Ed Husain and me

Truthtriumphs

Yes, you have been naive.

The point is that it is Islam that is the problem.
There is no such thing as a moderate interpretation.
It is a religio-political creed, violent in its origin and spread by invasion and conquest.
"Peaceful religion"?--- anything but!.
The word Islam means submission, and its ethos certainly lives up to the name.
It is not a faith that will ever agree to co-exist with non-believers, but will always seek to dominate and impose its will.

The proof is not in its religious texts, for all religions have unpalatable passages in their holy texts, but it is in the way that its adherents still impose this faith by force on the unwilling, usually by violent conquest.
In the West, of course, the invasion did not need to be violent, because our idiotic and reckless non-leaders actually invited it in, in the form of uncontrolled immigration, with a special affection for those of the Muslim faith.

It's good that now you have seen the light, Melanie, even if the obvious took some time to dawn.

As to the cesspit that is CiF, you should interpret its gratuitous insults as a compliment.
It is obviously rattled by your
blog.
Always better to be insulted than ignored.

Herbert Thornton

Melanie - perhaps you were a bit naive, but a lot of other people are much more so.

The Islamists, closely followed by the politically correct and others in the mainstream establishment are universally eager to heap abuse on those brave enough to proclaim obvious truths.

As Nick Griffin might say - "Join the Club".

Noddy67

Mel,I read your comments frequently.
There are times however, when I,like a lot of English people,I'm sure,just wish that the rest of the world would all b*****r off and have their arguments elsewhere !

Leslie

One characteristic about Husain, which is obvious from his book, is his inability to stick to a position.

Lizzy

Sadly, it seems Ayaan Hirsi Ali was right when she said there is no such person as a moderate Muslim.

Erica

Husain's attack on you must be seen in the context of the British election which must be held by May and the disintegration of the Labour Party which is in government. Labour is desperately trying to minimise its losses and the far Left is taking over (the funding has a lot to do with this - as individual donations vanish, the trade unions call the shots). As you point out Hazel Blears has gone and the Communities Department is now in the hands of Ministers who are soft on Islamism. That's why Husain - who receives public money through Quilliam - cn get away with this attack. Surely the Conservatives will stop his funding.

elixelx

With the clear untrammelled hindsight offered by knowing the history of the Muslims in Spain, Melanie, I can assure you that Ed Hussain is par for the course.
Muslims fight for those who pay the most, simple as that!
You were not naive, just unwilling to buy loyalty; and, in any case, I doubt your pockets are deep enough to compete with HMG or the MCB.
Even if they were I doubt you would do it, hence the truth remains that you are the altruistic one and Hussain the Hypocrite, Liar, Traitor, Momzer!
Not that there's anything new about that!

just Louise

You've always distinguished between Muslims who are a threat to nobody, Melanie, and the Islamic hotheads. You did so again only last week, in condemning Nick Griffin.
Ed's reaction suggests he's the one who perhaps has a hidden agenda to hide.
Keep up the good work!

Fahni Sawal

I don't understand why this muslims who say they are liberals who believe freedom don't like when anyone say anything about Islam, they say one thing like they like freedom of speech and they say another thing which is become against any western who say something about Islam why people can't say what they want about Islam? What are they hiding? and if the government want to moderate the muslims they should not give money and support to Ed Hussein and Bunglawala who have duplicate faces and anti Jewish anti western one time and the other time pretending they are not, what is wrong with the labour government and the lefty people why they are supporting this kind of people couldn't they find better person like an open minded honest muslim women to do this kind of job?

R Mitchum

We have forgotten the costly experience of our parents in the lead up to the war - you are lambs to the slaughter if you apply civilized rules to a group with a ruthless agenda. Being overly hospitable has set us on that road yet again.

GeoffM

"...zealotry and ignorance and being filled with anger, venom and hatred not to mention also being demented."

I don't know about you Melanie but I think that is a very accurate description of Islamism.

So much so in fact that they have obtained a virtual monopoly on these traits.

The Gateless Gate

Depressing stuff but entirely predictable: the Government in its pursuit of authentic Muslims is throwing good money after bad.

steve

ed hussein, tsk tsk, melanie melanie
what else did you expect :-)
in fact for nightlites nawaz and the whole of the quilliam fndtn, the jury of opinion should stay well and truly out, until they can prove
catorgorically by their deeds as,well as their words, that they are by any small modicum
TRULY reformist, otherwise its yet again,"taqiya city" here we come.
As you have exposed yet again
the twisty turny politic of the ultimate opportunists, no surprise he defends the MCB, they are obviously both the same INSIDE, so no change there.
Never mind you being naive, this bunch have government funding.

Roger Clark

"People must decide for themselves whether Bunglawala’s apparent conversion to the causes of gay rights and freedom of speech is genuine."

Clearly it isn't, whenever some Islamist required defending on Guardian CIF Bungawala was always to the fore(see for instance his musings on the "lyrical terrorist"). This tended to draw a lot of fire and so he changed his tack. This was a correct tactical shift from his point of view and has been rewarded with the praises of sundry dupes, but the agenda remains all too clear. He knows that the scale of immigration and birthrate is such that his Islamist aims are at least partly achievable within a few decades

"Mr Bunglawala said: "Those comments were made some 12 or 13 years ago. All of us may hold opinions which are objectionable, but they change over time. I certainly would not defend those comments today."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1496621/Top-job-fighting-extremism-for-Muslim-who-praised-bomber.html

Apparently he is given a latitude denied Griffin.

Harriette Shoemaker

The government is trying to fight against Islamic extremist, it is like saying we are fighting against criminal gangs like the Mafia, but still supporting and funding people who are link with that group, the liberals don't have any idea about what Islam is, they say they are against the criminals but they are funding and giving jobs people like Lord Ahmed who said he will send 10,000 muslims to march in the streets or Mr Bunklawawa who was racist against western non believers

Amjad

The old proverb comes to mind - 'there's no honour amongst thieves!'

logdon

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1224153/Burq-ingham-Palace-Hate-preacher-calls-Queen-wear-Muslim-dress.html

At least by banning the event something has happened in our defence.

Are our authorities now, at last getting the message/

As for Hussein, I read his book, The Islamist and was far from impressed.

Caveat after caveat.

If this is the best they come up with forget it.

And where is Quilliam getting it's funding?

Patricia

Sigh. I usually avoid CiF, it does nasty things to my blood pressure, but I thought I'd better take a look. It certainly has given a merry weekend to commenters!

Much amused to see that Douglas Murray is your acolyte. Delusion writ large.

phil

R Mitchum you echo the warnings of Churchill in the thirties which were ignored by those who thought that if you pat a rabid dog on the head it will not bite you -I am not confused by hitler or the Islamists militants ,nor am I confused by what Ed Hussein wrote in the guardian ,there was no hate just a plea for more understanding that many Muslims want -- he actualy said referring to Melanie and Douglas,whose opinions I value greatly" And why would they not support Islam's inherent pluralism and recognise that Islam per se is not the problem, but iconoclastic interpretations of it",as many of us have said before we must make a climate here where ordinary Muslims can live in peace without fear in our country and where they will feel able to be a part of our nation -I seem to remember that situation before bin laden and his lunatics changed the world .

When I first had contact with Melanie I asked her why she was perceived as right wing as I had felt she was merely pragmatic and sensible ,now I still do not see her as right wing but a person who has strong feelings and says them pugnaciously ,sometimes too much so for the milky ones amongst us .Without doubt she is pro Israel , as I am ,but sometimes I believe right or wrong ,and from what I read Ed Hussein feels the same .They are from backgrounds either side of the fence and one cannot expect them to feel entirely the same way .Here are two`people who want a better world and I hope have temporarily fallen out ,so I do not think we should fan the flames here .

For those of you that think Melanie is always right ,ask yourselves about her opinion on climate change ,personally I think her conclusions are off the wall ,and continues to campaign in the face of overwhelming scientific opinion -Nevertheless I admire her defence of Israel and the Jewish people immensely ,also her ideas on family and education coincide with my own , so in the case of Ed Hussein I suggest you let them sort out their own squabble without help from us in the sincere hope that they will both see reason .

I assume I will be the victim of some invective for saying the above from those who enjoy a good fight and I will try to bear it in good grace ,but maybe just maybe I will put Mel and Ed on the path to peace because these two are very influential in the search for that increasingly rare commodity .

alan stoddart

Reading Husain's book it is clear that the Islamist ideas still resonate through him...interesting that Mehdi Hasan supports Husain. So much for progressive, Liberal Muslims.

logdon

Join the dots and all of this points to the Neather World, that journalistic no go area maybe better described as a Neather Neather Land which allowed this to happen in the first place.

