Speaking at launch of Centre for Identities and Social Justice


by Sunny
4th October, 2011 at 10:25 am    

This is public interest note… I’ll be speaking at the launch of a new think-tank based at Goldsmiths college called ‘Centre for Identities and Social Justice’.

The event will take place on Wednesday, 5th October, 6pm.
LG Theatre 1, The New Academic Building

TOPIC
THE PREVENT AGENDA: What are its unintended and intended consequences?

SPEAKERS
LORD CARLILE (Liberal Democrat, House of Lords)
SUNNY HUNDAL (Editor, Liberal Conspiracy)
FARZANA SHAIN (Public Policy, Keele University)
AKEELA AHMED (CEO, Muslim Youth Helpline)
JAMES HAYWOOD (President, Goldsmiths Students Union)

OPEN TO THE PUBLIC


              Post to del.icio.us


Filed in: Events






75 Comments below   |  

Reactions: Twitter, blogs
  1. sunny hundal

    Blogged: : Speaking at launch of Centre for Identities and Social Justice http://t.co/SPwUR8ya




  1. doreen ogden — on 4th October, 2011 at 10:54 am  

    Would Dale Farm be on the agenda? Unable to attend but interested.

  2. damon — on 4th October, 2011 at 1:24 pm  

    Interesting. It sounds like the kind of body you get here in Northern Ireland.

    I hadn’t heard of ‘Muslim Youth Helpline’ before.
    http://www.myh.org.uk/about_us?id=1

  3. Terry Ist — on 4th October, 2011 at 7:58 pm  

    As I thought Jai in your nonsense post “EDL exposed in damning academic report”:

    Not one scrap of proof of any ‘terrorism.’

    As I said, this sites endorsement for proscribing an organisation it politically disagrees with it is just a deeply cynical act of deceit: A carefully measured attempt at anti-democratic totalitarianism, replete with the classic totalitarianism device of spurious accusations of terrorism for moralistic justification.

    And Jai, you must know this is all bombastic nonsense, hence the fear, the absolute terror, of free speech, open debate, scrutiny and challenge.

    As they say, it is a very weak and pathetic man who can broach no criticism …

    As for “deceit, cowardice, bigotry” after consistently lying, deleting, lying about the deleting we then have this piece of pathetic cowardice:

    Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

    Jai you are sad little man.

  4. Terry Ist — on 4th October, 2011 at 7:59 pm  

    Sarah AB

    Quite clearly Jai doesn’t allow any challenging at all without deletion, and deceit as to the reason for the deletion.

    If the premise is that EDL should be banned as terrorists, then prove that they are indeed terrorists.

    I gave solid examples of terrorist charges and terrorist acts to help clarify what it all means in the real world, where most of us live.

    Simple really.

  5. dave bones — on 4th October, 2011 at 11:52 pm  

    Is nearby will try and get to that

  6. damon — on 5th October, 2011 at 12:15 am  

    From Eurasian Sensation’s blog.

    Australia’s most popular news columnist, Andrew Bolt, found himself on the wrong end of a Federal Court decision this week. Justice Mordy Bromberg found the right-wing polemicist and his publisher the Herald-Sun guilty of a breach of the Racial Discrimination Act. The paper will be forced to print an apology. The court found that 2 articles Bolt penned about certain fair-skinned members of the Aboriginal community were racially offensive, humiliating and “destructive of racial tolerance”.

    http://eurasian-sensation.blogspot.com/2011/09/shock-and-disbelief-as-andrew-bolt-is.html

    The columnist had mocked light skinned aboriginal people for claiming that identity when they ”didn’t look” aboriginal.

  7. Sarah AB — on 5th October, 2011 at 6:45 am  

    Terry 1st – As I’ve said – I don’t think they should be proscribed either – I think that would be wrong and (definitely) counterproductive. The EDL has some links to terrorism, and perhaps might be said to use ‘terrorst’ tactics in a soft way – looking at the wikipedia entry on terrorism that seemed possible. Some supporters (of course the fact they don’t have members gives the EDL lots of deniability) have been involved in attacks on both people and property. You can’t pin such incidents down to the EDL, or prove they directly caused them, in the same way you can’t always pin down links between terrorist incidents involving Muslims and particular groups or preachers, but I don’t suppose you’d have a problem linking the stabbing of Stephen Timms with Awlaki.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-11682732

  8. Refresh — on 5th October, 2011 at 11:54 am  

    Terry lst,

    The debate on the EDL is pretty much done and dusted. The question over membership and deniability is resolved – they claim 100,000 members, meaning Facebook followers which we know are likely to include people who are monitoring their activities. I expect that will be quite a few of them.

    As there is no membership, there is clearly a non-democratic cabal out there somewhere creating divisions and division commanders out of thin air. And I don’t for a moment believe Yaxley has the capacity for analysis, he is a tool who enjoys the limelight.

    So as an EDLite you are in no position to talk about democracy or how a forum such as PP handles the far-right.

    To put it another way, I don’t recall that the BNP came on here to argue that it wasn’t a racist party. You on the other hand want to tell us that the EDL is democratic, is non-racist, non-violent and means to usher in utopia to last a 1000 years.

    And as more and more people recognise the need to counter the EDLites and tackle the EDL in all its manifestations, the more desperate you become.

    How many EDLites are out there waiting to mis-direct an online debate on news sites and blogs? Tell us. That is clearly your intention here.

    Jai has made a tremendous effort to counter the BNP and now the EDL and the EDLites. He does it because he is decent (and not in the HP sort of way). He represents the true values of our society in infinitely more ways than you ever will. And note these values are universal, and apply to the vast majority of the global population.

  9. damon — on 5th October, 2011 at 1:07 pm  

    Farzana Shain’s two books look intriguing.

    ”The Schooling and Identity of Asian Girls”
    http://www.amazon.co.uk/Schooling-Identity-Asian-Girls/dp/1858561817

    ”The New Folk Devils: Muslim Boys and Education in England”
    http://www.amazon.co.uk/New-Folk-Devils-Education-England/dp/1858564425

    I can’t see anything she’s has written in the regular media though, which is a pity.

  10. Terry Ist — on 5th October, 2011 at 1:39 pm  

    Sarah AB

    “but I don’t suppose you’d have a problem linking the stabbing of Stephen Timms with Awlak”

    I had never even heard of this incident or any of the players, so your assumption, at the very least, borders on prejudice.

    As for the rest, what ‘terrorist’ links? And as I asked before: Who are ‘the EDL’? How does one identify them? Do they not have their property and persons attacked also?

    And just what is ‘terrorist’ tactics in a soft way’? Is it even possible? Isn’t it an oxymoron?

  11. Terry Ist — on 5th October, 2011 at 1:42 pm  

    Refreash,

    What make you think I am an ‘EDLite’?

    Furnish some proof please, otherwise, again, your assumption, at the very least, borders on empty prejudice.

    I am not an illegal war supporting communist but I would speak up if there were calls for the Labour party to be banned under terrorist legalisation.

    And I am in a perfect position to talk about democracy, thank you, being an ardent democratic in a country with the mother of all parliaments.

