• Family

    • Liberal Conspiracy
  • 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

  • Islam4UK back out, but media continues to dance to their tune


    by Sunny
    11th January, 2010 at 9:49 am    

    So Anjem Choudhary and Islam4UK have decided to cancel their march through Wootton Bassett. Wait, I’m shocked. No really, I expected this to happen just like their lame march through London, which they backed out of simply because some anti-Islamists showed up.

    The News of the World reports that the home secretary plans to ban the group, and for reasons I outlined years ago when it applied to al-Ghuraaba, that’s fine with me.

    But the question is - will the British media now wake up to the fact that Anjem Choudhary has them wrapped around his little finger, and not dance to his tune the next time he tries a publicity stunt? We’ll have to wait and see but I doubt it.

    Update: 5 Muslim men who called parading troops ‘baby killers’ and ‘murderers’ were today convicted of threatening behaviour.

    Munim Abdul, 28, Jalal Ahmed, 21, Yousaf Bashir, 29, Shajjadar Choudhury, 31, and Ziaur Rahman, 32, all from Luton, were convicted at Luton magistrates court today of using threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress.

    I’m crying for them… really I am. Idiots. Full story.


                  Post to del.icio.us


    Filed in: Islamists,Terrorism






    41 Comments below   |  

    Reactions: Twitter, blogs
    1. pickles

      Blog post:: Islam4UK back out, but media continues to dance to their tune http://bit.ly/7HxrAn


    2. Deen Sharp

      RT @pickledpolitics: Blog post:: Islam4UK back out, but media continues to dance to their tune http://bit.ly/7HxrAn


    3. Syazwina Saw

      RT: @pickledpolitics: Blog post:: Islam4UK back out, but media continues to dance to their tune http://bit.ly/7HxrAn


    4. Nicholas Stewart

      #PickledPolitics Islam4UK back out, but media continues to dance to their tune http://tinyurl.com/ye7dja6


    5. Naadir Jeewa

      Reading: Islam4UK back out, but media continues to dance to their tune: So Anjem Choudhary and Islam4UK.. http://bit.ly/5hLp7w




    1. Kerry Smart — on 11th January, 2010 at 10:13 am  

      The media certainly don’t help matters. The whole idea is to drum up trouble and get an airing in the press. We should just take the lot of them, dump them in Afghanistan where they can obviously be of more assistance to the people there.

    2. bananabrain — on 11th January, 2010 at 10:26 am  

      as i understand it omar bakri’s opinion was “we have achieved our aims” - they certainly have; grab huge amounts of publicity with minimal effort, remind everyone they’re still there and get a bunch of people riled. i stand by my response, which was PANTS TO THE BEARDS OF TERROR!

      http://www.spittoon.org/archives/4566

      there was always going to be a logistical nightmare, we should have let it go ahead, then we could have seen who was going to carry the other 475 of the 500 proposed coffins once they ran out of members to help.

      b’shalom

      bananabrain

    3. Anna Raccoon — on 11th January, 2010 at 10:29 am  

      The Media,the Clergy and the Politicians are their official PR agents….

      http://www.annaraccoon.com/politics/ajem-choudhary-george-carey-nick-griffin-ecumenical-eugenics/

    4. MiriamBinder — on 11th January, 2010 at 10:36 am  

      Exactly Bananabrain … more fools us for falling for it. Did I say us? I mean the providers of the rich, rich oxygen of publicity of course ;)

    5. Yakoub — on 11th January, 2010 at 10:37 am  

      Anjem thinks he’s clever, but anyone with an average-ish knowledge of Muslim history will be laffing when they read the Islam4UK statement. The ignorant will be caught out (as is Anjem’s intent, no doubt) by references to Muslims being in medieval Switzerland - true, they were (briefly). However, the idyll that was multicultural Andalusia is conflated with Muslim Crete. That’s Crete, the Muslim PIRATE Emirate, Crete. Plus, Anjem, I’m not sure it’s wise to mention freedom of speech and medieval Muslim Spain - where Muslim puritans burned al-Ghazali’s books - in the same article. There’s a quote from Alexander Pope that’s on the tip of my tongue. I’m sure clever Anjem knows it.

    6. Ravi Naik — on 11th January, 2010 at 10:48 am  

      Al-Ghuarabaa should not be banned in theory, but media ignorance about Islamist organisations makes the reality rather different.