Had not our crazy multiculturalists and lets be honest here, the ever so effing PCly 'umble journo allies given Muslims the ammunition to attack our cultural institutions would the likes of Bunglawala and his confused secret buddy, Husein have the cohones to spew their often incoherent and self contradictory messages?

This is all of a piece, the Marxist/Islamist alliance working in unlikely conjunction but with one aim, the imposition of Shariah in Britain and, indeed world-wide.

Google religionofpeace.com or jihadwatch for a taste of the simultaneous hollowing out of western society and the repressive and deadly ways in which they operate over in Islamoland.

Those sites tell it as it is with source quotes and impeccable honesty. If only the MSM, and yes that includes this estimable organ, would wake up and shed the prisms of self congratulatory, self-delusion when dealing with this global menace masquerading under the false piety of a religion.

As ever, Peter Hitchens grasps the handle

The slow-motion New Labour putsch that swept our nation away

Last updated at 9:51 AM on 01st November 2009

Once again, one of the biggest stories of the week has been widely ignored by the official political reporters, who are not interested in politics.

This is the disclosure, by a New Labour apparatchik, Andrew Neather, of the real purpose of his party’s immigration policy.

The Blairites’ aim was to undermine and get rid of traditional conservative British culture. They really did want to turn Britain into a foreign land.

Mr Neather wrote an article praising immigration because it provided lots of cheap nannies and gardeners for funky Londoners like him.

Apparently thinking nobody would notice, he then revealed that there had been ‘a driving political purpose: that mass immigration was the way that the UK Government was going to make the UK truly multicultural’.

He recalled coming away from high-level discussions ‘with a clear sense that the policy was intended – even if this wasn’t its main purpose – to rub the Right’s nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date’.

I have to say I am not surprised. Nor am I so sure about the ‘main purpose’. In late 1996, an old friend of mine abandoned his long career as a distinguished journalist and went to work for New Labour......

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1224335/PETER-HITCHENS-The-slow-motion-New-Labour-putsch-swept-nation-away.html

solemnman

Perhaps he has rid you of the last residue of pollyanna liberalism and for that you can thank him.You can now join the unhappy ranks of the complete skeptics.

Verity (etc.)

The potted pseudo-history of Zionism should leave anyone open-mouthed.

Sam Lampardi

Imagine if bunch of Christians or infidel nonbelievers immigrate to Saudi Arabia and ask the Arab king to dress up like a western man wear a suit and tie, that would not happen because modern Christians don't bring their believes to other people, but the muslims who are coming to the west are carrying around their believes and some of them are trying to force to other people to practice, it doesn't surprise me they ask our queen age 80 years old to wear a muslim dress "Burka" next time I am not surprise if the muslim fanatics go to other British women and tell them to have genital mutilations and arrangement marriages, it could happen anything is possible now days and I hope the liberals don't try to fund this

Verity

"zealotry and ignorance

and being filled with

anger, venom and hatred

not to mention also being

demented."

Sounds more like Inayat Banglawangla boy. A very incident-prone fellow, shall we say.

Verity

Verity Etc is a fake Verity, trading on my long-established blog name.

I wish the moderators would block this vicious, lazy individual's email address.

Linda Smith

Verity (etc) the erstwhile "admirer" of Israel, also unfrocked out of her own mouth.

Sam Armstrong

So, even Melanie can fall foul of taqqiya. Scary stuff. I am glad you worked this slime ball out. Now go destroy him in your writing.

Augustus

TT says, "There is no such thing as a moderate interpretation." Quite right! We are dealing here with an idealogical infection. Husain is just the petri dish.

Marcus

This is an interesting post. I followed the link to Ed Husain's offending article, and have to say it is quite a lot more reasonable in tone than suggested here.(Incidentally, some of the comments which follow it about Mel are really quite funny - well worth a read for devoted acolytes).

Mel is at pains to stress that she is talking about one strand of Islamism, and not about Muslims, or Islam, in their totality - much to the distress of some of the posters on this site. She was also apparently initially motivated to engage in a constructive dialogue with Ed Husain. Is there any way in which she might consider taking a step back to reflect onthe more typical tone of her writings, and then perhaps ask herself why this blog increasingly attracts posters with extreme, often racist views, vociferously expressed? i invite her to ask herself if she is happy with this state of affairs, and whether she might need to disavow in an unequivocal way the views of those posters I have just described?

Chris

It doesn't surprise me that you're having doubts about the motives of Ed Hussain. I read his book 'The Islamist' the other day and gleaned more reading between the lines than from what he actually said. For example, when he wrote of attending meetings of radical Islamists, he noted that each meeting was secret and, apart from the five or six people in each cell, members never knew each other. Why would this be, apart from to protect each other from later questioning by the police or security forces? He didn't elaborate. He also noted, briefly, that the radical Islamists he mixed with as a student simply wrote what the tutors wanted to hear for assignments in order to gain their university degrees ... then what? A job in Whitehall as a civil servant perhaps? Personally I didn't take the book at face value and it left me with many disturbing unanswered questions.

Radical Islamists constantly and deliberately use dissembling as a political strategy (Ed Hussain himself remarks on it in his book). They claim state benefits (Islam4UK’s Anjem Choudary and his five dependents, for example) while working full-pelt to undermine and overthrow the very state which supports them. They also use every means at their disposal to exploit funding from the state as the state benevolently and naively attempts to de-radicalise Islamists. For example, in order to secure funding, Islamists change the names of their groups and they lie about their aims and objectives and so on (again, a deliberate strategy outlined by Hussain in his book). Renouncing radical Islamic tendencies as the folly of youth may wash with our somnambulant rulers, but to have a ‘former’ radical Islamist working inside Whitehall, is horrifying.
I sincerely hope Britain wakes up before it is too late and that the misguided UAF stop seeing the battle against fascism as a fight between left and right. British people need to break free from the politics of binary opposition (left versus right, white versus other) and to join together to defeat an ideological enemy which has a 25 year head-start on us.

Charlie

Melanie,

"Unaware that she was a last-minute, unexpected guest, and aware of the prejudiced views that she has expressed about Muslims in the past, ..."

You must not forget that he is a Muslim and has not renounced Islam so he cannot retain his honour by siding with an infidel.
One cannot let aspects of this culture slip from one's grasp while trying evaluate their verbal dialectics.
And don't forget that taquiya plays a big role.

Augustus

What's Macarthy got to do with it? Who is really being paranoid and living in a parallel universe? Melanie's Personal jihad? All childish bunkum. And Marcus rattles his tail with all the familiarity of a black scorpion. Feel better now Marcus? Extreme? Racist? Have you no respect for your betters?

Marcus

Augustus, shame om you. Just think for a minute - in what other circumstance was the concept of infectious disease used to describe a race or religion?

sebastian

Yes.........well. The bright spot in this is that Ed Husein - who's probably quite confused himself - has engaged in argument. As such, views come out and can be dismantled and seen for what they are: good bad or indifferent. If they (or he) can't take that kind of forensic examination and doubt, then hard Cheddar. Grow up. Get used to it! Even so, argument is argument.
So much for the "bright" side.
The gloomier side is that there are others who're completely unwilling to discuss anything, their lives being one long, hysterical mohammedan rant as so aptly and faithfully depicted in Geert Wilders' short film. My fear is that such ranters are actually more influential - they're so compelling and uncompromising - than the compromising, "reasonable" Ed Husein (when he's not losing it).
Liberal sentiment as mesmerised by the "moderate" reformist mohammedans may, I fear, shift their gaze from the highly unpleasant others whose true nastiness is less perceived, therefore.
Multicultural sentiment in the UK seems so desperate for good news about mohammedans, that they'll grasp at any straw offering hope. Ed Husein offeres sheaves of the stuff.
But we shouldn't be deceived. Mohammedism has an agenda and it has money. It's ambitious. It has a reputation for deception. Liberals, so smitten by Ed at his most plausible, may neglect this. But if enlightened Ed Husein can throw such a wobbler, then how deep does "reformed islam" actually go. Not nearly far enough for liberal melting regard, I'd say.

Frank P

Sam Armstrong

"So, even Melanie can fall foul of taqqiya. Scary stuff. I am glad you worked this slime ball out. Now go destroy him in your writing."

If I am not mistaken - she just did!

Frank P

Comprehensively!

Zikomo

After having read his book some years ago I was never fooled by Mr Husain's"redemption".He is no more to be trusted than that other well known Fifth Columnist,the good "Prof".Tariq Ramadan

Verity (etc.)

Linda Smith, I still am very much an admirer of Israel and its achievements and its vibrant society but I am not an admirer of all aspects of it, its treatment of Palestinians and its founding myths - but to repeat I am an admirer of ISrael and the Israelis, not of its government and its "right wingers" - it's a bit odd you can't see that it's possible to be both an admirer and critic of something as complex as a modern advanced society and polity like Israel is.