    You appear to one of those that see no irony in screaming ‘We will not tolerate this intolerance!’ and have the same trait of entirely inventing your own narrative and assigning it to others (otherwise known as a stawman):

    “You on the other hand want to tell us that the EDL is democratic, is non-racist, non-violent and means to usher in utopia to last a 1000 years.”

    All your words, old chap, not mine. There is a word for people that do that.

    As for EDL membership, it would indeed appear to be the case that they have no members, but then they are not a political party with policies but a protest group with one issue, so one either turns up to protest, or one does not: Membership is no indicator of democratic provenance here.

    As I see it, in the articles I have read from Jai on his clear obsessions, he presents an hysterical, cartoon like caricature of reality, laden with extreme bombastic conclusions borne from the flimsiest and most tenuous of crumbs.

    And he enforces this lopsided and quite frankly ludicrous world view by disallowing any challenge, any debate or anything other then the agenda by way of censorship, and he then lies through his teeth about that censorship in the same hysterical, cartoon like caricature of reality.

    If the EDL should be banned as terrorist, then prove they are in fact terrorists. Very simple really.

    The fact that the reaction to this very simple premise is one of censorship, lies and hysteria speaks volumes.

  12. Refresh — on 5th October, 2011 at 2:31 pm  

    ‘We will not tolerate this intolerance!’

    To correct you, I would say we will not tolerate what flows from this intolerance.

    Are you an EDLite? You respond as one. Either you are a supporter or you are not. So rather than waste each other’s time, just come out and say you are not.

  13. Kismet Hardy — on 5th October, 2011 at 2:33 pm  

    I saw this guy on telly ranting about not being good enough for X Factor and wondered why people some people insist on spinning the same old record while banging on about being rejected. I’m sure you can answer that question Terry 1st, maybe if we bump into each other in a pub or something, and not here, unless the insomniacs needing some boredom to drift off demand it

  14. Optimist — on 5th October, 2011 at 5:01 pm  

    Refresh, Kismet Hardy, Sarah AB -

    Well done all!

    But if Sunny won’t delete this rather abusive and insulting character, Terry 1st, can we now just ignore him?

    Maybe he will then get the message. Although I doubt that as he is already misusing this thread which has nothing to do with the discussion on the EDL.

  15. damon — on 5th October, 2011 at 9:18 pm  

    Yes, let’s not be talking about the EDL, this ”Centre for Identities and Social Justice” sounds absorbing.
    It is an area that can lead to fascinating insight and understanding, and can lead to a quagmire too.
    It’s such a potentially contentious area. I’d really like to hear more about tonight’s event.

    I mentioned the case of the ”Richard Littlejohn-like” Australian journalist who has just been convicted for defaming people’s ethnic identities in four newspaper articles. This was one of them. Where he mocked people who were a quater (or less) Aboriginal, but were strongly wedded to their Aboriginal identity. He’s a bit of an arse by the sounds of it.
    http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/column_white_is_the_new_black

    It’s worth clicking on the links in that article and seeing the people he named. From what I’ve been reading, liberal and left wing Australia is glad that this guy has been found guilty of breaking the race relations act.

    Personally I don’t agree with the judgement, but it looks like that it’s a done deal in Australia. No more poking fun and white Rastas, white Sikhs (I’ve seen a couple), or indeed white witches. Because their chosen identity is not something for other people to question.

    Even if he was being cruel to individual people, the subject of people chosing identities should be one open for legitimate debate. Particularly as we are far more racially mixed than ever before.

    http://www.thepowerindex.com.au/power-fail/andrew-bolt-found-guilty-of-racial-discrimination/20110928467

    I’m guessing that the journalist’s conviction would be popular with many people on this website.

  16. Terry Ist — on 5th October, 2011 at 10:33 pm  

    Refresh,

    “Are you an EDLite? You respond as one. Either you are a supporter or you are not. So rather than waste each other’s time, just come out and say you are not.”

    Shouldn’t you really have asked me this before you arbitrarily decided I was one and proceeded to make up entire narratives and quotes for me?

    The word prejudice means to pre-judge, by the way, precisely what you have clearly done here.

    I have made my position on this issue crystal clear: I am advocate of democracy.

    But out of interest, how exactly does an ‘EDLite’ respond? What are the defining characteristics? Is it to engage in open reasoned debate and ask for evidence of serious charges that are being purported as a reason for prohibition? If that’s the case then I must be one.

    If being an ‘EDLite’ means attending protests then I am not.

    Who is an ‘EDLite’? Anyone who opposes shar??ah law in the UK? Then I am one.

    Anyone who opposes Muslims in the UK? Then I am not.

    So, you tell me. Am I an ‘EDLite’?

    “we will not tolerate what flows from this intolerance”

    Precisely the same as: ‘We will not tolerate this intolerance!’

    Who are ‘we’, anyway? Do you really think it is the business of state to decide what opinions can be considered as ‘intolerant’ and ban them? And what ‘intolerance’ are we referring to? A view you don’t like?

    I recall a piece by this sites (and LC) editor in which he describes an EDL rally he attended and faced no hostility whatsoever.

    But the real question here, one everyone keeps avoiding, is what evidence you have that the EDL are terrorists? That is the basis for the ban that Jai supports.

    Prove it or accept that it is a deeply cynical act of deceit: A carefully measured attempt at anti-democratic totalitarianism, replete with the classic totalitarianism device of spurious accusations of terrorism for moralistic justification.

  17. Terry Ist — on 5th October, 2011 at 10:34 pm  

    Kismet Hardy

    There is nothing in there to respond to, I am afraid. So much so I am wondering you bothered to post it at all.

    If you don’t want to debate, fine, but why waste your time pitching that empty nonsense in? What do you feel you have achieved?

  18. Terry Ist — on 5th October, 2011 at 10:42 pm  

    ‘Optimist’

    Hello Jai.

    I see you are lying again in order to invoke censorship, avoid debate at all costs and also trying to prevent others from doing so too, because you know full well that your anti-democratic demands for prohibition and opinion suppression cannot survive challenge or scrutiny. Not even slightly.

    Actully, the truth is that you were the one throwing around abuse on your thread, old chap: “deceit, cowardice, bigotry” as I recall, a small sample.

    Ironically after a round of consistently lying, deleting,and lying about the deleting that all in ended in this:

    ‘Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time’ and thus with it any right to reply. Deceit, cowardice and bigotry indeed.

    Now that’s real abuse Jai: Gratuitous, unfounded, one-sided, inequitable and untrue.

    What I have said about you, however, is all rooted in fact and substantiated by your postings and subsequent behaviour.

    But the back to the real question here: What evidence do you have that the EDL are terrorists?

    For that is the basis for the ban that you support, Jai.

  19. dave bones — on 5th October, 2011 at 10:59 pm  

    Anyway

    was an interesting evening. Sorry I didn’t say hi Sunny, you were absorbed in discussion and I had to chip.

    I thought that guy in the audience who works in prisons was the most interesting part of the night. Can you get him to write something here?

  20. douglas clark — on 5th October, 2011 at 11:13 pm  

    Terry 1st @ 18,

    I am 99.99% sure that Optimist is not Jai.

    Why would you appear to argue otherwise?

    The only comment that ‘Optimist’ has made on this thread is this:

    Refresh, Kismet Hardy, Sarah AB -

    Well done all!

