Sunny Hundal website



  • Family

    • Liberal Conspiracy
    • Sunny Hundal
  • Comrades

    • Andy Worthington
    • Angela Saini
    • Bartholomew’s notes
    • Bleeding Heart Show
    • Bloggerheads
    • Blood & Treasure
    • Campaign against Honour Killings
    • Cath Elliott
    • Chicken Yoghurt
    • Daily Mail Watch
    • Dave Hill
    • Dr. Mitu Khurana
    • Europhobia
    • Faith in Society
    • Feminism for non-lefties
    • Feministing
    • Gender Bytes
    • Harry’s Place
    • IKWRO
    • MediaWatchWatch
    • Ministry of Truth
    • Natalie Bennett
    • New Statesman blogs
    • Operation Black Vote
    • Our Kingdom
    • Robert Sharp
    • Rupa Huq
    • Shiraz Socialist
    • Shuggy’s Blog
    • Stumbling and Mumbling
    • Ta-Nehisi Coates
    • The F Word
    • Though Cowards Flinch
    • Tory Troll
    • UK Polling Report
  • In-laws

    • Aaron Heath
    • Douglas Clark's saloon
    • Earwicga
    • Get There Steppin’
    • Incurable Hippie
    • Neha Viswanathan
    • Power of Choice
    • Rita Banerji
    • Sarah
    • Sepia Mutiny
    • Sonia Faleiro
    • Southall Black Sisters
    • The Langar Hall
    • Turban Head

  • ‘Anti-Islamist bigot’


    by Sunny
    10th July, 2007 at 4:29 pm    

    The deluded people at Islamophobia Watch have invented a new term - anti-Islamist bigot, which is used by Martin Sullivan to describe David T at Harry’s Place. The problem for Sullivan is that David T neither hates Muslims and nor does he have a particular vendetta against Islam. But he finds the politics and ideology of certain organisations such as the MCB, Muslim Brotherhood etc detestable. You know, like one might detest right-wing Hindu organisations such RSS or VHP, or may think Babbar Khalsa were crazy nutters.

    What IW and such pseudo-intellectuals increasingly do is conflate religious entities with people from that faith or theology of the faith itself, all of which are three different things, just so they can slander people. Muslims, Islam and the Muslim Council of Britain are not the same; as neither are Jews, Judaism or the Jewish Board of Deputies. But in a desperate attempt to shut down any criticism these far-lefties keep bandying about the words ‘bigot’ or ‘racist’ without justification and making them meaningless. Advice for you Sullivan, leave the words to those who actually face bigotry.


                  Post to del.icio.us


    Filed in: Muslim,Organisations






    118 Comments below   |  

    Reactions: Twitter, blogs


    1. Don — on 10th July, 2007 at 6:02 pm  

      Well, since he called Peter Tatchell ‘objectively pro-Nazi’ he clearly sets the bar pretty low.

    2. sid — on 10th July, 2007 at 6:10 pm  

      Especially when “anti-Islamist bigot” is a double negative. Something along the lines of “anti-Nazi chauvinist”.

      I think the man, Martin Sullivan that is, is either very naive or very warped.

    3. ZinZin — on 10th July, 2007 at 6:31 pm  

      He hit the nail on the head. I am an anti-islamist bigot.

    4. sid — on 10th July, 2007 at 6:32 pm  

      A few more anti-Islamist bigots who dare brave the wrath of Martin Sullivan.

    5. sid — on 10th July, 2007 at 6:34 pm  

      Sunny, your link to the IW site is 404, man.

    6. Carl Harpin — on 10th July, 2007 at 7:52 pm  

      Hey Sunny why is the Anti-defamation League acceptable to you?

      Anyone like Carter who writes a book is called anti-semite?

      Why the cosy relationship for some and not others. So much for your informed political debate. More like Islam bashing and the way you censor debate allowing certain posts and deleting others. Call this progressive politics! Ha what a joke!

      Harry’s One sided twisting of news is likely to appeal to you of course as it fits your agenda.

      Why do the right whinge pretend they are the only ones who present this with no spin.

      Hey man why don’t you subscribe to your ilk like Malkin, Coulter, Pipes, O’Reily, Mel Phillips and co.

      Those are the people you love.

      If people feel they are being victimised then they have a right to speak out. But in your selecvtive little world some can and some can’t.

      Rename the site Pickled Neo-Con Politics - it’s more in line with your agenda and thought

    7. jbob — on 10th July, 2007 at 8:07 pm  

      look out the peter pcs will be up in arms against any one daring to speak out against the minority of muslim nutcases who would gladly blow us all up!

    8. ZinZin — on 10th July, 2007 at 8:13 pm  

      “If people feel they are being victimised then they have a right to speak out. But in your selecvtive little world some can and some can’t.”

      Taking offence for someone else how very noble, but how do you know they are offended? Are the phone numbers of a billion muslims on your BT friends and family scheme?

    9. Don — on 10th July, 2007 at 8:26 pm  

      Just predictable chaff and sock-puppetry.

    10. Sukhi — on 10th July, 2007 at 8:40 pm  

      Interestingly, there is a direct parallel with the kind of gratuitous, unthinking slander employed by those who run ‘Islamophobia Watch’ in response to legitimate criticism of right wing Islamist politics and the abuse desperately slid out by sympathisers of other religious-nationalisms when faced with criticism.

    11. ZinZin — on 10th July, 2007 at 8:53 pm  

      Ice pick for Harpin.

      Hating Jihadis is not a crime. Presuming that all muslims are terrorists/terrorist sympathisers is hateful, but you you don’t see that do you?

      With friends like you, muslims have no need for enemies.

    12. Clairwil — on 10th July, 2007 at 8:57 pm  

      Muzumdar is banned and his comments will be deleted shortly.

    13. Chris Stiles — on 10th July, 2007 at 9:21 pm  

      Sunny is there defending Harry’s Blog which is so poisonous to Muslims that the action of one is portrayed liek the action of all. Yet you say he is Pro-Muslim! What a joke.

      I recall a number of occasions on which Sunny has taken grave exception to something over at Harry’s Place.

      OTOH - that doesn’t necessarily mean that every single argument posted over there is wrong. I looked at the piece linked - and whilst there are some specifics that I’d disagree with, their main thesis seemed to be fairly accurate.

      Why don’t you address their substantive points rather than keep claiming that it’s all a conspiracy?

    14. Katy Newton — on 10th July, 2007 at 9:31 pm  

      “Pickled Neo-Con Politics”

      Yup. That’s us. Group hug!

    15. Don — on 10th July, 2007 at 10:07 pm  

      Harpin,

      ‘Where are his blogs against others.’

      What others would those be?
      Give it a name.

