Policy Exchange slammed for anti-Muslim briefing


by Sunny
24th October, 2008 at 5:38 pm    

The LibDems have sent out this press release:

Liberal Democrat Leader, Nick Clegg has challenged the think-tank Policy Exchange over its briefing against a family event aimed at promoting harmony and dialogue between Muslims and non-Muslims.

A briefing note circulated by Policy Exchange links speakers at the Global Peace and Unity 2008 event on Sunday to Islamic extremism.

It includes ‘evidence’ quoted from the Society for American National Existence, an organisation that seeks to make the practice of Islam illegal and punishable by 20 years in prison.

In a letter to the think-tank’s Director, Neil O’Brien, Nick Clegg said:

“Your attempt to raise a boycott of this event by privately briefing against it is bizarre and underhand behaviour for a think-tank supposedly interested in open public debate.

“The information you are disseminating is extremely narrow in focus and as a result tars with the brush of extremism the tens of thousands of Muslims who will be in attendance.

“Of course, no-one should condone violence or bigotry. But neither must we allow the repugnant acts of a minority of dangerous individuals to be a reason to deny the one million British Muslims – and indeed all other members of British society – the right to meet together to celebrate faith and discuss the importance of peace.

“The sad truth is you play into the hands of the men you seek to discredit, driving further the alienation of the majority of Muslims who see themselves mischaracterised everywhere they turn as would-be terrorists.”

I see that Policy Exchange’s anti-Muslim agenda is becoming more open day by day. Good to see at least the Libdems stand up to it.


              Post to del.icio.us


Filed in: Religion






185 Comments below   |  

Reactions: Twitter, blogs
  1. Equal pay for equal work? « Mothers For Women’s Lib

    [...] that’s right. The think tank that brought you the frighteningly anti-Muslim briefing, and the would-be-laughable-if-they-weren’t-serious anti-scouser briefing also brought us the [...]




  1. M Khan — on 24th October, 2008 at 7:53 pm  

    It is good that the LibDems have had the courage to stand up to this nasty think tank.

    It is about time David Cameron did the same. If he wants to lead the country then he needs to show leadership and say when his own mates are wrong.

    No doubt Hazel “I Love Policy Exchange” Blears will lap this up and say they are right and most likely stop Labour colleagues attend any Muslim events!

    BTW How many ordinary Muslim events have Ministers really attended compared to other faiths? We keep hearing that Muslims get preferential treatment so how many? This excludes Labour Inspired Thought Launches.

    I think not many and this is something Policy Exchange will never suggest or highlight. Of course Policy Exchange and Blears who are pretty much one in the same thing taking their cues from the neoconservative movement in the USA who because of their alliance with Israel don’t want to see the Muslim voice heard.

    Why else would PE make such statements and briefings – so ordinary Muslim voices cannot be heard.

    Indeed it suits their agenda to make sure that politicians especially the senior ones will never attend evenmts with large numbers of Muslims.

  2. Frank — on 24th October, 2008 at 10:32 pm  

    The Global ‘Peace & Unity’ event is a hate fest of Islamism and Anti-Semitism. Clegg is a fool in showing that he knows nothing about it.

  3. Tom — on 24th October, 2008 at 11:58 pm  

    PX’s pet Mayor Boris ‘I read the Koran’ Johnson will be awfully disappointed, poor chap. Perhaps Nick Clegg can show him how to grow a pair of balls some time.

    “Why else would PE make such statements and briefings”

    To get publicity and channel the media narrative into them-and-us fearmongering, in accordance with their Cold War propagandist roots. As usual. Nasty bunch.

  4. MaidMarian — on 25th October, 2008 at 12:12 am  

    M Khan (1) – ‘Of course Policy Exchange and Blears who are pretty much one in the same thing taking their cues from the neoconservative movement in the USA who because of their alliance with Israel don’t want to see the Muslim voice heard.’

    That is self-parody, right?

  5. ac256 — on 25th October, 2008 at 12:51 am  

    Was this post made just to provide a counterpoint to/bait a fight with Harry’s Place?

    http://www.hurryupharry.org/2008/10/23/the-labour-government-and-the-holocaust-denier/

    I thought they were pretty good on this kind of stuff? The roll call for the Peace and Unity event is a bit of a who’s who of British Islamism- is PP a cheerleader?

  6. Tom Griffin — on 25th October, 2008 at 2:39 am  

    Interestingly, the Society of Americans for National Existence is a project of the Jerusalem-based Institute for Advanced Strategic & Political Studies.

    http://www.iasps.org/about.htm

    This is the organisation which gave the world the ‘clean break’ strategy for the Middle East.

    http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Institute_for_Advanced_Strategic_%26_Political_Studies
    http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/1493.html

    M Khan’s post is sadly very much to the point.

  7. Bartholomew — on 25th October, 2008 at 11:01 am  

    Anyone remember Policy Exchange’s promise to sue Newsnight “relentlessly, to trial or capitulation”?

  8. marvin — on 25th October, 2008 at 6:21 pm  

    I thought they were pretty good on this kind of stuff? The roll call for the Peace and Unity event is a bit of a who’s who of British Islamism- is PP a cheerleader?

    But, ac256 the event has the words ‘peace’ and ‘unity’ in it! Sounds pretty progressive to me! Also by criticising the islamists you are pandering to the racists, so don’t do it! You should only attack those who point out negative things in the brown muslim community. This is true anti-racism, left wing stylee.

    All of these Polish Jews which Hitler was supposedly trying to exterminate, that’s another point, by the way, Hitler never intended to mass-destroy the Jews. There are a number of books out on this written by Christians, you should read them. The Hoax of the Holocaust (3), I advise you to read this book and write this down, the Hoax of the Holocaust, a very good book. All of this is false propaganda and I know it sounds so far-fetched, but read it. The evidences [sic] are very strong. And they’re talking about newspaper articles, clippings, everything and look up yourself what Hitler really wanted to do. We’re not defending Hitler, by the way, but the Jews, the way that they portray him, also is not correct.

    — one of the speakers at this ‘peace and unity’ event.

    But of course the real evil is Policy Exchange for criticising people who believe in silly and potentially dangerous things, because it reflects badly on the others who only just think silly things. Which will lead to racism. Which leads to BNP. Which means fascism. Which means killing immigrants. You don’t want to kill immigrants do you ac256?

    PE should have just kept schtump, and not focus on the jew haters at a peace and unity event. Why all the negativity! There are some nice people there, why not talk about the nice ones?!

    No wonder the Lib Dems have not and will never be in power. They haven’t got a clue what’s going on. And people accuse the Tories of living in ivory towers.

  9. marvin — on 25th October, 2008 at 6:25 pm  

    Sunny, will you be condemning this event for hosting Jew haters?

    You can still complain about PE for it’s “anti-muslim agenda”. You will anyway :)

  10. platinum786 — on 26th October, 2008 at 12:38 pm  

    Firstly, there is no law against legitimate debate. A few hundreds years ago denying the existance of God would have been frowned upon. Some people used to think the earth was flat. I doubt the holocaust is a myth, but if someone wants to argue that, then debunk them with fact, counteract thier evidence, rather than try to silence them. Denying the holocaust is not anti semitism, it’s an alternative view on history. Some people think Elvis never died, is that a crime too?

    Secondly if you eally want to know what the global peace and unity event is, then i suggest you attend. Younever know you might expose all us muslims and our plotting and scheming….lol

  11. marvin — on 26th October, 2008 at 1:46 pm  

    White people who deny the holocaust are always labelled as neo-nazis. That’s because they are. It’s the most vicious and nasty of political ideas to deny the holocaust. It’s because they have a particular anthipathy to Jews. They may believe all sorts of things about the Jews.

    Yet when a Muslim brother does it, it’s just the same as thinking Elvis is still alive? Harmless!

    David T has already covered the nature of some of the people at this “peace and unity” event in depth The Global Peace and Unity Event: Extremists, Bigots, Supporters of Terrorism

    It’s farcial. Platinum786, your jokey criticism of accusing those who dare to point out nasty elements of people who are Muslims “you might expose all us muslims and our plotting and scheming….lol” is akin to arguing that Searchlight and Stop the BNP are anti-white and tarring all white people with the same brush.

    I’ve got no problem with Muslims talking peace and unity (even if their solutions are all too predictable). But inviting extremists (yes Brown ones!) to talk is just a load of bollocks really, isn’t it?

    People are so wilfully naive it’s despairing.

  12. Stephanie — on 26th October, 2008 at 4:04 pm  

    There is a lot within Islam that any sane person would be against. That is only normal. (if you believe in universal human rights anyway)

  13. Ala — on 26th October, 2008 at 10:03 pm  

    If every religious person displays some level of bigotry towards other religions and homosexuals, why only pick on Islam, which happens also to be the religion of the Israel’s biggest geopolitical enemies?

    As for Islamism, some might rightly be peeved at the apparent double standard that labels you a loyal Jew if you support a Jewish state, but a reclacitrant Muslim if you support an Islamic state.

  14. billy — on 26th October, 2008 at 10:12 pm  

    Nobody labels a Muslim who supports an Islamic state like Pakistan, to name just one of many Islamic nations, as reclacitrant. There is no double standard in that example, Ala.

  15. marvin — on 26th October, 2008 at 11:49 pm  

    Support a Muslim state? What like Saudia Arabia or Iran? One that executes homosexuals? Stones women to death for adultery? Does Israel execute people for sexual digressions? Will you be executed for insulting Judaism? Get a grip.

    “Picking on Islam” lol. If there was a big Christian group calling itself peace and unity, and they had jew haters and terrorist sympathisers and general bigots I’d attack exactly the same. Are there any Ala? I’m more than happy to go for haters who hide behind religion. Not just the poor, besieged Islamic variety.

  16. BenSix — on 26th October, 2008 at 11:54 pm  

    Does Israel execute people for sexual digressions? Will you be executed for insulting Judaism? Get a grip.

    I don’t think that it’s Israel’s domestic policies that really bother its critics, Marvin.

  17. platinum786 — on 27th October, 2008 at 12:31 am  

    Who decided that white people who deny the holocaust are neo nazi’s? Fredrick Toben would have something to say about that. Just because some jewish people get touchy about something shouldn;t mean we are not allowed to discuss it.

  18. billy — on 27th October, 2008 at 12:50 am  

    Who decided that white people who deny the holocaust are neo nazi’s?

    Why would anyone deny the holocaust if they were not either neo-nazis or insidious anti-semites? Why would anyone seek to deny that the Holocaust took place?

