Latest
» Well, at least Michael Jackson saved the BBC from enduring more faux-outrage over its expenses http://tr.im/pRdc 15 hrs ago

» "some people have gathered where we're pointing our camera. And that's the news" http://tr.im/pR4E (love it) 15 hrs ago

» Thanks @moviegrrl and @tcgriffin for #followfriday 16 hrs ago

» Birmingham based Jewish group slams Obama's speech in Cairo (only a few weeks late) http://tr.im/pQVA 16 hrs ago

» It's probably worth mentioning Iran & #iranelection in all tweets, regardless, so it doesn't get buried in public perception 17 hrs ago

More updates...


  • Family

    • Ala Abbas
    • Clairwil
    • Daily Rhino
    • Leon Green
    • Liberal Conspiracy
    • Sonia Afroz
  • Comrades

    • Andy Worthington
    • Angela Saini
    • Aqoul
    • Bartholomew’s notes
    • Blairwatch
    • Bleeding Heart Show
    • Bloggerheads
    • Blood & Treasure
    • Butterflies & Wheels
    • Campaign against Honour Killings
    • Cath Elliott
    • Chicken Yoghurt
    • Clive Davis
    • Daily Mail Watch
    • Dave Hill
    • Dr StrangeLove
    • Europhobia
    • Faith in Society
    • Feministing
    • Harry’s Place
    • IKWRO
    • Indigo Jo
    • Liberal England
    • MediaWatchWatch
    • Ministry of Truth
    • Natalie Bennett
    • New Humanist Editor
    • New Statesman blogs
    • open Democracy
    • Our Kingdom
    • Robert Sharp
    • Rupa Huq
    • Septicisle
    • Shiraz Socialist
    • Shuggy’s Blog
    • Stumbling and Mumbling
    • Ta-Nehisi Coates
    • The F Word
    • Though Cowards Flinch
    • Tory Troll
    • UK Polling Report
  • In-laws

    • Aaron Heath
    • Ariane Sherine
    • Desi Pundit
    • Get There Steppin’
    • Incurable Hippie
    • Isheeta
    • Neha Viswanathan
    • Power of Choice
    • Real man’s fraternity
    • Route 79
    • Sajini W
    • Sarah
    • Sepia Mutiny
    • Smalltown Scribbles
    • Sonia Faleiro
    • The Langar Hall
    • Turban Head
    • Ultrabrown



  • Technorati: graph / links

    Ibrahim Mousawi Kills Me


    by Sid (Faisal) on 7th March, 2009 at 12:00 pm    

    Ibrahim Mousawi is the Shi’i Lebanese spokesman of the Hezbollah and editor of the Lebanese newspaper Al Intiqad. He also works for the Hizbollah TV station Al Manar. This month Mousawi will be allowed into Britain on a lecture tour of British universities.

    As a journalist for the Daily Star, he has explained the religious basis for suicide attacks propounded in a “fatwa” by Grand Ayatollah Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah.

    In his work for Al Manar, he produced a 29-part “Ramadan special” serial Al-Shatat which featured the ‘Blood libel against Jews‘ and quoted extensively from the ‘Protocols of the Elders of Zion’, which was subsequently banned by French satellite TV. Mousawi has been reported in the New Yorker magazine as saying that Jews are “a lesion on the forehead of history”. Al Manar never allows Israeli officials to come on its talk shows because according to Mousawi, “It [Israel] is an enemy state,” and “why would you put spokesmen for an enemy state on the air?”.

    Last month the Dutch MP Geert Wilders was to arrive in the UK, at the behest of two UKIP peers, to showcase his anti-Muslim film Fitna. Wilders is an anti-Muslim bigot and closely associated with the far-right (read neo-Nazi) party, the Vlaams Belang.

    There’s no way of putting this subtly: Wilders and Mousawi are both religious bigots; both frame their politics in terms of race and religion. So why did the government ban Wilders and allow entry to Mousawi?

    The reason could be because of diplomatic manouvering in Lebanon involving the British government and Hezbollah. The government has signalled that it is ready to talk with the militant Shi’i extremists and has been making overtures:

    Bill Rammell, Britain’s foreign office minister, told a parliamentary committee on Wednesday: “We have reconsidered the position … in light of more positive developments within Lebanon … and for that reason we have explored establishing contacts.”

    The government believes that banning Geert Wilders was good for ‘community cohesion’. I think it was a cop-out, nothing more than a shoddy moment of capitulation to a political cretin. I argued that it is not beyond the wit of the British public to deconstruct the anti-Muslim bigotry of Geert Wilders. We do it here every day, for gawd’s sake. Instead Wilders’ exclusion order gave the appearance that Muslims are once again incapable of accepting any criticism of their religious beliefs and that cannot be good for ‘community cohesion’.

    The message that we can take away from this is the government adopts ethical position against religious and racial extremism in theory but is willing to forego these principles if it gains some political concession in dealings with religious groups, in this case Hezbollah. So clerics such as Yusuf Qaradawi (Muslim Brotherhood), Delwar Hussain Sayeedi (Jamaat-e-Islami) and Pastor Fred Phelps (’God hates fags’) are out because apparently are clerics loosely connected to theocratic political groups.

    Mousawi will be welcomed and treated like a Muslim political celebrity by the government and gifted with an advocacy tour. And you can be sure that anti-Muslim bigots will not miss the opportunity to associate Mousawi’s brand of vicious, anti-semitic terrorist politics with the religious beliefs of ordinary Muslims in Britain.

    Fareed Zakaria has argued convincingly, in this week’s Newsweek,  for the need for the West (and the US in particular) to accept the existence and legitimacy of radical Islamist politics. It must be prepared to make dialogue with Islamist power brokers by learning to distinguish between local Islamists and global Jihadists and to negotiate rather by adopting a bellicose position by default.

    Beyond Afghanistan, too, it is crucial that we adopt a more sophisticated strategy toward radical Islam. This should come naturally to President Obama, who spoke often on the campaign trail of the need for just such a differentiated approach toward Muslim countries. Even the Washington Institute, a think tank often associated with conservatives, appears onboard. It is issuing a report this week that recommends, among other points, that the United States use more “nuanced, noncombative rhetoric” that avoids sweeping declarations like “war on terror,” “global insurgency,” even “the Muslim world.” Anything that emphasizes the variety of groups, movements and motives within that world strengthens the case that this is not a battle between Islam and the West. Bin Laden constantly argues that all these different groups are part of the same global movement. We should not play into his hands, and emphasize instead that many of these forces are local, have specific grievances and don’t have much in common.

