quebec's current happy social context these strikingly one-sided results - if not the entire debate - seem to us somewhat irrational.

Immigrants, by and large, integrate into our society rapidly and well. To Quebec's credit, newcomers are not parked in homogeneous ghettos. In our red-hot economy there is opportunity for all, removing the economic-fear component from the equation. You don't hear many, if any, claims that visible minorities are "coming here to steal our jobs."

So why all this opposition? One figure offers a hint: 58 per cent object to providing prayer spaces in public buildings. That's far fewer naysayers than on most such issues.

This leads us to suspect that the less visible a practice, the more acceptable it's deemed. Praying to Allah or anyone else is bothersome to fewer old-stock Quebecers if done in private; but Heaven (so to speak) help the 13-year-old girl who wears a scarf to play soccer. Even the Quebec Council on the Status of Women, an organization dedicated to social equality, is campaigning to forbid public-sector employees from displaying any overt signs of culture or religion.

It's doing this in the name of a secular state, but the subtext is far different. If an SAAQ clerk or a teacher is barred by law from wearing a hijab, a turban or a kippa, what is the message? What is retained - by adults and kids - is that there's something wrong with these symbols - and, by extension, their wearers.

There is some good news in the survey. Younger Quebecers revealed themselves to be far more accommodating than their elders. That openness bodes well for the long term.

In the meantime, it will be the duty of elected politicians to make sure that the smooth integration of these immigrants - and their acceptance - continues. The Bouchard-Taylor Commission and the water-cooler discussions it has engendered have revealed, for better or for worse, some unexpectedly deep pools of cultural insecurity, or at least anxiety, among established populations.

Premier Jean Charest has been steadfast so far, in his public comments, in supporting an open and modern society. He'll need to keep doing that, and it won't be easy.

As for opposition leader Mario Dumont, so close to taking power, and for Pauline Marois, considered by many to be the best potential premier, they could continue to profit politically by talking about the narrow "nous."

But before they do, they need to ask themselves: what kind of society will we have if we try to jam everyone into the same mould? [Link]

A Town of Newburgh woman pleaded guilty Tuesday in Orange County Court to vandalizing a house that’s at the center of a family feud.

As her trial was ready to start, Donna D’Addio, 47, pleaded guilty to third-degree criminal mischief, a felony. She was arrested last year after Nisar Ahmed complained to town police that D’Addio carved “Get Out Muslim Bastard” on his house.

D’Addio was originally charged with criminal mischief as a hate crime. But as part of a plea bargain, she pleaded guilty to the lesser charge of criminal mischief. Her lawyer, Ray Sprowls, said last week that D’Addio has had a long-running dispute with Ahmed, who was once married to D’Addio’s mother.

In exchange for her plea, prosecutors said they’ll ask Judge Jeffrey G. Berry on May 22 to sentence D’Addio to six months in Orange County Jail and five years’ probation. She could have faced a maximum of 1¤ to four years in state prison. [Link]

Federal agents meet with mosque leaders

The Federal Bureau of Investigation has confirmed they are investigating a defaced Quran found Friday afternoon on the front steps of the Islamic Center of Clarksville.

"We are looking at the situation to try to determine what to do," said FBI spokesman George Bolds. "The first step is to determine what the situations really are."

Bolds said FBI agents are now in Clarksville, meeting with leaders of the mosque, and determining what to do next.

The vandalized Quran, Islam's holy book, read "Mohammad pedophile," and an expletive was written inside, smeared under two strips of bacon, a Clarksville Police report indicated.

The report labeled the incident a hate crime.

"No one was physically hurt, but Congress has seen it fit to pass statutes that protect houses of worship," Bolds said. "Based on their (Congress') evaluation that this is worth protection, our job is to enforce those laws," he said. "We are going to do our job."

Bolds said a defaced Quran shouldn't be taken lightly.

"Since 9/11, it has been a concern that people of middle Eastern ethnicity and Muslims might be objects of discrimination by people who perceive Muslims, in general, to be terrorists or supporters of terrorists," he said. "That is obviously not an accurate portrayal." [Link]

Aim Is to Increase Tolerance, Attorney Says

Just before he was scheduled to undergo surgery to treat oral cancer, Mohammed A. Hussain went to the bathroom at the hospital -- and that's when he says the humiliation began.

