More power. And if we recall from my piece on human rights and the damaging impact of neoconservatism in Britain, we will come to realise that power is a pursuit before which principles, liberal or conservative, fall by the way side.
Around April 2014, William Shawcross had written to David Cameron asking him for more powers. David Cameron has now announced new powers which will give the Charity Commission sweeping prerogatives to freeze charity bank accounts and suspend or remove trustees. There have been charities which have been investigated for over a year only to then be cleared of problems; if the charity cannot operate during the investigation the damage to the reputation of the charity will be immeasurable, and more fundamentally, it will inhibit charitable acts which the charity is engaged in such as humanitarian aid in critical, dire areas of the world, the impact of which will be catastrophic for the needy. With the direction given by the new Commission chief executive Paula Sussex that charities should not be given the “benefit of the doubt”, the ease with which such powers will be used, is a cause for consternation for those involved in the third sector.
The key issue is the belligerency with which the Commission has been behaving. It is the cold war tactics which have been employed by a body at the head of which is an ideologically motivated individual whose views on Islam and Muslims in conjunction with his pro-Israel, Zionist stance, which is a matter of concern. In an earlier blog on Shawross, I highlighted how discriminatory his view were. He has described the UN as “lynch mob” for condemning Israeli violence and gone on record to state that,
“Europe and Islam is one of the greatest most terrifying problems of our future, I think all European countries have vastly, very quickly, growing Islamic populations…”
There is no doubt that there have been failures, from governance issues to power-play, the problems entail a wide diaspora of issues in schools. The key point is this however: these problems are most certainly not peculiar to one faith, demographic or group. My articles in exposing various details of the attacks on the schools have sought to highlight the discriminatory targeting of the Muslim minority – they have never sought to exonerate any mistakes which have been made, unless there are good reasons in doing so, such as the plethora of lies, twists and distortions which have been peddled in the media.
This neatly brings us to my favourite reporter. The sock-puppeting “journalist” that is the hype-whore Andrew Gilligan did another piece mainly targeting the Jewish community.
Is Gilligan trying to restore some balance in his reporting by targeting the Jewish community? No Gilligan. One tokenistic piece is nothing compared to the targeted harassment of Muslims you have dished out over the six months and the continued surveillance you or your cronies subject victims too.
Despite some similarities in the allegations made about the Muslim faith schools/madrassas in the UK, and the Jewish schools (that they are insular, non-integrative and “indoctrinating”), there has not been an outcry regarding the Jewish community and the fallaciously constructed possibility of terrorism, despite the fact the British Jews are serving in the IDF. Neither have any of the neocons in Government blustered over the “shocking” revelations which are unseating “British values”, whatever they may be. After all according to the report, a number of Jewish schools stop teaching secular subjects to focus on yeshivas (religious studies), with Yiddish being the sole language being taught. In spite of this, no allegations, by Gilligan, are made of “hardliners” pushing “hardline” beliefs (as was done in the context of Muslims) and neither was the appellation “extremist” used to describe any of the aspects of the school’s “preaching”. Zionism is taught in their syllabi. Will Wilshaw be forming policy suggestions based on the potentially extremist nature of their curriculums and link it the fact that Zionism is a supremacist ideology which has been condemned as racism?
Islamism, according to the PREVENT policy is the political projection of Islam. As the 2013 PREVENT strategy defines it:
“‘Islamist’, a word used in a variety of ways to refer to a political philosophy which, in the broadest sense, promotes the application of Islamic principles to governance.” (para. 8.15)
Of course this is an undeniably facet of the history of Islam and though politicisation of Islam is not an aim, it is a means to an aim which is peace, justice and ultimately the pleasure of Allah. However as per the PREVENT policy this has in essence been criminalised. Even holding such beliefs is sanctioned, as it will be deemed, as per the discredited “conveyor belt theory”, a stepping to stone to violence. The PREVENT definition of extremism is,
“Extremism is vocal or active opposition to fundamental British values, including democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty and mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs. We also include in our deﬁnition of extremism calls for the death of members of our armed forces, whether in this country or overseas”.
Thus anyone who does not subscribe to the secular liberal outlook of society is an extremist.
David Cameron the Christianist Extremist
Of late, we have been witnessing a drip-feeding of what I call, “Christianism”: Christianity being propounded at the State level through policy and action. David Cameron started the ball rolling through his Big Society principles. Divine inspiration, rather like Bush’s conversation with God in deciding to invade Iraq, was what inspired Cameron’s Big Society policy. In Cameron’s own words,
“Jesus invented the Big Society 2,000 years ago, I just want to see more of it.”