    That does not mean we should accept the burning of girls’ schools, or the stoning of criminals. Recognizing the reality of radical Islam is entirely different from accepting its ideas. We should mount a spirited defense of our views and values. We should pursue aggressively policies that will make these values succeed. Such efforts are often difficult and take time—rebuilding state structures, providing secular education, reducing corruption—but we should help societies making these efforts. The mere fact that we are working in these countries on these issues—and not simply bombing, killing and capturing—might change the atmosphere surrounding the U.S. involvement in this struggle.

    The horse-trading that is going on in Lebanon might be a positive sign that diplomatic contacts with Hezbollah have been re-established. But it is the government’s job to tell us why they believe these negotiations and concessions, if any, are necessary. Dialogue with overtly reactionary Islamist extremists who advocate violence might become a necessity, if it is a step towards maintaining peace.

    In the Middle East, I can understand. But why do the demagogues of these reactionary Islamists need to be rewarded with lecture tours and friendly radio interviews here in Britain?



      |     |   Add to del.icio.us   |   Share on Facebook   |   Filed in: Current affairs, Muslim, Organisations, Other racists




    63 Comments below   |  

    1. Rumbold — on 7th March, 2009 at 12:12 pm  

      I find much to recommend DavidMWW’s approach: let them all in so we can laugh at them.

    2. marvin — on 7th March, 2009 at 12:38 pm  

      This bollocks about ’social cohesion’ by the government means that if a minority group threatens violence and smashes things up, then the government will generally go out of it’s way to appease such a group. This is an insane policy; a carrot for bad behaviour

      Admittedly there’s only 300,000 Jews left in the UK, but if they chose to threaten violence and smash things up I reckon they wouldn’t let Mousawi in.

      They let in aggressive gangster style rappers, who probably catalyse more violence in out cities than anything else, who rap “Kill dem batty boy”. So that’s incitement to murder homosexuals. That’s fine. You know why? Because the you wont get gays smashing up things and threatening violence! If they did, they’d be rewarded for their behaviour, and such people wouldn’t be allowed in by this Labour government.

      It’s crazy.

    3. munir — on 7th March, 2009 at 12:38 pm  

      Poor Sid the wannabee David T

      “So why did the government ban Wilders and allow entry to Mousawi?”

      Didnt you know Sid this dhimmi government exists solely to pander to the whims of the Muslim community. I read it in the Brussells Journal you linked to.

      As I recall Sid wanted Wilders to be let in. The only honest policy I can see is let them all in or keep them all out. The let the people I agree with in and ban those I oppose is hypocricy.

    4. munir — on 7th March, 2009 at 12:47 pm  

      marvin
      “Admittedly there’s only 300,000 Jews left in the UK, but if they chose to threaten violence and smash things up I reckon they wouldn’t let Mousawi in.”

      Give us a break Marvin. The zionist lobby exerts inordinate influence. It doesnt need to “threaten violence and smash things” - these are the actions of the powerless.

      Why else was Qardawi a person of much higher repute than Mousawi was banned from these shores? Why are Hamas and Hezbollah listed as terrorist organisations?

    5. fug — on 7th March, 2009 at 12:56 pm  

      MEMRI funded piece?

    6. marvin — on 7th March, 2009 at 1:11 pm  

      The zionist lobby exerts inordinate influence

      MEMRI funded piece?

      Haha. Predictably the Jewish conspiracy theories arise in the comments here! The all powerful Jews, stamping on the poor and destitute!!!

      There’s actually not a small number of wealthy and powerful Muslims in this country too. Probably more than Jewish ones. One in 72 Millionaires is has the surname Patel.

      Many of the most expensive and opulent buildings in London are owned by very rich Arabs. There are many very wealthy Muslim businmen, like Mohammed Al-Fayed.

      Good article Sid. You must be doing something right, judging by the reactions you often get from all quarters.

    7. munir — on 7th March, 2009 at 1:17 pm  

      marvin

      “Haha. Predictably the Jewish conspiracy theories arise in the comments here! The all powerful Jews, stamping on the poor and destitute!!!”

      Fuck off hypocrite. You were the one bringing up conspiracy theories about Muslim power and influence getting Musawi in and keeping Wilders out.

      You even continued in this vein

      “There’s actually not a small number of wealthy and powerful Muslims in this country too. Probably more than Jewish ones. One in 72 Millionaires is has the surname Patel.”

      Blissfully unaware that the name Patel is a predominantly Hindu name.

      An idiot AND a Muslim hater - no wonder you are so at home at HP.

    8. munir — on 7th March, 2009 at 1:21 pm  

      marvin
      “There’s actually not a small number of wealthy and powerful Muslims in this country too. Probably more than Jewish ones. One in 72 Millionaires is has the surname Patel.

      Many of the most expensive and opulent buildings in London are owned by very rich Arabs. There are many very wealthy Muslim businmen, like Mohammed Al-Fayed.”

      Its not really about wealth but political influence. the Muslim millionaires you mention ( most of whom seem to be Hindu) arent generally politically involved and when they are they come from disparate countries and causes. Many like al Fayed you mentioned do little for the Muslim community.

      There are however many wealthy zionists - they are politically active and focused on supporting one country (Israel)

    9. Rumbold — on 7th March, 2009 at 1:38 pm  

      Fug:

      Got it in one. The Jews dropped off Sid’s latest pot of gold this morning, before shedding their human skins and revealing their true form. Then Sid, myself and all our drinking buddies went down to the pub to laugh about it.

    10. fug — on 7th March, 2009 at 2:33 pm  

      no i think sid does it without payment and claims tax deductable white symbolic income!

      Bangali Jew in Platforms.

    11. munir — on 7th March, 2009 at 2:54 pm  

      Rumbold
      “Fug:

      Got it in one. The Jews dropped off Sid’s latest pot of gold this morning, before shedding their human skins and revealing their true form. Then Sid, myself and all our drinking buddies went down to the pub to laugh about it.”

