Harry’s Place

I was half-tempted to go along to this thing tonight. But what’s the point? One speaker after another will line up to demand that religions be beyond criticism. This is tolerance, is it?

Blimey, if Kate Hudson’s going to be there, I’ll wander along. She might autograph my keffiyeh.

http://tinyurl.com/y7qkwz

I can only assume that Liberty is run by innocents, who have no idea about the organisation they’ve teamed up with.

I trust you are well-placed enough to test that assumption, to destruction if necessary, Mr T. You are a member of Liberty, are you not? Keep your scissors sharp.

Good post, as usual.

*

Pubs, don’t bother. Many in these organisations spend most of their waking hours spreading as much religious division and polarisation as they can. Tolerance is *not* what they are about.

Well perhaps if you were to recall Shami Chakrabarti’s performance on the Dispatches (Are Muslims a Threat to Free Speech?) you wouldn’t be so surprised.
I am not sure what she’s after or perhaps what she’s afraid of but she was there to qualify free speech in no uncertain terms.
In case you wondered what the answer was - it was a No (52% for to 48% against). Even though Channel 4 refused to show the “cartoons of death” after the audience voted by 2 to 1 for it to do so,

So… not much happening in the big bad world, eh?

Is the Muslim Brotherhood really non-violent? It might accept that Muslims in Britain should not engage in violent Jihad - that’s becuase UK MUslims have placed themselves under the protection of non-Muslim authorities. But that does not mean they oppose an offensive by the Islamic world against the non-Muslim world does it? That is formally sanctioned by the Koran.

I was under no illusion as to what they were about, but I thought it might be a good idea to go and listen to them anyway, in a know your enemy sort of way. I can’t be bothered though. Corrie’s on tonight!

‘It is, in the words of Tony Cliff, a clerical-fascist organisation.’

Well if Tony Cliff said it, it must be true. Welcome to Tony’s Place!

Field, some Brotherhood people have certainly been extremely violent in Egypt. They actually save their greatest ire for fellow Muslims. Crushed by the Mubarak regime, many Egyptian members have renounced violence, while others have moved on to al Qaeda (eg. al-Zawahiri). Violent or not, they are always bad news, looking to foment hatred and rage wherever they can.

The MB founder’s brother has their number.

However, how can progressives support a Rally organised by extremist grouping, such as the Muslim Brotherhood? How could Liberty have allowed itself to become the sole co-organiser of such a meeting?.

Resentiment.

How exactly is religion being persecuted? How big is the threat? Are people being denied the full benefits of marriage because of their religion? Are they being denied immigration?

Religious people have freedom of assembly and are free to buy land and build meeting places. There are bishops in the Lords, faith-based funding from government, and religious state schools. Employers at religious establishments are free to discriminate on grounds of sex or sexuality if they can show a religious (or traditional) reason to do so. If Mormons were still discriminating against black people and calling them the accursed race it’d be interesting to see whether government and other religious groups would be calling them on it. The Mormons did indeed do this, until in 1978 the prophet (their CEO) had a revelation from a god (not the creator of the universe, just the one in charge of this planet) that this used to be right but was now wrong.

Religion is feted everywhere, especially over at Comment is Free. A Sustainable Development Commission publication gushed over the unique ability of “faith communities” to have sustainable values and respect for the earth and humanity etc. A top cop applauds the Scientologists at the recent grand opening of the new London HQ. And this country doesn’t even recognise Scientology as a proper religion, just as a cult.

Sure, there’s been a skirmish over the veil, but this is a legitimate debate insofar as it’s about covering the face. If society/government/employers place restrictions on balaclavas in public, it’s only logical to do this in the case of the niqab. Trouble is, government isn’t clear on this point, so it needs to establish a universal principle. And employers who have no problem with women wearing the hijab often do have a problem with people wearing baseball caps and so on. The whole uproar is so mixed and distorted that I have difficulty telling how much is suspicion of Muslims, how much is clinging to majority cultural norms, and how much is actually trying to establish a workable point of principle.

My own view is that rights are universal. You don’t have exemptions for hijab-wearers but not for baseball-cap-wearers. You don’t have exemptions for mask-wearers but not for niqab-wearers. Until the law against going masked in public is cleared up, a confusion of ignorance, good intentions and discrimination will reign.

From Odone’s latest CiF column:

…if instead of acting as the oppressor, the mocker and the bully, Britain would present itself as a land of tolerance where all faiths are treated with respect and all believers allowed to practise their faith…

Hang on. Aren’t all believers allowed to practise their faith? And teach it to their children as the only truth? And who’s been saying oh, this is a Christian country, so we shouldn’t put X on the same footing? or this moral code comes from God, so it’s the only possible moral code in society, and people who do x are perverted and evil?

FFS, government ministers sound off about the “religion of peace” and the value of “faith communities” all the time. Ruth Kelly, a Roman Catholic, is minister for equality despite not believing in equality for religious reasons, and it’s having an effect on her priorities and the message she sends out.

Yes, MPs have lined up to cast aspersions on the niqab, but not on religion itself, which they appear to back to the hilt.

From the Liberty site, Chakrabarti’s words:

We must all be able to think, wear and say what we like, subject only to personal ethics and restrictions truly necessary for the protection of others.

I may be wrong, though I’m waiting for the ‘but.’ Freedom to say what you like should include saying various things or drawing cartoons about Mohammed, yet I can’t see this going down well at the rally. Maybe she means what she appears to mean, maybe not. Maybe she’ll come down hard on the cartoons but also on religious leaders who slag off other religions as lies.

In sum, too many people are going around saying Muslims should be allowed to do this, Christians should be allowed not to do that. It’s completely wrong. Everyone should have the same rights, and those rights shouldn’t depend on their sex, sexuality, ethnicity or religion.

Sorry, got carried away there. But the complaints by religious people seem all to be sideshows about the veil or the crucifix, nothing about a substantial and unambiguous attack on religious freedom.

The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt support the death penalty for apostates - see here : “In April 2006 after a court case in Egypt recognized the Bahá’í Faith, members of the clergy convinced the government to appeal the court decision. One member of parliament, Gamal Akl of the opposition Muslim Brotherhood, said the Bahá’ís were infidels who should be killed on the grounds that they had changed their religion.[23]” - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostasy_in_Islam.

I really can’t believe the depths some of the “Left” have sunk to. Are they not aware of the nature of the MB or are they so cynical they don’t care ?

Beyond belief.

“Speakers include Tariq Ramadan, Salma Yaqoob, and new kid on the block, Soumaya Ghannoushi: who I assume is a scion of Rachid Ghannoushi, the head of the Tunisian franchise of the Muslim Brotherhood: the Al-Nahda Movement. ”

This is a crazy attack on Muslims and infantile guilt by association. YES, some of the Muslim speakers are related to Islamist radicals: Tariq Ramadan is the grandson of Hassan Al-Banna, Anas Al-Tikriti is the son of Dr. Osama Altikriti, the (anti-saddam)head of the Iraqi Muslim Brotherhood (see here http://www.ihrc.org.uk/show.php?id=1216 ), and Soumaya Ghannoushi is the daughter of Tunisian Islamist Rachid Ghannoushi, the head of the Al-Nahda Movement ( http://groups.google.co.uk/group/soc.culture.arabic/browse_thread/thread/eee92562c823eee7/cd4e5bb66b7f71d7?lnk=st&q=Ghannoushi&rnum=2&hl=en#cd4e5bb66b7f71d7

BUT that in no way means that they share all aspects of their parent’s/grandparent’s ideology for heavens sake. Or does Harry agree with all that his mummy and daddy believe?

So Jamie - I presume you disagree with David T that prominent members of the BMI are Muslim Brotherhood activists ?

Or do you just assume that Left-wing people wouldn’t have anything to do with them ?

Eleutheria, that first posting wasn’t a rant. It was a passionate piece of writing that raised some very good points.

I don’t know whether Tariq Ramadan, Anas Al-Tikriti or Soumaya Ghannoushi are Muslim Brotherhood activists, simply because they are either grandson, son or daughter of the Muslim Brotherhood leaders of Egypt, Iraq and Tunisia respectively.

Familial disagreements are common-place. eg I seem to remember Azzam Tamim telling an interviewer that everyone of his family in Palestine was a secularist.

What evidence do you or DavidT have for saying the three above mentioned agree with MB ideology?

David T - do you have the evidence ? I would be interested in seeing it.

Doesn’t Diddy Dave have some kind of blog now? I’m far too ignorant and lazy to bother searching it out. Perhaps you could tackle him about it there?

It should also be noted that Ms Chakrabarti also went along to a board meeting of the so called ‘Countryside Alliance’ earlier this year to tell them how hard done by they were because their ‘liberty’ to chase and rip apart a wild animal with dogs for ’sport’ had been curtailed.
That the CA is made up of thugs, many of whom are racists, badger baiters and other assorted far right types, does not seem to bother the ultra gullible director of ‘Liberty’.

It should also be noted that Ms Chakrabarti also went along to a board meeting of the so called ‘Countryside Alliance’ earlier this year to tell them how hard done by they were because their ‘liberty’ to chase and rip apart a wild animal with dogs for ’sport’ had been curtailed.
That the CA is made up of thugs, many of whom are racists, badger baiters and other assorted far right types, does not seem to bother the ultra gullible director of ‘Liberty’.

