More Tory hysteria over HT

HizbFurious residents are demanding to know why a Muslim extremist organisation they say is “peddling divisive hatred” was allowed to hold a conference for 2,000 people in London’s East End.

They contacted Tower Hamlets councillors about Hizb ut-Tahrir taking over Stepney’s Troxy theatre for the conference last Sunday (July 26), with police being deployed outside.

“It is extremely dangerous that this organisation is coming to the East End,” council Tory Opposition deputy leader Tim Archer told the East London Advertiser. “Hizb ut-Tahrir is known for peddling hatred and violence that can be divisive in the community.”

East London Advertiser, 31 July 2009


In reality, Hizb ut-Tahrir is a peaceful if highly sectarian organisation that poses no threat whatsoever to the people of East London. But what else can you expect from the Tories, given that David Cameron is on record as calling for HT to be made illegal?

Needless to say, Cameron isn’t calling for a ban on the far-right British National Party, even though no HT members have been convicted of the sort of violent crimes that BNP members have. Clearly the Tories apply different standards to white fascists than they do to brown Islamists.

CCTV images released after Mosque fire

Greenwich Islamic Centre CCTVTwo men are wanted for questioning in connection with a mosque fire where a caretaker needed hospital treatment for burns.

Police were called to reports of a fire at the Greenwich Islamic Centre, Plumstead Road, just after midnight on June 16. Caretaker Mohamed Koheeallee, 62, tried to fight the flames with buckets of water but the fire destroyed a part of the mosque and sacred Koran texts, as reported in the Times.

CCTV images have been recovered from cameras on the route 96 bus from Bexleyheath to Plumstead on the night of the fire.

Detectives from Greenwich CID want to speak to two white men aged in their 20s who were near the mosque at the time of the fire. The first has a shaved head and was wearing a black leather jacket, a t-shirt with a Lonsdale logo, jeans and white trainers. The other man was wearing a jacket with dark shoulder pads, light trainers and was holding a blue carrier bag.

Detective Sergeant Simon Beechey form Greenwich CID said: “The fire not only endangered the mosque and its community but all those who live in the surrounding area. We have been following a number of enquiries but now need public assistance in identifying the two men in the pictures.”

Anyone with information should call Police in Greenwich on 0208 284 7749 or Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111.

Bexley Times, 31 July 2009

Dudley Council loses mosque battle

A controversial £18 million mosque is set to be built in the centre of a Black Country town after the High Court threw out a council challenge. Dudley Muslim Association has won outline permission for the building in Hall Street, Dudley, following a five-year battle.

The scheme has attracted widespread criticism, with 20,000 locals signing a petition opposing the proposal. Dudley Council took its battle against the mosque to the High Court, costing taxpayers around £16,000, because it said the land had been designated for employment use and that the scheme did not fit this profile.

It could also still throw a spanner in the works because it is unhappy a land swap agreement made with the Association in 2001 has not been honoured. The deal stipulated the mosque had to be “substantially built” by the end of last year or the council could buy back the land at an agreed price. Dudley Council leader, Coun Anne Millward, is to hold talks with council chief executive John Polychronakis to see if the scheme can still be stopped on those grounds.

Birmingham Mail, 30 July 2009

Student hate group in Michigan gets new faculty adviser

WichmanMichigan State University (MSU) mechanical engineering professor Indrek Wichman made international headlines in February 2006, when, using his faculty E-mail account, he sent a blistering E-mail to the university’s Muslim Student Association, calling on Muslim students to either accept Western cultural standards or return to their “ancestral lands.”

“I counsel you dissatisfied, aggressive, brutal, and uncivilized slave-trading Moslems … [i]f you do not like the values of the West – see the 1st Amendment – you are free to leave,” Wichman wrote. “I hope for God’s sake that most of you choose that option.”