    16. Sunny — on 10th July, 2007 at 10:40 pm  

      I find it funny when sock-puppets like ‘Carl Harpin’ turn up accusing me of cosying up to the ADL when I’ve never even mentioned them once. But at least it shows Sullivan has fans, however thick they may be.

    17. raz — on 10th July, 2007 at 11:19 pm  

      Off topic, but does Muzumdar have no fucking life whatsoever? Even after being banned a hundred times he continues posting his vile nonsense which nobody wants to read.

    18. bikhair aka taqiyyah — on 10th July, 2007 at 11:25 pm  

      Raz,

      If you are up free basing curry powder all night, than no, you dont have a life.

    19. modernityblog — on 11th July, 2007 at 2:06 am  

      Sunny has a lot of fans too, Sunny (and his posters) contributes to a wider informed debate on issues, unlike Carl Harpin or Bob Pitt, who wish to close down discussing these issues and set the agenda.

      Sunny, Pitt/Harpin will be calling you a runningdog-of-Zionism-Imperialism-friend-of-Dick-Cheney-Big-Satan, etc

      yeah IW sure are childish

    20. Twining or Black in Blue — on 11th July, 2007 at 9:22 am  

      Clairwil, have I missed something? Muzamdar has been banned.

    21. Katy Newton — on 11th July, 2007 at 9:47 am  

      My group hug has been rejected.

    22. Jai — on 11th July, 2007 at 10:12 am  

      The problem with group hugs, Katy, at least those involving a bunch of blokes and especially when they’ve had a bit to drink, is that you always end up snuggled uncomfortably close to some geezer’s hairy face, and then there’s always some grinning dude who grips everyone a little too tightly and refuses to let go, and there’s “accidental” inappropriate bodily contact and “accidental” hands wandering and so on.

    23. Leon — on 11th July, 2007 at 10:20 am  

      Rename the site Pickled Neo-Con Politics - it’s more in line with your agenda and thought

      HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAH! Priceless, truly priceless comment…

      *hugs Katy*

    24. Kismet Hardy — on 11th July, 2007 at 11:16 am  

      I’m a total Born-Again-Shaytanist-Terrorist-Apathetic-Religion-Defying-Communist-Uprising-Nationalist-Troublemaker

      Acronym at will

    25. Kismet Hardy — on 11th July, 2007 at 11:17 am  

      Why don’t politics people just talk plain english?

      (or plain chinese if they’re chinese political people)

    26. sid — on 11th July, 2007 at 11:41 am  

      Jai, well you’re not called Groper Washington Jnr for nothing. ;-)

      *hugs Katy*

    27. sid — on 11th July, 2007 at 12:58 pm  

      Why do I see an “Ad paid for by the Conservative party” on this page? Very nasty.

    28. El Cid — on 11th July, 2007 at 1:08 pm  

      I can’t see how any good can come from banning people unless there is a greater degree of transparency in the decision-making.

    29. sid — on 11th July, 2007 at 1:11 pm  

      ad-hominem, slander, thread-disruption, obsessive chauvinism? Muzumdar was guilty of all the above which is why his otherwise worthwhile input sucked.

    30. Robert — on 11th July, 2007 at 2:04 pm  

      Very nasty

      Sid, all it says is “Vote Lit” which is one of the less offensive items of election material I’ve seen. Indeed, it even has a bit of alliteration in there. These tories, eh?

    31. Leon — on 11th July, 2007 at 2:07 pm  

      I can’t see how any good can come from banning people unless there is a greater degree of transparency in the decision-making.

      There is, the writers discuss and come to a general consensus. All writers have equal say and weight in their contributions to a decision like that.

      Sunny, who could rightly make the final decision or even not consult us and just do as he likes because he owns this place, is very egalitarian in his approach to such things.

      These decisions are not taken lightly, not taken quickly and certainly not taken often (I can only think of two regulars who’ve been banned for constant thread derailment/disruption).

    32. Leon — on 11th July, 2007 at 2:11 pm  

      Why do I see an “Ad paid for by the Conservative party” on this page? Very nasty.

      I think they’re Google ads which probably scan the content on the page and pull adverts into the box it deems relevant. We’ve talked about the Tories a lot in recent days so it probably ‘thinks’ we are good targets for Tory literature…

    33. El Cid — on 11th July, 2007 at 2:46 pm  

      justice needs to be seen to be done

    34. justforfun — on 11th July, 2007 at 2:54 pm  

      The burdens of cabinet government for Kulvinder - people banned in his name.

      Justforfun

    35. Leon — on 11th July, 2007 at 3:11 pm  

      Oh right, didn’t realise there was another banner ad, nope don’t know anything about that…

    36. Jagdeep — on 11th July, 2007 at 3:45 pm  

      Jai makes a good point on the group hug thing.

      Islamophobia Watch — what a rabble of clueless muppets. People like them make Islamophobia as a word and a concept absolutely worthless. In their hands its nothing more than a sinister attempt to slander people and close down debate. It’s Orwellian and bullying and those who can say this place is Neo Con have been eating too much raw Japanese fish, causing their brains to puff up in allergic reaction, and are probably hallucinating as the drool over the keyboard and trying to eat their own feet.

      Total clueless witless morons.

    37. Soso — on 11th July, 2007 at 4:56 pm  

      I think the bloom is comming off islamism and that more moderates are beginning to be heard.

      It’s not yet a groundswell, but we’re certainly seeing some movement in the right direction when it comes to dealing with clerical-fascist organisations such as the MCB.

    38. Don — on 11th July, 2007 at 5:30 pm  

      Soso,

      I agree that moderate voices are coming to the fore, and that is a good thing.

      I’m far from being an admirer of the MCB, but I think your description may have been a teeny bit harsh. I see them more as self-important opportunists who are simply not up to the job they have devised for themselves.

    39. Derius — on 11th July, 2007 at 6:05 pm  

      Islamophobia Watch has its own agenda, which has nothing to do with civil liberties, despite their facade to the contrary. They are part of the Communist/Islamist alliance which has grown in recent years. This relationship has been formed on the basis that “an enemy of my enemy is my friend”, and the enemy in this case is Capitalism and Democracy.

      More on this alliance here:

      http://www.benadorassociates.com/article/5163

      Islamophobia watch does not believe in free speech; instead it believes that dissent should be silenced by opponents being discredited through labels such as bigot, fascist, racist etc. The post above by Carl Harpin shows this well and therefore is most instructive, though not for the reason the poster intended.

      Bob Pitt would do well to study what exactly happened to the communists in Iran, who helped Khomeini to depose the Shah in 1979, once he actually came to power and set up his theocracy. There are no communists there now.

    40. justforfun — on 11th July, 2007 at 6:15 pm  

      Derius - what you say may be true - but don’t ever take Amir Tahiri’s word for it. I would not trust that man to sit the correct way on a toilet seat.

      “Sean Connery” aka Khomeini - unfortunately God did not break the mould when he made that man.