Classic David T

‘I would be fine about a rally with the BNP, but cheeky Muslims!!!!!!!’

A keeper.

Sonic - shalom

What he said was “I might well think twice, though, about speaking from the platform of an organisation which espoused a vicious politics. I might do it, perhaps, if I felt that I could make it clear that I was not making common cause with that outfit, generally.

One thing I would not do, were I the director of a progressive pressure group, is to co-organise a rally with an extremist political outfit.”

He was not attempting to distinguish between fascists and islamofascists and that is very clear from his post. What is this “cheeky muslims” thing? 9/11 bit of a prank, 7/7 high jinx, Madrid a bit of overexitement?

Perhaps I haven’t made myself clear, sonic. I oppose the politics of the extreme right but I’d oppose the banning of non violent right wing organisations. I would not, however, co-organise a meeting with such a group.

More nonsense on this at CiF :-
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/salma_yaqoob/2006/11/freedom_of_belief_is_worth_def.html

Excellent write up David T. It is ironic that many of the people speaking there may well be inclined to be less robust about free speech issues than Shami Chakrabati, who until now I really admired for her resolute positions in these matters. I wonder if she’ll be debating with them over post-conference drinks. You should forward this to Shami, her e-mail address must be on the Liberty website.

OK - done some quick research (5 minutes on google) re Anas Altiktriti / MAB links with Muslim Brotherhood :

http://www.workersliberty.org/node/3026

Note especially :

” Anas Altikriti replying in The Times (17 August 2004) to allegations that MAB is linked to the Muslim Brotherhood replied with these weasling words: “MAB is an independent British organisation. Links with others extend simply to shared ideas, values and expertise, in which the Brotherhood is indeed rich, with around eight decades of experience.””

Common “values” eh ? Nice

Now, sonic, although you have clearly misinterpreted David T. (and words to this effect would have done wonders to your reputation), you’ve raised an interesting point.

Have a look one post down, the one on the Dieudonné – Le Pen love-in. I wonder will you share your views with us about this.

Another issue on which you might tell us your opinion: Individuals at the more fundamentalist end of just about all religions (and I mean all) often share views which are intolerant, homophobic, sexist, often virulently racist. Are you in favour of denouncing this? With regard to all those, without fear or favour? Would you say that progressive individuals, as a matter of course, must dissociate themselves from these cesspits of hate just as much as they dissociate themselves from the fascists and racists of BNP? Should there be a firebreak between progressive individuals and all racists or only some of them?

I have just nipped over to Comment is Free and looked at polemicists link. There is a quote from Selma Yacoob’s blog, which all the posters rightly point out specifically excludes the right to freedom of speech in its “manifesto”.

Interesting how ALL the posters totally but totally reject the Moslem desire to have special “protection” in the name of religious or racist persecution.

Meanwhile I see Ken is working the Moslem vote again, while distancing himself from the cost of the Olympics. With that and the congestion charge in West London, he has only the Moslems, and Venichka left rooting for him.

Here at Ken Watch we are getting quite optimistic about his diminishing chance of getting reelected. Not at all sure the Moslem vote will swing it Ken.

Big_Ben

Does sonic really think that the gratuitous misrepresentation of somebody’s words, followed by a refutation or by the mocking of those misrepresented words is the same thing as making a point?

And why, given his contemptible record of doing this, does anyone bother to reply to him? It’s not as though he lacks the mental equipment to understand that he has become the worst sort of political bottom-feeder; a person for whom hatred has replaced analysis and who consequently uses guilt by association, distortion and character assassination when he cannot reason his way to a valid argument - which seems to be true in the case of every thread here - in his attempts to discredit people who are striving to untangle a complicated world using intellectual honesty.

I have never seen him address an issue directly on this or any other site. He will give free lunches to mass murderers and tyrants, and launch ad hominem attacks on democrats. This is his choice. He is clever enough to engage in direct debate but chooses not to. Aware that his views are insupportable, he snipes deviously to avoid their direct expression while seeking to discredit those he feels most threatened by - the decent left including, of course, Christopher Hitchens.

It is very reminiscent of that other capable advocate of the unspeakable - Nick Griffin. You wouldn’t give Griffin the time of day. Why sonic? Fascistic International socialists are no better than their National counterparts.

Ok if I’ve misinterpreted David I take it back. What confused me was this paragraph.

” have spoken on the same platform as the ancient, and now dead, racist, “Lady” Birdwood: because she would otherwise have been unopposed. I might well think twice, though, about speaking from the platform of an organisation which espoused a vicious politics. I might do it, perhaps.”

A bit ambigious don’t you think?

Not at all. ‘Lady’ Birdwood and David shared a platform that didn’t belong to ‘Lady’ B., e.g., Question Time or a university society. He wouldn’t speak from a platform that belonged to the BNP or the NF or whatever.

It was the BNF, according to Wiki. Interestingly, she stood in the 1983 Bermondsey by-election against Tatchell and Hughes.

This platform is not being run by an extreme organisation either.

Guardian has an article on it, interesting quote from Livingston

http://www.guardian.co.uk/religion/Story/0,,1952627,00.html

“Over recent weeks we have seen a demonisation of Muslims only comparable to the demonisation of Jews from the end of the 19th century. As at that time, the attack on Muslims in reality threatens freedoms for all of us, which took hundreds of years to win - freedom of conscience and freedom of cultural expression. Every person who values their right to follow the religion of their choice or none should stand with the Muslim communities today.”

“I cannot believe it is a coincidence that this entire artificial pseudo-debate has been stirred up at a time when the credibility of the entire war and occupation of Iraq is collapsing before our eyes”

Looks like he reads this site.

Ramadan may be more subtle and better mannered than Hamza and Qatada, but he wants the same thing - conquest. Wherever he goes, eventually people wise up to his smarmy use of Kitman (”Holy” deception). Britain (and particularly the BBC) has yet to learn. What is the point of any debate in which one side will not say what they really think?

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/800naxnt.asp
…
Caroline Fourest, a French expert on Islamic fundamentalism, studied Ramadan’s 15 books, 1,500 pages of interviews, and–most important–his 100 or so tapes, which sell tens of thousands of copies each year. Her conclusion: “Ramadan is a war leader.”
…
Malek Boutih (an Arab Muslim), told Ramadan after talking with him at length: “Mr. Ramadan, you are a fascist.”
…

http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=archives&Area=ia&ID=IA26606
Egyptian journalist ‘Adel Guindy says Ramadan is a Salafi. Ramadan: ‘There is a reformist rationalist stream, and there is a Salafi stream that is trying to remain faithful to the foundations [of the religion]. I belong to the [latter] stream.”
…
“Doublespeak is the key to understanding Tariq Ramadan.”

Where are the “decent” Muslims?

Birdwood was invited to a university debate at which she was to have been opposed by a CRE speaker. The CRE speaker found out who she was, late in the day, and withdrew. The debating society then proposed to let her speak, unopposed. I then got up to propose the anti-racist motion that she was to have spoken against. However, the SWP generally disrupted the meeting by chanting and throwing things, and the university closed the meeting down, under a procedure established by their Code of Conduct of Freedom of Expression: a requirement of the Education (No. 2) Act 1988.

This was, of course, in the days when the SWP opposed the right of fascists to speak.

Thanks for your withdrawal, Sonic.

Birdwood was a strange woman. Somebody I knew had a friend who was active in a far right “ginger group”. That friend received a call at 2 in the morning from Lady Birdwood, who insisted that he meet her in a cafe in Soho, immediately. He felt obliged to turn up: as she sounded frantic. When he arrived, Birdwood emptied a carrier bag on to the table, filled with pornography she had bought, declaring:

“Look at this FILTH! LOOK at it! LOOK!!”

He feared for his honour.

Good comment eleutheria, btw.

Muffim

I doubt that you will receive a comprehensive or lucid answer from sonic on your points

Sonic:

From Liberty’s website:

“Sponsored by Liberty and the British Muslim Initiative”

The BMI is a Tikriti/Tamimi outfit. It is another Muslim Brotherhood front organisation.

You may not regard the establishment of a theocracy as an extreme platform, but most sane people would disagree.

The IHRC published a lengthy defence of al-Tikriti’s MAB back in 2004. Some MB fun from that screed:

Amongst its members are those whom, back in their original countries, were members of the Muslim Brotherhood, and they were found to be of a level of awareness, understanding, skill and ability, that would serve MAB and what it aims for.

Yes, MB cadres are good at spreading hatred.

MAB enjoys good relation with every mainstream Islamic orgnisation in the UK and abroad among them is Muslim Brotherhood which is well respected not only by the common people on the street throughout the Arab and Muslim countries but also by politicians, intellectuals and opinion-makers in most Arab countries.

MAB reserves the right to be proud of the humane notions and principles of the Muslim Brotherhood, who has proven to be an inspiration to Muslims, Arab and otherwise for many decades.

We also reserve the right to disagree with or divert from the opinion and line of the Muslim Brotherhood, or any other organization, Muslim or otherwise on any issue at hand.

I don’t think the MAB has ever publicly disagreed with the MB. Has it?

