» Encouraging news by @Jim_Jepps 'Greens are moving forward on science' http://bit.ly/147UV7 (with a push from @mjrobbins ) 6 hrs ago

» That poster of Rupert Murdoch - http://is.gd/3v5pE - was created by the very talented @BeauBodOr 7 hrs ago

» Wow! This is very impressive http://is.gd/3v5pE 7 hrs ago

» NYT - How gangster rap is similar to conservative talk-radio (US) http://is.gd/3v0RK 8 hrs ago

» Fox News producer caught rallying Obama protest crowd http://is.gd/3uuVH - think they call it Fair & Balanced journalism 15 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
    • Operation Black Vote
    • 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
    • Women Uncovered
  • 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

    The CSC’s BNP report is a farce


    by Sunny on 15th July, 2009 at 9:13 am    

    So the oxymoronically named ‘Centre for Social Cohesion’ has published a report on the BNP (pdf), which Rumbold mentions below. It’s nice the British neo-cons are paying some attention to white-extremism but the report makes one glaring omission. Spotted it yet?

    The report plenty of activity by the BNP on messageboards and blogs. It lists some vile comments made by BNP supporters and is rather obsessed by the gimp a.k.a. Lee Barnes. The report’s authors could also have spent their time better transcribing outrageous things Nick Griffin has said in speeches littered all over YouTube, rather than that of some anonymous commenters on random blogs. In fact I think Pickled Politics/eGov did a better job in attacking the BNP with our 85 questions directed at the BNP.

    But that isn’t my main beef. What’s glaringly omitted from the report is an analysis of how the BNP has in recent years shifted its strategy from outright racism and anti-semitism to attacking Muslims and Islam generally. The report briefly mentions Muslims in the intro and lists some comments that include the word Muslim, but its conclusion doesn’t even mention anti-Muslim bigotry. It avoids the topic despite the fact Nick Griffin went on the record to say it was politically better for the BNP to focus on Muslims rather than Jews or racism.

    Now, why would a report by the CSC avoid talking about the one subject that the BNP constantly campaigns on now? Why ignore it when it is repeatedly mentioned in its literature and by its supporters online (much more than other enemies)?

    Is that because much of the anti-Muslim bigotry directed by BNP members sounds suspiciously like what the Dutch politician Geert Wilders would say ‘to save the west’? Oh look - the BNP website has written approvingly about Geert Wilders repeatedly! Douglas Murray, the director of the Centre for Social Cohesion, is a huge fan and defender of Geert Wilders. I think we should be told.

    Don’t get me wrong - the report turns up some interesting anecdotes and information about the BNP’s online activities - and the more of these the better. The fascists have clearly not lost their anti-semitic tendencies either despite Griffin’s attempts to whitewash that side.

    And yet any report that makes such a glaring omission cannot be taken seriously, especially since 9/11 the BNP has deliberately switched its focus on Muslims - even to the extent of playing up its links with Sikhs - because they know its more politically palatable. To challenge that narrative more forcefully would have been much more useful and relevant. Once again, an epic FAIL by Douglas Murray’s lame outfit.



      |   Trackback link   |   Add to del.icio.us   |   Share on Facebook   |   Filed in: British Identity, Islamists, Other racists, Race politics, The BNP




    115 Comments below   |   Add your own

    1. cjcjc — on 15th July, 2009 at 9:27 am  

      I assume you understand the difference between attacking Muslims (people) and Islam (an idea)?

      The BNP does both. Murray does the latter.

    2. Vikrant — on 15th July, 2009 at 9:31 am  

      The BNP does both. Murray does the latter.

      Exactly!

    3. Rumbold — on 15th July, 2009 at 10:13 am  

      “Don’t get me wrong – the report turns up some interesting anecdotes and information about the BNP’s online activities – and the more of these the better.”

      Which is the whole point of the thing. Yes, I don’t like Douglas Murray either, but I would hardly call the report a ‘farce’.

    4. Ravi Naik — on 15th July, 2009 at 10:15 am  

      Once again, an epic FAIL by Douglas Murray’s lame outfit.

      I do not think you made a convicing case, not when you use terms like “epic fail” and “farce”.

      The point of this report is to expose what the BNP is trying to hide: it’s neo-nazi ideology, and that means anti-semitism and crude anti-white racism, something the BNP wants to put under the carpet and present itself as a moderate party. The report - as you say - does present Muslims as one of the BNP targets. So there is no omission there.

      Finally, Geert Wilders has been very vocal against neo-nazi parties, and he rejected the BNP when they wanted to form an European Parliament group.

    5. billericaydicky — on 15th July, 2009 at 10:28 am  

      Well Sunny, why does the report not stress the anti Muslim nature of the BNP? You seem to be running some kind of conspiracy theory by Murray and co to play down the well documented anti Islam campaigns of Griffin and co.

    6. ali — on 15th July, 2009 at 10:35 am  

      Sunny,

      Do you reckon that the CSC deliberately omitted references to BNP anti-Muslim bigotry?

    7. chairwoman — on 15th July, 2009 at 11:19 am  

      Sunny is not concerned about any prejudice expressed unless it is anti Islamic.

      Muslims who post on this site like Imran, and, yes, Munir, express more concern for other forms of prejudice than Sunny does.

      Sunny will now do his usual ‘When did I…’. and ‘Didn’t I…’, but the fact remains that all prejudices are equally bad, and we should all be aware that one frequently hides and leads to the rest.

      We’re all aware that the BNP are currently hiding their hatred of Black people, Jews, Asians, Roma, etc., behind the burqa of Islamophobia, but they’ll be lifting that veil at the earliest ’suitable’ opportunity.

      Surely the BNP’s hatreds being exposed is more important than by whom?

    8. chairwoman — on 15th July, 2009 at 11:22 am  

      Sorry, my last post is stylistically displeasing, boring, and repetitive, but I am unable to edit it.

      Please re-install the edit feature :)

    9. munir — on 15th July, 2009 at 11:25 am  

      Why would anti-Muslims like the CSC criticise anti-Muslim sentiment? Its what they are all about!

      What they are essentially saying is the BNP are bad because they are anti-Jewish or anti-Asian /Black; and there is nothing intrinsically wrong with hating Muslims

      cjcjc (and Vikrant)

      “I assume you understand the difference between attacking Muslims (people) and Islam (an idea)?

      The BNP does both. Murray does the latter.”

      Give us a break. This is what Dougls Murray is:

      “It is late in the day, but Europe still has time to turn around the demographic time-bomb which will soon see a number of our largest cities fall to Muslim majorities. It has to. All immigration into Europe from Muslim countries must stop. … Those who are currently in Europe having fled tyrannies should be persuaded back to the countries which they fled from once the tyrannies that were the cause of their flight have been removed. And of course it should go without saying that Muslims in Europe who for any reason take part in, plot, assist or condone violence against the West (not just the country they happen to have found sanctuary in, but any country in the West or Western troops) must be forcibly deported back to their place of origin.

      Conditions for Muslims in Europe must be made harder across the board: Europe must look like a less attractive proposition. We in Europe owe—after all—no special dues to Islam. We owe them no religious holidays, special rights or privileges. From long before we were first attacked it should have been made plain that people who come into Europe are here under our rules and not theirs. There is not an inch of ground to give on this one. Where a mosque has become a centre of hate it should be closed and pulled down. If that means that some Muslims don’t have a mosque to go to, then they’ll just have to realise that they aren’t owed one. ”

      I love the will “fall to” as if Muslims are some alien enemy and not fellow citizens

      This is pure hatred of Muslims not Islam

    10. Carmenego — on 15th July, 2009 at 11:26 am  

      #8 Chairwoman

      Haha! Not at all! I liked your “lifting the veil” phrase, very poetic :-)

    11. Yahya Birt — on 15th July, 2009 at 11:31 am  

      As most commentators agree that an anti-Muslim strand has been a consistent part of the BNP’s politics since around 2000, isn’t it legitimate to ask why it hasn’t been covered adequately in the report? The precise reasons as to why there is this gap can’t be based on upfront and hard evidence, but the question should be pursued as it is important and relevant.

      cjcjc, Vikrant:

      In matters of free speech, and especially the law, I would agree that separating persons and ideas is essential for any functioning and healthy democracy.

      However, as a theory of prejudice, I think separating ideas and persons doesn’t make any sense, evidentially, sociologically or even ethically. The reason is that ideas are embedded in persons as identities and manifested as symbols that represent something of these identities in society. For instance, in Guantanamo, there was an outcry when a guard urinated on a copy of the Qur’an, the prisoners felt that to be an act of humiliation towards them. It wasn’t just a book carrying some ideas. Similarly if someone defaces the Star of David, whether on the Israeli flag or on a headstone, isn’t that offensive and felt to be an act of antisemitism by persons? They don’t say “well that’s just a symbol, it separate from me and who I am and the values I hold dear.”