      I feel very uneasy about your argument that freedom of speech should be guided by how savvy and responsible our media is. Our media is biased towards sensationalism and they will be squeezing the Islam4UK story as much as they can. So good luck with that. Instead, radical organisations should be banned if they have broken the law, and I certainly think that inciting Muslim boys to convert girls by making them drunk is enough reason to ban them.

      I also think that it is far better for organisations like Islam4UK to stick around and not be banned because it allows the public to look at them as attention-seeking whores that they are. I mean, what a freak show.

    7. Bartholomew — on 11th January, 2010 at 11:12 am  

      Choudary’s not the only religious self-publicist who doesn’t follow through with protests:

      The Westboro Baptist Church claims “God hates Lady Gaga,” for reasons known only to them and Reverend Fred Phelps, who also initiated the campaign. Convinced that this was the absolute truth, the Rev. even vouched to boycott Gaga’s January 7 concert at Fox Theater. However, he was snowed in and could not attend, therefore the entire thing was called off, as RFT can confirm.

    8. Yahya Birt — on 11th January, 2010 at 1:20 pm  

      What a relief! However irreponsible the press, it is still good news that Andy and co are no longer going to irritate the hell out of everyone, and instigate further divsion.

    9. douglas clark — on 11th January, 2010 at 1:53 pm  

      Whatever one may think of Anjem Choudhary it is quite astonishing how so small a group can pull our collective chain. He has the idea of assymetrical propoganda off pat.

      Islam4UK occupy one news cycle by declaring a protest and then another by cancelling it.

    10. Boyo — on 11th January, 2010 at 2:07 pm  

      I agree Douglas. They even got the PM going - and this the benefit-scrounging kingpin of a handful of undergraduates and loafers who can’t get girlfriends (I mean, other than burka-clad freakettes).

      The media will always conspire with his ilk - it’s good copy.

      Less excusable is the government response - to respond at all. If they had to say anything, they should have said something along the lines of “this is a deliberate provocation by a tiny sect of extremists and is designed to draw attention to themselves rather than make any serious point. They should grow up and contribute something decent to society rather than acting like obnoxious schoolboys.”

    11. halima — on 11th January, 2010 at 4:55 pm  

      “(I mean, other than burka-clad freakettes).”

      Nice turn of phrase, Boyo. Whatever did they do to get banded together with this vile man from Islam4UK? Share the same religion?

    12. Kulvinder — on 11th January, 2010 at 6:56 pm  

      It was a stupid stupid prosecution.

    13. Boyo — on 11th January, 2010 at 9:03 pm  

      I’m sorry Halima, being a feminist I find the notion that women who voluntarily deface themselves freakish. Certain sections of the left may conspire to square this particular circle (virtue being the easy, and lazy, option) but I’m old fashioned.

    14. Boyo — on 11th January, 2010 at 9:16 pm  

      I would add that the sight of the “sisters” marching down the main road dressed thus is a very visible and offensive protest against any and every woman, and should be treated as such. But the left has no spine - it has allowed Thatcherite individualism (“choice”) to override any notion of actual equality, let alone ideology.

      As Dr Robert memorably said at the time - “It’s your choice. There’s no choice at all.” Way back when people knew what they believed in.

    15. dave bones — on 11th January, 2010 at 9:32 pm  

      Although I personally think some sort of memorial to the needlessly dead in Iraq might be a good idea I understand that you all don’t like Mr Choudharry or his views, which is fair enough. What I don’t really understand is why you all throw buns here and none of you actually go and discuss your feelings with him, seeing as a lot of you are London based and he is accessible to you.

    16. Sunny — on 11th January, 2010 at 10:18 pm  

      But the left has no spine – it has allowed Thatcherite individualism (“choice”) to override any notion of actual equality, let alone ideology.

      Oh wait, so it’s now the left’s fault for letting Thatcher run amok too!

      You really come up with some stupid shite boyo.

    17. douglas clark — on 11th January, 2010 at 10:52 pm  

      Boyo,

      You sure have a way with words.

      Halima says:

      Whatever did they do to get banded together with this vile man from Islam4UK?

      my highlighting.

      and you take that as carte blanche for what?

      Your move.

