Combing Through Shredded Documents? When Will Riverside Church-linked Jo Tyler of PVET School be Investigated?

When the Trojan Hoax plot started to unfold, and as neocon, anti-Islam agenda-driven Michael Gove stood as the “statesman” in charge of sorting out “those Muslims” in Birmingham, I wrote my thoughts on it, parsing through the information as it disseminated through a partisan media via the penmanship of questionable individuals known as “journalists”.

I had hoped to offer a counter-narrative; an attempt to employ standards I believed would be equally applied had the target been Jewish or Christian-majority schools in order to challenge the architected status quo which posited the Muslim as a criminal before discriminatory investigations which targeted Muslim areas exclusively, had even finished. Never have I doubted that there may have been any issues; my contention has always been, if investigations are to be conducted, they should be done equally, targeting all schools applying the same flimsy criteria and tests which have been insidiously used against the Muslim minority. Of course when Christian and Jewish schools are affected, then the media reports the grievances positively without any ascription of “extremism”, and the government accedes to the contentions of the Christian and Jewish communities against the Trojan Hoax policies (see a further example here). If anything, this proves that Muslims can be freely bludgeoned into assimilation without question, but if Christians and Jews are affected by anything approaching the same, then their identity and concerns are voiced loudly and protected. So much for “pluralism”.

Justice: A slow start

In the course of my writing, I have encountered information which much of the mainstream media have ignored and the government has blatantly glossed over. I have tried to reveal the other side of the story which has been muzzled and filtered out through a process of osmosis where the (neocon media) membrane seems to allow through only that information which incriminates the Muslim minority and holds-in similar claims of misconduct when the perpetrator happens to be white and non-Muslim.

Human Rights and Justice: Understanding the Neoconservative Threat

In my previous article, I highlighted how Moazzam Begg and his ordeal signalled the death knell of the counter terrorism and counter extremism agenda.  His presence, words and actions were and still are a thorn in the side of the neocon government’s intentions.

Que Alan Henning’s death. However saddening and condemnable it is, from a government point of view, frankly it’s the best thing that can happen for the neocons to continue the onwards march of the war on human rights, and continuation of the foreign policy agenda.  It is a means of accelerating the recuperation from the damage dealt by the release of Moazzam Begg.

Neoconservatism – a “Mode of thinking”

Douglas Murray – supported American policies like drone attacks and waterboarding

Neoconservative policies are driving much of British politics today, but aside from a light mention of what neocons really stand for on this blog, the understanding of the intricate play of neoconservatism with the politics and the people requires a deeper analysis of the writings of the neocons and the sources from which they derive. I have already mentioned Douglas Murray, a man who does exert an influence over the current direction of UK’s frankly absurd policies. Murray in his book cites Leo Strauss,[1] and academics like Shadia Drury have described their thoughts as “Machiavellian”, abusing democracy to achieve their own ends.  For many, this serves little meaning in terms of everyday life.  In order to fully understand the implication of the neoconservative mind-set, one needs to delve further into the neocon “mode of thinking”.

The Henry Jackson Society, which is a key influence on UK domestic and foreign security policy, proudly imports (and exports) the American neoconservative “persuasion”.[2]  The focus on America is why Douglas Murray has passionately spoken in defence of American policies, for instance defending the use of US drone attacks and shockingly, even torture in the form of water-boarding. It is also why William Shawcross has defended Guantanamo Bay and the Iraq war and why Michael Gove pursued his “ideological” military-esque foray into the Muslim minority vis-à-vis Trojan Hoax, and why now the ground has been prepped for the neocons in Government to pull the plug on the Human Rights Act, to the disdain of various rights groups such as Liberty and Amnesty.

The “fathers of neoconservatism” are Irving Kristol and Leo Strauss. I will focus on Irving Kristol and other contemporary “leading lights” like David Brooks as it was Kristol  who brought out the writings of Strauss and wrote in defence and promotion of neocon “persuasions” (as opposed to principles) whilst contemporary neocon thinkers have built upon what has been written.

Neocons and the Acquisition of Power

The aim of the neocons is to firstly get into power, and once in power, stay there. They fundamentally do not believe in liberal “principles” as they do conservative ones.  This notion allows for the easy dispelling of other principles, such as the rule of law. As Kristol explains, there are moments when it is “wrong to do the right thing”,

“There are occasions where circumstances trump principles. Statesmanship consists not in being loyal to one’s avowed principles (that’s easy), but in recognizing the occasions one’s principles are being trumpeted by circumstances…”[3]

Is Alleged Architect of “Trojan Horse” Letter Tim Boyes Beneficiary of “Trojan Horse” Plot?

