Wednesday, May 29, 2013

Fighting Islamic terror by censoring and criminalizing criticism of Islamic terror

Today's Sun: two typical stories of how the media narrative has been framed after Woolwich














The almost universal reaction from our politicians and the main stream media to last week's terror attack in Woolwich has been to
  1. Insist that this has nothing to do with 'authentic' Islam (and we now know that David Cameron and Boris Johnson are apparently more qualified than any Imam to judge what is 'authentic' Islam) -
  2. Cast Muslims as the 'real' victims by desperately scouring for incidents of 'Islamaphobic' reaction and then massively overhyping the tiny number of incredibly minor incidents found (most of which are bogus)  while almost completely ignoring further acts of Islamic terrorism such as the attacks on prison wardens and on military memorials (note how the Mirror has actually censored out the Islam graffiti in its photos of the latter while bizarrely implying that the EDL is somehow to blame).
  3. Pretend to be serious about clamping down on Islamic hate preachers, while in practice use it as an opportunity to censor anybody who exposes the true Islamic threat (in fact, the only Islamic hate preacher who they now really want to censor is Anjem Choudary who actually performs a valuable service by being almost unique in stating very publicly and authoritatively what Islam is really about; in contrast, the many preachers who talk at Universities and even advise government ministers are given a pass because they restrict their hate incitement to Muslim audiences only).
  4. Focus their fury on the threat from who it calls 'right wing fanatics' (such as the 85-year-old woman arrested for shouting outside a mosque) and in particular the EDL (who have the temerity to be both British patriots and prepared to expose the dangers to the UK of radical Islam). 
The latter has led, for example, to the kind of stories now appearing as shown above in today's Sun. In the first story we find that the Help the Heroes charity is actually refusing to accept donations that originate from the EDL (compare the hypocrisy of the media's prompting of this action with their total lack of interest in organisations like Oxfam directly funding Palestinian anti-Semitism). In the second story we find that the Police arrested and fined a drunk who 'mocked a Muslim prayer ritual' (compare the speed and resulting action of this with the total lack of action against Muslims who have publicly called for the beheading of 'Kuffars' at many rallies in London). The Sun also has another story today in which it blames the EDL for violence at a rally on Monday, when the violence was actually caused by the 'United Against Fascism' counter-protesters (a grouping of violent socialists and Islamists).

Expect to see many more cases like this one.

Update: excellent article by Bruce Bawer covering this issue




Wednesday, May 22, 2013

COBRA meeting tonight after Woolwich terrorist attack - and guess who wil be there?

After today's terrorist attack in which a British solider was beheaded outside a school by attackers screaming 'Allah Akhbar' (nothing to do with Islam of course if you are watching the BBC news) it has been announced that an emergency meeting of the National Security Council (COBRA) will be held this evening. We can all be comforted to know that the unelected Islamist supremicist Baroness Warsi (who has made it clear that she views 'Islamaphobia' as one of the gravest threats facing Britain)  will be present at this meeting in her role as the Faith and Communities minister.

Sunday, May 12, 2013

Islamaphobic crime: how bad is it?

In a recent posting I noted the announcement by Cabinet Minister Baroness Warsi that "tackling anti-Muslim hatred was a key priority for the coalition government". I commented that this was a curious priority to have since there was no significant anti-Muslim hatred in the UK. It turns out a Jew is over 16 times more likely to be the victim of an anti-Semitic crime than a Muslim is of being the victim of an 'Islamaphobic' crime.

It is not easy to get hold of hard data, but last week I came across a copy of a local paper of the London Borough of Redbridge which sheds light on the scale of  'Islamaphobia' and 'Islamaphobic crimes'. This borough is second only to Newham in its proportion of Muslim residents; the Borough's own 2011 census results indicate that about 65,000 of the 281,000 population are Muslims. The number of Jews living in Redbridge is believed to be around 9,000. Given that the 'white' population of Redbridge is predominantly working class and generally fairly poor, if there was going to be any area of the UK where you would expect a very high number of  'Islamaphobic crimes' then this would be it. The actual figures are here:

So, the latest annual number of 'Islamaphobic crimes' is - other than homicide - the lowest number of any official category. Just 7 such crimes in the whole year (while the relatively small number of Jews experienced more than double that number of anti-Semitic crimes).  And that is despite the unprecedented campaign by Muslim organisations, as well as national and local government, to encourage reporting incidents of Islamaphobia no matter how minor they may be.

Isn't it wonderful that the Government is devoting so much money and energy to convince us that Islamaphobia is one of the gravest threats faced by the UK today?