    18. douglas clark — on 11th January, 2010 at 11:02 pm  

      dave bones @ 15,

      Or perhaps it is up to Mr Choudhary to make the first move. Perhaps he would like to come here and discuss his views in a vaguely ecumenical forum? Maybe you could tell him how low his coin is here and see whether he is willing to accept that challenge?

      We have already ‘discussed’ things with the BNP and SIOE, indeed the BNP have been given editorial ‘room’.

      I’m up for it. I doubt Mr Choudhary is. My guess is that he and Islam4UK would run away from a proper debate much as they ranaway from a demonstration.

      Perhaps you could persuade him?

    19. MiriamBinder — on 11th January, 2010 at 11:52 pm  

      @ Boyo # 14 - It has little to do with Thatchers’ “individualism” and a lot to do with freedom of choice, association and expression. Unless you prefer a communist style of freedom …’Any way you choose provided your choice is Boyos’ choice.

    20. Shatterface — on 11th January, 2010 at 11:57 pm  

      Banning them just makes the organisation look like they are being suppressed rather than simply incapable of getting a significant number of people to stand on a corner shouting like lunatics.

      Better to let them call for 2000 protesters then wave your pants at the half dozen who actually turn up.

      No need to use a hammer to crack these nuts.

    21. dave bones — on 12th January, 2010 at 12:55 am  

      I couldn’t really see myself as that sort of middle man dude.

      “Some people on a blog are challenging you to a debate”??

      his email and his phone number are on the site. I am only responsible for my views. You should form opinions from your own experience of someone surely. I talk to Mr Choudharry from time to time and have considered filming with him but I am more into music these days. If I thought I could do something useful I would. I am sure he has a different imaginary future utopia to the one I hold but he doesn’t scare me in the slightest and the Police don’t seem to be scared either.

      If I had concerns I would address them to the person I was concerned about. We are all adults.

    22. douglas clark — on 12th January, 2010 at 1:03 am  

      Anyway,

      I’d assume on your behalf, ’cause I like you both, that you Miriam Binder and you Shatterface would be willing to talk to the very great, the very indefatigable, Mr Choudhary?

      Should he have the cohones to appear here?

      Which, I obviously doubt.

      ———————————-

      Shatterface:

      No need to use a hammer to crack these nuts.

      Which is a riff on:

      Who breaks a butterfly on a wheel

      And we all know what that was about.

      Are you willing to face your nemesis, or not!

      Frankly it would be astonishing if the mad and bad Anjem Choudhary was willing to come here, for he would get right regally fucked.

    23. douglas clark — on 12th January, 2010 at 1:20 am  

      dave bones @ 21,

      I couldn’t really see myself as that sort of middle man dude.

      Oh, stop being such a fucking tit.

      Dry out, or what you say these days.

      Either your wee chum, has something to say, or he hasn’t. You have hung around here with your apparent access, or you are just another fantasist.

      You claim to know him:

      I talk to Mr Choudharry from time to time…

      Do not pretend that you couldn’t at least discuss with him talking here.

      Frankly, you sound like a sad wee tit.

    24. douglas clark — on 12th January, 2010 at 1:31 am  

      With, frankly, no access to the brain dead Mr Choudharry, who couldn’t argue his way out of insanity.

      Well.. Mr Choudhary.

      Your brain dead friends have failed, how are you going to do better?

    25. douglas clark — on 12th January, 2010 at 3:30 am  

      Dave Bones @ 21,

      You are completely annoying.

      If I thought I could do something useful I would.

      Try.

      Instead of pretending you are fucked up, which you are awful good at.

      Get the idiot to write here. Get the moron to try to justify himself.

      This is no excuse Dave:

      his email and his phone number are on the site. I am only responsible for my views. You should form opinions from your own experience of someone surely. I talk to Mr Choudharry from time to time and have considered filming with him but I am more into music these days..

      Anjem Choudhary should not be afraid of writing for us, unless he is a moron. Whether or not you have thought about filming him is irrelevant. He is either a nutter or he is not a nutter.

      Lets find out Dave Bones. You appear to have access to the idiot, lets see if you can deliver.

      I doubt you either can, or are willing to, for Anjem Choudhary is just the voice that keeps on giving. He justifies you….He pays your rent.

