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

  • More terror plots


    by Sunny
    9th September, 2006 at 11:30 am    

    This time it’s neo-Nazis who want a share of the limelight.

    Belgian police yesterday arrested 17 alleged neo-Nazis, mostly serving soldiers, who were said to be planning to destabilise the country’s institutions in a series of terrorist attacks. In simultaneous raids on five army barracks and 18 private addresses across the northern Flanders half of Belgium, police uncovered a homemade bomb and numerous weapons.

    The raids by 150 police officers in East Flanders, Antwerp and Limburg were the most dramatic breakthrough in a two-year investigation into far-right activists allegedly operating inside the armed forces.

    This comes not long after news that neo-Nazis in Britain have been posting videos threatening to behead Muslims unless they leave the country. But, there seems to be no moral panic. Hmmm…

    Al Hack adds: We expect white community leaders will be standing up to condemn atrocities in the name of their race any minute now


                  Post to del.icio.us


    Filed in: Race politics






    49 Comments below   |  

    Reactions: Twitter, blogs


    1. Jagdeep — on 9th September, 2006 at 1:20 pm  

      The fascists all feed off each other.

    2. raz — on 9th September, 2006 at 2:26 pm  

      Speaking of terrorism, there was another barbaric atrocity committed in India yesterday.

    3. g — on 9th September, 2006 at 2:29 pm  

      White people can’t be terrorists please remember. That is left to their brown skin brethren.

      I’m sure Burchill and Phillips will be making a big deal out of this. Or will they conviently ignore it, because it goes against their brown = evil, white = peacful shtick? Will it also mean all white men with shaved heads will get dirty looks and fearful stares, and in the worst cases get thrown off planes by racist pikeys? somehow i doubt it.

    4. g — on 9th September, 2006 at 2:30 pm  

      yes raz but seeing as muslims were mainly killed its not that important

    5. Geezer — on 9th September, 2006 at 5:15 pm  

      Holy crap serving soldiers as well? The guys who have sworn to protect the nation were preparing to kill as many non Whites as possible!

    6. David T — on 9th September, 2006 at 5:31 pm  

      There terrorists are old skool

    7. Bert Preast — on 9th September, 2006 at 5:56 pm  

      No moral panic? Well until they’ve started murdering people you wouldn’t expect there to be, would you? Same for the condemnations - though even so we’ll doubtless see unreserved condemnations from anyone who’s asked about the subject.

      Or are you expecting them to start making excuses?

    8. Sid — on 9th September, 2006 at 6:04 pm  

      One man’s moral panic is another man’s insight into the terrorist point of view.

    9. Amir — on 9th September, 2006 at 6:10 pm  

      Mr. G,

      ‘White people can’t be terrorists please remember. That is left to their brown skin brethren.’

      Why, of all of a sudden, the infatuation with skin colour? It has nothing to do with race. I can’t think of any politician or serious columnist who has claimed hitherto that the terrorist phenomenon is a ‘brown problem.’ It is dependent upon ideas and culture and ultimately prejudice (which may or may not involve skin colour), not on a person’s pigment. In any case, your protestation is insulting in the extreme. Many British citizens fought courageously against the Caucasian IRA, as did many Spaniards against the Basque group ETA & Italians against the pasty-faced Red Brigades. We don’t choose our enemies because they are black or brown or orange or yellow. So stop feeling sorry for yourself.

      Amir

    10. Amir — on 9th September, 2006 at 6:14 pm  

      Jagdeep, David T, Bert Preast – I agree with you all.

    11. Amir — on 9th September, 2006 at 6:47 pm  

      “Al Hack adds: We expect white community leaders will be standing up to condemn atrocities in the name of their race any minute now.”

      Ho ho ho… very funny. It’s just a shame that that smirking jibe backfires on you when one remembers that there is no such thing as a ‘white community leader’. Political correctness would never allow it, even though it is entirely consistent with the principles of multiculturalism. So the joke’s on you, guys.

    12. Vikrant — on 9th September, 2006 at 6:50 pm  

      I completely agree with Amir. Neo-nazis remain a fringe element of western societies.