Saturday, May 11, 2013

Daily Mail uses photo of Jewish women being restrained as evidence of mistreatement of Palestinians

Douglas Murray is one of the UK's finest political commentators. He is also a staunch defender of Israel. But in an otherwise excellent article he has written in the Daily Mail about Stephen Hawking's boycott of Israel he has provided the opportunity for a bizarre blunder by the Mail's editors. Because Murray decided (wrongly in my view) to 'balance' his criticism of the boycott with comments like these:
I acknowledge that there are those who are concerned about Israel’s approach to the Palestinians
the Editor (I assume) decided it was an opportunity to smear Israel even in a pro-Israel article by posting a picture showing Israelis 'mistreating Palestinians'. 
Screenshot taken from Daily Mail online article, 11 May 2013

Hence we have this picture captioned
There are those who are concerned about Israel's approach to the Palestinians, but if these academics think a boycott is the right way to address those concerns they are profoundly mistaken 
Except that the women in the photo, including the one being held back by an Israeli policeman, are clearly orthodox Jewish women (12 May Update: Elder of Ziyon has confirmed that the photograph is from AFP, and shows Israeli police stopping a Jewish protest after the murder of Evyatar Borovsky).

Incidentally I believe the whole approach being used by the pro-Israel side to the boycott issue is fundamentally flawed. When the Nazis were boycotting Jewish shops it would have been bizarre to say things like "We recognise that these Jewish owners have not all led perfect lives and so we have some sympathy with your hatred of them, but we think that the goods they sell are fantastic not just for Jews but for Nazis as well. So please don't boycott them". The only sensible - and winning - response is to attack the people behind the boycott for what they are: modern-day Nazis who have no interest whatsoever in the welfare of the Palestinians; their sole objective is to destroy the Jewish state. That's why the image here (by Isreallycool) is so much more powerful than the message here.

Just about the  worst strategy that you can possibly take in confronting the boycotters is the one I heard from the Israeli goverment representative (I didn't catch his name) who was chosen to speak against Exeter University's Israel-hater and boycott leader Ghada Karmi on Nick Ferrari's LBC radio show this week. While Karmi was spouting the standard lies about Israel being an apartheid state (unchallenged by both Ferrari and the Israel rep) the Israeli's response was simply to play the kumbaya card saying that whatever our differences it was much better to sit down and talk rather than boycott. To see the futility of that approach you should read the staggering account reported here.


Friday, May 03, 2013

Just who in Britain stands up for Israel?

As I explained last week, British Jews can no longer rely on the Jewish Chronicle to be either a defender of Israel, or even the provider of news that is anything other than coloured by a far left perspective.

A commenter on that article said that the free "Jewish News" is much more balanced.Sadly, that has not been the case for at least two years and today's issue provides a perfect summary of why. There is a wrap around cover publicising the "Closer to Israel Parade and Celebration' taking place in London on 2 June, but that is an advert and when you look inside the actual paper you will find plenty of evidence to suggest the writers do not sympathise with the advert's message. The articles shown here are especially disgraceful because they would not have been out of place in the Guardian, the BBC, or even Al Jazeera.
  • The article headlined "Two killed in confrontation" starts with "An Israeli settler in Nablus and a Palestinian were killed this week as several incidents led to heightened alert across Israel." In other words, in classic BBC style the Jewish News is now making a moral equivalence between an Israeli civilian killed in a brutal unprovoked terrorist attack and the pinpoint assassination of the very member of an Al Qaeda affiliated organisation in Gaza who led last week's rocket attack on Eilat. Even more outrageous is that, while the article names the dead terrorist, it does not bother to name the Israeli civilian. Instead it refers to him simply as "an armed settler" - apparently using that description as justification for him being killed and ignoring the fact that all Israelis living in the West bank must by necessity carry their guns with them when they travel (and he was hitchhiking). The murdered Jew, who the Jewish News feels does not deserve to be named,  was the much loved 31-year-old Evyatar Borovsky, from the settlement of Yitzhar, a father of five (the youngest just 7 years old). But, the Jewish News doesn't want you to know that - just in case you might feel a tiny bit of sympathy.
  • The article headlined "Ban on illegal shells" talks about Israel's decision to halt its use of white phosphorous. In fact the headline is a blatant smear. Israel's use of white phoshorous has always been legal (NATO troops use it in exactly the same way) and its decision to stop it was taken unilaterally purely for PR reasons.
  • The article headlined "Price tag attacks are an issue Jews worldwide must address" is just more of the nonsense we saw in last week's JC where we have the total inversion of reality in which Jews attacking Arabs is supposed to be the main problem that Israel faces. But in terms of sheer pomposity and stupidity it's hard to beat the message that 'Jews worldwide' must do something about this (non-existent) problem. How about this writer Dr Gvaryahu demanding that every Christian in the world must do something about Christian teenagers brawling in Scunthorpe every Friday night? Or even demanding that every Muslim in the world addresses the problem of Muslim terrorism (oops better rule that one out as it actually makes sense).
So, if the only two Jewish newspapers in the UK now simply parrot the same narrative as the Guardian and BBC about Israel, which organisations actually are there left to genuinely support Israel? It certainly is not the UJIA (United Jewish Israel Appeal) whose leader Mick Davis thinks Israel is an apartheid state; it certainly isn't the Board of Deputies of British Jews whose priority is  not just to partner with the anti-Israel Oxfam, but to continue with that partnership after Oxfam was revealed to be funding Palestinian anti-Semitism and support for terrorism; it certainly isn't BICOM (Britain Israel Communications & Research Centre) who actually employ an anti-Israel activist to do their 'promotion'; and it is no longer even clear we can rely on the Zionist Federation who felt that it was their job to take visitors to Israel 'to meet Palestinians and understand their point of view'. Do these organisations, which are supposed to represent the interests of Israel and British Jews, really think that in the UK of all places it is their job to put across the Palestinian narrative when nothing other than that is forced onto everyone nonstop by the main stream media?

