Sunny Hundal website



  • Family

    • Liberal Conspiracy
    • Sunny Hundal
  • Comrades

    • Andy Worthington
    • Angela Saini
    • Bartholomew’s notes
    • Bleeding Heart Show
    • Bloggerheads
    • Blood & Treasure
    • Campaign against Honour Killings
    • Cath Elliott
    • Chicken Yoghurt
    • Daily Mail Watch
    • Dave Hill
    • Dr. Mitu Khurana
    • Europhobia
    • Faith in Society
    • Feminism for non-lefties
    • Feministing
    • Gender Bytes
    • Harry’s Place
    • IKWRO
    • MediaWatchWatch
    • Ministry of Truth
    • Natalie Bennett
    • New Statesman blogs
    • Operation Black Vote
    • Our Kingdom
    • Robert Sharp
    • Rupa Huq
    • Shiraz Socialist
    • Shuggy’s Blog
    • Stumbling and Mumbling
    • Ta-Nehisi Coates
    • The F Word
    • Though Cowards Flinch
    • Tory Troll
    • UK Polling Report
  • In-laws

    • Aaron Heath
    • Douglas Clark's saloon
    • Earwicga
    • Get There Steppin’
    • Incurable Hippie
    • Neha Viswanathan
    • Power of Choice
    • Rita Banerji
    • Sarah
    • Sepia Mutiny
    • Sonia Faleiro
    • Southall Black Sisters
    • The Langar Hall
    • Turban Head

  • English Defence League release a new video


    by Rumbold
    16th September, 2009 at 9:19 pm    

    Here’s a screen shot from it:

    The English Defence League: clearly not anti-Muslim at all.


                  Post to del.icio.us


    Filed in: EDL






    85 Comments below   |  

    Reactions: Twitter, blogs
    1. Kevin Arscott

      RT @pickledpolitics: New blog post: English Defence League release a new video http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/5917


    2. pickles

      New blog post: English Defence League release a new video http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/5917


    3. Liberal Conspiracy » How the tabloids feed right-wing extremism

      [...] rubbish, and amounts to a series of still images juxtaposed against each other to stirring music. Rumbold at Pickled Politics has pointed out the pisspoor crusader imagery, but there is a series of 22 images in the video that [...]


    4. The tabloids and right wing extremism… « project-sheffield

      [...] rubbish, and amounts to a series of still images juxtaposed against each other to stirring music. Rumbold at Pickled Politics has pointed out the pisspoor crusader imagery, but there is a series of 22 images in the video that [...]




    1. Naadir Jeewa — on 16th September, 2009 at 9:24 pm  

      Meanwhile, the UK political system’s dalliances with racism are making waves in States.

      We’re not in 2008 anymore.

    2. The Common Humanist — on 16th September, 2009 at 11:00 pm  

      I think that image shows Teutonic Knights in action in what is now the Baltic States.

      So Germans fighting (then) ‘pagan’ Lithuanians.

      So English Centric of them.

      And no, the kop out that some English Knights crusaded in the region with the TK does not excuse the sloppy research. Tossers on all fronts.

    3. johng — on 17th September, 2009 at 2:04 am  

      Lenin’s Tomb on some of the debate of the last couple of days:

      http://leninology.blogspot.com/2009/09/by-soundbite-or-ballot-box.html

    4. Andrew — on 17th September, 2009 at 4:51 am  

      Has anyone seen on the ‘Casuals United’ site that there is now a Welsh Defence League and a Scottish Defence League? CS are supporting their anti-mosque marches in Newport and Glasgow. I wonder what their promo videos will be like!?

    5. johng — on 17th September, 2009 at 8:53 am  

      It looks like something out of “Birth of the Nation” or something.

    6. cjcjc — on 17th September, 2009 at 9:17 am  

      After visiting Lenin’s Tomb, please be sure to wash your hands.

    7. 5cc — on 17th September, 2009 at 10:12 am  

      Had a look at the EDL website, and they have an ad selling EDL shirts.

      Guess what colour they are.

    8. douglas clark — on 17th September, 2009 at 11:15 am  

      Andrew @ 4,

      The marches or demos in Newport and Glasgow appear to be a tad undereported, as in zilch, anywhere. No dates, times organisation, nowt.

    9. johng — on 17th September, 2009 at 11:55 am  

      …the only reason to wash your hands after a visit to Lenin’s tomb is that if you are very unlucky you’ll see the racist posts from assorted HPers before they are deleted.

      On No Platform Michael Rosen’s comment really deserved to be published:

      If we’re absolutely honest, the fact is we don’t know what are ‘media effects’ to this or that newsfest. We don’t have at hand a neat little breakdown of who watches what and when. We don’t have a breakdown of how the particular segments are thinking. We don’t know about the contradictions that play out in such people’s lives between what they say and what they do, or between what they say and what they think or indeed between what they say one day and what they say the next. If we start to second-guess all this, and claim that eg amongst this segment of the population, the newscast at 6.00 on BBC ‘would have’ had this or that effect, I think we’re turning into the worst kind of ballot-watchers ie the ones who make it up. What’s more we get embroiled in arguing with other people making up the same stuff. The fact of the matter is we don’t know. If Griffin succeeds in getting onto Question Time, we won’t even know how this particular event breaksdown, no matter what the polls will say after it. We shouldn’t get drawn into this.