      Thank God for posters like fug, Ashik, myself, platinum786 and er Sunny. We get vast sums from the Iranian and Saudi embassies to counter zionist propaganda and to create s khilafah here in Britain with non-muslims as our dhimmis.

    12. munir — on 7th March, 2009 at 2:56 pm  

      fug I dont think Sid’s ziophilia is funded - its based on a sincere personal anti-Islam, Arab hating stance he has.

    13. The Queen of Fiddlesticks — on 7th March, 2009 at 3:53 pm  

      I do try to remain detached in everything, so anything I say now in in support of nothing but looking for a truth.
      Sorry but I think there is a big difference between Mousawi and wilders …. though maybe they could learn from each other.
      Mousawi claims to have been miss quoted by the NYT ..
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9OM4UMpNecE

      and I wonder if anyone has told him the protocol of elders was in fact another fraudulent press release?
      http://tinyurl.com/beecrk

      as far as him being a Hizbollah spokes man I feel sorry for him as he comes off as naive ..but I know it is party policy to not let the right hand know what the left is doing …
      I have to ask now why is questioning or criticizingly Israel in anyway automatically labeled “antisemitic”?
      I support to the death it’s right to exist, but why does that overshadow the 4million Palestinian refugees,still living in exile?
      Where did Hizbollah come from? Israel is not solely to blame for everything .. http://tinyurl.com/bnvjlp

      when will Arab involvement in helping create this mess be criticized? Why have they been allowed to hold Palestinians in refugee concentration camps for 50 years?

    14. munir — on 7th March, 2009 at 4:01 pm  

      “when will Arab involvement in helping create this mess be criticized? Why have they been allowed to hold Palestinians in refugee concentration camps for 50 years?”

      Yes the Arabs have treated the Palestinians shoddily .

      You are ignoring the fundamental question. Why are the Palestinians refugees in the first place?
      That is because of Israeli ethnic cleansing and pointing the fingers at others will never change that fact. At least the Arabs gave the victims of the Nakba a home when the zionists expelled them.

    15. munir — on 7th March, 2009 at 4:02 pm  

      “when will Arab involvement in helping create this mess be criticized? Why have they been allowed to hold Palestinians in refugee concentration camps for 50 years?”

      Yes the Arabs have treated the Palestinians shoddily .
      but you are ignoring the fundamental question. Why are the Palestinians refugees in the first place?
      That is because of Israeli ethnic cleansing and pointing the fingers at others will never change that fact. At least the Arabs gave the victims of the Nakba a home when the zionists expelled them.

    16. Sid — on 7th March, 2009 at 5:01 pm  

      As I recall Sid wanted Wilders to be let in. The only honest policy I can see is let them all in or keep them all out. The let the people I agree with in and ban those I oppose is hypocricy.

      haha you’re guilty of the very hypocricy you claim to oppose. You don’t agree with Wilders and you wanted him banned from entering the UK. He was. You support Mousawi and his brand of Islamist politics which is a re-purposing of 19th century European anti-semitic supremacist philospohies, rebranded into an Islamic context, and he is being allowed in.

      So what exactly is your gripe with the government? It seems to be doing exactly what you and your pro-Islamist friends are arguing for.

    17. billaricaydickey — on 7th March, 2009 at 7:09 pm  

      At least Gerry Adams and Martin MacGuiness are allowed in, but then they are clever Irishmen who know when they have gone as far as they can and it’s time to negotiate. And of course the Jews are like us, they kick ass!

    18. The Common Humanist — on 7th March, 2009 at 9:42 pm  

      Look, a brown skinned fascist is still a fucking fascist.

      Let em all in and we can laugh and it will bring out the brown skinned fascists happy apologists out in the open.

      ‘course that takes tactical political nuance……my party is not too great at that.

      Munir, Fug et al,
      When you whine about Jews and Zionists controlling and influencing etc etc ad nausuem you enhance and perpetuate an image of muslim political weakness and professional victimhood that does nobody any favours.

    19. Anon — on 7th March, 2009 at 10:41 pm  

      The difference between the Wilders and Moussawi cases is this.

      Wilders wanted to enter the UK with the open aim of inciting hatred against the Muslim community. That is what his film “Fitna” is all about. That is why he was banned.

      There was a similar reasoning behind the exclusion of the right-wing homophobic pastor Fred Phelps, who wanted to come here with the stated aim of inciting hatred against the gay community.

      There is no suggestion that Moussawi is coming here to incite hatred against the Jewish community. He has been here before, in December 2007 and February 2008, and spoken publicly on both occasions.

      His speeches can be consulted here and here. Can Sid point us to anything Moussawi said that would justify excluding him from the country?

      Sid’s posts are increasingly indistinguishable from the bigoted rants of David Toube at Harry’s Place. Perhaps Sid would be better off leaving Pickled Politics and posting there instead.

    20. Sid — on 7th March, 2009 at 10:51 pm  

      He also said this here:

      Suicide attacks in occupied Palestine are not the craven acts of the morally depraved as they are portrayed by Western media, but a form of legitimate resistance amid escalating dangers.

    21. Clairwil — on 8th March, 2009 at 1:37 am  

      ‘The Jews dropped off Sid’s latest pot of gold this morning, before shedding their human skins and revealing their true form. Then Sid, myself and all our drinking buddies went down to the pub to laugh about it.’

      I know I don’t post much these days but I think I deserve a small cut of this Jewish cash for past services.

    22. Katy Newton — on 8th March, 2009 at 4:06 am  

      The more I read this antisemitic claptrap the less amusing I find it, I’m afraid.

    23. Anon — on 8th March, 2009 at 9:26 am  

      Sid: “He [Ibrahim Moussawi] also said this here: Suicide attacks in occupied Palestine are not the craven acts of the morally depraved as they are portrayed by Western media, but a form of legitimate resistance amid escalating dangers.

      The full quote reads (with emphasis added):

      “Suicide attacks in occupied Palestine are not the craven acts of the morally depraved as they are portrayed by Western media, but a form of legitimate resistance amid escalating dangers. This is the view of senior Islamic scholar and marjaa (highest level of Islamic religious authority) Ayatollah Sayyed Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah, who in a wide-ranging interview with The Daily Star presented a multifaceted argument about the legitimacy of the ‘martyrdom operations’, the culture of anti-Arab and anti-Islamic prejudice in the West and the degradation of the environment.”

