The Jews of Europe are.. still the Jews

Ron

Isn’t it funny how those who persecute the Jews feel like the Jews? Does that mean they persecute themselves or is it just another way of covering themselves with the blanket of victimhood they know only too well how to create.

Ron

Isn’t it funny how those who persecute the Jews feel like the Jews? Does that mean they persecute themselves or is it just another way of covering themselves with the blanket of victimhood they know only too well how to create.

Bob Latchford

"it is not muslim schools which are routinely forced to put up razor wire".

Dear oh dear. I wonder if Ms Phillips actually believes this, or whether its a deliberate attempt to mislead her loyal acolytes.

Here is a story, barely 8 weeks old of Berkshires first Muslim state school, smashed up and vandalised BEFORE it had even opened.

http://www.sloughobserver.com/live/stories/story.php?story_id=3396

I wish I had time to dissect this article piece by piece, but alas, an hour for lunch is all I get

Jon_Boy

It is the usual pratice of the Islamists which is to invert reality on its head.

When indulging in right wing political and military activities then use your intended victims as cover. When your actions and intentions are examined and exposed then cry out victimisation.

Justify clonial and expansionsit activities around the globe on the grounds of what other nations did in previous centuries. Leave out the fact that your own civilsation also had a chequered history in that respect.

Most importantly foster a cult of victimhood in order to justify future actions. This will help feed a frenzy amongst your own populace and for a wider and complient Western media.

Barney

Doesn't Malik realise his Homer moment? Doh! If he, as a Muslim, were like a Jew in Europe under pre-Holocaust persecution then he wouldn't be allowed to be an MP, let alone a Govt. Minister. He obviously doesn't realise he shoots his own argument down. HAving read many blogs and Comments to newspaper reports on this (The Independent is a classic) then a common comment thrown back to Malik is the people wish the Muslims were MORE LIKE the Jews of present day Europe.

Pete

I’m not a Jew and not an expert on history but I must have been off school the day they taught us all about the Jews who wandered around New York, London, Madrid, Indonesia in the 30s etc bombing people and trying to make everyone else subservient to Jewish law and Jewish culture.

What history book will I find these Jews in, Mr Malik?

Maybe our poster Bob Latchford can tell us?

Richard

Bravo! That man is obviously an idiot of the first rank!

Adam B.

Bob Latchford, you don't seem to understand that Jewish schools have had bomb proof windows and security guards for years. Guess who they are being protected from? Somewhat ironic, don't you think?

elixelx

Bob, you eat lunch?
I didn´t know that monkeys are given time off from showing their behinds for lunch!
So who are you having "lunch" with, boyo? One of the jackals and hyenas of the BNP? Do try not to BE lunch instead, you indigestible morsel of putrid flesh!
Oh! And I didn´t see any reference to razor wire in your link, nor have I found ANY Muslim schools in Britain that have put it up to keep out the wild beasts!

Straydingo

Barney & Pete well said.

Bob, to be honest I don't want to hear your analysis as I can get it from the BBC, Guardian etc. no doubt your primary sources of enlightenment.

Joe Strummer

Poor little victimised Muslims yet again. Pur-leese.! They should try being a Protestant in Northern Ireland.

Countless Protestant-owned shops and firms are picketed outside by IRA thugs to prevent sales and potential customers don't like the intimidation of their photographs and car number plates being taken if they do cross the picket line so they don't bother entering resulting in the closure of the business, that is unless a nocturnal IRA sectarian arson attack hasn't completed the job first.

Also, since 1989 over 300 Protestant social clubs and meeting places have been physically attacked by firebomb or petrol bomb in organised assaults, one in four of these deliberate arson attacks resulting in total destruction of the hall or club. Can you imagine the front page headlines and daily news bulletins on television if this was happening to Muslims in Britain week in week out.?

The Protestant community in Northern Ireland are also restricted to where and when it can publicly express their Protestant religion, cultural heritage and identity, even down to the musical instruments it can use whilst doing so.

In brief, the Protestant community in Northern Ireland lives in GENUINE fear both at work, at home, and in their recreation time. They would swop the Muslims in an instant for the media and Government sensitivities and privileges they receive.

Kennybhoy

Miss Phillips forgot this link ..

http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/news/article-1031769/Is-post-war-Britain-anti-Muslim.html

"Doubtless, many will disagree with him, but his views can't be ignored."

This weaselly rubric being the standard Daily Mail disclaimer whenever it wants to indulge in a wee bit of "Michael Moore Conservatism"!

Incidentally, was this a co-ordinated July 4th effort by Northcliffe House and Independent House....?

Cheers!

Kenny

Ben-Tsiyon (ha rishon)

What a prime piece of chutzpah from Shahid Malik!

Following the London bomb attack in July 2005, there was, quite correctly, the general view that there should not be any "knee-jerk" reactions against Moslems in the UK consequent upon the atrocity.

I well remember the spate of "knee-jerk" reactions from sections of the "indigenous" UK population against Jews here in the UK back in 1947, following upon actions taken by so-called Jewish "terrorists" against the British authorities in the Land of Israel. Synagogues, Jewish centres and individuals were attacked, and I recall a press photograph of a group of people (including young children) somewhere in the north of England demonstrating in the streets, carrying placards calling for violence against Jews. I do not recall that there was much protest at that time against such behaviour from outside the Jewish community. I also do not recall that there were any Jewish clerics (Rabbis) at that time preaching hatred, incitement to murder and treason from their pulpits, or any young Jews demonstrating against this country and burning its national flag in the streets, as has been the case with a number of Moslem clerics and young men here!

The official line in this country is to placate, appease and generally cosset the Moslem community. Shahid Malik and his buddies have no cause to complain.

phil

bob L-- 1 minute is too long for your lunch and what you might like to dissect during it -----it -must be a tough time for you now not knowing which ethnic minority to abhor the most -you flit from thread to thread dispensing your prejudices -what a sad man -I think Mr Malik may have been misunderstood and not chosen his words judiciously ,but there can be no mistake with you

Kennybhoy

"What a prime piece of chutzpah from Shahid Malik!"

Aye but no less than from Miss Phillips, who nowhere in her post above saw fit to mention that the "author" of tonight's piece of drivel on C4, two related pieces in the national press, and a "forthcoming pamphlet" on the subject is her Daily Mail and Spectator colleague, and doyen of islamophobia-watch.com, Peter Oborne.

Cheers!

Kenny

J. Isaacs

Crumbs, that Lee Barnes really is the end. The sentence juxtaposition of the ominous word "deportations" against the words "insane racial" instantly brings to mind black-and-white photographs of Max, sorry, Oswald Moseley and the blackshirts. Then there was that alopaesic BNP leader in the 60s, whose name I cannot, thankfully, remember, but who was fond of dressing up in Nazi uniforms and giving Hitler salutes. Must subscribe to Searchlight magazine and re-visit Cable Street in the East End.