      It might be one thing not to legislate to curb hate speech and to protect free speech (in nearly all instances outside of incitement to violence to preserve public order or child pornography), but who are we to tell anyone what does and does not matter to their sense of whom they are and what is important to them? Of course if they feel offended it doesn’t mean they get to ban the book, the painting, the play etc. does it? But they should be able to register their feelings of outrage and offence shouldn’t they through a reasoned rebuttal, and not by taking the law into their own hands of course, as we saw with the disgraceful arson attack on Martin Rynja’s home?

      Yes people should have always the liberty to be rude and offensive and insult each other, but on the other hand too much of that kind of thing does tend to fray the ability of people to really listen to each other and be open to change rather than just shouting at each other in a dialogue of the deaf.

      Wa s-salam, Yahya

    12. MaidMarian — on 15th July, 2009 at 11:33 am  

      Sunny - Either the headline to the article is inappropriate or you have wildly under represented the report, which is, to my reading, very comprehensive.

      The report is very clear about its scope - this is about a loose online network that has BNP sympathies (I would suspect that many of the report’s subjects feel that the BNP does not go far enough) rather than solely the BNP.

      Perhaps one other thought though Sunny - do you not allow for the possibility that the publication did not make a big play of Islam/religion because the research did not indicate such a thing?

      Sure - maybe the researchers did not look hard enough, I’m not second-guessing anything.

      The BNP and associated thinking is about ‘identity,’ that goes wider than religion per se. Islam is not first amongst equals in terms of ‘difference’ and if the research did not show it to be a major factor in the research subjects surely it would have been wrong for them to have bolted it on?

      Just a thought.

    13. munir — on 15th July, 2009 at 11:35 am  

      chairwoman

      “Sunny is not concerned about any prejudice expressed unless it is anti Islamic.”

      Absurd- one could equally argue that you:

      1) Are not concerned wth any prejudice except anti-jewish prejudice
      2) Are not concerned with anti-Muslim prejudice at all
      as evidenced by your comment

      “We’re all aware that the BNP are currently hiding their hatred of Black people, Jews, Asians, Roma, etc., behind the burqa of Islamophobia, but they’ll be lifting that veil at the earliest ’suitable’ opportunity.”

      “Sunny will now do his usual ‘When did I…’. and ‘Didn’t I…’, but the fact remains that all prejudices are equally bad, and we should all be aware that one frequently hides and leads to the rest.”

      This surely is Sunny’s point; that all prejudices are equally bad but the CSC ignores anti-Muslim prejudice in the BNP and concetrates on the others

      Its especially absurd and revealing as the BNP campaigns explicitly on an anti-Muslim ticket - its the main prong of their attack . What the CSC is doing is the equivalent of saying “that Hitler is appalling with his attacks on gypsies, communists and gays”

      I find your criticism of Sunny baffling; he’s easily the fairest most decent poster on here -does he tread on your toes by mentioning injustices you dont like to be mentioned or criticising prejudices you are comfortable with

    14. munir — on 15th July, 2009 at 11:40 am  

      Maid Marian

      “Perhaps one other thought though Sunny – do you not allow for the possibility that the publication did not make a big play of Islam/religion because the research did not indicate such a thing?

      Sure – maybe the researchers did not look hard enough, I’m not second-guessing anything.”

      Pure idiocy. How could you avoid the BNP’s anti-Muslim slant? the BNP campiagn last year was “a referendum on Islam”. A cursory look at their website reveals Muslims are the main targets. Nick Griffin spent 2/3 of his victory speech railing against Muslims. The party produces numerous anti-Muslim leaflets

    15. chairwoman — on 15th July, 2009 at 11:45 am  

      Munir - No, not at all. I have watched Sunny turn this blog over the past three years from one which considered all prejudices equally, to one that has become increasingly Islam Centric.

      For me, the initial charm and appeal of PP was that it was extremely inclusive. Yes we had the I/P arguments, but there was respect for each others views, and a common belief that we should be working towards a two state solution.

      There is no prejudice with which I am comfortable, and I resent you saying that there is, and as for injustice, I have fought it all my adult life, even losing a good job because I did so.

      Actually I do have one prejudice, and that is against the media for using near anorexic models on its fashion shoots.

    16. Random Guy — on 15th July, 2009 at 11:52 am  

      The BNP knows that anti-muslim hysteria that has been whipped up since 2001 is ripe for the taking in terms of public opinion. It is one of the reasons their vote increased in the last elections. The more liberal-minded sections of the media and population are aghast at this, yet they have also been partly responsible for it.

    17. Yahya Birt — on 15th July, 2009 at 11:52 am  

      Chairwoman:

      If you don’t mind me joining it. I’m not sure I share your assessment. Pickled Politics is anti-prejudice across the board it seems to me. The focus on Islamophobia is surely more the result of circumstance than a lapse in principle? If there a lot of one sort of prejudice around, then isn’t it evenhanded to devote relatively more attention to that at the time? I agree that the principled approach must be the bedrock to avoid the competitive victimhood syndrome, i.e. my suffering is more real and valid than yours etc, otherwise there can be no wider coalition against prejudice of all sorts.

      Wa s-salam, Yahya

    18. MaidMarian — on 15th July, 2009 at 11:52 am  

      munir - I’m avoiding nothing, it’s just that I did not carry out the research Sunny links to.

      Let’s go through this slowly one more time - the research is explicit that it is NOT solely about the BNP, but about a wider internet community associated with, but not necessarily part of the BNP.

      What it says is that any kind of difference, in the eyes of the people it studies produces identity politics motivated vitriol. That identity may or may not be religious.

      I’d raise more of an eyebrow if the report actively denied that Islam is a target, but it doesn’t say
      that.

      Have you actually read the link, munir?

    19. chairwoman — on 15th July, 2009 at 12:01 pm  

      Yahye

      Of course I don’t mind you joining in.

      I strongly feel that if one prejudice overwhelmingly takes centre stage, then the others have too much opportunity to slip in while nobody’s looking.

    20. munir — on 15th July, 2009 at 12:06 pm  

      chairwoman Yahya Birt answers your point #15 in a way far more eleqountely than I ever could

      Many Muslims would be delighted if there wasnt a focus on Islamophobia amongst people fighting prejudice because it would mean there wasnt a need since there wasnt prejudice against Muslims. But there is.

      “For me, the initial charm and appeal of PP was that it was extremely inclusive. Yes we had the I/P arguments, but there was respect for each others views, and a common belief that we should be working towards a two state solution.”

      Quite. But what does this havent to do with the topic at hand?

    21. chairwoman — on 15th July, 2009 at 12:10 pm  

      Munir - I shall just accept that you have a particular problem with me, and I shall have the warm drink and paracetamol :)

    22. munir — on 15th July, 2009 at 12:11 pm  

      chairwoman
      “I strongly feel that if one prejudice overwhelmingly takes centre stage, then the others have too much opportunity to slip in while nobody’s looking.”

      So would you suggest that during Hitler’s ascent to power those who opposed him not concentrate on his anti-Jewish rhetoric ? Absurd

      Would you agree that having a “holocaust day” (rather than a generic genocide day) which specific singles out one genocide and prejudice allows others “to slip in while nobodys looking”

    23. Yahya Birt — on 15th July, 2009 at 12:12 pm  

      Chairwoman @ 19

      I agree that danger is there, and while it is stating the obvious to say so, it is still worth saying that that is why we come together to keep each other honest in an atmosphere of shared respect.

      Wa s-salam, Yahya

    24. munir — on 15th July, 2009 at 12:13 pm  

      chairwoman
      “Munir – I shall just accept that you have a particular problem with me”

      true- it couldnt be that you have any prejudices at all. Thats not possible.

    25. ali — on 15th July, 2009 at 12:18 pm  

      Munir,

      If you are referring to holocaust memorial day, then you are a fool and (without probably even knowing it) at anti-semite. Holcaust memorial day covers a number of actual holocausts, INCLUDING ones against Muslims. So have a re-think on that one if you are referring to HMD.

    26. chairwoman — on 15th July, 2009 at 12:23 pm  

      Munir - Of course I have prejudices, but they’re not racial.

    27. ali — on 15th July, 2009 at 12:30 pm  

      so Munir, were you referring to HMD or not? If so, you must have had enough time to google it by now?!

    28. Yahya Birt — on 15th July, 2009 at 1:01 pm  

      I think this is off-topic (although important), but I actually am not sure that a generic genocide day is a good idea in the first place, even if the official HMD aims to be inclusive in any case.

      Other than private grief (those who lost family members in a genocide), publically memorializing a genocide must surely be first and foremost a lesson of terrible inhumanity from the past, remembered in the present, in order to cement future tolerance? And the primary, but not the sole, recipients of that message with respect to the Holocaust live in Europe for the history of colloboration and/or the failure to act when news of the concentration camps first came through. The sons and daughters don’t bear the sins of their parents/grandparents, but they do have a duty to remind themselves never even to start to go down that path again. Take Srebrenica, which was recognised as a genocide by the European Union this year, it seems to me to be most important that Serbs recall it as do all those who bore some responsiblity for letting it happen when they had a chance to intervene and do something about it. The same would go for Rwanda too. Similarly all genocides should make us highly sensitive to taking a stand against all ethnic cleansing, dispossession and systematic killing. Not drawing these lessons makes partisans of us all.

