Just whose side is Baroness Warsi on?

James Murphy

'Dealt with'? Promoted, more like. Indeed, I'd personally like to recommend Warsi for Archbishop of Canterbury - disingenuous fool she may be, but she's certainly got bigger balls than the bearded lump currently occupying the post.

t

be interesting for someone to pose these question to her, unlikely to happen though as she will probably dodge and duck them.

John Steadman

Cameron's only got Warsi, Melanie, but we've got you. Thank you.

David

"It is essential that this kind of verbal bullying and blackmail faced down. Yet now the co-chairman of the Conservative Party has associated her party with this mind-twisting intimidation"

As a card carrying member of the Conservative Party and an extremely committed activist of many years I am now reviewing my involvement with the party.

If David Cameron does not disassociate himself and the party with the dangerous and warped opinions of Baroness Warsi, then to be honest I don't see the point in flogging my guts out for a party that no longer reflects my views.

I suspect he will say nothing on this subject and leave me with no alternative but to leave a party which I have always felt was the best vehicle for change in the United Kingdom.

A very sad day.

logdon

Front leader on the Telegraph site this morning with a massive reader commentary. It could be said they were not exactly favourable and thus the whole lot has disappeared.

Why?

They expressed genuine thought, maybe a little robust at times but nothing of the nature of the horrendous anti western/anti-semitic bile which pours out of the ME or Pakistani media.

This mealy mouthed censorship achieves no ends whatsoever.

Comment is comment and as such should be allowed to stand. Kitchens and heat spring to mind.

logdon

I'd like to hear her comment on this.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUZApV8IwVc&feature=related

Martin Moore

Melanie is totally correct. What a reversal, with Jack Straw "coming out" about the behaviour of Pakistani males in his, and similar, constituencies, and the Conservative party chair mounting an hysterical defence of those who would settle in our land and then try to change everything that is good about our country.
The issue of the fact that the Uk is no longer a society which enjoys free speech is also quite chilling, and the fact that this is rarely aired or subject to protest even more frightening. The Conservatives need to repeal the new-Labour totalitarian legislation without delay.

St Bruno

As far as I am concerned Baroness Warsi can say what she likes about whoever or whatever she likes, I still will not trust or believe her one bit. She is definitely on her own side.

I fail to see why she is ever needed in the Higher House of the Coalition Government she seems to be a big disaster waiting to happen, like a few of her Lower House parliamentary party members. She could be appointed as the voice of apology for her Muslim community in UK and throughout the wider world. She should be very careful she doesn’t tread on any toes or upset any really big wigs in that wider world. Then again, maybe, she is the chosen one to front the peacefulness of Islam to the unbelievers that are still left in Christian UK.

The link below has as its main item a 67 page magazine entitled ‘Inspire’. I will only say that it did really inspire me to link it here as it might just reach a wide audience as I think it would open a few eyes to the agenda and thought processes of the many issues of Islam in the West. There are also links to many other exciting places and opinions that are worth reading, if you are really that concerned about the subject.

http://blazingcatfur.blogspot.com/2011/01/shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.html

Augustus

Islam's jihadist rights are already protected here, and in the rest of Europe. It's delusional to think otherwise. The infrastructure of mosques, schools, and litigation is already in place. And don't forget their laws are supreme and stand above mere man-made laws. No wonder that there's misunderstanding and intolerance
amongst the population.

cityca

".......it’s the denial that there is any problem with any Muslims or with Islam, the refusal to halt the process of Islamising Britain and the attempts to censor and stifle discussion that really inflame people to boiling point."

Precisely.

I had always assumed that Warsi was at the other extreme to someone like Inayat Bunglawala of the MCP but her outburst has made it only too clear that she is of a similar frame of mind to the odious Bunglawala.

We should be grateful I suppose that she outed herself because if she remains chairman of the Conservatives, we ought to be very worried indeed.

Steve Tierney

I don't know about the Baroness, but when I have guests at my dinner table I don't usually try to tell them what to say or think. It would be rude - and they'd be unlikely to ever want to come to dinner again.

If I disagree with something they say - I debate the point. Sensibly. Like an adult. It's called conversation. It was easier when speech was still free.

