Pizza HuT’s Denmark operations


by Sunny
20th September, 2006 at 1:35 pm    

A court in Denmark jailed a radical Islamic party member for three months on Thursday for inciting young Muslims to kill members of the country’s government and Jews, court sources said.

A Copenhagen court handed the sentence to Fadi Abdullatif, spokesman of the Hizb-ut-Tahrir party (Islamic Liberation Party). He was convicted last year for giving out leaflets which urged Muslims to fight in Iraq and told them: “exterminate your rulers if they stand in your way”. [at EJP, via Harry's Place]

Incitement to murder? Doesn’t that go against Hizb ut-Tahrir’s apparent dedication to peace, non-violence and understanding? As Public Enemy once said – don’t believe the hype.


              Post to del.icio.us


Filed in: EDL






84 Comments below   |  

Reactions: Twitter, blogs
  1. “Cos I’m mad, plus I’m the enemy!” « All About Nothing

    [...] Cheers to Jagdeep over at Pickled Politics (where we’ve both derailed this thread) for the link to these old skool hip hop gems. Public Enemy at their finest! [...]




  1. Leon — on 20th September, 2006 at 1:49 pm  

    Three months sounds a bit lenient for incitement to murder…

  2. Sahil — on 20th September, 2006 at 2:03 pm  

    Brilliant, lock up these tossers, I think I’ll have a Carlsberg ;)

  3. justforfun — on 20th September, 2006 at 2:08 pm  

    Good idea Sahil – I’ll break a habit and have a Carlsberg as well to wash down a Danish bacon sandwitch.

    Justforfun

  4. Glass House — on 20th September, 2006 at 2:33 pm  

    I’ll drink to that

  5. Col.Mustafa — on 20th September, 2006 at 2:42 pm  

    Hmm, yeh 3 months in jail is gonna do alot.
    He will come out even more angrier and positive that he must kill those he wanted to in the first place.

    But what else can you do i suppose.

  6. utbah — on 20th September, 2006 at 2:44 pm  

    And there was me thinking the British Army went to liberate the Iraqi people from torture and rape.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5363320.stm

    Oh sorry, I just remember i can’t paint brush the whole army just because of a few misguided people.

  7. utbah — on 20th September, 2006 at 2:45 pm  

    Also, welcome back Sunny. Hope you had a good time over there. Bought me anything special?

  8. Jai — on 20th September, 2006 at 2:46 pm  

    Good stuff. The British government needs to take similar measures with Anjem Choudhary and his cohorts.

    There were some fireworks at John Reid’s press conference earlier today too, apparently; it was temporarily hijacked by another thug from Al-Ghurabaa.

    Why the UK does not take a tougher stance with these people is beyond me. There is such a thing as being too fair-minded, especially if it gets to the point of being self-destructive.

  9. Leon — on 20th September, 2006 at 2:52 pm  

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5362052.stm

    In a speech Mr Reid asked Muslim parents to keep a close eye on their children and act if they suspected they were being radicalised by extremists.

    The comments reflect government frustration that not enough has been done since the 7 July London bombings.

    His speech was interrupted by a Muslim heckler who said he was “furious” about “state terrorism by British police”.

    The protester is believed to be Omar Brookes, otherwise known as Abu Izzadeen, who denies being a member of the banned Al Gurabaa group.

    He accused the minister of being an “enemy” of Islam.

    I think this is getting beyond a joke too Jai…

  10. soru — on 20th September, 2006 at 2:57 pm  

    Basic cultural error, reflecting ignorance of Islam.

    He should have asked their _aunties_ to keep an eye on them.

  11. nyrone — on 20th September, 2006 at 3:00 pm  

    This is what remains confusing about the Hizb…it swears that it’s totally opposed to this kind of ideology, and then you hear about members doing this kind of crap, which one is it?

    I had friends at University that were part of the Hizb and they were frequently far more progressive and concerned about issues than the rest of the lazy chavlims. I remember attending a couple of talks they held about issues like social justice, the welfare system in this country and street crime…they had some really great ideas, it just feels like they are struggling to define their own identity.

    Have you guys met members of Hizb that struck you as intelligent and motivated too? or did you only get to meet the lazy couch-potato folks who play Playstation all day, listen to Biggie and make speeches to each other in their dorm rooms, while going through 4 bottles of coke a day….

  12. Jagdeep — on 20th September, 2006 at 3:00 pm  

    I think I recognise this guy – he is a Jamaican convert who appeared on Newsnight after July 7th and said what they did was jolly good.

  13. Jagdeep — on 20th September, 2006 at 3:01 pm  

    I was talking about the guy in Leon’s link. It says in the Times that he said ‘how dare you come to a Muslim area’ — huh? Leytonstone??

