Theresa May’s Neoconservative Cold War Against Islam and Muslims (2)

BritishValuesMusimOnly

A Look at Theresa May’s Responses

The blind-spot for far-right and Zionist “extremism” extends to Theresa May’s pathetic response to critics.  She responds to the argument that “Islamist extremism” is social conservatism, stating that it is invalid because if anybody else discriminated against women, and rejected the democratic process on the basis of beliefs then they would be challenged.

There are a number of points being conflated.  Firstly “discrimination against women” for instance, is tolerated in other communities.  The Beth Din courts have “discriminated” against women in their judgments for over a century.  Yet it has never warranted the label of “extremism” let alone an independent inquiry which is called for in the context of Shari’ah courts. In fact, as per my previous blog specifically on this topic, the Home Office has effectively approved “discrimination” as a result of “Jewishist extremism”.  Moreover, previous versions of the London Beth Din website have clearly stated the Halachic position that it is prohibited  for Jews from take their legal matters to a “secular” civil court (rule of law anyone?).

Continue reading

Advertisements

Post-Trojan Hoax: When “British Values” Bite

govenickymorgan

I felt a tendency to shake my head when I read a recent report highlighting the “equal” application of Ofsted guidelines in promoting “British values” to Christian and Jewish schools.

During the start of the Trojan Hoax attacks, state officials actively demonised Islamic beliefs by mixing orthodox practices with unsavoury acts in their statements, all the while dog-whistling Christian members of the public by suggesting some British values are “Christian”.  This was in tune with the broader political landscape at that time. Indeed, it has been strongly alleged that evangelical Christian teachers linked to Birmingham’s Riverside Church had major involvement in the writing of the fabricated “Trojan Horse” letter.  Teachers who brought allegations against Muslims included those of evangelical background, and the very same allegations against them were never investigated. Of course, such allegations, including Christian takeover plots (see here, here and here), were of no interest to the anti-Muslim, neocon Michael Gove. To scapegoat the Muslim minority only, while ignoring other schools, and to abuse the Muslim minority as some sort of glutton for punishment upon which the PREVENT Strategy which defines “British values” can be cemented, was nothing short of bullying and minority discrimination.

“British values” had become sacred in the attack against Islam and Muslims, as neoconservatives, scapegoating the Muslims, started to successfully engineer and impose these faux values for their longer-term agenda to court symbols necessary to unify and conform the people of Britain under a nationalist neo-religion which serves neoconservative interests.

Sometime after, though, Christian and Jewish faith schools began to feel some of the heat from the fire started by Michael Gove.

Continue reading

PREVENT Reality: Police Chief Warns of “Police State”

Photograph: Stefan Wermuth/Reuters

It seems the problems with regards to the definition of “extremism”, and its abuse by neocons is finally starting to be discussed, although it may be too late given that the new counter terror bill has already been through its second reading in Parliament. Given the toxic implications of the Bill which I have briefly discussed here and here, one wonders why there is no outrage against what is an assault against the “democratic values” often propagated through military means around the world.

Peter Fahy in a frank and welcome warning highlighted that the battle against “extremism” could lead to a “drift towards a police state” in which officers are turned into “thought police”. Below are some of the excerpts which deserve being reproduced in full from the Guardian: Continue reading

The Real Trojan Horses: How “Trojan Horse” Phrase is used for Muslims by Far-Right Terrorism-Inspiring Ideologues 

 

The Real Trojan Horses

The Real Trojan Horses

Much has been written on this Hoax hype which was triggered by a fabricated document and blustered by neocon media outlets and politicians such as Michael Gove and Theresa May. Some have highlighted that the term “Trojan Horse” is a Chapter heading in Gove’s  anti-Muslim diatribe, Celsius 7/7 which has been comprehensively exposed by writers such as Darymple as essentially a useless book. However the usage amongst xenophobes, Islam and Muslim-haters amongst the right-wing and neocon extremist is more common than first thought.

Douglas Murray

Douglas Murray, the notorious neocon, has been a key influence in the discourse regarding Muslims today and his desire to make the lives of Muslims difficult is coming to fruition, as can be seen from the treatment of the Muslim minority at the cold-blooded hands of the government and media. From the false Eurabia hypothesis to blatant racism Douglas Murray is an anti-Muslim, Islam-hating racist neocon.