Inside the restroom at the University of Maryland Medical Center in Baltimore, the 61-year-old Muslim performed the Islamic ritual of washing his hands and feet. The private ritual, known as wudhu, was to purify his body and soul before praying.

But Hussain never got to pray. A hospital security guard saw him washing himself in the sink, Hussain said, and proceeded to manhandle him, yell racial epithets at him, push him down the corridor and order him to exit the hospital.

"He was just very loud and yelling at me," Hussain said. "He pushed me and literally dragged me into the lobby. . . . It was very terrifying."

Hussain filed a $30 million lawsuit Friday against the hospital, alleging assault, battery and emotional distress from the incident about 10 a.m. March 22. [Link]

Four hundred Montrealers attended a public forum Thursday evening to talk about reasonable accommodation, a hot-button issue that prompted Premier Jean Charest to launch a government commission after a Quebec town passed a controversial conduct code for immigrants last month.

Manjit Singh, a member of the Sikh community and the director of McGill University's Chaplaincy Services, said the Montreal public forum sponsored by CBC Radio was important because it helped clear up a lot of misconceptions.

"Just because I wear a turban, it should not be an issue for anyone," he said. "What they need to worry about is what is inside my head and not what's on my head."

Singh said some politicians are using the issue to divide people rather than promote tolerance. He said that might backfire since an election is expected to be called next week.

"If this becomes an election issue, which it seems to be headed for, people have to be able to make their choices, and it's better to be well-informed and then choose, rather than choose out of ignorance," he said.

The issue of reasonable accommodation reached a fever pitch in January after a municipal council in the Mauricie town of Hérouxville adopted a list of rules for immigrants, which was amended earlier this week after much public flak. [Link]

The scapegoating of the Muslim community has become the stock in trade of politicians, the Conservatives recently accusing the Muslim Council of Britain of separatist tendencies, and New Labour all too frequently indulging in the same kind of refrain - notably during the most disgraceful period of its domestic rule last autumn, when cabinet ministers were falling over themselves to make disparaging remarks about the Muslim community.

The argument typically starts from the global terrorist threat and ends up by suggesting the Muslim community nurtures and sustains such a terrorist mentality by its failure to integrate. Jack Straw squirmed about the veil, Ruth Kelly inveighed against imams, Alan Johnson proposed that faith schools admit up to 25% not of the same faith (patently directed against the Muslim community), and John Reid warned a Muslim audience of "fanatics looking to groom and brainwash [your] children ... for suicide bombing". Amid this panic-inducing rhetoric, there was little acknowledgment that Muslims suffer more discrimination than any other section of society, no recognition that every attack on their community can only intensify that prejudice. Imagine what it feels like to be a Muslim, stalked by a constant sense of distrust and suspicion? As a society we may condemn racism, but when it comes to Muslims, it seems to be somehow acceptable, from the cabinet downwards.

And what is to blame for this failure to integrate? Prejudice, perhaps? Discrimination? Racism? No, according to David Cameron, Ruth Kelly and many others, the cause would appear to be multiculturalism. Pause for a moment and spot the slippage in the argument. It is no longer only about Muslims but all our ethnic minorities. For enshrined in the principle of multiculturalism is the idea that the white community does not insist on the assimilation of ethnic minorities but recognises the importance of pluralism. It is not about separatism but a respect for difference - from colour and dress to customs and religion. The attack on multiculturalism is the thin end of the racism wedge. It seeks to narrow the acceptable boundaries of difference at a time when Britain is becoming ever more diverse and heterogeneous.

None of this is to deny the importance of finding ways of integrating the Muslim community. It is hardly surprising, though, that many young Muslims feel alienated. They face worse discrimination in education and employment than any other ethnic minority, Anglo-American policy in the Middle East has had the effect of demonising the Muslim world, and the Muslim community here finds itself the victim of a barrage of hostile propaganda. A major assault on discrimination involving the government, the media and the Muslim community is long overdue. But while British foreign policy so profoundly discriminates against the Muslim world, and New Labour remains in denial about the connection between domestic Muslim attitudes and its foreign policy, there seems little prospect of making a new start. [Link]