Verity - I feel a bit as if I've discovered my DNA has been patented by some biotechnology company - I find you have patented my name so I can't use it.

Herbert Thornton

People keep saying many Muslims are peaceful. No doubt many are. But how far does that get us?

The problem is that all Muslim communities are environments which, because of the nature of Islam, inevitably produce some people who become violently inclined extremists.

To believe that education can extinguish this phenomenon is, I am convinced, mistaken.

Marcus

Augustus
Begin by talking about infection and petri dishes, and you end up describing groups - races, religions - as vermin. There is extremism and racism - or pure bigotry towards one religious belief - displayed by some on this site. What, for example, is the reference to Muslims praying 'bottoms in the air', aired once then taken up with relish, other than an expression of blind hate? And in what way do such outpourings contribute to a intelligent debate of questions which can legitimately be discussed, forcefully but rationally?

logdon

From Cifwatch.com

When denial is not a river in Egypt

October 31, 2009 in Uncategorized | Tags: Antisemitism, Comment is Free, Ed Husain, Guardian, Inayat Bunglawala, Melanie Phillips | by Medusa | 10 comments

Ed Husain’s article is so evidently full of paranoid projection that it’s difficult to know where to begin:

Essentially he whinges about Melanie Phillips for criticising the demonstration against al-Muhajiroun, and for pointing out the rank hypocrisy of one Inayat Bunglawala (of whom more below) who appears to be supporting the moderate Muslims. Husain also goes on to whinge that Melanie Phillips criticised him too. Let’s look for a moment at some of what he said that caused her to do that:

Firstly, in December 2008 Husain wrote in ‘Comment is Free’:

“…Regardless of political condemnations, the crude reality is that Israel has just helped create a new generation of suicide bombers, prepared to stop at nothing. The ideology that justifies and advocates suicide bombings already exists. Israel though, through its recent actions, has just provided the fire that will now re-ignite this poisoned gas. Prevented for now by Israel’s wall and heavy security, the suicide bombers’ will to kill, to avenge will not calm. And where there is a will, victims will always find a way to lash out….”

Note the total lack of context, and that consequently he seemed not to have any awareness at all of how lacking in intelligence his arguments were – there was no mention that Cast Lead was the culmination of years of shelling Israeli civilians. Far from it, Husain reverted to the old belligerent self-pity on which he was probably fed in his days with Hizb-ut-Tahrir – when he implied that Israel forced the Palestinians into years of suicide terror and now, because she had the temerity to act to stop the war crimes against her civilians, said Palestinians cannot help but perpetrate more of the same, and wail when they are bested!

Note also the essential narcissism, no doubt bolstered by writing for a narcissistically-inclined CiF, which will not allow him even to offer any suggestions as to what Israel might have done instead (apart from march herself into the sea), and most importantly what he thinks the Palestinian leadership should have done rather than continue to shell Israeli civilians if it really wanted to avert what ensued. No doubt, like so many on CiF he thinks of Palestinians as children with behavioural problems who cannot be expected to control themselves.

He then went on to tell us that the Arabs have “.. strong notions of collective honour, dignity, and respect..” and that an attack on some of them is perceived as an attack on them all. He failed to convince me then, however, and my second reading of that article convinces me even less, that “collective honour… and respect”, however strong the notions of them, can ever be reconciled with using Palestinian civilians as human shields and teaching little children that the high point of their lives should be to martyr themselves murdering Israeli Jews. No, this was yet another insult to the intelligence by an allegedly reformed Islamist apologist.

In the same article Husain said that he was “no friend of Hamas” but he proved that he is hardly an enemy either: Nowhere in that December 2008 article did he criticise Hamas at all for the situation into which it got the Palestinians, and nor has he since. Not once did Husain acknowledge how Hamas had betrayed its people, who were conned into voting it into power on a welfare ticket, and that it then went on to get many of them killed as it could because it needed human shields in its relentless pursuit of fruitless aggression and “if it bleeds it leads.” He must have known that. Why, then, the deafening silence about it?

Husain’s current article is merely a rant, much as he accuses Melanie Phillips of ranting, but with more of the belligerent self-pity so characteristic of even the most reformed Islamist sympathiser. He complains that Muslims are wrongly accused of al-taqiyya whilst not appearing to realise that, for all his displays of moderateness, his own tendency towards al-taqqiya is writ large in this article. For example, he appears not to be aware of the ludicrousness inherent in his statement that the “reformed” Inayat Bunglawala, will ”once again, oppose racism..” So what?? Bunglawala and Husain can say whatever they wish, but the animus in this article against Melanie Phillips is still argued to put Husain’s own al-taqqiya on display.

(Apropos, Husain seems to have performed a volte face about Bunglawala, too, and doesn’t seem to realise the inherent contradiction in using the latter’s essential al-taqiyya – and he is well aware of it – in trying to shore up a very shaky argument: In Husain’s The Islamist, for example, he himself informs us of Bunglawala’s antisemitic credentials).

Finally we go from the sublime to the preternaturally ridiculous. Husain is writing on an avowedly anti-Israel and at times openly antisemitic blog, where Jew-hating comments are often allowed to remain whereas the comments which complain about them are swiftly deleted. He shows no sign of being aware of this, however. Instead he then gives us proof positive that his paranoid projection is in full spate with this priceless jewel:

“… But do fairness and humanity matter to Phillips?…”

without any apparent awareness that his question about Melanie Phillips can be asked as if not more appropriately, about him and his CiF article of December 2008, as well as about this latest ignominious tirade and about CiF in general!

Emily

Marcus, November 1st, 2009 2:53pm, if you’re the best the Grauniad has to offer then it’s no wonder the wretched rag is losing somewhere between £80 to 100K per day - despite all that money it gets from government advertising (now why did New Labour give Alan Rubbisher that source of income, I wonder?).

Are you trying to make the paper look even more stupid?

Why should Melanie Phillips start taking responsibility for everyone who posts here? Will you be applying the same principle to the Guardian’s writers?

The Guardian is a newspaper whose writers can’t even grasp the simple concept of taking responsibility for their own words by acting as they would write.

I’ll tell you what, Marcus, maybe when you’ve got all those Guardian writers who send their kids to public school but then advocate the comprehensive system to their readers then you can come back here and we might start to think about taking you and The Graun seriously.

daniel maris

The real test of whether a Muslim is moderate is whether they accept that some at least of their religious texts and some at least of Mohammed's actions during his lifetime are at least problematic. Anyone who doesn't is clearly deluded about what Islam teaches.

I am not asking a higher standard of Muslims. I would expect a moderate Christian to accept for instance that there are contradictory elements in their tradition or Jews to accept that there are problematic issues with their tradition (e.g. the massacre of Canaanites, Abraham's preparedness to kill his son and so on).

Which is not to say Islam, Christianity and Judaism are the same animals - but the test of reasonableness is.

Anyway I have never been convinced by Ed Husain's intellectual position shall we say.

And I don't expect Muslims to love Israel but I do expect Muslims to accept that Israel is a member state of the UN with as much right to exist as various Muslim states, including Bosnia, Pakistan, Albania, Uzbekistan, and other states of recent date.

Augustus

Marcus- Truthtriumphs says, 'spread by invasion and conquest'. Is that not what pathogens do? If that invokes pathos in you it is only to be expected.

phil

I tried to write a reasonable post about this thread and has anyone of you taken up any of the points ?-NO -just more and more accusations and fighting talk -do any of you think we will ever resolve our problems by shouts and insults ?

Do any of you think Ed Hussein is going to write publicity for Israel and if so who would read it ? He is intent on changing Muslim thought not ours ,so what would be his reception if he praised cast lead on Muslim sites .?For goodness sake get real or do you all prefer to continue the impasse forever -

Ed Hussein as he has said if any of you bothered to read it has reacted to what he perceives as incessant attacks on Islam by Melanie .I do not agree with him but I understand the reasons and our best chance of achieving any accord is with people like him who wish for that accord rather than the likes of abu hamza and his henchmen .

Unlike so many of you I have an inherent interest in peace, I have family living in Israel and dying too--yes you read it right, and gave away life in attempt to find that elusive peace -- , -they want peace and the hate filled diatribes I am seeing day after day here only prolong the agony.I am a fervent supporter of Israel and Jewish life but I am sickened by what some of you continually write here ,who the hell do you think you are helping ?,certainly not the two warring sides .If you continue to ignore me ,so be it but I will at least sleep at night knowing I am trying to do something constructive ,what about you ?