    13. Al Hack — on 9th September, 2006 at 6:59 pm  

      Why would political correctness never allow it?

    14. Al Hack — on 9th September, 2006 at 7:08 pm  

      “Why, of all of a sudden, the infatuation with skin colour?”
      Because we’re talking here of neo-Nazis?
      The willingness to play down neo-Nazi terror while playing up Islamism by non-Muslims, and Muslims doing vice versa is called group attribution error. Both sides are guilty.

      “Well until they’ve started murdering people you wouldn’t expect there to be, would you”

      If we’re judging groups on the basis of how many innocent people they have killed, where does that put the American government on your scale? Is it a Muslims-only scale?

    15. Katy Newton — on 9th September, 2006 at 7:17 pm  

      This is sliding off the point a little, isn’t it?

      Personally, I do expect community leaders to condemn terrorism wherever they find it, whether it’s the British government or the MCB, and whether the terrorism comes from overseas or within the British community.

    16. Don — on 9th September, 2006 at 7:24 pm  

      ‘We expect white community leaders will be standing up to condemn atrocities in the name of their race any minute now’

      No of course not, we expect them to send the PM a letter explaining how his policies have alienated fascist fuckwits and urging him to engage in a dialogue with the shaven-headed tattoo-monkeys in order to understand their grievances.

    17. Kismet Hardy — on 9th September, 2006 at 7:27 pm  

      I expect the shaven haired bomber jacket gay massive must be quaking in their bovver boots right now. How weird would that be? First neo-nazis get mistaken for homosexual, then gay people get mistaken for terrorists, soon all terrorists will be mistaken for young Asian blokes just walking around minding their own business

      Oh yeah

    18. Amir — on 9th September, 2006 at 7:56 pm  

      Sid,

      ‘One man’s moral panic is another man’s insight into the terrorist point of view.’

      Very clever. I agree with that maxim. Observe:

      1. Paranoia in the skies (Sunny on 20th August, 2006)

      2. More terror plots (Sunny on 9th September, 2006)

      Notice any semantic differences? ;-)

      Amir

    19. Jagdeep — on 9th September, 2006 at 8:00 pm  

      LoL @ Don # 16

    20. Pablo — on 9th September, 2006 at 8:11 pm  

      Al Hack can you point me in the direction of anyone who is ‘playing down’ the neo nazi menace? I just don’t see it, and the equivalency game in play here is not an easy fit at all. What is the point? That people should not worry about Islamist terrorism? Or they should be quiet about it? Or that they shouldnt talk too loudly about it? Or that they shouldnt hold all Muslims guilty for it? But who is doing that here? Or who does hold all Muslims responsible on this blog? So who was your message aimed at? is it just a gut reaction lashing out? Blame shifting, that kind of thing?

      If you read Don’s post, things become clear. When ‘white community leaders’ start making speeches about how the government is to blame for Nazism in the same way apologists for Islamism do the same, you might be onto something.

      Fascists breed each other.

    21. raz — on 9th September, 2006 at 8:45 pm  

      LOL at the desperate spin in this thread.

    22. Zinno — on 9th September, 2006 at 8:50 pm  

      There will be no moral panic as Britains white population does not make excuse for them. They just just ask for the law to take its course. No victim mentality from whites.

      Unlike muslims sadly.

      Al Hack PC loves bigots that are black and brown not white. Pc is for minorities not majorities that is why minority groups have a disproportinate amount of power in multicultural Britain.

    23. Bert Preast — on 9th September, 2006 at 9:15 pm  

      Al Hack wrote: “If we’re judging groups on the basis of how many innocent people they have killed, where does that put the American government on your scale? Is it a Muslims-only scale?”

      I can’t believe you’re trying to equate these 17 Belgians with the US government. What ARE you gibbering about, man?

    24. Roger — on 10th September, 2006 at 12:57 pm  

      “Al Hack adds: We expect white community leaders will be standing up to condemn atrocities in the name of their race any minute now ”
      Who would you- or “white communities, for that matter- regard as a suitable white community leader?

    25. Jagdeep — on 10th September, 2006 at 1:10 pm  

      Al Hack, your comments are lame.