  14. Jagdeep — on 20th September, 2006 at 3:03 pm  

    Four bottles of Coke a day? That’s enough caffeine to make you go loopy for sure. Maybe that is their secret of recruitment.

  15. Jai — on 20th September, 2006 at 3:10 pm  

    =>”I think I recognise this guy – he is a Jamaican convert who appeared on Newsnight after July 7th and said what they did was jolly good.”

    Assuming that we’re talking about the same guy and the same interview, I recall him refusing to call such actions terrorism and insisting on referring to it as “Mujahideen activity”.

    He also made a stupid joke recently at some public Muslim gathering where he said something along the lines of “Life changed dramatically on 9/11….{pause}…..Especially for those inside the buildings”.

    He’s as much of an aggressive jerk as Anjem Choudhary is.

    Sociopaths at the least and possibly even psychopaths.

  16. Leon — on 20th September, 2006 at 3:20 pm  

    Have you guys met members of Hizb that struck you as intelligent and motivated too?

    Yes. I met Dilpazier Aslam (the guy who was an intern at the Guardian) a good few months before it came out he was Hizb. Came accross as nice if somewhat eager guy…

  17. nyrone — on 20th September, 2006 at 3:20 pm  

    Anjem Choudhary….what a joker, what a moron! even Hamza Yusuf was starting to get a little frustrated with him in an interview following the Danish Cartoons ‘thing’

    Does anyone know what kind of ‘soliciter’ he is?
    I reckon he’s one of those guys that picks-up Somalians at the dover ferry port handing them his free business card, drives them down to Luna house in Croydon, promises to take on their complicated asylum-seekers case, does nothing for them whatsoever, and then turns up to claim his pay day from Legal Aid on the day they get deported back.

  18. Jai — on 20th September, 2006 at 3:25 pm  

    =>”Does anyone know what kind of ’soliciter’ he is?”

    Shouldn’t Anjem Choudhary have his licence to practice Law revoked (or whatever the British legal equivalent of getting “struck off” is – to use the doctors’ terminology) for bringing his profession into disrepute by his activities ?

  19. Vladimir — on 20th September, 2006 at 3:37 pm  

    But Sunny, Public Enemy have also said, ‘fuck the police’ (yes I know it is a cover version) and they have also said ’9/11 is a joke’ and then the person who was jailled, was for being a radical emmm… makes sense!

  20. Leon — on 20th September, 2006 at 3:44 pm  

    @Vladimir; It wasn’t PE that said that it was NWA.

  21. soru — on 20th September, 2006 at 3:50 pm  

    ’911 is a joke’ is about the phone number, not the event.

  22. Vladimir — on 20th September, 2006 at 3:54 pm  

    Yeh NWA did the original version of the song, PE did a cover version of the song though, I got it off limewire!

    Sorry for not stating that fact soru,

  23. Leon — on 20th September, 2006 at 3:59 pm  

    They did!? I stand corrected, never heard it!

  24. Jagdeep — on 20th September, 2006 at 4:06 pm  

    Yeah 911 is a Joke was on the album Fear of a Black Planet

    About how ambulance crews in America take longer to reach or ignore emergency calls to black ghettoes or something.

    Flavor Flav y’all!!!!!!

  25. Leon — on 20th September, 2006 at 4:07 pm  

    Yup! Any of you guys seen em live? They kick ass!

  26. Vladimir — on 20th September, 2006 at 4:24 pm  

    Ain’t seen them live, but my fav tune of their’s is ‘welcome to the terrordome’ it wakes me up in the mornings.

  27. raz — on 20th September, 2006 at 4:25 pm  

    Who’s gonna make “999 is a joke” then ? :)

  28. Jagdeep — on 20th September, 2006 at 4:25 pm  

    Leon, I wish I’d seen them back in the day when they toured with Beastie Boys and Run DMC – back in the 80′s – what a lineup – original DefJam tour

  29. Leon — on 20th September, 2006 at 4:29 pm  

    Man that would have been cool…never seen the BBs or DMC live…

  30. Jagdeep — on 20th September, 2006 at 4:29 pm  

    911 is a joke

    And this freakin’ greatness!! ——–>

    Don’t Believe The Hype – Live!

    50cent??

    Snoop Dogg??

    Hip Hop you lost your soul!!

  31. Roger — on 20th September, 2006 at 4:35 pm  

    “Have you guys met members of Hizb that struck you as intelligent and motivated too?”
    When he isn’t explaining the wonders of the caliphate Imranb Waheed is a consultant psychiatrist.

  32. Leon — on 20th September, 2006 at 4:35 pm  

    Fucking cool! Them two are going up on my blog asap!