      Some friendly advice here, Sid. If you want to misrepresent someone’s views, best not to provide a link to the article you’re distorting.

      True, Moussawi reports Fadlallah’s views sympathetically. However, if you’re going to ban everyone from the Middle East who fails to condemn suicide bombing in the specific circumstances of the Israel-Palestine conflict, where there is such a massive disparity between the military power of the Israeli army and that of the Palestinian resistance, you’re going to be banning an awful lot of people.

      And what about supporters of Israeli state terrorism, which has been responsible for the deaths of far more civilian non-combatants than suicide bombers ever have - does Sid argue that they too should be banned from entering the UK? Or is it just the supporters of the Palestinian resistance who should be banned?

      Presumably the latter. At any rate, that’s the view of Sid’s friends over at Harry’s Place, who reserve for themselves the right to cheer on the Israeli war machine as it slaughters women and children in Gaza - but angrily demand a ban on anyone who shows the slightest sympathy for Hamas.

      Decisions on excluding someone from entering this country should be based on what they do, are are judged likely to do, in this country.

      If they come here with the intention of inciting hatred or advocating violence against the Jewish, Muslim or gay communities, that is the basis on which they should be banned – not on the basis of their stance on the Palestine-Israel conflict.

    24. munir — on 8th March, 2009 at 9:39 am  

      Sid
      “haha you’re guilty of the very hypocricy you claim to oppose. You don’t agree with Wilders and you wanted him banned from entering the UK.”

      No I think Wilders should be let in.
      The Sid methodology: When cornered; lie

    25. Ravi Naik — on 8th March, 2009 at 9:57 am  

      Wilders is an anti-Muslim bigot and closely associated with the far-right (read neo-Nazi) party, the Vlaams Belang.

      Why is Vlaams Belang a neo-Nazi party?

    26. Anon — on 8th March, 2009 at 10:44 am  

      “Why is Vlaams Belang a neo-Nazi party?”

      It was founded by Nazi sympathisers who collaborated with the German occupation during WWII, in the course of which 20,000 Belgian Jews were sent to their deaths in concentration camps.

    27. Refresh — on 8th March, 2009 at 10:57 am  

      Sid you should explain what you do think should be the policy of said spokesperson Mousawi. Show him and his kind how they should halt and then reverse gains made through Israeli agression, and expansionist existence.

      Be positive.

      Good last post Anon.

      Fellas don’t get me started: Wilders is MEMRI at Spring Break.

    28. Refresh — on 8th March, 2009 at 11:14 am  

      ‘Good last post Anon.’ #23 refers.

    29. Sid — on 8th March, 2009 at 12:24 pm  

      Anon

      Even with full passage requoted in context from the Daily Star, that Mousawi quote still reads like an endorsement of the efficacy of Ayatollah Sayyed Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah’s fatwa for suicide bombing. In short, he is advocating that Islamic law deems it correct for Palestinians to kill Israelis by suicide methods. If you’re saying there is any other way to read it, I think it will be you who is guilty of misrepresentation. Which is why you, very wisely admit it yourself:

      “True, Moussawi reports Fadlallah’s views sympathetically. ”

      Like I said in the article, I am not asking for Mousawi to be banned from the UK. But what I am asking are 3 questions to be thrown into the debate:

      1) The first is to the government: If the government must make concessions to overtly reactionary Islamist causes, what exactly are these bargains they’ve made?

      2) Is the government going to answer the question of why a speaking tours be granted to advocates of that cause. Because when the inevitable shit storm over this Muslim demamgogue and his reprehensible views towards Jews explodes, is the government going to protect ordinary Muslims who will suffer from victimisation as a result of being associated with the views of these Islamists? In other words, who exactly is going to get it in the neck when a Muslim leader stands up and decontextualises to young British Muslims in lecture rooms in this country, why killing Jews is Islamically legal? Not Mousawi, I am pretty sure.

      3) And the third to Mousawi himself: Why should British Muslims of Southasian origin support the cause of Hezbollah, when they have never shown any state or public support for the plight of Muslims in Southasia? I don’t recall the Ayatollah Sayyed Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah or the Hezbollah publish any position pieces or fatwas on the plight of Rohingya Muslims, the Gujarat Massacre, Muslims in India further to the Mumbai attacks etc etc etc.

    30. Ravi Naik — on 8th March, 2009 at 12:26 pm  

      It was founded by Nazi sympathisers who collaborated with the German occupation during WWII, in the course of which 20,000 Belgian Jews were sent to their deaths in concentration camps.

      Er… what? Vlaams Belang founder is Filip Dewinter, and he was born in 1962.

      I believe we need to distinguish cultural nationalism from racial nationalism. Neo-nazi parties clearly focus on racial nationalism - I am not entirely sure Vlaams Belang belongs to that category. In their wikipedia page, it says they are not against multi-ethnic immigration, they are just against multiculturism and favor assimilation.

    31. Sid — on 8th March, 2009 at 12:38 pm  

      Is the Vlaams Belang a neo-Nazi outfit?

      If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then by golly, it is a…

    32. Anon — on 8th March, 2009 at 2:09 pm  

      On Vlaams Belang. It was formerly Vlaams Blok, founded by Karel Dillen in 1979, which was itself the product of a fusion between various far-right organisations, including associations of Eastern Front veterans - soldiers who had fought for the Nazis in Russia. In its early years the VB was financed by former Nazi collaborators.

    33. Ravi Naik — on 8th March, 2009 at 2:45 pm  

      If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then by golly, it is a…

      Two of your links (the two duck links) actually make the case that Vlaams Belang is *not* neo-nazi party, so I do appreciate that you actually read your evidence first. Let me show an extract of your “evidence”:

      “So where do the anti-Semitic, neo-Nazi charges comes from? Let’s start by acknowledging that Dutch is a Germanic language, and, in our age and culture, any Germanic-accented politicians decribed as “right-wing” may trigger an almost atavistic prejudice-although when these same right-wing, Germanic-style-accented politicians were born around the 1960s (or later) we need to think a little deeper. There is also the historical fact that, like much of continental Europe, Belgium was occupied by Germany twice in the 20th century, and both times, there were Flemish separatists who worked with and allied with Germany. Such alliances with first the Kaiser’s and then Hitler’s Germany were in no way unique to the Flemish, some of whom also opposed such collaboration.