    But if Sunny won’t delete this rather abusive and insulting character, Terry 1st, can we now just ignore him?

    Maybe he will then get the message. Although I doubt that as he is already misusing this thread which has nothing to do with the discussion on the EDL.

    Well.

    I agree with Optimist.

    _____________________________

    I’d go further, I think you are trying to play with people that are a lot more human than you. Nice people – y’know, the likes of Optimist and Jai and Sunny and my chum Rumbold.

    It leaves a bit of a gap for someone like you. What are you all about Terry 1st?

  21. Refresh — on 6th October, 2011 at 12:54 am  

    I am Jai.

  22. douglas clark — on 6th October, 2011 at 5:22 am  

    Refresh,

    Well, yes.

    But only to some sort of high confidence limits.

    I think it is a well known fact that I quite admire you.

    Frankly, you are better than Jai!

    I am ridiculously fond of:

    http://www.channel4.com/programmes/the-big-bang-theory

    which, I think encapsulates lots of folk here.

    Including me.

  23. Sarah AB — on 6th October, 2011 at 6:42 am  

    dave bones – why don’t you tell us a bit more about the event – or your views on the issues at stake?

    I love the BBT too Douglas – but surely you aren’t saying we are all slightly strange obsessives?!

  24. douglas clark — on 6th October, 2011 at 10:59 am  

    Sarah AB,

    I love almost anyone that writes here. I think most of us are ‘Big Bang Theory’ nerds. Well, Jai and Rumbold and that Sunny guy….and you.

    but surely you aren’t saying we are all slightly strange obsessives?!

    Absolutely not!

    There are horribly normal folk that comment here too.

    It is fun to talk down to them.

    Oops!

    We are all wonderful

  25. Refresh — on 6th October, 2011 at 11:26 am  

    Douglas Clark

    ‘But only to some sort of high confidence limits.’

    I am the 0.01%.

  26. douglas clark — on 6th October, 2011 at 11:39 am  

    Douglas Clark

    ‘But only to some sort of high confidence limits.’

    I am the 0.01%.

    Possibly. Frankly I like you, but….

  27. dave bones — on 6th October, 2011 at 2:19 pm  

    Sarah AB-

    yeah sorry, I wrote a blog post about it.

    I am a bit uncomfortable at these academia driven things really. I don’t see academics writing papers in relation to actual people on the ground who are affected by the prevent agenda. There was an interesting student who was standing up against the prevent agenda in Goldsmiths. said he had been asked to basically break the law and spy on students. ie if someone who was “at risk” came to the attention of his welfare committee they should organize a meeting with someone from MI-5 on the panel who was pretending to be someone else.

    Sunny said some stuff about not denying the EDL a platform, and reporting on who the EDL actually are rather than just slating them which I pretty much agree with.

    As I said, there wasn’t much useful information from anyone who was actually in contact with at risk Muslims. the only person on the panel who was doing that was Akeela who didnt get to say much, and this guy who was working in prisons. i sort of wish he was on the panel really and would very much like to hear more from him.

    Maybe if I chatted to people after I would have learnt more but there did seem to be a lot of left wing intellectuals who I would probably agree with politically but I doubt if they had much contact with Islamic fundamentalists or anyone affected by prevent.

    I tried to convince one of Abu Hamza’s old posse to come with me as I know he is involved with people who the government would probably consider to be at risk but he didn’d want to come. I tried to bring him to Robert Lamberts recent talk as well but he takes a dim view of government and Police etc naturally.

    Not sure of useful ways forward with the prevent agenda myself.

  28. Terry Ist — on 6th October, 2011 at 10:52 pm  

    Dougie,

    From what I have seen on previous threads, and I have now looked over quite a few, I am 99.99% sure that Optimist is Jai, and I can see over those threads I am far from the only one.

    The highly distinctive prose, in conjunction with the highly distinctive red highlighting previous that seemed to be the giveaway to others and I. And of course the instant and childlike resort to smearing opposing voices as abusive and the like to manipulate, when the complete opposite is true.

    But its all good, Dougie. You are of course entitled to your opinion, as of course am I.

    What you are not really entitled to do (and consider yourself anywhere decent at any rate) is try to dehumanise me because you don’t like me asking awkward questions or giving as good as I get, albeit in an honest, measured and good faith fashion.

    You seem to merit a human beings worth on whether you agree with them or not: A very sinister outlook and one that gives you no moral high ground whatsoever, if that’s where you thought you were.

    Well there you go. Just saying.

    But lets face it, not one person so far has any answer to a very simple question including you, Dougie.

    Jai cannot even begin to substantiate, let alone defend, his banning premise in an open arena. Why is that?

    I think we all know why, and I think we all know really that that is what this exotic dance is all about: The deletions, the hysteria, the lies about deletions, people posting that they have nothing to post, the abuse, the counter-claims of abuse, the sock puppets and the personal jibes.

    But no debate.

    No one has even the slightest scrap of proof that would hold up at police walk in desk, let at the CPS, that the EDL are even remotely terrorists.

    The call for the EDL ban under terror legislation is nothing other a deeply cynical, deeply deceitful, and deeply dangerous attempt to silence a raft of opinion that some object to.

    Well chaps, that is democracy I am afraid. You have the right to your opinion, they have the right to theirs. They don’t have to like your opinion, you don’t have to like theirs.

    And that is democracy in a nutshell. Take any of the above away and you take away democracy.

    Any claim that is designed to lead to a ban of any group of citizens freedom of association, freedom of expression and freedom of protest deserves scrupulous challenge, scrutiny and debate. That is the price of freedom and democracy and remains an everlasting duty for us all.

    And any such claimant who refuses to allow even the slightest challenge, scrutiny or debate is an enemy of freedom, a fascist in the truest sense of the word and inevitably, a liar.

    We all know that, even if for, shall we say, ‘thread bonding’ reasons, we won’t all say it.

  29. douglas clark — on 7th October, 2011 at 1:05 am  

    Sinister, moi?

    I am not in favour of censorship, if that’s what your getting at. But it seems to me that a newbie such as your good self could at least stop talking down to the folk that write or comment here. I can’t recall exactly how long, but this place has been around and about for years and years without the benefit of your opinions or advice.

    Just saying.

  30. Optimist — on 7th October, 2011 at 10:14 am  

    I wish I was Jai!

  31. damon — on 7th October, 2011 at 11:26 am  

    Dear oh dear. No wonder Sunny is ”busy with other things”. What’s hapened to the quality comments on Pickled Politics? Many of the best commentators no longer reply here.

    I’ve tried to look up this ‘Centre for Identities and Social Justice’ but there’s lttle on-line at the moment. But I will look with interest to see how it turns out. Reading the Muslim Youth Helpline’s website, I am undecided about how positive such a thing is. Is it any more positive than having a Presbyterian Students accomodation centre in Belfast for example?
    http://www.pcibsw.org/derryvolgie.html

    It might be, as young Presbyterians in Northern Ireland are probably in a different situation to young Muslims in Blackburn and Tower Hamlets. But still, I wonder if there isn’t a ‘chicken and egg’ situation going on with this identity evolution. Young people are being told they are ”different”, and then need counselling because they’re different.