  33. Jagdeep — on 20th September, 2006 at 4:43 pm  

    Leon, you need to do a thread on here about how Hip Hop lost it’s soul!

    At least there’s people like Kanye West and Lupe Fiasco today who don’t go with the gangsta flow.

    The Original Hip Hop Conscious Lyrics ———>


    Grandmaster Flash – The message

    Oh yeah!


    GRANDMASTER FLASH – White Lines

    I feel like getting the lino out and busting my original moves, except I’d probably slip a disc.

  34. Leon — on 20th September, 2006 at 4:49 pm  

    DUDE! On the level totally; got talking to the founder of Hip Hop Generation UK the other day about exactly this. I stopped listening to Hip Hop in the early 90s went it became apparent it was going to shit…Grew up with Grandmaster Flash etc, loved PE, NWA even 2 Live Crew (dirty but funny!) but it did, as far as I can see, lose it self to money making and rampant materialism…

    And yeah Kanye is good not heard any of Lupe Fiasco stuff but do like some of Immortal Technique tunes.

  35. Jagdeep — on 20th September, 2006 at 4:54 pm  
  36. Jagdeep — on 20th September, 2006 at 4:58 pm  

    Leon you need to do the article about this.

    Check out the Kurtis Blow link above dude – that is what you call music – freakin’ amazing just sit back and watch it all with the volume up

  37. Sid — on 20th September, 2006 at 4:59 pm  

    Hip Hop is’t completely a lost cause. There is the magnificent Madlib and the unapologetic genius of MF Doom/Viktor Vaughn from LA. Both under the Stones Throw label. Together they produced the classic MadVillain album from last year.

  38. Leon — on 20th September, 2006 at 5:05 pm  

    I never knew a thread derail could make me feel so bloody old…

  39. Sid — on 20th September, 2006 at 5:11 pm  

    I’m easily older than you Leon. And I’ve been around since Planet Rock.

  40. ZinZin — on 20th September, 2006 at 5:15 pm  

    The proper question is should Hizb-ut-tahrir be banned?

    I ask this not just in light of Sunnys article but Shiv Maliks articles in the New Statesman which have made an issue of this organisations influence on leading young muslim men into terrorism.

  41. Leon — on 20th September, 2006 at 5:15 pm  

    Yeah that was releasied around the time I was getting into hip hop etc.

  42. Bert Preast — on 20th September, 2006 at 6:27 pm  

    What would be the point in banning Hizb? Just look at what happened when Al-Muhajiroun was banned. In a free country it’s only possible to go after the people, you can’t stop the organisations from popping back up again and again.

  43. Conrad Hull — on 20th September, 2006 at 6:30 pm  

    Denmark should have deported him and all his hate filed Shi’tes!

  44. Bert Preast — on 20th September, 2006 at 6:30 pm  

    Utbah #6: The British army is happy to prosecute it’s own people when they fuck up.

    Good job, really, as any civilian defence would have them walking free in double time as under to much strain to be responsible for their actions, then go after their employer for damages.

  45. Sunny — on 20th September, 2006 at 7:13 pm  

    Zinzin – Me and David T debated this fairly extensively. I’ve come around to his view that they shouldn’t be banned, though I need to explain this reasoning and there are a few caveats in there too.

    Anyway, the idea that Hizb are non-violent is a joke. They simply dress up their rhetoric in language attractive to whoever is listening.

  46. Chairwoman — on 20th September, 2006 at 7:36 pm  

    It’s never attractive to me, Sunny.

  47. ZinZin — on 20th September, 2006 at 7:49 pm  

    Sunny

    A member of this organisation was found guilty of inciting the murder of his political opponents.

    On a lighter note listening to Talksport last night not something i usually do. A caller left a message regarding Anjem Choudary student days apparently he can down a pint of cider in 3 seconds.

  48. Sid — on 20th September, 2006 at 7:58 pm  

    I’m in favour of banning the HT. My reasons are this:
    If they were to be banned here they would not benefit from the ease of access they get as “Muslim representatives” onto Asian digital TV chatshows and thereby gain from the cache of respectibility.

    Furthermore, they are becoming increasingly popular amongst high-flying educated professional types in from India to Indonesia. How attractive would they be to a bank manager who is superficially interested in them if he were to know that they are proscribed in the UK. It would his/her chances up the greasy corporate pole and make HT far less attractive, I would imagine.

  49. David T — on 20th September, 2006 at 8:14 pm  

    Shouldn’t Anjem Choudhary have his licence to practice Law revoked (or whatever the British legal equivalent of getting “struck off” is – to use the doctors’ terminology) for bringing his profession into disrepute by his activities ?

    I don’t think he ever qualified. He wasn’t a brilliant student, and he didn’t get offered a training contract. He might have done after I knew him I suppose.