      Making a generic genocide day would I think, while on one score it might seem to be more fair (because our failure otherwise to be more inclusive), it would also carry the danger of making us think in terms of generic abstract suffering, or generic abstract victimhood, and I can’t see that that would have the same emotional impact. In fact it would make memorialization more prone to political posturing and grandstanding all round. Specificity on the other hand humanizes and makes the concrete and the abstract real and human, and makes us more humane if we can real listen attentively to each others’ stories while drawing out the universal lessons from them.

      Sorry if I’ve not expressed this very clearly, but I’m trying to think it through.

      Wa s-salam, Yahya

    29. Scots Tiger — on 15th July, 2009 at 1:17 pm  

      A VILE FABRICATION IN THE
      PAGES OF MIDDLE EAST QUARTERLY

      A report in MEQ asserts that some Iranian asylum-seekers and Afghan asylum-seekers arriving in Norway are claiming - respectively - to be persecuted homosexuals and converts to Christianity,

      Has anyone else heard of this bizarre assertion?

    30. Scots Tiger — on 15th July, 2009 at 1:32 pm  

      It was in Middle East Forum, of course.

      Here it is. Esther Ben-David wrote it.

      http://www.meforum.org/2107/europe-shifting-immigration-dynamic

      One immediately thinks of the celebrated Dyad Abou Jahjah asserting - doubtless lying as he did so - “…most asylum seekers tell lies …”

    31. douglas clark — on 15th July, 2009 at 1:44 pm  

      Yaha Birt @ 28,

      I know you think you haven’t expressed that idea very clearly, but I’d beg to differ. I think you have.

      Whilst it maybe a fair objective to make everyone feel guilt about a massacre, it is unlikely to resonate too deeply with particular groups that had nothing whatsoever to do with it. So, I would be surprised if Brazillians for instance, had a HMD.

      I’d have thought the Americans ought to have a Indian Memorial Day, for that is the people they destroyed. And it is right, and just, that Europeans have a HMD.

    32. Scots Tiger — on 15th July, 2009 at 1:53 pm  

      Douglas Clark knows that Europeans brought both horses and firewater to the natives of the Americas. It is they who should express their gratitude.

      Anyway, the [white] Americans are not as easily conned into feeling guilt-ridden - as the [white] Australians have been.

      We in the British Isles and Iceland await a ritual apology from the Maghrebi slave-raiders and LOTS of people - Japanese, Iraqis and Poles among them - are owed an apology by the Mongols,

    33. douglas clark — on 15th July, 2009 at 2:00 pm  

      Scots Tiger,

      That is what you bright people call satire, ain’t it?

    34. Gareth — on 15th July, 2009 at 2:22 pm  

      @32

      I suggest you read ‘Bury My Heart At Wounded Knee’ by Dee Brown.

    35. sonia — on 15th July, 2009 at 3:02 pm  

      Haven’t read the report but will do. I think I agree with what Rumbold says.

    36. sonia — on 15th July, 2009 at 3:15 pm  

      Anyway back to the report. I don’t see why every single report on the BNP necessarily has to focus on its anti-Muslim-ness. this is what the CSC says about its report:

      “On the day before two leading British National Party (BNP) members take their seats in the European Parliament, a new Centre for Social Cohesion report reveals that members and supporters of the BNP and its online activists display significant ideological affinity with key tenets of the neo-Nazi ideology. This included: support for violence; antisemitism and an admiration of the Third Reich; extreme racist views; and Holocaust denial.”

      So as far as I can see, if that is what the report was intending to show about the BNP, then that is what the report has achieved.

      Anyway these things are not meant to be “emotional” and focusing on the victimized and saying ‘oh poor these people those people, they are getting the brunt of the BNP.

      One can critique the BNP’s ideology without spending undue time ruminating about which specific sub-group (which is going to change anyway) gets the brunt of it/is the enemy of the moment. There is nothing farcical about it, its’ hardly trying to be wikipedia’s entry on the BNP.

    37. sonia — on 15th July, 2009 at 3:19 pm  

      Do we need to take this report so personally -as some kind of attack on Muslims! I don’t think so - i’m sure Muslims will manage, thanks all the same. there would be a wee shade of ‘the bnp are against the muslims so that’s why they’re bad!’ about it otherwise which is very self-centred thinking and NOT the sort of thing one should be using to bring together an alliance against the BNP. Sorry, but there it is.

      One should campaign against the BNP and the likes of them - on a collective anti-fascist and anti-racist front.

      And racism is NOT particularly worse or bad when it happens to people x over people y. It is equally bad regardless who it happens to.

    38. organic cheeseboard — on 15th July, 2009 at 3:30 pm  

      I do find it odd how much coverage this ‘report’ is getting. It’s just a bunch of the author’s blog posts repackaged in glossy covers.

      And for more of the author’s work see:

      http://edmundstanding.blogspot.com/2009/01/trouble-with-ed-husain.html

      http://edmundstanding.blogspot.com/2009/01/rocket-and-mortar-fire-into-israel-2000.html

      http://edmundstanding.blogspot.com/2008/12/operation-cast-lead.html

      http://pro-brit.blogspot.com/2009/05/no-to-nonsense-about-islamophobia.html

      I wonder why the Islamophobia has been downplayed by the report…

      I really don’t understand why Harry’s Place have taken this bloke on. It rather undermines their ideas about ‘fellow travellers’.

    39. douglas clark — on 15th July, 2009 at 3:38 pm  

      Sonias’ points at 36/37 more or less encapsulate my own beliefs. The BNP will see anyone they like as a suitable case for treatment. Muslims are just the dish of the day… Convenient fodder for an altogether repugnant belief system.

    40. sonia — on 15th July, 2009 at 3:41 pm  

      But in any case, as was mentioned right up at the top, it suits fascists and extremists of all sorts of stripes when critiquing a religion is compared and seen to be the same thing as racist xenophobic feeling.. It implies one is only against the ideas because one is against the people who follow it. It is very easy to figure out who is and who isn’t - therefore people shouldn’t bother suggesting attacking Islam (or any religion for that matter) is a bad thing and lump it in with being anti-Muslim or discriminatory towards a particular group.

      You can believe a particular group has a crap idea as an ideology (e.g. the Left saying about the right and vice versa) and tell them so straight - perhaps because you respect them as individuals actually! - and not be ‘anti-them’. You could of course do all that because you don’t like the group, but i don’t see why there is an assumption that the latter is automatically what happens.

      Of course the group might say anyway you’re anti-them cos they can’t handle the content of your points against their ideology. Most groups don’t like their ideology challenged. this is true across the board.

      No one of course has to listen to you and people have the freedom to believe in what they want. That is freedom of expression, freedom of critique, and freedom to believe in what one wants to.

      Anyway, Muslims don’t “own” Islam, no one does. It is there in the public domain for everyone to ruminate on, as is every other religion or ideology.

      Everyone should be free to criticise historical dogma and not just people who come from that ‘tradition’.

      So let’s be clear what we are actually talking about here.

    41. Yahya Birt — on 15th July, 2009 at 3:54 pm  

      @ 37 Sonia

      It seems fair enough to me that in constructing an anti-fascist and anti-racist platform we would take on board all the different ways the BNP lovingly displays it prejudicies like sinking boats of African refugees, describing the Roma as dirty criminals, denying the Holocaust, neo-Nazi symbolism. It doesn’t seem self-serving to a point out a obvious gap in the analysis at all.

      In any case one report in neither here nor there in building up a coalition….

    42. Ravi Naik — on 15th July, 2009 at 3:55 pm  

      This surely is Sunny’s point; that all prejudices are equally bad but the CSC ignores anti-Muslim prejudice in the BNP and concetrates on the others

      Did you actually read the report, Munir? It is actually full of references of anti-Muslim sentiment. You can blame Douglas Murray for being anti-Muslim, but I can’t see any bias against Muslims in the report:

      This ideology is based on the notion that European nations should be „purged‟ of their non-white populations and that „the white race‟ is currently
      under attack from a number of perceived aggressors. The ideology is fuelled by a hatred which is very often directed specifically towards Jewish and Muslim communities and homosexuals as well as all non-white races.

      The Guardian newspaper was also told by senior sources from within the Metropolitan Police that the rise in the ideology of neo-Nazism may lead to “an increased possibility of violence from the far right…[from] people who don’t like immigration, people who don’t like Islam. We’re seeing a resurgence of anti-semitism as well.”

      The BNP supporting blog Britain Awake praises Combat 18 and supports violent attacks on Muslim women

      BoycottIslamUK’s channel expresses support for the BNP and includes a playlist featuring BNP Deputy Leader Simon Darby. A message for visitors to this channel states: ‘Boycott Muslim businesses in your areas!! Vote BNP June 4th!’ and ‘FUCK ISLAM’.