    In a somewhat ‘crowded market’ – a new think tank should set out their stall clearly and state where they stand vis-a-vie what has gone before or exists already. So for example, if people think that ”the far right is on the rise”, they should really explain why they say that from scratch – and not just presume it’s a given because that’s what some people say already.

    And I would say it’s essential to state where they stand on views like that given here by a woman from the Institute of Race Relations (on OBV’s website)
    http://www.obv.org.uk/news-blogs/irr-race-and-class

    That woman shows a major faultline in thinking between that ”tradition” and the people she’s criticising.
    I think PP has traditionally been on her side, and that of OBV, and against Kenan Malik and Munira Mirza, (who gets quite a kicking there). I have been much more impressed by those others – which hasn’t gone down so well here.

    I have found that there’s an irritation and intolerance shown by the OBV/IRR strand of thinking – which includes UAF and ”official anti-racism” – towards that latter starnd, so I will be looking to see how the new think tank plays it.

  32. dave bones — on 7th October, 2011 at 12:53 pm  

    If a helpline helps, it helps. What does a think tank do?

  33. chelmsfordlad — on 7th October, 2011 at 2:37 pm  

    Sunny, I thought you had packed up politics and were selling viagra. Is this to be yet another of your failed projects? You are a serial loser and anything that has you involved is doomed. Get a Job.

  34. chelmsfordlad — on 7th October, 2011 at 2:40 pm  

    Just noticed the reference to the Jenny Bourne article. She was ripped apart last week in CiF because she is a fraud in a fraudulent organisation the IRR.

  35. damon — on 8th October, 2011 at 10:55 am  

    If a helpline helps, it helps. What does a think tank do?

    It’s really all in the detail I guess. One could ask why do British young people of Muslim origin identify with their parent’s religion more than the boys at my Catholic did with their’s.
    As I remember it, hardly any of us took the slightest bit of notice of the bible and religion.
    Of course it’s different for Asians and Muslims, but I don’t know if a Muslim helpline is what people need. But anyway. Untill they produce some stuff online, there’s not too much to be said. And Dave Bones, I didn’t mean you when I asked where all the talent had gone.

    Just noticed the reference to the Jenny Bourne article. She was ripped apart last week in CiF….

    I hadn’t seen that, but looked it up.
    And what a stupid article it is.

    ”The line between the political and the criminal can be a blurred one.”
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/sep/26/spaghetti-house-siege-1976-political-criminal

    It really reinforces my point about the great divide in this area of race and identity.
    She is hosted on Simon Woolley’s ‘Operation Black Vote’ website. Which Lee Jasper and his campaigns against ”police murder of black people” is also a part of. And Ken Livingstone had him as his advisor on race and policing when he was mayor.

    IMO, it’s essential to clarify who sits where on this whole wider issue. And as the new think tank is to enter this field by the sound of it, they would need to make clear which side of the divide they are on too. What side are you on Don? And you Refresh?

  36. Terry Ist — on 8th October, 2011 at 3:15 pm  

    Well there you go Dougie, again that’s your opinion but the reality is that I am the one who has been ‘talked down to’, abused, censored and lied about. All because I questioned an absurd premise. Just saying.

    And the ‘newbie’ thing leaves me cold: Its the mentality of a nursery playground.

    Like I said, if someone puts forward a claim that is designed to lead to the banning of anyone / any groups freedom of association, freedom of expression and freedom of protest then you can be sure that someone will challenge it, as they should.

    And if they get treated in the fashion I did, then you can be sure they will challenge that too, as they would.

    Its the way of the world Dougie. Reality. Welcome to it.

    Can you imagine, in all honesty, what would happen if certain people we know had any real power? Given the abuse of what little they have you can be sure that Gestapo style ‘protective custody’ would be the order of the day, with the same absurd justifications set forward here.

    Just saying, Dougie, just saying.

  37. Don — on 8th October, 2011 at 4:42 pm  

    Damon,

    You would have to define this ‘divide’ for me.

  38. damon — on 8th October, 2011 at 7:24 pm  

    Well Don, how many times have I refered to articles like this one?

    ”It’s mostly anti-racists keeping racism alive”

    http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/site/article/10315/
    So many times that I am now partly banned on Pickled Politics. Earwicga refused to even countenance such an idea as ”official anti-racism”. She wouldn’t read such an article she said.

    I would line people up in camps and connect them in the way that Jai would do one of those investigative OPs on the EDL.

    You could start with the politics that Lee Jasper is involved in at a community level. The ”No Justice – No Peace” street politics that led to the Tottenham riots breaking out and who suggestes that the police are killing black people for racist reasons.
    http://www.demotix.com/news/663290/hundreds-protest-justice-smiley-culture-march

    Lee Jasper is part of ‘Operation Black Vote’, and they it seems, are friendly with Jenny Bourne and the IRR.
    (see article linked in post 31 above). That article was complete rubbish IMO and so cearly shows up what I see as a problem with that kind of anti-racism.

    Ken Livingstone had Lee Jasper as his advisor on race and policing and Ken backed the non Labour candidate for mayor in Tower Hamlets.
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/davehillblog/2010/oct/19/london-london
    The now mayor of TH was very into the anti-EDL counter protest and all the politics that went into that. UAF, Respect etc. That’s what I call ”official anti-racism”.

    As I say, I have banged on about this kind of thing here so much that people have told me they are fed up with it. Which is a pity (to me) as I do actually care about the subject. What I think happens is that the mainstream anti-racists and leftists build up their case against the wider society with its institutional racism etc … which has then gone on to be almost an industry in which many people actually make their livelihoods from. And they can’t be having people picking holes in their analysis.
    As I remember, Sunny also took a swipe at the people in that special edition of Prospect magazine the same as OBV did.

    The rise of the inequality deniers

    http://www.obv.org.uk/news-blogs/rise-inequality-deniers

    Can you at least see two camps now Don? In my opinion the difference between them is where real debate lies.
    But it never happens.

  39. douglas clark — on 9th October, 2011 at 4:07 am  

    Terry 1st @ 36st.com.

    You say:

    again that’s your opinion but the reality is that I am the one who has been ‘talked down to’, abused, censored and lied about. All because I questioned an absurd premise. Just saying.

    Personally. I don’t think anyone has lied about you, exactly.

    I happen to think you are a pretendy sort of victim, a fascist, perhaps, with a grievance, if you will.

    Would that be wrong?

    Perhaps you really lurve all human beings and the clear failure of you to say so is just down to your inability to be articulate.

    Whatever.

    Just sayin’ Terry 1st………..

    ____________________________________

    Terry 1st.

    What a complete utter idiot you are.

  40. douglas clark — on 9th October, 2011 at 4:23 am  

    damon.

    I quite like you, but you have the ability to love complete utter idiots with a passion for stupidity that is beyond reason.

    It is what you like to pretend to be damon, it is frankly quite sad….

    Could you grow the fuck up?

  41. douglas clark — on 9th October, 2011 at 8:06 am  

    Terry 1st,

    I get the general impression that you see your race as somehow valid.

    All because I questioned an absurd premise. Just saying.

