It has been quite the spectacle in the last few days. Sitting from the side-1line and watching the political parties tear themselves apart in pursuit of power is a scene which would be amusing were it not for the far reaching consequences for the people of Britain.
As neocons fall over themselves to consolidate their elite, civil-liberties-eroding, democracy-subversion mafia, media attention has swiftly moved to a diversion from the bigger issue of the logistical nightmare of leaving the European Union. The Labour party is in “crisis” as a number of Labour MPs resign in protest to force Jeremy Corbyn to step down. Reasons vary from not campaigning hard enough for the EU Remain campaign (although his own constituency voted overwhelmingly to remain in the EU) to not showing leadership – a quaint remark given that those resigning are demonstrating the complete opposite by entering into a childish charade at a time when the country needs stability. At the time of writing, fifteen MPs have resigned, whilst fifty-seven MPs have written a letter expressing a lack of confidence in Corbyn and calling for him to step down.
What hasn’t been adequately highlighted in mainstream media is that those leading the resignation-revolt in Corbyn’s party also happen to be pro-Israel activists and Blair-apologists who promote Blair’s neocon doctrines and, of late, have sought to undermine Corbyn (and by extension his refreshing absence of Israel-lobby kowtowing).
In the previous piece, we saw how despite an ostensible opposition furnished against PREVENT, the likes of Fiyaz Mughal has no qualms with the Muslim-demonizing policy of PREVENT aside from its “brand” being damaged. It is therefore even more of a concern that Mughal is increasingly operating Tell MAMA as vehicle to establish neocon government-compliant “norms” for Muslims. Further, there are indications which suggest that Mughal is using Tell MAMA as a screen to protect those who are advocating the securitisation of the Muslim minority through the rhetoric of Islamophobia and racism.
Blind MAMA and “House Muslims” Spin
In a piece published on its website September last year, Tell MAMA moved beyond its remit to judge what are acceptable labels used by Muslims, ironically, chastising the “moral guardians of the internet”. I say ironically because firstly, Mughal, as already highlighted, perpetuates the CVE (Countering Violent Extremi) agenda that is all about labels (Islamism, extremism etc.), and secondly, the piece was published in favour of someone who hyperventilates litanies of “extremist”, “Islamist” and “regressive-Left” at any given opportunity (see below).
“We will be absolutely clear about the people and groups we will not deal with because we find their views and behaviour to be so inconsistent with our own.”
~ Counter-Extremism Strategy document
Following on from my previous blog, I take brief look at the Counter-Extremism Strategy which has been published to much neocon fanfare and celebration. Most of the measures have been either already implemented unofficially, or announced as upcoming proposals. I have covered these parts in detail in the following blogs:
In short, it’s the usual inevitable neoconservative mix of Machiavellian fear (“dangerous”, “poisonous”, “harmful”, “threat”, “extremists”, “Islamists”!), double speak (protect freedoms by curtailing them/“targeted powers” which are “flexible”/claiming “not about Islam” but advancing only “liberal” Islam), and irrationality (the Strategy is based on the PM’s assertions rather than empirical evidence, whilst conflating crime into the extremism discourse), not to mention implicit association with negative cultural practices with Islam and Muslims (or the phantom menace that are the “Islamists”), adding to the stigmatisation of the Muslim minority.
Any additional points? There are few which twiddled my whiskers as they say. Below is my elucidation of those points.
It has to be an epic form of hypocrisy. Amnesty International, after shamelessly being bludgeoned into publically distancing themselves from CAGE, now have their name on the Henry Jackson Society website. Abbas Faiz, senior research at Amnesty International South Asia is a listed speaker alongside neocon Haras Rafiq of Quilliam Foundation, and HJS’s very own Rupert Sutton at an upcoming event.
Gita Sahgal was paraded in the papers as the person who challenged Amnesty’s association with CAGE. Sahgal’s attack on Moazzam Begg was rooted in her bigotry toward Islam and Muslim in particular. The essence of her attack was ideological; Begg, she argued, subscribed to “a set of ideologies” which supported discrimination and violence. These were all responded at that time and are covered in my blog in detail.
It did not matter that CAGE advocated due process and rule of law. Neither did it matter that it campaigned against detention without trial and torture. Amnesty suffered amnesia regarding these aims when it decided to distance itself. What mattered was reputation under the façade of a defence of human rights. It sent an unequivocal message: a Muslim cannot campaign within the human rights paradigm, even if his calls support the causes of this very paradigm.
What acutely demonstrates the utmost bigotry of the faux liberals is the ear-drum-bursting silence on the “association” between HJS and Amnesty. As I argued early last year, human rights is often a stick used to beat the Muslim minority with. Islam is singled out and indeed, this is even “rationalised” by the likes of Sahgal and co.