I couldn’t understand some parts of this article, but it sounds interesting…

Oh, silly conversation is it now? Those poor naive little pro-left bunnies, they had good intentions but were misled by those nasty neo-cons, grrrrrrrrrrr. As I said above, I’d be a bit more sympathetic with your argument — and the claim you made in another thread, that people did support the war on *genuinely* humanitarian grounds — if there hadn’t been such overwhelming evidence that the invasion of Iraq was going to be a humanitarian disaster — and that the coalition weren’t going in for humanitarian reasons at all; evidence that was circulated everywhere, all over the internet, in the media at the time.

And yet even now, even after it’s become obvious to any reasonably sane human being right or left that the Iraq War and Occupation will be recognised as one of the greatest humanitarian disasters of the early 21st century most of the pro-War left still unapologetically persist in their “error” and are even turning their noxious gazes towards Iran. I will reiterate, the fact that these people openly and loudly assert themselves to be part of the left — having betrayed the core principles of the historical left which was anti-Imperialist — along with the idea that you can be so openly for naked capitalist greed like Gordon Brown is and still be a lefty, signals the utter bankruptcy of the term in everyday usage. It doesn’t matter how many times you bring up Inayat Bunglawala.

Anas asked about people who claimed to be on the left and had apparently betrayed their convictions. I’m pointing out that if one wants to point fingers at someone (as Anas keeps pointing fingers at my link to Harry’s Place), then it would be less hypocritical to point fingers at everyone not just your favourite hobby horse.

I am pointing fingers on a thread called “Most influential people on the left”, ostensibly about the state of the left today, at people who claim to be on the left. Surely there’s some relevance there, no? Surely, it’s fair enough if I choose to drag out my favourite hobby horse at this particular juncture? A bit more relevant than bringing up Inayat, though I suppose next you’re going to tell me about Asghar Bukhari and David Irving?

In political commentary terms, it simply doesn’t matter about the REALITY of events, what matters is that bloggers are able to dig up a skeleton and point to it one billion times in justification of their pre-thought rants that are at the tip of their tongues and are desperate to come bursting out. Isn’t this a grossly political trait? It’s easier for some blogger to find a quote by somebody on the internet and rip into it like some super-scholar and mock it, then it is for them to research and critizize people that are actively, practically involved in destroying this planet?

I noticed this with regards to the level of venom someone like George Galloway gets on a regular basis. And yet if you tot up his biggest crimes which are mostly related to his egoistic publicity seeking and his supposed friendship with Saddam and compare them to those of other MPs/politicians –e.g., taking us to an illegal war, supporting the crushing of Palestine and not speaking out, along with some of the other scummy things politicians get up to — to the people who are in power then they seem meagre. And I’m not that big a fan of the guy or of Bunglawala.

It is the difference between barbarians and the rest of us.

It is frankly ridiculous to choose a side. Both sides have blood on their hands, and neither is it sensible to argue that my hate figure is worse than your hate figure, so ya sucks! They are both equally bad.

If the left, or liberals, are going to go anywhere, it has got to be around a radical re-interpretation of what the grouping is. Y’know what is it that we all agree about? Independent of religious, ethnic or political hangups. I would argue it has to be about agreeing that human rights are more important than religion, politics or grievance. What say you?

Grouping. Now there’s the rub. It is easy to retreat into an Israel bad / Palestinians good mind set. Or, as I tend to do, take the same position on the evil that is George W Bush.

But, if we are all going to stay cosy on this, then nothing will change, nothing will alter.

We – folk that comment here regularily – are, I think, on the side of individuals: not religions, not politicians, not even philosophies. If we are not, then what the fuck are we about?

What I am trying to argue is that folk need to walk outside their ethnicities, religions, politics, even and shake hands with people from the other side, who are perhaps not that much different from you, or me.

See his wikipedia entry, it lists article making those accusations, which Inayat has not legally challenged AFAIK.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inayat_Bunglawala

Why are people like Tariq Ali so savagely and violently attacked when they merely write articles and books,

I think Tariq becomes a bit polemical sometimes but I broadly agree with that criticisms of his go OTT too. for the record I love No Logo by Klein, which made the same point.