Heather

I understood Baroness Warsi differently. I thought her point was that putting all 1 billion Islamic people into boxes--whether into one box labeled “extremist” or into two boxes, one labeled “moderate” and the other labeled “extremist”--is an oversimplification. Many traditional and devout Muslims are against the use of violence to achieve religious and/or political objectives. There’s a great variety of ways that people practice their religion, whether they are Christian, Muslim, Jewish, or other, and many use lots of things besides their religious beliefs to determine their response to political and economic issues.

Also, focusing solely on religion ignores the additional political, social, and economic rifts that are fueling the current unrest and the wars. If the people of Afghanistan and Iraq were all Christians, but they were poor Christians who lived under strict Christian theocracies with isolationist policies, and the issues of natural resources and geopolitical control were the same, and then a small group of Christian fanatics based in Afghanistan attacked the U.S., we would have virtually the same two wars that we have today. Whether the people were fundamentalist Christians, traditionalist Native Americans, or orthodox Jews, or what have you, as long as their vision clashed with that of the more secular, democratic structure of the first world nations, and a similar scenario of mutual fear and threat evolved, we’d be in the same bad situation.

Suicide attackers are not solely an Islamic manifestation. They are one tactic of asymmetrical warfare which is seen when there’s a great disparity between the two fighters. Even if the non-Muslim fighters opted more for roadside bombs and ambushes than for suicide bombs, the essential fight and disconnect would be the same. Would there be any less concern about assimilation and any less concern about the threat to national harmony just because the people who wore traditional clothing and preferred a less secular lifestyle were Christian? When anti-Semitism was rampant in the 1930’s and 1940’s, people would say things like, “He’s Jewish, but he’s a decent fellow.” That kind of assumption, that being Jewish is generally suspect, is what Warsi feels is happening to Muslims, and I think that’s what she meant with her example of the factory worker who is “only fairly Muslim”. Being “Muslim” is still damned. I don’t see anything in her speech that indicates any support whatsoever for militant extremism. I think her concern is for how prejudice can be subtle, how it prompts us to direct our rage at innocents, and how it prevents us from finding concrete solutions to our problems.

JohnW

"Front leader on the Telegraph site this morning with a massive reader commentary..."

Indeed - I was one of the commenters. I would say about 95% were strongly against Warsi's intended speech.

From the evidence of recent months, the Telegraph is titlting ever leftwards, mirroring the sad state of the Conservative party. It is now almost standard practice to see controversial comments wiped after a day or two.

I hope this is not a metaphor for our times.

Archie

Quite so, Miss Phillips, and what a storm across the blogosphere this silly woman and her apologists have raised! Not before time, say I. Interesting times ahead, as they are saying.

Andy Brim

Mrs Warsi is obviously a P.C nincompoop who is almost unsackable by Dave.

I wonder at just whose tables she has been sitting at recently? Harriet Harman's perhaps?

Derek BLADES

So, Baroness Warsi is expected to say that "The notion that all followers of Islam can be described either as ‘moderate’ or ‘extremist’ can fuel misunderstanding and intolerance"

Interesting observation. Let's try "All Seventh Day Adventists/ Jews/Black people/ Gypsies/Scots... can be described as either 'moderate' or 'extremist'"

Yes. I would certainly find that silly, and possibly objectionable, if I belonged to any of those groups. Thank you Baroness W. A useful pointer towards more civilised dinner-tables.

Yes. I think the Baroness has a point here. Tlaking at the dinner table about Jews, Blacks, Arabs or any other group defined by race or religion probably is offensive. If anybody does thaty at my dinner tgable I auromatically cross them off the invitation list.

Mosquito

It has long been the policy of the Islamic countries at the UN to try to shut down any open discussion of religion. For all her charm and sweet reasonableness there is clearly a darker side to the Baroness. It will be a sad day for democracy when we are no longer allowed to call extremists what they are.

Gerard

You slam those who criticise Israel as anti-Semitic. Why should others not accuse you of Islamophobia (an equally abhorrent crime) for judging all of Islam on the basis of a tiny -but no less iniquitous- minority of extremists? Defining the difference between valid criticism and distorted prejudice is essential for all debates of these kinds. Which side are you on, Melanie?

EC

Melanie, I agree with every word.