Muslim charities have been coming under intense scrutiny of late, and it seems that it is no coincidence that this discriminatory treatment of the Muslim charities is in synchrony with Shawcross’s appointment. Him overseeing charities is a major threat to all charities which do not subscribe to the current government’s policies and neoconservative aims. It is thus necessary to analyse this individual from the Muslim minority perspective to determine whether there is a possibility of discriminatory treatment of charities associated to or run by members of the Muslim minority of the UK.
The Charity Commission Neocon Coup
The fact that William Shawcross resigned from the Henry Jackson Society in 2012, a neoconservative organisation with Douglas Murray on the board, to take up his appointed role as head of the Charity Commission gives us the first clue to his mindset.
It is worth analysing his controversial appointment. Both the Labour and the Lib Dem MPs criticised Shawcross. MPs drew the attention of their concern at his pre-appointment hearing highlighting his extreme political views, bias towards the conservative party, and his resultant lack of impartiality. In a poll by the Guardian in determining whether Shawcross was suitable for the role, 77 per cent of the readers voted “No”.
This neocon coup does not end with Shawcross however. Most of the replacement board members also have some interesting, extremely biased, untenable backgrounds:
- Peter Clarke was formerly the Head of Counter-Terrorism Unit and was (through a security contract in Iraq and Libya with Olive Group) and still is employed by major war-profiteers (KBR) as an advisor to them
- Tony Leifer is a Member of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, an organisation which despite claims to the contrary, is an avid promoter of Zionist/Israel supporting events and have campaigned against human rights organisations which are deemed anti-Israel
- Gwythian Prins is a senior academic advisor to the Defence Academy of the UK. He has written, that
“Moves are needed to take defence and security, as far as possible, back out of the arena of short-term party politics.”
In other words, defence policies should not be democratically controlled.
The Charity Commission is run by partisan, warmongering elites whose interests and vision are in clear compliance with all that neonconservatism represents: elitism, deception and perpetual war.
Ryan McGee – British Solider found with terrorist material and a nail bomb in his house in Salford
Muslim minority discrimination is not limited to law-abiding citizens who happen to subsribe to an alternate world view. Its presence is also felt in the treatment of the Muslim minority at the hands of the government authorities and the right-wing neocon-serving media outlets in the context of the criminal justice system. Most of the disparity in treatment is “in your face”, but there is often subtlety to the discrimination employed too.
Studies have already suggested that there is an indication towards minority/racial discrimination in the contexts of conviction remand and sentencing patterns. Those who have studied the Criminal Justice System are fully aware of the culture of bias within enforcement authorities. The treatment of the Muslim minority, is evident through the daily onslaught of media reporting regarding Islam and Muslims
Take for example of the treatment of Michael Adebolajo. His brother Jeremiah whilst expressing his utmost sympathies for the family of Lee Rigby, recently made some interesting remarks which could point to a potential miscarriage of justice despite the heinousness of the crime,
“It seems strange to me that a man can be sentenced to life for the death of one man and another man can be sentenced to 40 years for the death of one man and the attempted murder of many others,” he told BBC Radio 5 live’s Victoria Derbyshire on Wednesday morning. “I wonder what the difference is here … It seems strange that [the judge] can suggest there is no prospect of rehabilitation for my brother and there is a prospect of rehabilitation for [Pavlo Lapshyn] who openly stated he wished to create a race war.”
The few in the video discuss Littlejohn’s bigoted piece in the Daily Mail. As can be seen from the video most upright, reasonable individuals condemn such behaviour and language.
It seems only the cabal of extremist Neocons are interested in perpetuating hatred against key Muslim personalities, Islam and it’s adherents.
Image from the Hackney Gazette of the Talmud Torah Chaim Meirim Wiznitz School in Lampard Road, Stamford Hill
Slapping of the hands, threats to pupils, social and cultural development inadequate, reception classes without adult supervision, history, geography, science, technology and physical education inadequate, an unengaging school (this is my own personal twist on the fact that the school declined to comment – in the Indo-Pak region, we call this “applying masala”, to spice up the news so to speak. Something which is the British media, especially the Neocon papers, do on a daily basis).
Now that is some serious ammo to fire through the media guns at the Muslim community. The only problem is that the above applies to a Jewish school.
You can imagine the case if it was a Muslim school. In fact you do not even have to imagine it. We know with the recent case of Al-Madinah school in Derby how the media and the government would have reacted. A mandatory spread in Daily Mail ensued where mentions of Hijabs and “Islamic studies” were made even though they made no material contribution to the report. “Muslim”, “Islamic” and “Dysfunctional” are indeed present in the headline along with a sensationalist verbiage: “forced wearing of headscarves”. The Neocons even managed to drag in “Taliban” and “Shari’ah” into the discussion!