Anas Altikriti is the former president of MAB and one of its founding members. His father, Dr. Osama Altikriti, a Consultant Radiologist is indeed the head of the Iraqi Muslim Brotherhood, having joined their ranks as a 15 year-old in Iraq. Known as a staunch opponent of the previous regime of Saddam Hussein due to the Ba’thists’ brutal elimination of all non-Ba’thi trends in Iraq, he arrived to live and work in the UK in 1970. Since the occupation of Iraq by US and British troops in April 2003, Dr. Altikriti returned to Iraq for the first time since he left it, and has been working ever since in the rebuilding of his country and his people. Browne’s accusation of Dr. Altikriti ,during an interview with BBC World radio last Sunday, that he somehow encouraged or supported insurgent attacks against occupation troops is another of his lies. If anything, Dr. Altikriti, who is also a prominent figure of the Iraqi Islamic Party (IIP), was and remains a staunch supporter of participation in the political structure. Therefore, he assisted and supported the IIP’s participation in the Interim Governing Council appointed and supervised by the US envoy Paul Bremmer. He continues to support the IIP’s in the current administration of Iyad Allawi, in which the IIP is represented in the cabinet by the Minister of Industry. To accuse Dr. Altikriti of assisting the insurgents or the resistance movement is laughable and Anthony Browne would be well-advised to be more thorough in his research.

The mentioning of Dr. Osama Altikriti is interesting, in that MAB has all along maintained a clear opposition to not only the war on Iraq, but to Iraqis taking part in any US-supervised governing portrayals and methods. Anas Altikriti, has continuously spoken on behalf of MAB on these issues, yet is on perfect terms with both his father and his father’s colleagues.

So, if anything, Daddy al-Tikriti is a bit soft.

In the abundance of water…

David I’ve always been impressed by the lack of evidence that MAB is the Muslim Brotherhood in disguise.

Anyone who reads MAB’s website can see that they are hardly the extreme ogre people try to present them as.

Sonic

You’re a fool, then.

Here is the Civil Liberty website.

At face value, where is the evidence that it is a far right outfit?

Sonic - would you say you shared the values of the MB like Mr Altikriti does ? Is that an acceptable thing for him to say ?

Saying you are associated with the values of an organisation that wants to murder Bahai’s for apostacy - is that OK ?

Come on tell us - what is more vile and to be opposed in this world - the MB wanting to murder Bahais’ or cartoonists drawing pictures that offend some Muslims ?

And which of those are the views of the MAB?

May I hazard neither?

Sonic - I was talking about the MB in Egypt re death for Bahai’s - see my link above.

Do you agree that policy is disgusting ? I would say it is so vile that that organisation that promulgates it should be shunned as an offence to civilisation.

Lets make a simple example for you. Say there was a political party that you agreed with in many ways but they had a policy of capital punishment for Gypsies.

Would you want to be associated in any way with that party ?

In that case, would you agree with the proposition that Civil Liberty is merely a human rights pressure group, with an interest in promoting basic constitutional freedoms for all, without regard to ethnicity or nationality, and which merely shares a membership with a neo-Nazi organisation?

Or do you think that they are - how should I put it? - lying scum, who are yet another aspect in the BNP’s spurious bid for respectability?

David, anyone reading this on the website you mention

“Britain is increasingly becoming a country where civil rights are being used as a political mechanism for social change. The enactment of the first Race Relations Act in 1965 and various amendments to it since, have resulted in a two tier system of justice in Britain.

Access to justice is dependent solely upon one’s ethnicity, skin colour and political beliefs and not on the actual harm one has suffered. Whilst ethnic minority groups and organised Leftist groups have State funded legal aid and legal assistance to call upon at any time, the indigenous people of Britain have no charitable associations or legal groups set up specifically to assist them in their fight for social and civil justice.”

Would have little doubt of what they are.

Are the Muslim brotherhood involved in this meeting?

May I hazard the answer is no?

MABS statement on who they are

“promote and propagate the principles of positive Muslim interaction with all elements of society to reflect, project and convey the message of Islam in its pure and unblemished form”.

Run for the hills!

Come now. All the Muslim Brotherhood want to do is to establish a state, organised on the sacred principles revealed to man by God, through the agency of his final prophet, and which seeks to roll back the corruption of a secularised world, premised on the improper notions of democracy, diversity, liberty, and equality.

Nothing that a socialist would find objectionable in that, eh?

Tamimi is Hamas and MAB.And has recently been seen supporting Islamic Jihad.
Nasty piece of dirt.
Anti semitic terrorist.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zh6q02J6dJk&mode=related&search=

David T wrote:

Sonic You’re a fool, then.

always using the British gift for understatement eh?

The MAB says :

“MAB reserves the right to be proud of the humane notions and principles of the Muslim Brotherhood, who has proven to be an inspiration to Muslims, Arab and otherwise for many decades.”

You haven’t really answered the question have you Sonic ? Here it is again : do you think its OK to say the above about an organisation that wants to murder minorities in Egypt ?

Sonic,

do you think its OK to say the above about an organisation that wants to murder minorities in Egypt ?

“MAB reserves the right to be proud of the humane notions and principles of the Muslim Brotherhood, who has proven to be an inspiration to Muslims, Arab and otherwise for many decades.”

Where do they say that? got a link?

Modernity, of course not, as usual your “questions” are not in any way an attempt to glean knowledge but just a way to try and sidetrack the discussion.

Found the quote thanks

Read the whole statement here, pretty much shoots down your whole MAB=BNP nonsense.

http://www.ihrc.org.uk/show.php?id=1216

Where are the moderate Muslims? getting smeared on HP as usual.

More MAB ‘extremism”?

“MAB’s stand on extremism is well-known and confirmed in all its statements and publications. Extremism is rejected in Islam and MAB has constantly played a positive role in which it called Muslims to act in moderation, appreciating Islam’s essential message of humanity and mercy to all mankind. MAB constantly called for open dialogue to be conducted with all elements of society, whether it be with the various faith communities or otherwise. MAB also condemned without reservation the terrorist attacks that occurred on 9-11, in Madrid, Istanbul, Bali, Casablanca and elsewhere, and labeled them as criminal acts which Islam rejects and disowns. MAB was part of a delegation that visited the Spanish Ambassador following the bombings in Madrid, to offer the condolences of the Muslim community in Britain and express its solidarity with the people of Spain”

Sonic - the quote is taken from the comments by habibi above. No doubt he can provide a link - I personally doubt he made it up.

So - if it is proved the MAB said it - will you accept that they are to be very strongly condemned ?

“just a way to try and sidetrack the discussion”

see every fucking comment ever from sonic. I thought this cretin was banned?

The meeting was on the 10 O’Clock News, but only because Archbishop Sentamu took a pop at British Airways for not letting a woman employee wear a cross visibly. No reference to David T’s Searchlighty fixations, funnily enough. That al-Burqa Broadcasting Corporation, eh?

Well, sonic, I can’t speak for anybody else but myself, so I can tell why why I have asked you all these questions. To put it simply, in order to know, when you say or imply that you are on the left, which kind of “left” you are.

Perhaps you will accept it and perhaps not, but I see myself on the left. Always have done and probably always will. Yet, precisely because I am on the left, and try to be honest with others and with myself, I must admit that the track record of people who put “I Am Left” labels and badges on their chests is – how to say it – checkered. While (I believe) that majority of them truly believed and do believes in universal values of freedom, equality, democracy, anti-racism, shared humanity, many important strands of the left used these as mere propaganda tools, to be employed and discarded at will. I believe that this readiness to shed professed values and, if convenient, dance with the devil exists also today among strands of the left. I want to see where do you stand. How universal are the values which you preach? How consistently applied?

Feel free to reply or disregard.

He’s squirming now though - the link does contain the quote.

So sonic - now we know - you don’t think the MAB, a group that “enjoys good relations” with an organisation that wants to murder minorities should be condemned.

Got ya. Nice one.

sonic,

here’s a few direct questions (not that I expect much of an answer)

what is your view of the Moslem Brotherhood??

do you think they are anti-imperialists or supremacists??

should socialists, such as yourself, support them??

The BBC used to give Hizb a free pass too, before their views became better known.

The BMI is a political front organisation. Its purpose is to distance itself from the taint of association with Muslim Brotherhood: that strategy having failed in the case of the MAB, whose nature is well known.

This is not a novel technique: not for the BNP, and not for other extremist organisations.

Which brings me back to the question: given that Civil Liberty does not openly state that it is a BNP front organisation, and given that its only links to the BNP are the fact that it shares its membership, and defends its members, what objection do you have to it?

Do I take it that your answer is “none”?

“One day, perhaps, somebody will write a book on the reasons that a members of ethnic minorities end up advocating political causes dedicated to their own persecution.” David T: I am sure many have already been written- there are certainly many discourses around to explain this phenomenon, in terms such as internalised oppression.
You must know the most brilliant searing film on the subject, The Believer, also based on a true story. Here is a commentary on the film which refers as well to the Frank Colin history.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0247199/#comment

Where do you find a list of participants, including the Jewish org?

Still awaiting this killer evidence that MAB is a front for an Egyptian organisation, I’m sure I’ll be waiting quite a long time.