      This user features a BNP rosette as his picture, includes two BNP videos on his channel,and states that ‘people need to wake up and accept that different ethnic groups and religions can not live side by side in harmony and peace’. pakidie100 also proclaims: ‘Fucking Hate Muslims!! big nose, smelly, pedos and they all fucking stink!!!

      And there is more…

    43. douglas clark — on 15th July, 2009 at 4:08 pm  

      Hmm…

      I didn’t expect to be as easily persuaded to a point of view as I was:

      Anyway, Muslims don’t “own” Islam, no one does. It is there in the public domain for everyone to ruminate on, as is every other religion or ideology.

      Everyone should be free to criticise historical dogma and not just people who come from that ‘tradition’.

      Although Sonia is justified in her own right, these two paragraphs explain why you should all be grateful that she writes here. It is terribly disappointing that despite trying I cannot see an inch of difference between her beliefs and mine :-) .

      munir, beware!

    44. organic cheeseboard — on 15th July, 2009 at 4:09 pm  

      The BNP are also strongly sceptical of the BBC:

      if, say, the Hindu community had only been fortunate enough to produce four young men willing to blow the hell out of Londoners and provided a clerical and political class willing to make excuses for them, then the BBC might credit Hindus with inventing the modern world.

      And they seem fairly hardcore in their idea about a British-Muslim love-in:

      If only they could find four young suicide bombers, then self-appointed Hindu leaders could dictate British foreign policy first-hand to the government.

      Oh no wait - that obviously disgusting crap is the work of a certain Douglas Murray. Who heads up the ‘anti-BNP’ organisation that produced Standing’s report.

      You couldn’t make it up.

    45. Yahya Birt — on 15th July, 2009 at 4:19 pm  

      @ Sonia 40

      If it was easy to distinguish between ideas/ideology/religion and people’s individual and collective identities, their sense of culture, history, values all of which might underground their sense of worth etc then we wouldn’t all be spending all this time arguing about it, but it’s not. It’s really difficult to get it right, and where to draw the line is what is precisely often in question. My personal take on it is free speech fundamentalism combined with a serious willingness to repair a fraying public culture by finding the magic formula between commonly-wide shared values and, yes, cultural diversity. Again, not an easy one either.

      @ 42 Ravi

      The report cites some instances esp. from the web, but other than reporting the planned far-right terrorist spectacular via the Guardian, the report in its own analysis and conclusion does I think not do much with some of the evidence it presents. That’s all — and I think Sunny pointed that out at the beginning.

      But it’s only one report….

    46. Leon — on 15th July, 2009 at 4:19 pm  

      In fact I think Pickled Politics/eGov did a better job in attacking the BNP with our 85 questions directed at the BNP.

      It’s not a competition mate. There are no anti fascist league tables for us to climb. We’re all pulling broadly in the same direction with regards to the BNP.

      I’m no fan of Douglas Murray but have met people from CSC and they’re decent folk with integrity and a genuine interest in making Britain a better place. I’m more than happy for every org and activist to go at the BNP with whatever resources they have available.

      I’m not going to sit there getting bogged down in distractions like tactics. You’ve read Alinsky, don’t you remember what he said about building coalitions and the focus on objectives not means?

      As in war the same in politics at times: the enemy of my enemy is my friend. I’m more than happy to link arms with Harry’s Place, CSC, The Spittoon and friends here at PP against the BNP.

      It’s called pragmatism, I thought you of all people understood the concept?

    47. Anon — on 15th July, 2009 at 4:46 pm  

      “As in war the same in politics at times: the enemy of my enemy is my friend. I’m more than happy to link arms with Harry’s Place, CSC, The Spittoon and friends here at PP against the BNP.”

      And will Harry’s Place, the CSC and The Spittoon link up with, say, the MCB or the British Muslim Initiative to resist the BNP? Of course they won’t.

    48. Faisal (The Spittoon) — on 15th July, 2009 at 5:07 pm  

      Anon, that’s not Bob Pitt of Islamophobia-Watch again is it?

      Hi Bob, how’s things?

    49. Jai — on 15th July, 2009 at 5:09 pm  

      Nick Griffin went on the record to say it was politically better for the BNP to focus on Muslims rather than Jews or racism.

      The BNP knows that anti-muslim hysteria that has been whipped up since 2001 is ripe for the taking in terms of public opinion.

      The BNP will see anyone they like as a suitable case for treatment. Muslims are just the dish of the day… Convenient fodder for an altogether repugnant belief system.

      Absolutely correct. Here is an extract from a speech by Griffin to local party activists in Burnley in 2006 confirming the above, in his own words:

      Quote:

      We bang on about Islam. Why? Because to the ordinary public out there it’s the thing they can understand. It’s the thing the newspaper editors sell newspapers with. If we were to attack some other ethnic group — some people say we should attack the Jews … But … we’ve got to get to power. And if that was an issue we chose to bang on about when the press don’t talk about it … the public would just think we were barking mad. They’d just think oh, you’re attacking Jews just because you want to attack Jews. You’re attacking this group of powerful Zionists just because you want to take poor Manny Cohen the tailor and shove him in a gas chamber. That’s what the public would think. It wouldn’t get us anywhere other than stepping backwards. It would lock us in a little box; the public would think “extremist crank lunatics, nothing to do with me.” And we wouldn’t get power.

      http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=1269630805284168668

    50. halima — on 15th July, 2009 at 5:20 pm  

      The preface explains why they caried out this study.

      It was to follow up to a study on Islamic terrorism and they decided they needed to do one on BNP extremism.

      So from the outset they have referenced Islam and Muslims so it’s not like they are indiscriminate and don’t mention particular BNP hates. It’s well known that the BNP are having a ball recruiting sympathisers using the Muslims breed terrorism bandwagon.

      Research is often presented to support a hypothesis - I’ve rarely seen researchers radically stray from their intended enquiry, so i doubt that somehow BNP respondants just failed to talk about ‘those Muslims’.

      I think Sunny is spot on this one.

      But as Sonia says, it’s only a report - and I’d add - only from the Centre for Social Cohesion, and credentials to the Policy Exchange - another fine institution with neutral politics on diversity.

      I feel very bad commenting on this report, lounging at home and haven’t bothered to read it’s contents - but will aspire to. But one thing I do seriously is look at the Institution and locate its perspective. Says a lot more than the mere content.

      What might that tell me about Sunny’s perspective? That he’s always been concerned about various wrongs and the need to right these. I might not agree with all his perspectives - but i won’t believe he has pet hobbies.

      Keep going Sunny.

    51. Faisal (The Spittoon) — on 15th July, 2009 at 5:31 pm  

      Sonia - #37 and #40.
      Still the voice of reason around here.

    52. halima — on 15th July, 2009 at 5:31 pm  

      “RESEARCH: The CSC undertakes on-the-ground research into ethnic and religious communities in the UK and publishes impartial, detailed analyses. With a focus on extremism, radicalisation and different forms of Islamism, the CSC analyses potential challenges to human rights, religious pluralism and social cohesion across the UK.”

      Blurb from the website.

      Seems like they are mostly concerned about Islam, and not the BNP so interesting how their analysis of the BNP failed to pick up on the BNP’s love of Muslims in particular in the UK.

    53. ali — on 15th July, 2009 at 5:35 pm  

      Halima,

      Read the report in full please. Until then, stop commenting on it as all you are doing is revealing the extent of your ignorace

    54. halima — on 15th July, 2009 at 5:41 pm  

      Ali

      What if the report only adds to my ignorance if i read it?

      I got as far as the Preface.

    55. halima — on 15th July, 2009 at 5:43 pm  

      Are you patient enough with those of us who are little less sharper?

    56. Yossarian (The Spittoon) — on 15th July, 2009 at 5:57 pm  

      Anon.

      No, Spittoon will not be linking with MCB to counter the BNP because the MCB has boycotted in the past (and did this year, I believe, but correct me if I’m wrong) holocaust memorial day. This completely discredits them as a voice of sincere anti-fascism so I’m rather intrigued that you would try to present our non-alliance with MCB as anything other than evidence of our commitment to anti-fascist values.

    57. chairwoman — on 15th July, 2009 at 6:38 pm  

      We bang on about Islam. Why? Because to the ordinary public out there it’s the thing they can understand. It’s the thing the newspaper editors sell newspapers with. If we were to attack some other ethnic group — some people say we should attack the Jews … But … we’ve got to get to power. And if that was an issue we “chose to bang on about when the press don’t talk about it … the public would just think we were barking mad. They’d just think oh, you’re attacking Jews just because you want to attack Jews. You’re attacking this group of powerful Zionists just because you want to take poor Manny Cohen the tailor and shove him in a gas chamber. That’s what the public would think. It wouldn’t get us anywhere other than stepping backwards. It would lock us in a little box; the public would think “extremist crank lunatics, nothing to do with me.” And we wouldn’t get power.”

      Makes me want to puke!

    58. chairwoman — on 15th July, 2009 at 6:40 pm  

      Sorry that hasn’t come out quite as I wanted.