George if you read this ,respect to you and your sons who continue to try and bring peace and I pray that one day your sons will live in suits rather than IDF uniforms

wonderer

logdon
November 1st, 2009 5:39pm, well said but did you really mean "narcissism", ie pathological self love, or "nazism"? Some might say Hitler was a narcissist, so perhaps you've squared a circle here.

Herbert Thornton

Phil - While I wish that your attitude could lead to peace with the Islamic world, I think you are mistaken.

Your attitude reminds me of the fable of the kind frog who tried to be nice to a scorpion who wanted to cross a river.

The scorpion promised that in return for ferrying the scorpion across the river, it would not sting the frog, but half way across it did.

As the poor frog was dying he asked the scorpion why he did it when it would obviously result in the scorpion being drowned too - and the scorpion answered -

"Because it's my nature. I can't help it."

Lupus Lungfish

"Tho I've belted you and flayed you, By the livin' Gawd that made you, You're a better man than I am Bunglawala"

Nah- doesn't have the same ring to it does it!

Wilhelm

phil
November 1st, 2009 12:27pm

What are you actually trying to say . Phil ?

Are you for Islamofacisim or against Islamofacism ?

Which is it, son ?

Verity

Verity (Etc), you are posting under false colours on a name that has been in use by someone else for five years.

You don't think this is sleazy?

Marcus writes: “this blog increasingly attracts posters with extreme, often racist views …”. Could you give us an example, please, Marcus? You do understand that (with the exception of Judaism) a religion is not a race? Could you point to some of these “racist” views? Are you sure you're not, in the towering New Labour ignorance of people like Jacqui Smith, Tony Blair, Jack Straw et al, not understanding that race is genetic and a religion is a belief system freely entered into. Christianity is not a "race". There are black, Oriental, Indian and SE Asian Christians. Buddhism ditto. Islam is not a race.

YA

phil and others - can't comprehend why do you blow significance of Islamic prestidigitators like Ed Husain, Bunglawala etc.? Their goal is to muddy waters, create a bogus anti-Islamist establishments, to put an obstacle to real anti-Islamic activity.

While you discuss Ed Husain's right to crap on Israel in order to look nice in the eyes of his co-religionists, - other Islamists train militias, penetrate police, install
Sharia nests, capture churches and schools.

They should be systematically confronted, there should be consistent Government policy on that, but there is none presently.

So the most relevant question to Mrs. Phillips is whom to support for PM in spring elections. And what is the opinion of others - Hitchens, Murray, Wilders.

Please please Mrs. Phillips write an article about that. Ed Husain can wait, let's clarify important things first.

Wilhelm

phil
November 1st, 2009 6:54pm

''I tried to write reasonably about this thread .NO -just more and more accusations and fighting talk do any of you think we will ever resolve our problems by shouts and insults ?''

Well Phill you werent like that last week, were you ? Where was the love for Nick ?

''Unlike so many of you I have an inherent interest in peace,''

No kidding, most of my friends just love being blown to smithereens by a muslim suicide bomber.They just love a bit of warmongering on the side.

Marcus

Verity,

I've had this argument before. Pointing out the obvious - that Islam is a religion, not a racial identity, cannot help anyone dodge the bigotry towards Muslims that is increasingly expressed here. And while religion is indeed freely entered into, the relationship is surely more complicated? Most people grow up within the religious belief system of their parents, family, nation, culture, and their attitude to that inheritance can be complex, even if their own feelings towards that faith are ambivalent or even antagonistic. I would have thought that this complexity is pretty well reflected in Ed Husain's journey. I agree with Phil: shouting doesn't help much here. As for racism, I wonder: it's an interesting question about the possible relationship between hostility towards Muslims and their racial background(s). This possible link is generally evaded by citing the dodge I've mentioned (Islam is a faith, not a race), but my guess is that it's more complex than that.

zkharya

Did Melanie request right of reply on CIF (and would they have denied it, as they did Robin Shepherd)?

Andy Gill

Just when you begin to think Cif cannot sink any lower, they publish Ed Hussein's demented rant against Melanie.

I think the liberal elite at the Guardian are beginning to lose the few marbles they still have left. However, I am confident that their sordid love affair with Islamic extremism will eventually marginalise them. The British people have finally begun to wake up to the trahison des clercs, and are starting to push back.

Jane

Marcus:
"Slay them wherever you find them...Idolatry is worse than carnage...Fight against them until idolatry is no more and God's religion reigns supreme." (Surah 2:190)

"The only true faith in God's sight is Islam." (Surah 3:19)

"Believers, take neither Jews nor Christians for your friends." (Surah 5:51)

"Fight against such as those to whom the Scriptures were given [Jews and Christians]...until they pay tribute out of hand and are utterly subdued." (Surah 9:27)

Utterly subdued! And for opposing that, and for opposing people who blow up suicide bombs to achieve that, and for opposing people who want the introduction of sharia law to achieve that, and for opposing sharia finance (which has a clear history of using money to fund terrorism)*, people are guilty of ‘bigotry’ and being ‘extreme‘?

Sounds to me more like you and the rest of the Guardianistas can’t deal with the truth and so seek to smear anyone who dares point it out by closing down their side of the debate altogether.

So you can leap on everybody else’s words - and call them extreme and bigoted to boot - but, of course, Islam can say what it likes.

How convenient for the jihadists and their useful idiots.

Don’t really like to play fair, do you, Marcus?

*www.shariahfinancewatch.org/blog/2009/01/15/bin-laden-calls-for-increased-giving-of-zakat-to-suppport-global-jihad/

phil

Herbert Thornton

-Herbert I always get a sane and thoughtful response from you -and I hope not to be the frog :) --my point is that we need to try to understand one another rather than to give in to fights and insults -I promise you I am not a softie ,it is easy to be a tough guy and harder to be gentle .Gentle is what we need now as fighting is not working .I believe that Ed Hussein is a brave and sensible man even if he still has a few miles to go to please the posters here or are we to believe he is the greatest liar to have emerged from Islam -I believe the former and it seems so did Melanie until he fell out with her -Well if someone falls out with me I think it is probably my fault and I try to put it right -in this case they both have room for thought and if they feel any responsibility for the trouble this is causing they need to apply their minds to putting it right -it should not be a problem that falls on any of us .

Just as an aside Herbert unlike you ,who always talks sense I am having my space invaded by a member of your party who seems to think I have some interest in his opinions ,.he calls himself wilhelm and continues to post nonsense whilst attempting to engage with me -do you have any influence with him ,if so please deter him as he does your party much harm ,my best regards to you .

Fergus Pickering

Come along Marcus. Your argument is specious. However hard you wriggle,Islam is not a race, Socialism is not a race, Fascism is not a race, Voodoo is not a race, the bleeding Mafia is not a race. You may have been brought up in it but you can reject it if you find it
vicious or ridiculous, like Socialism, or Voodoo, or the Muslim faith. Yes, most muslims are brown people, but that is not why we dislike and fear them. We d and f them because of what they BELIEVE. What they believe. Not what they ARE. Have you been following? Do you get it. Shall I say it again.

Sam Armstrong

Frank P:

Well I want more!

Charles

What Melanie should now do is try to ensure that Ed and his chums at the Quilliam Foundation do not receive a penny of taxpayer's money from the new Tory government.

Marcus

One of Jane's quotes is 'believers, take neither Jews nor Christians as your friends'. I wonder if those here who cling so desperately to their hatred of Muslims have any Muslim friends? I do. A person's relationship with their faith can be a complex thing - how about those Catholics who dislike much of what comes out of the Vatican? I dislike religious extremism as much as anyone, but reject utterly the blanket hatred of an entire faith group which is expressed here. It's called bigotry. Why are you so keen to hang on to this loathing? Isn't the form of constructive dialogue Phil is writing about, and which Melanie initially appeared to want to engage in with Ed Husain, a more fruitful option?

just Louise

Of course antipathy towards an aggressive proselytising religion isn't racism. It's self-preservation. There are a sufficient number of "Islamophobic" Hindus the world over to make that crystal clear!
A young British Indian post-grad student I fell into conversation with on a train told me that the last time he visited the little market town to which we were both travelling he'd been physically assaulted without provocation by two men walking towards him in a side street. I expressed genuine shock that such a friendly little sleepy hollow should harbour BNP thugs. My mistake - the two assailants were Muslims from a nearby big city who had realised from something on his person that he was a Hindu and decided to punish him for it by laying into him with their fists. He also warned me, having been set upon himself, never to walk down certain streets if I ever visit his native Leicester...They're no-go zones for the likes of him and me.
A female workmate from Goa, of Indian ethnicity, who had spent some of her childhood in a Muslim country, describes it in a way that (were she white) might be labelled "racist" - "they're very backward people", she said - despite the fact that it is in fact a distaste for hegemonic all-encompassing male supremacy based on misogyny and superstition.
Marcus, d'ye geddit now?