It’s always fun when you hit a nerve with you guys, you have bought into the, MAB is an extreme organisation, meme for so long that you forgot that it’s all made up!

Now we have David T saying “ignore every public statement they ever make because, er, Look the BNP are bad!”

As I said when anyone asks “where are the moderate muslims”? we can tell them, getting smeared on Harrys Place!

Internalised oppression seems overly sociological to me. I detect, in Atzmon’s clumsy jew-baiting, the naughtiness of a little boy trying to shock. It is a wind up-cum-personality trait. It is the political equivalent of farting at a funeral, and then sniggering to your mates about it.

I often think that’s basically what motivates the likes of Irving or Luniversal/Heterodox/WJP, and a lot of those on the British far right. I think of Irving and his nasty “ape or rastafarian” poem. Obviously, there’s a theoretical dimension to it too: quite a sophisticated on in WJP’s case. But, basically, he’s just a very naughty boy.

In the case of most of the MBers - well, they’re true believers. They just want to bring about paradise on earth.

Internalised oppression seems overly sociological to me. I detect, in Atzmon’s clumsy jew-baiting, the naughtiness of a little boy trying to shock. It is a wind up-cum-personality trait. It is the political equivalent of farting at a funeral, and then sniggering to your mates about it.

I often think that’s basically what motivates the likes of Irving or Luniversal/Heterodox/WJP, and a lot of those on the British far right. I think of Irving and his nasty “ape or rastafarian” poem. Obviously, there’s a theoretical dimension to it too: quite a sophisticated on in WJP’s case. But, basically, he’s just a very naughty boy.

In the case of most of the MBers - well, they’re true believers. They just want to bring about paradise on earth.

sonic,

so your nonexistent answer in effect is, that you don’t know anything about the Muslim brotherhood??

I cannot say I am surprised as you are pig ignorant on most subjects, why should the MB be any different?

Hey sonic - here’s the question made simple - perhaps its been too difficult for you to grasp before :

Do you think the MAB should be condemned for stating it has “good relations” with the Muslim Brotherhood, an organisation which (in its own words) wants to murder minorities in Egypt ?

Sonic

The MAB is the British franchise of the Muslim Brotherhood. It was founded by the British representative of the Muslim Brotherhood. It is run by Muslim Brotherhood members, some of whom - like Tamimi, who is a “Hamas Special Envoy” - moonlight as the representatives of of other Muslim Brotherhood franchises. Its spokesmen are the children of other extremely highly placed Muslim Brotherhood activists. It links on its website, originally exclusively, to other Muslim Brotherhood organisations. It quotes from Muslim Brotherhood theorists on its website. Its members express admiration and support for the views of those theorists.

Can I ask you what more you’re asking for?

You’ve watched, I hope, the link that tim posted. Here it is again

Let me know, honestly, what your response is to watching that clip. Watch it all through, go on.

Still awaiting for the evidence that MAB is a front for the Muslim Brotherhood, no doubt because it does not exist.

Ok then, show me the “proof” that the MB is an organisation dedicated to murdering minorities.

An article about the Egyptian MB and apostacy from a Middle Eastern newspaper :

http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticle.asp?xfile=data/middleeast/2006/May/middleeast_May69.xml&section=middleeast&col=

Quote :

One member of parliament, Gamal Akl of the opposition Muslim Brotherhood, said the Baha’is were infidels who should be killed on the grounds that they had changed their religion.

“The problem with the Baha’is is they are moved by Israeli fingers. We wish the Ministry of the Interior would not yield to the cheap blackmail of this deviant group,” added another Muslim Brotherhood member, Mustafa Awadallah.

what evidence do you have that each of the individual Muslims you have condemned in this post are Islamists, beyond their being relatives of MB leaders?

Sonic - are you genuinely unaware of the extremism of some Arab Islamists ?

I was shocked when I read that link as I hope you are. That is why I am so disturbed by the lack of open condemnation by UK Muslim organisations of the MB.

Sonic

Would advocating a state organised around the principle that the religiously “unconventional” should be executed?

Here is Dr Azzam Tamimi, on the appropriate punishment for apostasy:

Any discussion of the freedom of faith in Islam must raise the question of riddah (apostasy). The classical definition of riddah is ‘the voluntary and conscious reversion to kufr (disbelief) after having embraced Islam by denying any of its fundamentals in matters of ‘aqidah (faith), Shari’ah (law) or sha’irah (rite), such as the denial of Deity or Prophethood, or the licensing of prohibititions or the negation of obligations.’

There are two Muslim schools of jurisprudence on the matter. The first school, to which most classical jurists belonged, considers riddah a religious offence punishable by death. The second considers riddah a political offence that has nothing to do with ‘the Islamic guarantee of a person’s right to freedom of faith.’ So, riddah in this case is not apostasy but sedition, an act of mutiny or treason, that is punishable within the framework of the authority’s responsibility for preserving the community and maintaining law and order.”

Would you describe this person as a progressive, or as, how should I put it, a dangerous right wing bigot who should be shunned by all people with any sense of shame.

You guys are all over the place today. We are talking about MAB and you are running around like headless chickens bringing up Egypt, or demos or whatever.

I’ve not used the word “progressive” but to liken a bunch of moderates like MAB to the BNP or Osama Bin laden is insane.

Poor you.

Just for the record, here is sonic’s modus operandi.

Kamal Helbawy helped found the MAB and makes no bones about his MB associations:

“I still consider myself a member of the Muslim brotherhood… ”

In 2002 the MAB published a pamphlet titled Inspire which traces the organisation’s roots back to Hasan al-Banna, of whom it said:

“The ultimate collapse of the Khilafah [caliphate; the Ottoman Empire] in 1924 left the muslim Ummah with no figurehead or leadership … [But then] he [al-Banna] founded the Ikhwan al Muslimoon or Muslim Brotherhood, whose teachings to this day inspire people the world over … After him came characters such as Sayyid Qutb and Zainab al Ghazali, Shaikh Yusuf al Qaradawi and Shaikh Rashed al-Ghanouchi, standing at the forefront of islamic teaching and revival …”

sonic knows this and argued about it here on Indymedia. But the MAB had by then found it a trifle inconvenient to keep this pamphlet online and so removed it from their website.

Despite the fact that extant copies of the paper version exist and despite the fact that he is aware of this, sonic used the 404 error from the MAB website to dismiss the leaflet and is now feigning ignorance of it.

Why such disinformation? Why such dishonest tactics? Other people reading this thread are quite capable of figuring this out.

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

sonic ain’t a state, but he is making up for this as best he can, by stridently telling his lie as often as he can, wherever he can, in the hope that he can insulate people from the consequences of his politics until it’s too late.

In reality, of course, he’s some kid in his bedroom annoying other blogheads. Pucker up, boy. The revolution ain’t going to happen.

How is the MAB moderate when it has “good relations” with an organisation that wants to execute Bahai’s ?

If you really think that - Poor you.

Fingers in ears

Harry’s Place is bad, I’m not listening, all Muslims are lovely.

from that video (which I suspect will have no effect on sonic, even if he views it)

Dr. Tamimi is complimentary about Ayatollah Khomeini, later on about “… the great jihad of Hamas…”

sonic will probably send him a present for such statements

In any case, whats your prob with people being Islamists - it doesnot make them al qaeda ,does it? only you lot would think so. I suggest you read the following article from a representative from the moderate, democratic BMI

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1585000,00.html

“whats your prob with people being Islamists - it doesnot make them al qaeda ,does it?”

Er… no. Islamists who are not in al quaeda are not in al quaeda. But al quaeda are Islamists. Islamists are religious supremacists who peddle a dark ages nightmare of stonings, amputations and repression.

A question that is less of a figure made of straw is this: what makes you want to defend religious maniacs? You wouldn’t do it if they were Christian nutjobs, advocating the shooting of abortionists. How are people who hang, in the slowest way possible, seventeen year old rape victims, better?

Oh, and in what way is BMI democratic? They haven’t been elected by the “Muslim community”, and they don’t advocate man-made laws based on democracy.

There’s a big groundswell in the Muslim world against these headbangers. You’re standing on the wrong side of the line. This ain’t about Muslims, it’s about Islamists - and the foremost victims of Islamists right now are other Muslims.

horatio,

some self-consciousness please! people who do things like that ARE bad, yes.

BUT, how are people like you that support violent white conquest of Iraq that killed half a million(?) people, and people like you who support the killing of people in refugee camps to defend a neo -liberal democracy, how are people like you much better?

its not just saving Great Britain and America from evil that should concern you.

ever thought about that?

“There’s a big groundswell in the Muslim world against these headbangers.”

You wish - and you know you’re lying

(I’m not going to mention all the countries in which they either have millions of voters, or would do if people like you in power genuinely wanted democracies in the East

Jamie

I consider their family and political associations, of course, but more importantly, I also read the things they write. These pieces openly praise Muslim Brotherhood theorists, or repeat the ideas of the Muslim Brotherhood, or - more recently - write leftish sounding pieces which, on inspection, are premised on Qutbist theory, and scrupulously avoid saying anything which conflicts with that theory: largely by posing open questions, baracking opposing views, levelling accusations of hypocrisy. Take, for example, the notorious refusal of Ramadan to declare an absolute opposition to capital punishment for adultery. He can’t do so, of course, because he is, in fact, an advocate of a perfect system of government, laid down by God, which decrees death for adultery: but to say so to an audience of bien pensants, would be to wholly blow the whole point of his pose as a liberal away.