    Being a wee Scottish person who has been talked down to for hundreds of tears by wankers like your good self, then the premise is neither absurd nor a question of ‘just saying’. It is what the rather contemptible english superiority complex, based on lions led by wankers as a military strategy, appears to consist of.

    As far as I am concerned you are a cheeky chappy who can go fuck yourself. It might be offensive to reasonable English people, of whom there are many, but the likes of you are the worst of your kind and are a waste of space and time.

    Just saying………

  42. douglas clark — on 9th October, 2011 at 8:14 am  

    Hundreds of tears?

    Probably.

    l expect I meant hundreds of years but who knows, tears works for me, you absolute stupid idiot.

    But you are white, you are English and you are stupid. What’s to like about you? You probably support Manchester United too….

  43. douglas clark — on 9th October, 2011 at 8:33 am  

    Hopefully we’ll be rid of your pretendy superiority shortly. Frankly it is people like you that makes most of us up here Scottish Nationalists.

    And that includes many English people living here.

    Along with Asians, Poles and lots of others that find the likes of you a complete utter disgrace to humanity.

    Can you imagine, in all honesty, what would happen if certain people we know had any real power? Given the abuse of what little they have you can be sure that Gestapo style ‘protective custody’ would be the order of the day, with the same absurd justifications set forward here.

    Just saying, Dougie, just saying.

    I cannot imagine what would happen if a tit like you got power.

    ‘Protective custody’ would almost certainly extend to people like me. So, you can take your world view and stick it where the sun don’t shine.

    What a genuinely horrible politics you chose to share with us…

    Are you BNP, perchance?

  44. damon — on 9th October, 2011 at 10:09 am  

    Douglas, you’re wrecking the website with your mad nonsense. You have the perception of a nine year old.
    My point was a fair one. The people and groups I mentioned are connected, or of a type. And it starts by being supportive of – or at least not publicly critical enough of – this kind of populist street politics.
    http://www.irr.org.uk/2011/august/ha000019.html

    You can disagree with me, but stop being a tit. I know Sunny has criticised Lee Jasper a bit in the past. But not enough IMO.
    That politics is what sparked the Tottenham riots and is pernicious in it’s influence in inner city BME communities.

    On the OP itself, I look forward to seeing how this new think tank turns out. Although one of the participants at that meeting (Farzana Sahin) sounds very interesting and I wish she’d write some stuff that was accessible online, I won’t have my expectations too high.

    Btw – although I’m non-religious myself, I’ve not been a fan of Richard Dawkins, who is a bit too smug with his athiest populism ….. but he seems to have gone even further now and slagged off Muslim schools for ”teaching students ‘alien rubbish’ ”.
    Saying ”alien rubbish” has to be seen as racist. Because Islam is as British as black pudding these days.
    http://www.islamophobia-watch.com/islamophobia-watch/2011/10/8/richard-dawkins-claims-muslim-schools-are-teaching-alien-rub.html

  45. douglas clark — on 9th October, 2011 at 12:49 pm  

    damon,

    cheers.

    Sadly, I find you and your new friend Terry 1st just about able to destroy any sort of reason on a web site. Between you. You are both that daft.

    Your ridiculous ideas and those of your new hero Terry 1st are pathetic and very stupid.

    There you go damon.

    Have a love fest with Terry 1st. You are probably quite compatible, being equally thick.

    You ought to wonder if your new chum is BNP or not. ’cause the BNP don’t really like the Irish….

  46. douglas clark — on 9th October, 2011 at 1:09 pm  

    You are a very sad little person damon.

    And, you too are a very sad little person Terry 1st.

    Explain to your audience – Pickled Politics has an audience – quite what you are about.

    It seems to be about being racist on a web site that is not racist.

    Does that make you both bright and clever? I suspect it does not.

    I suspect it puts both of you into a contrary view to your audience. I suspect neither of you care for the people you address, and indeed get a bit of a thrill from being contrary and daft.

    And the ‘newbie’ thing leaves me cold: Its the mentality of a nursery playground.

    Eh?

    It seems reasonable to me that Terry 1st ought to gain a bit of respect before he spouts off as a white British racist. Your mileage may vary. Your mileage does vary. You love racists.

    Just saying.

  47. Don — on 9th October, 2011 at 2:22 pm  

    Damon,

    Well Don, how many times have I refered to articles like this one?

    That’s a trick question, isn’t it? A lot?

    I would line people up in camps and connect them in the way that Jai would do one of those investigative OPs on the EDL.

    What? Does that even mean something?

    What I think happens is that the mainstream anti-racists and leftists build up their case against the wider society with its institutional racism

    OK

    …which has then gone on to be almost an industry in which many people actually make their livelihoods from.

    I can’t say I’m shocked that large organisations/pressure groups/ movements need some full time staff. Nor am I disturbed that politicians whether local or national support anti-racist actions. I’m perfectly fine with that.

    And they can’t be having people picking holes in their analysis.

    In what sense? Could you, in your own words (and without linking to Spiked or pondering who Lee Jaspers’ friends are or wondering what some bloke in a pub might think) give your own analysis of where and how ‘mainstream’ anti-racists have got it wrong?

    Just tell me, plainly and directly, about this ‘camp’ you are in and I’ll tell you if I’m likely to be pitching my tent in it anytime soon.

    I suspect that you think I am being obtuse when I don’t ‘get’ what you are saying but honestly that is not the case. And I’m not generally regarded as lacking in reading skills. I find that you allude, imply, speculate and raise questions only to leave them dangling.

    You say that you have identified a ‘divide’, that there are two camps. If the dichotomy is that clear cut surely you can define it in a couple of hundred words of your own?

  48. Terry Ist — on 9th October, 2011 at 2:45 pm  

    “he spouts off as a white British racist”

    Care to substantiate that whooping great lie with some actual evidence, Dougie?

    Because all I have actually done is ask what evidence there is to ban the EDL as terrorists.

    And no-one, including you, has been able to provide even a scrap.

    So given that I would say that it is indeed you, Dougie, who comes across as a sad little man.

    A sad little man that has to lie and make personal rants on an open internet forum in order to insult people he doesn’t know, over an issue he doesn’t understand, in order to prop people he doesn’t know, and their equally whooping great lies.

    Doesn’t look good Dougie. Just saying Dougie, Just saying.

    Got any more lies for us?

    Or have you grown a set and will now tackle the actual issue, rather then defame the man?

  49. shhh, u know who — on 9th October, 2011 at 2:58 pm  

    Terry, Damon, look at the post times. Clark is drunk posting again and making a complete arse out of himself yet again.

    He’s not the brightest bless him and he seems to think this is facebook and that these people are really his friends. Sorry mate, but just ignore him. All you will get is a lot of drunken abuse and no sense, nonsense. The man needs a lot of help and little drink.

    Aint that right Clarky?

  50. damon — on 9th October, 2011 at 5:57 pm  

    Shhh, u know who, is that what you think it is?
    I’ve been there too. Quite bad. I went T-total and feel much better these days.

