Harry’s Place

Well well they are getting geared up for the new EU directive that makes Islamophobia a crime, well here we go, I can’t think of anything more likely to create a violent reaction and hatred by certain members of the non-Muslim world then destroying political freedom of expression using a law created by unelected bureaucrats and with truely harsh penaltis like withdrawal of all benefits, huge fines, closure of such a persons business and up to 10 years in jail from what I recall. Now that is a thought crime and a half…

Inayat Bunglawala is a figure of fun
Asghar Bukhari is a fan of David Irving

One of Britain’s most prominent speakers on Muslim issues is today exposed as a supporter of David Irving, the controversial historian who for years denied the Holocaust took place.
Asghar Bukhari, a founder member of the Muslim Public Affairs Committee (MPAC), which describes itself as Britain’s largest Muslim civil rights group, sent money to Irving and urged Islamic websites to ask visitors to make donations to his fighting fund.

Bukhari confirmed sending the letters in 2000. ‘I had a lot of sympathy for anyone who opposed Israel,’ Bukhari told The Observer said. ‘I wrote letters to anyone who was tough against the Israelis - David Irving, Paul Findley, the PLO.”I don’t feel I have done anything wrong, to be honest. At the time I was of the belief he [Irving] was anti-Zionist, being smeared for nothing more then being anti-Zionist.

Bukhari is either.
1.One of the thickest people in Britain.
2.A liar who sent his cheque and letters after the end of the Lipstadt Trial when Irvings anti semitism was exposed in the worlds media.And he sent them precisely because of Irvings anti semitism.

Either way he’s not to be touched with a bargepole.

I imagine that the exposure of the likes of Bukhari as an active supporter of David Irving that the Blackstone Foundation’s Legal Response Unit will be so alert to prevent.

I wonder how long it will take before they will be determined to be a vexatious litigant.

Seems nothing has changed much.
Don’t you ever tire, David?

“I wonder how long it will take before they will be determined to be a vexatious litigant.” Are you sure that this common sense approach will apply to a EU directive?

Never will tire of fighting the sectarians and fascists, Rastalion!

Bukhari sent his cheque in 2000.
The Irving - Lipstadt Trial began on 11 Jan 2000.

Perhaps Asghar would like to tell us when he sent his cheque?

Because unless it was in the first ten days of the year, Irvings racism,holocaust denial and anti semitism were being widely broadcast.
And we have to assume its what attracted Asghar.

Asghar’s political career is over. As is Bungle’s. As is Tamimi’s.

I wonder whether the next generation of Islamist leaders will be as foolish and clumsy as this lot. I expect the answer is “yes”.

The problem is, you can’t gild a turd.

Every so often, fascist groups try a PR drive. They wear suits and ties. They do their best not to use racist language. But the strain eventually gets too much for them, and they give themselves away.

They give themselves away because this sort of nasty politics is their lifeblood. This is what they do in private: and they can’t really keep it separate from what they do in public.

If they create this IMMRA aren’t they horning in on Bob Pitt’s territory? Pretty ungracious that. Though I suppose they could hire him as a consultant.

Look, I admit that I am feeling so belligerent and utterly reactionary at the moment..blame it on the disgust I feel at looking closely at Dutch politics in recent decades or something like that…but anyway….

First I must say I have the utmost respect for the research into various Islamist and associated front groups that David T has carried out over the last few years - it would be no exaggeration to say that the work he has conducted, most notably through this very site - has been that of a latter-day Sherlock Holmes (if not quite a Father Brown, unfortunately) shining a torch into all manner of questionable goings-on, and stripping away veneers to show the rotten wood beneath.

However - I really do want to tear my heair out when I read sentences like the following, coming immediately after a plea to combat “sectarianism”: (now I will defend “the bigotry of Belfast”, which is frequently not understood in England, let alone London, before all things, when it comes to it), but I maintain there is no sectarian like an escapee from the far-left - or who insists on finding other “centre-left”, as opposed to “centre-right” (as if the difference were so great) allies (or heaven forbid anyone who might be far-left but actually have agreat deal in common with the supposed moderate centre-leftist!) in such an apparently noble aim.