      “Under the suffocating strictures of politically correct Multiculturalism, any conservative nationalist party in Europe is certain to be demonized as “neo-Nazi”. In some countries it is all but impossible for a truly conservative party to emerge. Anyone who publicly admits to right-wing convictions is instantly vilified by the political establishment and set upon by the hounds of the media.

    34. fug — on 8th March, 2009 at 2:50 pm  

      3) Hezbollah kicked the Israeli Defence force which was inspiring for Muslims and others all over the planet.
      I don’t know if youve ever heard of non south asians praying out loud for the muslims of Burma or India, you probably havent heard of saudi support for the Rohingya which is often exploited by Chittagonians taken chances. Its not the stuff of MEMRI data spins and ordinary press releases. You actually have to witness this stuff to know it.

      Reading the wiki on him and the scholar you mention (which references MEMRI quite a bit), i guess his participation in conferencing amongst students is his expertise on the the compatibility of islam and democracy. He studied in birmingham for many years. as far as i know he is not hezbolla’s ‘chief’ spokesman, that is hyperbole. He is an expert on them. There are many things about hezbollas strengths that others in the family of islamic movements should adopt. Theres stuff in there to inspire other social movements also.

      Its with the younger minded like him that better future policies and practices can be arrived at. That controversial palestinian defence tactic has not achieved the needs of the palestinians. They need more successful ones. His participation in these seminars can let people know how in the rather strange electoral set up of Lebanon, how religious political parties can contribute.

      unlike Wilder, he is not a very major attention seeking figure are far as I know. He doesnt get his kicks in the same way. historically, he has also been banned from ireland by their police and the tory party had a go at banning him last year.

      The problem with following advice from israel and its minions is that they place themselves and the problems they have created, at the center of the universe. Political Islam is not all about Israel. Its being and progression is not a dedicated to it.

      Zionist type groups will range against knowledge based events by organisers with ‘anti israel’ agendas because they are so so self absorbed. Their advice should be tempered by other and better judgement, which i think it is.

    35. Ravi Naik — on 8th March, 2009 at 2:57 pm  

      On Vlaams Belang. It was formerly Vlaams Blok, founded by Karel Dillen in 1979, which was itself the product of a fusion between various far-right organisations, including associations of Eastern Front veterans - soldiers who had fought for the Nazis in Russia. In its early years the VB was financed by former Nazi collaborators.

      There is no evidence that Karen Dillen was an active collaborator for the Nazis. The collaboration between some Flemish nationalists and the nazis was a purely political one: they were promised independence from the French part. It is similar to Subhas Chandra Bose, who collaborated with the nazis, to help India become independent from the British.

    36. Sid — on 8th March, 2009 at 2:57 pm  

      Ravi

      Because two ‘duck’ links are to articles are by Diana West and Baron Bodissey of the Gates of Vienna. Both are virulent “Eurabia” advocates and supporters of the VB, whilst trying to wash out the legacy of fascism of the Vlaams Blok from Vlaams Belang.

    37. Sid — on 8th March, 2009 at 3:13 pm  

      I don’t know if youve ever heard of non south asians praying out loud for the muslims of Burma or India, you probably havent heard of saudi support for the Rohingya which is often exploited by Chittagonians taken chances. Its not the stuff of MEMRI data spins and ordinary press releases. You actually have to witness this stuff to know it.

      fug, you should realise that the House of Saud is *not* Hezbollah and each is violently opposed to the presence of the other.

      On the point of the Saudi support for the Rohingyas, I am not doubting your claim. But do you have any proof of this, like a link?

    38. Ravi Naik — on 8th March, 2009 at 3:19 pm  

      Because two ‘duck’ links are to articles are by Diana West and Baron Bodissey of the Gates of Vienna. Both are virulent “Eurabia” advocates and supporters of the VB, whilst trying to wash out the legacy of fascism of the Vlaams Blok from Vlaams Belang.

      Sid - you can find trails of virulent racism in the conservative party if you walk down a few years back in the legacy lane. This in no way should reflect Cameron and his party.

      Similarly, I don’t find any evidence that Vlaams Belang is a neo-nazi party - they are against multiculturism, and believe in assimilation of immigrants. Neo-nazis abhor assimilation of other races in Europe, and for this reason, they do not like parties like Vlaams Belang, or people like Pim Fortyn.
      The raison d’etre of Vlaams Belang is cultural identity and independence from Belgium. Not racial supremacy and an Europe with no non-whites.

      I could be wrong though. I do have a Flemish friend who is pretty liberal, but he does have a strong Flemish identity (thinks the French part are a bunch of lazy bastards) - I will ask him what he thinks about Vlams Belang the next time I see him.

      And I will apologise to you if he says they are a neo-nazi party. :)

    39. Sid — on 8th March, 2009 at 3:23 pm  

      Ravi, save yourself and your friend the trouble. I already know the Vlaams Belang is a neo-Nazi party. :)

    40. Anon — on 8th March, 2009 at 3:42 pm  

      On the issue of Vlaams Belang. I’m not generally given to citing the Jewish Chronicle, or at least not favourably, but this seems a relevant quote:

      “After its predecessor Vlaams Blok was forced to disband in 2004 when the Belgian courts decided it practised ‘incitement to discrimination’, Vlaams Belang launched with a radical nationalist platform. This includes a demand for an unconditional amnesty for convicted Nazi collaborators during the war, repatriation for all economic immigrants who cannot ‘assimilate’, and the repeal of the country’s anti-discrimination and anti-racism laws. Three VB MEPs are part of the newly-formed ‘Identity, Tradition, Sovereignty’ caucus in the European Parliament, led by French National Front member Bruno Gollnisch, who was recently convicted of Holocaust denial.”

    41. fug — on 8th March, 2009 at 4:19 pm  

      Ref:(a bro i met on umrah, 2003)

      you’ll find that most of what goes on in this world is not url’ed, and im sure youd use such a link, if it existed, to entrench your cartoony wahabisation paranoia.

      hezbollah types that ive come across on travels seem a lot more genuinely ummahtic than lipservice types whos islamist postures are more pan-arab.