I’d expect a progressive to be able to see through that sort of sham, of course: but one of the problems with the far left is that you’ve basically given up on the hope of proletarian revolution, which used to be your central organising idea, so you’re quite used to delivering and hearing arguments in which there is no principle or programme being advanced. You therefore think that the MAB/BMI crowd are simply talking, in some primal way, about a politics of inchoate resistance or countercultural hegemony-challenging ‘dissent’. It genuinely never occurs to you that - unlike you - they actually do believe in something, very strongly indeed. And that the “thing” they believe in is the replacement of the imperfect rule of man with the perfect rule of God.

Sonic

No, the Muslim Brotherhood is not the same as Al Qaeda. The Muslim Brotherhood have tried all sorts of strategies to advance their goal of restoring the Caliphate. They tried partnering with Nasser, but that ended in disaster. They tried terrorism, but that alienated their potential followers. Now they’re trying the electoral route. Their main focus is in Egypt and Palestine (where they also practice terrorism against civilian targets). In the United Kingdom and Europe, their primary aim is to be accepted, generally, as the key theoretical advocate of Islamist ideas, and to raise consciousness of that politics among ordinary Muslims. They oppose terrorism, except against civilians in Israel, because they correctly judge that terrorism against Egyptians will move them further away from power. They oppose it in the United Kingdom, in particular, because to do so has made it more difficult to achieve their more limited aims, without scrutiny and opposition from the likes of the New Generation Network. The reason that Tikriti and Tamimi (et al) have set up the BMI is because the cover of the MAB has been well and truely blown. You’re just about the last person who thinks that the MB and the MAB are unrelated.

That’s only part of it, of course. There is a genuine doctrinal difference between Al Qaedaists, who merely share some of the same early theorists as the Muslim Brotherhood. Al Qaeda is a takfiri organisation. The Muslim Brotherhood is primarily political, with a firm theological underpinning, and it wants to take power by conventional and rational means. Al Qaeda, by contrast, has tipped into a kind of insanity, in which the battle isn’t so much against corruption, external to man, in the societies in which we live. It is internal. It sees imperfection in those Muslims, who are too lost and corrupted to be redeemed, and so must be killed.

The Muslim Brotherhood, for all its faults, is prepared to embrace what the Al Qaedaists regard as the “shirk” - the theologically impermissable innovation - of advocating voting. From the perspective of hardcore Al Qaeda, they’re sell-outs.

Most mainstream salafists - not all of whom are advocates of immediate perpetual revolution - regard the Muslim Brotherhood as in deep theological error. They think they’re distorting the prophesy for temporal, unIslamic, political ends. And they’re right.

the trouble is people like you actually dont care about whether heads and limbs get amputated or not- you would support it if only the Islamists persuaded all Muslims to stay out of politics and learn to love Israel

isnt that true?

Jamie, child, how do you know what I think about Iraq or, indeed, anything else I haven’t commented on? And what on earth are you talking about, when you speak of massacres in refugee camps? You are the one speaking up for murderers, not I.

Here is an example of what you are setting yourself up against:

” 2005 witnessed the first group and public sexual harassment of women on the street in an attempt to intimidate the Kefaya movement, its women and men, and terrify them away from demonstrating and demanding democracy. Then, the thugs were attacking upon the orders of the Ministry of Interior. In 2006 they took the initiative and a launched their second collective and public sexual harassment of women in more than one location turning the days of the feast into hell for every woman who happened to be on the street seeking to celebrate the holidays. This time the harassment was protected by the police who were present. Between both incidents there are thousands of daily stories of harassment, albeit less public: on the street, at the work place, in public transportation, in crowded gatherings. Every time the Ministry of interior insists that nothing has happened! And Every time we hear some voices who blame the women for being the cause of that harassment, either because of what they wear or how they behave or even just for being out there, in the public space; an attitude which betrays the belief that streets, cinemas, playgrounds, and public spaces are there for men only.

But that is not the attitude of all Egyptians. Among Egyptians are women and men who look upon each other as human beings entitled to respect and freedom. In Egypt there are women and men who will not give up their right to freedom of movement and to be wherever they wish to be. Women and men who love life and believe that its beauty is incomplete in the absence of half of society. Among Egyptians are women and men who do not look upon women as bodies exhibited for their use, nor upon men as creatures led by their instincts. There are women and men who deal with each other as human beings, with all the humanity, respect for the other and love for freedom that this entails.

We are some of those women. We shall not desert the street and we shall not resort to exile ourselves inside our homes.. The street belongs to us and to each and every free spirit in this country.”

Shame on you.

David T: I don’t mean the naughty boy Atzmon type, but the Believer type, who may think if I can be as strong and merciless as my oppressor, I will survive. A more bathetic version of this is (some) JfJfP types who give out an aura of “Wait, don’t kill me, I’m the sensitive good Jew, not one of those bad, merciless ones.”

So David shifts the goalposts, nice move.

We have went from ‘MAB is a front for the Muslim Brotherhood” to “You’re just about the last person who thinks that the MB and the MAB are unrelated”

MAB, through all their public statements condemning terrorism and encouraging inter-faith dialogue (like through this meeting being condemned here) are obviously a moderate voice in the community. They may have the odd member who is not as moderate as the organisation as a whole, but we could say that about any political party (or indeed website)

““If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it”

Too true, and David has been doing that re MAB for the last two years, closing his ears to every moderate statement they ever make.

Read Livingstone’s comments today, the gig is up.

xxx

S

Oh, and prove me wrong when you answer. Let’s have a response which sets out, for us to see, the theoretical basis of your belief that it is proper to defend organisations which support the replacement of rule by human choice with theocrasy, and the execution of apostates, et al?

Let’s see if you can do it in a manner which consists of something more than simply casting doubts and throwing scorn at every counter argument, without saying anything substantive, ever.

I mean, at least the SWP did it, once. They originally advanced the idea that the internal contridictions within Islamist theory meant that it, like all bourgeois constructs, would collapse. They thought that they’d simply be able to stand by and pick up the casualties as fresh cadre.

That hasn’t happened. Instead, they’re simply engaged in soft soaping for dangerous bigots, and leaving an increasing number of people in little doubt that they’ve wholly lost their way.

I’m off to bed. But it would be nice to know, in the morning, what your answer was.

horatio.

please therefore confirm that you are opposed to all Israeli violence

and

please prove that those Egyptians agree with your wider views of the Middle East and would appreciate your support

So sonic - the most disputatious of commenters - chooses not to dispute that he is well aware of the fact that MAB has declared its antecedents to lie in the Muslim Brotherhood, but instead attempts a sort of poor man’s jesuitical weasling to try to shift the focus onto whether or not David T chose the right words to describe the undisputed link between the two organisations.

Then, he tries to describe this alleged poor phrasing as a lie.

Contemptible.

I think david t should be given secular canonisation for assuming that any of his arguments 1) are actually read by Sonic 2) that sonic would even understand them 3) that having read and understood them, that sonic could construct a logical counterargument

that is asking something from sonic which he has rarely, if ever displayed

Jamie, why?

You are obviously so convinced of your own virtue that you will avoid endorsing the statement of Egyptian women who have been subjected to repeated sexual humiliation and assault in order to try to advance your wider set of opinions.

What have my views about Israel, or the Kurds, or the Marsh Arabs, or the Iranian Zoroastrian minority, got to do with this point?

Why should my endorsement of middle eastern democrats, feminists and humanitarians only be valid if they reciprocate that endorsement?

And why should I seek to follow the evident opinions of an individual so degraded as to suggest any of these things?

So David, you have an official statement from MAB supporting the “execution of apostates”?

Please do post it with supporting evidence!

The classic sonic tactic: “So David, you have an official statement from MAB supporting the “execution of apostates”?”

Take one small detail, rephrase it (an “official statement”), then try by disputing it to discredit the whole argument.

Again, contemptible.

“You are obviously so convinced of your own virtue that you will avoid endorsing the statement of Egyptian women who have been subjected to repeated sexual humiliation and assault in order to try to advance your wider set of opinions.”

the idea that you have selected this issue amongst all the others in the world because of your humanitarian nature rather than your Islamophobia, Arab- hatred and zionist-colonial support is an insult to our intelligence,

Is that your final answer?

You have intelligence, Jamie?

Just how is support for Arab democrats, all of them Muslim, Islamophobic, Arab-hating and zionist-colinial-hyper-hyphenating-supporting?

Horatio, it a “classic” tactic of many people to ask for evidence of very serious accusations.

If you find this “contemptable” all I can have is pity for you.

So David, do you have an official statement from MAB supporting the “execution of apostates”?

Thought not.

“Just how is support for Arab democrats, all of them Muslim, Islamophobic, Arab-hating and zionist-colinial-hyper-hyphenating-supporting?”

Because it helps create the impression that the problems in the middle east and wider world, are the result of Arab bigotry and discrimination, largely caused by the evils of a 7th cent religion, rather than the imperialism and racism of Western governments including Israel which you support, and whose democracy is somewhat compromised by its racism

Yes, sonic. It’s just that I don’t recall David T referring to an official MAB document advocating the persecution of apostates. I got the impression he was suggesting that this is a part of the wider manifesto; the MAB are publicity conscious - hence their withdrawal from their website of the document you don’t want to mention.