    Don – yes, talk of ”camps” does sound a bit strange, but my basic point is that I think there is a divide.
    That you can criticise mainstream anti-racism from the left. Or at least from a place that isn’t automaticaly the right. Insisting that people are right wing is often the first thing people from that side will say to any criticism of their positions. Earwicga did it with me and said I must be a ”BNP supporter”, within week of her joining as a moderator. I only bring that up, because it’s so typical. I have laid out a reasonable case already I think and you’re chosing to ignore most of it Don.

    I already did this link in post #38 which shows a ”march for justice” for a black musician who died in suspicious circumstances when the police raided his house looking for drugs.
    http://www.demotix.com/news/663290/hundreds-protest-justice-smiley-culture-march

    You at least nead to look at that if you are to have a clue what I’m talking about. There’s lots of photos.
    Keen eyed people will spot Jody McIntyre there,
    I’m not making this up, that was an actual march. People WERE angry with the police. Another black man dead in police custody. The implication is that it’s worse for black men than it is for (say) white men in Glasgow. They’re the ones saying it. And it’s a political view that has remained constant since the 1970s. I think it’s well past its sell by date and just shows laziness and political opportunism and cynicism.

    The SWP support that kind of march with headlines like:
    ” Fighting back against police violence and racism”
    http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/art.php?id=24591

    Lee Jasper heads up those ”justice” campaigns.
    http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23937312-outrage-as-smiley-culture-supporters-and-lee-jasper-break-up-met-meeting.do

    I’m not a big fan of the police. I think they have a tendency towards incompetence at times, and we saw how they messed up and covered up over Jean Charles de Menezes …. but this isn’t the 1970s and 80s any longer and a lot of those people haven’t changed their positions on the police all this time. The proof is there in those marches and what people said about the killing of Mark Duggan in Tottenham.

    I live in Belfast these days and some Republicans try the same thing about the newly reformed police service here. It’s BS mostly too. The PSNI are not unreformed bigots, any more than the police in England are.

    That’s why I’ve talked about ”camps”. Who has spoken out critically against Jasper, the SWP and Operation Black Vote for smearing the police like that? Unite Against Fascism, (being backed by the SWP) most certainly don’t. They are more interested in hyping up the threat of a rather inconsequential EDL and mythical ”Nazis”.

    When one mentions all the other people who do that, you most certainly have a ”camp”. You could of course just say that that’s the left anti-racist camp and critics must be right wingers. Which is what they often do. Another thing people in that ”camp” will do when someone questions their analysis is to just say nothing. To refuse to engage and hope the person goes away. Or ban them or suggest they are trolls or something.
    The ‘victim culture’ is prevalent within the Muslim community too. Remember Dr Mohammed Naseem of Birmingham mosque saying it was like the early years of the Nazis in Britain for muslims right now?
    I remember a Question Time programme from Birmingham that had lots of muslims in the audience and there was a mood of persecution amongst many in that community it was said. After the bungled shooting of the two brothers in Forest Gate if I remember.

    To critiscise that sentiment does not make you right wing (necessarly). Though much of the criticism is right wing of course. And Don, I have to do a link or two to make my case. Here’s anotther and it shows the ”’camp split” quite plainly.
    http://adrianhart.net/halt-who-dares-to-criticise-official-anti-racism.html

    Yes that guy does work with Spiked, but they are people in their own right too and I find this closed mindedness where people will just dismiss whole ideas because it comes from ”them” somewhat frustrating.
    The OP’s on the EDL that are so prominent on PP have up to 27 links in them for Pete’s sake.

    Two link footnotes if I may. This is part of the other side, or the other camp. People are tyying to have a debate, but it’s quite a difficult one.

    http://www.battleofideas.org.uk/index.php/2010/session_detail/4374/

    http://www.battleofideas.org.uk/index.php/2010/speaker_detail/3231/

    Socialist Worker and UAF that is most certainly not. It’s from a different side of the left divide IMO.
    If PP is really not the place for such a discusion then fair enough. It doesn’t appear to be, but it’s still best when people are civil.

  51. douglas clark — on 10th October, 2011 at 2:07 am  

    Terry 1st,

    I get no change out of this. I just get shit out of the likes of you.

    I quite like the people that comment here on a regular basis and it would be somewhat better if a fool such as you at least pretended that anyone should care about you. Or your crazy days and ways and chums in your skull.

    shhh, u know who

    Eh?

    Just sayin’

  52. douglas clark — on 10th October, 2011 at 2:15 am  

    Wide boys.

    Just cheap mental fascists and that.

    Just thicko psycho freako’s.

    Well. who would that be?

    You are obliged to luv them ’cause

    Otherwise, they’ll tear you face off.

    Arseholes

    Just sayin’

  53. douglas clark — on 10th October, 2011 at 2:19 am  

    Couldn’t be Terry One or our new friend the shoo…..meister?

    Obviously not. For between them they might actually share a brain cell.

    Or not.

    The jury is out on that.

    Just sayin’

  54. douglas clark — on 10th October, 2011 at 2:40 am  

    Terry 1st,

    I think most of us are entitled to wonder about you.

    What have you got to say to mixed race folk or, indeed anyone else?

    Clarify your ideas, why don’t you? Try to write sense here, although that might be a tad difficult for the likes of you……

    It is strange that someone like me has to point out that you are a complete and utter tit.

    Perhaps you and your chum, the rather brain dead “shhh, u know who” are actually mad?

    Charmed, I’m sure.

    Just sayin’

  55. douglas clark — on 10th October, 2011 at 8:36 am  

    shhh, u know who,

    Terry, Damon, look at the post times. Clark is drunk posting again and making a complete arse out of himself yet again.

    He’s not the brightest bless him and he seems to think this is facebook and that these people are really his friends. Sorry mate, but just ignore him. All you will get is a lot of drunken abuse and no sense, nonsense. The man needs a lot of help and little drink.

    Aint that right Clarky?

    No, it ain’t, you little idiot. Quite how pathetic are you exactly? It seems to me that you are pretty stupid. And English to boot. Well, that would be you, I suspect.

    Just saying…..

  56. damon — on 10th October, 2011 at 10:26 am  

    Oh dear. That’s the end of any chance of reasoned discussion it seems. Douglas, you have to calm down and stop ranting. Many of the good people who commented here have been driven away.

  57. douglas clark — on 10th October, 2011 at 11:12 am  

    damon,

    Oh dear. That’s the end of any chance of reasoned discussion it seems.

    Absolutely.

    You choose your friends damon – they are as thick as mince which is hardly a surprise – and I’ll choose mine. It does seem to me that you must be desperate for chums what with Terry 1 and “shhh, u know who” being about as good mates as you can find.

    Expect that is the best you can do.

    Or perhaps it is the best that Terry 1 and “shhh, u know who” can do.

    Who knows?

    Who cares?

    Just sayin’

  58. Refresh — on 10th October, 2011 at 1:35 pm  

    Damon,

    You are being extremely silly.

    All this time you’ve complained no one will engage you (on your chosen subject) and here you have Terry 1st and you completely blank him.

    Address your comments to him (or her), I will happily observe.

    ‘shhh, u know who’

    I give up. Who are you?

  59. Optimist — on 10th October, 2011 at 3:06 pm  

    douglas clark -

    Respect !

    Keep up the good work, man. I think you have them on the run!