      Justforfun

    41. Soso — on 11th July, 2007 at 6:18 pm  

      I’m far from being an admirer of the MCB, but I think your description may have been a teeny bit harsh. I see them more as self-important opportunists who are simply not up to the job they have devised for themselves. Don.

      You could be right, but they haven’t done much (at least until recently) to distance themselves from the radicals, have they?

      Their current efforts at rebranding smack of cynicism, a case of too little too late perhaps.

    42. Carl Harpin — on 11th July, 2007 at 9:21 pm  

      modernityblog - yes your blog has lots of opinion and debate!! You delete comment and the only comments are your own and those that agree with you. Yet you have the cheek to say others are supressing debate. What a joke!

      Derius - I am sure the same applies to The ADL who suppress debate and smear people yet they are seen as acceptable. They smear people with liberal portions of anti-semitism and yet blogs like this do not debate this.

      Why was Sunny so quick to trash IslamophobiaWatch and yet failed miserably to mention the Haaretz article on destruction of Muslim holy sites by Israel? Oh that of course doesn’t matter. No doubt if you and UnModernityBlog link up with Mel “Pipes-Esque” Phillips you’ll come up with excuses for this! Israel land of religious freedom ha!

      There are enough neo-con commentators who love to suppress debate and shout loudly and yet that is acceptable TV on Fox!

      Why is it that Panorama and Newsnight following the BBC DG’s illicit visit to Sharon will not do any programmes on other faiths apart from Islam. I noticed the Paxman love fest for Melanie Phillips when Independant Jewish Voices was launched. Why no Panorama programme there?

      Why no Panorama programme on the Pope’s Latin Mass, and saying the Catholic Church iso the only true Chruch?

      It is clear whic religions Sunny and the BBC exempt from everything. Amazing what happens when you won’t allow debate!

    43. El Cid — on 11th July, 2007 at 9:59 pm  

      As a “Catholic” I’m very disappointed with Benedict’s recent initiatives. I’m not surprised but it makes me question whether I ant to be associated with his church.
      I think you’ll find that it headlined most broadsheets.
      You’ll also find that — when push comes to shove — it’s a bit of a boring theological subject.
      You’ll also find that NeoCon Picklers have had no problem having a pop at the RCC in the past. Who knows — there may well be a post in the offing (deep down it’s boring, though, as I said, so maybe not).
      The fact radical Islam gets more column inches these days than other religions is surely just a function of Sept 11 and all that. If this was 16-17th century England, Catholicism might command more attention.
      You speak with the certainty of a victim, and yet have only taken up the cause of the islamist because it serves as a battering ram against the bigger enemy — the military-industrial-capitalist-imperial machine of the United States. You may ultimately be correct in your revolutionary dogma — we’ll never know, I’ll wager, because you need much more than dogs on strings and fine words to inspire people to man the barricades — but deep down, I reckon you couldn’t give a shit about muslim people and their culture, whether radical or not.

    44. Don — on 11th July, 2007 at 10:09 pm  

      Carl,

      Have you noticed that you say, ‘What a joke!’ at least once in every comment? Not a criticism, just an observation.

      Why don’t you just post Sunny your agenda and I’m sure he’ll adopt it. Then you can adopt his and we’ll all switch sites and confuse the hell out of casual visitors.

    45. Katy — on 11th July, 2007 at 10:29 pm  

      *beams*

      I am happy with my current hug tally. Things are going well.

    46. Katy — on 11th July, 2007 at 11:36 pm  

      Current hug tally = 3 (Leon, Sid, Don). Perhaps I should have made this a sponsored charity thing.

    47. Anas — on 12th July, 2007 at 4:16 pm  

      See I don’t think you can be anti-Jewish and not a bigot, or that you can be anti-Muslim/anti-Christian/anti-Black/anti-White and not a bigot. But you can obviously be anti-Islamist, or anti-Zionist and not a bigot. So maybe the term just means that David T is both anti-Islamist and a bigot (just like you can be anti-Zionist and a bigot), which given the pro-aparthied, pro-Imperialist, pro-War, anti-Muslim slant of Harry’s Place is probably accurate.

    48. Avi Cohen — on 13th July, 2007 at 10:16 pm  

      [troll]Ssshhhhhh Anas don’t say that - Sunny will ban you.

      To be popular here you are supposed to bah Muslims and say it is their fault not say something they don’t agree with about DaveT.

      I am suprised modernityblog didn’t defend him, but poor lass must be mouring ole Conrad “Friend of Israel” Black being found guilty of fraud. Shame that now they’ll have to rely on ole Ruper Murd to say everything they do is great.

      Ah well at least Tony got well rewarded for his loyalty. Choice number in going round and helping to turn what is left of the West Bank into a Prison, Commandant Herr Blair!

      Sorry Sunny - I know you love Blair but come on you got to admit it is obvious what your boy is there to do.

    49. Avi Cohen — on 13th July, 2007 at 11:55 pm  

      [troll] On a day in which it is reported a Labour fundraiser is attended by a convicted rapist. On a day when Conrad Black is convicted of fraud, a man who is close friends of the one-sided new Middle East Envoy, Blair. For whom Tony Black or is it Blair gave a speech at his company event, we at Pickled Neo-Con Politcs won’t even discuss such issues, no we avoid those issues. No we must focus on comfortable ground where our buddy’s at Harry’s Place will continue our love in.

      Come on Pickled Neo Con Politics lets debate the real issues about how politicians are purchased with campaign funds, how the need to do what lobby groups want overides what is right. For a politics site not to discuss this - Crazy. even Newsnight whose editorial is done from the Israeli Embasssy discussed this. Obviously you haven’t got your clearance yet.

    50. Katy — on 14th July, 2007 at 12:21 am  

      When you’ve learned not to troll you can have your vowels back. “Pickled Neo-Con Politics”, indeed.

    51. Sunny — on 14th July, 2007 at 1:40 am  

      lol, nice one Katy!

    52. Avi Cohen — on 14th July, 2007 at 10:46 am  

      [troll] Typical Pickled Neo-Con Politics - abuse of power. Have you not learnt anything from the downfall of your friends Katy Phillips nee Pipes.

    53. Katy — on 14th July, 2007 at 11:10 am  

      Oh, I’m sorry, Avi. I’m just really vowel-hungry today.

    54. Avi Cohen — on 15th July, 2007 at 9:27 am  

      Kty or should that b Caty,

      Glad I am feeding your hunger.

    55. Avi Cohen — on 15th July, 2007 at 9:27 am  

      Caty,

      Is Sunny you other half taht you are so protective?

    56. Katy Newton — on 15th July, 2007 at 1:12 pm  

      No no. I think I just happened to be the only moderator on the site when you posted.