Bernard

Marcus - you are barking up the wrong tree. It would appear that the majority of posters here as well as the blog's author do not have issues with individual Muslims.

Rather they have issues with Islam and interpretations of Islam which are dangerous for those who think differently. Muslims that interpret their religion dangerously are to be pitied, perhaps scorned and derided, even shown compassion on occasion, but they must never ever be indulged. And this goes for people like Ed Husain who evidently are playing devious politics at a time when hard and clear denunciation of extremism and violent extremism would be welcome, particularly when they being paid a lot of money by the Government to do so.

Hard and clear, Sir, hard and clear.

Verity (not etc.)

Verity, "False colours" "sleazy"? Get a grip, we're talking about a little blog here. I have tried to distinguish between us, but a couple of times recently I fell back into the habit of a lifetime and just used my name tout court. I apologise. Clearly I would not want to be associated in any way with what you write, so I will adopt an alias.

Joshua

A few weeks ago, Ms. Phillips wrote the following:

"You can see samples of this reaction on the excellent CiFWatch site -- which is devoted entirely to monitoring and recording the institutionalised intellectual and moral depravity of CiF."

After reading this article by Ed Husain, who but a lunatic or a bigot could possibly disagree with Melanie Phillips's damning verdict of Cif? And who can be surprised that the Guardian is now routinely referred to as "Der Stürmer" by a large number of Jews in Britain?

phil

just Louise -----this thread was supposed to be about Mels spat with Ed and has now descended into all out attacks on Islam -I have no truck with militant Islam nor those who do not wish to conform to our ideas of citizenship,but I see no reason nor any advantage to turn it into an outpouring of hatred which it has become -You in particular normally post sound common sense but in your last post you decided to describe attacks by Muslims ,as a kid I was involved in fights with kids of different religions ,do you think that should cause me to hate all of them ?many actually became my friends when we found our noses bled with the same colour blood .

This thread and others too have become a frenzy of racist outpourings which shame us all ,in some Israel and the Jewish people are the victims and here it is the Muslims -I am beginning to feel "what is the point" I am not going to change anything ,the same old gang warfare will prevail and when I saw you were writing like this too I really did despair -We have become a frenzied mob and I think I am better than that -you too .

Linda Smith

Verity (1 Nov, 8:47pm) trotted out the old canard “You do understand that (with the exception of Judaism) a religion is not a race?”

“Judaism” ie Jews are not a race. Judaism is an ideology as is Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, etc. People can convert to Judaism and previously non-Jewish children can be adopted by Jewish families and become fully recognized as orthodox Jews by undergoing initiation rites. Their progeny are thereafter recognized as Jewish. This is no different than the rulemaking of any other club, say, Christianity. No-one claims that Christians are a "race".

just Louise

Phil, I hear you loud and clear.
You're a good-hearted person and you've always been a voice of reason and restraint on here. I have considerable sympathy with Muslims as fellow People of the Book, and share some of their values, not least belief in a Divinity. However, certain Muslims have created no-go areas in certain cities, something that no other immigrant group has ever done. No other immigrant group has sought to impose its beliefs on the rest of the population, as radical Muslims are doing. For no other immigrant group have governments bent over backwards to accommodate beliefs and demands. But then no other immigrant group has ever made such demands nor been perceived as a group that it is wise to appease. (And here I must say at once that I fully realise that many Muslims deplore much of the "outlawing" of "Christmas" and substitution of Winterval, the provision of halal meat to all schoolchildren, etc, by politically correct councils, which often do more harm to minority groups than good.) I don't think you would have chastised me if I had noted that two BNP thugs had roughed up the Hindu lad, so why should the fact that two Muslim thugs had done so be censored? There is too much censorship by the BBC and its cohorts of things like that such as harassment of shulgoers and churchgoers and of clergy in certain areas; a disused churchyard adjoining a former church (now mosque) in Lancashire was apparently bulldozed without permission or regard to the feelings of relatives; a Muslim mayor of Tower Hamlets insisted that women (all women, including councillors and non-Muslims) at his investiture must crowd into a separate room from men - this, at a civil event, not a religious one! It is this which causes so much resentment in society and is feeding the BNP. Censoring it causes more anger. And so it goes.

Trek

The only people who use suicide bombing as a weapon are Muslims. Why is it that no one in their faith condemns this?

stanley Jerusalem

I admire your intent to walk softly but please phil, please, carry a big stick.

Wilhelm

Im scared, really scared that Achmed Dinnerjacket might get nuclear weapons, truly I am.

It'll be curtains for all of us.

Wilhelm

What guilt ridden liberals fail to grasp is that there is not one single democracy in the muslim world, not one.

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan is famous for his quote that “Minarets are our
bayonets. The domes are our helmets, the
mosques our barracks and the believers our army”,

God help Christian Europe, because we badly
need his help just like the battle of Lepanto.

Wilhelm

When was the last time you heard the Salvation Army hijack an airplne and fly it into skycrapers in downtown Manhattan.

It just doesnt happen, now does it ?

Joan

Marcus: “One of Jane's quotes is 'believers, take neither Jews nor Christians as your friends'. I wonder if those here who cling so desperately to their hatred of Muslims have any Muslim friends? I do.”

What’s that, Marcus? You can’t deal with the point so you just thought you’d write a non sequitur? Jane’s comments were about Islam – not about your friend.

“A person's relationship with their faith can be a complex thing” – who said otherwise? No one.

How does that suddenly render the instructions of The Koran meaningless?

“I dislike religious extremism as much as anyone, but reject utterly the blanket hatred of an entire faith group which is expressed here.” No. That was not said to you by Jane at all.

You just decided that you had no response to what she did say and so decided to put the words into her mouth.

“It's called bigotry.” No, Marcus, it’s called you making things up that haven’t been said.

“Why are you so keen to hang on to this loathing?” – ah, yes, The Guardian reader’s version of “When did you last beat your wife?”

I think most people would agree with Winston Churchill in his book The River War that “individual Muslims may show splendid qualities”.

Winston Churchill: “How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property - either as a child, a wife, or a concubine - must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.

“Individual Muslims may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen; all know how to die; but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science - the science against which it had vainly struggled - the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome.”

Carl

It is clear that many contributors here take any chance they can get to demonise Muslims. It isn't pretty and it reeks of bigotry.

daniel maris

Phil and Phillips -

There are various considerations here.

1. What is the truth about Islam? What is taught by its clerics? What is believed by its followers and so on...

I think that what is taught by its clerics (both violent and non-violent) is pretty clear - it's a form of totalitarianism, with a Caliph as single ruler, no democracy, little personal freedom and no tolerance of anyone who defies Shariah. To the extent that clerics don't own up to this they are 99% of the time lying. There are very few clerics who have modernised their interpretation to the extent that it is compatible with liberal democracy. People often misunderstand the Dar Islam (House of Islam) philosophy and don't realise that many Muslims in the UK consider they can to some extent compromise on Jihad because of their status in the country (protected subjects) but that does not mean they don't support the overall project of achieving a global totalitarian order.

The extent to which individual Muslims take seriously the teachings of clerics is of course very debatable. In 1950s Ireland most people took the teachings of the Christian clerics very seriously. Now,50 years later, few do I would suggest. But Islam has a very strong hold on its followers through education, regular Mosque attendance and the tendency for Muslims to form separate social groups for all sorts of activities.

2. Having reach a view on 1, one then has to decide how you deal with it, assuming you decide it is a problem. Responses can range from outright appeasement to all out war. Personally I'd say I was in the middle.

3. In deciding on your response, one takes a view on how honest one is about the analysis under 1. I think MP has been a little disingenuous shall we say at times: insisting that there is some undefined Islam which is moderate and criticising "Islamism". I am not sure how credible that distinction is. Maybe that's what enraged Ed! To my mind Islam is what it is - a remarkably coherent and consistent prescription for personal and public action. Whether sincere Muslims forward it through violence (Jihadism) or by other means (e.g. Saudi money for propaganda) is a secondary matter.

Presumably Ed now seeks to promote it exclusively by peaceful means and not by supporting Jihadism in any shape or form. Which is good, but still leaves the question of how compatible Islam is with liberal democracy.

Neil Craig

When somebody engages in that much hysteria & is that unable to use facts you know that they know they are wrong.