Georgina

Wow, Kennybhoy, I never knew that Melanie Phillips and Peter Oborne appeared in some of the same publications.

Does anyone else know?

Do they use pseudonyms to hide this fact?

Who told you?

Bob Latchford

Ah, I see that Ms Phillips tactic of dehumanizing her enemies is rubbing off on her flock, led by elixelx,

Oh, and straydingo, unfortunately you don’t control who is allowed to post on here and who isn’t, so as long as I am not breaking any rules, the only way to ‘avoid’ my analysis will be to shut your eyes when you see my name on here

Gordon Neil

Sorry had to pinch myself when I read this ! On the day we remember those who suffered in an atrocity committed in our capital city by Islamic extremists in the name of their religion, Mr. Malik chooses to insult the British people and make grotesque and unwarranted claims about Muslims being the new Jews. Why is this man still a minister in Gordon Brown's government ?

phil

bob l ""the only way to ‘avoid’ my analysis will be to ""-analysis ,what analysis?-just hate mail

michael

Apparently Channel 5 is going to host a one off "Zionists' Hour" in August where mel, steve and mat will be joined by Ann Coulter and Rush over from the States. They will be allowed to talk for 30 minutes between themselves before a panel of
health and psychiatric professionals who will then analyse their characters and make recommendations. Should be good!

Kennybhoy

Michael,once again,if that is your real name....

I do remember you in my prayers.

PS You are aware that Michael is a Hebrew name...?

God Bless!

Kenny

Kennybhoy

Georgina,

Hello wherever!

Was that a feeble attempt at irony, sarcasm even, in your last post...?

Cheers!

Kenny

Ian C

"Mr Malik ... warned that many British Muslims now felt like ‘aliens in their own country’. "

Could this have something to do with the fact that an awful lot of them do behave like aliens when they come into this country and do not assimilate?

And if they did not nehave in this way, then we would welcome them as we have previous waves of immigrants over hundreds of years.

Ann

Is Michael really B. Latchford? Or is Latchford really Michael? And how many ignorant Jew-hating lunatics can balance on a pinhead?

Ivan

Although I frequently disagree with Melanie, I admire her willingness to tackle subjects others choose to ignore. On this issue, however, I feel that she has been out-Melanied , and dare I say out-thought, by Mr Malik.

I don't know where Melanie got the Nazi bit from Malik's speech. As far as I can see he referred to "the Jews of Europe", and of course the history of problems for Jewish people in Europe extends far beyond 1933-1945 Germany.

However, I think there is a clear common theme between historical European Jewry and current attitudes towards Islam, and it comes down to how society handles split allegiances. For Jews, there is the natural draw towards Israel that so blurs the boundaries between Jewishness, Israeliness and Zionism. And for Muslims there is a similar draw towards the ummah.

Both of these tend to create a boundary between Jews/Muslims and others. At best, this leads to slight suspicion and misunderstanding, at worst it leads to wholesale slaughter.

So, the position of Muslims in Europe today has a great number of parallels to historical European Jewry and this has nothing whatsoever to do with the 'final solution'.

It is also worth noting that, in a world in which national boundaries are increasingly obscured, this is an issue that is not going to go away, and indeed is likely to rise right to the top of the agenda. Because it goes right to the very heart of who we are and why we are here.

Groovy Times

I think the anti-Malik consensus here is a litte unfair. The Jews' long history in Europe is not confined to the years 1933-45 and Malik makes that point clear. It is true that Islamists here and abroad harbour an overtly anti-Semitic ideoleology that has influence in the mainstream British Muslim community, but that does not negate Malik's argument that Muslims share - to some extent atleast - the Jewish experience of being perceived as a suspicious and alien culture. Melanie argues that the European experience of these two minorites are not comparable, that Muslim schools and mosques do not share the same security needs as Jewish ones. On a contemporary level that is true but historically, as far as I know, the Jewish schools in the shtetl and the Great Synagogue in Warsaw did not have security guards and fences prior to the Shoah.

Harvey

You may think that being called a lunatic by Ann is like being called ugly by a toad. I couldn't possibly comment...

Mosquito

Melanie Phillips is absolutely correct on this topic. The present situation is very different from the thirties. Right across Europe -Holland, France, Denmark and this country -Muslim extremists have created such an atmosphere of fear and intimidation that many are simply too afraid to speak out on issues of human rights if these happen to have a Muslim component.

Herbert Thornton

It is especially interesting to read that Melanie's piece includes this -

"……according to the head of MI5, there are currently some 2000 known British Muslim terrorist suspects --and in reality probably twice that number -- and that according to opinion polls, hundreds of thousands of British Muslims would support terrorist violence against British institutions………….that’s a pretty huge minority that presents such an appalling problem – one which Shahid Malik strangely doesn’t mention and which the British Muslim community has ever even unequivocally acknowledged, let alone shown any sign of dealing with it."

Quite so, Melanie. And just as dismayingly, none of the mainstream British political parties, including the Tories, show much sign of unequivocally acknowledging it either, nor any sign of intending to deal with it.

Jonathan

Well done Melanie. Malik should be sacked. Jews were VICTIMS of an extermination campaign by the German government. Muslims are PROTECTED by the UK government. Even the police dogs are to wear bootees so as not to upset Muslims. There is no parallel whatever. Even more galling is that some Muslims call Jews 'monkeys and pigs'. How dare Malik make this comparison.

logdon

Are you taking lessons in political correctness from the BBC?

Daphne Patai

In addition to all the other excellent reasons already mentioned for rejecting the analogy between Jews and Muslims in Britain, consider also the demographics. There are approximately two million Muslims in Britain today. And about 280,000 Jews.

I'm not aware that Christian Brits have ever worried about Jews surpassing them in the British population, whereas Muslims are expected to do so by about 2020. And this, of course, omits mention of the important cultural/ideological differences. But the tradition of anti-Semitism in England is well-established. Even George Orwell was prejudiced. In his diary entry of October 25, 1940, he wrote: "What is bad about Jews is that they are not only conspicuous, but go out of their way to make themselves so . . . . What I do feel is that any Jew, i.e., European Jew, would prefer Hitler's kind of social system to ours, if it were not that he happens to persecute them. Ditto with almost any Central European, e.g the refugees. They make use of England as a sanctuary, but they cannot help feeling the profoundest contempt for it. You can see this in their eyes [sic], even when they don't say it outright."