What I think is a great pity, is that the groups which have realised this - notably the Centre for Social Cohesion - are centre-Right, and that there appears to be no corresponding centre-left think tank putting forward the liberal, progressive argument against sectarianism.

To be honest I am more to the right than the left, and I have little time for “progressive arguments”, having seen where they have led previously, and liberality, as a quality of character, is by no means a bad thing… but I can’t stand this kind of sectarianism that tries to do something worthy only by associating with those it deems of its own kind, with its own “progressive” (and actually generally rather intolerant) mindset.

Why can’t you demonstrate that you actually genuinely are anti-sectarian by chumming up with some conservatives who share some of your basic values for once?

(rant over)

Asghar: “At the time I was of the belief he [Irving] was anti-Zionist, being smeared for nothing more then being anti-Zionist.

Which is a position adopted by MPAC UK such that they use the word “Zionist” even in contexts where it obviously means Jews.

I guess he believe that Al Husseini’s courting of Hitler and starting the Handzar SS was simply an Anti-Zionist act.

Dear FAST & Microsoft,

There is a new organisation that plans to establish computer networks that seem supiciously cheap. For a 20 user server at a total price of £2,000. Given that Windows 2003 server costs approx £750 for 5 users and a 20 user CAL pack costs around £300 then it seems unlikely they can get a server and proper licensed software for such a low price.

Similarly they have a 4 user network and server priced at £1,000, Since Windows 2003 server is a minmum spend of £750 then it seems unlikely that their server will cost only £250.

The persons responsible for the quote can be reached at:-
c/o Carl Arrindell The Islam Channel, 14 Bonhill Street London,EC2A4BX http://www.islamchannel.tv Tel: 0207 374 4511 Fax: 0207 374 4511

Yours Sincerely,

A concerned IT professional.

Why can’t you demonstrate that you actually genuinely are anti-sectarian by chumming up with some conservatives who share some of your basic values for once?

I have just come back from the wedding of a university friend who is now a Conservative councillor. Indeed, some of my best friends are Tories (and LibDems, for that matter).

But the fact is this. There are, politically speaking, two camps in this country: the Left and the Right. The Left have the Guardian and the Staggers. The Right have the Telegraph and the Spectator. The Left have the Policy Studies Institute. The Right have the Centre for Policy Studies. And so on.

This does not mean that there are issues on which centre Left and centre Right are close together. Both are likely to support constitutionalism, fundamental human rights, due process, and so on. The far Left and the far Right also have their areas of commonality: particularly when it comes to Jews.

However, I do think that it is a pity that the sort of arguments for community cohesion and equal citizenship rights - that should be common ground for all centrists - are not being made by think tanks on the Left as forcibly as they’re being made by those on the Right. The reason for this is both cultural and fortuitous. This Government has, in fact, got rather good on community cohesion. It has more or less sniffed out and rejected groups like the MCB.

I think it would be a pity if, either in opposition or in Government, opposing religious sectarianism became an issue associated with the political Right, while pandering to it turned into something that the Left “does”: when it should be a non partisan matter.

In fact, let us not forget, it was Michael Howard who effectively installed the MCB as the Government’s partner in the first place.

Maven,
‘I had a lot of sympathy for anyone who opposed Israel,’
‘I wrote letters to anyone who was tough against the Israelis

Does Irving have any views on Israel?
Has Bukhari unearthed a stash or is it another euphemism

“Why can’t you demonstrate that you actually genuinely are anti-sectarian by chumming up with some conservatives who share some of your basic values for once?”

Giggle. Don’t forget you’re talking to the man that voted for Boris. David’s dislike of the right is pretty shallow if you scratch the surface. Some might argue he himself is firmly on the right.

And, to illustrate my point, along comes TheIrie: a beloved member of the Harry’s Place community, who nevertheless feels obliged to do all he can to explain away, or ignore the vilest of bigotry when it comes to whatever Third Worldist cause du jour is presently in fashion.

Now, how TheIrie ended up like this is anybody’s guess. He’s somebody who found himself on the fringes of trotdom, which he regards as the most authentic expression of progressive Left-wing politics.