      Come on Sunny, we may not see eye to eye on everything but please bring back the edit facility!

    59. Refresh — on 15th July, 2009 at 7:31 pm  

      What value does the CSC bring? They’ve watched and contributed to the same anti-muslim narrative as the BNP, as Melanie Philips, as Daniel Pipes - only now to see the fruits of their labour: The far-right in the ‘ascendancy’.

      Well done Mr Murray.

      Good piece Sunny.

    60. munir — on 15th July, 2009 at 8:25 pm  

      Yossarian
      ” This completely discredits them as a voice of sincere anti-fascism so I’m rather intrigued that you would try to present our non-alliance with MCB as anything other than evidence of our commitment to anti-fascist values.”

      A commitment shown in Spitton head Faisal Gazi linking to the Brussel Journals a fascist anti-Muslim rag which supports banning Muslims from politics and promotes the modern protocols “Eurabia” and the author Fjordman who explicitly called for the genocide of Europes Muslims on his Gates of Vienna blog.

      Not to mention its ties to Harrys Place which linked to Mel Phillips and still links to Stephen “ban Muslim immigration” Pollard

    61. Sunny — on 15th July, 2009 at 8:28 pm  

      Read the report in full please. Until then, stop commenting on it as all you are doing is revealing the extent of your ignorace

      I’ve read the report, as I said, and it’s still lame. No amount of mealy-mouthed excuses can get away from that.

      The report is a bit like an attempt to write about al-Qaeda without actually their meddling in Iraq. It’s like talking about Ahmedinijiad without pointing out the recent riots in Iran. Does that make it easier for some people to understand what I’m getting at?

      I don’t take reports seriously that make glaring omissions - especially when those look politically motivated.

      I’d like to ask the reports authors:

      1) Do they believe anti-Muslim bigotry exists?

      2) Do BNP sympathisers, the kind they targeted express bigotry and hatred against Muslims or not? (some of the evidence they gathered seems to indicate this)

      3) Do the reports authors deny that the BNP has recently decided to re-focus its attention on Muslims, because they knew it was more politically palatable?

      4) If 3 is true - then why not mention it in the report?

      As for someone who defended Geert Wilders - please try reading the links I provide.

    62. Faisal (The Spittoon) — on 15th July, 2009 at 8:38 pm  

      A commitment shown in Spitton head Faisal Gazi linking to the Brussel Journals a fascist anti-Muslim rag which supports banning Muslims from politics and promotes the modern protocols “Eurabia” and the author Fjordman who explicitly called for the genocide of Europes Muslims on his Gates of Vienna blog.

      The story of Lord Nazir Ahmed threatening other peers with mob violence if they did not ban the entry of Geert Wilders was covered in many insider blogs in addition to the Brussels Journal.

      I did link to it, yes.

      But then you sneered at the dead victims of the Bangladesh genocide. Are you a neocon, zionist too?

    63. Refresh — on 15th July, 2009 at 8:53 pm  

      Linking to the Brussels Journal was a particularly low point. I recall at the time we could only find one source, and it was the Journal everything else seemed to flow from it.

      Why didn’t the story go further than that? Probably because it was not true. I still maintain it was not a good idea for you to hook onto that journal so as to advance the Quilliam Foundation press release.

      I don’t think we should mention that faux pas (I hope I am not being generous in presuming that is what it was) again.

    64. Faisal (The Spittoon) — on 15th July, 2009 at 8:55 pm  

      Linking to the Brussels Journal was a particularly low point. I recall at the time we could only find one source, and it was the Journal everything else seemed to flow from it.

      You’re probably right Refresh. I didn’t really know it was a Eurabian blog until later. However, the story of Lord Nazir’s threats have been confirmed by many other sources so, in my opinion, it still stands.

    65. Scots Tiger — on 15th July, 2009 at 8:57 pm  

      Ya Faisal -

      The Bangladesh genocide was a long time ago.

      Has anyone here ever heard anyone on the thinking Left ever mention the poor bloody Muslim Biharis stuck in Bangladesh.

      They still hope - even after all these years - to move to Pakistan.

      The tragedy is that Pakistan doesn’t want them and neither does anyone else.

    66. Faisal (The Spittoon) — on 15th July, 2009 at 9:10 pm  

      You’re absolutely right Scots Tiger.

    67. MaidMarian — on 15th July, 2009 at 9:12 pm  

      Sunny (61) - ‘The report is a bit like an attempt to write about al-Qaeda without actually their meddling in Iraq. It’s like talking about Ahmedinijiad without pointing out the recent riots in Iran. Does that make it easier for some people to understand what I’m getting at?’

      Not really. Al-Qaeda have an existance outside of their activity in Iraq, Ahmedinejad is far ‘bigger’ than the recent riots. Similarly, the BNP and its associates are defined by far more than their relationship with Islam.

      The authors of the report certainly do not deny that there is anti-muslim bogotry and your suggestion that they are making such a denial is cheap.

      It may well be that the BNP are indulging in bgotry for electoral purposes, I’m sure that they are - but the research is not about the BNP’s electoral strategy, it is explicitly about far more.

      You are overreading this.

    68. Faisal (The Spittoon) — on 15th July, 2009 at 9:20 pm  

      Sunny

      What you’ve failed to understand is that the report is not about the public open face of the leadership – which has shifted from antisemitism to anti-Islam – but in fact about exposing the filthy underbelly which they have tried to sweep under the carpet and which has not changed at all from the old days.

      This is mainly made up of raging neo-Nazi antisemites who think Jews run everything, and who certainly see the ‘jews’ as a bigger threat than ‘Muslims’.

      We’ve had lots of reports about Griffin’s chameleon-like change in rhetoric but not in content. This report goes into the BNP’s membership and shows that despite the sanitation of BNP’s public face, it is still as virulently white race supremacist as it always has been.

    69. Adnan — on 15th July, 2009 at 9:39 pm  

      “the filthy underbelly which they have tried to sweep under the carpet and which has not changed at all from the old days.”

      The public face has a useful purpose because it pulls in people from the right of politics as well as from minorities who have their own issues with Islam. Also, they can use the “it’s a not race” argument.

      A report on the BNP that emphasises this public stance against Muslim will get a “so-what?” from people attracted to the “inclusive” BNP. However, exposing the “business-as-usual” aspect of the BNP (like PP have also done) reminds some of this group of why they would never support the BNP in the past.

    70. Sunny — on 15th July, 2009 at 9:46 pm  

      Similarly, the BNP and its associates are defined by far more than their relationship with Islam.

      So you’d write a report about the future of Iran and Ahmedinijad without actually mentioning the recent riots? Astounding.

      I’d prefer it if my numbered questions above were answered.

    71. Yahya Birt — on 15th July, 2009 at 9:46 pm  

      One of the stories I followed for a while was what happened in Stoke, where the BNP has now got, if memory serves, nine local councillors altogether, so it’s one of the BNP success stories around the country. There were background issues like structural unemployment and housing shortages but the trigger issue was the campaign to prevent the building of a mosque in the city. The leaflets that they distributed in the city which I have seen were truly hair-raising anti-Muslim propoganda. This campaign involved the rank-and-file the report talks about.

      No doubt these vile racist ideas against anyone not white and Jewish people must and should be exposed, as the report has done, but it still seems (at the very least) oddly and willfully myopic that the report doesn’t do more to expose this shift in the last several years to target Muslims. I think Sunny is right to call this one out — and to accuse him of doing so for reasons of political correctness or partiality is just inane internet chatter.

      The BNP must be laughing at all of us.

      Wa s-salam, Yahya

    72. munir — on 15th July, 2009 at 9:55 pm  

      Faisal (The Spittoon)

      “The story of Lord Nazir Ahmed threatening other peers with mob violence if they did not ban the entry of Geert Wilders was covered in many insider blogs in addition to the Brussels Journal.

      I did link to it, yes.”

      Untrue. Your sole link was to the Brussel Journals. When the fact you were sourcing far-right rags was exposed you scrambled about for any other corroboration. The other “evidence” you linked to was a Pakistan Daily News story (which mention nothing of the 10,000 Muslims you had mentioned )and a forum posting on the Sun.

      The thread is here

      http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/3155

      Its a joy to read- Id forgotten you use terminology like “taqiyya” beloved of Muslim haters and last used on here by Scots “expel the Muslims” Tiger

      Posts 6, 7,19,22 (damon), 27, 35 , 37, 46 (douglas clark-best post of thread), 49 (brilliant), 50 (douglas clark also brilliant), 54, 85, 90, 137 are my favs

      Its intriguing to note that even after the Brussel Journal was exposed you continued supporting the story (posts 24 28) and indeed still do

      “But then you sneered at the dead victims of the Bangladesh genocide. Are you a neocon, zionist too?”

      No i didnt. You are a shameless liar. (See above and below)

      You’re probably right Refresh. I didn’t really know it was a Eurabian blog until later.