    Just because some jewish people get touchy about something shouldn;t mean we are not allowed to discuss it

    I think a lot of people ‘like to discuss it’ because they get a thrill out of the thought of some Jewish people getting ‘touchy’; so cynical, depraved and belligerent are they. The genocide of millions of innocent children, women and men, reduced to a rhetorical weapon for baiting a despised group of people. It gives them a thrill. And it’s not only Jewish people who are repulsed by it. I am not Jewish, but the squalid nature of this ‘interrogation’ is something I find notable and concerned to speak out about.

  19. BenSix — on 27th October, 2008 at 12:53 am  

    “Who decided that white people who deny the holocaust are neo nazi’s? Fredrick Toben would have something to say about that.”

    Yes, he’d probably blame it on an international zionist conspiracy.

  20. Tu S. Tin — on 27th October, 2008 at 8:01 am  

    LibDems and policy exchange aside … why does it take a think tank to look at the line up of speakers at this event to realize what the conversation will be?
    I mean come on people …
    Though I don’t see why it is connected to Islamic “extremism”, any more than how it is aimed at promoting harmony and dialogue between Muslims and non-Muslims.
    Everything about it seems to be anti Israel – thats all it could be …
    which does not make questioning or criticizing it automatically anti-Islam! especially when the speakers are not all muslims!

    Why would anyone seek to deny that the Holocaust took place?

    Good question!
    and what if we all said ok it didn’t? then what?
    Israel the country exists today, that is something no one can deny!
    The Holocaust is a very personal topic to me, one that makes me the most angry!!
    It was a crime not only against jews! that is not what the word means! 11 million or more people were killed in ways you don’t even want to imagine!
    Peace and unity will never be reached until we actually learn something from history

  21. Roger — on 27th October, 2008 at 8:14 am  

    “Of course, no-one should condone violence or bigotry. But neither must we allow the repugnant acts of a minority of dangerous individuals to be a reason to deny the one million British Muslims – and indeed all other members of British society – the right to meet together to celebrate faith and discuss the importance of peace.”

    However, it looks as though violence-supporting bigots have laid down the terms of celebration and discussion.

  22. Ala — on 27th October, 2008 at 10:54 am  

    Marvin, our main Islamist contenders in the UK probably hate Saudi and Iran more than you do.

    The GPU is hosted and sponsored by groups linked to Saudi Arabia, and if that’s what make them Islamist, then they’re right at home with an ‘Islamist’ British government.

  23. fugstar — on 27th October, 2008 at 11:22 am  

    GPU was cute.
    Clegg was sweet for laying into Plokersexchange for being characteristically malevolent, horned and satanic. albeit with the rather naff fluffy axe of ‘you are playing into terrorist hands if you cuss muslims in that manner, why not do it with better manners’.

    A lot of people dont watch islam channel, or find it naff to consume. Still, they are very open and enabling of people who want to participate in their activities. GPUs are good for unity in the cosmopolitan Uk Millet and their real friends. They provide unique spaces for expression and reflection.

    Whingers just moan because it wasnt full of multisexual, athiest, south-asian-with-religion-issue, human-rightist, self-consciously-trendy-slightly-lefty-and-pc, dissentary prone bloggers.

    bit jarring though, to see that the biggest presence (a flipping huge bus) was the met police. still saw my first policewoman-hijabi-apa.

    Best stall award
    to Lokahi Foundation, proving once again that the human race could make it for another few generations.

    Interesting Award
    to Kube Publishing for having some awesome new publications in the pipeline.

    Weirdness Award
    to the fact that there was some comicbook expo going on next door full of people dressed up in scifi with pretend weaponry… AND WE were the ones who had security up our arses.

    Unfairness Award
    to all the funky clothing outlets overly focussing on ladieswear and not awesome ummahtic threads for males in the office.

    All muslims have links to saudi arabia. We dont have your ‘righteously’ indignant ‘boycott and bomb’ approach to improving eachother’s behaviour.

  24. billy — on 27th October, 2008 at 12:26 pm  

    Sounds like it was a bundle of fun.

  25. billy — on 27th October, 2008 at 12:36 pm  

    Is it an evangelical event?

    http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=uF1WjfAiGmo

    Looks like a bunch of prosletysing fruitcakes mixed in with the usual mob. I’d run a mile if I came across a bunch of happy clapper Christians speaking in tongues and baptising people on stage as the audience swoon in religious ecstacy. This looks worse because of the grousing and familiar hair pulling political shtick everywhere. How grim. Mashallah. Oh no I can’t believe I just said that I must be a racist.

  26. Refresh — on 27th October, 2008 at 12:42 pm  

    Not a racist, a sneer.

  27. billy — on 27th October, 2008 at 12:46 pm  

    Well, I don’t really do sneering. It was just a bit of laughter at the expense of religious kooks at a religious rally. Inject some comedy into life. We need a Sacha Baron Cohen on that stage, Refresh.

  28. fugstar — on 27th October, 2008 at 1:13 pm  

    Well things are how you make them, and a function of what you know and are interested in.

    Some types are interested in offical headlines and talk about them. Others prefer fair ground rides, kissing babies, seeing what old pals are up to, looking for new stuff to read and chiefing other people’s food.

    It was a little like a frozen Stop the War march crossed with a ‘project’ souk in Marrakech, an NGO fair and Noah’s Ark.

    to the dullard who wrote #2.
    Antisemitism isnt a muslim poison. It is a white and european one. Maybe it is the lens through with you see everything and try to make everyone else see perceived threats to your interests. You can accuse us till you become even more blue blooded if it pleasures you. Its wrong and become more and more incredible everytime you spit that poison.

    There was a good seminar on islam in europe, with new ideas and insights. Youd have stumbled into it if you had gone with a clean heart and interst.

  29. Refresh — on 27th October, 2008 at 1:19 pm  

    Billy, your #27 comes across as more sneering than your #25.

  30. Refresh — on 27th October, 2008 at 1:22 pm  

    ‘Antisemitism isnt a muslim poison.’

    This has been something I’ve been arguing for well over 30 years. Its not muslim in origin, which makes it doubly important not to be strangled by it.

  31. Refresh — on 27th October, 2008 at 1:24 pm  

    No Channel Dave, lets not have that old canard. It turns any debate into a bottomless pit.

  32. Refresh — on 27th October, 2008 at 1:52 pm  

    Equally there is an infatuation amongst Israelis and jews about muslims, probably for the same reasons.

  33. Refresh — on 27th October, 2008 at 2:13 pm  

    ‘But I guess it’s because Israel exercises all the power in the Muslim world, so they leave the thinking to Mossad and the like.’

    And therein lies the problem.

  34. Refresh — on 27th October, 2008 at 2:24 pm  

    Oh dear!

  35. bananabrain — on 27th October, 2008 at 6:17 pm  

    it seems that we are doomed to repeat the mistakes of past attempts to engage “alternative community leaders” (i include israel’s original attempts to bolster hamas as an alternative to the plo, which obviously have backfired in no uncertain terms)

    all you need to know about this event is that they are parading the neturei karta (small but vocal anti-zionist ultra-orthodox sect who claim they’re the only real jews) who were leading participants in the recent holocaust “history” conference – in tehran.

    plus, of course, now we have the familiar meme of “the ‘neocons’ and ‘zionist lobby’ are stifling the ‘muslim voice’” which has become a cliché.

    Interestingly, the Society of Americans for National Existence is a project of the Jerusalem-based Institute for Advanced Strategic & Political Studies.

    yuck! i’m so going to quote one this next time someone tries to make out that nobody jewish (no matter how loony and right-wing) has anything against muslims. it’s about as mad as the people who blame everything on the neo-cons and the zionist lobby, or say things like:

    Ordinary Jews don’t give a second thought about Muslims or Islam.

    hah.

    But of course the real evil is Policy Exchange for criticising people who believe in silly and potentially dangerous things, because it reflects badly on the others who only just think silly things. Which will lead to racism. Which leads to BNP. Which means fascism. Which means killing immigrants. You don’t want to kill immigrants do you ac256? PE should have just kept schtump, and not focus on the jew haters at a peace and unity event. Why all the negativity! There are some nice people there, why not talk about the nice ones?!

    i couldn’t have been more sarcastic myself.

    Denying the holocaust is not anti semitism, it’s an alternative view on history.

    so do you consider “young earth creationism” an alternative view of science, then?

    @ala:

    As for Islamism, some might rightly be peeved at the apparent double standard that labels you a loyal Jew if you support a Jewish state, but a reclacitrant Muslim if you support an Islamic state.

    the jewish state is about half the size of wales and is intended to stay where it is. the people that support an islamic state think it should cover the entire surface of the globe. it’s the difference between “self-determination” and “global domination”, which is why i support a palestinian state (self-determination, you see) but not an islamic one, albeit i have no problem with people trying to run existing states islamically, as long as i don’t have to live there and they’re not enforcing dhimmitude. except of course, it’s never been tried properly. an islamic state without social justice is a contradiction in terms.

    @marvin:

    Will you be executed for insulting Judaism? Get a grip.

    not by the state – but you might be murdered by extremists tolerated by the state. just ask yitzhak rabin. oh, yes, you can’t, can you? however, i do understand your point, but not all jews are cuddly like me.

    @BenSix:

    I don’t think that it’s Israel’s domestic policies that really bother its critics, Marvin.

    no – it’s its continued existence.

    @ refresh,

    it is the doctrinaire moral equivalence of people like yourself on the left that makes many jewish people despair of a fair hearing where israel is concerned.

    Antisemitism isnt a muslim poison. It is a white and european one.

    the history of jews and muslims is neither rosy nor terrifying. compared to the persecution of jews in europe (or our subsequent emancipation) there was nothing in the islamic world; simply a generalised, if not always active, contempt and institutionalised, if not always active, second-class status. nonetheless, anti-semitism has, in the last 100 years, migrated from europe to the islamic world (courtesy of everyone from the catholic and orthodox clergy to the ex-nazis hiding out in egypt and syria), with the sad result that most editions of the “protocols” are produced in arabic and farsi. if it wasn’t a muslim poison originally, it has certainly infected its body politic now. don’t believe me? do a search on the protocols and the majority of the hits that aren’t from white supremacists will be from the islamic world. sad but true. but never mind, we can always blame colonialism.

    b’shalom

    bananabrain

  36. marvin — on 27th October, 2008 at 7:29 pm  

    i couldn’t have been more sarcastic myself.

    :D

  37. Refresh — on 27th October, 2008 at 7:41 pm  

    Bananabrain

    What fair hearing do you want?

    I am not sure I understood your point about moral equivalence.

    On the question of the protocols, this is often mentioned when someone wants to point to muslims. But wouldn’t it be more relevant if someone actually pointed out how that has got there. You would prefer it as a stick, rather than try to correct the propaganda.

  38. billy — on 27th October, 2008 at 8:07 pm  

    Antisemitism isnt a muslim poison. It is a white and european one.