But think how different it could have been if, when his views were forming, there were unimpeachable voices on the Left challenging the notion that it is necessary to embrace this foolish, dead end politics, if you are to regard yourself as a true Left winger.

What nonsense. I’ve no interest in “trotdom” or “third worldist cause du jour”. The voices you are looking for, David, are out there. They’re just not on the left. And nor are you. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck (and votes for other ducks, encouraging others to do so at the same time, and quotes other ducks in support of its “cause” as in this post) its a duck. The only thing I don’t get is where does this identity crisis come from?

TheIrie

The political Left is not about cosying up to Islamists.

Yes, but Inayat Bunglawala is not a fascist. Its really silly to suggest otherwise, but of course, that kind of rhetoric has an audience.

The voices you are looking for, David, are out there. They’re just not on the left

You do realise that with that one sentence you’ve proved the very point you were trying to disprove?

Jesus you’re thick.

Incidentally, if you want to read some real left wing ideas, read George Monbiots piece in todays Guardian. He, perhaps more than anyone else, reflects my political position.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/may/20/labour.guardiancolumnists

A perfect model for this type of organization already exists in the US. It’s called CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations). I’ve heard CAIR has been quite successful (but not always) at silencing critics through litigation.

TheIrie

Inayat Bunglawala started his political career editing a magazine called “Trends” which was literally obsessed with the notion of Jewish Power. It reprinted conspiracy theories. He continued in precisely the same vein, in a career which has featured the circulation of Osama Bin Laden’s writings, and the defence of his mate, Bukhari, over the “Fundraising for David Irving” business.

He is a racist and a hardcore Islamist.

That is why his political career is over.

Who defends him now? You.

CAIR’s discrediting has been a long time coming, but now I think it has happened. It is well know that this group is a Muslim Brotherhood front organisation, and to support it, is to support Hamas.

Now, supporting Hamas is fine, if you’re some kind of fringe nutter, and content to be one.

For everybody else, CAIR seems to be little more than an attempt to hijack the cause of human rights, in defence of a politics which utterly denies those rights. They are the American National Socialists, marching through Skokie, and calling for their civil rights.

People can read what Inayat thinks very easily now on CiF. I notice he is extremely amenable to discussion of his views on CiF, replying to commenters, including you frequently. I think the idea he is a fascist, a racist and a hardcore Islamist is just laughable, but I’ve got no desire to rehearse these arguments with you here again.

Just out of interest, David, is there a single Muslim organisation in the world, anywhere, that you don’t regard as fascist?

Any one that isn’t actually connected to a clerical fascist organisation

Yes, such as???

All I can think, is that when you see the evidence that these organisations are linked to groups like Jamaat or the Muslim Brotherhood, that you think, either:

- this is all lies; or

- so, what is wrong with that?

Uh, well.

The Muslim Educational Centre of Oxford, the City Circle, the Progressive British Muslims and Muslims for Secularism lot, a whole bunch of clerics including Abdal Hakim Murad, the Quilliam lot, and so on, including a load of ordinary neighbourhood mosques which are simply places of prayer for ordinary Muslims people.

But, for you, it is all about the groups which have close links with two or three parties, whose policies stand full square against pretty much everything that liberal Left opinion has achieved, ever.

I think the Muslim Brotherhood is a much more diverse group than you make out. I’m not very well informed on either, and reading your posts doesn’t help me particularly, since you don’t ever give any citations to serious studies, books or articles. You simply repeat assertions, usually with the word fascist thrown about. Its all just very weak stuff, and largely unsubstantiated I feel. Here’s a tip. When you first introduce your reader to, for example, Jamaat, why not give us a quick description of the group, its origins and philosophy, with some serious citations, so we can learn something. As it is, we are expected to simply accept on your say so they are just evil, without actually learning anything in the process.

Anyway, since you’ve done so much research on this topic, I’m sure you can name at least one specific Muslim organisation that you don’t consider to be fascists? Come on, give me a name.

I see you’ve listed names above. Well done. But you then write “But, for you, it is all about the groups which have close links with two or three parties, whose policies stand full square against pretty much everything that liberal Left opinion has achieved, ever.” What on earth do you mean, “for me”? I don’t support in any material, spiritual or other manner, any Muslim groups at all. My only possible contribution to these issues is to occasionally criticise your smear jobs.