      We should start from first principles about the presence of fascists on the street, or indeed in the entirely public place of a BBC studio.

      re: street. What are they doing outside a mosque? We know that they are trying to intimidate those particular muslim worshippers, and by implication, bush telegraph and news - all muslims. ie they are trying to say: “if you are a muslim, be afraid. Be particuarly afraid when you go to mosque because we might be there threatening you. We own this street, this locality, this country and you don’t. You have no right to be worshipping here, you have no right to be here, full stop. This place belongs to ‘us’. ”

      That’s why we have to confront them right there and defy every part of that message. There is a politics in how we do the defying. It should ideally always be in terms, of ‘making it safe’. Apart from anything else, we are defending hard-won religious toleration here. It’s a sound principle that took centuries to sort out and we should be quite clear about that.

      re the BBC. The BBC is also a public place and is indirectly publicly owned. The BBC has a responsibility to represent everyone, but it has no responsibility to represent those who attack sections of the community and demand that they leave the country. Griffin will be given the right, by us as indirect owners of the BBC, to say that a percentage of us shouldn’t be living here. There is only one way in which a fascist party can bring that programme about, it’s through terror, internment, deportation, and enforced exile. There is no other way. We are entitled to say that no party with either the explicit part of this programme, nor the covert, implicit part of this programme should have the right to come on to a public service to help this programme come about.

      The BBC is under no obligation to film and broadcast what anti-social people say and do. It doesn’t have to give a platform to people who advocate burglary as a way of life. It may well choose to show such people but it will always, always, always be surrounded by commentary and context that make clear that this is anti-social and that it is a ‘problem’ that this person is saying such a thing. This is because of what the BBC calls ‘compliance’ which they have extended into the ‘trust agenda’.

      On the BBC’s own terms, it’s clear to me that Griffin on Question Time would break both these principles. It may seem to trivial to make the comparison, but the point about the ‘Sachsgate’ and Jonathan Ross/Russell Brand, was that it broke ‘compliance’ and ‘trust’. The BBC’s contract with us the viewer was deemed to be broken because it ‘offended’ ‘us’ and ‘we’ couldn’t ‘trust’ the BBC. For those who’ve forgotten or didn’t care a damn about it, this was about a broadcaster claiming that he had fucked the granddaughter of the very person he was ringing up, on air.

      If that is ‘universally’ deemed to be offensive, then how much more offensive is it to broadcast the views of someone who is planning to ruin the lives of millions of people?

      The BBC also has a requirement to represent different ‘communities’ and to be itself diverse. It is also clear it cannot do this if it represents the BNP for the simple reason that the BNP wants to eliminate different ‘communities’ and diversity. Griffin has made it clear that he wants to whiten the BBC itself - with his comments about the black Friar Tuck on ‘Robin Hood’ for example and his booklet on Jews in the BBC. In other words there comes a point where total diversity breaks down. And that’s when there is a political party that wants to use the BBC in order to smash the very polity that is putting that party on air. It would be as if, I, believing in principle I should eat a variety of foods, also on that principle knowingly drink poison. ‘Ah well,’ I say to myself ‘I must represent poison in my diet. It is just another food, after all.’
      Michael Rosen | Homepage | 17 Sep, 08:02 | #

    10. cjcjc — on 17th September, 2009 at 12:18 pm  

      Leaving the posts supporting the racists of Hamas and fascists of Hezbollah to reign unchallenged.

      No doubt Mr Rosen will spare the BBC his services were QT to go ahead with Griffin?

      The sight of the likes of SWP/Respect-ites johng and Lenin (and Rosen for that matter) claiming the high ground of anti-fascism is as laughable as that of the EDL claiming the high ground of patriotism, or whatever it is that they are trying to claim.

    11. Roger — on 17th September, 2009 at 1:03 pm  

      Great - so the next EDL circus will be in Manchester.

      I really hope the UAF and their followers have learnt their lesson from Birmingham and Harrow and now act maturely when it comes to the ‘counter demo’ - the last thing we need is an Oldham like situation with angry young men venting their anger left, right and centre on the streets of Manchester.

    12. dave bones — on 17th September, 2009 at 1:17 pm  

      … Last week, the imam giving the Friday address at the Harrow mosque invited those outside, who were calling for no more mosques in Europe, inside for talks.

      I know a lot of people here are into this “No Platform” thing, but I agree with the Imam. If the EDL are as small in number as they look I see no reason why people like the Imam shouldn’t chat with them. Maybe its all just a misunderstanding :-)

    13. johng — on 17th September, 2009 at 2:33 pm  

      cjcjc, what do you propose to do about the EDL. As opposed to denouncing those organising against them I mean.

    14. Suburban Tory — on 17th September, 2009 at 2:47 pm  

      johng

      Shouldn’t you be over at Lenin’s Tomb singing the “Horst Wessel Song” with Comrade Seymour?

    15. johng — on 17th September, 2009 at 4:07 pm  

      Excuse me? Are you the same person who thought it was outrageous that black people and women got mentioned in history lessons, or that many Americans mention black people and women in their lists of most notable Americans?