    57. Avi Cohen — on 16th July, 2007 at 9:10 am  

      Caty,

      I wouldn’t say you were a moderating force :-)

      More like a censor who is there to enforce Sunny’s will so he doesn’t have to get his hands dirty. Guess it is part of the job when you joined the Sunny Farm.

      So in neo-con terms you are Scooter Caty ;-)

      Do you take lessons from the not so White House? After all they don’t allow dissent in their conferences and you don’t either. They don’t like being called Right Whinge and you don’t either.

      The similarities are uncanny. Are you sure your surname isn’t Malkin or Coulter?

    58. Rumbold — on 16th July, 2007 at 9:21 am  

      If this was a Welsh thread your tactics would be useless Katy.

    59. sonia — on 16th July, 2007 at 11:28 am  

      “.. conflate religious entities with people from that faith or theology of the faith itself, all of which are three different things” ..”Muslims, Islam and the Muslim Council of Britain are not the same”

      yep, ain’t that the truth.

    60. sonia — on 16th July, 2007 at 11:30 am  

      i find it interesting that Islamophobia Watch - who are concerned about Imperialism, are so ‘biased’ that they can’t see the links between ‘Western’ imperialism and Islamic Imperialism. I mean why is one type of imperialism worse than another? Are they suggesting that all those people who suffered under Caliphate’s expansions had no legitimate gripe but those who suffered ‘western’ imperialism do?

      i can’t see that makes any sense, and is highly biased and bigoted in itself.

    61. sonia — on 16th July, 2007 at 11:33 am  

      Fact of the matter is that people like myself, who have been brought up as Muslims, and in Muslim countries, may very well have legitimate concerns with islam as Authority, just as they *IW* have gripes with their Authority. But im not allowed to say anything, because then they’d say ah you’re just an anti-Islamist bigot, so effectively, they’re trying to disempower me, and all the Muslim women out there who have big issues with Mullahs, and religious societies which try to not give them any choice in what religion they choose or don’t choose. Thanks a lot.

    62. Clairwil — on 16th July, 2007 at 12:36 pm  

      Avi,
      ‘Is Sunny you other half taht you are so protective?’

      Oh yes because obviously a silly woman couldn’t decide on her on to take exception to your comments. It may surprise you to learn that this a blog, not Sunny’s harem. There isn’t a casting couch. The little ladies are allowed their own opinions without prior approval from Sunny.

      ‘The similarities are uncanny. Are you sure your surname isn’t Malkin or Coulter?’

      Oh wow what a remarkable comparison. Let’s see you disagree with Katy and she’s a woman and you disagree with Malkin and Coulter and their women too. Cor so Katy must be one of them.

      Now why not run along have a think, work on reducing your evident contempt for women and if you’re very good you can come back and play with vowels and everything.

    63. Avi Cohen — on 16th July, 2007 at 9:57 pm  

      Clairwil,

      She cut/edited what I said, so most of what followed was a was just a joke but obviously you don’t understand such things. You need to have a humour implant.

      I suggest you run along and learn to talk with grown ups before charging in without really understanding what is going on.

      I suppose you love Malkin and Coulter. I suppose you have your Malkin “Bring in Internment” badge and poster set!

    64. Avi Cohen — on 16th July, 2007 at 10:10 pm  

      Sonia,

      I think the issues you have are with culture and not Islam. Over time with all religions culture creeps in.

      Religious values are a good guide for life and I think you’ll find that Islam in it’s early days was far ahead of it’s time in empowering women.

      Karen Armstrong describes this well in her writings as do others authors. The negative viw of Islma has been perpetuated by Orientalists.

      In addition mullahs often have no formal religious teaching. Women are beginging to play a more important role in Islamic socities again.

      Also many Muslims like Southern Europe, India, SE Asia have a very strong sense of family in which women are often the dominant force.

      I think in the Muslim world women are awaking and demanding their rights. What you’ll find if you read surveys is that women in the Muslim world do not want feminist type values but are more demanding of their righst within Islam. Religion is important to them even in Turkey.

      The Bush’s Ambassador to the Muslim world heard as much when she last toured the Muslim world. If anything you’ll find women are becoming more vocal in the Muslim world in terms of religion that say in the Christian world.

    65. Don — on 16th July, 2007 at 10:28 pm  

      Avi,

      Having read your posts I’m entertaining the suspicion that you are not actually Jewish. So why do you ID yourself as Avi Cohen?

      If you’re terse, I’ll bet you could answer that in three words.

      Has this troll got his vowel privileges back, or is Katy just busy?

    66. Sunny — on 16th July, 2007 at 10:34 pm  

      I suggest you run along and learn to talk with grown ups before charging in without really understanding what is going on.

      Are you under the deluded assumption that you’re a grown up who is talking sense? You’ve come to a blog, started insulting everyone, making sexist remarks, trolling with conspiracy theories - and then you’re telling someone else to run along and act like a grown up?

      That is rather assuming. We don’t need idiots on this blog. Go away if you can’t contribute constructively. I couldn’t give a crap.

    67. Katy Newton — on 16th July, 2007 at 10:50 pm  

      You need to have a humour implant.

      Dude, she already has one. Clairwil rocks.

    68. Jagdeep — on 16th July, 2007 at 10:59 pm  

      You need to have a humour implant. Dude, she already has one. Clairwil rocks.

      Aye, Clairwill rocks. Clairwill, I just saw your question about ‘Curb Your Enthusiasm’ on the other thread and yes, I’ve seen the incest survivor episode, and it is hilarious — he is able to do comedy on the rawest edge, he’s amazing. The episode makes you laugh out loud and be shocked at your own laughter. To do that makes you a genius and Larry David surpasses all other comedians living I reckon. You can tell Gervais has stolen so many tricks off him too.

      Oh yes, and down with the trolls and all the rest of this nonsense, good points everyone indeed.

    69. Clairwil — on 16th July, 2007 at 11:06 pm  

      ‘I suppose you love Malkin and Coulter. I suppose you have your Malkin “Bring in Internment” badge and poster set!’

      Yes I do. Don’t tell anyone but I actually am Ann Coulter!

    70. Clairwil — on 16th July, 2007 at 11:09 pm  

      Jagdeep,
      Did you see that programme where Ricky Gervais interviews Larry David. I normally like Gervais but that was beyond embarassing. The David rules!

    71. Clairwil — on 16th July, 2007 at 11:13 pm  

      Yeah Sonia you silly Muslim woman, listen to Avi -he’s a grown up!

      Life is such a puzzle until a chap comes along to set one straight.

    72. Uncle Joe — on 16th July, 2007 at 11:58 pm  

      Interesting that there is a LIT banner. And No legal imprint.

      I shall be refering it to the Commission and the returning officer in Ealing, bur to get these Tory Chancers disqualified it requires many protests from Ealing residents.

      Actually if I was really evil I’d put this up under one of my alias on Storm Front or C.U.N.*.S.

