The release of a report which points to democracy being undermined by a society linked to a shadowy network of hate-financing, anti-Muslim, pro-Zionists should have at least twiddled the whiskers of some of the media. In fact, the symposium held at the University of Bath on Islamophobia should have made some headlines: this was perhaps the first time an academic and intellectual response to the dominant narratives surrounding the Muslim minority were collated and deployed on a single platform. The major media response? Nowt.
Instead, on the social media, we were witness to a few ramblings from Maajid Nawaz, desperately trying to remain liberal whilst encouraging no-platforming of “extremists” such as CAGE, simultaneously indulging in hypocrisy and ignoring the fact that he continues to share platforms with known haters and bigots like Douglas Murray and Ayaan Hirsi Ali who have links to those whose writings have gone onto inspire, or, in Hirsi Ali’s case, defend massacring terrorists. Later on, his cheerleaders decided to attack Max Blumenthal for calling Nawaz and Hirsi Ali out in the context of co-opting members of the community to undermine the said community. There is nothing radical or offensive about this; the CIA admit to using such tactics when damage limiting the public perception of their immoral or criminal actions. Hirsi Ali is abused by neocons in the US and praised by British neocons like Michael Gove, for churning out their assumptions for them. Nawaz’s Quilliam Foundation was practically born from neocon assumptions, with Gove placed as an “advisor” to Quilliam, while their founders and employees share work with the Henry Jackson Soceity (HJS). Quilliam’s US operations have had disconcerting links to racist, far-right, neocon loons.
Sara Khan Lies
The failed, women-abusing feminist Sara Khan also took to Facebook to “lionise” her dear friend, and co-director of her counter-extremism organisation, “We Will Inspire”, Kalsoom Bashir. Khan proclaimed that CAGE had asked questions like “how can you possibly be Muslim?” She then linked this to “takfir”, i.e. excommunication, which she posits as “extreme” thereby insinuating that CAGE was extreme.
Rashad Ali, a disreputable Quilliam founder who has links with HJS and other neocon outfits, and is known to engage in subversive activities against the Muslim minority, followed with a rapidfire comment: “kharijite”. This is an epithet used to describe a deviated group of Muslims who in the past would pronounce takfir on those who committed sin. The virulent Rashad simply reinforced his well-known sectarianist hate.
Khan on the other hand is a bit of a takfiri albeit a secular one. By implementing the discriminatory PREVENT Strategy and applying the “extremism” label, her organisation contributes to a society where people are excommunicated from the civic religion of “British values”. The result is removal from government engagement, Stasi-esque disruption of lives, which often result in pecuniary losses and societal chastisement through the loss of reputation. The said person is treated as terrorist and a pariah who is to be brainwashed or “deradicalised”. In Khan, we have a secular “extremist” running a counter-extremism organisation. Some would say lying and twisting facts to sell oneself is a little “extreme” too. The truth is, according to my sources (and recordings of the actual event will support this), what Khan alleges is completely false. Lies and spin to score cheap points? She has learned well from her Machiavellian neocon paymasters.
Perhaps the lauding of Bashir was needed as comfort. Having no qualifications on the topic of radicalisation aside from the fact that she has teaching/youth work experience and is a parent, speaking on and justifying the PREVENT Strategy which has been debunked by the intellectual milieu can be somewhat difficult. It is like trying to present an argument against surgeons where the arguer’s expertise are born from having been operated upon a few times and later perhaps having started work as a nurse. Understandably, she, and her fellow supporter Cherene Williams, were unable to answer the question at the conference about whether or not there was any peer reviewed evidence to show an empirical link between beliefs or ideas and violence. From a psychological point, the need to lionise and be lionised thus can be empathised with, but not justified, especially using specious lies.
Henry Jackson Society
But let’s not get too hung up on the reactions of confused individuals leading a soul-destroying life. The conference itself was the platform for Spinwatch to release their forensic analysis of the neocon Henry Jackson Society. This circa 80-page document needs to be read aloud in Parliament and, just as Celsius 7/7 was, handed to every MP.
It is a mounted exposition on the neocon/Zionist lobby machine. Peter Oborne wrote a damning follow up to the report, entitled “Cameron the neocon?” He reiterated the neocon penetration of key government institutions through individuals like George Osborne, William Shawcross and Michael Gove. Additionally, he reiterated the findings of the SpinWatch paper that “HJS bears its share of responsibility for the Cameron government narrative on Islam which has taken shape in the Prevent agenda.” Concluding his clinical piece he wrote,
“I regard many of the ideas with which the Henry Jackson has been associated as dubious in theory and disastrous in practice.”
The criticality of mainstreaming the knowledge of the corrosive effects neoconservatism cannot be overstated. As the Canadian academic Shadia Drury wrote of Leo Strauss, the father of neoconservatism, “It is… but Strauss’s philosophy that invites the horrors of the Nazi past.”
At the start of this year I wrote a blog in which I highlighted HJS’ link to hate-financier Nina Rosenwald and further delved into the type of realities such funding normally achieves (Muslim-hating ones). I expressly called for a statutory investigation into the Henry Jackson Society. At the time I knew full well that the Commission would not effectuate any proceedings against the Society; after all William Shawcross, the former member of the board of directors of HJS, is at the helm. Shawcross, if we recall, was primarily brought into ensure the existence of neocon charities which effectively acted as conduits for Zionist and neoconservative interests permeating Whitehall. It was a reaction to the Atlantic Bridge fiasco, where a similar warmongering think-tank run by Liam Fox, George Osborne and Michael Gove, was deregistered by a neocon-free Commission.
Despite this reality, the public needs to place pressure on the Commission. The call needs to be made loudly once again. The public must understand that Islam and Muslims are the battering ram by which totalitarian neoconservative policies can be imposed on British society and by which neocons can wield their Machiavellian power.
The report by SpinWatch is thus a service to the people of Britain. Neoconservativism has destroyed democratic principles, rule of law and is continually shredding civil liberties through its securitisation agenda. The actors which have come out to lend credence to this agenda are employed from disparate backgrounds, including ostensibly Muslim ones. This report is a sterling effort to reclaim some sanity to a political sphere where the dominant determiner of outcomes is no longer rationality, but hyperbolic, bigoted, and emotional neocon equivocations.
Raise you Concerns About the Henry Jackson Society to Charity Commission
Raise your concerns about the links key members of HJS have to extremists and hate-mongers mentioned above to the Charity Commission Complaints Form:Raising concerns about a charity.
Articles/Reports which can be additionally cited are as follows:
Report by SpinWatch: THE HENRY JACKSON SOCIETY AND THE DEGENERATION OF BRITISH NEOCONSERVATISM: LIBERAL INTERVENTIONISM, ISLAMOPHOBIA AND THE ‘WAR ON TERROR’ – can be accessed here.
Peter Oborne’s article on the Henry Jackson Society, here.
The Guardian article: “Rightwing think-tank pulls funds for Commons groups after disclosure row”.
The original complaint by Hilary Aked and other MPs and responses can be found here.
Analysis of the Henry Jackson Society as a charity (including a brief legal analysis): The Henry Jackson Society – “Political Propaganda Masquerading as Education”
 Drury, S.B. The Political Ideas of Leo Strauss, Palgrave Macmillan, New York, 2005, p.xxi