    16. Suburban Tory — on 17th September, 2009 at 4:35 pm  

      No. You seem to have me confused with someone else.

      You on the other hand are a regular supportive commenter at the anti-semitic hate site Lenin’s Tomb.

    17. johng — on 17th September, 2009 at 6:55 pm  

      sorry, in what sense could Lenin’s Tomb concievably be called an ‘anti-semitic hate-site’. Perhaps you could explain.

    18. Soso — on 17th September, 2009 at 7:11 pm  

      It looks like something out of “Birth of the Nation” or something

      Fitting, seeings your politics are as fucking old as Lillian Gish

    19. cjcjc — on 17th September, 2009 at 8:04 pm  

      Gee, John, I dunno…the love affair with Hamas and Hezbollah perhaps?

    20. The Common Humanist — on 17th September, 2009 at 8:32 pm  

      tut tut cjcjc - Remember that through the Lenins prism brown skinned fascism good, white skinned fascism bad.

      One would have thought that in the 21st Century we could all come together that fascism is just bad full stop.

      Shame Lenin et al can’t see that…….

    21. Tory — on 17th September, 2009 at 9:31 pm  

      Johng, do they sing The Red Flag at pro-Hamas rallies now?

      Do you just cover your ears when all the stuff about the eternal Jew gets spouted. (i mean ZIONISTS of course).

    22. Tory — on 17th September, 2009 at 9:44 pm  

      You and ‘Lenin’ are the useful idiots of religious sectarianism.

      Trust me johng, these guys dont give a shit about your dead Russian mass murderers.

      Take the guy in the HP video saying the police are ‘filthy kaffirs’ who are no better than ‘cattle’. He isn’t excluding you from that johng. He isn’t making exceptions for people who enjoy a bit of Das Kapital and treat UK muslims like third worlders.

    23. Refresh — on 17th September, 2009 at 9:45 pm  

      Guys, nothing to say about the EDL? No counter to their provocations?

    24. cjcjc — on 17th September, 2009 at 9:57 pm  

      A prediction: in a year’s time the EDL will have disappeared.

      Let them provoke; but do not be provoked.
      The Harrow Mosque guy was right - ignore them, or invite them in for a nice cup of tea.
      They have no answer to that.

      The worst thing to do would be to join forces with SWP/UAF types who have no interest in harmony. Their Respect adventure didn’t go too well for them, but never mind, they see an opening here.

      They don’t give a damn whether the media image of muslims is harmed - indeed they welcome that, hoping that more EDL idiots will then turn up and the whole thing will escalate.

    25. falcao — on 17th September, 2009 at 9:57 pm  

      EDL frustrated football hooligans who happen to be racist who would have guessed!

    26. johng — on 17th September, 2009 at 10:11 pm  

      So basically the message is: lets not worry about the EDL. Nothing to see here. We’ll just keep on spouting rancid communal garbage about Muslims. OK. (Love the term ‘third worlders’ by the way. I’ve never heard anyone but BNP supporters use it. What do you mean by the term and how do you think ‘third worlders’ ought to be treated?).

    27. Refresh — on 17th September, 2009 at 10:25 pm  

      Johng, yes I am afraid that is the message I am receiving.

    28. Soso — on 17th September, 2009 at 10:28 pm  

      So basically the message is: lets not worry about the EDL.

      Have they been planning to blow up dozens of airplanes over the mid-Atlantic?

      Are you ever fucking archaic.

    29. cjcjc — on 17th September, 2009 at 10:28 pm  

      Basically the message is: if you are worried about English fascists, best not to ally with people like you who support foreign fascists.
      Isn’t that Hezbollah salute just lovely?!

    30. Suburban Tory — on 17th September, 2009 at 10:33 pm  

      Does johng stand shoulder to shoulder with the the Nazi German Peoples Union (DVU)?

      A sister party of the NPD, the neo-Nazi German People’s Party (DVU), issued a call on its homepage to support the Al-Quds Day march. A popular author and journalist, Jürgen Elsässer, urged German leftists to attend the anti-Israel demonstration. The Al-Quds Day march was an amalgam of German “anti-imperialist” leftists, neo-Nazis and Muslims

      The far left, far right, islamist convergence continues apace.

    31. Refresh — on 17th September, 2009 at 10:50 pm  

      Why do you guys insist on avoiding discussing the EDL?

    32. falcao — on 17th September, 2009 at 11:05 pm  

      The English Racist League are 12 idiots who after media hype what else is there to discuss about?

    33. douglas clark — on 17th September, 2009 at 11:06 pm  

      Refresh,

      Why do you guys insist on avoiding discussing the EDL?

      Good question. Here are three possible reasons:

      - since Birmingham they have been almost completely anonymous, except on the internet where their U-Tube video must have taken a little effort to put together, or

      - they are actually a pyramid scheme, in the sense that they claim to have membership but don’t, or

      - they are about to disappear completely?

      I suppose we’ll find out after their show of strength on the 10th of October when millions rally to their demos in Manchester, Newport and Glasgow, eh?

      [edit] Why Newport? I just can’t see the point.