The point here is that even that much-admired figure, Orwell, expressed the standard anti-Semitic attitude. Imagine what he would have said if Jews had behaved as many Muslims do today -- making clear that they were aiming to transform Britain into country run according to Jewish religious law.

Adam B.

I believe Melanie highlighted some recent polls which showed an extraordinary amount of anti-semitic bigotry in the Islamic community, along with fairly widespread support for terror attacks in this country. Does anyone have the figures?

D Gray

The muslim as victim is a tried tested and hugely successful strategy of muslims like malik.When your ideology is so resented and distrusted then the best thing to do is lash out then fall to the floor clasping your head as if someone has belted you,thus enducing the required sympathy.His comments about the Jews of pre-war Germany is so idiotic that the only reaction will be muffled laughter and a shaking of the head.This fool has yet again done what muslims seem to find almost as easy as drawing breath....an ability to isolate themselves.

When 6 million muslims have been starved,raped,experimented on,gassed,enslaved and their extinction eagerly sought then and only then can any muslim claim to be in the same situation as the Jews of old Europe.

Until then Mr Malik do shut up.

PS....does anyone know any areas in the UK where a community Police officer has told a muslim that he should get out as it is a Christian or Jewsish ONLY area.

Dave M

Seeing as Melanie mentioned the BNP....Why, I wonder, did the BNP choose to get associated with David Irving at that Oxford conference? To my mind, it didn't make sense to seemingly support a crank academic holocaust denier who has a chip on his shoulder over democratic Israel. Let's look at it logically: If the BNP takes a stand against immigration in defence of national identity then surely this should also apply to Israel and its right to exist as a Jewish State? It should surely apply to all indigenous peoples who have deep roots in the land they choose to inhabit. I mean, the BNP supports the Serbs so why not Jews? If not the Jews, does the BNP support the Palestinians? No, I don't think they do favour the Palestinian cause so I think they are pretty much confused. Also, you can produce a reliable map of Israel and Judea as far back as 1000 B.C. but to find a map of England or the U.S. so long ago isn't possible. Having said that, the situation with the BNP is an odd one and has to be considered. The fact is thousands and thousands of BNP supporters support the Judeo-Christian cause whatever that is. They see themselves as Judeo-Christian Britons.Thousands of BNP supporters may support the BNP simply because they are totally fed-up with Labour and its support of Political Islam, in schools, institutions and in law assemblies. Many many people vote BNP as a means of giving Labour a bloody nose. Many many BNP voters certainly oppose capital punishment even though the BNP seeks to bring it back. I just think people are now so concerned over this Sharia Law situation, the BNP is going to win a lot more votes.

Jim Fox

Thanks Melanie for keeping an open mind. It is always refreshing reading your comments. I just hope those who are the biggest culprits also read your comments.

Guy Leven-Torres

Thankyou Melanie!

Once again! Superb article!

Eugene

The Community Security Trust "has nothing to do with Israel"?

The Jewish Chronicle 23.6.06 reported:

"On Wednesday, the board of Bicom, the British Israel Communications and Research Centre, agreed a multi-million pound action plan to be carried out over the next three years through existing organisations engaged in pro-Israel advocacy. These include the Jewish Leadership Council, the Community Security Trust and all three major political Friends of Israel groups."

http://tinyurl.com/lwvp4

Jon_Boy

Can anyone name me a part of the world where there is a historically and significantly sized Muslim minority where there isn't either an active military insurgency being waged or political autonomy/ independance demands being placed by those Muslim populations?

Everywhere I can think of this is the case.

India
Kashmir
Western China
Israel/Palastine
Southern Thailand
Kenya
Nigeria
Balkans
Chechnya
etc
etc
etc

Now either there is a conspiracy of a small group of extremists based in places like Saudi that encourages all these geographically dispersed and ethnically diverse groups of Muslims to always call for separation and independence.

Alternatively there is something inate with in the religion itself which encourages Muslims to instigate separation from themselves and others around them on religios grounds under the banner or veil of political self determination.

If no one can give me an example of a place where significant Muslim minorities have not attempted separation or implementation of Islamic Religious laws etc then pleaese why are we at all surprised that after allowing extensive Islamic immigration over the last fifty years we currently face the situation we do.

Tony

As if Peter Oborne’s piece in the Mail wasn’t disingenuous enough, the programme accompanying then expanded on this.

We were shown the journalism department at Cardiff University, which had been measuring the level of media coverage on Islamic culture stories versus stories on terror.

Cue footage of po-faced students clustered around PC monitors and newspaper clippings being passed about desks. And then came the ominous Oborne voiceover telling us that the level of stories about Islam and culture had – for the first time – overtaken stories about Islam and terrorism. To which the sane viewer’s response was to say “So what?”

That’s the whole point, Mr Oborne. The terror is but the weapon of the Islamists, the aim is cultural subjugation: to create a two tier society.

This isn’t fiction or some scare story, this is how the state works in Islamic countries such as Egypt. Christians in Egypt are treated like dirt. The are only allowed to live on rubbish heaps. They are dhimmis. Dhimmification is a concept borne out Islam, Mr Oborne. It’s not made up by some Sun reporter.

“Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Apostle have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.”
The Koran (9.29)

Given that this is the year the British public finally woke up to the fact that their legal system is now under threat of being fundamentally changed as a result of Islam, it’s hardly surprising the press have been printing lots of stories on Islamic culture.

To set out to prove how biased the press were, Mr Oborne decided to play the word swap game.

To give one example, he showed passers by in a shopping centre a headline that read something like: “Now Jews get their own laws” and asked people what they thought of it.

Then he would show a headline actually used in a paper, which here, of course, read: “Now Muslims get their own laws”.

But hang on, there is only one group of people asking for the legal system in this country to start creating one law for some and another for others – and it’s not Jews. The comparison was completely specious.

If Mr Oborne wants to play swap the word, then, as others have pointed out, he could have played swap the word with something like this:

“Make war on the unbelievers...” (9:121)

Now, why wouldn’t he want to play word swap with that? Because if you put the word Muslims at the end of that phrase, you’d have Sir Ian Blair & Co on you like a ton of bricks.

One man in a street scene started talking about “cockroaches”. Mr Oborne’s voiceover said: “This is the language of ethnic cleansing.”

What does Mr Oborne think this is the language of?

“They desire that you should disbelieve as they have disbelieved, so that you might be (all) alike; therefore take not from among them friends until they fly (their homes) in Allah’s way; but if they turn back, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them, and take not from among them a friend or a helper.”
The Koran (4.89)

Mr Oborne covered the debate about the niqab (the full face veil) and said no-one would be allowed to get away with objections to Jewish clothing. But hang on, Jews don’t cover their faces. Again, the comparison is completely specious.