    Historically, relatively speaking, that was probably true, as bananabrain points out. But at the moment, it very much is a Muslim poison.

  39. Refresh — on 27th October, 2008 at 8:15 pm  

    Yes and for a pretty plain reason. Lets not go in circles.

    Some interesting stuff here:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_and_the_Crusades

  40. Roger — on 27th October, 2008 at 8:31 pm  

    “Antisemitism isnt a muslim poison.”
    Up to a point, Lord Copper. The usual interpretation of the quran meant that muslim societies tended to be less muderously antisemitic than christian ones, but their toleration of jews (and christians- most muslim societies were more tolerant of most varieties if chrietianity than christian societies) was limited and disdainful and depended on their knowing and accepting their (inferior) place.

    “Denying the holocaust is not anti semitism, it’s an alternative view on history.”
    No it isn’t.
    Debating the exact number murdered, how they were murdered, why they were murdered and when or where they were murdered is an alternative view on history. However, there is enough evidence- in the form of remains, reports, documents and statements by perpetrators, victims and witnesses to know that the nazis murered several million people for their alleged racial inferiority. Denying that is on the same level as denying the massacres in the partition of India or the deaths of the slave ships across the Atlantic.

  41. billy — on 27th October, 2008 at 8:38 pm  

    Yes and for a pretty plain reason.

    What’s that then?

  42. Me — on 27th October, 2008 at 8:39 pm  

    The stuff about “anti-semitism being/not being a Muslim poison” is fascinating because it again puts the onus on the victims. The (mainly ) Muslim Palestinians are being occupied slaughetered and starved by the Jewish Israelis not vice versa.

    Islamophobia is also a Jewish poison – and a far more pernicous one because the difference is that extreme Muslims dont get columns in mainstream newspapers or books published on the ignominy of the Jews. Extreme Jews do on the evil of the Muslims.

  43. billy — on 27th October, 2008 at 8:45 pm  

    the ignominy of the Jews.

    the ignominy of all of ‘the Jews’?

  44. Me — on 27th October, 2008 at 8:45 pm  

    bananabrain

    “with the sad result that most editions of the “protocols” are produced in arabic and farsi. if it wasn’t a muslim poison originally, it has certainly infected its body politic now. ”

    You forget to mention that the 21st Century protocols “Eurabia” was written by a Jewish writer Baet Yor about a secret Muslim takeover of Europe. It is used by “mainstream” publications. The protocols arent.

    ——————-

    Eurabia has been compared to antisemitic writings by some writers. Journalist Johann Hari calls the two “startlingly similar” and says that “there are intellectuals on the British right who are propagating a conspiracy theory about Muslims that teeters very close to being a 21st century Protocols of the Elders of Mecca.”[35]
    In Swedish newspaper Dagens Nyheter, journalist Andreas Malm[36] quotes Mark Steyn predicting genocide[37] and highlights the conspiratorical claims against Islam as a whole made by the Eurabia writers. In a follow-up article, journalist Eva Ekselius claims “Like the Jews were depicted as the foreign, the other, onto which one could project all the traits the culture wants to deny in themselves, so the ‘muslims’ now get to take over the second-hand props of anti-semitism” and makes a direct comparison to pre-war Europe[38].

    Israeli peace activist Adam Keller, in a letter of protest sent on June 2, 2008 to the Israeli publisher of Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis, wrote:
    In 1886 the French antisemite Edouard Drumont published ‘La France Juive’ (Jewish France), creating the false nightmarish image of a France dominated by Jews, and sowing the poisonous seeds which came to fruit when Vichy French officials collaborated in the mass muder of French Jewry. [...] Bat Ye’or follows in notorious footsteps indeed by creating the false nightmarish image of a Europe dominated by Arabs and Muslims.[39]

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurabia

  45. Me — on 27th October, 2008 at 8:53 pm  

    bananabrain

    “the jewish state is about half the size of wales and is intended to stay where it is. the people that support an islamic state think it should cover the entire surface of the globe.”

    untrue. Islamic movemest want Islamic states in Muslim lands indeed most are localised and want it primarily in their land .

    In a world where the US has troops in over 100 countries to imply its the Muslims (who are defending their land from invaders) who want world dominance is beyond parody

  46. billy — on 27th October, 2008 at 8:59 pm  

    Me

    Please don’t bother debating with bananabrain. The ignominy of his race renders him an unsuitable interlocutor. It’s in his genes, it’s a special one they have, called the Ignominy Gene of the oy vey DNA compound. It’s closely related to their crooked nose and propensity for money lending and sabotaging Islam.

  47. M Khan — on 27th October, 2008 at 9:17 pm  

    Maid Mariam – “M Khan (1) – ‘Of course Policy Exchange and Blears who are pretty much one in the same thing taking their cues from the neoconservative movement in the USA who because of their alliance with Israel don’t want to see the Muslim voice heard.’

    That is self-parody, right?”

    No it isn’t. Neocon Organisations and their affiliates keep talking about the need for keeping Political Islam out? Why is that?

    The whole purpose is to keep their own control and ear of politicians like Blears.

    Tell me how many times has Blears listened to Muslims? She constantly and arrogantly lectures them but never listens to them then keep prattlign on about the need to bring them into the political process but only those that recognise Israel? Surely the political process isn’t based around recognition of Israel alone? Surely entering the political process means listenting to all views pro and anti in all cases and making a reasoned choice? Non?

    I’d like to see peace with Israel but at the same time the engagement of Muslims in the UK shouldn’t be based around the issue of acceptance of Israel anymore than entry of Jewish people into the political process should be baesd on recognition of Palestine. One is made to recognise in Blears world and one isn’t? Does Blears make say The Board of Deputies recognise the rights of the Palestinians? No.

    This is political manipulation by Blears and can only backfire but the lasting effect is on the two communities is it not?

    Moderator – I think the comment at 47 must be removed.

  48. billy — on 27th October, 2008 at 9:22 pm  

    Mister M Khan. I’m afraid I have to inform you that comment 47 is your own comment. I am saddened by your attempt to commit comment-suicide.

  49. persephone — on 27th October, 2008 at 9:30 pm  

    I find the comment at 47 objectionable

  50. Roger — on 27th October, 2008 at 9:34 pm  

    ” Neocon Organisations and their affiliates keep talking about the need for keeping Political Islam out? Why is that?”
    Because political islam- according to political islamists- involves bringing as much islam-friendly law as possible into the society concerned in the short term, including recognition and privilege of religions, laws against blasphemy, persecution of homosexuals, sharia-based civil law for muslims and- in their more deluded aspirations- constructing an entire islamic society with all of their fantasies as to what it entails, including torture and mutilation as punishment and enforced muslim customs.
    There is a difference between political islam and the immediate- and usually practical- political aspirations of muslims, which usually are shared with many nonmuslims too.

  51. Avi Cohen — on 27th October, 2008 at 9:36 pm  

    BananaPoliceman – Sadly in all the weeks which I have left you to promote peace you’d done a fairly poor job.

    In fact you back to your best at stifiling any debate.

    The Islam Channel Eveny is no different to any Pro-Israel event where or indeed eventys in many Synagogues where it is openly being stated that Palestinians are a political creation and have no rights. I know of a Synagogue just North of London that not so long ago held just such a discussion. As I’ve said to you before this is now a recurring theme sadly on both sides namely denial the other even exists. So your whole aim has been to side track the disgraceful underhand tactics of Policy Exchange.

    Surely you can stand up with the rest of us and condemn them for their biased approach.

    “plus, of course, now we have the familiar meme of “the ‘neocons’ and ‘zionist lobby’ are stifling the ‘muslim voice’” which has become a cliché.”

    It isn’t familiar and in fact is accurate in the case of the neocons. Show me where the neocons or even in fact organisations such as AIPAC have said that the Muslim voice needs to be heard? You don’t hear Kristol say this do you?

    “the jewish state is about half the size of wales and is intended to stay where it is.”
    In theory but until Israel sets its borders by coming to peace then its borders are fluid and it isn’t staying where it is. Does Israel intend to hand back the Golan, if it doesn’t then it isn’t staying within international law and has expanded its borders so your statement isn’t reality. It is just more rah-rah as usual.

    The only way to stop and defeat anti-semitism in the Muslim world is to start engagement work now and not be sidetracked at every point by asking people if they support Israel. Not everything needs to revolve around Israel. Now if NK were at the Islam Channel event then why couldn’t anothet Jewish Organisation go along as a counter? Staying away doesn’t work as I told you about IslamExpo. There needs to be engagement to stop this issue.

    That engagement cannot always be on the terms that the Jewish Community wants or the Muslim Community wants. But that engagement is needed to stop the rot.

    Backing Policy Exchange or staying silent at their underhand attempts does no one any good.

    Just as some Muslims may want to see NK, as many Jews want to listen to the Imam from Brighton give his talk on Israel’s Right to exist at Synagogues but neither can move forward on building community relations.

    It needs work and it needs it now and the likes of Policy Exchange, Kristol, Pipes, Phillips etc will help but there needs to be a sea change in the approach.

    Billy – Your comment at 46 are a bloody disgrace and fecking stupid. I disagree with Bananabrain on issues but at heart he is only standing up for what he believes in and doesn’t deserve the sort of mindless bigotory your post contained.

  52. M Khan — on 27th October, 2008 at 9:40 pm  

    Ok my mistake in typing but your comment at 46 is a disgrace. I’d rather commit comment-suicide than type the trash you have typed there.

    Fair debate is one thing but comments such as yours are uncalled for in debate.

  53. billy — on 27th October, 2008 at 9:41 pm  

    Billy – Your comment at 47 are a bloody disgrace and fecking stupid. I disagree with Bananabrain on issues but at heart he is only standing up for what he believes in and doesn’t deserve the sort of mindless bigotory your post contained.

    D’ya think so? D’ya reckon I was being serious? Or d’ya reckon I was taking the piss out of people who talk about things like ‘the ignominy of the Jews’, and elsewhere talk about how Holocaust deniers aren’t nazis and anti-semites?

    What do you think Avi Cohen? And why the cries when I take the piss out of that? Platinum786 and the fella called ‘Me’ were absolutely, deadly serious in their analysis. But their contributions seemed to fall under your radar, whilst my little comment seemed to go right over your head. Whoosh.

    (It’s so boring when I have to explain it, I wish you’d just get it)

  54. persephone — on 27th October, 2008 at 9:43 pm  

    @ 49 A correction: I meant I find the comment at 46 objectionable. I don’t care if I sadden anyone in saying that.

  55. Avi Cohen — on 27th October, 2008 at 9:45 pm  

    Ah once someone says something then it becomes a joke huh?