Why are we fighting with each other over trivialities when the people we REALLY disagree with are continuing to flourish under the rader?

I agree… but look who turned up first annoyed and with accusations that the leftist had betrayed its principles… and that they don’t support his own personal vendettas.

but, in order to demonstrate your point, are you also are not in danger of exaggerating and amplifying the views and statements of a potential ‘opponents’ like Bunglwala to add add weight and credibility to your own argument?

Isn’t saying that IB supported OBL a bit of a blanket generalization? Where is the context? It’s a huge thing to attach to somebody, that they supported OBL..where is the proof, and what part of what OBL said is IB being accused of supporting? Could he have perhaps have misunderstood during a question posed by someone else? Could he have made an innocent mistake? If you discovered that, would it lessen the impact of a verbal tirade against him?

If OBL said he believied that peace is important, and IB then agreed with that statement, couldn’t a journalist then infer that IB supported OBL? You know how tricky terminology is, I just don’t like how public individuals who might say 99.9% good things get viciously slammed against the wall by a lot of bloggers and ‘commentators’ for a single quote that is predictably brought up so often and frequently that it leaves the realm of actual reality and enters into a totally new meaning because of how many times it’s been referenced via other people…it still doesn’t make it accurate though.

All injustice should obviously be condemmned unequivocally by people, but this fanatical obsession with folks trying to get ‘dirt on people through magazines, who disagree with them and then repeating it like a mantra has to stop, if mutual progressive solutions are to be reached by a cross-section of people.

Why are people like Tariq Ali so savagely and violently attacked when they merely write articles and books, when the people behind the curtains at Primark prolonging grossly exploitative sweatshop labour conditions in India are never heard of and go about their business? Why are we fighting with each other over trivialities when the people we REALLY disagree with are continuing to flourish under the rader? Bloggers have a lot of critical energy, and I can’t help but feel that they spend too much of it bickering with each other for chest-thumping egoistic reasons, rather than to achieve the aims they proclaim to aspire to.

This is like a broken record. Some pro-war lefties may have become enamoured by the neo-cons because they thought that Islamic terrorism was going to lead to the disintegration of the west. I’d say the vast majority of those on the pro-war left did so because they support liberal interventionism, which is an old leftist tradition, to get rid of dictators like Saddam. There was a marriage of convenience with the neo-cons that went horribly bad. I don’t know what’s so difficult to understand… and I don’t even know why I’m having this silly conversation.

Why do progressive bloggers take a smug pride in taking quotes by folks like Inayat Bunglwala out of context and then proceed to collectively laugh at him ad nauseum because they have identified a potential weakness?

Bunglawala’s former support for OBL is important for several reasons. Firstly I wanted to point out that people on the right and the left have changed positions according to changing conditions many times.

Secondly, OBL is a hateful warmonger who wants nothing but the destruction of the west. I don’t want him around and neither do I like people who fell for his agenda in the past. That not only includes many from the US government but also Arab govts and so-called government advisors from the Muslim community. Anas asked about people who claimed to be on the left and had apparently betrayed their convictions. I’m pointing out that if one wants to point fingers at someone (as Anas keeps pointing fingers at my link to Harry’s Place), then it would be less hypocritical to point fingers at everyone not just your favourite hobby horse. It’s exactly similar to the fact that he is obsessive about the state of Israel but says relatively little about the inherent racism in an ‘Muslim state’.

Why do progressive bloggers take a smug pride in taking quotes by folks like Inayat Bunglwala out of context and then proceed to collectively laugh at him ad nauseum because they have identified a potential weakness? It’s a nit-picking school-boy tactic that is unnecessary in reaching a mutual goal.

I’m actually angry about how individuals I respect do this. It’s not once or twice, it’s a dependency drug to shoulder on, and I’ve noticed a pattern of it taking place, with people publicly dismissing giants like John Pilger or Tony Benn with the brush of their hand, as if they are rubbish because you have found a quote that can be intepreted negatively from your subjective experience.