And there you go, you’re doing it again with the “official” thing… Please quote the David T allegation you are referring to.

The whole thread is above, try reading it.

” Let’s have a response which sets out, for us to see, the theoretical basis of your belief that it is proper to defend organisations which support the replacement of rule by human choice with theocrasy, and the execution of apostates, et al?”

Islamophobia, Arab- hatred and zionist-colonial support is an insult to our intelligence

There you have it. Don’t dare question the MAB, the Muslim Brotherhood, Tariq Ramadan, Hamas, or do anything other than Bunting-esque moronicity or Sonic and his new best friend Jamie will call you a racist! *gasp*

I think this thread should be saved and linked to prominently by HP to demonstrate what utter cunts Sonic and the likes of Jamie are.

OK, Jamie, so we’ll leave the Arab democrats to their fate, because we don’t want to divert attention from our own sins.

Oooh… whip me again… call me a nasty colonialist… YESSSS… Now do it in an Irish accent… AAAHHHHHH

And we’ll even support their oppressors because we hope they’ll help us bring about a revolution after which their religious mania will dissolve into our socialist utopia.

Meanwhile, good people die without our support.

As I said, degraded.

I dont call you a racist Morgorth, I’m quite happy with ignorant Orange bigot thanks.

I blame the problems on oil, having it.

of course, the inordinate amount of wealth which flows into some Middle Eastern dictatorships, theocracies etc and is spent on useless military projects, nukes, or frittered away with only the crumbs left for social spending, is a problem too.

Can you imagine what parts of the Middle East will be like without billions and billions of dollars, euros, yen, etc pouring into the region, after the invention of some technological breakthrough, which frees humanity from using fossil fuels and oil??

I’ll bet that such a technological breakthrough would be denounced as a fiendish tool of neo-imperialistic-zionistic-Freemasonry-runningdog capitalism, before the day is out?

and the circle starts again

Thank you, sonic. No allegation of an official statement to that effect, just the allegation that they support this - which simply puts them in the Islamic mainstream.

I won’t be holding my breath for your retraction, though.

Today’s lesson in why it is impossible to have a grown-up discussion with sonic was brought to you by people with more patience than I have.

Seriously, why do any of you bother?

agreed Brownie

That crazy old Sonic asking you for evidence, honestly does he not realise that people here are not part of the reality based community?

I think it is sonic 1 DavidT 0 tonight!

sonic, oh dogma-addled one, you’re asking for evidence of something he didn’t say, as your own quotation demonstrated.

It’s sonic 0, The Real World zzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Just a thought that is unrelated to the loonies here: has it occurred to anyone that the Right has to swallow a certain amount of disapproval to share a platform with the Left? That this might be a two-way problem? And that the real political divide is now shaping up to be anti-discrimination libertarians (with a variety of opinions about economics) vs identity-politics-obsessed authoritarians (with a variety of opinions about economics)?

PS - I’d say the BNP is obsessed with identity politics. Wouldn’t you?

sonic wrote:

That crazy old Sonic asking you for evidence, honestly does he not realise that people here are not part of the reality based community?

the simple fact is your beliefs are not based on evidence, you are nutjob ideologue with a persecution complex

sonic, you invariably ignore any evidence that doesn’t suit your predetermined views,

eg. when video evidence of anti-jewish racist chanting on an “anti-war” demo was shown to you, you simply ignored it.

A video of anti-jewish racist chanting on the stop the war coalition demonstration in London, 5 August 2006.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yU4S9nGOhf8

the chant is “Khaiber, Khaiber, Ya Yahud, Jaish Muhammad Safayahood”, which translates into, “Khaibar, Khaibar, O Jews, the army of Mohammed is coming for you”

well sonic?

Modernity what has a chant in arabic at a demonstration that happened 8000 miles from where I sit (and did not attend( have anything to do we me challenging David T’s insane argument that this rally was organised by the Muslim Brotherhood or that MAB officially supports executing apostates?

As always when you are on the ropes you drag up any old rubbish to try an muddy the waters. For once in your life try and stay on topic eh?

sonic, are you not a supporter of the antiwar movement?? it doesn’t bother you that anti-Jewish racist chants occur on StWC demos??

OK sonic, let’s stay on topic. You’re asking for evidence of something you alleged that David T said (”official statement”) which your own quoting of David T shows David T didn’t say.

Why?

Horatio, he said that MAB supports this and that, but when he was called on it ran away.

Pretty simple really.

Still I’ll take an unoffical statement if that is any hlp, even one on headed notepaper will do.

Modernity, it’s an outragous chant, if I had been there and understood arabic I’d have objected to it. Happy now?

(he wont be of course he will just bring something else up for me to condemn, perhaps someone in singapore refused to serve Kosher food)

sonic,

your snide comments about kosher food only confirm my original statement, you’re a nutjob, Strasserite filth and incapable of reasoned argument, but then those two things tend to go together

brownie’s got you down to a T

I’m quite happy with ignorant Orange bigot thanks.

Oh, that was cutting. And so original.

Better people than you have called me worse names than that. You and your little Al-Guardian chum Jamie, I wouldn’t even cross the street to piss on you if you were on fire.

Chortle. “David T” - that well known libertarian and human rights activist - has now taken to lecturing Liberty during his coffee breaks. Whatever next, indeed….

Oh sorry Modernity, I completly condemn my previous comments

It was a joke, lighten up for goodness sake!

Morgorth gets all precious, ahh the poor wee lad. Go back and read what you called me first.

Must say though, admire those html skills!

No, sonic, you were very specific:

“So David, do you have an official statement from MAB supporting the “execution of apostates”?

Thought not.
Posted by: sonic at November 21, 2006 12:16 AM”

And I have posted links showing that the idea of executing apostates is in the Islamic mainstream, let alone the province of the MB. But you chose not to respond to those, just as you chose not to respond to the proof I posted that you are perfectly well aware of the links between the Muslim Brotherhood and the MAB.

You know there are severe problems with even mainstream Islam, but that a lot of Muslims are trying hard to deal with them. Take Ali Eteraz and his recent arguments with Robert Spencer over the treatment of apostates.

Why the hell do you insist on allying yourself with the religious maniacs and ignoring the reformers and progressives?

That was a rhetorical question. The truth is, you’re so wedded to your socialist revolution that you’ll sacrifice any number of reformers, democrats, secularists, prisoners of conscience, feminists to your ideals. And, by God, are they being sacrificed. The death toll in Iraq right now isn’t the result of American bullets, it’s competing Islamist, Islamic and Ba’athist factions. But you’ll blame the Americans because you’ll infantalise Arabs - say they are not responsible for their own actions but the puppets of American actions - rather than face what is actually happening.

The constant sniping at details that is so characteristic of you, rather than the addressing of the main point, is just a tactic, not a conversation.

Oh no… benjamin has turned up to stick his bayonet, pointlessly, into the fringes. A serious mind turned into porridge.

Jamie has retreated and sonic is past redemption.

Time for bed.

sonic,

in your current poser mode, you wouldn’t dream of making a slur, “joke” or insult against any other ethnic group (black, Asians, etc) but Jews, and you are very strange for an alleged “socialist”, who is happy to make snide comments against Jews, and only Jews?

you let the cat out of the bag there eh?

what next? an impression of Atzmon as an encore? or Bernard Manning?

WTF are you talking about Modernity?

I was making a joke about you and your pretend outrage about anything you can label as anti-semitism, if you were showing false outrage at anti-black racism or whatever I’d make a joke about that as well.

Horatio, I’ve said I’ll take an unoffical statement, got one of them?

Thought not.

It rather looks like Sonic, Benjamin and Heterodox are all that is left of the “old left” these days.

2 expats with a 20 year old sense of what is and isn’t “racist” and a nutjob who sees Jews behind every bush.

Tragic really how people get left behind.

“support violent white conquest of Iraq”

That’s truly one of the most fucking hilarious things I’ve read on here. I think little else needs to be said in relation to the delightful Jamie.

I’m astonished that Sonic has managed to continue posting without noticing that his ad hominems and non sequiturs fail to amount to any kind of refutation of what is well-accepted common knowledge about the origins of the MAB. I will say for him, though, that his ability to fail to score any hits at all, whilst absorbing enormous flak from left, right and centre, is truly, utterly, heroic.

Sonic,

Cut the BS, you disgusting excuse for a human being

Is it common in the SSP (or amongst ex-SSPers) that people make snide comments about kosher food???

Would you make a joke about halal? Or a hijab or Burqa, of course not.

You would only make snide jokes against Jews, typical filth

That’s probably why you’re so enamoured with Atzmon and his lunacy, it reveals your nastier side

You nauseating gobshite

Tree hugger

That’s what you have deduced from my two sentences? Don’t ever get yourself employed as detective, old boy…

Oh I would never be a detective, but I would make a very good sewer cleaner. I can spot rats miles away you see.

Great post David.

Why anyone would want to waste time responding to sonic is beyond me.