    Most people when they make a joke show it is one by putting exclamation marks you hide behind the its a joke banner when people complain.

    Well me thinks Me and Billy may be the same person.

  56. billy — on 27th October, 2008 at 9:45 pm  

    ^^^^^ *whoosh*

  57. billy — on 27th October, 2008 at 9:50 pm  

    Most people when they make a joke show it is one by putting exclamation marks you hide behind the its a joke banner when people complain.

    I thought that taking the piss out of someone who rants about ‘the ignominy of the Jews’ by saying that bananabrain has a gene that all Jews have called the Ignominy Gene of the Oy Vey DNA compound was exclamation mark enough.

    Well me thinks Me and Billy may be the same person.

    Your detective skills have scuppered me!

    It it wasn’t for that pesky Avi Cohen I’d have gotten away with it. This is truly a Scooby Doo moment.

  58. Rumbold — on 27th October, 2008 at 9:55 pm  

    Billy was mocking the poster ‘Me’. There is no need for moderation.

  59. Avi Cohen — on 27th October, 2008 at 9:56 pm  

    Bily – more trash talk. Your comment was totally uncalled for and you should apologise unreservedly to Bananabrain.

    That isn’t humour you were making it was a disgraceful slur.

  60. Avi Cohen — on 27th October, 2008 at 9:59 pm  

    Rumbold – that isn’t mocking the poster and it did need moderating. The way people can read it is as a slur so that isn’t mockery. Bloody hell even other people are saying the same thing so why say it is a joke.

    Yeah very funny- ha ha. It isn’t bloody funny and is the type of comment we are trying to rid people of.

  61. Sid — on 27th October, 2008 at 10:03 pm  

    Yet more proof that Avi Cohen is a literalist, if any were needed, that is…

  62. billy — on 27th October, 2008 at 10:05 pm  

    Ignominy, ignominy, they’ve all got it ignominy for me.

  63. persephone — on 27th October, 2008 at 10:13 pm  

    or: infamy, infamy they’ve all got it in for me

    Source: carry on screaming I think (anyhow the one with the frankenstein)

  64. Refresh — on 27th October, 2008 at 10:21 pm  

    Sid, If 46 is read in isolation it is offensive. Perhaps that’s a lesson for Billy.

  65. billy — on 27th October, 2008 at 10:22 pm  

    It’s from Carry on Cleo, Persephone.

    ======

    Refresh, you are right, it is a lesson for me. I have learned a lesson about Avi Cohen.

  66. Sid — on 27th October, 2008 at 10:26 pm  

    Sid, If 46 is read in isolation it is offensive. Perhaps that’s a lesson for Billy.

    Refresh, this is a discussion thread, so 46 comes after 45, after 44 and so on…

  67. Avi Cohen — on 27th October, 2008 at 10:35 pm  

    Sid – up to your usual tricks again in trying to prove your piss poor position by backing a purile attempt at humour to bash me.

    If you read what was said then it is actually very easy to miss the humour and see what is actually a disgraceful comment. It is for that reason I objected.

    Humour is funny when it is clear but in this case it is very easy to miss the fact it is humour.

    Thus it isn’t bleedin humour is it when people can miss the joke so easily (veiled as it is byt a few small words) and thus instead read a racial slur.

  68. persephone — on 27th October, 2008 at 10:35 pm  

    @ 65 really? I thought it was when kenneth williams was dying in the great iconic role of the mad scientist

  69. Avi Cohen — on 27th October, 2008 at 10:36 pm  

    Billy – It isn’t Carry On because they were quite clear in their slapstick. You were not. Thus the objection.

    It is very easy to rea your comment and see it as a racial slur and hence my concern. But hey you clearly don’t give a damn as long as you have Super Sid backing you.

  70. Sid — on 27th October, 2008 at 10:38 pm  

    Avi, up to your tricks with your racist double-entendres and anti-Muslim rants again. tsk tsk tsk

  71. Avi Cohen — on 27th October, 2008 at 10:43 pm  

    Sid – Your really are being silly and up to your usual crap in destroying any chance of discussion.

    Your whole approach is destestable and purile.

    Your are so full of yourself you can’t even see that other people have said that if read without care then the comment is a slur. But then again you always did think you know best.

    “racist double-entendres and anti-Muslim rants again”
    Where? Where have I made a racist double-entendres and anti-Muslim rant in this thread?

    This is a slur and again you are back to attack people on a personnel level which you do only too often and it is a shame that the Editor won’t stop you.

    You ruin any discussion on Muslim or Jewish issues with your shitty analysis.

  72. Avi Cohen — on 27th October, 2008 at 10:44 pm  

    The appointment of Sid to the Editorial Team of PP has been one of the worst decisions ever taken and people who dare disagree with him and subject to a volley of abuse and slur.

  73. persephone — on 27th October, 2008 at 10:44 pm  

    this post should be re-named:

    Poster’s exchange slammed for anti-jewish briefnote

  74. billy — on 27th October, 2008 at 10:50 pm  

    Persephone, it’s from Cleo.

    http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=kvs4bOMv5Xw

    +++

    Carry on Screaming is when Kenneth Williams falls into a boiling vat of oil and says ‘Frying tonight’

    http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=bY0oM0FwGUo

    +++

    Avi Cohen, I picture you as the Bernard Bresslaw type

    http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=ELkWNvwFc7U

  75. Avi Cohen — on 27th October, 2008 at 10:53 pm  

    Oh don’t worry Sid loves to bash Muslims and those that defend them all the time whilst failing to admit that he is an ex-Muslims and loves to derail any thread or anyone that seeks to help or side with Muslims.

    He is awfully quick to label people with slurs and falsehoods to try and ensure that only his view is heard.

    It is something you get used to and maybe PP now needs to carry a Sid warning that if you post in defence of certain subjects then Sidney may come charging in to derail things.

    Poor chap thinks he is like Paxman but ends up more like Dot Cotton in his analysis!

  76. Sid — on 27th October, 2008 at 10:55 pm  

    The appointment of Sid to the Editorial Team of PP has been one of the worst decisions ever taken and people who dare disagree with him and subject to a volley of abuse and slur.

    You mean the volley of abuse and slur, not to mention hyperbole, you’ve subjected me to for simply pointing out your inability to read the irony in #46 being comensurate with literalism? Oh I see!

  77. Avi Cohen — on 27th October, 2008 at 10:56 pm  

    Billy – close but the red jumper isn’t quite me :-)

  78. Don — on 27th October, 2008 at 11:01 pm  

    There was clear context for 46. It is obvious that Billy was mocking what he saw as the true sentiments behind some of the previous comments.

    Of course, if B’brain finds it objectionable I’ll listen, but Avi’s objections?

  79. Avi Cohen — on 27th October, 2008 at 11:02 pm  

    Sid – You live in a world devoid of reality. You subjected me to slurs with your comments first and I replied.

    If you bothered to read what people are saying then you’d see that people have said that if you read the comment quickly or in isolation then it can be viewed as a slur. That is what I and other have pointed out.

    You have the approach that anythign written by me you must object to.

    In fact you started by saying:
    “Yet more proof that Avi Cohen is a literalist, if any were needed, that is…”

    Then hide behind a voley of abuse fairytale. You started with abuse when I didn’t even say anything to you.

    If you look at the commetn quickly or in isolation then anyone can see it isn’t humour. Plenty of people read comments quickly and may read it incorrectly. All I asked for was that type of comment not be made and you go off on one.

  80. Sid — on 27th October, 2008 at 11:02 pm  

    And I must hasten to warn our readers that Avi is a Mossad agent who deals in black-ops posting, giving the impression that he is a Muslim posting under a Jewish name when in reality, he is actually a clueless fuckwit posting under a Jewish name.

  81. Avi Cohen — on 27th October, 2008 at 11:06 pm  

    Oh yes now people can really see who subjects whoi to a volley of abuse and slurs.

    Fine appointment by PP’s Editorial Team. Someone who can’t debate but resorts to abuse and slurs to ensure that he is heard.

    So where is the Editorial Team now and why is Sid allowed to get away with this??

  82. Avi Cohen — on 27th October, 2008 at 11:08 pm  

    A simple objection to a comment that may be misconstrued is now leading to rampant abuse by a member of the editorial team who isn’t even posting on the contents of the thread but resorting to personal attacks and it isn’t the first time.

    This is a disgrace and a slur.

  83. Sid — on 27th October, 2008 at 11:09 pm  

    Only joking Avi, you’re one of our most valuable voices on these here pages. :D

  84. Don — on 27th October, 2008 at 11:09 pm  

    failing to admit that he is an ex-Muslims

    Admit?

    What are you, Witchfinder General?

  85. Don — on 27th October, 2008 at 11:12 pm  

    Avi,

    Please never leave us. This is the mother of all huffs.

  86. Avi Cohen — on 27th October, 2008 at 11:13 pm  

    Sid – “Only joking Avi, you’re one of our most valuable voices on these here pages. ”

    Yeah right – I can see your are letting loose. So you may as well carry on and let those pent up frustrations out.

    Frankly because of your constant abuse I have been posting less and less here and that is likely to continue. Which is no doubt what you want.

    Hiding behind the old its a joke when the editors are asked to curb your excesses is hardly the way to go. We both know you emant what you said and this time the comment unlike the other one wasn’t caked in a few letters to identify it as a joke.

    Your comments are a disgrace as an editor and you know it.

  87. persephone — on 27th October, 2008 at 11:17 pm  

    Thks billy made me forget the credit crunch seeing those old clips again.

    As to the matter of the comment at 46. The issue is that the post can be argued equally from both sides.

    I object to it on the basis that it may make anyone jewish unwelcome or am I being too sensitive/ unfair in thinking it may not be received in the spirit in which it is claimed to be in?

  88. marvin — on 27th October, 2008 at 11:26 pm  

    I thought everybody would have ‘got’ #46 from the sequence of discussion. It’s clearly mercilessly mocking “Me”. We all need a bit of humour, even in serious subjects at times. Makes us hoooman.

    LOL Sid & Don

  89. billy — on 27th October, 2008 at 11:30 pm  

    I kind of thought it was all so self-evident, you know. We’ve had one apologist for holocaust deniers on this thread, to whom I replied in post 18, then we had a lovely fella talk about ‘the ignominy of the Jews’, so I just wanted to take the piss out of him, because that’s all you can do with racist morons, isn’t it? I mean, what else is there to say to people like that?

    I mean, what am I, chopped liver?

  90. douglas clark — on 27th October, 2008 at 11:41 pm  

    Well, I thought post 46 was quite obvious satire, and I’d even go as far as to say barbed satire, mocking the opinions of the poster aka ‘me’.

    Perish the thought that any of the complainants read Johnathan Swift’s “A Modest Proposal”.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Modest_Proposal

    Perhaps they’d all have a fit of the vapours.