    26. Shatterface — on 12th January, 2010 at 4:10 am  

      ‘Which is a riff on:

      Who breaks a butterfly on a wheel’

      Yeah, but I got to say ‘nuts’ in a way they can’t be sure I was being offensive.

    27. douglas clark — on 12th January, 2010 at 4:32 am  

      OK Shatterface,

      Willing to talk to our good chum, Mr Choudhary? Whom I am conviced won’t turn up? You might get the chance to nut butterflies on wheels or summat…

      Islam4UK are an idiotic and pathetic bunch of whingers.

      It is for them to justify themselves, contrary to the Dave Bones conceit that we have to justify ourselves to them.

      Insomniacs r’us…

    28. douglas clark — on 12th January, 2010 at 4:41 am  

      Still, given that you don’t know your enemy until you engage with them, and then all plans fall apart, Mr Choudhary may be on a winner….

      Doubt it though….

      I am no-one in paticular, and I think I can wrestle him to the floor. Islam4UK are about a couple of dozen media savvy lunatics. That is all they have got.

      I think he is a wanker.

    29. Shatterface — on 12th January, 2010 at 12:30 pm  

      ‘Willing to talk to our good chum, Mr Choudhary? Whom I am conviced won’t turn up? You might get the chance to nut butterflies on wheels or summat…’

      I post on several atheist/science sites so I’m probably well enough versed in whatever arguments he might come up with. I’d rather argue the toss with him on a public forum than ban him from speaking publicly and have him retreat into his own small sector of his community claiming victimhood and preaching to the converted.

    30. dave bones — on 12th January, 2010 at 5:48 pm  

      I don’t care what you think about me Doug. If you want to talk to him talk to him. He is accessible. Why not? Do you think writing comments here is earth shatteringly important? In what way is it earth shatteringly important? How has the earth shattered? Do you think I need to prove something to you? Stop being a baby. If you want to talk to someone fucking T-A-L-K to them. Surely it is better than e-fantasizing about “wrestling them to the floor”. Who is a tit for fucks sake?

    31. dave bones — on 12th January, 2010 at 6:03 pm  

      Incidentally from close up I think you have overestimated them. I think there are less than a dozen people who are actually media savy and maybe 150-200 others.

    32. dave bones — on 12th January, 2010 at 6:06 pm  

      Email: islam4uk@live.co.uk
      Telephone: 07956 600 569 or 00961 70 209 335

    33. Don — on 12th January, 2010 at 6:38 pm  

      Douglas/Shatterface,

      You have probably heard the anecdote about the 18th-century wit, the Reverend Sydney Smith, who, when walking through an Edinburgh alleyway, saw two women shouting abuse at one another across the alley from their tenement windows. He concluded that they were never likely to agree, as they were arguing from different premises.

      I seriously doubt any of us here could make the slightest impact on Mr Choudhary in a debate. What would you use? Reason? Logic? Respect for basic human rights? Respect for the autonomy of the individual? Evidenced facts?

      Do you really think any of those would make an impact? Against the killer argument ‘I know what god wants’ these tools are useless. It is regrettably quite possible to armour oneself effectively from rationality (I’m sure we’ve all encountered enough YEC’s to know that) and Choudhary has equipped himself with an impervious carapace of crap.

      You might well show him up, but only to those of us who share your premises. And we have already reached a conclusion about him.

      It’s mildly amusing when LJB LL.B.(Hons.) shows up, but it never it goes anywhere. Same with Choudhary. You can entertain yourself by poking them with a stick, but you can’t debate with some mindsets.

    34. dave bones — on 12th January, 2010 at 9:37 pm  

      I am not trying to make an enemy of anyone. I just can see no earthly reason why I would have an imaginary opinion about someone who was accessible by phone or email.

    35. douglas clark — on 13th January, 2010 at 9:52 pm  

      dave bones,

      I apologise for that. You have made your neutrality pretty obvious here and elsewhere and it was wrong for me to disrespect it.

    36. douglas clark — on 13th January, 2010 at 10:04 pm  

      Don @ 33,

      Well, my original idea was to say that he had been taken over by Shaitan, and that I was about to start a Facebook group to declare him an apostate.

      The fact that he didn’t realise that he was acting on the devils behalf just proved his guilt.

      I can do the Inquisition too you know….

    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.