Worthing Herald Censors Free Speech
Local Paper Frightened To Air Legitimate Opinion
Criticism Of Islam “Might Cause Offense”, Says Deputy Editor
A Free Society Must Accept Some Risk To Get At Truth

Last week the Worthing Herald published a letter from Ali Abdul Rahman, Chairman of the Worthing Islamic Society, in which he expressed condemnation of the London bombing. In my opinion this did not go nearly far enough. I believe that Muslims are in denial about the impact of aspects of Islam and that they must accept the need for reform and act on this.

But the Worthing Herald doesn’t see it that way. The local newspaper happily published what, in my opinion, were warmed over clichés from local Muslims. But Deputy Editor John Hammond declined to publish my letter because he considered it inflammatory and might cause offense. If the truth causes offence, I’m not going to apologise for that, but I leave you to be the judge. A copy of the letter follows.

Hammond declined an offer by me to rewrite sections of the letter, and blustered about not publishing letters without names and addresses. I was happy to have my name published, but didn’t want my address known. If I was criticising Hindus or Sikhs or Buddhists or Roman Catholics I wouldn’t dream of hiding my address. It makes my case that we are dealing with a religion here that has a lunatic fringe that can’t be trusted to act in a civilised fashion, so addresses must be kept secret.

The Worthing Herald has form in going wobbly in the face of pressure from local Muslims. In April, I wrote to the newspaper after local Muslims arranged meetings to open up a dialogue with the local people about Islam, after a mysterious fire destroyed a local meeting place. In my opinion, the letter was hard-hitting but fair. The Editor, Jon Buss, quite rightly said he needed to get reaction from local Muslims before publishing my letter. They failed to cooperate, so my letter never saw the light of day. By declining to react to my letter, the local Muslims effectively denied my right to be published (a copy of that letter follows too). They were banking on the fact that the Worthing Herald, because of its lack of bottle, would effectively censure opinion critical of Muslims.

Neil Winton – July 21, 2005

Letters to the Worthing Herald:
To: The Editor
Worthing Herald
from: Neil Winton

The sentiments expressed by Ali Abdul Rahman, Chairman of the Worthing Islamic Society in his letter "We condemn this wicked, cowardly act in London" are not enough. A story on my web site - Muslim Leaders Must Unite To Outlaw Suicide Bombing - www.wintonsworld.com - addresses what, in my opinion, needs to be done.

Mr Rahman's warm words of sympathy are easy. But Britain now needs action to rid us of the threat from traditional Islam and my story suggests two actions for starters. Firstly, can Mr Rahman, and his fellow Muslim leaders in Worthing, not to mention Britain, Europe and the Middle East, stand up and say without equivocation - "All suicide bombers, whether in Britain or Israel, are unIslamic. Any perpetrators will rot in hell. They will never go to heaven."

Secondly, we need some acknowledgement from Islam that there is a problem with the Koran and that it needs to be modernised. If people bother to investigate what is actually contained in the Koran they will be in for a shock. Yes, there is lots of stuff which Christians would agree 100% with. But there are other aspects that are often incompatible, even an affront, to western values and culture. For instance, there are wriggle words in the section on the taking of life which traditional Islamists use to justify killing Israelis.

“Whoever killed a human being, except (my italics) as punishment for murder or other villainy in the land, shall be regarded as having killed all mankind”, the Koran says according to Irshad Manji in her book “The Trouble With Islam”. The use of "except" takes much of the meaning away from the edict.

Because of the outdated nature of much of the content of the Koran, British Muslims must reform and modernise. They must bear in mind that because they are living now in a western culture, any compromises must come from them, not us. Only Mosques which agree to abide by the reformed Koran will be allowed to operate. The rest will be closed down. All services and written material will be in English.

Can I suggest a group of concessions which I'm sure the majority of British Muslims would have no trouble at all agreeing to –
  • Stop “honour” killing.
  • Agree that it’s ok to pay interest.
  • End teaching that women are inferior to men; ban the Hibab.
  • Stop forced marriages.
  • Embrace democracy and equality for all before the law.
  • End Halal killing of animals.
  • Accept the division of church and state.
  • Eschew anti-Semitism.

Finally, I must insist that you do not reveal my address, although as I know you won't dare to publish this letter, that is a moot point!

Yours sincerely

Neil Winton


This letter wasn’t published either
April 6, 2005
The Editor
Worthing Herald

Dear Sir,
Muslim Reform

I note that local Muslims have arranged meetings to foster understanding with the rest of us. The Muslim Council of Great Britain often says how the traditional British community must make a bigger effort to understand Muslim ways. Can I suggest that the reverse is true?

Far from the host community needing to compromise to fit in with the ways of Muslims, it is they who should be doing the compromising, because there are many aspects of traditional Islam that are incompatible with British culture.

Everyone agrees that religious tolerance is desirable. But often the argument stops there. If we are to offer respect for a religion like Islam, surely it is reasonable to ask what it stands for. Many aspects of Islam don’t stand up to scrutiny.

Some seem trivial, others not so.

  • Why do Muslim clerics fail to outlaw suicide bombings?
  • Why do Muslims feel that it is wrong to pay interest on mortgages. Why do they seek special treatment to get around this?
  • Why do Muslim organisations seek separate schools? Isn’t this the last thing you’d do if you wanted to integrate with the local community?
  • Why do Muslims tolerate “honour killings” and forced marriages, both oxymoronic concepts in Britain.

In a recently published book, “The Trouble With Islam”, Irshad Manji, a Muslim herself, says Muslims are trapped in a medieval, authoritarian and contradictory religion which enslaves women and encourages violence against Jews.

Only root and branch reform can make Muslim life styles compatible with the freedoms and openness of the West, and this means confronting what Manji calls the rotten “desert Islam” which, by its mindless and literalist adherence to the Koran, condemns hundreds of millions of Muslims around the world to lives of poverty, ignorance, and exploitation by dictatorial regimes.

Manji said advice in the Koran is often confused, watered down, or neutered by weasel words. For example, the section which allows Muslims to insist on the Halal ritual for killing animals for meat, is based on a section of the Koran which is as contradictory as it is opaque and which suggests vegetarianism was the preferred lifestyle choice.

A useful contribution to the debate recently came from Lord Carey, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, who in a speech in Rome urged Muslims to modernise, and denounced moderate Muslims for failing to condemn unequivocally the “evil” of suicide bombers.

Can I suggest some reforms which Muslims can make for starters?

  • Agree that it’s ok to pay interest
  • End teaching that women are inferior to men; ban the Hibab
  • Stop forced marriages
  • Embrace democracy and equality for all before the law
  • End Halal killing of animals
  • Accept the division of church and state
  • Eschew anti-Semitism

Finally, I must insist that you exclude my address from this letter. If I was criticising Hindus or Sikhs or Buddhists or Roman Catholics I wouldn’t dream of saying that. I rest my case.

Yours sincerely,


Neil Winton

Top