Moreover, there is nothing in The Koran that says a woman must wear a veil. Even further, the debate about the effects of the veil even goes on in places such as Turkey. But Peter Oborne thinks we shouldn’t be allowed to discuss the veil in Britain on the way it makes people relate to one another.

Mr Oborne wants us to take graffiti on walls at its word. He wants us to take the BNP at its word.

Does he think we should take The Koran at its word?

Mehdi Hasan

As one of the commissioning editors of the programme, and to be fair to Mr Malik, he specifically did NOT draw an analogy between the Jewish victims of the Holocaust and Europe's current Muslim population. He made a general comparison between pre-war hostility to the Jews, including in Britain, post-7/7 hostility towards Muslims.

Ms Phillips thinks it is outrageous for him to do so, but remains curiously silent about the fact that the Jewish analogy was also drawn in the film by Pete Tobias who happens to be, er, a Jewish rabbi.

Harriet

“He specifically did NOT draw an analogy between the Jewish victims of the Holocaust”, yes, Mr Hasan, we know that from the film.

Who said he did?

Far from trying to put those words in his mouth, Ms Phillips touched on this in her post by saying this was “not mitigated one whit by the weaselly caveat”.

We are fully aware of the contribution of Rabbi Pete Tobias and there are other similarly misguided people like him, be they Jew, Christian or whatever.

The other point about Mr Malik is that he is a minister of the Crown. To reiterate Ms Phillips’ point for you, since you seem oddly to have passed over it, she is astonished not just that he has said this but that no-one in high office has dared to challenge his utterly inappropriate comparison.

As a Christian, I have to put up with Dr Rowan Williams setting out comparisons equally stupid in their logic as that set out by Rabbi Tobias, so this isn’t a first.

Mehdi Hasan

Sorry, Harriet, let me direct you to the offending sentence:

"To equate the situation of British Muslims today with Jews in Nazi Europe is despicable"

Yet nowhere did Shahid Malik make such a specific comparison. In fact, Rabbi Tobias, who expanded on the point, referred to Jews in Britain (not Nazi Europe) and the specific anti-Semitism of the Evening Standard in 1911.

As for other ministers not challenging his statement, I am not sure how they could because he spoke as a Muslim, giving a particularly Muslim perspective, and none of them are Muslims. Unless your point - and Melanie's - is that Muslims like Mr Malik have no right or freedom in modern Britain to speak about their personal experiences or views. Is it?

You can read my own views on the programme here:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jul/07/channel4.islam

steve

Mehdi: Thanks for posting here. I found the program very powerful, especially the point that many of the comments being made about Muslims today in the UK were being made about Jews a hundred years ago (not to mention over the decades about other immigrant groups, including the Irish and Sikhs). I'd like to Ms. Phillips engage with this point because her postings frequently ignore all historical context.

Harriet

Mr Hasan, you object to this sentence from Ms Phillips: "To equate the situation of British Muslims today with Jews in Nazi Europe is despicable", so why did Mr Malik say this: “they feel like the Jews of Europe”?

You say: “As for other ministers not challenging his statement, I am not sure how they could because he spoke as a Muslim, giving a particularly Muslim perspective, and none of them are Muslims.”

So there’s no right of reply to Muslim opinion? Now we’re getting to the crux of the matter, aren’t we?

It was never said in the documentary that he was speaking in a personal capacity (which being a Channel 4 producer, you should well know is par for the course if someone who is part of an organisation wishes to speak outside of it).

What’s more, any politician knows that anything they say in public has political implications. You don’t suddenly take off your hat of office just for this or that interview.

Imagine your colleagues at Channel 4 News catching something off guard from any politician and accepting as a defence that they were speaking in a personal capacity.

That’ll be the day.

This wasn’t even off the cuff, it was a formal interview and Mr Malik’s political credentials were spelt out to the audience.

And here you go again with your old trick of trying to put words into people’s mouths again “Unless your point - and Melanie's - is that Muslims like Mr Malik have no right or freedom in modern Britain to speak about their personal experiences or views”.

Where have I said this? Mr Malik can say what he pleases, but when a politician talks what is plainly nonsense they can normally expect censure even from within their own party.

The silence from other ministers provides this minister’s opinions with tacit endorsement they plainly do not deserve. That is why it is so damning of the British Government.

Andy Gill

@Bob Latchford
“The latest figures reveal that the level of antisemitic incidents in the UK over the last month is amongst the highest on record. As a result, security measures that many citizens would consider inconvenient and invasive have become the norm at Jewish community gatherings, schools and places of worship. This is clearly unacceptable."
Chris Huhne, Parliamentary Committee on Antisemitism.
http://www.thepcaa.org/report.html

Malik should reflect on the contribution of his own community to this disgraceful state of affairs. The Muslim victim card is getting a bit dog-eared.

MD

In response to Mehdi Hasan, racist incidents, and invective, are always wrong. I wonder, though, why would Shahid Malik see fit to insinuate a Holocaust analogy, only to knock it down, if not to create a perceptual framework for the claims he makes about "feelings". That's because there is, in any case, no objective analogy between Muslims and Jews in this context. Muslims, unlike the Jews, include both numerous victims and numerous perpetrators. There are claims made that incidents and invective for which the perpetrators are responsible are not really racist but reactive, to foreign policy decisions and to the existence of the State of Israel, for instance. But precedents in the Koran and the Hadiths stand against that view. Perhaps Shahid Malik should take time to think about the facts, for decency's sake.

Harriet

Mr Hasan, you object to this sentence from Ms Phillips: "To equate the situation of British Muslims today with Jews in Nazi Europe is despicable", so why did Mr Malik say this: “they feel like the Jews of Europe”?

You say: “As for other ministers not challenging his statement, I am not sure how they could because he spoke as a Muslim, giving a particularly Muslim perspective, and none of them are Muslims.”

So there’s no right of reply to Muslim opinion? Now we’re getting to the crux of the matter, aren’t we?

It was never said in the documentary that he was speaking in a personal capacity (which being a Channel 4 producer, you should well know is par for the course if someone who is part of an organisation wishes to speak outside of it). What’s more, any politician knows that anything they say in public has political implications. You don’t suddenly take off your hat of office just for this or that interview.

Imagine your colleagues at Channel 4 News catching something off guard from any politician and accepting as a defence that they were speaking in a personal capacity.

That’ll be the day.

This wasn’t even off the cuff, it was a formal interview and Mr Malik’s political credentials were spelt out to the audience.

And here you go again with your old trick of trying to put words into people’s mouths again “Unless your point - and Melanie's - is that Muslims like Mr Malik have no right or freedom in modern Britain to speak about their personal experiences or views”.