    34. Boyo — on 17th September, 2009 at 11:07 pm  

      you see there are fascists and fascists.

      there are the white british fascists whose “birds” have tattoos and fall down drunk - these are “bad” fascists

      then there are the brown fascists whose “womenfolk” you can’t see because they’re hid behind veils or closed doors while they’re men folk beat up poofs - these are “good” fascists

      and they call the EDL racist…

    35. Boyo — on 17th September, 2009 at 11:18 pm  

      Indeed, many of those on the left are arguably far more racist than the EDL - the EDL at least claim to be opposed to Islamism or Islamic culture. Many on those on the left defend it, seemingly oblivious to its impact on its adherents - and in particular women, gays, etc. But hey, it’s their culture - their women and gays aren’t entitled to the same rights and hopes as “ours”, right? That would be imperialist. Or maybe just socialist. Personally I think denying others the rights we take for granted ourselves is simply racist.

    36. Boyo — on 17th September, 2009 at 11:21 pm  

      But then I view us all as equal. To the non-left left, some are less equal than others. If religion is the opium of the masses, oppositionalism is the crack of the non-left left.

    37. persephone — on 17th September, 2009 at 11:21 pm  

      Womenfolk? Never heard that used in brown circles and not seen that behaviour held up here as a good trait though you get a few apologists for it

    38. Boyo — on 17th September, 2009 at 11:23 pm  

      Muslim women and gays are a price worth paying to lay it on The Man…

    39. persephone — on 17th September, 2009 at 11:26 pm  

      “Why Newport? I just can’t see the point.”

      Maybe theres a good deal on with their railcards

      Griffin lives in Wales so Newport could be where he may be developing support

    40. dave bones — on 18th September, 2009 at 1:31 am  

      We are quite London centric down here. There may be a real problem oop North and no easy way to deal with it.

    41. Refresh — on 18th September, 2009 at 2:38 am  

      I think Newport as that could be the inauguration outing for so called WDL.

      Douglas I think you are due for the SDL. Belfast will be NIDL.

      Boyo, interesting you see the EDL as a liberating force. Fighting to liberate muslim womenfolk.

      And no doubt they would then move onto liberating Sikhs from their turbans.

    42. Boyo — on 18th September, 2009 at 8:39 am  

      I don’t think they’re good refresh, i just think you and your bedfellows are worse ;-)

    43. douglas clark — on 18th September, 2009 at 8:48 am  

      Refresh,

      Maybe you’d like to try this. Google Scottish Defence League and the only results I got back yesterday were to:

      UK Casuals United where they mention a march in Glasgow on the 14th of November (?)

      This completely astonishing thread on Vital Football.co.uk where Millwall supporters prove some of them are nothing like the stereotype! Unbelievable:

      http://www.millwall.vitalfootball.co.uk/forum/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=36319&start=1

      The English Defence League site where I can’t even find a link!

      And this very thread.

      That’s it.

      _______________________________________________

      Persephone @ 38:

      Maybe theres a good deal on with their railcards

      LOL!

    44. cjcjc — on 18th September, 2009 at 8:50 am  

      Muslim women and gays are a price worth paying to lay it on The Man…

      Yes, it was Lindsey German (SWP) who said that gay rights should not be a “shibboleth” and obstruct their alliance with the conservative clerics of Respect.
      She was obviously working on the beggars can’t be choosers principle.

      So, as a gay man, I can’t take her or johng or any of that laughable crew terribly seriously.

      Still that SWP/Respect thing really worked out well, didn’t it?!

    45. douglas clark — on 18th September, 2009 at 8:53 am  

      persephone @ 38,

      Maybe theres a good deal on with their railcards

      LOL!

    46. Boyo — on 18th September, 2009 at 8:55 am  

      Islamophobiawatch kindly directed me to a blog entry at the Centre for Social Cohesion (oooooooh!) that sums it up for me…

      “The recent emergence of the English Defence League (EDL) is the inevitable outcome of the failure of a government to properly address Islamic extremism topped off with good old fashioned British hooliganism and bigotry.”

      http://www.socialcohesion.co.uk/blog/2009/09/hooligans-racists-bigots-we-dont-want-your-help.html

      Johng btw is John Game, an SWP stalwart, just in case you thought there was the slimmest possibility that you might extract a reasonable argument from him.

    47. cjcjc — on 18th September, 2009 at 9:25 am  

      That blog entry seems to sum things up very well, once you get beyond the provocative (but probably accurate) opening paragraph.

    48. johng — on 18th September, 2009 at 9:25 am  

      Actually the comment made suggested that when it came to racism and war we would not make the existence of real disagreements a barrier to working against them. As opposed, for example, to those commentators who have come pretty close to expressing support for a bunch of racist football hooligans because they hate Islam. Or people who think that its perfectly ok for organised thugs to attack brown people because they’re brown because the particular brown people have reactionary ideologies. All this nonsense (I find the idea that if you do not support the bombing of southern Lebanon and support the right of people to resist such bombing this makes you a fascist particularly amusing) derives from an attempt to force all argument into a framework dictated by defence of the governments support for the US in the war on terror: opponents of which are accused of being allies of Bin Laden. Its extraordinary to me that this politics of the ostrich (any framework like this is by definition ostrich like), which has all the ingrediants of knee-jerk chauvinism is taken seriously by anyone. Unfortunately its pretty close to the politics of our government. And its this, rather then “a failure of the government to tackle extremism” as stated by the Orwellian and absurdly named “community cohesion” group, which lies behind the legitimation of the kind of vicious communal hatred promoted by the EDL, a communal hatred which sadly, some people just can’t see because of their blinkered politics.