  60. damon — on 10th October, 2011 at 3:46 pm  

    You clearly have the wrong end of the stick Refresh.
    I don’t think the EDL are that important as an organisation – nor it’s leading people that interesting as individuals. I’m not really interested in talking to someone like Terry here on Pickled Politics, as it’s not the right place and there would be no point.

    What I do think is a very important subject though is the way that anti-racists and the left have responded to what are really just a bunch of jumped-up football hooligans. For me it’s not about the EDL but about the analysis and character of those ranged against them.
    Is that clearer now Refresh? I’m pretty sure I’ve made that point quite plainly before.

    But like someone advised Peter Tatchell on Harry’s Place, sometimes it’s best to know when you’re beat and move on.
    http://hurryupharry.org/2011/10/09/from-todays-trafalgar-square-anti-war-rally-a-report-from-a-true-radical-activist/

  61. Refresh — on 10th October, 2011 at 4:16 pm  

    ‘I’m not really interested in talking to someone like Terry here on Pickled Politics, as it’s not the right place and there would be no point.’

    And it would seem no one else wants to engage with the point you’ve clearly made repeatedly.

  62. damon — on 10th October, 2011 at 5:00 pm  

    ”And it would seem no one else wants to engage with the point you’ve clearly made repeatedly.”

    Er, Refresh. I know that. That’s why I was NOT talking about the EDL, untill you mentioned them.
    Really Refresh. You’re one of these people who I have to look up on google search If I’m to remember any worthwhile opinion you have made yourself. I know PP has been more or less ”parked” by the mods for the time being. I understand why.

  63. Refresh — on 10th October, 2011 at 5:20 pm  

    ‘Er, Refresh. I know that.’

    If you know that then explain why you persist in demanding that someone talk to you?

    More than once you’ve told us that you’ve been banned (or at least treated with curtness) from this site or the other, and I can see why some may finally tire of your nagging.

    As for my own (worthwhile) opinions, their expression has become less over time. There are only so many ways of expressing the same views.

    Blogs being what they are most of us have come to learn that regurgitating the same material each time someone new comes along is frankly boring and so you develop a shorthand. Which can come across as curt.

    And sometimes, less is more.

  64. damon — on 10th October, 2011 at 6:09 pm  

    Refresh, Jai banned me from commenting on his threads.
    That’s his decision. Maybe I was ‘rude’ about his OPs on the far right. Personally, I would have thought that was fair comment, but all these internet blogs all have their own judgement on what they will accept or not.
    Who’s nagging? It’s not me. Don asked me what kind of ”divide” I was talking about and I think I laid that out pretty clearly. Politics is a bickering and sectarian business at the best of times and it’s made worse over the internet and people’s egos getting in the way I’ve found.

    As you say, sometimes less is more, but often it’s not. If you want to understand what happened in Egypt yestersday, you have to read more than The Sun.

    I really don’t know how a blog like this can work if people don’t put some effort into explainining their opinion. The OP’s can outline terribly complex issues. Like that one ”India and Pakistan – what next?”

    Why not just say that you don’t like what I say Refresh? About the far right and about those ”No Justice – No Peace” marches Lee Jasper organises?
    It’s a discussion board, so there’s really a minimum that’s required too.

  65. Terry Ist — on 10th October, 2011 at 6:59 pm  

    Dougie,

    You are clearly a nutter; not one thing you said is true, not one piece of it, and as such you can’t substantiate any of it.

    I am not even English you racist clown, so you can direct your vile anti-English racist bile at someone else.

    I don’t know if the other guy is right and you are an angry drunk, certainly his point about the post times would suggest something along those lines, but clearly you are not the full quid.

    So far all you have done is swear, scream racist abuse, make totally deranged allegations, comment out of complete ignorance and prejudice, lie and generally make a complete tit out of yourself.

    No wonder Jai (Optimist) thinks you are doing well.

    For every other normal person, you do quite clearly need help. Just saying Dougie.

    In other circumstance I would have thought your ludicrous behaviour was just a cynical smoke screen to cover the fact that you have nothing of merit to contribute and obviously can’t substantiate / defend your sock-puppet loving ‘friend’s’ equally ludicrous premises.

    But no so with you, Dougie. I truly think you are the genuine article: A full blow fruit loop.

    I know I shouldn’t laugh at the afflicted, but you do make it hard Dougie. You are such a deluded, ignorant, pompous, hate-filled, racist, ranting and raving little arse. Who wouldn’t find you hilarious, Dougie?

    Just saying.

  66. Sarah AB — on 10th October, 2011 at 9:17 pm  

    damon – I don’t think you should allow your thoughts about parts of the far left (fair enough) to interfere too much with your view of the EDL, or your sense of the impact fear of the EDL can have on people. The fact that some individuals who are attracted to the EDL may perhaps mean no harm doesn’t alter the nature of that impact. Naseem has said some OTT things perhaps but there is plenty of anti-muslim bigotry around. It seems that almost any plan to build a mosque is targeted by the EDL, for example.

    http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/Cambridge/Fresh-target-for-EDL-in-protests-over-mosques-12072011.htm

  67. damon — on 10th October, 2011 at 10:02 pm  

    Sarah, I think you also misunderstand me. I think the EDL are a bunch of meatheads. They aren’t nice, they’re backward and potentially violent. There’s no way I’m being supportive of them or giving some of them a benifit of any doubt in any way.

    But thirty years ago, me and my teenage mates from our little football gang probably looked prety much like an EDL march when we went to our club’s away fixtures.
    There would be hundreds of us coming off the train in some other city, all singing and chanting and being met by the police who held us back with horses and dogs, and pushed us around and marched us to the football ground under heavy escort.
    It looked worse than it was really though. It was mostly high spirits and testosterone.

    Of course it’s out of order for them to be picking on muslims. I’m not saying anything different. But you talk about ”the fear”. And that is the area that I think is worthy of discussion. Muslim communities are pretty resiliant. They’ve had to be, living next to football grounds like Birmingham City, Bradford and Manchester City and West Ham all during the 70s and 80s.
    Don’t tell me now they’re terrified of a few hundred goons that show up for a few hours once in a blue moon. They’re not really much more than a lumpen white street gang.
    As were the football hooligans of old and the Teddy Boys before them. So I’m not saying they’re not obnoxious, or a problem. The only thing to discuss is how much of a real or imagined problem they are.
    And that’s not a discussion that’s going to be had here. So let’s not bring it up anymore.

    I googled ”Refresh/EDL” just to see if I could find where he/she’s said anything on the issue, and I saw it here in the comments of this thread from June.
    http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/12859

    I’m sure we can just agree to disagree and leave it at that.

  68. Don — on 10th October, 2011 at 10:16 pm  

    Muslim communities are pretty resiliant. They’ve had to be, living next to football grounds like Birmingham City, Bradford and Manchester City and West Ham all during the 70s and 80s.

    It’s not a problem because they must be used to it by now?

  69. Terry Ist — on 10th October, 2011 at 10:20 pm  

    Sarah AB

    You still have yet to explain what exactly ‘terrorist’ tactics in a soft way’ are? Or how indeed it is even possible.

    And of course you have to yet to produce a single scrap of evidence that the EDL are terrorists, the basis for the attempted banning of them.