Husain is in the unenviable position of trying to make his entry to the British nomenklatura by the tried & tested method of claiming to represent some interest group with its hand out while making it clear he is sufficiently moderate to be open to offers from the establishment. As such he is simply unable to take up any but an anti-Zionist position. His anger & bewiderment are understandable, though not right. I don't think Melanie should count this a failure.

phil

just Louise,STANLEY ,DANIELthanks for the response .i am sure we tread a similar path preferring peace and are prepared to tread that path with those of different religions -I just feel we are being manipulated into unnecessary fights which none of us need -Stanley I always carry a large table tennis bat----
and a short message for the wonderful wilhelm who said ""

Im scared, really scared that Achmed Dinnerjacket might get nuclear weapons, truly I am.

It'll be curtains for all of us."" ---- willie he definitely will be looking for you !!! in fact only last week he mentioned you on press TV -he asked who the hell is wilhelm ?

phil

Ya """While you discuss Ed Husain's right to crap on Israel in order to look nice in the eyes of his co-religionists,"" you well know that is not what I said .Please read it again -I am not his publicist here but if anyone makes a statement they are entitled at least here to have it put truthfully

I have said for more time than I care to remember here that I am a supporter of Israel ,you are also aware that I believe engagement is important for our progress-do you prefer this with the lunatics or Ed Hussein -?----please no one liners ,you often write meaningfully but this nasty stuff ill becomes you

London Calling

Its obvious to me that your 'United Front’ article hit a raw nerve with Ed Hussein, so much so he went all cappuccino on you...I would stick to lattes alone next time.

Ed actually directed readers to your blog which informed people of the Sharia law march, who otherwise would not have known, therefore I doubt he scored many points on his Jihad accusations against you.

I didn’t see anything on the news regarding the protest for ‘Sharia Law in Britain’
In London on Saturday, however I did see footage of the far right protest in Leeds.

Impartial news or was the protest in London cancelled ?

Verity

Linda Smith - Are you sure? I had always heard and read that not only do one's ancestors have to be Jewish for one to be formally Jewish, but that Judaism was a uterine descendancy. In other words, having a Jewish father didn't get you in. Did this change with Reform Jews? Surely it has not always been thus?

Carl writes: "It is clear that many contributors here take any chance they can get to demonise Muslims. It isn't pretty and it reeks of bigotry."

Muslims demonise themselves with great competence and don't need any help. Hanging gay male teenagers from cranes, for example. Making women walk around in long black shrouds with only their eyes showing to the point where Islamic women so dressed all suffer from severe Vitamin D deficiency from lack of sunlight on their skin. Marrying children. Murdering daughters who "shame" the family. Slicing the clitorises off little girls. Multiple wives in the service of breeding warriors for Allah. Mass murder of "infidels" (in other words, sane people). Individual beheadings of people they don't approve of.

Frankly, in demonising Islam, I just cannot compete with the Islamics themselves.

George R

The websites with the clearest critiques of Islam include:

Jihadwatch, Frontpage Magazine, New English Review, Gates of Vienna, and Religion of Peace. Such sites are necessary reading to understand what Islam is, and how it operates against us, from Islamic jihadists to Muslim Brotherhood.

The dhimmi British Labour government has little clue about the motivation and operation of Islam jihad and its supporters. Wittingly or unwittingly, Labour aids and abets such dangerous interests by:

1.) mass immigration of hundreds of thousands of people from Islamic countries; and by campaigning for 75 million Turkish Muslims to be allowed into the EU.

2.)delegating UK security to certain Muslim organisations and individuals as publicly paid propagandists who put Islam's interests first;

3.)ignoring the advice and writings of non-Muslim critics and scholars of Islam (including apostates).

Henry Sidgwick

Phil, We have been on opposite sides of many arguments, but I think your remarks here are admirable for their common sense, restraint and decency. (I know that from me this may not be particularly welcome. Feel free to disregard it. Nevertheless, you have on this occasion improved the tone of the discussion.)

Mike Diboll

A 2009 Gallup poll found that 77% of British Muslims felt that they identified ‘very strongly’ or ‘extremely strongly’ with their country; higher, in fact, than the British public as a whole at 50%.

This seems about right to me, and deserve wider publicity.

I've never had that much time for Ed Hussein, since his 'Islamist' experience is only with Hizb ut-Tahrir, and, when who's said and done, who are they? The Islamic equivalent of the SWP, that's all; silly undergraduate campus radicalism for angry young men who grow out of and end up with respectable jobs in the BBC or wherever.

How many HUT members or sympathisers ever went on to become real jihaidis? None, I'd wager. Yes, what they say is sick and objectionable, but ditto the SWP, the RCP and the 57 varieties of campus Trotskyism one used to find on the '70s and '80s campus. Yes, there might be the odd HUT figure who's cavorted aith real terrorists, just as there were a hardcore of Trots with shady associations with the IRA. But which of them ever actually killed? Where the Trot vanguard led, HUT and such like follow on the postmodern, politically correct, culturally relativist campus. As with the Trots, one grows out of it all, as EH did.

British jihadis, it seems to me, are quite different people from the both HUT 'bring back the Caliphate' bores or yer actual Middle Eastern or South Asian Islamic terrorists.

Unlike in the Middle East, ideology is the excuse, not the reason foir their atrocities. British jihadis are mimetic, just as British Movement bootboys were mimetic neo-Nazis. British jihadis' real links OBL, Zawahiri et al are about as real as the Nazi boneheads' links with Hitler and Himmler. Largely imaginary.

Thus British jihadis, by and large, are simply the dysfunctional, the alienated, the psychotic, the misanthropic.

Mostly, they are just confused and deeply disturbed people who but for an accident of birth would be school shooter uppers, serial killers, or neo-nazis. Having a background in Islam, or converting to it, merely provides an excuse for violent, nihilistic, murderous behavious.

And if it wasn't Islam (or a perversion thereof) providing the excuse, it's be 'postcode' or 'respect' killings, or drug turf wars, or black leather trench coats, pump-actions and goth make up, or biker gangs, or their microwave ovens telling them to kill prostitutes, or their tapeworrms telling them to kill the Prime minister, or whatever.

For EH to claim to be a jihadi insider on the basis of campus HUT radicallism, and therefore an 'authentic voice' of reformed jihadism is disingenuous to say the least.

While I have some sympathy for Melanie Phillips' position on Jihadis, she's become increasingly shrill of late and I fear is starting to lose the plot a bit. But then so is Ed Hussein. In defence of MP I can quote verbatim from her recent Spectator article. In one paragraph she says:

"There are many British Muslims, after all, who are a threat to no one, who want to enjoy the benefits of a secular society and human rights and are themselves potential victims of Islamism and Sharia law. But the BNP seeks to elide this distinction. It hates not just Islamism, but all Muslims; indeed, it has siezed upon the widespread concern with Islamic extremism to morph seemlessly from Paki-bashing to Muslim-bashing"

Speaking of the 'English Defence Leause' she says:

"The EDL leders have admitted that it is opposed not only to Islamist extremism, but too 'all devout Muslims' -- a BNP-style pitch"

She also clearly distinguishes "jihadis who indorse the Islamicisation of Britain, death to gays and apostates, the destruction of Israel, and the second-class status of women' from the majority of Muslims. So I think EH is overstating his case somewhat. I've read his Guardian piece, and her reply on

http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/

Both of them seem pretty shrill, and pretty nuts. So perhaps they deserve each other. After all, both are journos who are trying to make careers as commentators on things they understand imperfectly at best.

I once had an ambition to be a columnist, I'm glad I never followed through with it!

Herbert Thornton

Phil –

I acknowledge, & hope I can reciprocate, your courtesy.

However, when you say “Gentle is what we need now as fighting is not working” I think you have the wrong end of the stick altogether.

From everything I see and hear, the fighting being conducted by the vanguard of Islam is working very well indeed - and so, from the Islamic point of view is our gentleness.

Islam has declared war on the civilized world. It is a low grade variety of war, but it is the kind of war that Islam has currently chosen to pursue and Islam is currently winning it, and this is especially true in Britain. We are in a state of war. We need to oppose Islam with far greater vigour and determination because if we do not, we will be subjugated. Britain will become a cruel, retrograde, medieval, theocracy.

May I also make a minor and perhaps quibbling correction. In the strict sense of the expression, the BNP is not “my party” because I am not a member. But that does not mean that I oppose the BNP – in fact I wholeheartedly support them because they are the only party interested in defending & rescuing Britain including both you and me and all our relatives from the onslaughts and advance of Islam.

I can’t offer you any support in the matter of your being, it seems, somewhat agitated by Wilhelm. I have read pretty well all of what he writes, and he always seems to me to write good sense, and to express it robustly.

