» RT @wdjstraw TaxPayers' Alliance enter US climate debate with false allegations on EU cap and trade http://bit.ly/tMTR1 22 hrs ago

» Wait, Dan Hannan's Polish mate Kaminsky *likes* the Lisbon treaty? That kills their main reason for a new EU grouping! 22 hrs ago

» David Davis shows why we can't trust Tories (by me) http://bit.ly/2FlsVW 1 day ago

» Funny to watch Tories, including Guido Fawkes, hating on Daily Telegraph while sucking up the Spectator. How times change. 2 days ago

» 'Conservatives in "discord and confusion" over European policy on eve of party conf' http://is.gd/3Ze62 2 days 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

    Blog wars!


    by Sunny on 5th August, 2009 at 6:19 pm    

    Poor Edmund Standing was presumably crying into his cornflakes in the morning after I skewered his most recent articles on how to combat the BNP, on eGov Monitor. He has now gone through my previous writings to find, shock horror!!, that I’ve criticised Muslim orgs like the MCB in the past. That must mean I have ‘double standards’.

    Now, I don’t want to waste time arguing with someone who is also fighting the good fight against the BNP, but this point is worth clarifying again and again. When I challenge self-appointed community leaders and organisations like the MCB, the Hindu Council and Sikh Federation - I do so because they hurt those they claim to protect.

    What Standing is pushing, an approach I have skewered in the past, is the old nonsense that the rise of the BNP is down to activities of minorities themselves and the ‘Guardianistas’. It’s really no different to the oft-repeated rubbish at the Daily Mail and Telegraph that minorities themselves are to blame for segregation and unemployment, not thanks to local councils and estate-agents.

    Demonising the BNP is an easy task these days - even the Sun and Daily Mail do it. In the same way highlighting the BNP’s misogyny is old hat. My concern is more the people who echo BNP talking points about race and sex in the mainstream media - and want to bash minorities (and women, see the Daily Mail article below) and liberals by blaming them and the Guardianistas.

    But this isn’t the first time someone from HP has spent ages trying to find examples of ‘double-standards’ by me, after I’ve taken them to task, just so they can make themselves feel better. I suggest finding an easier target boys.



      |   Trackback link   |   Add to del.icio.us   |   Share on Facebook   |   Filed in: Race politics, Religion




    88 Comments below   |   Add your own

    1. Edmund Standing — on 5th August, 2009 at 6:30 pm  

      Blog wars? Get a life.

      And your presumption about ‘crying’ is wrong - I simply thought, “Oh great, another self-important twat is trying to score points in some silly ‘blog war’.”

      And how right I was.

    2. ali — on 5th August, 2009 at 6:41 pm  

      Having a bbq sunny? there seems to be a lot of ’scewers’ around.

      ‘now, i dont want to waste my time arguing with someone who is also fighting the good fight’

      WOW! You do have some balls. YOU started this whole fiasco with your bogus attack on his report, he didnt attack you and accuse you of being a racist or bigot - YOU did that. And for this you should be ashamed - dont try and back track now, you have already shown yourself to be a petty man who cares more about scoring political points than taking down fascists.
      Shame on you

    3. Sunny — on 5th August, 2009 at 6:44 pm  

      And how right I was.

      Then don’t bother writing about me Standing. Simple.

    4. organic cheeseboard — on 5th August, 2009 at 6:52 pm  

      I simply thought, “Oh great, another self-important twat is trying to score points in some silly ‘blog war’.”

      funny that, i thought the same thing when i looked at HP Sauce this afternoon and read your post, Mr Standing.

    5. modernity — on 5th August, 2009 at 7:13 pm  

      I think the real point is that Edmund Standing had written an informative report on the BNP.

      Yet you get the impression (and I am not sure as I have yet to see a comprehensive critique of the report) that his critics would wish that he hadn’t written the report in the first place.

      All seems a bit petty to me, and places into the BNP’s hands.

    6. Don — on 5th August, 2009 at 7:15 pm  

      Sunny,

      It’s been a long time since I visited HP, but I followed Standing’s recent work on the BNP and am familiar with articles of his elswhere on the internet. You have repeatedly said, rightly in my opinion, that he is a decent guy fighting the good fight. You might disagree on matters of emphasis and interpretation, but why the acrimony?

      Is it because he writes on HP?

    7. Edmund Standing — on 5th August, 2009 at 7:15 pm  

      Sunny, I’d never bother writing about someone like you under normal circumstances but it’s you who started this whole business with your allegations and innuendo. I’m doing my bit (in my free time and for no payment, incidentally) to expose and fight against a nasty racist organisation, and all you can do is waste time bitching about how you would prefer my report to have been written and launching uncalled for personal attacks. Pretty sad really.

    8. organic cheeseboard — on 5th August, 2009 at 7:19 pm  

      all you can do is waste time bitching about how you would prefer my report to have been written

      dear god - not criticism! and for something you do as a hobby, too! Oh no!

    9. RedSeaPedestrian — on 5th August, 2009 at 7:21 pm  

      “Is it because he writes on HP?”

      Obviously.

    10. ali — on 5th August, 2009 at 7:21 pm  

      Sunny,

      If you really cared about taking down the BNP, you wouldnt have twisted this recent report on their online activity in the way you did. Simple as that

      Instead, acting as a proxy for people who dont like Standing and the organisation for which he wrote the report, you decided to insult, discredit, defame and libel both the author and the organisation. Bravo!

    11. Doubter — on 5th August, 2009 at 7:23 pm  

      Mr Standing - it’s just a shame that your report is so laughably incorrect that you have already been forced to amend it. You do anti-fascists no favours whatsoever when you produce complete and utter garbage that appears to have been researched by someone with the skills of a brain-damaged amoeba.

      I understand you have at least one legal action pending against you because of the errors in the report - care to comment?

    12. MaidMarian — on 5th August, 2009 at 7:35 pm  

      You know, I can actually remember when PP and Sunny were worth reading.

      Yesterday moral equivalence, today Blog Wars - christ on a bike.

    13. Don — on 5th August, 2009 at 7:41 pm  

      …the skills of a brain-damaged amoeba.