    42. douglas clark — on 9th March, 2009 at 2:52 am  

      Two points, one minor, one more so.

      Sid, in your original article you said the “Protools” of the Elders of Zion. Strictly speaking it is the Protocols. Just here to help, though the misspelling Pootocols has much to recommend it.

      My second point is even less profound, no, really!

      The range of opinions that come from Muslims - well at least I assume they are - who have commented on this thread suggests that there is no central agreement about what a Muslim actually is.

      Which is probably a good thing. For there are some supremacist Muslims, just like there are other supremacists.

      Now that way of thinking is a lose, lose game.

      That’s what it is….

    43. Sid — on 9th March, 2009 at 8:34 am  

      Thanks for pointing out the typo douglas.

      Ibrahim Mousawi isn’t really a supremacist. He isn’t saying Shia Islam is the best thing since sliced bread. His job, as the media-savvy spokesman for the Hezbollah, is to incite hatred of Jews and to shore up support from Muslims and non-Muslims credulous enough to believe his message. And all the time, Hezbollah cares little about the situation of ordinary Muslims everywhere else which does not involve fighting Israel and hating Jews - still more Muslims seem to want to accept this as well.

    44. Refresh — on 9th March, 2009 at 10:19 am  

      Douglas

      I suspect Fug has already called Sid a ‘Protool of MEMRI’.

    45. fugstar — on 9th March, 2009 at 10:26 am  

      i think you are on to something there, a Putul(doll) of MEMRI.

      you can tell what people are about by what they exert themselves over. and Dr Ibrahim has spend several years studying islam and democracy, with iran as its case study.

      israel, the great jewish supremacist exclusivist lie, is not at the center of his universe. stop trying to making it, you broken record player. general muslim attitude is that israel should be supersceded asap. except yours, no doubt youll send your unfortunate kids to a kibbutz…

      clearly sid knows about as much about hezbolla’s relations for muslims near and distant to it, as he does of his own ugliness of mind body and soul.

    46. Sid — on 9th March, 2009 at 11:10 am  

      As you know, I am a big believer of Islam and Democracy.
      http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/1668

      Mousawi’s PhD dissertation was called “Compatibility between Islam and democracy; Shiism and democracy under Wilayat Al-Faqih, Iran as a case study”.

      Would love to get hold of that. I would really like to know what his treatment of Abd al-Raziq’s “al-Islam wa ‘Usul al-Hukm is, if any. Published in 1925 Abd al-Raziq asserted that Islam was a religion and not a state, a message not a government, a spiritual edifice not a political institution. The publication of his thesis led to his defrocking and the banning of his work by the Ulema (community of scholars) of Al Azhar university.

      Like I said, Mousawi is not a transnational jihadist. I don’t think he even claims Hezbollah’s offerng for the political problems of Muslims around the world is Global Jihad and Khilafa. He doesn’t give a toss about Muslims in Southasia, his extremism seems to based exclusively on the incitement of the hatred of Jews on a state propaganda level.

      Which Muslims like Refresh and fug and munir seem to have swallowed hook line and sinker.

    47. munir — on 9th March, 2009 at 11:48 am  

      Ravi Naik
      “Er… what? Vlaams Belang founder is Filip Dewinter, and he was born in 1962.

      I believe we need to distinguish cultural nationalism from racial nationalism. Neo-nazi parties clearly focus on racial nationalism - I am not entirely sure Vlaams Belang belongs to that category. In their wikipedia page, it says they are not against multi-ethnic immigration, they are just against multiculturism and favor assimilation.”

      Your whitewashing Vlaams Blok/Belang is astonishing. VB actually want to prohibit the practice of Islam in Europe and expell all its Muslims (to where who knows?). This probably gives you a boner.

      “Neirynck’s fable seems alarmist and alien; but it is undeniable that the far right continues to gain ground in Belgium, where Turkish and Maghrebian immigrants, joined by a substantial convert community, provide a convenient lightning-rod for the insecurities of Belgians of all social classes, unnerved by unemployment, globalisation, political corruption, and the visibility of the non-Christian Other. The far-right Vlaams-Blok, the leading Flemish nationalist party, described by Stephen Fisher of Oxford’s Nuffield College, as ‘the most blatantly racist and xenophobic of the extreme-right parties in Western Europe’, has grown in strength from 1.3% of the electorate in 1984 to 14.8% in 1999, and has become the largest Flemish party in Brussels, and also in Antwerp, where it has gained control of the municipality. Vlaams-Blok politicians have not been reluctant to identify Muslims as the new threat. Filip De Winter, the party’s former leader, has called for the ‘hermetic closure’ of Belgium’s borders, and anticipates ‘the return of all immigrants, without exception, to their countries of origin.’ This is to be accomplished by the progressive deprivation of state benefits and citizenship rights, and the creation of specific immigrant areas with the cities to improve levels of surveillance. Islam itself is to be prohibited, ‘because this religion is anti-Belgian and anti-European.’ [6]”

      http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/ahm/right.htm

    48. fug — on 9th March, 2009 at 12:01 pm  

      ive never spoken to him, but dont think he’ll be as careless as you make out. If you live in the midlands or the north for a while… you tend to become quite south asianised. its only in london where the different arabs have there own scenes.

      but him ‘not giving toss’ is an assumption thats telling about your own angst about ‘ummahtic nonreciprocal relations’ and strawman ummahtism 1.0.

      get with the programme?

      refresh are you a bro?

    49. Sid — on 9th March, 2009 at 12:16 pm  

      but him ‘not giving toss’ is an assumption thats telling about your own angst about ‘ummahtic nonreciprocal relations’ and strawman ummahtism 1.0.

      I think he is more fadhlallatic than ummahtic, to use your strange, retarded parlance.

      But if you have any indication of Hizbullah’s solidarity with the Muslims of Gujarat or Rohingya, then show us. Get with the program and link it up dude. Give us a concrete example instead of faith-based fairy tails and prove me wrong.

      But I think you will find that being a Southasian muslim fanboy of the Hizbullah is unreciprocated from the the Hizbullah side.

      But no one is stopping you accepting the Hizbullah thesis of adopting anti-semitism as the cornerstone of your religious belief. But don’t blame others for this modernist deformity you proudly wear like a badge of honour.