Augustus

The Jihad ideology and the dhimmi rules aren't even in the Koran. These were made up after the death of Mohammed and were developed by Muslim theologians as a result of the interpretation of certain verses
in the Koran, and some from the hadith (commentaries). These ideas were mostly developed during the period of Islamic conquests in the eighth or ninth
century, when there was a strong
military confrontation between
Christianity and Islam. When Mohammed established his community, his initial intention was to have Jews and Christians be a part of it, by paying a designated tax. But they did not accept him as prophet. The concept of the Jihad precedes the Crusades by five centuries, and it was with
Jihad that both Christians and Jews became subject to Islamic law. If they submitted without resistance to the Muslim armies they were given protection by the ruler, and if they paid the tax their life was safe. To be tolerated they had to submit and be inferior. Therefore, in Countries that have an Islamic government and Sharia law not everyone is equal. In the Western world we recognize that everyone has the right to live by their conscience and have liberty. So for us to ignore the intolerance of militant Islam towards what they deem as unbelievers is a grave and costly mistake. There is no middle ground.

daniel maris

Mike Diboll misleads by referring to it as simply a Gallup Poll.

"The report, by Gallup and the Coexist Foundation , a charity dedicated to promoting understanding between Jews, Christians and Muslims..."

Never heard of the Coexist Foundation before but I think that tells you where it's coming from. Also the polling methods sounds distinctly dodgy if you read up on them. If you were a Jihadi fearful of Western security services' tricks and infiltration would you really express your extremism over the phone?

In any case, you can get any answer you like if you ask the right lead-in questions as anyone who knows anything about polling knows.

Here are two questions you could lead in before you ask "Do you support the death penalty?" -

(a) "Do you agree it is shameful for a country to execute innocent people and that innocent people should never be executed?"

(b)"Do you agree that our sentencing is too lenient, especially for really serious offences such as murder?"

Do you really think you'd get the same response after each lead in?

Pollsters don't reveal these vital lead in (and leading) questions.

hippiepooter

I read Ed Hussein's book. But near the end he wax misty eyed about great Muslim 'acheivements' such as the occupation of Spain. The seed of his relapse to barbarism was clearly incubating from the word go.

phil

Henry Sidgwick-many thanks that was very brave of you and I do not bear grudges -well done

phil

Herbert Thornton -Herbert I really have a great deal of sympathy with your thoughts and I am sure much of the British public do too ,but I relate what you say to militant Islam and not to what I believe is the silent majority and one which is terrified of the lunatics within it as Mike Diboll described . We have all discussed this subject at great length and its getting boring now so I will finish by telling you that I am not the least agitated by wilhelm I see him as a figure of fun and one who seems more interested in what I have to say than the other way round ,although I am surprised that you think he is worthy of "listening" too -he is just a music hall act to me . I visualise him in shorts , braces and knee socks with a straw in his mouth :) regards phil

wonderer

Linda Smith
November 2nd, 2009 12:18pm, in common sense terms you're right but for the purposes of the Race Relations Act 1976 Jews and Sikhs are considered to be races: see the House of Lords decision in Mandla v Dowell-Lee [1983] 2 AC 548.

Wilhelm

Cheer up Phil, its not all that bad, son.

Look on the bright side, Nick is on 22% of the vote and drum roll please, he's going back on Question Time next year, Huzzah ! cant wait.

Today Question Time, tomorrow 10 downing street.

Avanti

Wilhelm

''I visualise him in shorts , braces and knee socks with a straw in his mouth ''

Bit racist there, Phil.

You'll be hearing from my lawyers in the morning.

Linda Smith

Verity (2 Nov 4:46pm) Yes, I’m sure. Anyone can convert to Orthodox Judaism by following a course of instruction and demonstrating a sincere religious conviction by observing the religious rules - a bit like becoming a nun! Judaism is not now a proselytising religion - probably a pragmatic development to avoid murderous repercussions from “host” communities in the Diaspora. But, in Roman times for example, vast numbers of pagans converted to Judaism. And you may recall the story in the Old Testament of the convert Ruth.

I understand that the practical reason for “a uterine descendancy” was that one could determine who the mother was easily enough but not the father. Also, if a Jewish woman was raped (e.g during a pogrom) then any child born consequently could be automatically accepted as a member of the community.

Frank P

Sam Armstrong (12.25am)

There is not the slightest doubt that you will get your wish, e.g. the next post on Melanie's blog.

I've been waiting for Ed Hussain to put a foot wrong for some time; to me he was always lupus in ovine costume.

Don't trust any of the buggers: extreme, moderate or indifferent; come the day, they will all be on the same side. More than we can say about 'our' lot I'm afraid; appeasers, fools and cowards abound.

Carl

Verity - full marks for deliberately confusing cultural and religious practices and thereby proving my point.

skydog

Ed Husain:''Melanie Philips's zealotry and ignorance frighten me.''

And Islamic fundamentalist zealotry and ignorance don't I suppose?

Laban Tall

According to Churchill, de Gaulle once confided to him: "He had to be rude to the British to prove to French eyes that he was not a British puppet..."

I think Ed is being rude to Melanie for similar reasons.

just Louise

Good Heavens, Wilhelm! Old Nick, with a face for radio and the oratorical powers of a budgie, has won over 22% of voters?
Imagine what the bovver boys' party might achieve if it had a handsome charismatic leader!
Just goes to show how desperate times have become.
And there are signs that in his desperation to cling to office the odious Brown is pretending to get the message: Alan Johnson - he who told us recently that loses no sleep about the prospect of the UK population reaching 70 million -is making noises about immigration now!

pip

Bit of an eye opener this one Melanie, well done!

As to EH, I have read his book and had my misgivings about his sincerity. I also have read the Quilliam site, there were telltale signs there I wasn't happy about. I don't read CiF - or anything to do with the guardian, it makes me feel unclean.

This recent spat, confirms my doubts about EH.

Keep that chin up Melanie!

Linda Smith

Carl, I should be interested to read your definition of a "cultural" as opposed to a "religious" practice, ie where does one end and the other begin?

Verity

Carl writes: Verity - full marks for deliberately confusing cultural and religious practices and thereby proving my point.

I have no idea what your point was as I don't recall reading any particular post from you. I have no idea what "cultural and religious practices" you refer to and have absolutely no motive for "deliberately confusing cultural and religious practices" - even if I had enough knowledge. I know very little about Judaism, which is why I asked Linda about her particular point.

Linda, thank you for the courtesy of your reply. That was very illuminating. I had absolutely no idea that people could convert to Judaism and that vast numbers of pagans had done so during Roman times.

Is it not true though - I ask because I don't know; not with any hidden motive - that they really don't like people to convert? I think they sort of kept Madonna out. (Although, who wouldn't?) Hindus absolutely hate the idea of anyone non-Indian "converting" to their religion. They think that being Indian is essential to understanding it.

Peter Phillips

Melanie, you are wasting your breath. None of the branches of the LibLab&CON party are going to listen to your warnings about Islam. They are too busy trying to garner it's votes.

There's only one party that will do anything about the threat, and it isn't UKIP.

When you finally realise that, and drop the rather silly 'racist' 'repulsive' and other such tags that you feel obliged to pepper your otherwise excellant articles with, you, and our country, might start to address this serious problem before it is too late - though I fear it is probably already so.

Gregory Hartley-Brewer

"After all, there was in principle no reason why the settlers couldn’t just be left there and become citizens of a state of Palestine whose boundaries could simply be drawn around them."
In practice not sure ideological settlers who want a Greater Israel would appreciate becoming citizens of a Palestinian state. Principles with realism anyone?

Carl

Fair question Linda: Just about all of Verity's bile was concerning cultural rather than religious practices. She can't see it herself because, as she says, she doesn't know much about it.

Unless of course you really do believe that the average Muslim does go around mutilating and killing their daughters.

phil

just Louise I think wilhelm meant 22 per cent alcohol, and the "vote and drum" is a pub -when he claimed he was referring me to his lawyer I think he meant psychiatrist -he gets easily confused

Greg D

George R
November 2nd, 2009 5:42pm wrote:

"The websites with the clearest critiques of Islam include:

Jihadwatch, Frontpage Magazine, New English Review, Gates of Vienna, and Religion of Peace. Such sites are necessary reading to understand what Islam is, and how it operates against us, from Islamic jihadists to Muslim Brotherhood."

I suggest you and other Phillip-worshipers read this Frontpage article (http://97.74.65.51/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=12534)
and think about the Neather revelations, Lord Levy, Jeremy Oppenheimer (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8332314.stm), Barbara Roche (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jews'_Free_School), the Frankfurt School et al. You're barking up the wrong tree pal.

Linda Smith

Carl, you said my question was "fair" but failed to answer it. Why?

Jews and Christians do not mutilate their daughters either culturally or religiously, neither are they known for "honour killing" either culturally or religiously. Moslems do both, religiously and culturally.

Herbert Thornton

Greg,

The first link that you gave is especially fascinating. I see that the headline to the FrontPageMag article reads “Why Jews Welcome Muslims”. I foresee an explosion of protest about it, but it is hard not to read it and wonder about the motivations of, say, Jack Straw.