      Grown-ups talking. Go away.

    14. MaidMarian — on 5th August, 2009 at 7:45 pm  

      doubter (11) - You are really asking someone to comment on a talkboard about pending legal cases?

    15. Mantis — on 5th August, 2009 at 7:47 pm  

      The Centre of Social Cohesion (you got a laugh at the name!) is determined to influence UK politics and silence critics using the same methods that AIPAC has implemented in the U.S.A. The Centre of Social Cohesion is the British branch of AIPAC! If you want to know the future of British Democracy (or the end of it) read The Israel Lobby by John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt.

    16. Amrit — on 5th August, 2009 at 8:02 pm  

      ‘Blog wars!’

      Are fucking dull.

      Ultimately, y’all are both on the same side. Stop throwing insults around and work out where you can meet in the middle.

    17. London Muslim — on 5th August, 2009 at 8:12 pm  

      Mantis

      Good point although be careful its almost 10 minutes and you havent had the “anti semitic” blah blah blah brigade kick off.

      What also pisses me off about parasites in the the neo-con brigade is how they have to use a muslim name like “Ali” to cover their tracks.

      FFS lets be honest how many muslims called “Ali” use the term “bravo”?

    18. Rumbold — on 5th August, 2009 at 8:22 pm  

      We all need to remember that we are on the same side. The BNP won’t care about our minor squabbles if it is ever able to unleash its agenda.

    19. Leon — on 5th August, 2009 at 8:24 pm  

      Another big fucking waste of time…

    20. ahmed — on 5th August, 2009 at 8:33 pm  

      Speaking of double standards -HP accused PP of them for discussing Israels misdeeds and not , in HP’s opinion , discussing Sri Lanka. When not only did HP ignore Sri Lanka but it has done perhaps 40 pieces on Iran!!!
      Why can HP discuss Iran but others cant discuss Israel’s opression of the Palestinians?

      One gets the impression David Pube and the people at HP like their darkies to be compliant and not too uppity (viz Mr Maher,etc) and talk about only their “own” affairs or say what HP wants them to say.

    21. Don — on 5th August, 2009 at 8:34 pm  

      End of British democracy…Israel lobby…

      Do I need to read it, or is that more or less it?

    22. modernity — on 5th August, 2009 at 8:34 pm  

      “The Centre of Social Cohesion is the British branch of AIPAC! If you want to know the future of British Democracy (or the end of it) read The Israel Lobby by John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt.”

      Rumbold, is PP really the place for this type of comment?

      I ask you because you seem to have more grasp of the implications of “Mantis’s” words, and why they are unacceptable outside of the Far Right.

    23. Pete999 — on 5th August, 2009 at 8:35 pm  

      As someone who reads both blogs but never comments I just wanted to say that this is downright childish.

      And helps noone but the BNP, while making some of those who argue and fight against these fascists nitwits look like utter tools.

    24. Don — on 5th August, 2009 at 8:40 pm  

      Why can HP discuss Iran but others cant discuss Israel?

      Because discussing Israel is forbidden. That’s why we never, ever have on this site. Ever.

    25. Eben — on 5th August, 2009 at 8:40 pm  

      Mantis: “The Centre of Social Cohesion is the British branch of AIPAC!”

      Erm…what? I’ve only heard of the CSC recently but a quick look over their website shows up precisely zero mentions of Israel. And ‘London Muslim’, how do we know that’s your real name? Maybe you’re just a Neocon in disguise! Using a name that implies you speak for over half a million people. The ‘“anti semitic” blah blah blah brigade’ will kick off when you have the guts to just say what you believe rather than going for vague innuendo.

      As for the subject in hand, we shouldn’t stifle debate between anti-fascists when people genuinely believe (as Sunny did) that someone is producing material that is unhelpful to the cause. That said, clearly there is a point when you just need to drop it and get back to formulating and suggesting your own methods for attack.

    26. Rumbold — on 5th August, 2009 at 8:46 pm  

      Modernity:

      It is an idiotic comment but not worthy of deletion. I tend to ingore these sort of people most of the time.

    27. ahmed — on 5th August, 2009 at 8:49 pm  

      modernity

      Rumbold, is PP really the place for this type of comment?

      I ask you because you seem to have more grasp of the implications of “Mantis’s” words, and why they are unacceptable outside of the Far Right.

      modernity that is mild stuff

      What do you think of this appearing in a “mainstream” newpaper?

      Muslims are a threat to our way of life

      “All Muslims, like all dogs, share certain characteristics”

      http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/3608849/Muslims-are-a-threat-to-our-way-of-life.html

    28. modernity — on 5th August, 2009 at 9:16 pm  

      ahmed, you wrote:

      ““All Muslims, like all dogs, share certain characteristics” “

      and if people commented that here or on my blog, then I would delete it without a second thought.

      But please, I don’t want to get into an Olympics of oppressions, but you do understand Mantis’s underlying meaning?

      Mantis, along with Ku Klux Klaners, white power freaks, neo-nazis is essentially saying that Jews (in the form of AIPAC) control America, and that it will happen in Britain too.

      This is the belief of hardcore BNPers, neo-nazi skinheads and the pre-WW2 Nazis in Germany

      It is very old-fashioned racism and those that push it are often the most bigoted and paranoid that you’ll ever find.

      They believe that nearly all human catastrophes are caused by Jews.

      It is indicative of a political sociopathic impulse, not mere mild chauvinism or fear, but something much worse.

      It is the ideology that holds together the most extreme of Far Right groupings.

      However, people that subscribe to this view know that if they make fond comments about Hitler, or really go on Hitler worship then people will think they are barking mad.

      So instead they take the simpler route of attacking Jews, a small and largely defenceless minority in Britain.

      It is a cheap tactic to make the views of Adolf Hitler more acceptable, and speed up the rise of neo-fascism.

      PS: I think those comments in the Torygraph are appalling, the writer should be sacked, IMHO.

    29. Anon — on 5th August, 2009 at 9:32 pm  

      The fact is that the MCB have taken an active role in opposing the BNP, using their influence to mobilise Muslims to turn out and vote against the BNP, issuing joint leaflets with Unite Against Fascism etc.