  91. Avi Cohen — on 27th October, 2008 at 11:42 pm  

    It wasn’t self-evident as it was only supported by two words to show it was a joke:

    oy vey

    If you scanned the comment at 46 or read it in isolation then it can leave a pretty poor picture can it not? It is only those who have kept up with the thread that will see the humour. Hence the danger of making such comments.

    Anyway the point here is that people are very quick to jump on Muslims comments but they also need to doa bit of house keeping themselves as the comments about Muslims are driving an irrational fear as we can see in the USa where a presedential candidate is having to distance himself from coments about his middle name and that he is a Muslim.

    Fact is that the rigth wing have driven an agenda to demonise Muslims which is what the thread was about and every Muslim event is open to the type of scrutiny which others don’t face. We have other unsavoury events from other faiths but Policy Exchange don’t warn against that – so why not?

    We’ve had investigations into Islamic bookshops but what about the works of other faiths? The Evangelical Movement is very active here and what are their books and literature like? Does Panorama or Policy Exchange or Martin Bright investigate – hell no.

    Muslim literature where offisive should be highlighted and consigned to the bins but writings and fear mongering by the likes of Policy Exchange deserve the same treatment.

    Don’t forget they have the ear of the potential Govt in waiting so their hate rhetotic can cause great harm to community relations but it appears most people don’t give a shit about them or the writings of other necons sympathisers that directly affect the lives and well-being of over 1.5 – 2 milion people in the UK and the fact they are demonised and scrutinised for everything.

    What Policy Exchange did was unsavoury and to pretend it isn’t is most unwise.

    From a “clueless fuckwit posting under a Jewish name” according to an Editorial Member of Staff at PP who is also allowed to get away with such things then hide behind the old its a joke defence.

  92. Don — on 27th October, 2008 at 11:48 pm  

    oy vey

    Please, stop now.

  93. Avi Cohen — on 27th October, 2008 at 11:51 pm  

    Billy – “I mean, what am I, chopped liver?”

    Hey man I wouldn’t know after all I am defined as a “clueless fuckwit posting under a Jewish name” by some of the Editorial Staff here. When they feel their position is under threat then they hide behind the its a joke defence.

    The best way to answer the comments of “Me” was to reply to them was it not?

    As I said the potential for peopel who scan comments here is that your comment isn’t seen as a joke.

    I don’t think you are chopped liver here but more likely me ;-)

  94. Refresh — on 27th October, 2008 at 11:54 pm  

    Avi, everyone on PP have their moments, perhaps Sid more often than most. :)

    Don, I think there was more than Avi that objected to #46. It would be unfortunate you would need B’brain to object before recognising the problem with it.

    It seems to be a useful rule that a commenter doesn’t leave themselves open to being quoted out of context. Particularly where it might be a whole comment piece as in #46.

    I found your witchfinder comment quite interesting.

    Its valid and extends to both protagonists: Sid ‘accuses’ Avi of not being a jew (reading between his mossad lines) and Avi ‘accuses’ Sid of not being a muslim. :)

    Fun to watch!

  95. Avi Cohen — on 27th October, 2008 at 11:55 pm  

    Don – “Please, stop now.”

    “clueless fuckwit posting under a Jewish name” should stop making comment so that your Poster Boy effectively gets away with making nasty slurs?

    In most places an Editor who made such a comment would be removed from his post or stand down and leave his job. So lets see how this pans out now.

    Will Sid now step aside for making a nasty slur or just hide behind its a joke so let me keep my editorial role at PP.

  96. Me — on 27th October, 2008 at 11:59 pm  

    Oh dear. It seems silly billy (deliberately) took my quote out of context and misunderstood it.

    Here it is in full billy. If you dont get it just ask someone intelligent to explain it to you

    “Islamophobia is also a Jewish poison – and a far more pernicous one because the difference is that extreme Muslims dont get columns in mainstream newspapers or books published on the ignominy of the Jews. Extreme Jews do on the evil of the Muslims.”

    Note billy has no objection to the phrase “evil of the Muslims”. Does a career at the Policy Exchange beckon?

    But congrats on trying to turn a discussion on a zionist anti-Muslim organisation into the usual diversionary tactics

  97. Avi Cohen — on 27th October, 2008 at 11:59 pm  

    Refresh – I don’t accuse Sid of not being a Muslim. he himself has said that he doesn’t accept the basic principles of the faith.

    Frankly I don’t care if he is or he isn’t. I’ve asked him in the past and received two different answers.

    But my point was that he charges in to comment on any Muslim issue and it isn’t clear what his position is as regards his faith so that his comments can be viewed in that context. beyond that I don’t care what he is and even though I don’t like what he says regarding some of his comments on religion he is perfectly entitled to make them.

    What I find nasty is his attacks on people who defend Muslims.

    His attack on me today was frankly over the top and for that he should go but that isn’t my decision. It isn’t the first such attack either and het gets away with it each time. The Editorial Staff have a greater responsibility in their behaviour then general commentators.

  98. Avi Cohen — on 28th October, 2008 at 12:04 am  

    Refresh – “Avi, everyone on PP have their moments, perhaps Sid more often than most.”

    For the average commentator to have a moment(s) is ok. For an Editor to have them on a regular basis and resort to slurs and smears isn’t acceptable.

    The fact that people are defending the slur ““clueless fuckwit posting under a Jewish name” as a moment is pretty sad. The fact that someone resorts to such a slur, then hides behind the defence that it was a joke and people defend him is a poor refelction of what has happened and the fact that Sid and his fanclub derail any meaningful discussion of Muslim issues mean that they don’t get the attention and respect they deserve here at PP.

    From a “clueless fuckwit posting under a Jewish name”

  99. douglas clark — on 28th October, 2008 at 12:15 am  

    Avi,

    If you scanned the comment at 46 or read it in isolation then it can leave a pretty poor picture can it not? It is only those who have kept up with the thread that will see the humour. Hence the danger of making such comments.

    I hope billy completely ignores that.

    There is no “hence the danger of making such comments”, except, perhaps to have someone grab the wrong end of the stick and then fail to let go. There are more ways of making a point than strict literalism.

    Please, at least stop digging….

  100. Avi Cohen — on 28th October, 2008 at 12:19 am  

    Douglas – I figured your use Sid’s lines on me and was just waiting for you to come in.

    If it is so literal then why did other people complain. I guess everyone else is wrong as well.

    Fact is that the Sid Fan Club is now trying to portray me in the wrong to defend him from a disgraceful slur and attack. So you choose to portray me as digging. I made a fair comment as did others. Two words to portray a joke amongst a larger set can be easily missed.

    From a “clueless fuckwit posting under a Jewish name” who is now apparently digging.

  101. Refresh — on 28th October, 2008 at 12:20 am  

    I think the fuss about #46 has completely derailed this lively discussion.

    What I found much more amusing was Billy’s ‘(It’s so boring when I have to explain it, I wish you’d just get it)’ @ #53.

  102. Refresh — on 28th October, 2008 at 12:23 am  

    Back to the issue in hand:

    Does anybody know anything about this link between Policy Exchange and that other entity:

    ‘It includes ‘evidence’ quoted from the Society for American National Existence, an organisation that seeks to make the practice of Islam illegal and punishable by 20 years in prison.’

  103. Avi Cohen — on 28th October, 2008 at 12:27 am  

    Well as usual those that like a good Muslim bashing have derailed what is an important topic.

    Policy Exchange were in the wrong and there is no defence. Simple fact is that large events set-up by Muslims are subject now to underhand right wing and neocon attacks and these attacks are designed to ensure that politicians stay away and thus engagement with Muslims is limited or non-existant.

    This is a cowardly way to behave and can only lead to more isolation of Muslims.

    The fact that people keep highlighting what Muslims say whilst ignoring the xenophobic comments in other faiths is a sad reflection of the acceptable nature of phobia against Muslims.

    We need to ensure that Muslims are treated fairly and Government engages with all of society and not select parts.

    Posted by From a “clueless fuckwit posting under a Jewish name” according to a member of the Editorial Team who is now apparently digging according to said Editorial members supporters

  104. Refresh — on 28th October, 2008 at 12:33 am  

    You see what I don’t understand is what do these organisations hope to achieve. Yes they can drive muslims out of the country by making it inhospitable, and presumably that would open doors to push anyone who could look like a muslim out; and then of course anyone who is of immigrant stock (for not sharing their values).

    Nobody seems to think that there is another part of the world which will see what is going on here and will pass their own judgement. When we are all so divided, where will that leave Britain, Europe, US?

    In a nutshell these organisations are undermining the fabric of society from within, I would argue they are the real threat to western civilisation.

    Civil liberties gone, economy gone, civilisation gone.

    OBL must be laughing his socks off.

  105. Avi Cohen — on 28th October, 2008 at 12:33 am  

    BTW Douglas it is a bit strange that you are quick to have a go at me but mute at your friend, Sid’s slurs and attacks at me.

    Is it good practise for an Editor to call a reader a “clueless fuckwit posting under a Jewish name” and get away with such behaviour and later pretend it is a joke??

    Your always jump on me if you feel I say anythign you disagree with but won’t say anything to your friends when they resort to using disgusting slurs.

    From a “clueless fuckwit posting under a Jewish name” who is now apparently digging.

  106. Avi Cohen — on 28th October, 2008 at 12:40 am  

    Refresh – “In a nutshell these organisations are undermining the fabric of society from within, I would argue they are the real threat to western civilisation.

    Civil liberties gone, economy gone, civilisation gone.

    OBL must be laughing his socks off.”

    I’ve said this for a while. What they hope to achieve is quite clear. They want to rule and have power and anything they see as a threat to that they wantt o sideline and marginalise.

    The danger is there because some politicians are prepared to be bedfellows to this.

    It will come back to haunt society. The aim to to push Muslims out of Europe and America and sadly people find this acceptable.

    Muslim events enclounter the type of scrutiny that others don’t.

    The problem is that Blears and her cronies are picking which Muslims they will talk to based on a neocon agenda and thus causing mistrust in the Muslim community.

    Staying away from events that Muslims organise is self-defeating. It will never win out.

    From a “clueless fuckwit posting under a Jewish name” who is now apparently digging.

  107. Avi Cohen — on 28th October, 2008 at 12:47 am  

    Incidently similar organisations in the USA to this “Think Tank” have so succeded in demonising Muslims that it is now unacceptable for a President to be a Muslim and Arabs are not seen as good family people!

    These people label anyone who dares to disagree with them as unpatriotic and have destroyed jouranlism and news reporting on the major networks.

    Posted from a “clueless fuckwit posting under a Jewish name” according to one of the editorial staff who is getting away with saying this.