    There is, however, a very prominent partner in a city law firm who was formerly very active with Al Muhajiroun: although he claims not to have known what sort of organisation it was.

  50. David T — on 20th September, 2006 at 8:31 pm  

    And no, I don’t think HuT should be banned.

    First, what is the point of banning an organisation whose ideology is never questioned by the BBC, and which is feted by the likes of Clare Short at the Commons? Banning an organisation means that it is impossible to challenge its ideas. Instead, the debate is shifted to the irrelevant question of whether or not it should be prohibited.

    Secondly, what other political parties are banned in the United Kingdom? Should revolutionary socialists or the BNP be banned?

    Thirdly, Hizb does not exist merely because they appear on TV, propagating its belief systems. Its exist because they tap into a global resurgence in theocratic politics. Banning it amounts to attacking the symptoms of a political malaise, and will be futile.

    Fourthly, the threat of banning has already resulted in Hizb disguising its ideology. I think we should counter Hizb on the basis of what it truely believes. I don’t see how we can do that if they continue to attempt to disguise their true nature.

    Fifthly, we should be defeating Hizb by countering it, in our communities: not by expecting the state to do it, ineffectively, on our behalf.

  51. ZinZin — on 20th September, 2006 at 9:38 pm  

    David T

    Is it worth debating with an organisation which wants to return the Caliphate?

    Such ideas are ludricous in the extreme.

  52. David T — on 20th September, 2006 at 9:58 pm  

    I don’t care about debating them. I’m not expecting them to be moved from beliefs which are premised on a belief in the supernatural. I suspect that the only people able to engage with HuTers are those who are capable in engaging in theological discourse.

    What I am keen on doing is exposing them, ridiculing them, countering their influence, and preventing them from proslytising. In a free and open society, I’d be only one of the people seeking to do that: I’d be up against socialists, free marketeers, liberals, and the likes of Bikhair and so on.

    But if you ban them, there’s no opportunity for that sort of open discourse, and the debate simply becomes one of the propriety of banning them: on which I’d – sadly – find myself in the same camp as the MCB, the MAB and the rest…

  53. ZinZin — on 20th September, 2006 at 10:47 pm  

    Good point DT

    I don’t want to join the MCB/MAB ranks that certainly wins the argument.

    Lets hit the hut not ban the hut.

  54. Amir — on 21st September, 2006 at 4:41 am  

    What utter nonsense…

    Banning political parties and illegalising so-called ‘hate speech’ is dangerous because it must not become a weapon that a government, yet unknown, can use against people who disagree with it. Another aspect of this is that abhorrent opinions, if spoken openly, can be challenged, argued and defeated. Suppressing them by law doesn’t prevent them being thought. If you are interested in tracking extremists then it would be useful to know where they are gathered.

    Our biggest challenge, contrary to fashionable opinion, is not ‘Islamofascism’ or ‘The War on Terror’ or al-Qaeda, WMD, & Hizb-ut-Tahrir. No, no, no, no, no, no, no. Devout and pious Moslems, so far as I know, have little interest in bombing us. On the contrary, what they hope to do is to first establish a major Moslem presence in the European countries – which they have done – and then to spread the Moslem message beyond their own ranks. Those shiny new Mosques appearing all over Britain are there to impress us and to accustom us to a powerful new faith in our midst. This will be a far more effective way of changing our way of life than bringing down an aeroplane or blowing up the Tube.

    Now, to forestall any silly accusations of ‘Islamophobia’ (one of the shadiest words in our political lexicon), let me make it clear that I do not ‘look down’, so to speak, on Islam. It is, to my mind, an impressive religion, which engenders a powerful and often very moving faith in its adherents. Because we have become a secular society, too many of us do not understand its force. Islam’s appeal, wherever it has triumphed, has been in its simplicity. It requires submission to some basic, straightforward rules which are easily kept, and in return it offers that most wonderful and rare commodity, peace of mind.

    To modern Westerners, its attitude towards women seems incredibly backward and even hateful (I concur). Yet it’s discipline, safety and certainties have an appeal for girls lost in the anarchic seas of permissiveness, whose own families have been weakened by the crumbling of the two-parent family, the absence of fathers and the adultery of husbands. In a country in the grip of unbelief, Islam has a great advantage over those who offer nothing but shiny gadgets and Bacardi Breezers to the young and the perplexed. Moslems do not think much of our society – Fact. They think it is sexually immoral, polluted with narcotics and poisoned by alcohol, vain, cruel and hedonistic. And I am inclined to agree with them about a lot of what they say. Our properly spiritual allegiances are squandered on such things as football teams, rock bands, marijuana and gangster rap.