      There is a simple question for Standing - is he prepared to work alongside the MCB in a broad anti-BNP alliance?

    30. London Muslim — on 5th August, 2009 at 10:04 pm  

      So “Eben” thinks I’m a Neo-Con who does not have the “guts” to say what I believe. Best laugh I’ve had all year. What a Muppet. Read my blog you twat for my “Neo-Con” views.

    31. Sunny — on 5th August, 2009 at 10:12 pm  

      but why the acrimony?

      Is it because he writes on HP?

      Acrimony? Look, frankly I couldn’t give two hoots about Standing. the BNP aren’t quivvering in their boots because he’s suddenly blogging about them.

      But if someone is writing about how to fight the BNP, then it sort of fucking annoys me when they say the reason for the growth of the BNP is the ‘white liberal guilt’ and these organisations. The MCB might also argue that they’re fighting against the BNP - but no one here throws a fit when I cuss them.

      I’m making clear what is a nuanced argument about the BNP and how some right-wingers are trying to blame the left for the growth of the BNP. You take the argument or you don’t.

      Edmund Standing is cussing me on HP and taking my arguments out of context, so I’m very justified in making my position clear.

    32. Sunny — on 5th August, 2009 at 10:27 pm  

      Also, Leon and Amrit - it’s a shame neither of you two get it. When people start claiming, in a couple of years, that festivals like the London Mela or Vaisakhi in the Square or Notting Hill Carnival are responsible for the growth in BNP support - then you’ll suddenly wonder why the fuck people are so stupid and how it became received wisdom. This is why I’m trying to whack these moles now when they come up.

    33. ibnbattuta — on 5th August, 2009 at 10:30 pm  

      Anon

      The fact is that the MCB have taken an active role in opposing the BNP, using their influence to mobilise Muslims to turn out and vote against the BNP, issuing joint leaflets with Unite Against Fascism etc.

      There is a simple question for Standing – is he prepared to work alongside the MCB in a broad anti-BNP alliance?

      Are you serious? HP are too anti-Muslim to actually work with Muslim community organisations. They dont wish the Muslim community to exist in any organised form.

      This is the tightrope they try and walk - demonising Muslims which strengthens the BNP while also (for their own reasons) being anti-BNP. Actually a look at their blog and the topics they cover shows how half hearted their anti-BNPism is and how strong their anti-Muslimism is.

    34. Don — on 5th August, 2009 at 10:40 pm  

      Look, frankly I couldn’t give two hoots about Standing…

      Hence the title of this post. You are over-simplyfing and just cussing each other. Where’s the benefit in that?

    35. KB Player — on 5th August, 2009 at 10:49 pm  

      after I skewered

      I know that Sunny has his own estimation of his powers both in debate and in use of the English language. Where he says “skewered” others would say “flailed about with a wet paper bag”.

    36. Sunny — on 5th August, 2009 at 11:03 pm  

      Hey I wouldn’t be blogging if I didn’t have an inflated sense of my own importance.

    37. ahmed — on 5th August, 2009 at 11:04 pm  

      modernity

      Mantis, along with Ku Klux Klaners, white power freaks, neo-nazis is essentially saying that Jews (in the form of AIPAC) control America, and that it will happen in Britain too.

      Think your being more than a tad paranoid and disingenous. The only people who claimed this for Walt and Mersheimer’s work were loonies like Mel Phillips. Saying that AIPAC (and remember the Zionism movement in the US has many more Christians in it that Jews and AIPAC are right-wingers) have way too much influence on US middle east policy than is healthy is simply a fact.

      The same can be said of Cuban exiles in regard Cuba and even Irish-Americans in regards the US attitude to Northern Ireland and its IRA apeasement

      This is what Daniel Levy former adviser to Ehud Barak (not I believe a Ku Klux Klaner, white power freak or neo-nazi) said about the book “The paper was described as a “wake-up call” by Daniel Levy, former advisor to Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak. In a March 25 article for Haaretz, Levy wrote, “Their case is a potent one: that identification of American with Israeli interests can be principally explained via the impact of the Lobby in Washington, and in limiting the parameters of public debate, rather than by virtue of Israel being a vital strategic asset or having a uniquely compelling moral case for support”.

      This is Jimmy Carter (again not I believe a neo-nazi) on AIPACs influence:

      “AIPAC is the dominant voice among the Israeli organizations in this country. And if you look at the purpose of AIPAC, it’s not to promote peace, it’s not to bring peace to Israel, it’s to promote and defend the policies of the incumbent government in Israel. And so they defend Israel. It’s politically impossible, as you know, for any member of Congress to make a public statement condemning or criticizing the policies of Israel. It would be political suicidal for them to do so. A lot of the members of Congress agree with me, some very high up in the Congress. But if they came out publicly and said it, their seats would be in danger.”

      Is this healthy in a democracy?

    38. Amrit — on 5th August, 2009 at 11:04 pm  

      Sunny, Edmund Standing is cussing you because of your ahem, vehement reaction to his report.

      I am reading that article on eGov that you mentioned, and I think it needs to be called on some of the rather confused things it says. The stuff about ‘Guardianistas’ and his failure to realise that it’s not just parts of the ’so-called left’ or ‘white liberals’ who encourage separatism, isn’t great.

      The deligitimisation of patriotism, the claims that reasonable concerns about immigration and its effects are ‘racist’, and the uncritical celebration of any culture and group bar that of the white British majority are all helping to feed into the rise of the BNP.

      I don’t agree with that, but OK - fair enough, to some extent. Why did you not ask him to provide evidence?

      > ‘The deligitimisation of patriotism’ - By who, exactly?
      > ‘The uncritical celebration of any culture and group bar that of the white British majority’ - Well um, who is (or should be) responsible for celebrating ‘white British majority culture’? Maybe the reason that there’s no celebration is because the ‘majority’ argument is a bit bullshit (there are Welsh, Scottish, Irish, European-descent white people…)? What are HIS ideas on how we should celebrate ‘white British’ culture in a non-racist way?

      Also: did he somehow miss the BBC’s ‘White Season’?