      I think this was inevitable. Nazi groups are always going to be linked to violence and copying the rhetoric of Islamist jerks who proclaim beheading people and killing the infidel, it’s just a meeting of minds, isnt it? Pathetic.

    26. Sahil — on 10th September, 2006 at 7:47 pm  

      “Al Hack, your comments are lame.

      I think this was inevitable. Nazi groups are always going to be linked to violence and copying the rhetoric of Islamist jerks who proclaim beheading people and killing the infidel, it’s just a meeting of minds, isnt it? Pathetic.”

      Why can’t people ask these neo-nazi communities to come against terrorism?? Oh, I guess all the white people in the EU are in denial, right?? People are asking Muslim communities to come out against the jihadies (skinheads in this case). Where is the backlash? I agree that western peoples are more PC generally, but where is the reaction?? Where’s the consistency?? I guess there is none.

    27. soru — on 10th September, 2006 at 10:44 pm  

      ‘where is the reaction?? Where’s the consistency??’

      Isn’t the word neo-Nazi a bit of a clue?

      If they were being called extremist Belgian patriots, and there were 5 articles in the Guardian in the average week arguing a slightly weaker version of their case, the multiculturalist establishment would be screwing over the average Belgian as badly as it it currently misrepresenting and mistreating Muslims.

      Those fascists are not treated as ‘the same thing but more so’, an exemplar of true Belgian-ness besides which a moustache-wearing cherry-beer-drinking cafe owner feels somehow insufficiently Belgian. They are labelled, correctly, as a bunch of fascist nutters who are presumably a major embarrassment to say, a conservative Belgian who perhaps wanted higher defence spending and a bit more Christianity in public life.

    28. g — on 11th September, 2006 at 12:53 am  

      yes but every single muslim is constantly asked to analyse, explain and apolgise for the actions of a minority of its people. so why don’t white people have to do the same?

    29. soru — on 11th September, 2006 at 9:14 am  

      g: partly because there is no commonly used short and effective phrase, the equivalent of neo-nazi, that divides the nice from the nasty. As a consequence, people pick up on any division they do understand that happens to fall between them and the bad guys: this is what Al Hack calls the group attribution error.

      Terroríst, fundamentalist, jihadist, al qaeda member, Hizbie, Islamist, Salifist, Wahhabi and islamofascist are all either badly misleading, controversial or not widely used. Every one will either exclude some people who indubitably are part of the problem, or include and so understandably piss off some people who are not.

      And all too often, the media uses the bomber´s own language, takes seriously their self-description as the true face of Islam, which is the direct equivalent taking seriously the BNP or Combat 18´s claim to be true British patriots.

    30. bananabrain — on 11th September, 2006 at 10:56 am  

      although i will be [not really very] happy to hear about examples, personally, i can’t think of anyone who can be described as a “white community leader”. i mean, who are we talking about here, that lazy-eyed psycho nick griffin? “whites” (whatever they are) are not currently being treated as a block vote in terms of tammany hall voting patterns, partly because their “community leaders” are not standing up and talking about the “white community”. where you get a community, you get community leaders. where you get a community, you get some kind of shared values over and above mere skin colour. the so-called “white community” can’t agree what its values are, so we don’t get white community leaders emerging to encapsulate those values, “stand for” them and represent those values to society at large. and so much the better, frankly, if the MCB are an example of community leaders.

      secondly, if you think melanie phillips doesn’t take neo-nazis seriously (can’t speak for burchill of course, but then she’s not a serious political commentator, rather a puerile agit-prop loudmouth) then you’re missing something rather fundamental about the feelings of neo-nazis about the jewish community.

      b’shalom

      bananabrain

    31. Jagdeep — on 11th September, 2006 at 11:36 am  

      Sahil, your comments are just a restatement of Al Hacks lameness.

      bananbrain, as I understand it, Neo Nazi propaganda has been utilised by Islamist extremists. Hatred of Jews makes strange allies sometimes.

    32. Sahil — on 11th September, 2006 at 12:01 pm  

      “Sahil, your comments are just a restatement of Al Hacks lameness.”