    So if eventually Britain begins to sicken of strong cider, pools of vomit, corrupt and bullish bouncers, part-time brawlers, ecstasy tablets, cocaine, football-hooliganism, pregnant teenagers, morning-after pills etc. etc., could Islam one day become the established church of Britain? Might English women adopt the headscarves and enveloping robes of their Asian counterparts, as the call to prayer rises and falls across Bradford, Rochdale, Manchester, and London?

    Quite possibly. Islam, you see, is growing. More and more British cities have seen the domes and minarets of smart, prominently positioned new mosques rising in their neighbourhoods. A large and imposing Islamic centre now resides in Oxford, one of Christian England’s holiest places. Imagine what would happen if Protestants sought to build a Christian centre in Qom, Isfahan, Najaf or anywhere on the soil of Saudi Arabia, and wonder what Moslem leaders must think of our multicultural feebleness?

    Thanks to mass immigration and open borders, Britain has a young, self-confident and swelling Moslem population which is increasingly assertive about its religion. You will already find plenty of bright young Moslems in our universities, many of whom are impressive and industrious students, and their influence is bound to increase as they move into the higher echelons of British society. If any serious Moslems really were ‘offended’ by the Pope’s lecture, I suspect it was because they recognised in Pope Benedict the same single-mindedness and religious self-confidence that they themselves show. And, in a Europe where Moslems generally get what they want from politically-correct liberals and leftists, they see Pope Benedict as a serious obstacle to the spread of Islam in a continent of wimps and pushovers.

    The problem, for all of us, is this: we are a civilization based upon Christianity, a wholly distinct religion from Islam. Atheists and agnostics don’t realise how much of our thought, our law, our education, our family relations, are founded on Christian rules and practice (they would realize it pretty quickly if they were replaced by Sharia Law). As far as I’m concerned, the West’s progress, its relative liberty of thought and action and an awful lot of the other things that make it attractive, are based on the fact that it is Christian, or was Christian. Everything that we hold dear – liberty of expression, the rule of law, private life and property, policing by consent, the presumption of innocence, religious tolerance, habeas corpus, voluntary charity, public health and many other virtues – are not exclusive to the Christian faith, but they owe a lot to it. Please consultthis book.

    Yet we abandon faith, while expecting the civilisation based upon them to continue unscathed. It doesn’t. Our decision, over the past century, to try to manage without faith and absolute morality has made our societies very vulnerable to Islamic imperialism – fuelled by open borders and overseas marriage, immigration and multiculturalism. It is not necessary to be a great expert to realize a growing distortion between two demographic curves. In the countries of Christian cultures, the demography is progressively dropping; while we realize the inverse in the young Moslem countries (and Diasporas).

    For now, Europe remains a Christian Continent. The majority of its 320 million inhabitants are adherents of the Trinitarian churches – Roman Catholic, Protestant Episcopalian, Anglican – believers in the doctrine of the Trinity. Yet, for the past thirty to forty years, many Church leaders, under the pressure of society and also interior ferments, wish for the downgrading of their church in relation to society, accepting the ‘privatization’ of their church – a word which horrifies Christians, but emboldens a growing minority of Moslems. If we don’t respect our own customs and religion, we may end up respecting someone else’s. Don’t be surprised.

    If this trend continues – which I believe it will – then we will have to get used to Sharia Law and what I regard as Islam’s far less free, far less open prescriptions for society (just look at the Islamification of Amsterdam – Dutch liberals aren’t laughing now, are they?). Islam rightly despises weakness. And it is even more contemptuous of the sort of ignorant indifference to faith, morality, and tradition which is common in Britain. My fear is that secularism and copious consumerism, combined with temporary military might, will be our only answer to Islamic imperialism. And they, like illiberal ‘security’ measures, will fail against an opponent of this sort.

    Amir

  55. Parma Violets — on 21st September, 2006 at 8:05 am  

    I’d be against banning HuT, largely because organisations like this seem to work off a persecution complex. If they’ve got nothing to whine about, they’ve got no arguments left.

    Strangely, I’ve just read Robert Pugh’s excellent book ‘Hurrah for the Blackshirts!: Fascists and Fascism in Britain Between the Wars’, which contains an eerie number of parallels to the current political landscape: the major political parties hamstrung by apathy and frequent leadership changes, talk of coalition or other collaborative governments, old-school Tories protesting against their party’s liberalisation by going over to fringe parties, etc.

    At the start of Churchill’s government, a lot of members of Moseley’s British Union of Fascists were locked up without trial and, if not tortured, then certainly abused for information (depending on where you draw the line). Churchill wasn’t happy with this and eventually forced the police to either charge them or free them. He felt Britain should be proud of its ability to incorporate dissidents.