      I doubt if the BNP etc have any members in Ealling. But please don’t let political correctness hold the anti Tory brigade back, No imprint is a breach of the Representation of the Peoples Acts so lets hang the B*****d’s, and not neccessarilly by the neck !

    73. Don — on 17th July, 2007 at 12:28 am  

      Didn’t understand one word of that.

    74. Avi Cohen — on 17th July, 2007 at 2:06 am  

      [troll]
      Sunny - “Insulting everyone” - rather a grand statement. I said your politics were right wing but I suppose on here you are everyone. Your enforcer then decided to make fun of me, which you enjoyed and said so.

      If I reply you them jump in and say I am not constructive. Excellent.

      I suggest you review what was said before hurling accusations.

      Your only contributions are to malign Muslims and provide a very conservative commentary. If someone highlights this you don’t like it. Review what you have written and see the number of attacks made against Muslims compared to other religions. If someone answers back then you don’t like that.

      Most of the people you allow to contribute to your “Constructive debate” are here to agree with you and bash Muslims. Any organisation taht tries to represent Muslims is a target for your increasing venom.

      Why the biased rhetoric against one faith and not so much against others?

    75. Avi Cohen — on 17th July, 2007 at 3:00 am  

      Sunny - you and your supporters say that this blog isn’t right wing or neo-conservative.

      Please explain why you are so selective in what debate you allow regarding religions and parts of the world?

      There is actually very limited debate on for example Israel, Why? It is in the news and politics enough? Yet your focus and derision is reserved mainly for Muslims.

      Then if someone highlights this you step back and your slick team kicks in.

      In the past week there have been excellent reports in Hareetz about the destruction of Muslim religious places in Israel - no debate or discussion here. Yet you have an obscure story about a Jewish Man helping a Muslim man build a Mosque in America. Why have a minor story but not even feature the major one?

    76. Avi Cohen — on 17th July, 2007 at 3:01 am  

      Katy - Thank you :-)

    77. Sunny — on 17th July, 2007 at 3:21 am  

      There is actually very limited debate on for example Israel, Why? It is in the news and politics enough? Yet your focus and derision is reserved mainly for Muslims.

      Because I write about things that interest me, not things that interest others. And secondly because there is already much discussion of I/P in other places, notable the Guardian CIF. I have my own niche, which is one of the reasons why this blog has become known for its own style. If you want to call us right-wing and neo-con that’s up to you. It’s laughably absurd, but then so are most of your other posts.

      PS, I’ve highlighted plenty of times the way the media has sought to demonise Muslims. There are more positive Muslim stories here than negative ones because the negative ones focus mostly on specific organisations.

      Anyway, I’ve humoured your rubbish enough now.

    78. Avi Cohen — on 17th July, 2007 at 3:31 am  

      Then why the lack of focus on other organisations - why specifically the Muslim ones. There are Christian, Hindu and many other religious organisations but a lack of debate.

      Other people have also mentioned the lack of debate on issues such as I/P which must be why you get onto the Beeb who follow a similar style since their DG went to see Ariel Sharon.

      Those who diagree have their views called rubbish, excellent debate.

    79. Sunny — on 17th July, 2007 at 3:57 am  

      On the right hand side, under Archives, click the ‘Sikh’ and ‘Hindu’ link under ‘Organisations’.

      You’re posting rubbish because you’re being deliberately obtuse. You’ve spent all of 5 min on this site without having looked at my record of mentioning other organisations, and you have the audacity to even think that you can dictate the editorial agenda to me. That is laughable. I think I’ll post more on Muslim organisations later just to annoy you even more.

    80. Avi Cohen — on 17th July, 2007 at 8:29 am  

      I am not dictating the editorial agenda. I am pointing out that you spend more time focussing on Muslims stories and organisations, than others. Your own site shows this clearly. It isn’t just about having a link on the right hand side to a few other faiths, it is about the numbers.

      Because I have highlighted this then I am being subjected to attack by you and your friends.

      Despite your portrayal of me, I am not so silly that I don’t check this. Even a quick look shows that the number of stories filed about both other faiths is much less than the number filed against Muslims. And of those that are filed a smaller number are critical of organisations within those religions. Lets look at the evidence:

      Hindu - 14 Stories

      Sikh - 13 Stories

      Muslim - 25 Stories

      So Muslim stories are almost double the others.

      This year the numbers have really accelerated for Muslims with 15 stories mostly negative so far in 2007, whilst being in single digits for the others and almost half the Muslim number.

      Stories of other faiths are also much less so by a percentage of the population your website is focussing more and more on Muslims and Muslim organisations. So it is clear it is an editorial policy. That is all I am saying.

      Publish more about Muslim organsations - it will just show people the reality of what I am saying.

      For a political discussion site if you go against the agenda then people start on you.

      The numbers don’t support your argument, they support what I am saying.

    81. Katy Newton — on 17th July, 2007 at 9:16 am  

      Ha - actually that wasn’t me, Avi. I think it’s only the comments you put up that are trolling as opposed to fair comment that get disemvowelled.

    82. Chairwoman — on 17th July, 2007 at 9:33 am  

      Are there not more Muslims in the UK than other religious minorities?

      More Muslims = more stories.

      Not rocket science.

    83. sonia — on 17th July, 2007 at 10:40 am  

      yep chairwoman, you’re right, after christians, the biggest religious group in the UK are muslims.

    84. Don — on 17th July, 2007 at 10:43 am  

      A quick calculation shows that, proportional to population (2001 census), Islam is heavily under-represented.

      Hindism one article per 40,000
      Sikhism one article per 26,000
      Islam one article per 72,000

    85. Chairwoman — on 17th July, 2007 at 11:12 am  

      Don - I bet I know which religious minority is heavily over-represented :-)

    86. Katy — on 17th July, 2007 at 4:34 pm  

      It’s been three days now and God’s existence STILL hasn’t been proven.

      Well, you know, (all the time since time began)+three days.

    87. sonia — on 17th July, 2007 at 5:02 pm  

      heh katy good one

    88. Jagdeep — on 17th July, 2007 at 5:07 pm  

      Are there not more Muslims in the UK than other religious minorities? More Muslims = more stories.

      It’s not really that, is it? It’s suicide bombing and extremism. No suicide bombing, no apologists for extremism in the Muslim mainstream, more integration and less denial, and there would be no reason to have articles about Muslims or Islam. That’s what it’s all about. Put simply, other religious minorities don’t have as many ‘issues’ that impact the rest us, ie: curdling multiculturalism and blowing us up in our train seats.

      Sorry to put it so starkly, but clarity helps to cut through bullshit.

    89. Don — on 17th July, 2007 at 5:27 pm  

      Just noticed #75 ‘…your slick team kicks in’

      Just want to make it clear; I am not a team player, and I have work evaluations to prove it.