      Anyone who feels dirty reading through these reams of communal bile could have a look at this nice little article in International Socialism about the history of Muslim’s in the British working class.

      http://www.isj.org.uk/index.php4?id=288&issue=113

    49. Boyo — on 18th September, 2009 at 9:44 am  

      Dave Spart (sorry, johng)…

      “I find the idea that if you do not support the bombing of southern Lebanon and support the right of people to resist such bombing this makes you a fascist particularly amusing”

      Well Hitler was a vegetarian, but even I do not believe all vegetarians are National Socialists.

      It’s (anthropologically) interesting the way you construct the “framework” of your argument - like precarious scafolding upwards from terra firma.

      How understanding (though not supporting) the EDL as a phenomenon that has more to do with simple-minded racism leads on to supporting the government’s “war on terror”. I can see how students get sucked in, but what I’m really wondering is why you haven’t grown up?

    50. cjcjc — on 18th September, 2009 at 9:45 am  

      At what point, I wonder, were you actually intending to address those real disagreements?

      Fortunately for everyone else, johng, your tiny sect continues to shrink. Some people are fussier about their friends but in your case I understand that beggars can’t be choosers.

      I enjoyed this para from that article:

      It is also increasingly clear that the assertion of a religious identity in the face of Islamophobia or anti-Muslim racism contains a strong positive element and the potential to engage in militant mass action with others, religious or otherwise.

      Hate gays? Who cares?! You’re welcome to join our “militant mass action” (it’s just been us 3 men and a dog up to now, but please swell our numbers, please, please…)

      And for a Respect (RIP) supporter to accuse others of communalism…well that is just beyond parody.

    51. damon — on 18th September, 2009 at 10:17 am  

      I listened with interest to Lindsey German in this youtube that was linked inside the one Boyo made.
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZzOotCGVHkw&feature=channel_page

      It sounds all very good and fine. But it’s a bit of a merry-go-round as to who got to be unreasonable first (but I guess it was the original racists).

      But now an objection to Islamism, or the open parading of Hezbollah placards through the streets is seen as islamophobic from whatever quater it comes from. Be that the government, the Harry’s Place blog, the police, or the wretched EDL.

      Listening to Lindsey German, I get the idea in my head that if people in Ireland (or Slovenia) were to realise that this could be their country that she’s talking about in ten years time, there might be a popular mood to not even go down that road and allow a large muslim community to develop.

      Because the regular people of those countries would never reach the level of class consciousness and solidarity that Lindsey German shows here.
      That they would probably mostly fail to reach George Galloways’s high standards. (Which seems to be a prerequisite).

    52. douglas clark — on 18th September, 2009 at 10:17 am  

      Y’know, someone could probably trace a line from Stop the Wars failure to achieve it’s objectives, right through the Iraq War and out the other side to the ludicrous situation we see ourselves in now, where the left is so fragmented that it can’t get support to save itself.

      The SWP were major partners in the original protests and frankly made an arse of it.

    53. cjcjc — on 18th September, 2009 at 11:18 am  

      George Galloway’s high standards

      Very good. Very good indeed.

    54. douglas clark — on 18th September, 2009 at 11:49 am  

      I thought this, by someone called cookie cutter over on our friendly rivals Harrys’ Place was quite funny:

      (an afterthought)

      Fixture List - EDL Utd.

      A. Birmingham 700,000 v EDL 25 - 5th September 2009

      A. London (Harrow) 500 v EDL 18 - 11th September 2009

      A. London(Pall Mall) 1,800 v EDL 27 - 13th September 2009

      A. Leeds v EDL - 31st October 2009 . KO TBA
      Please note this is not an all ticket match.

      A. Manchester v EDL - Date TBA
      Note that extra time may be played in this fixture

      The Manager’s Page

      The BNP Premier League fixture computer has unfortunately handed us consecutive away games and these have resulted in heavy defeats. Often we haven’t been able to field our first team and with unlimited substitutes for the opponents it is natural that we are facing relegation.

      One hope for us is the European Nazi Cup where we face Sweden Ultra Fascists in the first round in December……..

      Fixtures courtey of MPAC UK http://www.mpacuk.org/story/180909/action-alert-stop-edl-rioting-leeds.html

    55. Paul — on 18th September, 2009 at 11:49 am  

      The quote above from the Centre for Social Cohesion sums up the general attitude of this blog (PP):

      “The recent emergence of the English Defence League (EDL) is the inevitable outcome of the failure of a government to properly address Islamic extremism topped off with good old fashioned British hooliganism and bigotry.”

      It is a widespread attitude, not just in the UK. Try to step back, and look at the logic of this claim. Suppose the Islamist militants (who are constantly targeted here at PP) all convert to liberal democracy. What will happen? Supposedly, the EDL will no longer have any objection to the presence of Muslims, and neither will the BNP. And even if the EDL did not renounce its position, then supposedly it would lose all support.