Douglas Murray in his book Neoconservatism: Why we need it was first published in 2006.  In one section, lamenting the fact that Americans were focussed on anti-Muslim violence he states,

“The Whitehouse and all government departments remain intent on demonstrating how pro-Muslim they can be, celebrating Muslim religious festivals and arranging constant photo-opportunities with Muslim “leaders.” These are the early signs of societal suicide… In the face of this the government has been unwilling – because scared – to recognize that its immigration and multiculturalism policies have to an extent allowed this threat within American society.  The moves to counter it must be harsh, and mosques and centers that have been preaching hatred must be closed down entirely. Treating the Islamist threat seriously means being wary of allowing the Trojan horse into our midst. At the very least it means ensuring that the Trojan horse is not built from our own materials of tolerance and fairness. P.178

Regarding Muslim schools he writes,

 The attitude towards Muslim schools should be exceptional… if any Muslim academies are allowed to exist, they should be funded entirely privately, with no taxpayer assistance and should be subject to uniquely strict regulation and inspection. If such conditions are considered unbearable, then Muslims will have to try their luck in other countries… America must start implementing its response… For we have allowed the Straussian-nightmare endpoint of relativism to arrive, in which intolerance towards our society is treated as a value “equal in dignity” to intolerance… we must not allow tolerance to prove the Achilles heel of freedom.  To defend our tolerance we must be intolerant to those who oppose us. pp. 177-178

Continue reading

Britain First’s Threats and a Reminder of Minority Rights Protection for the UK Government

“Invaded” apparently now means to walk into an open building and give a few leaflets.

If the secularists, liberals, right-wing and neocons have distorted and attacked the noble Shar’ia of Islam then the likes of al-Muhajiroun in certain circumstances have certainly acted as a catalyst for those attacks.

In 2011, his little posse plastered “Sharia Zone” stickers around East London. The media picked it up straight away claiming it was “Islamic” extremists. In doing so, the noble Shar’ia was maligned and demonised and the various rulings within Islam also became, by association, “extreme”. The only people who benefited from the actions were the government, the far-right and neocon policy-makers as it reinforced their dubious Blairite narrative of “Islamist extremism” being the most evil thing ever known to humanity, forgetting of course that the massacres in World Word II and Sebrenica had secularist foundations and the perpetrators happened to be Christian.

David Selborne advised John Kerry to a similar narrative, with more than tinge of “we are the high and mighty with the moral high ground”. Blaming the violence of the Middle East on Islam, he regards it as the enemy. Iraq and Afghanistan were not a sufficient enough destruction to iron out this threat, clearly, as he mopes the fickle victories of the US. Of course, he ignores the fact that the violence today is a result of the rejection of the Western colonialist shackles which physically, spiritually, culturally and economically raped much of the Middle Eastern and Eastern lands. He also ignores the present day imperialism of his own country and her allies which has exasperated, not calmed the violence and violent mentalities around the world. It is the absence of Islam, not the presence, and unethical interventionism – black or otherwise, supporting of dictatorship regimes, currently routed in neoconservative thought and plaguing British politicians as well, which has caused much of the present day chaos and loss of innocent life. As Arun Kundnani states,

…the neoconservatives who shaped his foreign policy in the early years of the terror war did have a culturalist analysis of the Muslim problem. It was their analysis that was reflected in Bush’s characterization of the war on terror as a “crusade”. Bernard Lewis himself was a key adviser to the administration. And among members of the Christian Right, a key base of Bush’s support, the idea of an apocalyptic crusade against Islam was prevalent… In 2003, William Boysin, Bush’s deputy undersecretary of defence for intelligence and an evangelical Christian, told a meeting in Oregon that the war on terror is a battle against Satan fought by “the army of God”. (Kundnani, 2014)

Which neatly brings us to the discussion of Britain First’s latest “crusade”. Britain First, like EDL came to prominence with their response to al-Muhajiroun’s activities, for which they were sentenced and imprisoned. An offshoot of the BNP, Britain First conducted “Christian Patrols” which Christian themselves rejected, fuelling tension and undermining community cohesion. Britain First has engaged in “activist” combat training. One wonders what type of “activism” they wish to engage in. And the recent report of Britain First’s “invasion of mosques” answers that question.

Continue reading