Warsi is so wrong and so disingenuous in so many ways. Where to start, how much time have we got? I think that you summed it up very nicely with:

"Warsi has now outed herself as at best a stupid mouthpiece of those who are bamboozling Britain into Islamisation, and at worst a supporter of that process. Either way, how David Cameron now deals with her will tell us much about how the Prime Minister will deal in turn with the great civilisational crisis that Britain now faces."

My bet is that David PRameron will do absolutely nothing. Her appointment tells you everything that you need to know about him!

The never elected "Baroness" Warsi has about as much credibility as the never elected High Priestess of the EU, "Baroness" Ashton.

We desperately need a Freedom Party in the UK.

Andy Gill

Warsi should be addressing the prejudice coming from the Muslim community , which far outweighs the prejudice against it.

Islamic schools have been exposed teaching anti-semitism on more than one occasion, and CHannel 4's 'Undercover Mosque' revealed a disgusting collection of hate-preaching imams.

She is painting Muslims as the victims of prejudice when in fact they are amongst the worst perpetrators.

TomTom

You should look at YouTube for the Conservative Meeting in Oldham hosted by Warsi.

Cameron has created his own Sarah Palin who wants to build a platform for her own clientele on the wreckage of his party.

He wanted to court the Muslim bloc vote with his LibDem pals and might soon liberate it from mainstream parties to be a pressure group

RS

I heard the Baroness' speech last night. It was a well argued, intelligent articulation of her position. She took questions which she answered robustly. She spoke out clearly against criminals and terrorists.

You can whip yourself into a self-righteous right wing stupor over her or you can read the transcript which is on her website.

And a bit more civility wouldn't go amiss.

greg

heather
Lets see.... here in uk you have the chinese poles germans vietnames low obedient citizen you never heard any of them commited themself to destroyng the land where they lives in. Now take the muslims if you ever heard about them is only with connection to terror, the prisons are full of them, the honnor killing commited every day by the muslims..If its not enough the massacre in:Tunis, Iraq,Egypt,Sudan,Alger commited by muslims... You seem to me like terror appologist heather!

Garry

there is probably some truth in what Warsi says, but the logical next question is..why has it become so? Also, I wonder what is being said about the rest of us around some muslim dinner tables ( we can all imagine)

Peter

The ruling elite in this country (of all parties likely to form a govt) are in serious denial about the Muslim problem. This follows a well defined pattern.

That is : if the public, by a vast majority, want something to happem, be enacted, or just recognised and that falls foul of the elite's perception, then simply ignore it.

Example include :
1. Global warming Or lack of it.
2. The West Lothian problem
3. Membership of the EU
4. The related ECHR
5. The death penalty
6. Britain is not a first rate power(nation).
7. Last but by no means least is the Muslim Threat.

In the last analysis, both major parties are in full agreement on how to deal with these things - i.e. to totally ignore public opinion.

Why do we bother with elections? Let them just take turns, and save a lot of money and aggro.

greg

Gerard

You seem to ignore everyday massacre commited in the name of islam in:iraq,tunis,egypt alger sudan etc Not to mention 1000 of terrors supporter in uk who who eger to replace the uk low with in sharia... you are terror appologist boy

Robbo

"We desperately need a Freedom Party in the UK."

We have one EC. It's called the BNP.

michael

"Just wait a minute."
"listen."
"Too be 'onest - if there aspects of Islamic culture that you don't like,... you... should mind your own business."

This cliche's coming, it always does.

John Thomas

I think it's a good question as to who are the biggest threats to free speech, the Islamicists or the homosexualists. But maybe the Government/establishment is, for cringing before both of these threats, placating, and thus encouraging them.

rippon

Ms Phillips,

I think Ms Warsi’s point is that it would be anti-Semitic to call you an moderate/extremist +Jew+.

Suppose your views about Israel are considered moderate or extremist. Ms Warsi’s argument, which seems entirely reasonable, is that it would be repugnant to refer to you as a ‘moderate Jew’ or ‘extremist Jew’.

raymond

One of the more disreputable things that the last Labour government did, was to encourage mass Muslim immigration. This was done for purely electoral reasons, and to rub the right's noses into multiculturalism ! I, for one, will never forgive them for this !

Raymond Douglas

John Thomas, Peter, excellent posts. Could not agree more.

Jilhan Asfar

Baroness Warsi should know better and tell the truth. we get treated better in Britain than our countries.