      Supposedly, there is no general opposition to Islam as such, or to the immigration of Muslims. Therefore -supposedly - dealing with the Tiny Minority of Extremists will cure all ills, and result in a happy harmonious society. The white British working class, especially, will happily live alongside its Asian / Muslim neighbours. I would emphasise that you can hear this argument in Belgium, the Netherlands, and Germany, among others. It is not a UK-specific phenomenon. Now, the only way to absolutely disprove it, would be if all the ‘extremists’ did in fact renounce their politics, which will not happen. So it is pointless to argue about that hypothetical scenario.

      What we can look at, is the question of why some people are desperate, to avoid recognition of widespread anti-Islam sentiment. (Emphasising groups like the EDL and SIOE is often part of this strategy - they are small and obviously marginal). To me it seems obvious, that integration of Muslims in western Europe has collapsed completely, and that relations between the indigenous populations and immigrant minorities are worse than ever. But if I say that to the average politician or journalist, they will reply, “That’s absurd, you are an alarmist, you are trying to undermine cohesion, the vast majority of immigrants have successfully integrated, their children often go to university, all the tensions are caused by a few extremists on both sides …”

      And so on. That’s if they would talk at all - because the usual response is complete denial, and an absolute refusal to communicate.

      Why is their such a fanatical refusal to recognise, that tens of millions of people in western Europe absolutely reject Islam, and all its beliefs, and its expression in any form? Part of the answer is obvious: its not a nice idea, and besides it implies that bloodshed is imminent. Is that all there is to it?

    56. douglas clark — on 18th September, 2009 at 12:16 pm  

      Paul,

      I suspect you’d quite like to see this debate develop along race lines, perhaps leading to some sort of race war. Would that be correct?

      Almost everybody that is a serious commentator here understands the, frankly rather naivé, points you are making, whichever side of the debate they are coming from. Whether folk argue for greater or lesser integration, greater understanding, even the ummahtastic mob, everyone understands the issues. And, even despite allowing BNP supporters to speak here, the consensus that there is a peaceful solution has never broken down.

      I note that the left may make sweeping gains in Germany at the next election. So alls not lost there either.

      You could probably find tens of millions of atheists around Europe that think that all religion should be abolished.

      I am one of them, but I’m not about to fight you with fisticuffs over it. You ought to have more faith in your own culture, things like health and education and stuff like that. If it doesn’t work for everyone then maybe it ought to be ammended. I doubt very much it would ever be replaced by the current iteration of Sharia, right enough, but who knows?

    57. Paul — on 18th September, 2009 at 1:04 pm  

      Certainly, there is a very broad consensus that things will go well in the end, that the problems are soluble, that integration is the only hope, that understanding will prevail, and so on.

      The problem is, that doesn’t correspond with the real world, where anti-Islam sentiment is widespread and radical. But arguing about that is pointless, because all you get is denial (and personal attacks on anyone who questions the consensus).

      So instead, try to understand the motives of those who promote the consensus. What are they trying to achieve? By and large, a traditional nationalism: one nation, cohesion, harmony, a sense of common identity, cultural homogeneity, cultural unity, national loyalty, patriotism, national values, a single legal system, and so on.

      However, mass immigration in western Europe has undermined the traditional starting point for that kind of nationalism, namely that the nation is supposed to be inhabited by a single ethno-cultural group. What can the nationalist do? Feverishly restore the national unity, by almost stopping immigration, and forcibly “integrating” the immigrants already here.

      So far so good. Nationalist wants the Muslims to speak the national language and wave the flag. Muslims learn English, Muslims wave Union Jack, and white working-class neighbour says, “Welcome Fellow-Briton!”.

      However, what the white neighbours actually say is: “No more mosques” or “Ban the Burqa”. Or they complain about “Asian paedophile gangs grooming white girls”. Or that Muslims are planning to ban Christmas, and so on.

      Nationalist strategy up in smoke.. but they won’t admit it. So instead, they deny that the indigenous population has any major problem with Muslims, or indeed with any immigrant minority. That seems to be what’s happening.

    58. douglas clark — on 18th September, 2009 at 1:18 pm  

      Paul,

      You say:

      The problem is, that doesn’t correspond with the real world, where anti-Islam sentiment is widespread and radical.

      I’m willing to agree that there is a low level sentiment about otherness. But, frankly there is a low level sentiment about the Germans and the French too!

      If it is low on folks agenda, a little discomfort, like a rainy day in August, it isn’t really worth commenting on.

      My measure of racism, in the UK at least, is probably measured by the canary in the coalmine, the number of people that say they will vote BNP. Last Opinion Poll I looked at said it was circa 3%. And, viz other comments here, that may include an element of a protest vote against our, largely, discredited political class.

      97 out of a 100 people say they won’t vote for the BNP.

      And the skirmishes will die away, what with the cold noghts drawing in. The Casandra like suggestion that we were in for a summer of riots proved a bit misplaced in my opinion.

    59. douglas clark — on 18th September, 2009 at 1:24 pm  

      err nights, not noghts.

    60. Tory — on 18th September, 2009 at 4:21 pm  

      “I think Newport as that could be the inauguration outing for so called WDL.”

      Splitters!