      Given that your quote came from the third paragraph of the Brussels Journal and that to get to it you would have read this the first paragraph

      “The House of Lords is a venerable British institution, but what does one get if one accepts Muslims in? This:”

      and later this
      “That, apparently, is what one gets when one accepts Muslims into the House of Lords.”

      as well as the huge advert on the left saying “Defeating Eurabia” how credible does anyone think your claims that “I didn’t really know it was a Eurabian blog until later” are ?

      http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/3765

      However, the story of Lord Nazir’s threats have been confirmed by many other sources so, in my opinion, it still stands.

      Which other sources/insider blogs?
      Even today months after the event a google of “Lord Ahmed 10,000″ (which is presumably the search you did as the sun was next after the Brussels Journal” brings up such credible insider blogs as “sheikhyrmani(muslim hater), the bnp, free republic (anti-Muslim rag) Mel Phillips and ….stormfront

    73. Faisal (The Spittoon) — on 15th July, 2009 at 10:30 pm  

      That thread is a joy to read. It also has the comment in which you sneered at and dismissed the murder of my family members in the 1971 genocide of East Pakistan. It removes my need to respond to your calling a “shameless liar”. Thanks for dredging it up.

    74. Refresh — on 15th July, 2009 at 10:43 pm  

      Sid/Faisal

      ‘That thread is a joy to read.’

      It certainly is. Lets see if we can repeat the experience:

      Its disappointing that you are making those allegations again. Can you provide thsse ‘independent sources’ this time?

      I know we were all hoping we would get to the bottom of it, ideally with the smear clan in the dock.

    75. Faisal (The Spittoon) — on 15th July, 2009 at 10:46 pm  

      Its disappointing that you are making those allegations again. Can you provide thsse ‘independent sources’ this time?

      Can’t be that disappointing for you. Sorry my lips are sealed.

    76. Sunny — on 15th July, 2009 at 10:53 pm  

      Guys can you take this broken record conversation somewhere else please? It’s off-topic.

    77. munir — on 15th July, 2009 at 10:55 pm  

      Faisal

      What you’ve failed to understand is that the report is not about the public open face of the leadership – ”

      And what youve failed to disclose is Houriya Ahmed
      one of the core editorial team at Spitoon
      http://www.spittoon.org/contact
      is a reasercher at the CSC http://www.socialcohesion.co.uk/people

      you thus have a clear “conflict of interest ” and need to defend the CSC as you at spitoon are linked to them

      Indeed it is yet more proof if any was needed of your anti-Muslim slant at Spitoon- you collaborate with someone like the loathsome Douglas Murray -responsible for the nazi like anti-Muslim rant I posted on #9

      You collaborate with a man who wants to ban Muslim immigration (a BNP policy) and send Muslims refugees from war “back” (a BNP policy). So clearly what troubles the CSC about the BNP isnt its anti-Muslim stance

      There certainly is merit in looking at the fringes of a movement like the BNP- but its quite obvious that CSC avoids adressing the BNPs anti-Muslim rhetoric because it doesnt have a problem with it- why would it when its director is an Islamophobe like Murray who speaks at “Pim Fortuyn” memorial lectures and its publications are uniformly anti-Muslim ?

      Indeed Murrays introduction to the report doesnt mention the BNP’s anti-Muslimism ONCE!!!

      which has shifted from antisemitism to anti-Islam

      nice try- not anti-Islam - anti-Muslim

      – but in fact about exposing the filthy underbelly which they have tried to sweep under the carpet and which has not changed at all from the old days.

      This is mainly made up of raging neo-Nazi antisemites who think Jews run everything, and who certainly see the ‘jews’ as a bigger threat than ‘Muslims’.

      We’ve had lots of reports about Griffin’s chameleon-like change in rhetoric but not in content. This report goes into the BNP’s membership and shows that despite the sanitation of BNP’s public face, it is still as virulently white race supremacist as it always has been.

      Again the presumption behind this quote is that the BNP’s sanitatory public anti-Muslim face is OK - what only is bad and is the real issue is its hidden anti-semitism- white supremacism is wrong anti-Muslim is OK

      . What you and the CSC report are saying is “the BNP is only bad because it has an anti-semitic underbelly- if it got rid of this and was just anti-Muslim (say like Pim Fortuyn Murrays hero) it would be OK”

    78. Faisal (The Spittoon) — on 15th July, 2009 at 11:01 pm  


      And what youve failed to disclose is Houriya Ahmed
      one of the core editorial team at Spitoon
      http://www.spittoon.org/contact
      is a reasercher at the CSC http://www.socialcohesion.co.uk/people

      I don’t need to disclose it. Houriya mentions her association with CSC in her blogging herself.

      Indeed Murrays introduction to the report doesnt mention the BNP’s anti-Muslimism ONCE!!!

      Murray didn’t write the introduction. He wrote the preface. Have you read the report that you’re getting so paranoiac about. Or are you just operating on Sunny’s ‘reading’ of it?

    79. munir — on 15th July, 2009 at 11:02 pm  

      Faisal

      That thread is a joy to read. It also has the comment in which you sneered at and dismissed the murder of my family members in the 1971 genocide of East Pakistan.

      Utter liar. Give us the comment number, liar.

    80. Faisal (The Spittoon) — on 15th July, 2009 at 11:03 pm  

      There you go you nasty little cockroach:

      http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/3155#comment-150338

    81. Refresh — on 15th July, 2009 at 11:08 pm  

      Munir @77

      Precisely!

      Pym Fortuyn to Haider to Geert Wilders to Douglas Murray.

      And if I recall, it was Pym Fortuyn’s electoral success which fed directly into the BNP targeting muslims. As it was for Haider in Austria.

      Get with it guys.

    82. SQBA — on 15th July, 2009 at 11:17 pm  

      Sorry my bad - website said I couldn’t post it for some reason, didn’t realise it was already up… so ignore comment 83 :)

    83. munir — on 15th July, 2009 at 11:23 pm  

      It gets worse- The reading list the CSC recommends on Islam is extraordinary - Id highlight it to all muslims

      astonishingly it includes a number of books written by “Eurabia” author Baet Yor - so we have Sid denying he has links to the Eurabian blog (#64) while happily associating Spitton with the CSC that promotes its author!!!

      This is how extreme promoters of Baet Yor, CSC and Spitoon are:

      “Craig R. Smith in a New York Times article referred to her as one of the “most extreme voices on the new Jewish right.”[43]

      Johann Hari, a British journalist, argues 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” and that Bat Ye’or is a “scholar” who argues that Europe is on the brink of being transformed into a conquered continent called “Eurabia”.[44]

      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 murder 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.[45]

      According to David Aaronovitch:

      [Eurabia] is a concept created by a writer called Bat Ye’or who, according to the publicity for her most recent book, “chronicles Arab determination to subdue Europe as a cultural appendage to the Muslim world — and Europe’s willingness to be so subjugated”. This, as students of conspiracy theories will recognise, is the addition of the Sad Dupes thesis to the Enemy Within idea.[46]”

      This is who Spitoon have allied themselves to

      as well as book by Serb apologist for genocide Serge Trifković and Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch!

      as well as books written by Ibn Warraq an apostate who considers the Quran to be false and the Prophet (pbuh) to have been a liar as well as other books attacking the Quran and the Prophet (pbuh)

      there is a book on anti-semitism (fair enough) but none of Islamophobia

      This is Sid/Faisal, Muslims, this is Spitoon!

    84. SQBA — on 16th July, 2009 at 12:32 am  

      I really do not get you Sunny. Though I do not know you, but only through your blogs, I am sure you are a perfectly nice guy. But I really do not understand why you keep deleting my comments, which are perfectly legit. Shame. Oh well. Bye then!

    85. Edna Welthorpe — on 16th July, 2009 at 12:36 am  

      Can the tale told in that Middle-East Forum [link provided at #30 above] he true? The unshaven Iranian males swishing around in ballet skirts at Oslo Airport and claiming to be outrageous queens persecuted for their sexual orientation?

      Or the planeload of Afghans claiming that they had all converted to Christianity en masse?

      It all sounds pretty dodgy to ME, anyway!

      So some proto-BNP nutters are alleged to have forsaken their accustomed and time-hallowed anti-semitism and taken up the smart new cult of Islamophobia.

      Unsurprising, really!

      The important thing is to hate SOMEONE! Faithful readers of Orwell’s ‘1984′ will understand this in a heartbeat.

      Incidentally, it is a joy to visit a site which provides links to such stimulating and interesting websites as the ‘Brussels Journal!’ The nearby site THERE’S NOTHING BRITISH ABOUT THE B.N.P. also provides interesting links [and the indolent can navigate there by way of Harry's Place.]

      Can anyone even begin to make sense of the
      “Oh yes, he did!” and “Oh no, he didn’t” pantomine exchanges about whether or not the Lord Ahmed threatened to surround the House of Lords with a cordon of ten thousand savage Waziris or some equally preposterous allegation?

      A cynical person might even suggest that the Noble Lord allowed the story to be believed by the credulous in Pakistan while denying it strenuously in England.

      Not that anyone HERE would belief so base and scurrilous an allegation for a moment.