    90. Chairwoman — on 17th July, 2007 at 5:43 pm  

      Jagdeep - Ssh. You’ll wake the elephant :-)

    91. sonia — on 17th July, 2007 at 5:43 pm  

      ;-) good one Don!

    92. Carl Harpin — on 17th July, 2007 at 6:26 pm  

      Well extremism exists in all religions. The evangelicals have a great hold on the White House and are extreme. Blair pushed his own religious values in the PM’s Office.

      Yet none of this is discussed to the degree that Muslim issues were and are. Debating Muslim issues brings access to the wider media, say the BBC and CIF.

      Equally there is a degree of restraint towards other religions probably for fear of being labelled. Indeed one could make a case that there is greater care taken towards other religions aside from the Subcontinent ones.

      Don whilst your numbers are fine this means that Christianity is also heavily under represented.

      The wider issues surrounding other religions is barely touched upon.

      Jagdeep - fine sentiments so asking for a TB infected Bull to be kept alive to the detriment of the local farming community is integration? Not even discussed here.

      Other issues barely discussed here so there is a clear focus whether you like it or not.

      Stories about Muslims and Islam are also the key to appearances on the BBC and in the news media, and hence they take priority over discussing other issues.

      Dissenting voices are quickly frowned upon.

    93. Sunny — on 17th July, 2007 at 6:29 pm  

      Dissenting voices are quickly frowned upon.

      Terrible isn’t it! It’s not like there’s idiots going around with burning cars or threatening to behead us.

    94. Don — on 17th July, 2007 at 6:54 pm  

      Carl,

      Responding to #80.

      By all means let’s discuss Christianity (check out current lead post). Maybe you missed the heated debates on ‘faith’ schools and gay adoption? I would have liked a brief mockery of the imbecilic Bishop of Carlisle’s opinion that the recent floods occured because God Hates Fags. But that would have been fish-in-a-barrel stuff.

      Numbers aside, when a bunch of faith heads sets out to grab the headlines, you can’t act surprised when they get them. That’s being disingenuous.

      ‘Dissenting voices are quickly frowned upon.’

      Meaning that if people here disagree with you they say so? If being frowned upon is all you have to worry about …

    95. Carl Harpin — on 17th July, 2007 at 7:05 pm  

      Yes they are idiots and no-one denies that.

      Equally worrying is the portrayal of minorities and the lack of wider debate about issues, instead it is easy to finger point. Culture is built by taking the best values from many people. Us have had some parts fo their culture brought in from places like India and the faiths you hold in so little regard. Many indiginous people are complainign about a lack of family values and yet to a large degree Asian have maintained this. So Us should be grateful to them.

      It is easy to pick on the media’s current hate target.

      Claiming to bring new thinking and yet being careful of full debate on some issues is hardly new thinking.

      Other issues also affect people in this country, and it would be nice if they were addressed.

      Of great concern and yet lacking great debate is the ever creeping Lobby Groups into UK Politics. They have practically destroyed confidence in elected representatives in the USA and are appearing here.

      You’ve done many articles on the MCB, Muslim/Hindu/Sikh organisations and this is an area that gets scant attention.

    96. Carl Harpin — on 17th July, 2007 at 7:15 pm  

      Don,

      Equally interesting is the fact that Subcontinent religions get their own links due to the number of articles and yet other religions don’t. Let’s say that shows the agenda priority in discussions.

      “Meaning that if people here disagree with you they say so?”
      Yes with a fairly heavy handed approach. At times the editorial team can be quite haughty and with a degree of arrogance. Which has come across at times in this debate.

      If one runs a political discussion site then one also needs to be able to listen to other views without resorting to cliches.

      “Terrible isn’t it! It’s not like there’s idiots going around with burning cars or threatening to behead us.”
      I didn’t realise Melanie Philips was writing here ;-)

    97. Don — on 17th July, 2007 at 7:30 pm  

      ‘Subcontinent religions get their own links…’

      ‘We have an Asian (meaning South Asia) tinge to our stories as some of us are of that background,…’ from the ‘About us’ bit of the site. You must have noticed.

      It does what it says on the tin. For a more scatter-gun approach to religion, I find there are other sites. Personally I favour Pharyngula and Butterflies & Wheels.

    98. Carl Harpin — on 17th July, 2007 at 7:38 pm  

      Maybe Avi should do a guest spot or three to bring a bit more variety ;-)

      Asian Tinge is fine and I know about that.

    99. Jagdeep — on 17th July, 2007 at 9:36 pm  

      Look Carl Harpin.

      There’s a big problem with Muslim extremism in this country, and it presents a great challenge not only to the lives of all of us, but relations between all the races of all of us in this multicultural society.

      Trust is breaking down, and many Muslims are still in denial about the crisis facing them. Hence more stories about Muslims. Nobody’s denying that. In fact its important, because Muslim issues are more intractable and urgent than anything else, and the primary need of the moment is to slap people out of their denial about what is going on.

      The moderators of this blog do what they like and focus on a wide range of issues. They definitely dont need editorial advice from you. The thing works. It’s a good, popular and vibrant place. And the reason for the ubiquity of Muslim issues here as elsewhere in society and the media is because of the ubiquity of Muslim problems.

      For quite a few years people were too afraid to even discuss these openly for fear of offending the likes of you. Quite frankly, I’ve had enough of all that, because when it comes to Jihad and the denial of all that crap by some people, it affects me, my family, my children, my friends. I’m sick of it all and want these things addressed and people to be slapped awake.

      In short, quit whining.

    100. Carl Harpin — on 17th July, 2007 at 9:53 pm  

      Jagdeep,

      What a joke - fear of discussing, so when was that? You’ve made a career out of discussing this and now you claim there was a fear. What nonsense.

      People have discussed for years and there is no fear which is why the conservatives and subsequently the neo-cons whipped this up. It was used to justify an illegal war.

      Muslims live in fear of extremism whipped up by conservatives but that doesn’t worry you. Fear of the BNP and neo-conservative movements.

      There is no denial and never has been. If you actually bothered to do your research then you would know that eminant Muslim scholars have denounced this. If you looked on the CIA website they have information about this. The methodology came from the west and was further whipped up in Afghanistan but now it is a Muslim problem because that is the easiest target.

      Simply put your exposure in the media depends on your writing and the portrayal you give which feeds the media and your own exposure and hence you like to portray this as “oooh somethign that cannot be discussed.”

      So quit trying to portray this as something you are worried about, it isn’t it is simply to get your pieces in the media such as the BBC, CiF etc.

      There is extremism in all circles, yet you focus on one because it feeds your exposure.

      Stop pretending like it isn’t. And stop your bellyaching.

      The MCB and Board of Deputies and the Christian Alliance and so forth each have an agenda and each protect their turf. You tolerate some and not others.

      I didn’t offer editorial advice as dictators like you won’t take it, I simply gave my opinions.