  108. Refresh — on 28th October, 2008 at 12:50 am  

    I wonder if there is a link with that other organisation that sent out 28million anti-muslim DVDs, to undermine Obama.

  109. Moss Sad — on 28th October, 2008 at 12:51 am  

    “he is actually a clueless fuckwit posting under a Jewish name.”

    Bit harsh on Avi. Might we refer to Mel Phillips as “a clueless fuckwit posting under a gentile name?”

  110. Avi Cohen — on 28th October, 2008 at 12:54 am  

    Refresh – “I wonder if there is a link with that other organisation that sent out 28million anti-muslim DVDs, to undermine Obama.”

    They are linked by the same ideology. What is worrying is that such organisartions are making inroads into the Democrats and Labour Party. Hazel Blears has spoken at their HQ I believe or at an event they organised.

    Posted from a “clueless fuckwit posting under a Jewish name” according to one of the editorial staff who is getting away with saying this.

  111. douglas clark — on 28th October, 2008 at 12:57 am  

    Avi,

    If it is so literal then why did other people complain

    It isn’t literal. When will you get that through your head? It is either sarcastic or satirical. You chose. Can you distiguish between these two forms?

    I am defending billys right to express himself in what I believe to be a powerful and legitimate manner. Without having to self censor in order to avoid the cruise missile that is an Avi Cohen missive in full nuclear mode. (Warning! This is the ironic use of simile and is included for mild comic effect. Avi Cohens missives are not, in fact, nuclear tipped Cruise Missiles)

    You and Sid can get a room. (Warning! This is a mildly flippant suggestion.)

    It would take the entire Diplomatic Corps to resolve the issues that you two have. (Warning! This is not to be taken literally, it is, perhaps, a slight exaggeration.)

    I’d prefer this post absent the Health Warnings, but that would leave me open to someone deliberately misunderstanding what I’d said. And we wouldn’t want that now, would we?

  112. Refresh — on 28th October, 2008 at 12:58 am  

    ‘They are linked by the same ideology. What is worrying is that such organisartions are making inroads into the Democrats and Labour Party. Hazel Blears has spoken at their HQ I believe or at an event they organised.’

    You are worrying me.

    Douglas, any room at the inn?

  113. Avi Cohen — on 28th October, 2008 at 12:58 am  

    Some of the links Policy Exchange have are well posted here:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2007/dec/20/thinktanks.conservatives

    Posted from a “clueless fuckwit posting under a Jewish name” according to one of the editorial staff who is getting away with saying this.

  114. Avi Cohen — on 28th October, 2008 at 1:03 am  

    Douglas – With respect Sid calling me “clueless fuckwit posting under a Jewish name” isn’t an issue it is a slur and you will quickly jump on me but are mute from saying anything to your friend for his slurs.

    Posted from a “clueless fuckwit posting under a Jewish name” according to one of the editorial staff who is getting away with saying this.

  115. Avi Cohen — on 28th October, 2008 at 1:03 am  

    Refresh – “You are worrying me.”

    Huh??

    Posted from a “clueless fuckwit posting under a Jewish name” according to one of the editorial staff who is getting away with saying this.

  116. Refresh — on 28th October, 2008 at 1:09 am  

    Avi, what I mean is that its scary that they are getting so organised and involved with mainstream political parties.

    I am hoping that Douglas will have his wish so that we can move to a civilised independent Scotland when the time comes.

  117. Avi Cohen — on 28th October, 2008 at 1:19 am  

    Refresh – The neocons have been going for over 30 years so they have had plenty of time to get organised. They have many influential media people in their ranks including Murdoch himself. Teh number of neocon funded think tanks and writers is huge and their influence is highly significant.

    They are the single biggest threat to democracy and form governments within governments. Look at their influence in going to wart in Iraq and their control of policy in Bush’s administration. Powell said it all but he said it too late. He should have stood up when he was in power.

    Look at how they are squealing now they may lose.

    Posted from a “clueless fuckwit posting under a Jewish name” according to one of the editorial staff who is getting away with saying this.

  118. douglas clark — on 28th October, 2008 at 1:31 am  

    Avi,

    In my own defence your first comment on Billys post was at 51 @ 9:36pm, and then at 55 @ 9:45pm, followed by 59 @ 9:56pm, yawn, and then 60 @ 9:59pm, 67 @ 10:35pm, 69 @ 10:36pm, 71 @ 10:43pm, 72 @ 10:44pm, 75 @ 10:53pm, 77 @ 10:56pm, 79 @ 11:02pm, 81 @ 11:06pm, 82 @ 11:08pm, oh, and thank goodness 86 @ 11:13pm before I even commented on this thread.

    I’d have thought my restraint compared to your, err frequent posting, made a bit of a mockery of your comment to me, 105 @ 12:33am (note to self this is becoming compulsive obsessive behaviour, stop it):

    BTW Douglas it is a bit strange that you are quick to have a go at me but mute at your friend, Sid’s slurs and attacks at me.

    I make that 14 posts you’d had before I even felt motivated to comment at all. And when I did it was to defend Billy’s rights to express himself in a manner to which you are clearly not accustomed, but which I consider completely valid.

    FWIW, I don’t trust PE either.

    Well, that’s 20 minutes of my life I’ll never get back…..

  119. Avi Cohen — on 28th October, 2008 at 1:40 am  

    Douglas,

    I don’t doubt your ability to stand up for Billy. But you described Sid’s Slur on me as an issue. That is what I commented to you on.

    Calling someone “clueless fuckwit posting under a Jewish name” and then to have it dusted over as an issue was poor comment. A slur is a slur is a slur and he is getting away with saying this as his support base minimise the issue.

    Fair debate is one thing but to attack people with slurs is another and his actions need to be condemned in the strongest terms possible and he should be removed from his position of editorial responsibility at PP.

    My comment to you was about your minimising what your friend said – “clueless fuckwit posting under a Jewish name”.

    Posted from a “clueless fuckwit posting under a Jewish name” according to one of the editorial staff who is getting away with saying this.

  120. billy — on 28th October, 2008 at 1:49 am  

    This thread is a vision of a lot of barking dogs going around in circles chasing their tails.

  121. billy — on 28th October, 2008 at 1:53 am  

    But congrats on trying to turn a discussion on a zionist anti-Muslim organisation into the usual diversionary tactics

    It’s all a centrailsed conspiracy by your enemies, I’m telling ya.

  122. Avi Cohen — on 28th October, 2008 at 1:59 am  

    Billy – the fact is that the editor involved has done this before and also charges into any debate on Muslim issues, I/P, democracy/theocracy debates and derails them.

    Calling someone – anyone – “clueless fuckwit posting under a Jewish name” is unacceptable behaviour especially from the editorial team. He needs to resign his position, it really is that simple.

    Here the thread has been derailed by a joke and by a slur from a member of the editorial team.

    The more serious debate is the lack of will from people to criticise the underhand behaviour which is put forth by right wing and neocon thinktanks which are making it extremely difficult for Politicians to engage witht he Muslim community. This is not a good way for democracy and community cohesion.

    There are unsavoury elements in all camps. A recent Rabbinical visit to the UK where the Chief Rabbi endorsed ethnic cleansing of Gaza or the Pope who wants to confer great honour upon a previous pope whose response to the suffering of Jews was frankly piss poor. Yet Policy Exchange do not write reports and do exposes on this.

    Posted from a “clueless fuckwit posting under a Jewish name” according to one of the editorial staff who is getting away with saying this.

  123. douglas clark — on 28th October, 2008 at 2:08 am  

    Avi,

    Then your issue – or whatever else you want to call it – is not with me. My work here is done.

  124. Avi Cohen — on 28th October, 2008 at 2:13 am  

    Douglas – My issue with you is that you called a slur by your friend an issue and not what it was which is a digusting unwarranted slur.

    If you choose to make comment on it by calling it an issue then at least be fair and call it was it is a nasty digusting slur.

    Other than that I have no issue with you criticising what I write.

    The fact is that Sid should do the right thing and resign for making the disgusting comment he did and people should say this to him. It isn’t called for and he needs to step down.

    Posted from a “clueless fuckwit posting under a Jewish name” according to one of the editorial staff who is getting away with saying this.

  125. Sid — on 28th October, 2008 at 2:29 am  

    Avi,

    this has been educational. Doubtless, you’re a natural jewish southasian muslim impersonator. You’re up there with this guy.

  126. fugstar — on 28th October, 2008 at 3:16 am  

    I went to GPU, and didn’t once hear any mention of Jews. Funny that.

    Policy Exchange have succeeded in their radar jamming operation. and you people just take the bait and ungle yourselves with ever replenishing vigour.

    Most of the comments here are from non-jews falling over themselves competing to be perceived as heroic defenders of jewish life and dignity. A good 60+ years AFTER it would really have made any difference to human suffering.

    bit naff no? if not a criminal waste of literacy…

  127. Jai — on 28th October, 2008 at 11:24 am  

    This is what happens when you forget to bring the Mars Bars to the party…..

  128. Rumbold — on 28th October, 2008 at 11:31 am  

    A note on moderation.

    Avi Cohen:

    You think that Sid should be reprimanded for saying that you are a “clueless fuckwit posting under a Jewish name.” Well, the latter is not in any doubt, whilst the former is a matter of opinion. While I don’t care for Sid’s language, it hardly warrants deletion.

  129. Refresh — on 28th October, 2008 at 11:33 am  

    Nice work Sid.

    Lets see if you can revive this discussion. Not the name calling one, the substantive.

  130. Don — on 28th October, 2008 at 11:44 am  

    Just checked out Society for American National Existence. Strewth.

    http://www.saneworks.us/mission.php

  131. Sid — on 28th October, 2008 at 11:58 am  

    The jewish-muslims dyamic is complex to say the least.

    Bananabrain has alluded to the fact that there are jews who hate muslims. The recent campaign in the US to distribute the Obession DVD (which aims to demonise Muslims as anti-American terrorists to a man) has been funded by a right-wing Israeli group. Daniel Pipes is on it holding forth his hate incitement by calls for laws to detain muslims as a matter of national security.

    But the casual and routine antisemitism amongst muslims who have become politicised is real. I have met politicised muslims spout off unchecked in the most unspeakable and obcene anti-jewish language. This has now become part of the narrative of political Islam.

    Takfiri muslims like fugstar and his confreres are strangely oblivious to this, choosing to deny its existence. But as we all know with problems of this sort, unless you recognise it, you cannot address it. And if you can’t address it, you will continue to see Arab nationalists who live in the UK appropriate the voice of muslims and make them forever associated with antisemitism.

  132. marvin — on 28th October, 2008 at 12:16 pm  

    We have other unsavoury events from other faiths

    Great, please provide details.