      Why?? If we’re all individual’s living in some anarchist utopia, how can the concept of ‘community leaders’ even exist? WHilst I totally agree that there needs to be more engagement rather than segregation, why is it that in the west the attitude seems one way? I lived in Singapore for over 6 years, and went to an international school where expats closed themselves off completely from the local population, not to mention the superiority complex that permiated through the ranks. I didn’t hear anyone asking for engagement from the expat community??

    33. Jagdeep — on 11th September, 2006 at 12:21 pm  

      Anarchists Utopia, Ex-pats in Singapore, the hypocrisy of ‘the West’ - what did you leave out?

    34. Sahil — on 11th September, 2006 at 12:41 pm  

      How does that even relate to what I was aksing you in my post?? You do seem to love your sound bites. Do you want to talk about the relevant point:

      Why are ethic or minority communities (including Jews) expected to have some sort of leadership, that speaks on all their behalf, whilst the majority of the population is considered diverse and complex. If all people are individuals can the concept of self-appointed leadership ever exist. I know of no groups that claims to speak for my values, do you have community leaders speaking on your behalf? As for mentioning the expats, if you thought about why it was mentioned, its to point an example of a minority that does not feel the need to have a so called community leader, and the local Singapore population do not ask for one either. When the Michael Fay case happened in Singapore I didn’t see Singaporeans up in arms about the drunken maraduring of expat teenagers, they simply said that he was a twat, and treated him like an individual, not white-washing the entire American community.

    35. S — on 11th September, 2006 at 1:28 pm  

      I don’t have much to add but reiterate what others have said.

      Firstly there hasn’t been any nazi bombing yet- not since the nail bomber I think.

      Secondly I don’t know who you expect to represent the white community (whatever that is) in condemnation. I’m glad there isn’t a white ethnic representatives, that is healthy in my opinion.

      Thirdly nazism is completely unrepresentative of British public opinion. Not only are they a tiny minority but they have no real diaspora of people who excuse their actions.

      Thirdly the actions of nazis are never “understood” or “put in context”. You are never going to see such an argument in a British newspaper or on British TV. Certainly no current British MP would ever say that we should change our policy to appease or head off the threat of nazi violence. That type of thinking thankfully died with Enoch Powell.

      I actually find the analogy quite breath-taking.

    36. Jagdeep — on 11th September, 2006 at 1:30 pm  

      Sahil

      What S said

    37. Al Hack — on 11th September, 2006 at 1:44 pm  

      I expected I made was clear as to what I was referring. Obviously not in the climate we are in.

      For the slow ones then: Asking for “white community leaders” to apologise for the actions of neo-nazis is akin to asking Mulim community leaders to apologise for the actions of their own neo-nazis. It makes no difference and it makes no sense because most Muslims are equally unresponsible.

      Reactions here were equally predictable. Neo-Nazis can be sectioned off by calling them that, so they have no linguistic connection with the wider white community. But Muslim extremists cannot be because they’re linguistically (and psychologically) seen as part of the wider Muslim community. So self appointed community leaders are then asked to come forward and explain the actions of their own neo-nazis and deal with them. Makes no sense. Does that make it any clearer?

    38. Al Hack — on 11th September, 2006 at 1:48 pm  

      “we expect them to send the PM a letter explaining how his policies have alienated fascist fuckwits”

      But Don, are we not already explained to by the mainstream media why more people are voting for the BNP and why immigration will only lead to more support for the BNP. Do you not see that as explaining a rise in fascist fuckwits? In May we had all manner of newspapers going to Barking and Dagenham and listening compassionately to why these poor white folk were being forced to vote for the BNP because the influx of brown and black folk left them no choice. How do you expect us to view that sort of coverage?

    39. Jagdeep — on 11th September, 2006 at 2:04 pm  

      Al Hack

      Nobody is asking Muslim community leaders to ‘apologise’ for the actions of terrorists or extremists. They are being criticised when they make opportunistic demands in the aftermath of extremism though. Can’t you see the difference?

    40. S — on 11th September, 2006 at 2:16 pm  

      “For the slow ones then: Asking for “white community leaders” to apologise for the actions of neo-nazis is akin to asking Mulim community leaders to apologise for the actions of their own neo-nazis.”