    50. platinum786 — on 9th March, 2009 at 1:20 pm  

      Earlier there was a mention of people getting paid. I’d like to announce that someone has been taking my cut. Admit it before i come looking for you.

      Regarding the topic at hand, it’s interesting to see the lack of comments suggesting that we should let him in and debate with him about his views hence making him look foolish, as was suggested with Wilders.

      I don’t know who this guy is, but if he is here in Britain to stir between communities and spread hate, then he should be refused entry.

    51. blah — on 9th March, 2009 at 6:02 pm  

      “And the third to Mousawi himself: Why should British Muslims of Southasian origin support the cause of Hezbollah, when they have never shown any state or public support for the plight of Muslims in Southasia? I don’t recall the Ayatollah Sayyed Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah or the Hezbollah publish any position pieces or fatwas on the plight of Rohingya Muslims, the Gujarat Massacre, Muslims in India further to the Mumbai attacks etc etc etc.”

      1) Muslims should support the cause of anyone opressed Muslim or non Muslim- the people of Lebanon fighting Israeli invasion certainly belong in that category

      2)It is part of the Muslim religion to have feeling for fellow Muslims and their suffering regardless of their colour or language or sect. this is one of the beauties of Islam which your “south asian” construction ignores.
      If some Muslims are failing in this that is no reason for Muslims in Indian subcontinent to do so.

      3) You of course knowing Arabic and having exhaustive knowledge of Fadlallahs speeches know for a fact he has never spoken up for Indian Muslims

      4) People like you who whine all day about how the Arabs dont care for Asian Muslims will condemn with the strongest adjectives Arabs who came to Afghanistan and Kashmir to fight for the Muslims there against the Russian and Indian occupations. Pure hypocrisy.

      5) Since you are a promoted of South Asianess (well except when it comes to Pakistan and Bangladesh) why dont you ask the far more pertinent question- where the fvck were the Hindu groups when Gujurat was happening

      And Im not talking about those doing the killing and raping. Your condemning Arabs for Gujurat while ignoring the Hinduvata murderers who actually perpetrated the atrcoities is symptomatic of your deep anti-Arab hatred.

      BTW I have never ever met a religious Arab (not secular nationalists like you) who didnt have deep sympathy for Muslims suffering in India and elsewhere.

    52. Sid — on 9th March, 2009 at 6:09 pm  

      3) You of course knowing Arabic and having exhaustive knowledge of Fadlallahs speeches know for a fact he has never spoken up for Indian Muslims

      Pure Alice in fucking Wonderland. And you of course know that Fadhlallah has. Do post a link to a fatwa or even a position piece by the Hezbollah on the plight of Southasian Muslims. I have a feeling you won’t but I could be wrong. If anything, it will be a great justification of your inherent anti-semitism.

      And Im not talking about those doing the killing and raping. Your condemning Arabs for Gujurat while ignoring the Hinduvata murderers who actually perpetrated the atrcoities is symptomatic of your deep anti-Arab hatred.

      No blah, my point is this: Hezbollah has no symapatico for the plight of Muslim Southasians but you’ve based your religious-political ideology on their existence. Kind of sad, isn’t it?

    53. blah — on 9th March, 2009 at 6:14 pm  

      Sid
      “2) Is the government going to answer the question of why a speaking tours be granted to advocates of that cause. Because when the inevitable shit storm over this Muslim demamgogue and his reprehensible views towards Jews explodes, is the government going to protect ordinary Muslims who will suffer from victimisation as a result of being associated with the views of these Islamists? ”

      There you go again Sid blaming the Muslims. If some idiot attacks Muslims because of hearing something from other Muslims they dont like that is that persons fault solely. Imagine if someone blamed attacks on British Jews on Israels actions in Gaza rather than on the attackers themselves.

      “In other words, who exactly is going to get it in the neck when a Muslim leader stands up and decontextualises to young British Muslims in lecture rooms in this country, why killing Jews is Islamically legal? Not Mousawi, I am pretty sure.”

      Which Muslim leader would say such a thing? And you seem to have brought the frankly racist notion that Muslims are like sheep who will believe whatever they are told.

      And your using the emotive “Jews” is straight out of the zionist copybook. Oh my God its 1930s/40s again- Never again!

      You are essentially saying what extreme zionists say ; that uniquely the Lebanese/Palestinians have no right to fight against those who have stolen their land/occupiers because those theieves/occupiers are Jewish (never mind that the Israeli army also has Arabs in it who the Lebanese/Palestinains dont refrain from fighting). This argument is actually anti-semitic as it suggests Jewish criminals should be treated more leniently than non-Jewish as if such behavious was somehow to be expected.

      Using this logic anyone who tried to get money back from Bernie Maddoff would be an anti-semite. Anyone who had been wronged by a black person who sought redress would be a racist, since blacks have suffered terribly in the past, etc.

      Extreme zionist say this because they are supremacists who genuinely believe that Jewish life is more valuable than non-Jewish. Why do you say it?

    54. Sid — on 9th March, 2009 at 6:18 pm  

      Sorry, you’ve fundamentally misunderstood my point. :D

      If anything, I am blaming Mousawi for endangering the welfare of Muslims by promulgating an ideology of hatred and Jew-bating. Like his mentor, the ridiculously stupid Grand Ayatollah Fadhlallah, he justifies and urges Muslims to go out and kill themselves while living the life of a spiritual and social elite.

    55. Sid — on 9th March, 2009 at 6:27 pm  

      5) Since you are a promoted of South Asianess (well except when it comes to Pakistan and Bangladesh) why dont you ask the far more pertinent question- where the fvck were the Hindu groups when Gujurat was happening

      Yes they were very brave but I’d not talking about the odd individual nutter.

      How much money and effort did the Saudi and Gulf Kingdoms run by the plutocrats and the playboys in the Royal families put in to rebuild Afghanistan? hmmmm?

      I’m talking unconditional, no-strings attached capacity and nation-building aid.

      I’ll tell you - next to nothing. But they will make speeches in front of their countrymen claiming to be the spiritually pure Custodians of the Ummah.

      That’s pure hypocricy.