      He’s also disgracefully ignored the fucking CLASS angle of things. Many BNP voters probably use class-based issues as a cover for the fact that they are simply racists, but many others simply trade in the classism that they experience, for racism which they can make others experience.

      Maybe people should ask ‘Racism! What does it achieve?’ For example, if there were no non-whites in this country, would that have slowed the gradual rise of India and China in any way? I think not.

      I know you get worked up about this stuff Sunny, but it’s better to fight back properly. (I never ever thought I’d hear myself, a feminist, failing to sing the praise of blazing rage!) Time that could have been spent properly critiquing what ES said has been wasted in yet more willy-waving.

    39. Sunny — on 5th August, 2009 at 11:23 pm  

      Willy waving? I just didn’t bother going into too much detail, but I laid out the same argument above.

    40. Doubter — on 5th August, 2009 at 11:50 pm  

      Don, don’t be such a patronising twat. When you’ve put the internets away and been out on the streets fighting fascists, then you can tell me to go away. Until then, shut it.

    41. modernity — on 6th August, 2009 at 12:38 am  

      ahmed you wrote:

      “Think your being more than a tad paranoid and disingenous.”

      I am saddened by your reply. I gave you what I consider to be a reasonable and honest reply, and whilst I am more than capable of being caustic, exceedingly rude, etc. in this particular instance I wasn’t.

      I was hoping that you and I both share a loathing for anti-Muslim racism and anti-Jewish racism

      But if you share Mantis’s is view that Jews control America, and soon will control Britain, then there’s not much I can do about that.

      I could provide numerous titles of books which explain the nature of anti-Jewish racism and neo-Nazi beliefs, if you wanted?

      Anyways, I am afraid that’s me. Knowing about anti-Jewish racism, its connections, how the Far Right use it, is Politics 101 as the Americans might say.

      I don’t have any time for Melanie Philips or her ilk, nor Torygraph racism.

      I’m not terribly interested in discussing the role of lobbies as plainly there is more than one lobby in America, and they compete.

      Not to mention the NRA, the oil lobby, etc, but if you are going to push that particular thesis that “Jews control America” then you might at least consider when they didn’t, a simple example would be the American contract to supply Saudi Arabia with arms, which was opposed by many “lobbies”.

      And you know what the strange thing was?

      It went through, and anything the Saudis wanted too.

      So if you look for evidence of a counter thesis you might find it, if, however, and I would regret you doing this, become wedded to the notion that Jews control America then those views are not too dissimilar from those of the BNP.

      The latter point is worth thinking about.

      I seriously hope that you don’t subscribe to anti-Jewish racism because naturally it would compromise your views in other areas, as you could hardly complain about racism towards Muslims and others, but suggest that propagandarising age-old racism towards Jews is somehow acceptable? I’m sure you will see the logic to that particular argument.

      I’m not suggesting that you do hold those views, but it is a slippery slope and I wouldn’t like you to fall down there.

      Please do forgive me if I don’t reply again, but I am slightly allergic to the whiff of anti-Jewish racism and I remember why I don’t visit PP anymore. Pity, I used to enjoy some of the debates.

      Again, just so you understand me. I’m not accusing you, Walt,etc or even Jimmy Carter of racism, I am suggesting that such a line of thinking when taken to the extreme, is essentially an extremist position and is racism. You will find such views in 9/11 forums, at Stormfront and amongst the higher echelons of the BNP. All I wish to do is to ask you to reconsider, and think of the implications.

      Selective anti-racism isn’t really antiracism, at all.

      I will leave you at that, good night :)

    42. Leon — on 6th August, 2009 at 1:18 am  

      Also, Leon and Amrit – it’s a shame neither of you two get it. When people start claiming, in a couple of years, that festivals like the London Mela or Vaisakhi in the Square or Notting Hill Carnival are responsible for the growth in BNP support – then you’ll suddenly wonder why the fuck people are so stupid and how it became received wisdom. This is why I’m trying to whack these moles now when they come up.

      You seriously think that the NHC (which has survived both Blair AND Thatcher) wont survive unless you save it with a six month willy waving competiton with HP?! :D

    43. Shatterface — on 6th August, 2009 at 1:30 am  

      I haven’t been so excited since I read the last article on Edmund Standing.

      Iain Dale and Nadine Dorries must be glad for the time off.

    44. Shatterface — on 6th August, 2009 at 1:37 am  

      ‘This is why I’m trying to whack these moles now when they come up.’

      You are aware that ‘wack a mole’ has two colloqual uses: (a) a futile, repetative task (after the arcade game) and (b) masturbation?

    45. Katy Newton — on 6th August, 2009 at 1:49 am  

      What Don, Leon and Amrit said, amongst others. I’ve set out what I think of this pathetic anti-Standing campaign elsewhere. This, though:

      In the same way highlighting the BNP’s misogyny is old hat.

      Christ on a bike! Talk about male privilege! Highlighting misogyny isn’t “old hat” to those of us who have to put up with it, Sunny my friend. I have no idea what you are on these days but perhaps you could dial down the machismo and arrogance a bit whilst you’ve still got some readers left?

    46. Eben — on 6th August, 2009 at 2:04 am  

      London Muslim:

      “So “Eben” thinks I’m a Neo-Con who does not have the “guts” to say what I believe. Best laugh I’ve had all year. What a Muppet. Read my blog you twat for my “Neo-Con” views.”

      Fail.

      I was getting at your rather paranoid claim that “Ali” was in fact a neo-con in disguise. I’ve no idea who he is and can’t prove that he isn’t a neo-con but nor can you prove that he is, at least not by pointing out the fact he used the word ‘bravo’.

      And it’s not “Eben”, it’s Eben, because I have the conviction to use my real name.

    47. Sunny — on 6th August, 2009 at 2:20 am  

      Highlighting misogyny isn’t “old hat”

      I think you’re deliberately misreading the article. I never said highlighting misogyny was old hat otherwise I’d stop doing it. I was saying the emphasis should be put on misogyny perpetuated by the people in suits who don’t claim to be racist or sexist (the Daily Mail article for example).