    One of the most prominent prisoners was Diana Moseley, who the police actually thought was a better source of information than her husband. This was because most of the information they had on her was provided by her ex-father-in-law, who hated her and was willing to say anything to get her locked up.

    You can take from this information what you want, but it’s worth throwing out there, I think.

  56. bikhair aka taqiyyah — on 21st September, 2006 at 9:21 am  

    Jagdeep,

    Kayne West is a douche bag. What he said about Bush on National T.V. was too idiotic. He thinks he is some kind of messaih. Lupe Fiasco on the other hand is cool. He is Muslim you know and wrote Muhammed walks like Kayne’s Jesus walks. He has got a nice delivery.Gangsta rap isnt bad. I liked Ice Cue and NWZ but yeah they are pretty negative but still entertaining. All those old school jams you named are tight. You gotta listen to Boogie Down Productions, Edutainment. I’ve had it for years but it still bumps. Some of KRS social critiques are wrong, history is off, and he comes off as a demogogue but he is the best.

  57. bikhair aka taqiyyah — on 21st September, 2006 at 9:37 am  

    “He was convicted last year for giving out leaflets which urged Muslims to fight in Iraq and told them: “exterminate your rulers if they stand in your way”.”

    Now how many hadiths does this statement contradict? What bastards. Their heads should be cut off and allowed to roll into the gutter.

  58. Sahil — on 21st September, 2006 at 10:00 am  
  59. Sahil — on 21st September, 2006 at 10:00 am  

    Sorry a succinct discussion on religion

  60. Git — on 21st September, 2006 at 10:23 am  

    Great – so when can we expect Anjem Choudary and Abu Izadeen to be locked up, out of the way of decent folk?

  61. Arif — on 21st September, 2006 at 10:41 am  

    Amir, I found your post #54 quite interesting. Some things I at least partially recognised, and some things I didn’t. But the thrust of your argument seems to be that Christianity needs defending in the UK in an analogous way to how Salafi Islam is defended in Saudi Arabia. I assume you would be less vicious and abusive than the House of Saud is reputed to be, but in terms of curtailing religious freedoms and promoting the role of one religion as a guarantor of a good society. Is this what you advocate? I may have misunderstood you because the structure of your argument sounds to me like the arguments used by some Muslims advocating State-backed religious intolerance as in Saudi.

    Bikhair #57 – whether that is incitement or a figure of speech, writing that people’s heads should be chopped off doesn’t normally go down well here at PP…

  62. Leon — on 21st September, 2006 at 10:55 am  

    Watched Anjem Choudary on Newsnight last night (well bits of it), the guy is truly from another planet.

  63. Jagdeep — on 21st September, 2006 at 11:25 am  

    Bikhair

    I don’t agree with you about Kanye West, I think he was being emotional and he lost it for a second after seeing all that devastation in New Orleans. We all make mistakes. At least he tries to take Hip Hop away from the usual bitch-ho-nigga groove it seems to be in these days. Plus Jesus Walks is one of the best records of the last few years full stop. I also heard Lupe’s Muhammad Walks on Bobby Friction – great version.

  64. soru — on 21st September, 2006 at 11:27 am  

    Amir: you are, I think, right that some of the conservative guys in the background secretly want that, but it is not remotely likely. And in the umlikely event it did happen, it would be some syncretised Christian/Muslim religion, sort of like Nation of Islam in the states.

    You might even see some grand Abrahamic Sky God Trinity supergroup, 3 religions in one.

    ‘He Creates, He Saves, He Rules’.

  65. Jagdeep — on 21st September, 2006 at 11:31 am  

    Yeah Amir I agree, set up your blog, then you can store your long posts in one place as well as posting them here.

  66. sonia — on 21st September, 2006 at 11:37 am  

    banning things never work i agree.

    when i read amir’s post in no. 54 – i think: the man needs to visit some countries where a majority of the population is muslim. he’s got some ideas about ‘Muslims’ – which i can see apply to lots of people, but definitely don’t to loads of other people. Ha!

    What’s this focus on just Christianity – what does he really think it popped up out of a hat and didn’t ‘take anything’ from its surroundings – and even Judaism? Does he really think the traditions and customs in the bible context were just ‘Christian’? Not much of an understanding of Abrahamic ‘culture’ – or just life in general – in my humble opinion. {Check this out.. on links between Bedouin culture and Bible customs http://www.meridianmagazine.com/ancients/060224bible.html
    seems to be the source of many unpleasant customs }

    Goodness me. What is ‘religion’ in any case? are religious practices ever separate from ‘culture’? Amd in any case what is Amir referring to when he talks about ‘Christianity’ anyway? there are big differences between the Eastern Orthodox churches and Roman Catholicism and Anglican Church – and it doesn’t stop there… talking about the Trinity isn’t enough here.