    86. munir — on 16th July, 2009 at 12:37 am  

      Faisal

      There you go you nasty little cockroach:

      http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/3155#comment-150338

      Thanks Eurabian- this is my quote you allege is sneering at your dead family member (rather than at you)

      Sid sadly is blind to this. He is focussed in his tasbih of Jammat Islami/Islamists, Jammat Islami/Islamists , Jammat Islami/Islamists as if no other injustice exists on the planet. This is because a family member was alleged killed by JI. His is narcisssim rit large; narcissism and revenge as belief and political ideology. And he uses PP as its platform

      Its absolutely true and sums you up totally. Given you were 1 years old at the time of the 1971 war you clearly were deeply affected by it. You never forget what happens to you at that age.

      You also forgot to quote my post of
      http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/3155#comment-150336

      “I said that the Pakistani army behaved like Nazis in Bangladesh and should be held account (something you have never suggested for your group). Then I dared suggest people who murdered Muslims in Gujurat should also be.” (comment was adressed to Jai)

      Ive suggested Jamati members who committed war crimes be arrested and tried (as with anyone else who commits atrocities). Sid knows this but lies and lies as he needs to distract from the fact his hatred is so extreme he collaborates with Muslim haters .

    87. munir — on 16th July, 2009 at 12:40 am  

      Sids hatred and desire for “revenge” is so extreme he will blindly join with people who desire destruction/perdition for Europes Muslims

    88. Faisal (The Spittoon) — on 16th July, 2009 at 12:42 am  

      Sunny

      I’d prefer it if my numbered questions above were answered.

      If you read the preface and to the intro, which I’m sure you have, you’ll see that they already are.

      1) Anti-Muslim bigotry in the intro.
      2) You ask if there is anti-muslim bigotry evidenced and then you admit there is.
      3) Again mentioned in the intro, and the answer is yes.
      4) Same as 3.

    89. Sunny — on 16th July, 2009 at 12:55 am  

      You two are fucking boring me wth your irrelevant bickering. As I said - take it somewhere else.

      Faisal - I’m afraid that won’t really do. It gets a brief mention in the intro, but there’s nothing about it in the conclusion. The conclusion also says:

      The BNP continues to promote an ideology centred on race and racism. It is a socially divisive organisation that is attempting to rebrand as a conventional political party in order to gain the legitimacy that some European far-right parties have managed to achieve in recent years.

      Anyone who’s done an ounce of research could tell you the BNP aren’t really focused as much on racism any more, especially since Griffin himself claims he’s not racist. They certainly don’t go around with t-shirts claiming ‘white power’ any more.

      The BNP’s rhetoric has changed to focusing on immigration and Muslims. Griffin constantly equates Muslims with terrorists and say Islam itself is hate-speech, ergo all Muslims who follow the religions are terrorists.

      To miss this and not even talk about this makes the report a farce. It’s a glaring omission on a monumental scale - and I suspect there is a political motivation behind it. Frankly I wouldn’t recommend the report to my dog to eat it. If you have a disagreement with that opinion - so be it. I’ve made my position clear.

    90. Ravi Naik — on 16th July, 2009 at 1:31 am  

      Anyone who’s done an ounce of research could tell you the BNP aren’t really focused as much on racism any more, especially since Griffin himself claims he’s not racist. They certainly don’t go around with t-shirts claiming ‘white power’ any more.

      That’s a tactic. Their strategy, though, remains unchanged. Promote their ideology based on race and racism. Nick Griffin said so himself.

    91. Faisal (The Spittoon) — on 16th July, 2009 at 1:52 am  

      Sunny, I disagree with your reading of the report. I think Standing has done a pretty good job of uncovering the BNP’s deeply vicious side, which is still, at mass-membership level very much occupied with race and white-supremacism.

      And that message should be passed onto any small-c conservatives who are not particularly racist bur are considering joining the BNP as a way of tackling immigration.

      There are multiple methodologies for tackling the BNP. The left liberal approach is not the only one.

    92. Sunny — on 16th July, 2009 at 2:48 am  

      Their strategy is to focus on Muslims. Why not mention that?

    93. damon — on 16th July, 2009 at 4:36 am  

      I know the focus is to beat the BNP and udermine fascists everywhere. To pull the rug from under the feet of Geert Wilders and Douglas Murray, (who in the current Standpoint magazine said this):
      ”The British people have said for years that they do not want mass immigration. The main parties have ignored them. This is venality”
      http://www.standpointmag.co.uk/the-outsider-july-09-mps-expenses-BNP

      I’m not as up on all this stuff than many people on here.
      But this is what they are talking about.
      http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=malmo+sweden+immigrants&search_type=&aq=f

      That’s what they mean when they speak of The Netherlands being ”the canary in the coal mine” for Europe, and such stuff.

      I just wish we could tackle their arguments head on without forever going round and round the houses.

    94. organic cheeseboard — on 16th July, 2009 at 8:24 am  

      Just to come back to someone up there - I don’t think that the CSC is a credible place for anti-BNP activism to reside, since the place is more or less openly islamophobic and endorses Bat Yeor.

      Edmund Standing I have a *bit* more time for, but he most definitely is an islamophobe, and his report is skewed away from a focus on the races the BNP are targetting at the moment.

      To an extent the report does a service in showing that they’re still racist towards almost everyone non-British, but for me this is old news - this stuff was all over the media before the report came out.

      And as I’ve said, I don’t really take Standing seriously as a researcher - he is an amateur blogger.

      Put simply, I’d leave this stuff to Searchlight. The CSC are at best open to racism themselves (endorsement of Wilders for example), and they are most definitely islamophobic. combatting the BNP requires a large coalition, granted, but I don’t trust the CSC as allies and I’d wager most British Muslims would feel the same.

    95. Jai — on 16th July, 2009 at 11:22 am  

      That’s a tactic. Their strategy, though, remains unchanged. Promote their ideology based on race and racism. Nick Griffin said so himself.

      Correct on all points. And it’s confirmed by the BNP’s ongoing responses to the questions eGov has been addressing to them too. Despite the horribly inflammatory public rhetoric, their “real” policies and ideology don’t necessarily focus solely on Muslims — they have a problem with all non-white people full-stop, whether they’re Muslim nor not.

      And, as Griffin himself stated (see #49), the BNP’s current public focus on Muslims is an opportunistic political tactic — they’re deliberately scapegoating & persecuting Muslims in order to further their own ambition to achieve power. Nasty, nasty stuff.

      Underneath it all, they’re still unambiguously antisemitic as well (again, as Griffin confirmed in that speech). Meaning that they still hate Jews at least as much as they hate Muslims and all non-white people.

      Incidentally, Griffin’s comments about “the public” (in terms of deliberately exploiting people’s prejudices and manipulating current/potential supporters in general) demonstrate yet again the BNP leadership’s contemptuous attitude towards the public as a whole, including people whose support they wish to elicit.

    96. Yahya Birt — on 16th July, 2009 at 12:24 pm  

      Granted that a racist ideology lurks beneath the surface, but obviously I take it as read that when Nick Griffin says that Islam is a cancer that Europe must remove, he means it. It’s not just a tactic is it? It comes out of a racist ideology.

      And shouldn’t we be asking the question: what conditions allowed for an anti-Muslim message to front-end and drive the BNP electoral success in recent times? Yes, there is extremism and terrorism, yes, there are conservative attitudes among British Muslims that cheese a lot of people off, yes, Muslims in this country have so many issues to sort out with other minority groups that suffer discrination (to name some of the major challenges), but for God’s sake isn’t this a line-in-the-sand moment? If any of us contributed, inadvertently or otherwise, to feeding the monster, let’s admit that, move on, and turn over a new leaf.

      And another thing: if Douglas Murray was to resile from his support for Geert Wilders and other Eurabianists and an “Islam is the problem” position, then the CSC would have more chance of being taken seriously. There are too many big question marks for people not to have justifiable qualms as to why this report was put together in the way that it was.

      Wa s-salam, Yahya

    97. chairwoman — on 16th July, 2009 at 12:45 pm  

      “And shouldn’t we be asking the question: what conditions allowed for an anti-Muslim message to front-end and drive the BNP electoral success in recent times? Yes, there is extremism and terrorism, yes, there are conservative attitudes among British Muslims that cheese a lot of people off, yes, Muslims in this country have so many issues to sort out with other minority groups that suffer discrination (to name some of the major challenges),”

      Yahya - Despite the things you’ve listed, the honest answer to your question is nothing. No more than Jews or Black people did when they were the prime overt targets of the BNP and their predecessors. There seems to be a need for the British people to feel that some ‘outside’ group is stealing their jobs/women/housing/way of life, and a desire to get rid of them so that they can have them all back again, and IMHO it is just the Muslims’ turn.

      Yes it’s vile, yes it’s unfair, but don’t wrack your brains, there is no real answer.