Although Provost Kim Wilcox formally admonished Wichman, the anti-Muslim professor remained on the MSU faculty. Now, he’s apparently taken on a new role in the MSU campus community: faculty adviser for the MSU chapter of Young Americans for Freedom, or MSU-YAF, an extreme-right student organization. The Southern Poverty Law Center has designated MSU-YAF a hate group for its hosting of white supremacist lecturers and repeated bigoted statements against Muslims and Latinos, among other groups.

According to the MSU Department of Student Life guide for the upcoming academic year, Wichman has replaced William Allen, a professor of political philosophy, as MSU-YAF’s faculty adviser.

Wichman’s association with MSU-YAF dates back at least to February 2008, when he was scheduled to give a lecture on “How Muslims Suppress Free Speech” at an MSU-YAF event that was booked at the Holocaust Memorial Center in Farmington Hills, Mich. That lecture was canceled after Holocaust Memorial Center administrators learned of MSU-YAF’s background, including that MSU-YAF had previously sponsored a lecture on the MSU campus by Nick Griffin, a Holocaust denier who heads the racist British National Party.

Southern Poverty Law Center, 29 July 2009

Benedict Brogan, Bruno and the ‘Islamists’

“Bruno and the conspiracy to mock the Islamists.” Thus the headline to Daily Telegraph comment piece by Benedict Brogan responding to the supposed threat against Sacha Baron Cohen made by a spokesperson for the al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades.

Quite aside from the fact the Torygraph’s “chief political commentator” might be expected to have a slightly more informed understanding of the Israel/Palestine conflict, even a quick google would have indicated to Brogan that the al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades are a coalition of militias aligned with the secular-nationalist movement Fatah.

Prosecutors press for action against BNP leaflets

BNP changing face of london leafletSenior prosecutors are calling for the laws on race hate crimes to be strengthened to counter the threat posed by the British National party.

The threshold for securing a conviction is so high that far-right activists are able to evade prosecution for material that many people would consider to be threatening and racist, according to sources at the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS). Several BNP leaflets have been referred to the CPS over the last five years – some by senior police officers and one by a judge – but no further action has been taken.

Peter Herbert, the chairman of the Society of Black Lawyers and a part-time judge, submitted a complaint last year over a leaflet called The Changing Face of London that had two pictures, one depicting an all-white street party from the 1950s, the other showing three Muslim women wearing a niqab, one of whom is making a V-sign towards the camera.

Under the law, it has been extremely difficult to mount a prosecution against extremism and hate speech,” said Herbert. “But with the rise of the BNP, and the subsequent rise in racist attacks and the fear the party’s leaflets can provoke, it is essential we are given the tools to deal effectively with this threat.”

Guardian, 29 June 2009


Of course, the main obstacle to a successful prosecution of the BNP over its incitement of Islamophobic hatred is that Muslims are legally defined as a multi-ethnic faith group. They are therefore covered not by the racial hatred laws but by the 2006 Act dealing with incitement to religious hatred. The latter requires not only that the offending material should be explicitly “threatening” but that the prosecution should prove subjective intent, which in practice means that the religious hatred law is completely useless as a means of combating the BNP.

Standing reality on its head: the BNP and Islamophobia

CSC BNP pamphletHarry’s Place contributor Edmund Standing, whose report The BNP and the Online Fascist Network was recently published by the right-wing anti-Muslim propaganda organisation the Centre for Social Cohesion (blandly characterised by Standing as “a non-partisan independent think-tank”), has offered us some more of his thoughts on the BNP in an article for eGov monitor.

Standing’s latest piece is characteristic exercise in political evasion and confusion. Adopting the diversionary tactic of throwing his opponents’ accusations back in their faces (rather as the BNP accuses its enemies of being racists and fascists) he claims that Sunny Hundal and other critics of his CSC pamphlet have demonstrated “a complete failure in understanding of the true nature of the BNP’s anti-Islam campaign”.

In fact almost everything Standing has written about the BNP has been designed to downplay the significance of the fascists’ turn towards inciting hatred against the Muslim community. Elsewhere he has dismissed this turn as “little more than a superficial political trick” and he now asserts, bizarrely, that “the reality is that Griffin and co don’t really care about Islam”.

