[SCREENSHOT OF FOI RESPONSE AT END]
When the dust settles and the reality of neocons is more publically known, history will recall the discriminatory nature of the entire Trojan Hoax fiasco, in which Islam and Muslims were dragged through dirt based upon fabricated allegations of takeover plots which have yet to be proven till this day. The same sort of allegations, incidentally, which could be found in other minorities (see here and here), but were only solely focussed upon in the context of the Muslim minority, constituting Muslim minority discrimination.
Most of the press, reflecting their churnalistic function contrasting with genuine journalism, hopped upon the neocon bandwagon to create the pretext necessary for the totalitarian measures, which the government is now looking to legislate for.
Here, the BBC’s Muslim minority discrimination through its line of questioning is exposed.
Towards the beginning of this year, I covered the takeover of Golden Hillock School in Birmingham by ARK Schools, the Academy chain which had, in scandalous circumstances, taken over another Muslim-majority school subjected to spin and lies: Oldknow Academy. I also found ARK’s links to the “Christian influence” (undue influence?), how ARK has been a favoured chain by the notorious anti-Muslim neocon Michael Gove, whilst Ofsted’s head, Michael Wilshaw, not only headed the first ARK Academy school, but was an Education Director at ARK before becoming Chief Inspector.
Disconcertingly, the “old-boys network” of pro-Israel, hate-mongering neocons also extend their links into ARK. “Vanilla tax”-avoiding Stanley Fink, a major donor of the Tories, bigoted Henry Jackson Society’s Israeli-crime whitewashing project Just Journalism, became the chair of ARK in 2009.
Applying the presumptions about Muslims propagated by neocons (Muslims are untrustworthy due to Islam and their actions are to be seen as a form of sinister subversion) the Trojan Horse test set out for Muslims, there is one hell of plot here for Peter Clarke to investigate.
For a complete list of articles exposing Andrew Gilligan’s propaganda masquerading as journalism, please see the following archival link here.
As the conference season gets underway,Andrew Gilligan in the Sunday Telegraphprovides another demonstration of his obsession with undermining British Muslims who legitimately engage in politics and public life.
The Prime Minister in his ‘Munich 2’ speech singled out those who perpetuate lies about a “secret Muslim conspiracy to takeover Government”. You only need to look at the dubious links and nonsensical associations unearthed by Gilligan to understand the lengths ‘conspiracy theorists’ will go to in their efforts to tarnish the reputation of British Muslim organisations, such as the Muslim Charities Forum and MEND.
Gilligan rehearses the usual half-truths about the Muslim Charities Forum and its alleged links to Union for Good despite The Guardian revealing in an article published in July that the sources behind the unverified allegations were Israeli sources. Akin to the allegations levelled by the Israeli Defence Minister, Moshe Ya’alon, that Islamic Relief was funnelling funds to “Hamas-controlled organisations”, which were proven to be without foundation, Gilligan repeats accusations against the Muslim Charities Forum with no regard for the facts.
There were some rich words coming from David Cameron in the Guardian of all papers. It seems when Cameron wants to ride the wave of fear of “immigrants” he uses the Daily Mail, and when he wants to demonstrate his social responsibility for poor “immigrants”, albeit laden with typical neocon doublespeak which dresses up neocon warring and global neoliberal fiscal policies as benevolence, he (ab)uses a lefty liberal paper.
Cameron, in typical neocon hypocrisy tells the Guardian readers that,
“Our aid budget also enables us to promote British values around the world. It helps us to lay the building blocks for prosperity and opportunity – the rule of law, strong and accountable government, gender equality and education for all.”
Rule of law. Accountable government. These two attributes of a just government have been suffering from severe attrition resulting from neocons raining down their policies over the years. The government’s PREVENT Strategy to tackle extremism is one such policy which is indirectly increasing the opacity of the British state.
Legislative hunting season has started. Predictably the neocons are disseminating their versions of “truth” whilst the churnalistic media regurgitate what they have to say without much of challenge to the claims being made.
With the onset of the Counter-Extremism Bill, a press release was issued by the government on the 17th of September announcing, as part of the neoconservative “One-Nation” Toryism (a euphemism for war and the creation of a “closed society”), a new duty to stop extremists radicalising students on campuses. This duty came into force on the 21st of September 2015. It will ensure that “extremists” espousing “extremist views” would not go unchallenged and that staff are thoroughly brainwashed and bathed in the neoconservative counter-extremism discourse so that they may be able to protect students from “poisonous and pernicious ideas”. Offering some hot chocolate with an arm of comfort around the shoulders of the circa 280 academics, lawyers and public figures who slammed the counter-extremism strategy (PREVENT) and the assumptions which underpin them, Cameron stated that,
“It is not about oppressing free speech or stifling academic freedom, it is about making sure that radical views and ideas are not given the oxygen they need to flourish.”
This is the “guided” liberalism of Cameron as opposed to the university leaders’ “misguided liberalism” condemned in his Birmingham speech. By reconstituting human rights-violating measures into a “duty to protect”, the central objections to such measures are somehow magically meant to disappear. Even the establishment “independent reviewer” of terrorism laws David Anderson QC said,
“These issues matter because they concern the scope of UK discrimination, hate speech and public order laws, the limit that the state may place on some of our most basic freedoms, the proper limits of surveillance, and the acceptability of imposing suppressive measures without the protections of the criminal law…”
Putting it in slightly less diplomatic terms, Cameron and his neocon cabal are riding rough-shod over the principle of non-discrimination, free speech and freedom of belief on the basis of views that he and his nihilist neocons deem unacceptable.
from user @mrjammyjamjar1
Journalism is meant to convey an impartial view of the world. Whilst the spirit of this ideal is laudable, the application is increasingly rarely seen.
Nazi-Style Propaganda from the Time
Skimming across news reports on social media briefly, my eyes caustically jarred upon a Times article defamatorily titled “Koran encourages rape”.
Can a newspaper fall so low? Could it be that a paper will front page grand lies demonising a minority? We are talking about Muslims here, and the nihilist paper which pedals lies only to have them retracted later knows the value of the initial impact of its propaganda – and frankly dangerous propaganda at that.
Neoconservatism’s subversive nature is characteristic of the fascist ideology. While the neocons like Michael Gove and their associates in the far-right have pushed the myth of “Eurabia”, the Muslim Trojan Horse in the West, hell-bent on taking over Europe, the neocon Trojan Horse in Whitehall has permeated policy largely unnoticed. Indeed, the basic premise of the hyperventilating “counter-Jihad movement” which neoconservatives often provide oxygen too, is of an impending take-over by Muslims who wish to impose “Shariyah”.
Maajid Nawaz dog-whistled Michael Gove’s Trojan Horse fetishes as late as last year, explaining his then new buzzwords “tadarruj” or gradualism as “parlance for entryism & Islamisisation from within”. This has now of course translated into Quilliam’s counter-extremism proposal which mainly focusses on “counter-entryism”. The “counter-extremism experts” at Quilliam have, though, typically failed to address the greatest threat that are the neocons running the government in their discriminatory proposals.