      Nobody is concerned about hearing an apology from muslim leaders I think, but they do get annoyed when they hear excuses or blame shifting. Fair enough if they don’t have influence with these nutters- but please don’t use the opporunity to ask Ruth Kelly for limited Sharia.

    41. S — on 11th September, 2006 at 2:18 pm  

      oops sorry Jagdeep for repeating- just read your comment

    42. Al Hack — on 11th September, 2006 at 2:32 pm  

      I meant condemn not apologise for, sorry. That is the point made initially.

      S - You hear excuses because they have nothing to offer and say in the matter. They then resort to pushing personal agendas.

    43. g — on 11th September, 2006 at 2:39 pm  

      exactly Al Hack. at the time of the elections all we heard was how it was now acceptable for white people to vote for the BNP and it was not at all because they were racist but due to the fact that apparently all the major poltical parties had not suppoprted them. which was complete rubbish in itself. white people were not forced to apolgise for that, yet all muslims are held to account every time some nutter blows up innocents.
      if we don’t stand on top of buses and trains screaming out that we are against terrorism than that means we are pro terrorism.
      But white people voting for the BNP is not racist, its a reaction to all the freebies refugees supposedly get.

    44. S — on 11th September, 2006 at 3:04 pm  

      “and it was not at all because they were racist but due to the fact that apparently all the major poltical parties had not suppoprted them. which was complete rubbish in itself. white people were not forced to apolgise for that, yet all muslims are held to account every time some nutter blows up innocents.”

      I understand what you say about excusing BNP voters. However again I reiterate that muslims are not held to account- only those who make denials, excuses or even demands are given short shrift. My wife teaches in a school where the majority of muslim kids either believe or at least affect to believe that 9/11 was some sort of anti-muslim conspiracy.

      Also much as I dislike the BNP I still would not attribute moral equivalence to someone who votes BNP and someone who murders people with a bomb. The equivalence is more accurately between an individual who agrees with the politics of the bomber and sees some jsutification though he wouldn’t do it himself- and a BNP voter.

    45. Al Hack — on 11th September, 2006 at 5:44 pm  

      “However again I reiterate that muslims are not held to account– only those who make denials, excuses or even demands are given short shrift”

      You may not do this but plenty others do. The government definitely does because it keeps asking kamooonity leaders into No 10 to ask them how they are going to condemn and deal with terrorists. On PP we keep hearing of people asking why Muslims don’t condemn the 9/11 attacks enough. It all adds up my friend. Ordinary Muslims are being thrown off planes because of the actions of neo-nazi equivalents. Would you like it if you were constantly stopped or harassed you in Belgium because of what these people did? You don’t think you would get a bit agitated?

    46. Baz Choudhry — on 11th September, 2006 at 8:04 pm  

      Baz says: death and destruction of innocent men, women and children disguised in a thin veil of democracy is not justified any more than terrorism is in the name of fanaticism. Everyone in the graveyard votes the same. The injustice comes from one rule for the white man and another for the black / brown man. We move closer to peace when we recognise injustice equaly to all mankind irrespective of race, religion or colour.

      Bert Preast — wrote on 9th September, 2006 at 9:15 pm “I can’t believe you’re trying to equate these 17 Belgians with the US government. What ARE you gibbering about, man?” in response to

      Al Hack who wrote: “If we’re judging groups on the basis of how many innocent people they have killed, where does that put the American government on your scale? Is it a Muslims-only scale?”

    47. Bert Preast — on 12th September, 2006 at 12:10 am  

      Which government do these people represent? Show me the people marching in support of them, perhaps? Check out the religious leaders giving them the big up? Now the biggie: how many people have they murdered yet?

      So how are they on a par with the US government? In your own time, now.

      And I’ll ask again for Al Hack et al to show me any what could even be loosely termed a white community leader giving even the merest hint of support or justification for their actions?

    48. Don — on 12th September, 2006 at 12:31 am  

      They’re in custody. Banged up. I’d call that unequivocal condemnation.

    49. anon — on 12th September, 2006 at 10:25 pm  

      http://thereligionofpeace.com/

    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.