Over the course of the blogs published on the alleged Christian evangelical involvement into the instigation of the takeover plot, several key allegations have emerged:

• Tim Boyes is closely linked to controversial Riverside Church which is known to convert Muslim teenagers to Christianity
• Tim Boyes has allegations of being one of the architects of Trojan Hoax letter
• Tim Boyes has a history of instigating takeovers of schools
• Tim Boyes has supremacist views towards Muslims
• Tim Boyes lied about raising Trojan Hoax allegations to the Department for Education in 2010

Recently, through my own research, I have come to realise that these pieces of information fit into a potentially broader narrative. I will stop short of calling it a “plot”, but based off Peter Clarke’s criteria of establishing a “plot”,

“The tactics that have been used are too similar, the individuals concerned are too closely linked and the behaviour of a few parents and governors too orchestrated for there not to be a degree of coordination behind what has happened,”

there seem to be strong grounds here of a particularly grand evangelical plot taking place.

The question which needs to be asked is, aside from the neocons who have now the pretext to further push their anti-Islam agenda, constricting the Muslim minority in any way they can, who has benefited from the Trojan Horse allegations in Birmingham, the epicentre of this entire scheme?

Birmingham Education Partnership

Will Allegations Against Riverside Church-Linked Tim Boyes and Reverend John Ray be Investigated?

Peter Clarke and Ian Kershaw’s reports regarding the Trojan Hoax seemed to have highlighted some damning issues.  However upon closer analysis, they are incredibly biased and methodologically flawed reports which any social scientist can pick apart.  A detailed analysis will be given at some point.  However, my contention remains the same as before; issues in schools may exist and I am for one against any form of intimidation and flouting of rules. They need to be dealt with. But those rules, inquiries and outcomes, by government bodies and the media must be equally be applied. There are many cases where issues have occurred, not by Muslims but by evangelical Christians, yet the treatment of Christians has not been the same and their behaviour has been largely ignored (see Albert Bore’s quote here). Rule of law as such has been trodden over in order to push a wider “anti-Islam” neocon agenda, and it reinforces the notion that the Muslim minority are continually being treated as second-class citizens. This is Muslim minority discrimination.

Alleged incidents implicating controversial Riverside-linked teachers, who are also purportedly behind the Trojan Hoax letter, demonstrates this point.

Boyes’ Shocking Allegations

Tim Boyes of Queensbridge School is alleged to have latent supremacist views which occasionally surface in his outbursts and during conversations.

Riverside Church is based on Queensbridge School on sundays

Since publishing my previous two articles dealing with Riverside Church and Karen Slater, I have received many messages supporting the claims made in the articles and have been privy to allegations against Tim Boyes in particular, lending some veracity to the allegations which have been made. The example set forth are those which my sources in Birmingham have been able to confirm.

Around 2009/10 a local Birmingham Imam visited Queensbridge School with the intention of assisting Moseley School, where Boyes was the interim head, in reaching out to the children. He wished to deliver a lecture. Boyes was uninterested, and when leaving his office, the Imam asked whether he could help in any way. Boyes retorted telling him that the Muslim children after ablution leave water in the toilets and the caretaker of the school dislikes cleaning it. He suggested to the Imam that the mosque could come to the school and clean up after the children. To Boyes’ credit, upon his attention being brought to his mistake and/or possibly sensing that this could be brought against him in the future, Boyes sent a letter to the Imam explaining that he did not intend offence and that he would come and clean the mosque for him.

My Response to Alleged Architect of “Trojan Horse” Letter, Tim Boyes

A week ago, upon the authority of Reverend John Ray, I exposed the alleged architects of the Trojan Horse letter: evangelical Christians Cecil Knight (with the possibility of Peter Slough), Matthew Scarrott and Tim Boyes. Straight off the back of that particular blog, Karen Slater, a former teacher at Golden Hillock School, added to the chorus, rather hypocritically given her little Riverside Church circle consisting of Jo Tyler and co, were purportedly perpetuating the same.