Heather

Read Warsiâ™s speech.
http://www.sayeedawarsi.com/2011/01/university-of-leicester-sir-sigmund-sternberg-lecture/
Her message is simple: please donâ™t blame the majority for the sins of the few. If we want a harmonious society without the threat of terrorism, we canâ™t be ruled by fear. Once we get scared, we generalize (I was stung by a bee--all bees must be dangerous; a man raped me--all men are rapists; a Muslim set off a bomb in the name of jihad--all Muslims are violent jihadists ). If we generalize, we will lump together those people who are harmless with those who are harmful. Treating the harmless as if they were harmful will make us lose the help that we need from the harmless people.

Fear made the majority of people in Germany decide that all Jews were a threat and thus most German citizens did nothing to stop the Holocaust. Please, letâ™s not repeat the horror of the Holocaust with todayâ™s Muslim citizens. We need to focus on whatâ™s a threat to a safe and civilized society: those specific individuals who want to use the violent anarchy of bombs and bullets. Focusing our anger at buildings (mosques) and clothing (veils) which are part and parcel of the life of any ordinary Muslim (just as churches and Sunday hats are part of the lives of ordinary Christians) prevents us from focusing on the heart of the problem.

Australians for Non-Bigoted Thinking

WAS I GAGGED ON THE BBC?

Apropos to your comments:

'Indeed, there are deeply totalitarian attempts across the west to suppress any association between Muslims and extremism or terrorism and isolate and punish any who make such an association.'

In a related vein, a few nights ago I was listening to the BBC World Have Your Say, a program called, 'Facing up to Germany's past, or a homage to Hitler?'
There were a panel of Germans on the program attempting to explain why nobody stood up to Hitler.

I wrote this comment but it was never published. Was I too politically incorrect for the BBC ?

I said:

'The bottom line is that the Germans did nothing about Hitler because of our greatest instinct; self-preservation. The populace were scared into submission by the intimidation of the Nazis-that they may be severely beaten, sent to a concentration camp, or even killed, if they protested.

This has an important lesson for today.

I see a parallel with violent Islamic fundamentalists. They threaten death for instance, to those that exercise their democratic right to criticise Islam. As examples, there was a Dutch politician who was killed, a Danish cartoonist attacked, and Salman Rushdie had to live in hiding for years. Geert Wilders, an outspoken Dutch politician, has to live in safe houses and even army barracks, for protection of himself and his family. This is not to mention the pervasive threat to world peace of Islamic terrorism, and how Britain egregiously appeases, permitting in parts,Sharia Law, and by allowing violent protests and hate speeches of Islamists in Britain, who want to bring down the West.

You must stand up to bullies, and that includes the enemies within, that wish to gag our freedom to protest with politically correct speak and its enactment by law. As one of your guests said. It did not take long for the Nazis to transform Germany, due to a submissive population, who were cowed into silence by the hand of violence.'

charles soper

Thanks Melanie, no surprise Cameroon has done and said nothing substantial in response.

charles soper

Australian, I don't know why you bother with the old dinosaur, the BBC has been blinkering its audiences and filtering the news for years, and the phenomenon is becoming more and more marked.

charles soper

BNP - a freedom party? Ha ha ha ha!

Freedom from conscience, freedom from Jews, gypsies and liberals, freedom from inconvenient criticism.

Edward McLaughlin

Derek Blades

"Tlaking at the dinner table about Jews, Blacks, Arabs or any other group defined by race or religion probably is offensive."

The 'probably' suggests you are not totally convinced. I'm not at all convinced and I'd be interested to hear your explanation as to how such discussion might be offensive.

Augustus

"Was I too politically incorrect for the BBC?"

Yes!

John.

rippon: you forget a small detail: no Jew in this country is planning to blow up as many innocent British citizens as possible.

James Hodson

@Heather: "Her message is simple: please don't blame the majority for the sins of the few."

Except she didn't say that. She stated that any dividing of Muslims into extreme and non-extreme groups is a sign of 'Islamophobia'. Essentially, she accused anyone who criticized any behaviour by any Muslim person of being motivated solely by bigotry.

No one sensible ever argued that all citizens of the Republic of Ireland were members of the IRA, merely that some were such.