Where have I said this? Mr Malik can say what he pleases, but when a politician talks what is plainly nonsense they can normally expect censure even from within their own party.

The silence from other ministers provides this minister’s opinions with tacit endorsement they plainly do not deserve. That is why it is so damning of the British Government.

Imran Khan

Mad Mel,
You know what Malik means when he says that the Muslims are the new Jews of Europe. The persecutors of the Jews didn't just wake up one morning and decide today is the day to exterminate them; but it progressively moved towards that final solution. The first stage was precisely the anti-culture and anti-religious hysteria the Muslims are currently facing. This is the glaringly obvious point he is making.
It is unbelievable that this so-called commentator could make such a leap, create a strawman, and then thumbsuck it.

Charles

Mehdi,

Of course, as you may be aware, one of the main reasons that Russian Jewish immigrants were unpopular in England early in the last century was because their number included many anarchists and political radicals. The Rabbi chose his particular time frame reference advisedly, it would seem.

LPressler

Mehdi Hasan is, to quote,
'one of the commissioning editors of the programme'.

He then goes on to say (which is a little worrying):

'Ms Phillips thinks it is outrageous for him to do so, but remains curiously silent about the fact that the Jewish analogy was also drawn in the film by Pete Tobias who happens to be, er, a Jewish rabbi.'

Oh dear. Stop press, a jew and a rabbi agrees with premise of programme. Rescind the article immediately Mel, or else at least explain your silence on this stunning fact!

I suspect you will find, that you can find one, or even several people, of any given grouping, to express views not shared by the majority of his/her grouping. You will find sScientists who believe the earth is flat, or historians who believe the holocaust is a jewish fabrication.

And this means....sod all really.

Idiot.

J. Isaacs

Channel 4 Stop Press Good News for Lee Barnes: "Three prostitutes tell High Court their sado-masochistic role-play with Max Moseley(British Union of Fascists leader Oswald Moseley's son and head of Formula 1 car racing) had nothing to do with Nazis."

J. Isaacs

Slightly less good stop press news for Lee Barnes on the Channel 4 News report. "One of the women told the Judge she had been wearing a Luftwaffe jacket which she owned." The Judge now has to decide...

Ed

To be fair, Shahid Malik has done more than any other prominant Muslim to condemn Islamic extremism. He is the M.P. for the town with the most fundamentalist Muslim community in Britain [if not Europe]. I agree with the jist of what Melanie is saying here, but she ought to have researched Malik a little further.

phil

As any regular reader will know I defend the Jewish people to the hilt,and I believe Mr Oborne,s programme, which I watched ,was very naive although not racist ., but for the life of me I cannot see what Shahid Malik did wrong-his choice of expression seems to have offended many in the way he mentioned the position of the Holocaust victims but he did not equate them with the present day Muslims -it seems obvious to me that he didn't mean it in an offensive way.,in fact it was said in my opinion with empathy for the fate of the Jews .If he had attacked the Jewish people I would have been his fiercest critic-he did not .

If I remember rightly he has said many sensible things about the way the Muslim community should behave , and tried very hard to improve race relations.We have enough enemies to deal with without attacking a decent man who was pleading for his own community ,and I do not mean the Islamist militants .I rarely ever have disagreed with Melanie but this time I must ,bringing in the word nazi and despicable was way over the top . The real problem was the programme itself and some very silly parts of it ,but not Shahid Malik.

The debate as to whether the Muslim community could do more to improve their position is quite another matter ,and absolutely I believe they could -this country has a record second to none for race relations and acceptance of immigrants of many different persuasions -They need to do it and fast ,one only has to look at Melanies earlier thread about the BNP to see that .I have no doubt I will be called ignorant by one of our regular lady posters for this but c,est la vie .

BJ

Well done Bob Latchford for interrupting his lunch to introduce, as usual, a welcome note of sanity into this thread.

Also thanks to Mehdi Hasan for trying to reason with Mel's fan club. Usually a thankless task, believe me!

Interesting how Melanie Phillips denounced the film before it had even been broadcast. How typical!

Nimue

Dear Mrs Philips,
what is your point? what you say is for the pub, not for the spectator. Stammtischgerede... And?

Mike Brearley

Joe Strummer,

Your post above is deliberately misleading.

“The Protestant community in Northern Ireland are also restricted to where and when it can publicly express their Protestant religion, cultural heritage and identity”

You don’t mention that there are over three thousand of these sectarian and often very intimidating parades in Northern Ireland - and the population of Northern Ireland is only one and a half million! Moreover, the ones that are banned are ones that pass through or near Catholic areas. I have to ask, how many marches do you want? It may be your dream to have at least one set of Protestant boots marching down each Catholic street once a year, but in civilised societies we sometimes have to forgo such aspirations, and we don’t gripe about it endlessly when we do. In short, the Protestant people have an extraordinary number of opportunities to express their “religion, cultural heritage and identity”, and the restrictions that are placed on them are perfectly normal ones.

When you talk about pickets, do you mean Catholics protesting outside Protestant businesses because one of those marches is planned to go through a Catholic area? If so, you should have said so, since the same would happen in England if the NF or some other group attempted to march through a contentious area. And could you put a figure on the term “countless”, since most people in the UK can count to more than, say, ten, as it seems to me such protests are relatively infrequent. In regard to the attacks on Protestant buildings since 1989, you neglect to mention the large number of attacks on Catholic churches in the same period.

As for your comment, “In brief, the Protestant community in Northern Ireland lives in GENUINE fear both at work, at home, and in their recreation time” you really have dragged the bottom of the barrel. I don’t deny that in some areas, such as the fountain estate in Derry, there is Catholic intimidation of Protestants, nor that in others, such as Ballymena, there is Protestant intimidation of Catholics, but it is simply wrong to say that either of the two communities, Protestant or Catholic, generally lives in fear in their daily lives. And it would also be wrong to say that Catholics are more sectarian than Protestants. Moreover, I believe you know you know that it is wrong to say these things, but like most trolls, you have simply inserted a falsehood into your post in order to shape people’s perceptions.

I know numerous people from both communities in Northern Ireland; I read the Northern Ireland papers, watch the Northern Ireland news, and listen to what all the politicians have to say, and almost everyone knows that, overall, there has been an extraordinary improvement throughout the province. Things are by no means perfect, of course – there are still a large number of sectarian incidents on both sides – but surely, if Protestants were generally living in fear, Ian Paisley and the rest of the Unionist politicians, as well as the media, would be continuously telling us about it, wouldn’t they?

The general improvement is reflected in Northern Ireland's most comprehensive community relations poll, which may be found here:

http://www.ark.ac.uk/nilt/2007/Community_Relations/index.html

Look, for example, at the answers to the questions “Are relations between Protestants and Catholics better now than 5 years ago?” and “Will relations between Protestants and Catholics be better in 5 years time?”.