He made a total fanny of himself after ‘the bet’ with Kammo though. :)

Winning a bet makes you a “fanny”

Fancy.

Nice that Modernity got a excuse to be outraged and potty mouthed though.

I also love Ben’s “what is well-accepted common knowledge about the origins of the MAB.”

Well accepted common knowledge that no-one can produce any evidence for!

Amazing.

Tree Hugger,

Benji’s not as bad as Sonic and WJ. He’s just a bit vacuous and inane. He has a slither of value in his similarity to the major from Fawlty Towers.

Shooting the messenger again LWW?

Always the clearest indication that you have lost the argument.

Anyone got that evidence yet I asked DavidT for by any chance?

Thought not.

LWW, you’re correct sonic’s a floating turd in the political pond, he’s impervious to reason or the stupidity of his previous posts (and after posting nonsense, he trundles on as if nothing happened)

Modernity, let me explain (not sure why I am bothering)

You were doing your usual condemn this, condemn that trick. I tried to think of the most trivial example of possible anti-semitism I could. The comment was not meant to be offensive, and to be honest I do not think that in context it was.

Now that’s over is there any chance we could talk about something other than fake accusations of racism against me?

Ta

Meanwhile, in News from Over The Rainbow (way up high), Sonic won his bet with Oliver Kamm and Mab are not linked to the MB. George Galloway is a credible politician who finds time to do much loved cat impressions on Big Brother, and Tommy Sheridan has made a purer and better socialist party in Scotland by driving away two-thirds of the membership.

Back on earth the leaders of liberty are fighting a losing battle as their heads inflate with hot-air, a worrying development which threatens to see them float up to la-la Sonic land within weeks.

Oh look there goes Chakrabarti now.

And did the war in Iraq reveal Saddams nuclear weapons and bring freedom and democracy to the middle east Trevor?

I think we should be told!

sonic, to you everything is “fake”, even your own posts, are you going to make some more snide “kosher” jokes? or pluck a few examples from Bernard Manning’s “joke book”??

I shouldn’t wonder if you were kicked out of the SSP for racism, etc or some such pathetic conduct

Modernity, there is no point even bothering with you any more. Yet again you have shown that to you, the, very serious issue, of racism and anti-semitism is merely a stick you use to try and beat those who outsmart you in argument. You are a one trick pony constantly obsessed with trashing your opponents with whatever low means you can find, faux outrage and false accusation being your primary tools.

Be off with you.

plunk

Sonic has been used as a floor mop tonight I’d say. His last comment describes himself to a tee.

He’s gone all postmodern on us. The only way out for him now is to pretend he was joking all the time.

Its a sad ending.

I am beginning to the HP actually likes Sonic, what other reason could there be for un-banning the antipodean arsehole!

So after all that - still no answer from Sonic re condemning the MAB for having good relations with the Muslim Brotherhood, an organisation which has the stated policy of executing Muslim apostates and the Bahai religious minority.

Why the silence on this question Sonic ?

Sonic is silent on the terrorist organiser Tamimi.
Silent (despite his claims to have an inside track) on Sheridan

I wonder if he has anything to say about a fascist political party, The Syrian Socialist Nationalist party, which claims Iraq as part of Syria and supports Syrian annexation of Lebanon having the Respect MP speak at their meetings all weekend.Paid of course.

Absolutely nothing.

That is, I’m now forced to agree, because parts of the far left have become Strasserite.

Sonic is silent on the terrorist organiser Tamimi.

Shocking! Hold the front page.

After all, if “Sonic” was not silent on it, it would really tip the balance, chaps. The warped world of blog comment boxes does get incredibly bizarre at times.

Who really gives a…. !

Who really gives a…. !

You do. Otherwise you would not comment on absolutely everything.

So David, you have an official statement from MAB supporting the “execution of apostates”?

So, Sonic, do you have an official statement from yourself opposing the liberation of Iraq? Even just something on headed notepaper will do.

No? Great! Welcome to the decent left!

See how this doesn’t work? Or are you truly the logical vacuum that you come across as?

And have you paid that bet you lost yet?

Does anybody at all think that sonic won that bet, other than sonic?

Nope.

Black is white, white is black in Sonic’s world.

David T’s only game these days is ‘outing’ Muslims and left-wing political parties for hiding their true colors.

That’s pretty funny coming from a website whose main purpose is plugging every Zionist front it can find: Engage, the Euston Manifesto, Unite Against Terror, the Scoop Jackson fan Club, Democratiya etc etc and pretending they’re all separate, unbiassed friends of humanity.

It’s even funnier considering that David T is a Jew who has spent three years on this site refusing to admit he is one.

Takes a compulsive dissembler to know one, I guess.

There is very little overlap between the Henry Jackson Society and the other campaigns you mention.

The other campaigns are supported by many of the same people for reasons which are made absolutely explicit by those campaigning for them. Indeed, their purpose is to propagate - with a fair degree of success, I should add - the political ideas which define these campaigns.

I think you can say the same thing about the likes of Tamimi, Tikriti et al. They are pretty frank - not at all times, admittedly - about their enthusiasm for a vicious, violent, illiberal, misogynist, racist theocracy. Indeed, it takes a high degree of Nelsonian blindness on the part of those Leftists and Strasserites who have thrown their lot in with the Islamists to pretend that it does not exist.

I also appreciate that it is difficult for the likes of WJ Phillips - under his many and varied psuedonyms - to understand that it is only really far-right nutters like him who understand the world principally in terms of ethnicity and biology.

I’m going to take Tolkiens’ line on this:

“But if I am to understand that you are enquiring whether I am of Jewish origin, I can only reply that I regret that I appear to have no ancestors of that gifted people.”

Morgoth, are you a Jewish lapsed Ulster Protestant nutter? Confess!

I’ve not been anywhere near an internet since Friday. It’s nice to see that Sonic and WJ Phillips and everyone and everything is trundling along as ever.

I am beginning to the HP actually likes Sonic, what other reason could there be for un-banning the antipodean arsehole!

The answer to this oddly worded question is that I felt like a bully, like I was picking on him. And to be fair, he’s been absolutely determined since to make sure that every discussion he has here is well-intentioned, substantive and fair, and doesn’t descend immediately into stupid accusations and petty, sterile pointscoring. Good for him, I say.

The Age Factor - the trouble with people like Chakrabarti is that they are too young - they have seen nothing, experienced nothing and have read nothing, with the end result that they end up being used by Islamist Supremacists, the very people outfits such as Liberty should be campaigning against, rather than supporting. ‘Useful idiot’ is too polite a term.

The most significant thing is the appearance of Livingstone on this platform.

In this we have a unity of the “Left” along with Islamofascism. By the way the central issue is hatred of Israel and this is what unites Livingstone with the Muslim Brotherhood.

The branch of the Muslim Brotherhood in Palestine is Hamas. The aim of Hamas is to destroy Israel, wipe it off the map, get rid of all the Jews in the Middle East, drive them out. This is also the policy of the Hezbullah. It actually is the policy of Abbas and the Fatah organization if you go by their constitution and what Abbas says in Arabic.

These mythical people called the “Palestinians” who have been created in public consciousness by an Israel hating media according to all polls taken, never mind the last election, support these aims of Hamas to wipe out the Jews.

The big question is where is the Left in Britain at this moment in time. I would say in support of Hamas…Livingstone, Indymedia, WRP etc.

So this meeting is indeed a very big deal.

I would say that the central problem is the imperialist and racist nature of Islam itself and the Muslim people if they are going to have any freedom have got to make a revolution and overthrow these theocratic fascists who rule over them in so many countries. This applies especially in Iran. The Iranian workers, professionals and youth should be given all encouragement to overthrow the Mullahs and elect a government pledged to democracy.

I do not think anybody has mentioned that Blair and Baker/Hamilton are at this moment moving in behind (supporting the Islamofascists of Iran and Syria) these enemies of Israel.

This (from yesterday’s Times) sounds a more heartening event in the name of tolerance: (Thank whatever god they didn’t choose the Behzti response this time)
Hundreds of Sikhs from all over Britain held a prayer vigil at the site of a racial attack in which the hair of a 15-year-old Sikh boy was hacked off by four white youths last Tuesday evening. The boy was subjected to a tirade of racial abuse by the gang in Pilrig Park, Edinburgh, before being kicked and punched to the ground. The organisers had invited people of all faiths to attend the event, which they said was aimed at promoting peace and tolerance.

I do not think anybody has mentioned that Blair and Baker/Hamilton are at this moment moving in behind (supporting the Islamofascists of Iran and Syria) these enemies of Israel.

Damn that well-known islamofascist Tony Blair, he won’t stop until the caliphate is restored will he?

There is very little overlap between the Henry Jackson Society and the other campaigns you mention.

Except that their organising committee includes Ollie Kamm, plus Brendan Simms whose ‘Social Affairs Unit’ published Ollie’s pamphlet and who pours cold water on the idea of an Israel Lobby, plus Alan Mendoza and Gideon Mailer, frequent academic defenders of Israeli actions. And the HJS’s sponsors also include Stephen Pollard, Gerard Baker, Denis MacShane MP, Philip Goodhart, Michael Gove MP, Irwin Stelzer, Gerard Baker, Gisela Stuart MP, Robert Halfon, Vernon Bogdanor… not many firm friends of the Palestinians among that lot.

