The reports of late around the increases in anti-Semitic reporting have primarily centred on Palestine, with Andrew Gilligan for instance, attempting to forge a link between the rise in attacks and Muslims Islam.
This came to a more emphatic, anti-Muslim assertion made by a Jew amongst the audience on BBC’s Question Time (05/02/2015), who stated that (at 57 minutes),
“There is a strong correlation between the rise of Muslims in Britain, and the rise of anti-Semitism… we don’t how many come from Muslims and how many don’t, but I suspect, there is a very strong relationship.”
The assertion was calmly made as though it was a statement of fact, yet it was admitted that the actual figures were not known. An unsubstantiated attack on the Muslim minority, no less.
In my piece on Gilligan, I highlighted how Gilligan focussed entirely on Muslims and Muslim behaviour. He also dragged in Muslim organisations and individuals in what was a Salafi-bashing piece, a nod to RICU directives, presumably. After reading Gilligan’s propaganda material, it would be understandable why the gentlemen in the audience relayed his anti-Muslim thoughts in the manner he did.
Attacks because of one’s faith or race, or any other identifying feature is unacceptable. It is dehumanising, and very often for the victim, traumatising. The perpetrators too, can be victims; victims of their own ignorance which is exasperated by stereotypes reinforced in the media and government officials. Instead of fighting stereotypes, and challenging xenophobia, our government has institutionalised xenophobia, a necessary ingredient for hate-crimes and manufacturing consent for draconian policies.
As such I was happy to see Theresa May and other neocons mourning the increases in attacks against the Jewish community, even though the claims which prompted Theresa May’s reassurance were from a study which the Institute of Jewish Policy Research slammed as “littered with flaws”, with the conclusions being “dubious”, “irresponsible” and “incendiary”. Nevertheless, it was befuddling to see the comparative silence on the rise of attacks against the Muslim community, not just in the UK, but across Europe. Instead, the rhetoric around the Muslims continued to assign blame to the Muslim community, calling on them to “do more”, and therefore reinforcing the far-right narrative that the Muslim minority is inherently to blame for every and any attack perpetrated anywhere in the world. It abhorrently played Muslims off the Jewish community, in a similar fashion to the political opportunism displayed in David Cameron’s Chanuka speech.
Key senior figures are clearly not interested anti-Muslim hate crime. Tell MAMA, headed by the opportunistic Fiyaz Mughal, was set up as a government initiative. Once the Foreign Office had published its 2013 report on Human Rights and lionised the fact that the Muslim minority had a comforting arm of the government cuddling the Muslim minority, Tell MAMA’s funding was promptly pulled.
John Ware followed up his propaganda aired through the British Bias Corporation with a piece in the Independent. This piece sought to address, it seems, some of the contentions raised in my critique. It is only fitting I return the favour.
His documentary was an attack on Islam, and so is his continued assault in his article. Labelling his proxy that is Shaykh Haytham al-Haddad as a person fitting the government’s definition of a “non-violent extremist”, Ware attacks, for instance, the mainstream Islamic ruling on the prohibition of music. In doing so, he attacks a juristic ruling shared between the spectrums of Islamic theology from the Sufis through to Salafis and the Shi’a. If any definitive evidence was required that the “extremism” discourse is criminalising Islamic beliefs, look no further.
Ware continues with other snippets of “damning” quotes which have already been clarified by Shaykh al-Haddad himself. There is one particular aspect which is worth addressing. Ware seems to have a problem with a Muslim believing in the superiority of the “law of Allah”. A person of religion wouldn’t be a believer if he did not believe in the primacy of his Book. To highlight this as evidence of some form of “extremism” is absurd and minority discriminatory. David Cameron, slightly overselling himself, once called the Tory party, the “Torah party” . Is he too an extremist? The Beth Din Court, as alluded to in an earlier blog, has previously asserted the primacy of Judaic law over British civil law stating that,