    In the sack of Constantinople of 1204 – where was this unity? {The ‘us’ and ‘them’ of that fight turned into a ‘you Latin b*****s’ vs ‘you Greek b*****s’) So much for ‘permanent’ clash of civilizations. in any given situation an ‘us’ vs. ‘them’ can materialize – it’s hardly ‘set’ between specific groups – this obviously depends on the context.

    And please if we’re going to hear spouting forth on women wearing hijabs – that’s likely to take us to a whole other debate. We’re used to hear generalizations about women wearing hijab – that’s all we ever hear.

    the overall problem i have of Amir’s post is that it seems to have such strange dichotomies – Christians – or Muslims. What?! Are there no commonalities? Are these ‘groups’ not just banners which include individuals who are all different by virtue of their individuality? And at the same time sharing commonalities by virtue of being human? Religion seems to be a primary focus of Amir’s writing – well what about all the people who aren’t Christian or Muslim – or people who ‘culturally’ may belong to such groups – but don’t give a shit about it apart from thinking what a lot of preachy nonsense? Religion matters for some people – it may be a vehicle for them to express their ethics. If people don’t have a religion – that’s not to say they don’t have their own belief/philosophy/ethics. So all the focus on religion rather than people – doesn’t approach an understanding of social reality.

  67. sonia — on 21st September, 2006 at 11:40 am  

    and if we want to get into a debate on marijuana! ( i notice you include it in your list of ‘evils’ amir..)

  68. Sahil — on 21st September, 2006 at 11:53 am  

    I miss the days when rap was political, yes NWA was mouthy, but at least they tried to stir a debate, now its baout big butts, big TVs, and big egos. Appraently IceT’s next album is going to be political and about bashing neo-conservatives, I might actually buy it, instead of using torrents :)

  69. Leon — on 21st September, 2006 at 12:13 pm  

    NWA were more than mouthy (atleast in the beginning), they had real social commentary in a raw form. Things changed, as they always do, when some people/record companies twigged that controversy means huge profits.

    Ice T back in the game? He was always a better rapper than tv/film actor if you ask me…

  70. Sahil — on 21st September, 2006 at 12:17 pm  

    “Ice T back in the game? He was always a better rapper than tv/film actor”

    Pretty good in 3 Kings though but pretty diabolical elsewhere. As for money, well it seems everything is about publicity and branding, Beyonce brand, J-lo brand, Pee-pop-diddy brand, etc. I’m fed up with all this, nothing of any substance has been released by these so-called artists.

  71. Leon — on 21st September, 2006 at 12:18 pm  

    Ice Cube was in three kings not Ice T.

  72. Sahil — on 21st September, 2006 at 12:19 pm  

    Sorry I meant Ice cube, here’s the link:

    http://arts.guardian.co.uk/features/story/0,,1860124,00.html

  73. Leon — on 21st September, 2006 at 12:24 pm  

    Oh right, confusion over!

  74. Sahil — on 21st September, 2006 at 12:31 pm  
  75. Jagdeep — on 21st September, 2006 at 12:59 pm  

    Nothing wrong with Beyonce.

  76. Jagdeep — on 21st September, 2006 at 1:01 pm  

    sonia, just because the boundaries of religion mean nothing to you, or me, or anyone else for that matter, doesnt mean that they dont exist or matter for large numbers of people and as such are real and should be discussed.

  77. Amir — on 21st September, 2006 at 1:49 pm  

    Arif,

    Thank you for reading my contribution. Now, let me respond to a few of your queries and quibbles:

    Point 1 ‘But the thrust of your argument seems to be that Christianity needs defending in the UK in an analogous way to how Salafi Islam is defended in Saudi Arabia.’

    I do not, in any way, shape or form, propose that we adopt the institutional or ideological habits of Saudi Arabia. My belief in civic virtue and patriotism, my disbelief in moral relativism, my yearning for older ways and values, customs, chivalry, etiquette, language, nationalism and respect for tradition is more akin to Japanese society.

    Point 2 ‘I assume you would be less vicious and abusive than the House of Saud is reputed to be,…

    Golly!? Do I sound like Genghis Khan or something? :-)

    Point 3 ‘…in terms of curtailing religious freedoms and promoting the role of one religion as a guarantor of a good society. Is this what you advocate?’