I think the Muslim Brotherhood is a much more diverse group than you make out

Yeah. There are the ones who want to throw gays from tall buildings. While the other faction maintains that it is appropriate to collapse walls on them.

David - that illustrates perfectly how unserious you are about these things. You reduce complicated issues to utter childishness. Good night sir.

TheIrie,

your only contribution on these topics is to sneer, demonstrate your ignorance or apologise for someone’s dodgy connections and make excuses

you’ve done it before, and you’ll do it again

you couldn’t exercise any more energy than you did trying to exculpate Asghar Bukhari from the Irving fiasco

and I daresay that if, hypothetically speaking, Mr. Bukhari was found reading Mein Kampf and praising it that you’d try to make some excuse like “he didn’t really mean it”, “he wasn’t feeling well that day”

so before you accuse other people of arguing in bad faith you could do well to look in the mirror, first

Four full time staff for £72k in total (presumably including employers national insurance and I guess pension contributions and other sundry benefits) in the Media Monitoring Group. They sure will get top quality staff at that rate of pay. They may be able to find people who can read and write providing the print is quite large and the words are not too long at that rate of pay.

I copied this (it wasn’t easy. I wonder why?) from the (English language) Muslim Brotherhood site:

IkhwanWeb » Issues » Women »

Justice not equality

“We don”t have the eternal complex of having to be equal with men,” said Um Mahdi, head of the women”s branch of Hayeet Daam Al-Muqawama, the Organisation for Supporting the Resistance, the financial arm of Hizbullah. “We seek justice not equality,” she added. A similar view is often voiced by women activists in the Muslim Brotherhood. There is emphasis on “the complementarity of roles” between the sexes. But they are also aware that in practice the status of women varies between Islamist movements.

Well isn’t that just fucking dandy.

Can someone explain to me how the fuck you can have justice without equality?

They may be able to find people who can read and write providing the print is quite large and the words are not too long at that rate of pay.

Heh. Not to mention the top notch pro bono legal team they’ll be able to assemble. :D

David T wrote: I think it would be a pity if, either in opposition or in Government, opposing religious sectarianism became an issue associated with the political Right, while pandering to it turned into something that the Left “does”: when it should be a non partisan matter.
Why the future tense? That’s already happening; Nick Cohen wrote a book about it…but then again…I think the left right dichotomy, is itself rather an anachronism.

But then again, there does seem to be some corrolation between command economy advocacy and authoritarianism. Even many Social Democrats who are more inclinded to advocate big government, just cant help themselves in being a bend-over-backwards apologists for any fascist that happens to have a brown skin.

Dear FAST & Microsoft,

That £500 per computer looks a little light when Microsoft Office costs about £170 per seat. I wonder if they are going to need something like Microsoft Exchange to run their e-mail? About 20 seats of Exchange will cost them at least £1,500. And if they are running two servers then they won’t be using Small Business server.

Looks a bit suspicious to me. Wait until they are up and running for a few weeks and have a look.

BTW - do they realise that they will be using a lot of Israel designed and influenced hardware and software? So this new Muslim Advocacy group, obviously opposed to Zionism, will be basing their IT infrastructure on “Zionist” computers! LOL!!! (and it seems suspiciously cheaply)

Modernity - Don’t make me unleash the dragon.

David - Do I think “this is all lies”? Well I think its vastly exaggerated. Someone once had a cup of tea with someone who knew someone who once saw Bin Laden in the distance. FASCIST!!!! or do I think “so, what is wrong with that?” In some cases, yes. There are moderate branches of the Muslim Brotherhood, I’m fairly sure, with modernising tendancies. But more to the point, they are a reality, borne of opposition to reppression in Egypt at the hands of our client leaders there. A fine example of “Western Democracy”. The Hamas wing, again has a horrible ideology, but is a reality, bourne of the Israel Palestine conflict, and failures, lets say on all sides, to reach a solution. Palestinians are living a miserable, nightmare existence. Out of violence comes violence, and it is unsurprising that when peaceful means of finding a solution fail, Israeli expansion and occupation continues, some minority of Palestinians become less moderate, more extreme and the problem becomes harder to solve. Its your fault, in other words. You will never criticise Israel. Israel continues to expand and kill and torture and so on, (you said of course, killing 20 Children the other day was entirely proportionate) and in doing so undermines the hopes for a possible solution. It breeds hatred and terrorism. This is entirely predictable.