If Baroness Warsi had intended to be more careful, which, Heather, is what you state, then she should have been just that: more careful. After all, she completed her legal training with the CPS and the Home Office Immigration Service (source: Wiki) so should be more precise with her words.

@Derek BLADES: And she's from Yorkshire. (That's a joke, BTW.)

J D Bryan

This reveals as I have feared Left-wing political correction has now infected the Conservative Party.

Margaret Muller-Johansson

She is on the other side the fanatics side.

AY

Fear doesn't know political parties. Labour, LibDems and Conservatives are all intimidated and don't dare to make slightest move opposing Islam.

The risk is too high, they reckon, to initiate mob violence which, in the case of fatalities among "activists", will bring all beauties of "Islamic self-defence", arms smuggling, and civil war. So politicians prefer not to notice de-facto shifts of power to Islamists in every aspect of social life.

Unfortunately as this situation of creeping submission isn't defused, the chances of further provocations only increase, as jihadis feel more confidence.

Having Freedom Party like Dutch or German, is only necessary thing for starting systematic opposition to Islamization. In the UK, there is no such party. The whole bulk of work lies ahead.

Alyn

I am curious about one thing.
How did Warsi become a Baroness?
Aren't such titles given only to people who have accomplished something of value (such as Margaret Thatcher).
What did this person do to merit such recognition?

Derek BLADES

@ Australians for Non-Bigoted Thinking.

You wrote that "Britain egregiously appeases, permitting in parts, Sharia Law..."

I assume you are referring to the arbitration laws under which the rulings of arbitration tribunals are binding in law, provided that both parties in the dispute agree to give it the power to rule on their case. Sharia courts are now taking advantage of the arbitration laws in exactly the same way as have the Judaic Beth Din courts for many years.

To describe that as egregious appeasement sounds like the bigotry your pseudonym suggests you don’t like.

Derek BLADES

Heather. "If we want a harmonious society without the threat of terrorism, we can't be ruled by fear."

Thank you for an excellent post. Unfortunately, paranoia is exactly what this blogsite is all about.

Mohammed

British-Muslims for many generations have worked, lived and served this country and its old empire in many ways. Our grandfathers who arrived on her majesty’s soil more than a hundred and fifty years ago [during times of global colonialism] were loyal workers, merchant sailors and soldiers who fought side by side against aggressors in times of war [First and Second World Wars]. Without any bias history needs to be read and understood. It is a shame that everything after the tragic event of 9/11 have been blown out of proportion thanks to poor leadership and a powerful global propaganda machine which clearly fulfilled its objective at raging war (which its legality is currently being questioned) to seek ghostly weapons of mass destruction. Unforgettably, the events at Abu Ghuraib’s prison in Iraq were despicable and shameful! Just a few years earlier to the 911 events, nobody within the European continent intervened to stop the thousands of innocent Bosnian men, women and children being raped and slaughtered on the continent's door step. Help to stop the genocide finally came by Clinton from across the pond too little too late but does deserve some credit. Last but not least, and for the past 60 years, the Israeli occupation of Palestine still insists on expanding settlements and killing Palestinians on a routine basis and which can be seen by millions of people across the globe. The killing of PEACE ACTIVISTS by Israeli commandos on the Turkish Flottilla boat was just unbelievable.

I think it’s time we look ahead to find real solutions to our current problems instead of fuelling suspicion and hate amongst people which I feel is going to be a major challenge ahead for us all, as much nonesense has already been powerfully drilled into quite a few minds.

I certainly agree with Warsi that Islamophobia has become "socially acceptable". I say this needs to STOP because we need to get on with our lives and move our nation forward.

Paul McGlade

I lose patience with people complaining about bias in the BBC when their comments immediately indicate not that they want a more balanced, centrist approach, but rather that they just want it biased according to their views.

And since when was does The BBC News=The BBC? it's a tiny fraction of the BBC's output. And when you take away the bits of the News where political bias could not reasonably said to be at play (Weather, Traffic, Sport), it's smaller still. And on an article by article basis, you'd struggle to find discernable politics at play in a lot of the rest.

Yes, set up and inquiry and reform the editorial process if necessary, but with guaranteed independence from the Government of the day. But only if all news broadcasters are subject to the same scrutiny and standards.

eeore

The irony is Baroness Warsi is using the old trick of accusing everyone of being racist, in order to define what is not racist.