      I’d appreciate it if you didn’t twist my words around thanks.

    48. Sunny — on 6th August, 2009 at 2:30 am  

      You are aware that ‘wack a mole’ has two colloqual uses: (a) a futile, repetative task (after the arcade game)

      Heh. Probably not the best analogy to use, admittedly. But it can also be fun!

      Nadine Dorries must be glad for the time off

      After telling us Trident wasn’t a weapon of mass destruction, I thought someone else could take up the slack :)

      You seriously think that the NHC (which has survived both Blair AND Thatcher) wont survive unless you save it with a six month willy waving competiton with HP?!

      Maybe. But times change. The BNP also had no electoral power in those days. The London Mela is on its last legs now anyway, especially after the Rise Festival car-crash. It’s a shame you see it merely as a willy-waving competition but oh well. I’m not sure when it started becoming bad etiquette to start cussing other bloggers but it was still ok to cuss organisations and journalists. I don’t discriminate between stupid people, know what I mean?

    49. Halima — on 6th August, 2009 at 6:09 am  

      “I was saying the emphasis should be put on misogyny perpetuated by the people in suits who don’t claim to be racist or sexist (the Daily Mail article for example).”

      Sunny, I am with you all the way. I’d say fighting the BNP in the street is one way, but fighting their proxy wars with men and women in suits and letters behind their names and organisational affiliates claiming to be evidence-based is a trickier road… Personally I save my energies for the latter and I think it’s great that you do, too.

      “But if you share Mantis’s is view that Jews control America, and soon will control Britain, then there’s not much I can do about that.”

      Why is it so easy for people to talk about the Jews and the Muslims as though they speak with one voice and always share the same interests. Wish we would stop …

    50. Mutazillite — on 6th August, 2009 at 6:17 am  

      I would never dream of saying Standing is racist. But he has a political agenda I do not share (playing down anti-Muslim bigotry, blaming the left).

      You might never *dream* of calling Standing a racist but in reality you already have, with this:

      “It looks like the aim of people who write this guff isn’t to actually combat the BNP but simply bash the people they dislike (lefties, Muslim orgs). The BNP is simply used as the conduit for that bashing.”

      In effect you’re accusing Standing, barefaced, of being a Muslim “basher” or to put a fine edge on it, an anti-Muslim bigot.

      Even by your own admission, Standing has produced some outstanding anti-BNP material in the last few months both on his site and on HP. And since you claim (or rather agree with Yahya Birt’s articluation) that the BNP has become a predominantly cultural racist party, what you do is tantamount to attacking the author of some of the best critiques of the BNP that have that come around in ages. We know his work has been effective because of demonstrable actions the BNP have taken to mitigate themselves from the damage he has caused them. And not to mention the kind of danger to his self he’s put himself in as a result of his work.

      Edmund Standing is not the first person to blame the rise of the BNP on the Left. Even leftists have blamed the reason for the rise of the BNP on working class’ migration away from traditional Labour support because of the agrievement and abondonment they feel towards New Labour. Leftists such as Kenan Malik, for example, says exactly the same thing.

      Kenan Malik gets a guest post on this blog (and rightly so) for saying this but Edmund Standing gets collared with the anti-Muslim bigot jibe for his work!

      If there is a “Blog War” going on here it is because you have started this whole silly business. And now finding yourself in a weak position your only option is defence by offence.

      But I have to echo both Don and modernity here: The only group who benefits from all of this the BNP.

      You know that. So why do it?

      I wonder if this rather cavernous discrepancy in your own logic has even occurred to you.

      I suspect it hasn’t.

    51. Katy Newton — on 6th August, 2009 at 8:35 am  

      I’d appreciate it if you didn’t twist my words around thanks.

      I didn’t twist your words, it’s what you said. I can’t help it if you don’t make yourself clear. Nor did I say you were a misogynist yourself, so try not twisting mine, yes? I just find the way you seem to think it’s for you to decide which amongst the BNP’s various revolting policies and attitudes are worthy of highlighting and which are not rather bizarre.

    52. Jai — on 6th August, 2009 at 10:15 am  

      The only group who benefits from all of this the BNP.

      The level of risk of the above should always be the primary guideline when considering an appropriate action, response or counter-response in relation to anything concerning the BNP.

      Incidentally, “Ahmed” and “Abdullah” on this thread and others concurrently on PP is very obviously the banned racist Munir, although I expect most regulars will have realised that already. Apparently the statement by PP’s editors “Munir is banned from PP” isn’t clear enough for him, irrespective of how many fake aliases he conjures up on a daily basis in an ongoing attempt to circumvent the ban.

    53. Leon — on 6th August, 2009 at 10:30 am  

      The London Mela is on its last legs now anyway, especially after the Rise Festival car-crash.

      You really think we’re going to have a Tory run administration in London forever? Do you seriously think this blog war will have any electoral impact?

      It’s a shame you see it merely as a willy-waving competition but oh well.

      Well it’s being going on for bloody months with no clear objective until you tacked one on in the last couple weeks. I call it as I see Sunny, I consider you a friend and a political ally in most respects but on this one I think you’re wasting your time.

      I’m not sure when it started becoming bad etiquette to start cussing other bloggers but it was still ok to cuss organisations and journalists. I don’t discriminate between stupid people, know what I mean?

      Oh please enough with the straw men! I never said that, I’ve pointed out countless times publicly and privately that your obsession with HP is serving no discernible purpose (ok fine it may be exciting for you and raising traffic but is that really enough?). I’m not alone on this as you well know (have a re-read of Amrit’s open letter and reflect on those tagged there in who agreed with it).

    54. resistor — on 6th August, 2009 at 10:42 am  

      Defenders of Standing and Douglas Murray’s Orwellian ‘Centre for Social Cohesion’ should be aware of this CSC defector’s story.

      http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jan/13/islam-uksecurity

      ‘Finally, there is, of course, Douglas Murray, “Britain’s only neoconservative”, who has often failed to distinguish Islam from Islamism. In just one speech, for example, Murray referred to the “violence, intimidation and thuggery of Islam” and “the problem of Islam”. Like Steyn, Murray has also represented Muslims as a collective threat, referring ominously to the “demographic time-bomb which will soon see a number of our largest cities fall to Muslim majorities”. He concluded that “conditions for Muslims in Europe must be made harder across the board” – a phrase that could easily be interpreted as a call for the collective punishment of Muslims.