Now, if you completely ignore this context when discussing Hamas, or similar contexts for the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt (who are routinely imprisoned and tortured by the state) and Hezbollah (again bourne of resistance to Israeli occupation of Lebanon in the 80s, and now operating in a country which external powers are constantly trying to control) then you are not being at all serious. Serious people would acknowledge the context, they would also consider the support base, and its motivations. Hamas isn’t popular because its Islamist. Its popular because of its welfare programmes and its resistance to the occupation. So to discuss its ideology in the abstract is just misleading, and this is what you do, David - mislead.

… and this brings us back to Inayat. As far as I’m aware, the only evidence you have against him is that when he was editor of a magazine 20 years ago, a full center page spread was published supporting Hamas. That is hardly very convincing, as we’ve discussed before. Very weak stuff.

this brings us back to Inayat. As far as I’m aware, the only evidence you have against him is that when he was editor of a magazine 20 years ago, a full center page spread was published supporting Hamas.

It’s rather worse than that though, isn’t it?

A straightforward give-away is that “whilst”. Anyone who uses that sort of archaic language is a buffoon. See John Major.

Arindell’s conversion sems to have gone well. He’s totally grasped the Bokhari and Bunglawala tangle of antisemitism and anti-Zionism:

“The Jewish lobby in the UK have developed a tried and tested structure and methodology. On one occasion several years ago, I was sent a draft that had been circulated to over 5,000 Jewish Zionist subscribers - individuals who had signed up to respond immediately to a centrally generated communication describing the basic content for a specific letter of protest and with details to whom it should be sent.”

Ahem, so the Jewish lobby is the recruitment pool from which the Jewish Zionist 5th Column subscribers sign up for their orders. (Presumably handed down by the Jewish Lobby Elite, or should that be Elders?). Right.

And the 5,000 subscribers are all Jews. Right. Is that Jews as in human beings with Jewish mothers? Or is it Jews as in practising members of synagogues? Which synagogues? Does it include Progressive, Liberal, and Reform? How about Masorti? Or, is it just Jews in the “Jew is, as Jew does” sense?

Didn’t Inayat write a piece (for the Graudniad?) supporting the stance taken by the West Midlands Police and the CPS over the Undercover Mosque progamme? Didn’t his piece big-up this now discredited stance as having legal status? Has he withdrawn this view yet in the light of the recent court judgement? (Indeed why was he so quick to support their position the first place given it was unfounded and indeed without any legal merit?)

Incidentally OT sort of, anyone else notice the MPA has started to ease out Sir Ian Blair?

Arindell’s correspondence also reveals the remarkable penetration of UK Jewish lobby assisted Jewish Zionism within the UK Jewish community:

“The Jewish lobby in the UK have developed a tried and tested structure and methodology. On one occasion several years ago, I was sent a draft that had been circulated to over 5,000 Jewish Zionist subscribers - individuals who had signed up to respond immediately to a centrally generated communication describing the basic content for a specific letter of protest and with details to whom it should be sent.”

Today’s news (I saw it on teletext and in the Independent, so it must be true) shows that UK Jewish community demography has increased from 275,000 to 280,000 and that the increase is due to growing ultra-orthodox community. (Jewish Zionist conspiracy chasers can rest easy, however, as this part of the community is relatively resistant to recruitment by the UK Jewish lobby).

Arindell says that “several years ago” “over 5,000 Jewish Zionist” subscribers were awaiting orders. Subtracting just some of the ultra-orthodox from the 280,000, and just some of the kids (who presumably haven’t yet been signed up by the lobby) I reckon that means somewhere between 1 in 30 and 1 in 40 British Jews are signed up for Jewish Zionist activation orders.

(Oops, should have subtracted Independent Jewish Voices from the total also.)

Don’t give away all our secrets!!