The HJS consists of three main elements:

(i) Cambridge academic historians and international relations specialists.

(ii) Neoconnish Murdoch pressmen.

(iii) Zionist campaigners and their Parliamentary water carriers.

It takes the Zionist line on the Balkans– Serbian Christians are bad, Muslims who don’t abut on Israel are victims, see how tolerant we are– and an ‘Atlanticist’, ‘Anglospherical’ line on everything else: The Last Hegemon plus its NATO running dogs can and should go anywhere, do anything. This omnipotence will justify the HJS’s non-conservative, universalist contentions, i.e. “only modern liberal democratic states are truly legitimate, and that any international organisation which admits undemocratic states on an equal basis is fundamentally flawed.” So much for the UN, not to mention most of America’s Third World alliances of opportunity. However, “alliances with repressive regimes can only be temporary.” Phew!

The acid test is not whether the HJS openly bangs a drum for Olmert (that would be far too crude for these intellectual-snobby Peterhouse characters) but whether it ever says or does anything that seriously undermines the Israeli national interest or the self-esteem of world Jewry. And conversely, whether the HJS is willing to sing from the same hymnsheet when it comes to scarifying Israel’s perceived foes.

The last few articles on its rather inactive website may be seen here:

http://www.henryjacksonsociety.org.uk/

There’s nothing to give a ‘middle of the road’, two-state-solution, Engage-model Jew any qualms. That is the mark of a fellow traveller; he may not swallow precisely the same sleeping draught, but he behaves himself in the couchette, gives you no sleepless nights and helps fend off any intruder.

The only public appearance of the HJS since the summer has been a ‘terrorism event’ at Westminster chaired by Fabian Hamilton, the Jewish Labour MP, and addressed by “Mr. Yoram Schweitzer, from the Jaffee Centre for Strategic Studies, University of Tel Aviv” who “consults for government ministries on a private basis”. Getting a Mossad agent to talk to you is a coup the more obvious fronts have to eschew.

In the HJS’s eyes, the fate of Israel and the fate of humanity are indistinguishable. It’s the kind of guff you find in Congressional resolutions, here dished up with a little academic top-dressing.

From alphabetcity bog about a new Danish book - the term ‘naivist’ may also be applied to Liberty:

Karen Jespersen and Ralf Pittelkow, two Danish liberals who once advocated tolerance now argue in their new book, “Islamists and Naivists” (Islamister og Naivister), that anyone who underestimates the threat posed by radical Islam to Denmark and the West is naive.

The book’s main argument is that Europeans who ignore the threat posed by Islamists belong to a new and dangerous tribe of “naivists,” a term coined by the authors. This may not sound so radical at a time when the pope has upset the Islamic world by quoting a medieval passage calling Islam “evil and inhuman” and when Islamic terrorist plots have put Europe on edge.

Morgoth, are you a Jewish lapsed Ulster Protestant nutter? Confess!

To make it really NI-like, you should have asked if I was a Protestant Jewish lapsed Ulster Protestant nutter or a Catholic Jewish lapsed Ulster Protestant nutter.

Are you a Reform Presbyterian DUP nutter or an Orthodox Church of Ireland Garden Centre Prod weirdo? Be specific.

Jack the Bear: My, how closely you monitor the minutiae of the Henry Jackson society. The cultured elegance of the writing belies the fact that you are just another slavering Jewly fixated obsessive.

David T: Your reference to Lady Birdwood brought back creepy memories of going to watch one of her trials and trying to avoid eye contact with her cosy middle England supporters who would offer me conspiratorial smiles.

In my opinion, they’re all wanking fools. WJP especially.

Ami, “Jack the Bear” is Luni’s Stopper Personality.

Redhanded, a few years back, when I could be bothered to hang out at soc.culture.irish (before it went downhill in a big way), I was known as the resident “Goth Satanist Unionist”.

Nowadays, I’m a unionist with a small ‘u’.

I could be bothered to hang out at soc.culture.irish (before it went downhill in a big way), I was known as the resident “Goth Satanist Unionist”.

LOL, say hi to Greig and Hunchback for me, how’s the weather in West Belfast nowadays?

Greig

Ah, the republican nutter of “mendacious” fame. He was SCI’s very own Callum.

I miss Ger, Unki, Westprog, Bro and co, though.

I went under the moniker of various “Cats” when I was on SCI. (i.e. Albertus Magnus, Aleister Crowley and so on)

I live in Dorset now, a bit far from West Belfast ;-)

I have been following this argument, and even though I already know it is pointless to comment .. what the heck.
Up untill the name calling starts in, both sides made some good points.
I think this why nothing is ever solved … in some way both sides are right but can’t find a way to come together.
I am new here but just from this debate … I have to say …poor sonic. His point made that is over looked - and one I agree with - is everyone asked why aren’t the moderate muslims speaking up? then when they do or try … they are ignored, told to shut up or almost called liars for speaking against extremism … I have actually seen people comment back extremist views to them like they are trying to convert them as well.
On the other side things shouldn’t be ignored.
this group the MAB, though I have checked into them and they seem to only offer positives, they do have ties to the muslim brotherhood.
what they trully beleive is know only to them.
Lets not forget what happened in somolia. The islamic courts took over power, and the victory was praised by most muslims… even though they had a connection to Alqueda … they still promised to be good and nice … they lied … especially to their own people.
I am afarid things will soon turn from panic to ignorance. where is the balance?

Er, so who do you think would win a debate between Sonic and Lady Birdwood then?

The thing is this. A different test of “moderation” applies when Islamist politics is talked about. “Moderate” tends to be used, simply to mean “not in favour of suicide bombing, at least in the United Kingdom”.

The most liberal things said by the most conciliatory of Islamists - Tariq Ramadan, for example - would put them at the far fringes of the democratic European right. Except, of course, that as Islamists, different standards are applied.

This is a ridiculous situation.

Religious politics tends to be dominated by the doctrinally reactionary, and the socially conservative. People who are not religious extremists tend not to be drawn to faith-based identity politics, and so tend not to identify themselves as “moderate” religious politicians. Rather, they identify as liberals, or conservatives, or socialists.

It isn’t, in any case, the supposed “moderate” nature of the MB which appeals to those on the Left who champion them. It is rather that they think that they’re the foot soldiers and fellows in a global resistance to capitalism.

They’re partly right: but they’re also particularly fierce opponents of progressives of all types.

Nowadays, I’m a unionist with a small ‘u’.

Sweet Jesus, Joseph and Mary. What does a big “U” unionist sound like?

[Joking].

A bit like this:

“NO SURRENDER SAVE ULSTER FROM SODOMY THE PAPE IS THE ANTICHRIST HE TOOK THE AULD FLUTE FOR TO PLAY IN THE MASS IN THE SASH MY FATHER WORE AND EVERY DAY IS LIKE THE 12TH OF JULY !!!!”

Lady Birdwood, Graham: Her brain is in better condition than his, cos she’s dead.

I went under the moniker of various “Cats” when I was on SCI.

Heh, I am not going to tell you mine, as you will then work out my real name.

Yeah, those were the days. Being insulted by Cunningham et al was often the highlight of my day.

Ah as someone who attended a lot of by-elections around her time I was always impressed by Lady Jane’s ability to get young NF’ers to do all her fetching and carrying for her.

She was a big deal in the “World anti-communist league” or some such thing, so she would undoubtedely have dispatched an agent to Auckland to settle Sonic’s hash with thalium.

I remember having a drunken plan to try and matchmake her to that other electioneering eccentric Bill Boakes (famous for saying he would never stand at a by-election in Croydon because he thought that the forces of international communism were not a threat there.) But alas, the romance was not to be.

If only we had a Lady Birdwood to tickle the heart of Luni…

Heh, I am not going to tell you mine, as you will then work out my real name.[Montag]

It’s not PrisWasserHaus, is it?

No answer from Sonic to my question - guess he must have given up like the nomark he is.

Bye bye Sonic - still I hope to see you again - lets see if you answer my question next time.

Here it is again for any newcomers :

“So after all that - still no answer from Sonic re condemning the MAB for having good relations with the Muslim Brotherhood, an organisation which has the stated policy of executing Muslim apostates and the Bahai religious minority.

Why the silence on this question Sonic ?”

Guys - if we ever see Sonic any more - shall we try again ?

Do we care?

Big_ben

Heh, I am not going to tell you mine, as you will then work out my real name.

Yeah, those were the days. Being insulted by Cunningham et al was often the highlight of my day.

Westprog perhaps?

P.S. David T, so you HAVE met my parents then!

was delighted to read of this noble effort by german et al to defend freedom of thought and freedom of speech! Would have loved to have gone along - but stranded down here in swansea - would have loved to have spoken up bout the rights of gay muslims (both here and in muslim countries) sure that contribution would have been warml;y recieved. Just cannot understand the intolerance in islam towards gay people after all wasnt the prophet mohammed himself gay?

(guess that comment alone will earn me a personal fatwa from the muslim bros proxy groups in britian so i’ll say it again - and dont remove it board managers - the prophet mohammed was gay! He had sexual relations with other men!

There said it - bring on that fatwa muslim asocc of briian/ muslim brotherhood!