      At this point I must add that until recently I worked with Murray at his Centre for Social Cohesion, which I joined because, in mid-2007, few other thinktanks were willing to seriously address the problem of Islamism at all. My time there was a constant struggle to “de-radicalise” Murray and to ensure that the centre’s output targeted only Islamists – and not Muslims as a whole. This October, however, I had finally had enough of this constant battle and resigned. To his credit, Murray has privately retracted many of his more noxious comments – but he apparently lacks the courage to do so publicly.’

      Standing has replaced Brandon and signed up to Murray’s anti-Muslim agenda. For him to pretend otherwise is laughable.

    55. chairwoman — on 6th August, 2009 at 11:05 am  

      Does anyone here remember an old black and white SciFi movie where a spaceship landed in the desert near a small American town, and whatever had travelled in the spaceship started inhabiting the townspeople. There’s one superb bit where Little Tommy pulls at the jacket of an inhabitee shouting, ‘What have you done with my pa?!’

      I’m starting to feel like Little Tommy.

      Who has taken over Sunny? Why has this once fair and even-handed political blogger been taken over by this bitter, waspish person who spends at least half his time engaged in a vendetta against other bloggers who are pretty much of the same mind as he?

    56. Ravi Naik — on 6th August, 2009 at 11:14 am  

      The title of this post is “Blog Wars”. That’s Sunny playing World of Warcraft against HP, which is exciting for those who play it, but for the rest of us, it is boring.

      Quite frankly, I think both sides are becoming hopeless… blaming the Tories, Labour, leftists, right-wingers, the Guardian, right-wing tabloids…

      I do believe that both sides are reasonable people and write in good faith. However, they are blinded by Left-Right divide. Perhaps the rise of the BNP can be explained by several factors, and perhaps both Left and Right establishments share the blame. Or maybe it is just a bad economy. I wish we could find a common coherent and non-simplistic narrative that explains how a tolerant Britain elected two MEPs that are so extreme that the hard right European parties do not want anything with them.

    57. damon — on 6th August, 2009 at 11:26 am  

      I’d still like to see exactly the ”bashing” that Standing is supposed to have done. I can’t seem to find solid evidence of it. But have seen his criticisms of the left, which I think deserve to be looked into. And criticisms of ”the race industry”.

      On that last point Sunny said ”First, the “race industry” is a bunch of civil society organisations started by activists who were pissed off being constantly demonised and decided they had to organise themselves politically. Anyone who blames the “race industry” for the rise of racism, than actual prejudice is hilariously deluded.”

      I think that statement is too general. I know for a fact that there has been resentment in the past (admitedly from people who already were a bit Sun/Daily Mail in their outlook) at the likes of Ken Livingstone’s GLC anti-racist campaigns and adverts.

      I remember one billboard ad that showed a bunch of people walking in the street, and it zoomed in on one white person in the crowd and said something like: ”Racism. If you try to ignore it you’re part of the problem”. And even I would think ”Oh piss off” as I went past on the bus.
      Well intentioned, but hectoring.

      As for critiscising ethnic minority people and blaming them for a rise in the BNP? No, you can’t do that.
      But does minority asertiveness cause some marginalized white communities to become somewhat resentful?

      Could I suggest that Sunny takes a look (or reports from) Deptford market in south East London, and look at how this fast changing community has handled it’s transformation from solid white working class community, to really multi-racial one, in a (I think) short period of time. Lots of new African and Chinese people there. When I see some of the Chinese I have this idea that some of them might be illegal immigrants (which is hardly surprising as there’s said to be up to half a million undocumented people in London alone).

      How are those centres of the new immigration coping with the change? Places like West Croydon, Walthamstow, Finsbury Park, Tottenham, Newham, Peckham etc.
      This isn’t bashing minorities btw, it’s just an interest in the changing environment.

      And inviting Sheikh Abdul Rahman al-Sudais to speak at places like the East London Mosque is worthy of criticism isn’t it. Just as the Australian Muslim community got some flack after the Bali nightclub bombs when it was discovered that Abu Bakar Bashir of JI had made several trips to Australia, and had done speaking tours of the country’s Muslim communities.

      Is that what people mean by ‘muslim bashing’ or what Yakoub said of Standing on another thread: ”Standing’s kind of barely disguised anti-Muslim racism”.
      That’s a big charge. I wish it was spelled out more plainly.

    58. Jai — on 6th August, 2009 at 12:12 pm  

      I wish we could find a common coherent and non-simplistic narrative that explains how a tolerant Britain elected two MEPs that are so extreme that the hard right European parties do not want anything with them.

      Ravi’s point above hits the nail on the head.

      I think that, depending on the specific individual, the people constituting the approx. 1 million Brits who voted for the BNP either agree with the BNP’s racist extremism, or they’re unaware of the full scale of it, or for one reason or another they don’t care.

      But it’s interesting that nearly every single person who admits to supporting the BNP and can freely express their views anonymously via various media turns out to be a racist. I wonder how many of the aforementioned 1 million BNP voters would exhibit similar behaviour if their own anonymity was assured.

    59. Shamit — on 6th August, 2009 at 12:26 pm  

      As i said on another thread

      “Lunatics are taking over PP — Reason, logic take cover — from the worst idiots of the BNP to sad munir to idiotic Celt Lord to pathetic London Muslim — and then an articulate loony here now says 9/11 was a Zionist conspiracy.”

      Now this particular “WAR” — this is surreal.

      And I haven’t smoked anything that is illegal.
      **************************************************
      Jai and Ravi — Well said guys.

      I agree in this “war of words” we are losing the bigger picture which is probably far more important.

    60. cjcjc — on 6th August, 2009 at 12:26 pm  

      What also pisses me off about parasites in the the neo-con brigade is how they have to use a muslim name like “Ali” to cover their tracks.

      FFS lets be honest how many muslims called “Ali” use the term “bravo”?