    98. munir — on 16th July, 2009 at 1:41 pm  

      chairwoman
      “Yahya – Despite the things you’ve listed, the honest answer to your question is nothing. No more than Jews or Black people did when they were the prime overt targets of the BNP and their predecessors. There seems to be a need for the British people to feel that some ‘outside’ group is stealing their jobs/women/housing/way of life, and a desire to get rid of them so that they can have them all back again, and IMHO it is just the Muslims’ turn.”

      This is true but the fact is we are dealing with a far right that is far stronger now in the UK than in living memory. I mean 10 years ago could anyone imagine them winning council seats (they use to lose their deposits) let alone European ones?

      You are right to say the BNP hate Blacks and Jews as much if not more than Muslims (In their bizarre mind they seem to believe in some grand co-operation whereby Jews allowed milions of muslims to enter the UK) but what this report and arguing over who they hate more misses is the fact that they have dumped the anti-Jewish rhetoric because it wasnt a vote winner.
      What has gained them unprecendented support is the anti-Muslim ticket so unless you deal with their and wider Islamophobia (which the CSC fail to do) you are simply strengthening them to eventually do what they may truly desire to blacks and jews.

      It really is a case of “first they came for the Muslims”

      They have dumped anti-semitism publicaly because it is no longer socially acceptable not because they dont believe in it. However as long as Islamophobia is socially acceptable they will feed off it and grow in strength.

    99. ali — on 16th July, 2009 at 1:49 pm  

      Munir,

      The report doesnt ‘miss’ the fact that the anti-Jewish rhetoric has been dumped - it highlights how beneath the veneer, the BNP has not changed from its neo-Nazi days of believing in a worldwide jewish conspiracy and that the holocaust never happened.

      BTW, are you still dodging my Holocaust Memorial Day question to you? See comments 25 and 27. Cant you just admit you were wrong on that one?

    100. chairwoman — on 16th July, 2009 at 1:57 pm  

      Munir - what bothers me more than anything we’ve discussed here, is the head-in-the-sand attitude that so many people of all groups display.

      I can’t count the amount of times my concerns about the BNP has been shrugged aside by people saying “They’ll never get in here”, even after their unprecedented success in the European elections.

    101. Soso — on 16th July, 2009 at 2:11 pm  

      The BNP and other Far right outfits will continue to grow in tandem with the the sociopathic misbehavior displayed by radical Islamists.

      Anyone can see that the current resurgence of the Far right is directly related to the increase in radical islamism in Europe

      The obstinate refusal on the part of moderate muslims not only to not reign these hot-heads, but also to deny they’re even a problem is part of that which fuels the Far right.

      The one extremism feeds off the other.

      And Far right ideas, and the supremacist attitudes they generate can be based on race OR on religion.

      Peoeple here, in their haste to bash Whites, have lost sight of that.

      Nick Griffin or Anas Altikriti, take your pick.

      Same shit, different smell.

    102. Yahya Birt — on 16th July, 2009 at 3:24 pm  

      Chairwoman

      Yahya – Despite the things you’ve listed, the honest answer to your question is nothing.

      Thanks, I needed to hear someone say that. Thank God.

    103. munir — on 16th July, 2009 at 3:39 pm  

      ali
      “BTW, are you still dodging my Holocaust Memorial Day question to you? See comments 25 and 27. Cant you just admit you were wrong on that one?”

      ali who are you? You have never posted on here then you suddenly pop up and ask me a question and demand to be answered!

    104. munir — on 16th July, 2009 at 3:44 pm  

      soso

      “Anyone can see that the current resurgence of the Far right is directly related to the increase in radical islamism in Europe”

      Yeah its always the minorities fault- likewise it was the Jews fault in the 1930s eh Soso?

      “The obstinate refusal on the part of moderate muslims not only to not reign these hot-heads, but also to deny they’re even a problem is part of that which fuels the Far right.”

      oh fvk off- how exactly do you want Muslim to reign in hot heads? are you suggesting the Muslim community be given en masse the powers of the state? Extremist groups have been banned from mosques

      What are you doing to reign in the BNP?

      You of course mask the fact that there has always been a core of people opposed to coloured immigration from day one - ever heard of Enoch powell? was he the fault of Muslims too?

      And the fact you consider Anas Al Tikriti (!) an extremist says it all

    105. Random Guy — on 16th July, 2009 at 3:59 pm  

      Soso @ #101, who is bashing Whites? WTF are you on about?

    106. Katy Newton — on 16th July, 2009 at 9:08 pm  

      Sunny, I’ve read through the report and I don’t understand why you keep saying they’ve “omitted” Islamophobia. They clearly haven’t. It’s all over the report.

      In any event, the report wasn’t about whether or to what extent the BNP has shifted focus. That’s what you wanted it to be about, but what it was actually about was how the BNP uses online resources to market itself and disseminate its ideas. That’s what the conclusion dealt with. It was never intended to be an historical exploration of the evolution of the BNP’s strategy.

      If you want a report that mentions Muslims more often, and with respect that is about as high as your objections can be put, then perhaps you should get yourself some funding and write the report you want to read, instead of rather childishly dismissing another blow in the fight against the BNP as an “epic fail”.

    107. organic cheeseboard — on 16th July, 2009 at 9:09 pm  

      er, you might want to delete that ‘religion of peace’ post. that is one appalling website.

    108. Katy Newton — on 16th July, 2009 at 9:14 pm  

      I mean, did you read the Methodology, Sunny? It sets out exactly what the writers intend to do.

      The BNP denies links to neo-Nazism or to the promotion of racial hatred, antisemitism and Holocaust denial. This report examines the extent to which many of its members and supporters continue to advocate such views online and associate with, and link to the websites of, those who do.

      The report does what it set out to do, doesn’t it? It identifies the links between various BNP bloggers and commenters on the internet and exposes them for the neonazi scumbags that they are. That’s why it isn’t just a list of quotes from Nick Griffin’s speeches, you see. That’s not what the report is about.

    109. Edna Welthorpe — on 16th July, 2009 at 9:38 pm  

      Do - please - keep the RELIGION OF PEACE post at #106 and here’s a brief introduction in English to teachings of Imam Al-Hayiti of Quebec:

      http://ezralevant.com/2008/12/chrc-its-ok-to-say-gays-should.html

      Good, innit ?

    110. Mantis — on 17th July, 2009 at 1:42 am  

      The Religion of Peace website is just another hate site run by a racist who calls himself ‘Glen Reinsford’ and is beloved of BNP nuts.

      A report on the TROP website can be found here:

      http://www.chasingevil.org/2007/12/trop-website.html

    111. douglas clark — on 17th July, 2009 at 2:45 am  

      munir @ 98,

      Yes, you are dealing with a

      far right that is far stronger now in the UK than in living memory. I mean 10 years ago could anyone imagine them winning council seats (they use to lose their deposits) let alone European ones?

      Just so’s you know, I am white and I detest them.

      Along with the vast majority of people that did not vote BNP.

      I know that you in particular will see this as off the wall, but most white people are not your enemies. I would rather slit my wrists than vote BNP. Y’know, I am as angry as hell that you characterise anyone that is not of your religion as your enemy. For that is what you do, every time you comment here.

      I am very fond of the folk that write here.

      I like them.

      Seriously.

      I’ll only point to one person that comments here and say you are ‘beyond the pale’ in your reactions. And that is chairwoman.

      If you at least attempted to engage in discussion rather than arguement, well, who knows?

    112. chairwoman — on 17th July, 2009 at 8:34 am  

      dougie - thank you for your continued support :) .

      Munir has a problem with me. I said this to him directly this week, and he agreed that he does. I’m not sure whether it’s my age, sex, or ethnicity, but I suspect it’s a combination of all three. Anyhoo, I have decided to let it be his problem. I will of course continue to try and interact with him. One of the few things my late husband and father agreed upon was that I didn’t know when to stop.

      Basically I still don’t.

    113. Samir S. Halabi — on 29th July, 2009 at 9:12 pm  

      Muslims don’t like to be singled out for persecution, however it seems fair game on their side to be actively engaged in Jew hatred, ie. to attack jews going or leaving synagogues, to attack jews for wearing Kippot (skull caps) to desecrate jewish cemetries, to deny the holocaust, to threaten teachers if they persist in teaching about the holocaust, because their bigoted parents tell them it’s not true.
      these are events which are happening all over europe including the UK. It’s ok for muslim asian or arab citizens of the UK or the EEC to support Islamic states, however as far as they are concerned it’s not ok for Jewish citizens of the UK or the EEC to support Israel. When muslims disagree with the UK’s foreign policy in Iraq or Afghanistan, they can have an opinion, however when they want to go over to those places in order to kill British soldiers, and preach hatred against this country, against Christian & Jews, then the time is ripe for them to be tried in a court of law for high treason.

    114. Edna Welthorpe — on 2nd August, 2009 at 2:33 pm  

      Heartening news from Australia here:

      http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/027088.php

      time that Keysar Trad wuz taken down a peg!

    115. [...] BNP, again by Sunny on 4th August, 2009 at 3:29 pm     Edmund Standing, who wrote the farcial report on the BNP for a think-tank, has written another article for eGov Monitor offering lessons on how [...]



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