    56. blah — on 9th March, 2009 at 6:47 pm  

      Sid
      “Pure Alice in fucking Wonderland. And you of course know that Fadhlallah has. Do post a link to a fatwa or even a position piece by the Hezbollah on the plight of Southasian Muslims. I have a feeling you won’t but I could be wrong. If anything, it will be a great justification of your inherent anti-semitism.”

      You are nuts - you ignore my first two points then demand proof for something which if I produce it means Ill be an anti-semite

      “Inherent anti-semitism “? - what planet are you on?
      Its the old “if you oppose Israelis atrocities youre an anti-semite” which even zionists wince at using. Not Sid though. Sid isnt Sunny and anti-semite then?

      I mst also be inherently anti-Hindu since I oppose Indian rule in Kashmir, inherently anti-Buddhist as I oppose Burmas treatement of the Rohingays, inherently anti-Russian/Orthodox because I support the Chechens, etc etc

      And you must be inherently anti-Muslim as you support the Bengali war of Independence against Pakistan.

      You fail to address my point about the numerous Arabs who went to Afghanistan and Kashmir to fight for the Muslims there. How many Asian Muslims have gone to fight for Palestine? And Im not aware of Arab Muslims slaughtering Indian Muslims in great numbers as Hindus have - are you?

      “No blah, my point is this: Hezbollah has no symapatico for the plight of Muslim Southasians but you’ve based your religious-political ideology on their existence. Kind of sad, isn’t it?”

      Riiiight so your suggesting Muslims fellow feelings with Muslims only exists because of Hizbollah not because the Muslims of Lebanon are fighting the invaders of their land or its part of the Muslim religion- what Fadlalla has or hasnt said is an irrelevance.You also ignore the fact that Hizbollah as a fighting force wouldnt exist without the Israeli invasion of 1982. No Israeli invasion-no Hezbollah.

      My “religious-political ideaology” (sic) is what Islam teaches
      Namely the Quran and the sayings of the Prophet (sallAllahu alayhi wasalaam)

      “And verily this Ummah (nation) of yours is a single ummah and I am your Lord and Cherisher: Therefore Fear Me (and no other).”
      Quran 23:53

      Or the sayings of the Prophet (sallAllahu alayhi wasalaam)

      “The believers, in their love, mutual kindness, and close ties, are like one body; when any part complains, the whole body responds to it with wakefulness and fever.” [Muslim], “The faithful are like one man: if his eyes suffers, his whole body suffers.” [Muslim]
      “The Faithful are to one another like [parts of] a building - each part strengthening the others” and

      “Every Muslim is a brother to a Muslim, neither wronging him nor allowing him to be wronged. And if anyone helps his brother in need, Allah will help him in his own need; and if anyone removes a calamity from [another] Muslim, Allah will remove from him some of the calamities of the Day of Resurrection; and if anyone shields [another] Muslim from disgrace, Allah will shield him from the disgrace on the Day of Resurrection.” [Al-Bukhari and Muslim, on the authority of `Abd Allah ibn `Umar].

      You do believe these dont you?

      In any case your argument is strange - its like saying because some Muslims are doing what they should be other Muslims who are should also neglect it.

    57. blah — on 9th March, 2009 at 6:52 pm  

      Sid
      “How much money and effort did the Saudi and Gulf Kingdoms run by the plutocrats and the playboys in the Royal families put in to rebuild Afghanistan? hmmmm?

      I’m talking unconditional, no-strings attached capacity and nation-building aid.

      I’ll tell you - next to nothing. But they will make speeches in front of their countrymen claiming to be the spiritually pure Custodians of the Ummah.

      That’s pure hypocricy.”

      You are an idiot . Nobody seriously believes that the Muslim rulers give a damn about the Muslims.. they dont even care about the Muslims in their OWN country why should they care about others..they are just seen as what they are -western puppets. so your argument is totally false and an Aunt Sally.

      Positing dictatorships as represntative of the true feelings of their people is pathethic Sid.

    58. Sid — on 9th March, 2009 at 8:29 pm  

      You are nuts - you ignore my first two points then demand proof for something which if I produce it means Ill be an anti-semite

      blah have you forgotten that during the Gaza conflict, you were posting comments here on PP under the names of munir, SE and various other pseudonymns? I haven’t. You and a bunch of other trolls were posting anti-semitic material that was so offensive and so heinous that Leon, Rumbold and myself were spending all our time deleting them from the site.

      In other words, we covered your tracks for you so that you can look good now. So that you can cut and paste verses from the Quran and insinutate what a good Muslim you are and how spiritually superior you are to me. Do you have any scruples or any sense of shame?

      There is no depth to your moral bankruptcy. You are a cowardly and amoral little wanker.

    59. fug — on 9th March, 2009 at 9:01 pm  

      so sid, are you going to see dr ibrahim in person, listen and dialogue?

      or happy just to snipe from the sidelines and play your language games, taking signals from all the wrong people and extrapolating your partial view of a person and his ideas to the unwashed blogerati?

    60. Sid — on 9th March, 2009 at 9:14 pm  

      I sure will.

    61. Pickled Politics » Mousawi barred — on 14th March, 2009 at 1:33 pm  

      [...] Mousawi barred by Sid on 14th March, 2009 at 1:33 pm     The good news is Ibrahim Mousawi, the spokesman for Hezbollah, has been barred from entering the UK, something which I argued for here. [...]

    62. Topics about Crimes » Ibrahim Mousawi Kills Me — on 19th March, 2009 at 1:26 pm  

      [...] Bangalore Guy in Chennai writes… added an interesting post on Ibrahim Mousawi Kills MeHere’s a small excerptMousawi will be welcomed and treated like a Muslim political celebrity by the government and gifted with an advocacy tour. [...]

    63. Topics about Crimes » Comment on Ibrahim Mousawi Kills Me by Topics about Crimes » — on 19th March, 2009 at 2:28 pm  

      [...] Sierra Vista Herald added an interesting post today on Comment on Ibrahim Mousawi Kills Me by Topics about Crimes »Here’s a small reading[...] Bangalore Guy in Chennai writes… added an interesting post on Ibrahim Mousawi Kills MeHere’s a small excerptMousawi will be welcomed and [...]

    Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

    Pickled Politics © Copyright 2005 - 2009. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.
    With the help of PHP and Wordpress.