      Right, because all Muslims have to agree with you, London Moron?

      I would hope that many muslims - of whatever name - use “bravo” - especially at the opera.

    61. qidniz — on 6th August, 2009 at 1:16 pm  

      Defenders of Standing and Douglas Murray’s Orwellian ‘Centre for Social Cohesion’ should be aware of this CSC defector’s story.

      It’s hard to take this Brandon chappie seriously when he can’t hold a thought coherently from one sentence to the next. For example, there’s this:

      Other icons of the right have similarly attacked Muslims collectively, dangerously blurring the lines between Muslims, Islam and Islamism. Rod Liddle, for example, wrote that “Islam is largely to blame for the viciousness which is periodically unleashed upon us all in the form of bombings – that it is the credo, rather than the individual, which is principally to blame”.

      It is blurring to distinguishing credo from individual? Whatever.

    62. abdullah — on 6th August, 2009 at 1:58 pm  

      qidniz

      It’s hard to take this Brandon chappie seriously when he can’t hold a thought coherently from one sentence to the next.

      Are you seriously suggesting we take Douglas Murray seriously?

    63. Sunny — on 6th August, 2009 at 2:15 pm  

      Thanks Halima - good to see someone gets it.

    64. Soso — on 6th August, 2009 at 2:51 pm  

      Mr Standing has a point. The refusal of certain sections of The Left to denounce a few clerical hotheads, as is their duty to do, has allowed those hotheads to take centre stage and to utter outrageous, hatefilled statements. The atmophere thus generated becomes conducive to the fearmongering of the type the BNP engages in.

      When one listens to these hate preachers, hate preachers who are not only unopposed, but are even encouraged by a few of the more rancid lefists, one cannot help but have apprehensions as to their aims, ambitions and goals.

      The failure to gag these jokers has opened a breach for the BNP to mercylessly exploit, and exploit it they will.

    65. Yakoub — on 6th August, 2009 at 5:28 pm  

      I thought it was quite nice to read sthg by Sunny that mentioned the MCB without invoking the four horseman of the apocalypse and all of Satan’s minions. And IMHO, there was something of a volte face in the tone of that piece — for the better. Now we’re back to the old pissing wars, I see. Whatever, Sunny could join the SWP and stand on Mount Snowdon, shouting “Edmund is an Smellbum!” but the fact is, everything he said about Standing’s scribblings was 100% on target.

    66. Sunny — on 6th August, 2009 at 6:18 pm  

      On last point. Unity with the likes of douglas Murray’s Centre for Social Cohesion is not possible. I might as well join the MCB for all that’s worth.

      Douglas Murray is a defender of the fascist Geert Wilders. Perhaps Edmund Standing should have thought more about associating himself with such despicable company. Funny how certain people are not bringing up that point hey.

    67. dawn — on 6th August, 2009 at 9:54 pm  

      “What also pisses me off about parasites in the the neo-con brigade is how they have to use a muslim name like “Ali” to cover their tracks.

      FFS lets be honest how many muslims called “Ali” use the term “bravo”?”

      London “Muslim” - ‘parasites’ is the kind of language used by the Hutus in Rawanda when describing the Tutsi’s - cockroaches come to mind?

      If you do have a problem with neo-conservatism, then why do you not critique the ideology as opposed to describing the ‘neo-con brigade’, which you mean as the people who believe in the ideology, as parasites? Calling a group of people who believe in any religion or ideology parasites would be unacceptable - so why is it then that you find it acceptable to call people who believe in neo-conservatism parasites?

      The funny thing is, you assume that it is inherently contradictory for someone to be a Muslim and neo-conservative - ‘they have to use a muslim name like “Ali” to cover their tracks’. What if this ‘Ali’ was actually named Ali, and was actually a Muslim? Do you have any understanding of political theory at all? Do you even know what neo-conservatism is? So what political views can a Muslim hold then? Huh? Would they have to be just left wing, right wing? Can they even be, god forbid, liberal?

      Lastly, how dare you ask ‘how many muslims called “Ali” use the term “bravo”?’.

      What, is it really hard to believe that a Muslim - of which are so diverse in this country and worldwide - cannot use culturally western terms like ‘bravo’? Do you know how insulting that is?

      In trying to make yourself seem the defender of Muslims, you have actually showed your ignorance, prejudice and low intellectual integrity.

    68. marvin — on 6th August, 2009 at 10:14 pm  

      LOL Sunny. It’s all about Douglas Murray. I knew he had his evilcon tentactles all over this. That’s why you can’t stand Edmund Standing.

      Geert Wilders is not a fascist. He’s anti-Muslim. It’s not the same. He’s not antisemitic, and he doesn’t have race based supremacy theories. He supports Israel, and his greatest role model is the small state low tax free market advocate Margaret Thatcher. Hardly a Nationalist Socialist, then.

    69. anobody — on 6th August, 2009 at 10:30 pm  

      He’s anti-Islam that makes him a fascist. You are blinded by your own prejudices marvin.

    70. Don — on 6th August, 2009 at 10:37 pm  

      He’s anti-Islam that makes him a fascist.

      Gets my vote for stupidest remark of the week.

    71. marvin — on 6th August, 2009 at 10:42 pm  

      He’s anti-Islam that makes him a fascist. You are blinded by your own prejudices marvin.

      Fascism is a very specific political ideology you left-wing heathen. Fascist = anything bad in your world. Such a tragic denigration of intellectual nuance, alas endemic with many on the left!

      Try reading the first few sentences here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism . Go on, it won’t hurt.

      You remind me of when I was in Camden a few weeks ago, there was a beat boxer on the pavement, he was rather good. A crowd developed. Of course PC plod came along, asked if he has a license. Of course he didn’t, and PC plod sorry mate you’re going to have to move along.

      Trendy young punks start shouting “fascists!” at the police. At first I thought it was funny, how cleverly ironic, I thought. Until I realised they weren’t being ironic!

    72. anobody — on 6th August, 2009 at 10:55 pm  

      marvin,

      Sorry I didn’t take your dictionary definition of fascist, but I’m sure it was you who said words evolve

      Having queried the god of the freeworld, google with ‘geert wilders facist’ it brings up 91,000+ search results.