There are, politically speaking, two camps in this country: the Left and the Right. The Left have the Guardian and the Staggers. The Right have the Telegraph and the Spectator. The Left have the Policy Studies Institute. The Right have the Centre for Policy Studies. And so on.

My dear fellow, that’s horribly lazy thinking. You’re making the same mistake that George Packer does in that New Yorker article posted by Gene. Take my good self for an example. Am I in the same “camp” as that woman-hating theocrat Nadine Dorres? Or Peter Hitchens, of whom the best that can be said that he imparts more thermal energy even quicker into my blood upon reading his material than even Seamus Milne? Or even take Gordon vs Gene vis-a-vis Obama and Hilary. The bad blood there is sufficient to suggest that even the Democratic party isn’t a single political camp. To even call them two loose-coalitions would be sometimes stretching the analogy also.

Ven is right vis-a-vis Northern Irish sectarianism. If I could be so bold as to suggest an example from my own history, it was circa 1995-1996 or so that I started giving secondary votes to the likes of the SDLP not as purely a tactical move against, say the DUP or SF (though initially that was a consideration) as something positive in its own right (although the whole “United Ireland” thing was a deal-breaker as far as primary votes happen).

And if an unhinged nutjob like I can break out across the sectarian barrier, David, so can you.

But think how different it could have been if, when his views were forming, there were unimpeachable voices on the Left challenging the notion that it is necessary to embrace this foolish, dead end politics, if you are to regard yourself as a true Left winger.

The problem is, and aptly illustrated by TheIrie’s replies above, that he doesn’t think like that. In some ways, this is actually an argument from authority, and whilst we all know that TheIrie is hidebound to arguments from authority (witness his near deification of Chomsky et al.), he has displayed a sufficient lack of intellectual nous to suggest that his political positions are visceral, emotional things. Witness his almost hysterical near-pavlovian responses to aerial bombing - this is an example of his main political and emotional raison-d’etre - that no brown person can ever possibly be wrong, or be criticised in any fashion. Now, yes, we can rationalise this behaviour by conclusing that TheIrie is a prime example of liberal guilt masochism stuck in an ever-increasing recursive loop that has led to this racist worldview (he sees brown people purely in terms of mindless, helpless automata, reacting purely to events and non-brown people), and will lead him eventually to convert to either Islam or fundamentalist Christianity as a counter-reaction, but it will not matter about the views of his interlocturs on say, personal freedom vs the state, or economic models (which is all that seperates the conventional left and the right nowadays on non-martial matters), since TheIrie’s worldview is predicated upon the whole racist axis referred to above. You can certainly try, David, and kudos to you for doing so, but with TheIrie, you might as well be talking to the proverbial brick wall. One without any dubious, through possibly artistically worthy, sectarian grafitti.

Modernity - Don’t make me unleash the dragon.

Is this some sort of codespeak for TheIrie teling us he is some actually sort of transformer? In his case, its not so much Optimus Prime but Wilful Ignorance Prime.

The last few years have not been kind to our domestic Islamist groups.

They are the red squirrel of extremist politics. Or the Tufty Club, if you’re TheIrie.

IMMRA

Are they perchance based in a mysterious pyramid fortress from which they plot tirelessly to destroy the Thundercats?

“Blackstone” to me has legal connotations

Ironically, the legal opinion that the proposed UCU academic boycott would be illegal was produced from Blackstone Chambers.

Perhaps this is the model that IMMRA has in mind?

Indeed.

Beloff is a great silk, as is Pushpinder - an absolute top ranking human rights silk who is incredibly nice, and clever to boot

If anyone wants to learn something about the Muslim Brotherhood, read the pdf linked to below. Its a serious, researched article, which as I asserted above, paints the Muslim Brotherhood as a far more complex, diverse grouping than David would allow.

http://www.nixoncenter.org/publications/LeikenBrookeMB.pdf

Although I agree with TheIrie that combating left/right sectarianism is a good thing, I would not wish the honor of my good name and reputation to be besmirched by an apologist for Hamas such as himself citing the work of my centre.