Why do writers spend so much time slinging mud at each other instead of working with each other?

I’ve never said there weren’t stupid people on all sides, just that the idea of a pro-War “left” that embraces all those things that the left used to be against, almost by definition, demonstrates how far the concept of the political left has come — and ultimately how meaningless it has become. Why bring up Bunglawala when as I mentioned in my last post, his record doesn’t seem to particularly stand out in the hypocrisy stakes? I still don’t see his relevance unless you were somehow implying that I’m affiliated with him.

No one said you were. My point is, stupid people existed on all sides.

but actually given military and diplomatic support during the time when he was gassing the Kurds of Halabja?

I’ve never defended UK foreign policy. I think msot of the time it’s stupid. But we’re going around in circles. Don’t forget there were plenty of Arab states covertly helping Iraq against Iran in that war… and now are doing nothing about Darfur.

So I’m still not sure what yardstick you’re using to measure anyone…

You mean like all those Muslims, like Inayat Bunglwala, who praised Osama Bin Laden pre-9/11?

Hey, no fair, when did I suddenly become the official spokesman for Inayat Bunglawala?

And if he did praise OBL, how fucked up is that in comparison to the case of someone like Saddam Hussein who wasn’t just praised in the West but actually given military and diplomatic support during the time when he was gassing the Kurds of Halabja? Or all the other regimes the West has been providing arms to to slaughter its own people — or for example as in Uzbekhistan where we’ve been turning a diplomatic blind eye as the regime carries out countless greivous human rights abuses. And given that OBL was a mujahideen in Afghanistan in the 80s, he was being praised by the US and UK governments too pre-911 — and I think they were even given vocal support at some Tory conference of the time. In comparison to the overall shameful record I don’t think Inayat or “all those Muslims” stand out that much.

Given your own hypocrisy over ‘apartheid’ states, I hardly think you’re in any position to influence who I should link to.

I explained my reasoning on the other thread I’m not going over it all again.

, and the fact that most people have seen through the StWC and their politics, I doubt they’ll be around for long.

Hahaha! Sunny you joker!

You mean like all those Muslims, like Inayat Bunglwala, who praised Osama Bin Laden pre-9/11?

Not just pre 9/11, he praised Bin Laden AFTER the Nairobi bombings in which 300 African men and women were slaughtered outside the American embassy. African lives meant nothing to him. That man is the biggest two-faced fork-tongue bigoted creep out there. And the same goes for all his fellow travellers.

You mean like all those Muslims, like Inayat Bunglwala, who praised Osama Bin Laden pre-9/11?

It’s handy PP links to them, saves me typing in the weblink.

Given your own hypocrisy over ‘apartheid’ states, I hardly think you’re in any position to influence who I should link to.

Yeah, but it is funny that all these people, the pro-War left, can stand against all the things that were a hallmark of the left a few decades back. I mean some of those who made excuses for Stalin way back when could, perhaps, claim that at the time his crimes hadn’t been brought to light to the same extent that we are now aware of what’s happening in Palestine, Iraq, etc.

Anyway it’ll be interesting to see what new low those over at HP have sunk in their vain attempts to defame Chomsky, ZZ. It’s handy PP links to them, saves me typing in the weblink.

They’re all there…

Maybe Murray could get a mention (well, he’s more influential than me) but with Respect’s disintegration, and the fact that most people have seen through the StWC and their politics, I doubt they’ll be around for long.

Did I miss them, or was there no Toynbee? Hari? Rusbridger? Pilger sneaking in at 100, despite beeing one of the few genuine left-wing journalists able to write & produce his own documentaries? (although unless I’m mistaken he’s not British anyway!)

Notice our friends in the StWC / SWP (German, Rees, Murray etc) don’t even get a look-in, despite being the major players in Respect (RIP) and the anti-war movement and still wielding significant influence in the unions…

Oh, and Claire Fox a figure of the left (even with the disclaimer)? – a-hahahahahaha.

I dunno. Either these people don’t have a clue what the left is any more, or I don’t. Could well be the latter.

b’shalom

bananabrain