    Please see earlier comments. More than happy to attack any mainstream meeting of bigots, extremists or terrorist sympathisers, whatever their religion, especially when they are touted as The Voice of Progression of the religious grouping.

  133. douglas clark — on 28th October, 2008 at 12:18 pm  

    Don @ 130,

    Re the Society for American National Existence, has it now become usual for Christians to adopt the Jewish idea that writing the word God is inadmissable and must be replaced with, say, G-d? It certainly jarred with me, but perhaps it’s some sort of Masonic thing or something.

  134. douglas clark — on 28th October, 2008 at 1:07 pm  

    Here’s a further bit of background:

    http://www.tomgriffin.org/the_green_ribbon/2008/10/nick-clegg-on-policy-exchange.html

    Curiouser and curiouser.

  135. Roger — on 28th October, 2008 at 1:41 pm  

    SANE seem to be as dangerous- potentially more dangerous perhaps- a bunch of dingbats as any set of political islamists. The important thing here, however, is whether what they say about some of the speakers at G.P.U. is true.
    There’s the further complication that some muslims with political opinions are skilled at doublethink; speaking as muslims they accept all the more repellent aspects of the quran, speaking individually- which includes politically- they reject them. In neither case do they consider the contradiction between their views. The problems come when they don’t consider the circumstances in which they are thinking.

  136. Refresh — on 28th October, 2008 at 2:10 pm  

    Roger, you are missing the bigger question, and resorted to offering your muddle-headed thinking which is simply backing up Policy Exchange, SANE, and Mad Mel. Only you put it in such pleasant language.

    The bigger question is, will ‘western civilisation’ survive this ‘internal’ onslaught?

    There is little value in spending another decade vilifying muslims, when there is a far bigger threat from these highly motivated ideologues.

    The flipside of course is how does the muslim world respond? Do they turn completely away from a re-crafted west? Do they work with east? And given the basket-case western economies are likely to become, do the West then rely entirely on invading resource-rich countries?

    If I was a policymaker in any number of muslim countries I would be pondering on these points every waking moment.

    So letting these thugs take over our democratic institutions (bear in mind SANE openly rejects democracy), I believe will mean a permanent state of war.

    As for GPU, go right ahead and stop every possibility of muslims gathering.

  137. Avi Cohen — on 28th October, 2008 at 2:22 pm  

    Rumbold – “A note on moderation.

    Avi Cohen:

    You think that Sid should be reprimanded for saying that you are a “clueless fuckwit posting under a Jewish name.” Well, the latter is not in any doubt, whilst the former is a matter of opinion. While I don’t care for Sid’s language, it hardly warrants deletion.”

    I didn’t ask for him to be deleted and if you bothered to read what I actually said you’d realise I didn’t ask for his comments to be stopped. What I asked for is that given his oft abusive approach to people who disagree with him and his constant name calling, slurs and smears which basically amounts to character assassination of people that he be removed as editor.

    Editorial staff should not be abusive to posters and it isn’t the first time he’s done it with people.

    It is a shame that you so easily find it acceptable for one of your editorial colleagues to be so abusive and offer profanity laced abuse at posters. Your colleague has derailed all discussion on Muslim issues and I/P with constant streams of abuse at people.

    He hasn’t had the courtesy to apologise for his behaviour and whats more the fact that you are defending this profanity is shameful upon you.

    If the purpose of this blog is to debate then that should be done with civility and if it is to slur, tar and character assassinate then that defeats the purpose of debate.

    The fact that you find his behavior acceptable and go on to agree with him put you on a poor light.

    FYI..I was asked by one person here to take a test of questions which I did and answered on here. But when I asked the same person to answer my questions they declined. So that highlights your approach as invalid.

    Further you implication that jewish people can’t have knowledge of muslim affairs is nonsense.

    Anyway I have had enough of the abuse on this board and won’t be posting again.

    You and your pal haven’t progressed debate instead you are just as shameful as each other and make a great partnership and have destroyed the whole ethos of what this blog was set up to do.

    The smear he has made is libelous and the blog is responsible for that so perhaps you’d like to think about that next time he attacks someone.

    If the best an editor can do is slur people as a response then should they be in the job???????????????????????????????????????????

    Look through every discussion on Muslim or religious issues and Sid has derailed every discussion with his approach and that is being accepted so why have the discussions if one editor is hell bent on derailing any discussion and forcing their opinion to the fore?

    As to your opinion well given the fact that the Chief Rabbi, Board of Deputies etc. all know in detail about Muslims they must all be Muslims. I suppose IJV because it sympathises with the Palestinians it must be Muslim as well. So all you know about me is that I know about Jews and Muslims and sympathise with the Palestinians so hell yes I must be Muslism because Jews won’t care about such issues will they?

    Refresh – his intention has never been to allow any debate about helping Muslims to proceed. Just watch what he does in future.

    anyway I don’t intend to post here again due to the slurs and actions of Sid which is no doubt what he wants and his pals support. Editors who falsely slur people have been allowed to get away with despicable behaviour.

    Posted from a “clueless fuckwit posting under a Jewish name” according to one of the editorial staff who is getting away with saying this.

  138. Refresh — on 28th October, 2008 at 2:47 pm  

    Avi, I sympathise.

    Sid does go off on a tangent and launches into personalised attacks, which to his detriment makes him look insecure.

    He will need to resolve his own issues, but perhaps we could in a way help, by pointing out his shortcomings.

    As for not posting again, that would be a big mistake. You will be missed.

    I rather you stayed and persevered with bringing us information and analysis. I value your perspective.

    BTW there isn’t a single commenter who’s posted more than three thoughtful lines, Sid hasn’t abused. Commenters willing to go past 10 lines earn themselves a personal attack. You should wear it as a badge of honour.

    I used to deplore his behaviour, now I’ve learned to be entertained by it.

    I hope that puts it into perspective for you.

  139. persephone — on 28th October, 2008 at 3:00 pm  

    Avi

    Theres obviously history here & some baggage that I am not aware of since I only started posting here recently. But nonetheless it would be defeatist to stop the debate. And that is the whole point of this blog. No?

    There seems to be plenty of other commentators here who would still engage despite any off piste derailment.

    Persephone

  140. Sid — on 28th October, 2008 at 3:14 pm  

    Avi

    If you look back on this thread, the first person to use an expletive was you towards me:
    #67 Sid – up to your usual tricks again in trying to prove your piss poor position by backing a purile attempt at humour to bash me.

    So, I don’t see that you have any room for complaint if I repay in kind. You can continue to post waves of disengenuous nonsense, false accusations but it makes not a jot of difference. I have no doubt that you will continue derail this thread with your boring, humourless, witless and moronic fuckwittery concerning identity politics, Islamism and support of terrorist interests.

    My politics are diametrically opposed to yours. That is why I see no surprise that you are here agitating for my removal. Since censorship is fundamental to your tactics, I’m sure.

    By the way from fuckwit.info:
    A “fuckwit” is a person who has consistently failed to obtain any degree of ‘clue’.

    I stand by that useage, given your performance on this thread and others in the past.

  141. billy — on 28th October, 2008 at 3:16 pm  

    you’ve got to admit Avi, you can be a bit of a histrionic drama queen.

  142. Sid — on 28th October, 2008 at 3:25 pm  

    Refresh, you are a disgrace, you really are. I think bananabrain has the measure of you in #35:

    it is the doctrinaire moral equivalence of people like yourself on the left that makes many jewish people despair of a fair hearing where israel is concerned.

    Although, if you are of the left, then I will run a mile from the left you claim to be a part of.

    Your tacit but low-key apologia/support for reactionary Islamism should *not* be identifiable with the Left, but thanks to people like you it has become so. The vast majority of Muslims reject everything you and your politics stand for. You’re not as inscrutable as you like to think.

  143. Kismet Hardy — on 28th October, 2008 at 3:44 pm  

    Sid, I want one of these ‘personalised attacks’ you give Refresh.

    So touching. It shows you care

    Anyhoo, muslim and jewish children get on. I saw it on an advert once

  144. Sid — on 28th October, 2008 at 3:50 pm  

    Sure Kismet:

    Kismet, your tacit but low-key apologia/support for reactionary Rarseklartery should *not* be identifiable with the Left, but thanks to people like you it has become so. The vast majority of Rarseklarters reject everything you and your politics stand for. You’re not as inscrutable as you like to think.

  145. Roger — on 28th October, 2008 at 4:01 pm  

    “As for GPU, go right ahead and stop every possibility of muslims gathering.”

    I have no objection to muslims gathering, Refresh, or to christians or scientologists gathering. What does worry me is when they gather for avowedly political purposes and politicians appear to give countenance to the political application of their religious beliefs by also attending such a gathering. I think that it easier for muslims to turn their religious beliefs into avowedly political beliefs than for other religions. For what itis worth, I think that history shows that islam has been much less harmful than christianity applied politically.
    If people choose to impose restrictions in behaviour on themselves, that is their business. If they wish to impose such restrictions on others they need to find more cogent reasons than that they believe god told them to.

  146. Refresh — on 28th October, 2008 at 4:03 pm  

    Sid,

    You should really have taken my #138 in jest. It was a lighthearted put-down. Nothing more.

    Look, it doesn’t help develop debate if you have to put people in boxes before you can engage. You should have engaged with Avi on the argument he advanced (as should he with you), and not your historical antipathy.

    But as it happens, on the whole you don’t disagree with him. You just seem to want him to go away.

  147. Refresh — on 28th October, 2008 at 4:07 pm  

    Roger, GPU aside what are your views regarding Nick Clegg taking issue with Policy Exchange and SANE?

  148. Sid — on 28th October, 2008 at 4:09 pm  

    Look, it doesn’t help develop debate if you have to put people in boxes before you can engage. You should have engaged with Avi on the argument he advanced (as should he with you), and not your historical antipathy.

    I think people put themselves in their own boxes. You like to think that you haven’t, but you have.

    Your politics stink especially you can’t even bring yourself to verbalise them. So all you and your coterie end up doing is denial and whataboutery.

    Thats not the formula for healthy politics and I would recommend you take stock of where you think you stand in the scheme of ting an’ ting.

  149. Refresh — on 28th October, 2008 at 4:11 pm  

    As you wish.

    Shall we get back to the substantive?

    ‘But as it happens, on the whole you don’t disagree with him. You just seem to want him to go away.’

    Am I right?

  150. Sid — on 28th October, 2008 at 4:18 pm  

    I think reactionary bigots like fugstar, Muzumdar and Avi Cohen are figures of endless joy and amusement. So, no.