When in fact people weren't racist in the first place, and the new paradigm is - because it prejudges that people are racist - or in this case islamophobe.

My favourite example of this is the people who complain about Huckleberry Finn because of the 'N' word. When in fact Mark Twain demonstrates through wit and humour the evil of slavery and the reason black people are not niggers - in a way that forcing people to refer to the 'N' word does not.

JOHN ROOSEVELT

Paul McGlade: "I lose patience with people complaining about bias in the BBC when their comments immediately indicate not that they want a more balanced, centrist approach, but rather that they just want it biased according to their views."

..but one should, of course, complain about bias at the BBC even if one wants it based on bias according to the BBC's views. The fact is, the BBC is indisputably biased.

"And since when was does The BBC News=The BBC? it's a tiny fraction of the BBC's output."

True, but one is not concerned, for example, with BBC drama, in this instance..and it is true that the BBC website is perhaps the most successful website in the world. If biased, and funded by the British taxpayer, I think it worth at least a bleep on our moral radar, dont you?

"And when you take away the bits of the News where political bias could not reasonably said to be at play (Weather, Traffic, Sport), it's smaller still. And on an article by article basis, you'd struggle to find discernable politics at play in a lot of the rest."

I fear you underestimate the power of British Broadcasting...and the reach of the BBC...

James Heartfield

That's funny. My comment seems to have been rejected. How so>

RezaV

Melanie

Your use of the statement “Muslim terrorism” counter productive as it allows the water to be muddied.

In order to win this argument we must accept that the overwhelming majority of Muslims, both here and throughout the world, oppose “terrorism” (some albeit according to their own definition of that term).

However, the fact that they DO oppose terrorism must NOT be taken as evidence that the overwhelming majority of Muslims, both here and throughout the world, must therefore be ‘moderate’.

Therefore, let’s keep ‘terrorism’ out of it.

Instead we must explain that anyone who believes that, in an ideal world, all humanity should be subjected to Sharia law is NOT ‘moderate’. Anyone who believes that, in principle, someone who leaves Islam, has sex outside of marriage or is homosexual should be killed is NOT ‘moderate’. And regardless of whether they are ‘law abiding’ or nice people, simply holding such views makes a person an extremist.

And there’s the rub. Imagine if, the BBC described members of the KKK as ‘moderate’ because they didn’t lynch black people or even support the lynching of black people. Imagine if politicians described neo-Nazis as ‘moderate’ because they opposed mass extermination of other races and would never take part in a genocide themselves.

Yet we are using exactly that logic to describe huge numbers of fascists, simply because they are basing their totalitarian and fascistic beliefs upon their interpretation if Islam. (That and the fact that these fascists are likely to belong to a so-called ethnic minority’).

I accept that in Britain Muslim extremists are in a minority. But, if one looks at the various polls for example regarding support for Sharia law and the killing of converts, it appears that that minority is nevertheless frighteningly high.

John.

RezaV: Absolutely right, and, furthermore the situation is quite the reverse of what Warsi proclaims: the British authorities have bent over backwards to do everything in their power to accommodate Muslim demands -Muslim schools, acceptance of total female body covering even in airport checks, provision of interpreters in doctors' surgeries and gov't dep'ts, etc. Moreover nothing is said about the no-go Muslim areas of our cities - where even the police are afraid to venture - nor of not infrequent Muslim bigamy. One law for us another for them. How fair is that? And how conducive to tolerance?

Jack Dysteleo

It can be safely assumed that all Muslims who use a prayer mat for prayer subscribe to the teaching of the Koran and acceptance of Shariah Law in Islamic schools and for all Muslim children. Thus the next generation of Muslims has the theocratic option to behave in conformity with democratic principles [not necessarily inwardly accepting them, however] or violently oppose them with strong support from Shariah. The Shariah sees apostasy as the greatest of sins and beheading is the prescribed option for any Muslim. Not a death threat in the UK this apostasy law is nevertheess a powerful terrorist inhibitor of free speech for all Muslims who do not want to offend the ummah community and incur its social rejection and imperil other family members. If Baroness Warsi has not formally rejected the apostasy law she can be perhaps be suspected of accepting it. If this is the case what value does her professed democracy have?