I’m not saying that all the above shows that Northern Ireland is perfect, but, in any event, Joe, the burden of proof is on you. Cite some evidence in support for your claim that Protestants live in fear, or even for the claim that what fear they do experience is greater than that experienced by Catholics - and bear in mind that I will match any anecdotal evidence showing one side is at fault with the same sort of evidence showing that the same can be said of the other.

One last point, Northern Ireland has improved immeasurably over the last few years, and this is the message that everyone is conveying to improve the region’s image and attract inward investment. Don’t you think it’s rather disloyal of you to be presenting to the world a false impression of the place to suit your own agenda?

Marcel

Shahid's comments are extremely insulting to jews and anyone with a bit of intelligence. No way is the persecution of jews remotely comparable to how muslims 'feel'. I felt enraged! All cultures / races at some point will feel victimised whether you are white, black, gypsy... oh i am sooo enraged by shahid. How dare he compare jewish persecution to 'feelings'. What a way to raise public support shahid - way to go! What about Rwanda? - why not throw that in at the same time. The polish community in leicester fought toothe and nail to get their own church yet money was thrown as muslims for mosques. Who is persecuting who I ask?

Zkharya

I think Phillips is being silly, to put it nicely. It is perfectly legitimate to use the metaphor of 'Jew' in certain situations. It is true that Muslims today are discriminated against today to the extent that Jews were in the '30s, but there is discrimination and inequality. There is racism against Muslims, or Muslims of widely differing cultural groups, chiefly Asian or North African. Using the metaphor does not preclude accurately describing the situation of Jews in modern Europe, or refuting those who misrepresent it.

No metaphor is perfect, but that does not mean one is not entitled to use, so long as one is open to observation where it is inaccurate.

Marcel

Dear Zkharya, I suggest you do some research on history. I have studied and taught history most of my life - your comments are very much in line with those of Shahid's. I assume you are one of his supporters no doubt.

KateA

The operative word here is, of course, "feel".
Muslim's 'feel' "like the Jews of Europe"! Only a Muslim or useful idiot would fail to see the uninformed offensiveness of that statement.

Doublespeak i.e. taqiyya is commonly used by Muslims in the heart of the Western democracies, in order to facilitate their advance towards defined goals - colonisation and conversion - or to manipulate the absurd sensibilities of cultural/religious relativists.

One would ask these 'feeling' Muslims: Where are the starving, walled-in Muslim ghettos? Where are the yellow stars? Where the frozen bank accounts, where the appropriation of homes, property and valuables, the curfews, the thugs stopping Britons from shopping in Muslim business; where the segregation on buses, trains, trams; where the Krystalnacht, where the homes and mosques set on fire, the ban on attendance at British schools, or employment in British institutions; where are the labour camps or the disappeared?

Muslims are distinguished on the streets of Britain ONLY by their insistence on alien and political dress codes. They enjoy all the freedoms of a democratic society. However, Muslims 'feel' they have an Allah-given 'right' to utilise equality under the law and freedom of speech as tools of intimidation, invasion and conquest.

Allah-given 'rights' come through the immutable Koranic injunctions on the inferiority of infidel and Jew. These allow invasion by stealth, murder of innocent fellow citizens, book-burning, public disorder, death threats to authors, Danish cartoonists, editors, even the Pope/Queen - AND the installation of an alien religio/legal code (Sharia).

Let us compare and contrast: none of these aggressive behaviours were ever manifested by the Jews of Europe. Hostility to Jews in Britain was/is both despicable and irrational BECAUSE unlike Muslims, Jews have never given just cause for hostility.

Jews do not colonize or institute 'no go' Jew-only areas. Jews have never murdered or threatened their fellow citizens. Jews have never demanded their religious practice be incorporated into either British culture or British law. Jews, as a group, have never been a drain on the welfare services of Britain. Jews have never sought to dominate the skyline of Britain with Synagogues.

NO, Jews CONTRIBUTE - as law-abiding, self-supporting citizens to the arts, science, medicine, law, retail and a plethora of other professions and disciplines.

Muslims take; they 'expect', demand because as followers of Mohammed, the Book tells them they are superior even to the least of the Infidel and Jew. By these attitudes, Muslims alienate all who are not Muslim.

Ergo, Muslims have earned the suspicion of their fellow citizens. What we have learned (from experience) to expect from Muslims is "hysterical" claims of victimization; a 'feeling' (so long as it is felt by a Muslim) - accepted as totally subjective by any civilized standard - is exaggerated in every instance and paraded as factual accuracy.

Whilst anti-Muslim hostility is not a priori “natural or normal,” the desire of non-Muslims to defend their land, families, culture and faith against aggressive and manufactured demands (or 'feelings') IS “natural and normal”.

"Tariq Ramadan - advisor to government and to Canterbury, insists that Muslims in the West should conduct themselves as though they were already living in a Muslim-majority society and are therefore exempt on that account from having to make concessions to the faith of the host-society.

Ramadan says, “under the terms of Western liberal tolerance, society as a whole should be obliged to respect that choice.”

SO Imran Khan - What price these vacuous comparisons: "The first stage [against Jews] was precisely the anti-culture and anti-religious hysteria the Muslims are currently facing."

Indeed. Except there are two false inferences (if not premises) in that assertion of relativism.

a) Jews and Muslims (in their Being in the World i.e. culture and history) are not equivalent - for the reasons given above.

b) Muslims ARE NOT facing "hysteria". Muslims are facing a natural suspicion of proven behaviours - listed above.

It is, unfortunately, an accepted fact of life in enlightened societies, that one - whether individual or group - is responsible for the consequences of one's own actions.

In Muslim-speak (culture?) no responsibility is ever accepted for any Muslim offence; every act of Muslim subversion and anti-social behaviour is blamed on A N Other - in Britain, on the 'Other' infidel population as a whole. Muslims must learn that respect is EARNED. They cannot force any FREE citizen to respect the tenets of a religion which is anathema to Free Will.

"Mr Malik ... warned that many British Muslims now felt like ‘aliens in their own country’."

Huge problem here. The "own country" claim is an arrogant presumption if Muslims per se do not subscribe to the laws and culture of (in this case) England.

No other country in the western hemisphere hands out unconditional citizenship to immigrants. That a treacherous government has done so in the case of Muslims is to the detriment of both the indigenous population and other integrated immigrant cultures.