My own reaction to it is to say – especially to, for example, Phil and Melanie – for God’s sake think about it and despite the current manifestations of ignorant anti-Semitism, please understand that most British people believe that their Jews are as essential a part of themselves – the British people - as are the English. We all need each other.

If ever Nick Griffin stands down as leader of the BNP, my most heartfelt wish would be for his place to be taken by a new Benjamin Disraeli.

Linda Smith

Gregory Hartley-Brewer, no non-Muslim in his right mind would want to become a dhimmi in an Islamic Palestinian state.

Linda Smith

Wonderer (2 Nov 8:26pm), in the case you cited, for the purposes of the Race Relations Act 1976 Sikhs were to be treated as if they were a race. The decision clearly states that Sikhs are not a race in the biological sense; their difference lies in their “ethnicity“, ie their group practices and identifications. It is a pity that a separate Act has not been devised to avoid the confusions that arise due to the conflation of “ethnicity” with “race”.

Linda Smith

Dear Moderator, I'm not sure if this comment was posted properly a few minutes ago, so I'm posting it again.

Verity, Judaism is above all a philosophical and legalistic religion. If a person wants to convert, then they must choose which branch suits their own predilections, eg. Ashkenazi, sephardi, orthodox, conservative, reform, liberal. It is then up to the proselyte to convince the rabbis of the relevant branch that they are serious in their intentions, that they understand the rules and live by them. I rather get the idea that Madonna’s beliefs belong to some wacky offshoot of Judaism, not to any of the mainstream branches. Sammy Davis Jr, as well as Elizabeth Taylor, are two well-known entertainers who converted to mainstream branches of Judaism.

Somebody that might interest you is Rabbi Capers Funnye (Michelle Obama’s cousin) ‘..in 1985 he underwent a second conversion, this one certified by a Conservative rabbinical court. ..I explained that if I was going to do the kind of outreach I wanted, European Jews had to feel that I was their brother, Funnye said. “But I’m still a Black Israelite. A halakhic conversion” - one in accordance with traditional Jewish law - “wasn’t going to take away any of my blackness.“…In 1997.…he became a member of the local Board of Rabbis. Rabbi Michael Balinsky, the executive vice president of the Chicago Board, says Funnye makes a conscientious effort “to play an active role in the mainstream Jewish community without losing his Black Hebrew tradition. He‘s taken a leadership role for the Jewish community on civil rights issues and outreach to Hispanics and Muslims”.’ (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/05/magazine/05rabbi-t.html?pagewanted=all)

Carl

Linda Smith: In which case my second paragraph was entirely correct. I suppose that I really shouldn't have expected otherwise.

Greg D

Thank you, Herbert, for taking the time to read the article and for your balanced response. Essentially, I think Melanie takes exactly the same line as Steinlight (as her writings on Obama in the JC make clear). Unfortunately, she seems to be in a minority - which she also realises!

Linda Smith

Carl, what on earth is an "average" Muslim?

Verity

Mike Dieball "I once had an ambition to be a columnist, I'm glad I never followed through with it!"

On the evidence, I cannot imagine any editor giving you a job.

wonderer

Linda Smith, this comment may be superfluous as I'm not sure we're even disagreeing but it is clear from Joshua Rozenberg's comments and quotes in http://standpointmag.co.uk/node/1851 that the same reasoning is applied to Sikhs and Jews.

Linda Smith

Wonderer, reminds me of the teaser my philosophy tutor posed in my undergraduate days re bicycles, ie. What makes a a bicycle a bicyle? Take away a wheel or the saddle or the chain - do you still identify it as a bicycle? What is the essence of a bicycle that makes it a bicycle?

GeoffM

I think you should jump on the Guardian articles about Kim Howells views on Afghanistan, border controls, surveillance of "certain communities" etc.

I say this because in the process of commenting I noticed that the leftist commenters seem to think that Kim Howells greatest crime is being involved in the Labour Friends of Israel.

Gareth

Well said Melanie - it's one of the few articles I have ever read where someone who has been lying has been exposed directly. How refreshing!!
Politicians and journalists seem to play a game where you try and be anything but direct.

btw - The Guardian calls you Mad Mel because you don't want to destroy Israel/Jews. Whereas

Mad Mel Gibson does want this but he is a cool, popular, well balanced (like Rod Liddle) and the 'mad' is just an affectionate rebuke to his antics.
Ho ho - those funny people at the Guardian - always fooling around and being satirical !! (again like Rod Liddle)

British Muslim

IM sick of BNP spamming every race related article on every newspaper - in an effort to impose their rediculous views.
I see no difference between these people and those that are on the opposite scale - i.e muslim extremists.

They both portray thier simplistic views that all muslims must be terrorists / or non muslims are equally dangerous.

THIS IS SOMETHING THE AUTHOR OF THE BLOG DOES NOT ADVOCATE.

You can tar us all with a brush but I can tell you now that you guys are wrong -

Im a muslim - do i want to impose sharia law? NO - although some laws would be a great deterrent against those that murder / rape / steal and commit adultery. 50 flogs for the MP's that stole money from the public purse? Dont tell me they dont deserve it.

Do I want my wife to wear hijab - thats up to her. But I can see why some do, but as far as Islam taking away womens right - whoa there! Every muslim guy can tell you that its his wife who really wears the trousers.

Do I love my country? Yes thats why I pay taxes - I help the town - raise money for cancer charities and I even pick up litter in my neighbourhood if I see some in the street..

Do I hate western values and civilisation? Yes - Certain things like binge drinking and people who violate civil rights - picking fights with others and destroying the town which seems to be a good night out on a Saturday for most.

Remember hate breeds hate. I wont take any crap froma muslim extremists or a racist party. I will fight you both to the death.

logdon

British Muslim
November 5th, 2009 3:37pm

You may be a good citizen but unfortunately your last paragraph indicates the cultural void between Muslims and the rest.

It's always so stark isn't it? Despite the anger many on this thread feel against Islam, death threat or as you put it, fighting to the death is never mentioned.

A co-religionist of yours has just killed five of his so called fellow soldiers in Afghanisan. Shot in the back, in other words, by a Muslim traitor whose action has deprived many back here of their loved ones.

You may note, whilst incredibly angry, we're not talking of a similar retaliation.

I suggest you go to Amazon, buy the DVD, Obsession, and then think long and hard as to where Islamic hate and our Newtonian response comes from.

Its all there, the ranting mullahs, the senseless killing, the lies spewing forth as to how nothing is the fault of Islam, its always the West.

Then make your case.

logdon

Two here to back up my comment.

1/ From Jihad Watch

Five British soldiers Killed by Taliban Infil-traitor

Spencer: the problem here is a fact that we have pointed out many, many times there is no reliable way to distinguish jihadists from peaceful Muslims. There is no Islamic authority (with the arguable exception of the Spanish ulama) that has declared that Muslims who hold to the theology and ideology of Osama bin Laden are not true Muslims and are not welcome in their mosques. Making this even more difficult is the doctrine of religious deception founded on Koran 3:28. Thus the Afghan police authorities couldn’t have kept Taliban loyalists out, even if it tried — and it is unlikely that it is trying. This is something for the learned analysts to ponder not only as it concerns our policies in Afghanistan, but numerous other policies as well, including immigration, the language used in defending ourselves from this threat, and more.

2/ From sheikyermami

‘Everyone Hates Jews’…

Jew hatred is more common than couscous in the ME:

Aaron Klein/World News Daily

JERUSALEM – Trees, animals and non-Jewish athletes despise Jews, declared an Egyptian cleric on his country’s television network.

“People hate (Jews). They don’t like them. We are not talking only about people. [The same goes] even for trees and animals,” stated Egyptian cleric Amin Al-Ansari on a program two weeks ago that aired on Egypt’s Al-Rahma satellite network.

Emma Royds

I have to agree with Bernard, Nov 2nd 10:35am "people like Ed Husain who evidently are playing devious politics at a time when hard and clear denunciation of extremism and violent extremism would be welcome." Immediately after Geert Wilders was banned from UK Ed Hussain, in an interview on Sky News, said that any Islamic scholar would wipe the floor with his arguments. Curiously, Hussain made no attempt to do so. The noted authority on Islam - Robert Spencer (Jihad Watch)invites experts on Islam to disprove his claim that Islam is not a religion of peace. Not one will take up his offer. Instead they content themselves with avoiding him and trying to get him banned from appearing on public debating platforms for fear he will open our eyes to the truth about the goals of Islam - the great elephant in the room.

Carl

logdon, you are clearly some kind of Doctor Dolittle. Isn't that rather silly?