    I’m sure people find all sorts of groups frightening and have an “impact [of] fear” but other peoples perceptions form no basis for reality.

    I’m sure the average non-Muslim could find a group of men chanting ‘Allah Al Akbar’ an event with an ‘impact of fear’ and the average UAF outing could well elicit the same, but that does that form the reasoning for a ban of it?

  70. Sarah AB — on 11th October, 2011 at 6:57 am  

    damon – I still think you are slightly trivialising the EDL, by using expressions such as ‘out of order’ which doesn’t really reflect the hatred on display at their demonstrations.

    Terry 1st – I think this is the third time I have pointed out that I am not at all minded to agree with the idea that the EDL should be proscribed. I was curious as to how anti-terrorist legislation would be invoked by those behind the petition, and I looked up the wikipedia entry on terrorism and found some points which might fit the EDL. I’ll put them in a separate comment in case it’s moderated for length.

    Certainly Islamist groups could be (at least as) frightening, and I did earlier suggest you could have invoked the (legal) Hizb ut Tahrir as part of your argument, but in practice they do not march in neighbourhoods which they perceive as full of their targets/opponents. But there have been some extreme speakers at student societies, mosques etc.

  71. Sarah AB — on 11th October, 2011 at 6:58 am  

    “Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them.”

    “Nonetheless, Hoffman himself believes it is possible to identify some key characteristics of terrorism. He proposes that:

    By distinguishing terrorists from other types of criminals and terrorism from other forms of crime, we come to appreciate that terrorism is :

    ineluctably political in aims and motives
    violent – or, equally important, threatens violence
    designed to have far-reaching psychological repercussions beyond the immediate victim or target
    conducted by an organization with an identifiable chain of command or conspiratorial cell structure (whose members wear no uniform or identifying insignia) and
    perpetrated by a subnational group or non-state entity.[22]

    A definition proposed by Carsten Bockstette at the George C. Marshall Center for European Security Studies, underlines the psychological and tactical aspects of terrorism:

    Terrorism is defined as political violence in an asymmetrical conflict that is designed to induce terror and psychic fear (sometimes indiscriminate) through the violent victimization and destruction of noncombatant targets (sometimes iconic symbols). Such acts are meant to send a message from an illicit clandestine organization. The purpose of terrorism is to exploit the media in order to achieve maximum attainable publicity as an amplifying force multiplier in order to influence the targeted audience(s) in order to reach short- and midterm political goals and/or desired long-term end states.”[23″

  72. damon — on 11th October, 2011 at 6:03 pm  

    Sarah

    damon – I still think you are slightly trivialising the EDL, by using expressions such as ‘out of order’ which doesn’t really reflect the hatred on display at their demonstrations.

    You may be right. I’ve never actually seen the EDL. Only on youtube and through reports. As always, it comes down to judgement. If I’m trivialising, then many others are doing the opposite I think. To me it’s about debate, and what kind of debate is or isn’t possible in different political arenas.

    Different forums will have different ideologies.
    As different as the Conservative and Labour party conferences or an SWP/Respect meeting. And as different as Pickled Politics is to Harry’s Place.
    You know that quite a few people on PP think that HP is islamophobic and too obsessed with what muslims get up to? I often don’t agree with HP myself, but it’s a different place with it’s own agenda. And raises things that the regular left gloss over.

    I don’t support the UAF-like hysteria about the EDL.
    That doesn’t mean I have any time for them, I just have a different perspective of them and how people should respond to them. It should be something that’s open for debate, but some places will not allow open debate. I don’t support the war in Afghanistan either, but I think that many of the people who were in Trafalgar Square on saturday for the ‘Stop the War’ rally are complete eejits. Yvonne Ridley etc.
    I know better than to try to discuss things with the Stop the War people, as it would be pointless.
    I should just accept that my ”far-right/Nazi skepticism” doesn’t go down well here.

    The political landscape is pretty bleak IMO. I look where I can for a bit of wisdom or at least a forum where wide ranging debate can take place. These people (below) are much derided and ignored, particularly on PP, but if I was in England, I’d be wanting to go along to this weekend event that the Spiked people are running in a couple of weeks. They do allow open debate and (I’ve been once) some of the sessions can be very good.

    http://www.battleofideas.org.uk/index.php/2011/session_detail/5740/

  73. Terry Ist — on 11th October, 2011 at 7:06 pm  

    Sarah AB

    You also went on to say that you were not ‘immovable’ on a ban and that the EDL, in your opinion, engaged in ‘terrorist’ tactics in a soft way’ but never explained what either meant.

    Under previous UK law, the common legal definition of what constituted terrorism was probably the most apt:

    “acts of terrorism” means acts of persons acting on behalf of, or in connection with, any organisation which carries out activities directed towards the overthrowing or influencing, by force or violence, of Her Majesty’s government in the United Kingdom or any other government de jure or de facto.”

    This has been broadened somewhat considerably, and not in favour of common sense or liberty.

    Section 76 of The Counter-Terrorism Act 2008 offers up to a 10 year sentence and an unlimited fine for, amongst other things, taking a photograph containing a policeman.

    But it is section 1 of The Terrorism Act 2000 where terrorism is contemporarily defined and even after the dangerously broaden parameters, nowhere in subsection 2, let alone subsection 3 can the EDL even remotely be held liable.

  74. douglas clark — on 13th October, 2011 at 11:21 pm  

    Dear readers,

    this is really not about the person I engage with below. It is about you.

    Well, I think you are better than this, better than me, and you really need to start commenting here. It gets lonely fighting fascists, which is what Jai and I appear to be doing, alone.

    Anyway:

    ________________________________________________

    Terry 1st @ 65,

    You say:

    @ 4:

    If the premise is that EDL should be banned as terrorists, then prove that they are indeed terrorists.

    Why, exactly, is it down to people here to try to prove that? It is pretty obvious that the EDL consists of people who would quite like to stir stuff up don’t you think? Some of whom would like to indulge in serious violence, or have I missed their new pacificism?

    _______________________________________

    I accept that a tiny minority of muslims slip through the training and become terrorists.

    Much like the EDL seems to slip through whatever sieve of reasonableness the rest of us have.

    Note the word training, ’cause it refers to all sorts of oddballs that claim the mainstream of their religion or beliefs. For instance, catholic priests that are a bit wishy washy about paedophilia, christians that hate what these jews did to the son of god and will take revenge until eternity and other nutters. Christians just lurve to kill unbelievers anywhere they can find them…

    As do many people of many colours, nationalities and beliefs.

    I do believe I was personally threatened with death by someone who believed in Woden. Hopefully I am wrong or he is undergoing serious treatment for his mental health issues. The same individual threatened Jai too. In a similarily 007 manner.

    He certainly doesn’t seem to be hanging around the BNP front page these days.

    But who knows? What with the complete breakdown of identity that the internet has brought – especially when right wing fuckers have had anything to do with it – we are left with guesses about who other folk are and whether they matter or whether they don’t.

    I’d suggest that “shhh, u know who” is probably trying to play a trick or a trap or something equally interesting.

    Do you care who “shhh, u know who” is?

    I don’t.

    Until someone has established themselves on a web site they might as well be tinkerbell.

    They probably are tinkerbell…..

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.