Muslims flaunt 'alien' status by segregation, arrogance, dress code, discourtesy towards the host nation and unacceptable demands e.g. Muhammad Abdul Bari, MCB (Born in Bangladesh) has threatened, "If demonisation [of Muslims] continues, then Britain will have to deal with two million Muslim terrorists — 700,000 of them in London. If you attack a whole community, it becomes despondent and aggressive." (Interview DT 10/09/2006)

I wonder about the comprehension gap this illustrates. The latter statement might well apply equally to a community (England) under attack from, not just Muslim terrorists, but the creeping intrusion into British life of alien cultural/religious habits.

Sir Iqbal Abdul Karim Mussain Sacranie, OBE ex-MCB (born Malawi) supported the Rushdie fatwa and riots:"Death, perhaps, is a bit too easy for him [Rushdie]… his mind must be tormented for the rest of his life unless he asks for forgiveness to Almighty Allah". AND
"... homosexuality is not acceptable" (BBC Radio 4, Jan 2006). Indeed no. Such people are tortured and hanged in Muslim states.

At the root of this problem, and exploited by Muslims in particular, is the notion that countries do not belong to the people who have built them over generations, but to whoever happens along at any given moment in time - regardless of his/her culture, attitude, or intentions towards that country.

Self-preservation and righteous anger is not racism or bigotry. It is the sensible human reaction to threat - fight or flight . It is an unfortunate fact that, had Muslims arrived, settled and integrated - as is the case with so many other foreign immigrants - there would be no problem.

What they have done is behave (in keeping with Ramadan's injunction) as though they live in a Islamic society whilst working to convert Britain by fair means or foul. Conquest by subversion, demographics and the acquisition of political power is the unabashed message of the Muslim Brotherhood which has centres all over Europe.

The Muslim Council of Britain was founded by the Muslim Brotherhood to which Ramadan, Bari and Sacranie are all affiliated. We betray our own heritage and our children and grandchildren by ignoring or giving credence to the taqiyya machinations of such people.

Joe Strummer

- Mike Brearley

What exactly do you mean "the Protestant community demands to march through Catholic areas." ? That is laughable piffle. What is a "Catholic area" anyway.?

The Ulster Protestant people only demand equality, like any other community in the United Kingdom, to employ their civil right to publicly express their cultural identity on the Queen's Highway which is available to everyone. Where is the harm in that.?

Applying your same warped logic for banning or re-routing Orange parades and marches in Ulster to the UK, London's Gay Pride March would thus be banned outright as it would obviously pass through or near to "heterosexual areas", as would the Notting Hill Carnival face the same restrictions as we couldn't have an Afro-Caribbean festival "invading" pockets of white areas of the city could we. ?

As for the St Patrick's Day parade in London. Should this Irish Roman Catholic "sectarian march" which is officially blessed by Cardinal Murphy O'Connor and held by the same fellow countrymen and women of those who bombed, murdered and maimed in the name of the terrorist and fascist IRA be banned from Britain as it offends not only British people in general, but especially those families who lost loved ones in the decades of IRA terrorist carnage.? This provocative, sickening and grotesque spectacle of Irish Catholic triumphalism would be top of your banned list as well I presume.?

This is the road we go down when we restrict and limit our priceless civil rights of public expression to sectarian or racist ghettoes.

Or shall we in your own very sinister words " forego such aspirations in a civilised society." This is where the end of freedom begins.

In regards to sectarian intimidation in Northern Ireland, there has never been a pogrom or in reality such an act of massive ethnic -cleansing of any religion or community that was enacted on the Protestant community in Londonderry or the border areas with the Irish Republic. But you would know that already.?

As for your other quite disturbing and uneducated allusion to the Protestant Orange Order being akin to the NF, it is worth reminding all that whilst the Ulster Protestants were dying liberating Europe from fascism alongside their Allies comrades in WW2, the fiercely Roman Catholic and anti-Semitic IRA were colluding with Adolf Hitler's henchmen.

In fact, to this day Sinn Fein STILL annually commemorate in Dublin the death of the IRA fascist-in-chief Sean Russell who died on a German U-Boat off the coast of Ireland on his return from receiving his orders from his Nazi overlords in Berlin.

But then again, you probably know this also but don't like to mention it.?

ROBERT CROSS

Well said Kate A

Ben-Tsiyon (ha rishon)

BRAVO, KateA! My hands are sore from applauding you!

Mike Brearley

Though I have no doubt that many decent Muslims have been unfairly discriminated against as a result of the current crisis, the degree to which they have been discriminated against is so much less than that suffered by the Jewish population of Nazi Germany that comparisons are pointless. The discrimination is different in degree and in kind.

Degree: Has Britain introduced racial purity laws directed against Muslims? Has any Muslim been banned from public office? Have Muslims been prevented by law from marrying outside their race? Have Muslims had their civil rights taken from them?

Kind: The discrimination in Nazi Germany arose entirely as a result of government policy. In Britain, the government is making great efforts to accommodate Muslims.

And these are only a few of the important differences. I think we ought to maintain a sense of proportions here, because, though unpleasant, strongly worded opinion pieces and blogs are not that bad in the whole scheme of things.

D Gray

Phewwwww....Kate 'kicks ass' A.That was just about the best post ever on any thread on this site.You need to come back and write more.

Ann

Excellent, Kate!

The Muslim reaction (and that of the useful idiots) is not, usually, "hysterical". It is hysterical, though I'll grant you that sometimes the hysteria is clearly calculated.

phil

Kate A I am sure by now you are aware of the high esteem in which I hold you ,and once again you have written an eloquent piece on the outcome of this programme .In this case though you generalised about the Muslims of this country when in fact many of them are exemplary citizens -I certainly have had dealings with some in my professional career .I do not intend to become an apologist for that community but in the interest of fairness which our country is famous for I must take issue with some of the thoughts put about on this thread-

Shahid Malik is well known to those who take an interest in these matters as a moderate man and one who has always sought what we would call " the right path on race relations"-for him to be castigated and referred to as a useful idiot is not what I have come expect from you ,and it has of course given our most famous lady poster a chance to sneer which I doubt was your intention -whether or not I was included for what I wrote earlier I am not sure,but I will always say what I believe is fair .

In my opinion ,if I may,the fact that he sought to defend his co.religionists is a position to admire , providing it is plain that he does not include those that show no loyalty to their adopted country or even those born here who have similar views -that is not what I have heard him propound in the times I have heard him speak on TV -I don't know whether you saw the programme but he was in no way disrespectful to the Jewish people and certainly not to the victims of the Holocaust (RIP). His choice of expression may not have satisfied all ,but I believe he was empathising with the Jews and should be given the chance to clarify his words .