      Maybe I’m not the only one who thinks he is a fascist.

    73. Ravi Naik — on 7th August, 2009 at 12:48 am  

      Having queried the god of the freeworld, google with ‘geert wilders facist’ it brings up 91,000+ search results. Maybe I’m not the only one who thinks he is a fascist.

      Try “Obama fascist” - and you will get 3 million hits. And now what?

    74. Sunny — on 7th August, 2009 at 5:56 am  

      Knowing your politics Marvin, perhaps you’ll agree with this:
      http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/197486.php

      Anyway - I’m not here to debate the merits of Geert Wilder’s plan for taxes. I’ve made the reasoning behind my position clear - I do no truck with racists. If Douglas Murray wants to, then that’s his choice.

    75. jj — on 7th August, 2009 at 9:17 am  

      sunny,

      ‘i do no truck with racists’.

      really?!

      You staunchly defended Mehdi Hasan, who is happy to use the term kaffar for non-Muslims. This is widely accepted as a highly offensive term used to describe people who are not Muslim. Although not technically racist, it is a derogotory term used to refer to a certain group of people. You certainly have been ‘trucking’ with a supremacist, but just not the type that you accept even exist.

      dont give me any rubbish about him quoting from the koran either, that is no excuse…

    76. Doubter — on 7th August, 2009 at 10:23 am  

      Enlightenment into Standing’s motives can be found by examining the links between his fellow CSC member Hitchens and Hitchens’ brother’s friendship with David Irving.

    77. Don — on 7th August, 2009 at 10:28 am  

      Bit of a stretch, last I heard Hitchens major and Hitchens minor weren’t even on speaking terms.

    78. Leon — on 7th August, 2009 at 10:53 am  

      Can we leave the potentially libelous speculation out of this please?

    79. steve — on 7th August, 2009 at 11:46 am  

      Douglas Murray is a defender of the fascist Geert Wilders. Perhaps Edmund Standing should have thought more about associating himself with such despicable company. Funny how certain people are not bringing up that point hey.

      see HP Sauce today - Standing has now parted company with them, as he thinks (unlike them) that ‘there’s not just a problem with Islamism, but with the Qur’an itself’. He’s also a fan of neoconservatism.

      hmm. somthing tells me the vetting procedure for HP Sauce’s recruitment of commenters hasn’t been working all that well.

    80. Katy Newton — on 7th August, 2009 at 11:50 am  

      Ha. Nice, steve, but for those of us who enjoy a little context with our quotes here’s what Standing actually said:

      Harry’s Place is also a website whose driving conviction is that it is not religion itself, but rather politicised expressions of religion that represent a threat. I’m sceptical of this, as my writings on religion elsewhere show. To my mind, for example, Islamism isn’t the only problem, the Qur’an is a problem. Likewise, the Christian Right isn’t a problem that can be disconnected from its devotion to ancient religious texts, the values of which are largely opposed to the values of the Enlightenment.

    81. douglas clark — on 7th August, 2009 at 11:52 am  

      Six degrees of separation, anyone?

    82. Amused — on 7th August, 2009 at 12:40 pm  

      Poor Edmund Standing was presumably crying into his cornflakes in the morning after I skewered his most recent articles on how to combat the BNP

      Skewered?! Hahaha, nice one Sunny. I expect Edmund was confused at your ramblings considering what you’ve said in the past. Skewered! Nice one, very funny. Nice ego you’ve got there.

    83. qidniz — on 7th August, 2009 at 2:37 pm  

      I do no truck with racists.

      You do no truck with racists your politics tells you to dislike. Just as, “obviously”, those you do truck with are ipso facto not racist.

      We wouldn’t expect anything less of you.

    84. bashir — on 7th August, 2009 at 2:49 pm  

      jj

      You staunchly defended Mehdi Hasan, who is happy to use the term kaffar for non-Muslims. This is widely accepted as a highly offensive term used to describe people who are not Muslim. Although not technically racist….

      So you criticise Sunny for defending someone who you admit did not make a racist comment. mmmmm

      The terms “Islamist” “Islamofascist” and “Islamic terrorism” are highly offensive to Muslims. Are those who cry crocidile tears over “kaffar” going to stop using them? Are they heck. If they still use such terms, offensive to Muslims, they have no right to complain about Muslims using offensive terms for them

    85. Soso — on 7th August, 2009 at 2:58 pm  

      Douglas Murray is a defender of the fascist Geert Wilders. Perhaps Edmund Standing should have thought more about associating himself with such despicable company.

      To see some of the fauna Britian lets in these days, Geert Wilders would be the least of my worries. I mean, you can go to a screeening of his film without having to endure the insult of gender segregation.

      It’s getting to the point where people will portray anyone they disagreee with as a *fascist*.

      To smear Mr Standing with such a label is both wholly unjustified AND childish.

    86. Amused — on 7th August, 2009 at 4:04 pm  

      The terms “Islamist” “Islamofascist” and “Islamic terrorism” are highly offensive to Muslims.

      Are they why? Were/are Irish people offended by the phrase “Irish terrorist”? (answer: no)

      I am particularly bemused by the idea that “Islamic terrorism” is offensive (I actually highly doubt it is, but I’ll humour you). How else should people refer to terrorism carried out in the name of Islam?

    87. Don — on 7th August, 2009 at 4:17 pm  

      Soi disant Islamic terrorism?

    88. Jai — on 7th August, 2009 at 4:26 pm  

      Don & Amused,

      “Bashir” is the banned racist thug Munir. It’s not worth replying to him, both because of the source of the comment and because it’ll inevitably end up getting deleted by PP’s editors as per their statement in the recent ‘Comments policy’ article specifically in relation to Munir.

      Persistent, isn’t he ? That’s over half a dozen fake aliasis by Munir on a near-daily basis since last week, despite the fact that he’s been told directly by PP’s editorial team that he’s banned from this website and despite the fact that almost all of his subsequent comments have been deleted.

      I guess he’s quite the obsessive stalker as far as Pickled Politics is concerned.



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