      On one side you have a bunch of hooligans and thugs who want to ‘protest’. You then have people like Choudhary and his ‘Sharia Roadshow’ trying to provoke them. You also have people like johng trying to whip up masked asian youths into a complete frenzy. Not to forget the idiots at UAF who think they can relive the 1970′s by calling everyone a Nazi.

      No good is going to come out of all this nonsense. All these people turn up to fight and the police are left with the job of trying to protect the general public. The cops even get bottles and bricks from at them for stopping both sides from attacking each other.

    61. Boyo — on 18th September, 2009 at 4:35 pm  

      I think it should be like Quatermass - we should lock them all in Wembley stadium.

      And then televise it.

    62. Refresh — on 18th September, 2009 at 5:07 pm  

      ‘Splitters!’

      Absolutely. And that is the chink in the armour and the seeds of their destruction.

      It will not take long before one of xDL outfits wants to play top dog. SDL, WDL and NIDL will then want to kick their heads in.

    63. David T — on 18th September, 2009 at 5:38 pm  

      Seen Al Muhaj’s line on the EDL?

      They’re defending them!

      http://www.hurryupharry.org/2009/09/18/panto-politics/

    64. johng — on 18th September, 2009 at 7:10 pm  

      David T clearly thinks the fear and intimidation of British citizens by street thugs is a laughing matter. Obviously they are only Muslims and not really British so who cares? And who, if you’ll pardon my French, gives a flying fuck what al-muhaj’s line is? What has this got to do with marching on mosques and planning to intimidate the Muslim populations of Manchester and Leeds. The fact that David T hosts a site where a large section of the contributers are BNP sympathisers (cookie cutter is on record as suggesting that they are useful as they represent an anti-Islamic backlash) tells you all you need to know about his supposedly liberal principles.

    65. douglas clark — on 18th September, 2009 at 7:45 pm  

      Johng,

      I think subjecting street thugs to ridicule can only be a good thing. It might not be the whole answer, but it might be part of it. Cookie Cutters’ suggestion that they have played three and lost three is quite streetwise, I’d have thought.

      It actually achieves no sensible agenda to favour one violent group over another, does it?

      Have you some information you’d like to share with us about the prospective size of the demonstrations in Manchester, Leeds, Newport and Glasgow? Because there isn’t much to indicate that the EDL could organise a piss up in a brewery. Nor that the WDL or the SDL actually exist at all. So far.

      The link (@43) I gave to Millwall supporters talking about this suggests that this is something exercising the political class rather than the football class.

      Just saying, don’t pour petrol on a fire that may well go out, left to it’s own devices.

    66. Sunny — on 18th September, 2009 at 9:43 pm  

      Of course Anjem Choudhary are going to defend the EDL - these people are two sides of the same coin.

    67. Boyo — on 18th September, 2009 at 9:57 pm  

      “these people are two sides of the same coin.”

      Like John Game and Dave Spart.

    68. damon — on 18th September, 2009 at 10:27 pm  

      Douglas, I was reading that Millwall football blog a few months ago - and linked to it on this site.
      They’re an odd bunch. Racism is tolerated on there, but many of them aren’t particularly racist.

      Being mostly a clannish football site, it seems that they accept that they are a broad church as far as politics is concerned, but anyone getting too intelectual or sounding like a Guardian reading liberal would be shot down with scorn.

      For example, one thread they had recentlty was from some thicko who started it by complaining about some gay characters on Coronation Street or Eastenders.

      They were putting him off his dinner he said, and spoiling his favourite tv programmes.
      No one stepped in to challenge his homophobia, but much joshing and mickey taking ensued when they picked on one of their number to suggest he seemed a bit too easy going about their being such a thing as gay people at all.

      The reason I linked to one of their threads was because I thought it helped explain that mentality (which the EDL shares).
      Some had said they had left the area near Millwall’s ground where they grew up, and admit it was for (so called)
      white flight reasons that they did it.

      I know people are busy, and there is so much on the world wide web, but I felt that it was an interesting part of society to observe.

    69. douglas clark — on 18th September, 2009 at 10:52 pm  

      damon,

      Sure, I wasn’t trying to paint them as angels. I just thought that on the thread I linked to they weren’t that interested in the EDL.

      Sometimes, that is as much as you can hope for.

      Heh!

      Better ennui rather than force de frappe.

      Guess I’d be better not posting there…

      Still. I think they add to the idea that white people have dimensions too.

      However, my point was that they didn’t actually seem to care much for the EDL. You disagree?

    70. dave bones — on 18th September, 2009 at 11:31 pm  

      Choudharry’s posse were complaining about Galloway trying to court Muslim votes in his election campaign. they are complaining about UAF trying to ally with Muslims now. They don’t like Socialism. This isn’t a surprise is it.

    71. damon — on 18th September, 2009 at 11:45 pm  

      No Douglas, I don’t disagree. I think you have it perfectly.
      It’s great that they don’t seem that interested.

      And thanks to you, I’ve learned some new words and phrases (after looking them up). Ennui and force de frappe.

      ”Still. I think they add to the idea that white people have dimensions too.”

      That’s what I meant the other day when I talked about trying to ‘understand’ the EDL type people.
      Not to concede anything to them, but to try to know what makes them tick.