From that article, this section which contrasts the (Muslim Brotherhood associated) MAB with Hizb ut-Tahrir (HT) is worth reproducing:

“As the mab grew in prominence, it began to work with the British
government.This cooperation has been notable at London’s Finsbury
Park mosque. That mosque gained notoriety thanks to its infamous
erstwhile preacher.Despite Masri’s arrest and expulsion from the mosque,
his followers returned and quickly regained control.The police, hesitant
to intervene directly in a house of worship, oªered the mab control
of the mosque in exchange for ridding it of radicals. The mab gained
a majority on the mosque board and gathered to retake the building.
Although Masri’s men tried to storm the mosque, the assembled mab
supporters routed them. Since then, Scotland Yard tells us that their
“reliable and eªective partners” have even “deradicalized” some of
Masri’s former followers.
Open cooperation with the authorities has put the mab at odds
with radical groups such as ht. The contest between the mab and
ht roughly follows ethnic and generational lines: young Muslims of
Pakistani descent are heavily represented in ht, whereas the older and
fewer Muslims of Arab descent join the mab. A former ht member
told us that his group “dominates the British scene.” He estimated
that ht had some 8,500 members in the United Kingdom; the mab
could boast only 1,000. The formally nonviolent ht itself is a full step
away from the subjects of the British internal security chief ’s recent
assessment of jihadist activity: “Some 200 groupings or networks,
totaling over 1,600 identified individuals (and there will be many we
don’t know) who are actively engaged in plotting, or facilitating,
terrorist acts here and overseas.” In light of these numbers, no wonder
mab o⁄cials told us that their group was “a decade behind,” and not
gaining ground against, radical groups in the United Kingdom.”

Presumably, if David was in charge, the active help given to the police by the MAB would have been rejected since they are associated with the brotherhood, and hence, we might even have seen more bombings. Marvelous strategy - alienate the moderates, by lumping them together with the really dangerous groups.

Its also worth reproducing the conclusion:

“When it comes to the Muslim Brotherhood, the beginning of wisdom lies in differentiating it from radical Islam and recognizing the significant differences between national Brotherhood organizations. That diversity suggests Washington should adopt a case-by-case approach, letting the situation in each individual country determine when talking with—or even working with—the Brotherhood is feasible and appropriate.”

“reading your posts doesn’t help me particularly, since you don’t ever give any citations to serious studies, books or articles.”

TheIrie, your chutzpa is breathtaking! Time and time again modernity, for one, has painstakingly assembled serious bibliographies for you which you have never shown the slightest indication of consulting.

“When it comes to the Muslim Brotherhood, the beginning of wisdom lies in differentiating it from radical Islam and recognizing the significant differences between national Brotherhood organizations.

Yes, “The Brotherhood” ( there are no sisters in Islam, just “sub-males”) makes for a wonderful counterpoint to the dictaroial régimes now dominating the muslim world.

From what I can tell they’re the cure for oppressive arab gov’ts in much the same Mugabe was the cure for Ian Smith.

The Brotherhood are composed of incompetant, miogynistic retards whose ‘transcendant’ world-view is to the the faaaar right of the BNP.

As soon as the skin is brown, though, The Irie abdicates all critical thought and goes up to bat for an outfit that, if brought to power, would probably set about renaming the streets and avenues of Arab capitols after Adolph Hitler.

Anything for sake of ‘the resistance’.

ami - don’t take Modernity too seriously. He has kindly suggested reading material to me, yes, and its appreciated. But this is almost solely on the topic of anti-Semitism. This is a serious topic, but not one I feel motivated to read about in great detail, because I don’t think its terribly complicated, or frankly a particularly serious problem in the modern world we live in (witness for example the parliamentary inquiry, which listed a number of nasty, but minor incidents, the like of which I can see out of my South London window most every week. Note I’m saying this is nasty, but compared with serious issues of today, terrorism, war, occupations, etc, it is minor). Other reading material suggested in on Israel Palestine, and I do endeavor to read it if I can get hold of it. I’ve read various books on this topic, and I’m very happy to rely on the factual detail of the history presented by Benny Morris, whilst I think his opinions (rather than his scholarship) are basically racist. Other people I read (Chomsky, Finkelstien, Said, Fisk) are considered anti-Christs, so theres no point citing them.