Anyone who has followed the endless stream of anti-Islam propaganda on the BNP’s website will be left rubbing their eyes in disbelief. Is Standing asserting that the BNP leadership don’t actually hate Islam, but are simply pretending to do so, as a cunning political manoeuvre?

Trying to make sense of Standing’s argument, he seems to be saying that the BNP’s Islamophobia is a mere epiphenomenon of traditional colour-based racism and that anti-fascists should concentrate on resisting the latter. He writes: “The truth is that the BNP hates Muslims because they are predominantly brown skinned. In ‘white nationalist’ ideology, everything ultimately boils down to an obsession with race.”

It is of course true that the BNP’s hatred of Islam is inseparable from the fact that the overwhelming majority of Muslims are not white. But racist ideology is not based solely or even primarily on the physical characteristics of members of the victimised minority community. These days it is more often justified in cultural terms. When the BNP denounces Islam as “alien” to “Western values”, and rants on about the threat to European civilisation posed by a “barbaric desert religion”, this isn’t reducible to a hatred of Muslims because they are brown. The far right really does despise and fear Islamic beliefs and religious practices.

As for Standing’s assertion that Griffin is “may be an odious figure, but he’s not a complete idiot, and knows very well that Britain is not on the verge of turning into an Islamic State”, what Griffin has in fact argued (the quote is from a 2005 interview on the Think-Israel website) is this:

“We are deeply concerned about the mainly – though not exclusively – French elite project to morph the EU, Turkey and the Maghreb into ‘Eurabia’. Bat Ye’or is 100% right about this. If this now far-advanced scheme comes to fruition then it would in turn lead to the Islamification of the whole European continent. A generation ago the revival of the historic Islamic threat to Europe would have been unthinkable; now it is clearly destined to be the great issue and decision of our time. For us, the closely linked threats of mass Third World immigration and Islamification outweigh all other considerations.”

If we accept Standing’s analysis, the BNP leadership doesn’t believe a word of this. Griffin is stupid and bigoted enough to embrace paranoid fascist fantasies about Jewish control of the media (see his 1997 pamphlet Who are the Mindbenders?) but apparently he’s too intelligent to imagine that the “liberal elite” are complicit in a plan to facilitate the Muslim takeover of Europe. Indeed, according to Standing, Griffin has a far more sophisticated understanding of this issue than a mainstream right-wing commentator like Melanie Phillips, who clearly does hold the view that the Islamification of Britain is an imminent threat.

Standing goes on to say that the right-wing tabloid press, by giving disproportionate coverage to unrepresentative nutters like Anjem Choudary and his followers, has whipped up an atmosphere of anti-Muslim bigotry that provides favourable conditions for the growth of the BNP – which is true enough. But he omits to mention the role played by writers who claim to be liberals, leftists or progressives in promoting hostility towards the Muslim community and its representative organisations. Indeed, Standing himself is a good example of this. Thus his article concludes with the following passage:

“Another important factor that is undoubtedly greatly assisting the BNP in its promotion of anti-Muslim sentiment is the problem of largely self-appointed Muslim ‘community leaders’ and organisations and their very vocal and, to the majority of Britons, unreasonable lists of demands of how British society should change to accommodate what is presented as Islam and the ‘rights’ of Muslims.”

Leaving aside the question of who the unnamed “self-appointed Muslim community leaders” might be – perhaps this refers to the Muslim Council of Britain with its 500 affiliates and elected national committee and officers? – Standing might ask himself how he would react to someone explaining fascist antisemitism on the basis that it had been encouraged by “self-appointed Jewish leaders” posing “unreasonable lists of demands” about “how British society should change” in order to accommodate “the ‘rights’ of Jews”.

Standing would undoubtedly condemn the writer as an antisemite. And he would be right.

Update:  See also ENGAGE, 30 July 2009