    101. Jagdeep — on 17th July, 2007 at 10:01 pm  

      First of all Carl Harpin I’m not an editor here nor am I involved in any way other than as a commenter.

      Stop pretending like it isn’t.

      Nobody is pretending otherwise. Muslim extremists are blowing up people in this country. Nobody else is.

      Muslims live in fear of extremism whipped up by conservatives but that doesn’t worry you. Fear of the BNP and neo-conservative movements.

      Sikhs and Hindus live in fear of being blown up and murdered by Muslims, then reaping a racist backlash whipped up in response to that, and caused partially by Muslim ‘leaders’ being in denial and not taking the cancer of extremism seriously enough, shifting the blame, using it to leverage their own ideology. We cover that lots too. We all live in fear of that.

      And stop your bellyaching.

      That would be you, in all of your posts, under a variety of aliases.

      Your victimhood hysteria and self pity is so tiresome.

    102. Rumbold — on 17th July, 2007 at 10:03 pm  

      Don:

      “Just want to make it clear; I am not a team player, and I have work evaluations to prove it.”

      Good one.

      “You’ve [Jagdeep] made a career out of discussing this and now you claim there was a fear.”

      Have you really made a career out of this Jagdeep? Does it pay well?

    103. Jagdeep — on 17th July, 2007 at 10:06 pm  

      Enough to pay the bills Rumbold. Mossad pay well these days.

    104. Rumbold — on 17th July, 2007 at 10:11 pm  

      Mossad? I thought that you were CIA/MI6. I owe Carl a fiver.

    105. Jagdeep — on 17th July, 2007 at 10:16 pm  

      Everyone else pays peanuts in comparison Rumbold.

      They control the global capitalist banking system and media too so they can afford me.

    106. Don — on 17th July, 2007 at 10:20 pm  

      Carl,

      You’ve started saying ‘What a joke’ again. I’m not saying you shouldn’t, but try cutting down.

      Nothing after those three words made very much sense, unless Jagdeep really is a sinister eminece grise of the media.

    107. El Cid — on 17th July, 2007 at 10:29 pm  

      Can I get on the payroll? Is it like being a sperm donor?
      I’m on a fixed rate mortgage but every little bit helps

    108. Clairwil — on 17th July, 2007 at 10:49 pm  

      People are getting paid here! I’m off for a word with Sunny.

    109. Carl Harpin — on 18th July, 2007 at 2:00 am  

      Slowly your hatred and enmity towards Muslims is creeping out. Hindu’s and Skikh’s have enough extremeist problems of their own. But by narrowing things down you can point your finger at Muslims, which is what you want to do.

      We’ve all seen Hindu extremism in India and how that affects people’s lives. Hardly a model of peace! The BJP get elected on a platform of hate and their ministers are openly welcome here. Where is your frequent commentary on that?

      The Muslim community leadership is mainly self-appointed and whilst some may be in denial it is no different to any other community and how they deal with extremists. Is the Hindu, Sikh or Jewish community any different?

      You see the Chief Rabbi for example share a platform with right wing politicians and when was the last time he was critical of right wingers in his religion? Same with Hindus. Sikhs too have had their own terrorism in th West.

      “Your victimhood hysteria and self pity is so tiresome.”
      Your constant theme of Muslims to blame is just as tiresome. Your own self pity and pretence to whip up hysteria under a guise of new thinking is similarly victimhood hysteria.

      Your lack of knowledge of the community about which you write is clear for all to see and it is easy enough bringing up the same lines and blaming the same people over and again.

      Again if you did your research you would know that the Muslim community worldwide has been condemining and that this type of ideology was whipped up inAfghanistan not only by Muslims but by the West. Then these same people were freedom fighters as was Saddam Hussein.

    110. Carl Harpin — on 18th July, 2007 at 2:15 am  

      “They control the global capitalist banking system and media too so they can afford me.”

      Again for a clever writer like you I would have thought you’d come up with some other line rather than trying to go down this same old tired line, but I guess the old lines are the best!!

      Building a career by writing on blogs liek this means that you hope to get noticed by the mainstream media and write there. I didn’t say anythign of this but again in order to build legitimacy for your arguments you have to portray anyone that disagrees with you in some negative way, I suppose trying anti-seimitsm brings you sympathy. I never said this and you know that.

      Yawn! Oh look Sunny he is arguing with me what shall I do, shall I try the old he says I work for Mossad rountine! Try not to copy Irshad Manji ;-)

    111. Avi Cohen — on 18th July, 2007 at 3:53 am  

      Jagdeep slowly brings forth the truth of the type of views expressed here. Ok so the Muslim community is in denial. How much different is that from other religions such as Hindu’s where terrorism is also rife and people are being kiled. Where women have little if any rights. Where the caste system shackles people. Where religious bigotory means that you get elected leader of India, and are able to destroy places of worship without fear of condemnation. Where a judiciary is afraid to rule because of the hysteria whipped up. Yes and then you too can say another faiths leadership is in denial.

      A feeling of superiority is wonderful to allow you to look down upon others.

      I suggest you tackle the deep seated problems of untouchables in your own community, the deeply rooted caste system, women having to marry trees to lose their bad luck and other such extremism which affects millions of peope from going about their daily lives.

      How lovely for you that you are able to blame Muslims for everything.

      If anyone disagrees with you hurl wild accusations in the hope that people will ignore what they say and listen to you.

      The same hysteria and mentality that was in force during the 1930′s in Nazi Germany and now here with a new bogeyman - yes the Muslims replace the Jews and if someone replies then accuse them of sayign you are part of Mossad.

      Welcome to the wonderful world of Pickled Politics and then your fans get upset if I say this is a neo-con site. What is the difference between this and Fox News?

      Bill O’Reilly would love this place.

    112. Avi Cohen — on 18th July, 2007 at 8:53 am  

      BTW Jagdeep,

      If you are Hindu your wife has more to fear from you dying as she would get thrown on the funeral pyre so how about some comment on that.

      Also across the world other religious fundementalism affects people, for example in the Balkans and Chechyna the Christians are abusign and terrorising Muslims. In Kashmir your peaceful Hindu and Sikh brethren are doing the same. Wonderful thing democracy when it allows you to bully people. As I recall India was supposed to allow the locals to vote as part of it joinging the UN. So how about putting your own house in order. Those people don’t want to be part of your country, but due to alliances with the Brits they are forced to.

      The Hindu world is in denial to the point they say that the Taj Mahal is a Hindu building. They rewrite history and all that does not ellicit comemtn from you. You” claim it doesn’t affect you. But such tyranny affects millions of people everyday both Hindu and Muslim.

      Christianity has wrought more devestation and destruction that all other religions combined. Entire continents have been wracked but that doesn’t ellicit much comment from you.