    72. douglas clark — on 19th September, 2009 at 7:45 am  

      Ah, Mr Bones!

      Have you come under the spell of Mr Galloway?

      When I was but a barrowboy, think the Hovis advert sans bike, I remember a man in an open top Mercedes driving along Dumbarton Road looking for all the world like a cat that had got the cream. I took an instant dislike to him, and it has never left me. For as someone whispered in my ear,

      “That’s George Galloway, he’s an MP and he’s a chancer.”

      ____________________________

      Just as an afterthought, not in any way related to the above, heaven forfend! I found John Le Carrés book A Perfect Spy a particularily interesting read.

    73. douglas clark — on 19th September, 2009 at 7:52 am  

      damon @ 70,

      Cheers. I accept that I got you wrong. We should get Observer Badges to distinguish us from the politicos around here!

      Though I’d need mine with Velcro.

      :-)

    74. Cjcjc — on 19th September, 2009 at 9:26 am  

      Sunny - it’s in fact a three sided coin (as it were) of laughable imbecility - EDL, Al-Muhaj and SWP/UAF.
      All three desperate for a rumble, and laughter isn’t such a bad response.
      My “strategy” such as it is I posted @24.

    75. douglas clark — on 19th September, 2009 at 9:32 am  

      cjcjc,

      Frankly, I never expected to agree with you on anything. But on this I do.

      Bloody hell!

    76. douglas clark — on 19th September, 2009 at 10:10 am  

      And that is what this is all about, isn’t it? It is about marginalised folk wanting to swing a punch? Well, fuck that for a game of soldiers.

      What this is certainly about is the testosterone of being a gang member. Whether it is of the English Defence League, or the insanity of the likes of Anjem Choudhary, or the SWP?

      You think you can explain or rationalise through violence?

      I think you are all kidding yourselves. I do not think they speak for thee or me. I think they are all nutters…

    77. Issy — on 19th September, 2009 at 2:50 pm  

      Why Manchester?????????????????

      EDL claim that they are against extremists Muslims only i.e. Anjum Choudry Al Muhajerun and the 8 or so looneys who protested in Luton. The fact is these people and this tiny group who number less than 50 nationally are so hated by the UK Muslim community that they have been banned from every mosque and have been chased and beaten up literally since the 1990’s especially in the North and they will never get support from UK Muslims (that’s why you never see them up North but that’s another whole topic altogether TJs know what im talking about). It’s a shame that this has not been publicised and very few people except Muslims are aware of this. People really need to know that the UK Muslim community have been fighting this tiny vociferous Minority for the last 15 years! Out of over a thousand mosques in the country they were only able to preach at one i.e. Finsbury Park Mosque and that was only after they physically beat up the trustees and took it over. Thankfully the mosque is now back with the trustees after successful legal action. That’s why they are always on the streets or talking to the media who lap it all up, Anjum Choudry is not even a trained qualified Islamic Scholar in fact he did law at uni before he became a looney.

      Many Muslims believe they are MI5 agents used as a honey trap or agent provocateurs. Ask yourselves this, why is Anjum Choudry never arrested??? Why do high profile MPs call for action against them and then nothing happens and you never hear about it ever again? Why do they only pop up at the most opportune moments cause extreme offence and then disappear again? Why are they on first name terms with the media/journalists? Why are they portrayed as if they have support from and speak for the UK Muslim community? This whole outfit stinks!

      Therefore the EDL have no reason to march but they use Anjum Choudry and his band of loons as an excuse for race hatred and to attack Muslims just listen to their chants and posts on the net which consists of P*** and N***** in reference to the huge numbers of Black Caribbean youths who joined the anti-Nazi protest in Birmingham and Harrow. The EDL are nothing more than street fighters for fascist political forces i.e. Black shirts or the brown-shirted Stormtroopers. For all those who support the EDL/BNP I just say be careful what you wish for!

    78. Tory — on 19th September, 2009 at 6:33 pm  

      “Sunny – it’s in fact a three sided coin (as it were) of laughable imbecility – EDL, Al-Muhaj and SWP/UAF”

      Yes I know, its just quite possible someone is going to get very hurt or very dead and everyones right to protest gets curtailed by the Home Secretary.

    79. douglas clark — on 19th September, 2009 at 7:20 pm  

      Issy @ 78,

      I don’t believe you, or your analysis. In fact, I think you are all over the shop.

      Many Muslims believe they are MI5 agents used as a honey trap or agent provocateurs.

      Well, you’d either know you were, in which case you’d remain silent, or you’d just be talking out of your arse..

    80. dave bones — on 20th September, 2009 at 5:54 am  

      Douglas- Not mr Galloway or Mr Choudharry. As I said on that stupid Lenin Blog- I don’t support, I report. But I dont think some one who believes an Islamic state is destined for this country is necessarily stupid. They just believe what is said in the Koran. Personally I don’t want an Islamic state in this country or believe the Koran, but I can see that if I held to the Koran I might a well believe what is says.

    81. reg74 — on 24th December, 2009 at 6:03 am  

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_-jhVw_-Hs

    Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

    Pickled Politics © Copyright 2005 - 2010. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.
    With the help of PHP and Wordpress.