    Here, in nutshell, is the typical knee-jerk response to conservatives like myself. Let me crystal clear on this: I have no problem whatsoever with a sizeable Moslem community living and preaching in our midst. STILL, I do not believe in multiculturalism. My rejection of Sharia law and the Islamification of Europe does not involve any illiberal measures or ad-hoc abuse; it involves, on the contrary, cultural checks and balances, such as, for instance, strict immigration quotas, immigration preferences (i.e. wooing migrants from, say, Christian provinces of Nigeria and Eritrea as opposed to Islamic nations like Kashmir and Turkey), citizen tests and acculturation, compulsory British history for primary and secondary school students, British culture on the BBC, gigantic stipends for tottering churches and Christian organisations, compulsory reading of the King James Bible in secondary schools, etc. These measures are all cultural choices. Cultural choices are unavoidable. Let’s just be sure to make the right ones.

    Point 4 ‘I may have misunderstood you because the structure of your argument sounds to me like the arguments used by some Muslims advocating State-backed religious intolerance as in Saudi.’

    This is a gross misrepresentation of my views. I believe in a society governed by conscience, patriotism, and the rule of law, which I see as the best guarantor of liberty. No country cannot long retain consent, freedom and order unless it defends and respects its own culture. Without the memories and stories and traditions of our ancestors, the development of cohesion is stunted, private life is diminished, and the power of the state increased (i.e. anti-terror laws, anti-riot police, anti-blasphemy laws, Sharia, etc.). National culture defines the nation, the largest unit in which it is possible for human beings to be effectively altruistic. Patriotism, to be distinguished from jingoism, is a vital pre-requisite for law and order. If we look at, say, the United States of America (notwithstanding its many faults; and yes, there are many), we will find no contradiction between liberty and nationalism.

    Point 5 ‘Bikhair #57 – whether that is incitement or a figure of speech, writing that people’s heads should be chopped off doesn’t normally go down well here at PP…’

    Unless, of course, we’re referring to Ken Livingstone or Faisal Bodi. ;-)

    Amir

  78. Arif — on 21st September, 2006 at 4:09 pm  

    Amir, thank you for your response. It makes it clearer to me that you would like certain social values to be internalised more effectively, how this would be achieved by cultural, media, education, immigration and grant-making policies, and how this would reduce the need for repressive control by the State. At least I’m interpreting you this way, sorry if this misrepresentats you.

    By your arguments I guess you think secular liberal values aren’t up to the job. I’m not sure if you think that religious liberal values would be up to the job, or do the values propagated have to be conservative? Eg would your proposed checks and balances guard against Sea of Faith or liberation theology type Christianity, or is any Christianity a suitable cultural choice to be promoted by the State?

    I think I agree with you on the importance of cultural traditions, but not of patriotism. I think cultures can survive and develop without needing to be carried by a State. Patronage of my culture does not legitimise the State for me.

    I guess what I think doesn’t matter, as when you get power the State would make sure by cultural choices that people like me (who question its role) do not exist in the territory it claims. (Nb claim defence of affectionate provocation, not gratuitous misrepresentation, for previous sentence.)

  79. Sunny — on 21st September, 2006 at 4:36 pm  

    No country cannot long retain consent, freedom and order unless it defends and respects its own culture.

    Rubbish. India hosts thousands of differing cultures without very little problem of breaking down.

  80. sonia — on 21st September, 2006 at 5:15 pm  

    yep sunny.

    in any case it seems to me Amir’s conceptualization of a ‘country’s culture’ is that of a homogeneous culture.

    and look where all the identification of nation-states and nationalism as for one culture and one culture only only have gotten us: the holocaust; evictions of people whose families lived in a place for centuries but were not of the ‘dominant’ culture – e.g. armenians, greeks, jews etc from turkey and egypt etc.

    that’s why i’ve supported multi-cultural-ism.

  81. sonia — on 21st September, 2006 at 5:24 pm  

    cultural ‘checks and balances’ – what a term! :-) hoo hoo – wow – I’d recommend a course of social psychology for Amir. Maybe an understanding of people would help if he’s serious about all this stuff.

    Being aware of history is certainly a good idea – though schools don’t seem to be able to manage it very well, and in fact, seem to do the opposite – teach it in such a crap way turn people off for life. I wasn’t at all fond of history in school and i’m a history buff now. I guess when you’re a kid it’s just not interesting.

    i don’t know what genghiz khan sounded like – you sound rather hitler like.

  82. sonia — on 21st September, 2006 at 5:25 pm  

    if that’s what ‘Christian’ conservatism is like, frankly i can’t see any difference between that and the Muslim conservative Mullah’s – they use language like ‘cultural checks and balances’. “oh we can’t have any of this ‘foreign western rubbish corrupting our wonderful moral culture’

    ha. what a laugh.

  83. sonia — on 21st September, 2006 at 5:34 pm  

    oh yes ..Japanese society, so i see Amir is interested in : conformity.

    the freedom to conform :-)

    oh boy what fun – coupled with the reading of the Bible in secondary school – these conservatives do know precisely how to turn people OFF religion. ( just like the Muslim mullahs …)

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.