Since then there has been much frenzy. The articles have had a mention in Peter Clarke’s flawed report, however Clarke, rather conveniently, chose to ignore the allegations made against the Riverside Church attendees citing absence of evidence (DfE Investigation Report, p.9). Ironically, his report and conclusions suffers from the same especially in the face of conflicting evidence. Perhaps it was the wrong religion being implicated. It is after all, difficult to posit Christianity as the governmentally defined “Islamism”, especially when no definition of “Christianism” exists. On a tangential note, his report, as well as the Birmingham City Council’s findings will be subjected to an analysis in upcoming blogs.

Clarke, Gove and Wilshaw: Singing off the Same Neocon Hymn-Sheet

Wait, another leaked document?! And this of a report written by a former counter-terrorism chief? With someone with skills in the counter-terrorism profession, who works as an advisor for major war-profiteering outfits, this is some seriously poor level of security on his part, and the people he has carried out the work for. Surely, an inquiry is in order?

Reading the piece in the Guardian which sumarises the findings of Peter Clarke’s leaked report, I couldn’t help but note the similarity in the narrative between Clarke, Michael Wilshaw and Michael Gove. Gove conflates religious conservatism as extremism, as a Whitehall official confirm:

“Michael Gove’s views are so incredibly black and white. It’s either his way or no way. He seems to think that anybody who strictly follows Islam is not really integrated… And he thinks anybody who holds conservative Muslim views is a bit of an extremist. He has been using Birmingham to pursue an ideological agenda that he’s had for many years.”

In submitting his evidence to the Education Select Committee, Wilshaw stated,

“What we did see was governors going into the school and deciding they would move head teachers out of the school… to promote their own ideas…  [there was a culture which] “made children vulnerable to extremism”

The theme of “unchecked” orthodoxy is recurrent in both Wilshaw’s and Clarke’s statements. The culture was the beliefs of Muslims as gauged by the personal questions Ofsted inspectors have reported to have asked (which mosque do teachers pray at, for instance). Now we have Clarke’s statement:

“…sustained, coordinated agenda to impose segregationist attitudes and practices of a hardline, politicised strain of Sunni Islam” on children in a number of Birmingham schools. A draft of the report, marked as sensitive, states: “Left unchecked, it would confine schoolchildren within an intolerant, inward-looking monoculture that would severely inhibit their participation in the life of modern Britain.”

In fact, the statement sounds like Maajid Nawaz’s definition of extremism in the context of the Shari’ah, which he trotted out in a BBC interview:

“A desire to impose any given interpretation through law.”

Exposed: Evangelical Senior Teacher Behind Channel 5 “Exclusive” on Golden Hillock School

A couple of days ago Channel 5 ran an “exclusive” which stated that officials had ignored warnings over extremism. The comments were made by an “anonymous” former senior teacher at Golden Hillock School, depicted in a shadowy short-clip in which she made her revelations. As with most of the reports regarding the Trojan Hoax allegations, most of the sources have not been named. Wilshaw claims to have spoken to many heads in Birmingham for instance, however, dubiously, he does not mention the names. I say dubiously, because given the agenda of some evangelical teachers in Birmigham, his track record, and affirmations from (non-Muslim) sources that he is a Gove-lackey, an extra level of scrutiny is required with regards to the allegations which come out.

As for the “exclusive”, who is the source for this report?

KAREN SLATER

Slater is another practising evangelical Christian linked to the controversial Riverside Church and is alleged to be the “whistleblower”. Her background is interesting. Slater had applied for a deputy role at Golden Hillock School against the advice of Matthew Scarrott, the head teacher. Sure enough Slater did not make the grade (much like most of the students who have been let down there for the past 4 years) and fell through the recruitment process against stronger candidates.

The above would generally be sufficient to dismiss her claims as a disgruntled employee getting her own back. However the “plot” thickens.

Matthew Scarrott was married to a Christian Indian lady. According to sources in Birmingham, it is a well-known fact that when the couple separated a close relationship developed between Scarrott and Slater, to the point that even school children in the playground made jokes about them.

In other words, Scarrot and Slater are linked and given the fact that Scarrott is one of the alleged individuals behind the Trojan Horse letter/instigation of the investigations, it is more than a mere coincidence for Slater to come out and add to the chorus of allegations against the schools in Birmingham.

Allegations against Golden Hillock School

Sources in Birmingham have been able to confirm whether the allegations made by Slater have any validity. Many of her allegations distort and ascribe falsities to the school and their governors.

Slater: “they banned sex education, pressured some staff to wear headscarves and ran a campaign to oust non-Muslim senior teachers.”

According to sources in Birmingham who have confirmed with the school, this is a,

“patently false claim which is deliberately designed to feed into the Trojan Horse claims”.