If the Jewish newspapers and organisations really want to talk about the Palestinian's viewpoint then why not focus on telling the British public about their obsessive death cult (which starts very young) their worship of terrorist murderers (the killer of Evyator Borovsky apparently had to murder a Jew to bring honour back to his family - oh and by the way he was a member of Fatah our 'peace partners'), their brutal treatment of women,  homosexuals, and christians, their genuine apartheid (not a single Jew is allowed to live in areas controlled by the Palestinians); or how about the way they treat their disabled children leaving - guess who to pick up the tab; and above all the fact they do not - and never did - want an independent state; they only ever wanted the destruction of Israel. Then perhaps people like Dr Gvaryahu might demand more appropriately that Jews worldwide do something about that.

p.s. There is an outstanding article today by Caroline Glick which tounches on many of the issues above.

Wednesday, May 01, 2013

A letter to the Labour Party (Ken Livingstone et al)

A friend of mine who is a long-time Labour Party member (yes I do have such friends!) has given me permission to publish the following letter he has sent to his local (Labour) MP (names withheld). He has promised to let me see any response.
Dear XXXX

Continued membership of Ken Livingstone (and other antisemitic, terrorist supporters) in the Labour Party

As I believe you know, I am one of your constituents and have been a member of the Labour party for many years. In the last few years I have become dismayed at the anti-Semitism of an increasing number of Labour MPs and senior party figures. Sometimes this anti-Semitism is dressed up under the guise of anti-Zionism, but of course their obsessive hatred of Israel (and Israel only) reveals their true feelings. Increasingly, certain Labour figures no longer even bother to make the 'politically correct' replacement of 'Jew' with 'Zionist'. It seems the Labour Party as a whole is not only tolerant of these views, but sees them as a potential vote winner among the expanding Muslim communities.

So, for example, we have had Paul Flynn MP accuse Britain's first Jewish ambassador to Israel of having 'divided loyalties'; Martin Linton, MP speaking about the "long tentacles of Israel" reaching into British politics; Gerald Kaufman MP stating that "Just as Lord Ashcroft owns most of the Conservative Party, right-wing Jewish millionaires own the rest," and saying "Here we are, the Jews again" when pro-Israel MP Louise Ellman rose to speak in the Commons. Even more worrying are the continued activities of MPs Jeremy Corbyn, Sadiq Khan, and Andy Slaughter (the latter who even holds the position of Shadow Justice Minister). These MPs not only campaign for the destruction of Israel, but have a long history of support for Hamas and other Palestinian terrorists, and they have all shared platforms with members of terrorist organisations, and notorious anti-Semitic, homophobic Islamic hate-preachers (see, e.g. http://hurryupharry.org/2013/01/29/labour-embraces-islamist-extremists/).

But, above all, it is the fact that the Labour party still hosts Israel-hater and terrorist supporter Ken Livingstone that makes me question why I should continue to be a member of the party. It appears his Jew-baiting (and anti-Labour party activities) are insufficient ground for his expulsion, as is his working for the Iranian government on its Press TV. But then how about his comments on his Press TV show earlier this week (www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22352929) where he blamed "Western governments" for the terrorist bombing in Boston on the grounds that it was understandable for Muslims to get angry. Presumably he now feels that the London 7/7 bombings when he was Mayor were also justified. I feel I can no longer be a member of a party with the likes of Livingstone et al. Unless I hear in the next few weeks that at least Livingstone is finally booted out once and for all after his latest outburst I shall be terminating my membership.

Yours sincerely,