  151. Roger — on 28th October, 2008 at 4:21 pm  

    You’ll regard this as weasel words, probably, Refresh:
    As far as Policy Exchange is concerned, I don’t share their political opinions but they appear to be honest, ‘though their unchecked reliance on SANE, who appear to be lunatics (anyone who chooses an acronym like that is automatically of dubious sanity or honesty in my opinion) makes all of their claims questionable. On the other hand SANE are not the only people who have brought similar accusations against some of the people speaking at G.P.U. In short, I think Policy Exchange were wrong to rely solely on SANE as a source for their information, if that is what they did; on the other hand, I think Mr. Clegg was mistaken to assume that the charges were untrue just because SANE brought them.

  152. Ala — on 28th October, 2008 at 4:35 pm  

    Roger, what do you mean politicised Muslims or Muslims with political views? This is an awful way of putting it, whatever it is you’re trying to say. It seems like you’re saying that you’re only allowed to be apolitical if you want to be a religious Muslim at the same time.

  153. Refresh — on 28th October, 2008 at 4:39 pm  

    Roger, did you read the link Douglas provided upthread?

    Do you think muslim countries should work towards disengaging from the West?

  154. Refresh — on 28th October, 2008 at 4:43 pm  

    I think the charge of being bigotted and reactionary is probably far worse than your use of foul language to belittle Avi’s intellect.

    In any case I am not convinced you disagree with him. Reading through the whole of this thread you have not countered his arguments.

  155. Sid — on 28th October, 2008 at 4:52 pm  

    I think he has made, in something like 50 comments, just one single point. And if you want to see my countering of that, you can go read it on #140.

    I’m glad the words reactionary and bigotted are registering some reaction with you. Its about time you saw yourself for what you are and not how you like to see others see you. Unless you actually believe the untruths, the denials and the diversionary whatboutery you deal in.

  156. Refresh — on 28th October, 2008 at 5:10 pm  

    Lets move on. This was a very important topic.

  157. Roger — on 28th October, 2008 at 5:13 pm  

    Ala: I mean people who apply the quran and hadith interpreted literally as bases for their politics, not muslims who hold- other- political views. As i said, I think that muslims who apply quranic rules to their own behaviour sometimes speak as though they would like to forcibly apply those rules to everyone else- which is what political islam means- without necessarily actually wanting to in their less enthusiastic moments.

    I’d missed Douglas’s post, Refresh. I’m not actually very concerned with peoples’ motives for what they say about others, only with whether it is true. SANE may have interesting information, but i wouldn’t accept its assertions as unqualified truth without other evidence. As William Blake pointed out:
    “A truth told with a bad intent
    Beats all the lies you can invent.”
    and such people often find such truths.
    I don’t think muslim countries should work towards disengaging from the West- or vice-versa. Nor do I think either is possible. The world is too tied together for that.
    However, I think that democratic politicians should not attend conferences where religion and politics overlap. The basic assumption of such a conference is that politics must be based on the word of god not, the will of the people, however expressed or fulfilled, and as such it is antidemocratic.

  158. Sid — on 28th October, 2008 at 5:17 pm  

    Lets move on. This was a very important topic.

    But you keep on diverting it to me.

    I believe you have a role to play in the justification of the extreme right wing tendencies in Islamist politics. You just haven’t been very good at applying yourself to it, although clearly, thats where your sentiments lie.

  159. douglas clark — on 28th October, 2008 at 5:24 pm  

    Roger,

    As far as Policy Exchange is concerned, I don’t share their political opinions but they appear to be honest…

    I don’t know why you think that, exactly. Their report, “The Hijacking of British Islam: How extremist literature is subverting mosques in the UK” has been roundly condemned as being based on suspect research by none other than Jeremy Paxman. The whole, sorry, saga is here:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/2008/05/policy_exchange_dispute_update.html

    Dishonest? Perhaps not. Sloppy? Most assuredly.

    This latest spat seems little different.

  160. Refresh — on 28th October, 2008 at 5:25 pm  

    ‘But you keep on diverting it to me.’

    That was me in devilish mode.

  161. Roger — on 28th October, 2008 at 5:30 pm  

    Dishonest people aren’t often sloppy, Douglas; they know what they’re doing.

  162. Sid — on 28th October, 2008 at 5:35 pm  

    But when will *you* articulate your own gravitation towards the ultra-right wing tendencies of Islamist politics?

  163. douglas clark — on 28th October, 2008 at 5:38 pm  

    Roger,

    If we’re to share aphorisms, mine is:

    A lie is half way around the world before the truth has got it’s boots on.

    Which is a slight bastardisation of a Mark Twain original….

  164. douglas clark — on 28th October, 2008 at 5:41 pm  

    Roger,

    I said I didn’t think it was necessarily dishonest, I thought it was just sloppy…

  165. Roger — on 28th October, 2008 at 5:44 pm  

    “A lie is half way around the world before the truth has got it’s boots on.”
    Er You mean:
    “A lie is half way around the world before the truth has got its boots on.”
    Evidence you’re honest, no doubt.

  166. Refresh — on 28th October, 2008 at 5:46 pm  

    ‘Dishonest people aren’t often sloppy, Douglas; they know what they’re doing.’

    This is true, I believe they know what they are doing.

  167. Don — on 28th October, 2008 at 5:52 pm  

    Looks like confirmation bias to me. Once could be sloppiness, but if it is habitual then integrity has to be questioned.

  168. Sid — on 28th October, 2008 at 5:52 pm  

    Refresh, any chance of you responding to my points to you in #160 and again in #164?

  169. Refresh — on 28th October, 2008 at 5:54 pm  

    Sid, I clearly don’t need to. You are doing a fine job of speaking for me.

  170. Roger — on 28th October, 2008 at 6:01 pm  

    Well, no, Refresh: in the case of Policy Exchange, if they were dishonest they would have been less sloppy. It looks very much as though some of their researchers are dishonest and incompetent, but probably not the organisation itself. They do seem to accept without question claims which they would like to be true.

  171. Sid — on 28th October, 2008 at 6:02 pm  

    Perhaps you should set up a sister blog to Pickled Politics. Everything you wanted to know about the Right/Left nexus in British Islamism, but were afraid to ask. With a Takfiri category by fugstar! Avi would cover US politics of course. And you could generally mince around. It would be great!

  172. douglas clark — on 28th October, 2008 at 6:08 pm  

    Roger @ 167,

    I would say I am almost always suspicious of motive. The ‘Qui Bono’ test ought to be applied a lot more rigorously than it presently is. Dunno about you, but I think that there are a lot of people on both sides of this arguement that make a good living from it. It is damn near a symbiotic relationship.

  173. Roger — on 28th October, 2008 at 6:12 pm  

    That doesn’t mean they don’t believe what they say, Douglas. In fact, I think that stupidity and sloppiness are often signs of honesty. People- especially extremists- wouldn’t say anything as stupid as much of what they say if they didn’t believe it themselves.

  174. Sid — on 28th October, 2008 at 6:15 pm  

    Ha! Two conversations, in tandem, and both to do with intellectual dishonesty.

  175. Refresh — on 28th October, 2008 at 6:17 pm  

    ‘They do seem to accept without question claims which they would like to be true.’

    That surely is because they have an agenda to attend to. In my opinion its the agenda that we are discussing.

  176. douglas clark — on 28th October, 2008 at 6:34 pm  

    Roger @ 175,

    True, it doesn’t mean that they don’t believe what they say. But it certainly undermines their credibility.

    Put it this way. There are folk that really believe they have been abducted by aliens. Doesn’t mean we can’t apply Occam’s Razor to the issue.

    Is it more likely that these people are right, or is it more likely they are suffering from a delusion?

    You decide.

    The analogy is rough at best, but if you are predisposed to a conclusion – pro alien abduction – before the evidence is even gathered, then you would be irretrievably compromised, would you not?

    Which I took it was your point at 172 when you said:

    They do seem to accept without question claims which they would like to be true.

  177. Roger — on 28th October, 2008 at 6:46 pm  

    ” if you are predisposed to a conclusion…before the evidence is even gathered, then you would be irretrievably compromised, would you not?”

    Your conclusions would be dubious, Douglas, as would the material you select, but it still might provide useful information. That’s why I said I wouldn’t accept their uncorroborated claims. An example is David Irving who was superb at finding unused material concerning the nazis and then misinterpreted them. His own misuse did not mean his sources must be completely rejected.

  178. Don — on 28th October, 2008 at 6:52 pm  

    It is human nature to be inclined to accept information which confirms your bias. Basic intellectual honesty should make you check that information carefully.

    However, if you set up as a ‘think-tank’ and are habitually guilty of this error then either you are not sufficiently qualified with thinking skills or you are dishonest. Either way your conclusions will be comprehensively de-valued.

  179. Roger — on 28th October, 2008 at 7:08 pm  

    Not necessarily comprehensively: SANE appears to rest on deranged and inaccurate assumptions which means that all its conclusions will be comprehensively de-valued. Policy Exchange has more general aims and appears not to have the same dogmatic presuppositions. Its unreliabilty here does not mean that it is invariably inaccurate even though it does damage its credibilty.
    In both cases, though, the accuracy of their sources and the use they make of them are two separate questions.

  180. Refresh — on 28th October, 2008 at 7:20 pm  

    Roger, I like the word deranged.

    With regards SANE and fellow ideologues, we should not suppose that they are deranged, and work on the basis that its simply what they want.

    Deranged would be think-tanking the move of whole populations of ‘failed cities’, to the south east.

  181. BenSix — on 28th October, 2008 at 7:29 pm  

    “SANE appears to rest on deranged and inaccurate assumptions which means that all its conclusions will be comprehensively de-valued.”

    Their conclusions, incidentally, are that the US and Israel should “conquer and control” Islamic countries with any means necessary.

  182. Don — on 28th October, 2008 at 7:43 pm  

    Roger,

    Hmm, ‘not invariably inaccurate’ as against ‘not totally deranged’ would be an interesting choice of slogan for a think-tank to make.

  183. Avi Cohen — on 28th October, 2008 at 8:14 pm  

    Sid – “reactionary bigots like fugstar, Muzumdar and Avi Cohen”

    I am getting fed up of your false and baseless accusations aganst me. Your continual slurs and slander are getting beyond a joke. If the owner will not stop you then obviously libel action is needed against this blog, something I really don’t want to do.

    So kindly withdraw your fabrication and slurs and let the matter rest.

    Sunny – I am serious this is beyond a joke now and you either need to reign in Sid or prove his arguments. If you can’t reign in him and he can’t prove his points then this is slander and if it won’t stop then only a legal course of action remains. I leave it to you to ask him to withdraw his false remarks against me.

  184. Rumbold — on 28th October, 2008 at 8:20 pm  

    I am closing this thread, as it is just descending into bitterness, which benefits no one. Apologies to anyone carrying on proper discussions.

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.