      Yes there is a problem for the Muslims but your poor research, wild accusations and inaccurate assertions merely play to the media audience who you desperatly hope will notice you as they did Sunny to adavance your own standing.

      Despite your assertion, and as the media reported, over 600 of the world’s leading Muslim scholars said that suicide bombing and terrorism had no place in Islam. Over a decade ago the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia wrote an open letter warning of the evils and impermissibility of Bin Laden’s approach and how countries needed to deal with this problem. So your wild lies that Muslims are in denial are not borne out by facts. Instead your smear campaign merely divides instead of buidling relations.

      People face persecution from all sorts of people across the world. Simplifying the issue to demonise isn’t productive.

      When people argue back your approach is that you can say what you like, that is fair enough but people have a right to respond. So alongside your call to Muslims to clean up their act what are you doing in your own community to clean up terrorism, calling for women’s rights etc.

      At least Muslims are strating to speak out whilst your own community is in denial and simply acting like a big bully here and in India. Some example.

    113. Avi Cohen — on 18th July, 2007 at 9:03 am  

      In addition the Muslim Community has called for cooperation with the Police in dealing with the terrorism problem. To the extent that if people know anythign they should alert the authorities. Even scholars in the Middle Eats and Saudi Arabia have stated it is a religious obligation to tell the Police.

      Kindly show me what the Hindu community has done? Ah yes they instead arrange meetings for people with these dodgy connections with leading politicians and say thye are a religion of peace and hurt no one. So where is your stand on that?

      Drugs, gangs etc are a bigger problem for the Asian community and statistically you stand more chance of being killed in a drug war or gang feud than terrorism but you won’t address that - no. You’ll only focus on terrorism as that brings quick headlines.

      Sorry people won’t be bullied to listen just to you as they will speak out against what you say if it is wrong. As long as one presents ones arguments well then the moderators shouldn’t allow you to throw wild accusations implying people say you work for Mossad to divert attention from your bullying.

      The site says it is to discuss politics with an asian tinge and baseless slurs from editorial writers shouldn’t be permitted. So kindly show where it was clearly said you worked for Mossad or kindly apologise for making such a statement. If you cannot bring yourself to apologise then Sunny should consider your position for inaccurate editorial.

    114. zucchini — on 18th July, 2007 at 9:14 am  

      …looking at a recent item in a Sunday supplement about the Bin laden family, it seems clear that young Osama came from a very wealthy family - so wealthy that he seems to have been stuck for what to do with himself as an adult - rather like members of the British Royal family or aristocracy (many of whom were drawn to support fascism before the war)..

      Why droves of Muslims support Bin Laden & his “cause” is a mystery to me - he is stinking rich, idle rich in fact, so his only outlet is to be a mischief maker and hide his mischief within a cloak of fundamentalist twaddle - meanhwile the real victims of his mischief are the poor, or the middle classes or just plain ordinary folk going about their business…

      Osamas’ psychological make up is that he desperately wants to be seen as being useful and important whereas he is’nt in reality (well, as important as any of us..)and probably may never be…

    115. Avi Cohen — on 18th July, 2007 at 9:16 am  

      “Drugs, gangs etc are a bigger problem for the Asian community and statistically you stand more chance of being killed in a drug war or gang feud than terrorism but you won’t address that - no. You’ll only focus on terrorism as that brings quick headlines.”

      This means that innocent people like you getting caught in the crossfire in a drug or gang feud in an Asian area in say London, Manchester etc.

      I thought I would state this crearly before someone jumped in with another wild accusation.

      Anyway I am back to just reading and no commenting for a while. I think here you like people to listen and not be heard unless it is to agree. Stating opinion merely brings wild accusations of wanting to change editorial policy.

    116. Jai — on 18th July, 2007 at 9:51 am  

      I knew it ! Jagdeep is actually Hardeep Singh Kohli !

      All this time we thought he was just an anonymous regular commenter on PP, and yet there he was on television all along, in his pink turban, kilt and suspicious-looking sporran…..

      If you are Hindu your wife has more to fear from you dying as she would get thrown on the funeral pyre so how about some comment on that.

      Yes, because that happens all the time in the lawless Hindu frontier that is Leicester and Wembley.

      women having to marry trees to lose their bad luck

      Even as we speak, hordes of wayward Gujarati girls can be found shackled to tree-trunks in Epping Forest…..

      *****************

      On a more serious note, Sunny does actually blog about “extreme”/irrational cultural and religious practices back in the subcontinent on a fairly regular basis (irrespective of the religion concerned), as regular commenters know and as a trawl through the archives would confirm.

      However, people are generally more concerned with matters involving the Asian community here in Britain. But negative practices in this country are regularly blogged about too, including (indeed, especially) the issue of women’s rights across ALL Asian communities.

      As Jagdeep has stated, the reason Muslim issues appear to be written about more than others on PP is because, in Britain, there are currently more problems amongst the Muslim community than in other Asian groups — at least with regards to issues that affect the rest of the British population (support for terrorism and extremism amongst some British Muslims being the main one). Many commenters on PP don’t exactly enjoy criticising Muslims, and the apparent over-representation of Muslim-orientated topics here has been mentioned a number of times in the past by regulars, but this is a sign of the times we are currently living in. Unfortunately.

    117. Clairwil — on 18th July, 2007 at 10:42 am  

      Perhaps the reason that in depth articles about each world religion’s problems are posted here is that this is a news and current affairs blog not one devoted to religious news. If you feel so strongly that thse issues should be covered why not contribute a guest article or better still start your own blog doing just that. Muslim extremeists as distinct from all Muslims are news. I accept that much of the msm, paticularly the tabloids don’t cover it in in this way, however the odd troll aside I don’t regard anything written here as being particularly offensive, prejudiced or Islamaphobic.

      That explains the coverage. No conspiracy, no Islamophobia, no secret agenda. Sorry to disappoint.

      Just a thought but if you dropped the hysterical tone you might find more of us here willing to debate with you.

      Ypu may accuse me of owning Fox news now.

    118. Clairwil — on 18th July, 2007 at 10:43 am  

      Perhaps the reason that in depth articles about each world religion’s problems are posted here is that this is a news and current affairs blog not one devoted to religious news. If you feel so strongly that thse issues should be covered why not contribute a guest article or better still start your own blog doing just that. Muslim extremeists as distinct from all Muslims are news. I accept that much of the msm, paticularly the tabloids don’t cover it in in this way, however the odd troll aside I don’t regard anything written here as being particularly offensive, prejudiced or Islamaphobic.

      That explains the coverage. No conspiracy, no Islamophobia, no secret agenda. Sorry to disappoint.

      Just a thought but if you dropped the hysterical tone you might find more of us here willing to debate with you.

      You may accuse me of owning Fox news now.

    Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

    Pickled Politics © Copyright 2005 - 2010. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.
    With the help of PHP and Wordpress.