On the current topic, I have provided a serious source, which I hope you will read. If you, Modernity or anyone else can suggest any material on the Muslim Brotherhood I will read it. I am interested.

btw David T, are you still biding your time about writing about Shiv Malik? It does not seem to have blown over, -did you see this letter from index on censorship and individual writers, also MIcheal Gove in yesterday’s Times.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/letters/article3957424.ece

The entire strategy of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) is running front organizations. Ikhwan is the Muslim Brotherhood’s name for itself. This can be seen on its web site.

In a strategy memo of the MB dated May 22, 1991 accepted as original by the United States in a Federal Court. (You can see the government stamp on the front of the document) The strategy of the MB is very clear (page 7 of 18 of the English language version at the back):

The Ikhwan must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ’sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and Allah’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.

As the paper outlines, the aim is to take control of Muslim organizations in America to prepare for an ultimate Islamic state. Husain Haqqani, head of Boston University’s Center for International Relations and a former Islamic radical, confirms that the Brotherhood “has run most significant Muslim organizations in the U.S” as part of the plan outlined in the strategy paper.

Zeid al-Noman delivered a speech in America in the early 1980s. Yet again this document passed the detailed scrutiny of the United States Federal court system and accepted as original. A transcript of that speech is available on line.

It can clearly be seen from that document that the MB set up a number of front organizations in the United States and it was part of their strategy. The purpose of these front organizations is “destroying the Western civilization from within.”

More details about this trial and the implications of the documents discovered in it can be seen in the following article: Joseph Myers, “Homeland Security Implications of the Holy Land Foundation Trial” American Thinker, September 18, 2007

Can someone approve the comment I just wrote. Sorry it contains a number of links and hence is moderated in case it is spam.

TheIrie, your chutzpa is breathtaking!

His doublethink, cognitive dissonance, double-standards, his hypocrisy are a sight to behold as well. In the words of the old axiom, there’s enough material for a conference of He really is probably the most racist sod I’ve ever had the unfortunate chance of meeting.

In five years time he’ll either be another Stephen Green or else he’ll have changed his name to Abdullah or something. such is the way of the Self-loathing.

I don’t think we’ve actually met have we M o r g o t h? I think I’d remember that encounter, some how.

It’d be something akin to a matter-antimatter annihilation reaction.

I don’t have a problem with people holding political views opposite or polarised from mine. I do have a problem with people who defend terrorism, terrorists and fascists (both secular and clerical), i.e. you.

I was speaking of “meeting” in the interwebnet sense. This being 2008 and all that, y’know.

TheIrie wrote:

. He has kindly suggested reading material to me, yes, and its appreciated. But this is almost solely on the topic of anti-Semitism.

did you even read the email I sent you?

of course, not

wrong again, I sent you a reading list on two topics the ME and antisemitism, I assumed that you might want to read widely before spouting off your mouth

I was wrong.

you wrote:

This is a serious topic, but not one I feel motivated to read about in great detail, because I don’t think its terribly complicated, or frankly a particularly serious problem in the modern world we live in…”

fascinating, hundreds of scholars beavering away on antisemitism, yet you don’t think it’s terribly complicated? we are fortunate to have you here

perhaps with your majestic genius you could explain, briefly, the essence of the various forms of antisemitism (religious, political, social and racial, etc) and as you find this so easy, maybe you could further tell us why they occur in particular places at a particular times?

as you write: “I don’t think its terribly complicated, or frankly a particularly serious problem in the modern world we live in…”

that should be easy for a scientist like you? after all you think that it isn’t “terribly complicated”?

Morgoth-

‘He really is probably the most racist sod I’ve ever had the unfortunate chance of meeting’

Surely that has to be Exile, flithy individual

Onwards to the Golden age of Humanity :)

“As the mab grew in prominence, it began to work with the British
government.This cooperation has been notable at London’s Finsbury
Park mosque. That mosque gained notoriety thanks to its infamous
erstwhile preacher.Despite Masri’s arrest and expulsion from the mosque, his followers returned and quickly regained control.

“The police, hesitant to intervene directly in a house of worship, offered the mab controlof the mosque in exchange for ridding it of radicals. The mab gained a majority on the mosque board and gathered to retake the bui