Some here have taken the opportunity to Muslim bash because they have seen a programme that was at the very least naive and in other parts an exercise in sheer stupidity - I hold no truck with the militants nor those that do not speak out against the racism that emanates from many parts of the Muslim community -i have seen too many marches and placards dealing out hatred for that ,but we must not fall into the trap of blaming the whole community because out of those people who wish to integrate and become useful citizens will emanate the peace we all want .

I hope you will take this in the spirit it is given as I have always seen you as a kindred spirit and one whom I admire -my best regards to you

Zkharya

Marcel,

I don't mind being wrong. Yes, there are all kinds of reasons why the metaphor is imperfect. But, Muslim or Asian or North African extraction are probably among the more discriminated against groups, after sub-Saharan Africans and Gypsies, no?

anglicus

This really is old news. Brian Gerrish says this in his video of Sept. '07:
http://video.yahoo.com/watch/1285264/4514927

anglicus

This could have been written by Melanie, but it wasn’t:
A quote from Diana West in a National Review Online interview, 2 July 2008

I have come to believe that the Western way of life – which I’ll define in brief as life lived according to Judeo-Christian-evolved morality and liberty – is imperiled by the demographic spread and influence of Islamic ideology and laws. Notice I didn’t say the spread of “Islamism.” Or “Islamist-ism.” Or “Islamofascism.” Or just “Wahhabism.” Or “fundamentalist militant extremism.” Over the years, I have used most of these “ists” and “isms” in my column, trying them out one by one until I got to the point where I realized they were serving as a distraction, a form of verbal camouflage that turns our attention away from the ideology and laws of Islam itself. In the cause of not-giving-offense – the highest cause of Westerners-turned-multiculturalists – we have prevented ourselves from undertaking a hard-eyed appraisal of Islamic ideology as a whole, jihadism included, and engaging in a serious discussion of how to contain it.

Mike Brearley

Joe Strummer -You have still not addressed my points, or shown that Northern Ireland Protestants fare badly in comparison with Muslims, but I will answer your post nonetheless to point out your errors and bias.

Paragraph 1 – I didn’t say “the Protestant community demands to march through Catholic areas” (Style tip: only put quotation marks around a phrase if someone has actually said it).

I think you know very well what I mean by the phrase “Catholic area”, since a large majority of areas in Northern Ireland are either overwhelmingly Protestant in composition or overwhelmingly Catholic. I am not of course implying that they are no-go areas, or that the inhabitants ‘own’ the area - I am simply using these phrases as descriptive terms. And before you start arguing, let me point out that I searched the net and found in another blog a case where you yourself, Joe Strummer, used the phrase “Protestant village”. QED, I think.

Para 2 – Your argument seems to be that in Northern Ireland parades have to be evaluated by the Parades Commission, while in the rest of the UK people have an absolute right to march where and when they want, but this is not true. The relevant authorities can prevent marches on public safety, public morals or law and order grounds. For example, a National Front march was planned to go through Leicester, but is was banned by the Home Secretary because the police said it might end in “violent confrontation”.

In Northern Ireland, the situation is different, because the public order consequences are so much greater. What would have happened in, say, 1995, if there was a Loyalist march down the Falls Road against the will of the local community, or a Republican march up the Shankill under the same conditions? The consequences would have been catastrophic. So even though things are now better in Northern Ireland, you cannot complain that you are being unfairly treated. Even now it is conceivable that serious public order issues could arise.

But, again, you have missed out important facts when you say “to publicly express their cultural identity”. You don’t mention the other relevant facts. The two communities have been in a long term murderous dispute which has left more than three thousand dead; in many places there still exists a violent antipathy between the communities which would probably lead to public disorder in the event of a contentious march going ahead; many of these parades have marchers and followers who belong to proscribed organisations, such as the UDA and the UVF, which have been responsible for the deaths of numerous innocent Catholics - some of the people in the parades have even killed people from the Catholic community; and in the past local residents have been subjected to physical assault and sectarian abuse.

Of course, people from the Catholic community have in the past attacked people on their way to marches, but the essential point is that if there is no march there is no possibility of either side causing trouble.

Para 3 – When someone explains why a parade has been re-routed, they usually say, as I more or less said, something like “it was banned because it passed through (or by) a Catholic (or Protestant) area”. They don’t explain that public order issues might arise if it were allowed to continue, or that the two sides were fighting against each other for thirty years. These things are taken as read. Yet you seem to have taken my words as if I meant that it was solely because of the difference in faith. As though I implied that in countries where there had been no conflict between various groups, you still could not hold certain marches. Otherwise you couldn’t have said I was using “warped logic” and used an argument referring to Gays.

But the two situations are not remotely comparable. There has not been a murderous dispute between the Gay and the Hetero- community, most homo- and hetero-sexuals are not violently antipathetic to one another, there is no likelihood of large scale public disorder and an escalation of violence, and so on. But if things were different, the police would doubtless have to prevent the parade.

Moreover, The Gay Pride parade and the Notting Hill carnival are one-off events. They do not have 2,999 other parades where they can express their identity.

Para 4 – The St Patrick’s Day parade in London is an Irish parade, not an IRA one, and it is also a one-off event. If there were a poll, I’m sure most people would not object to it, and it is clear from experience that the parade is not a threat to public order. By the way, people might just as readily object to Orange Order parades, given that it was the Orange State’s bigotry and unwillingness to accept equality for Catholics that was in large part responsible for the troubles in the first place. But I digress…

Para 5 – “This is the road we go down”. Here you are using the slippery slope fallacy. We don’t have to go down any road. We have banned National Front marches in the past, but we are no nearer banning Gay and Afro-Caribbean marches.

Incidentally, a supporter of the Orange Order using the phrase ‘our priceless civil rights’ - LOL & *falls off chair laughing*

Para 6 – You say my remark was sinister because I said we can’t march everywhere, but we have already established that even in England we can’t necessarily do this, and also that in Northern Ireland such freedom could be catastrophic. “This is where the end of freedom begins” – freedom has always been misused in Northern Ireland, and that is why there was direct rule for so long.

Para 7 – Our dispute concerns the present state of Northern Ireland, so previous acts of sectarianism are not relevant. Nonetheless, in terms of sectarian killing, the Protestants paramilitaries were worse than the Catholic ones. The most authoritative book on the casualties is “Bear in mind these dead… An Index of Deaths from the Conflict in Ireland 1969-1993” by Malcolm Sutton, who spent twenty years studying the deaths of those who were killed during the Troubles.
According to Sutton’s data, as of 2001 only 134 of the 1822 people killed by the IRA were sectarian killings of Protestant civilians. This represents only 8% of the total. Most of the people they killed were British security force personnel and other combatants. The information can be found via this link -

http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/sutton/book/index.html

By contrast, according to the same database, 713 of the 1020 deaths carried out by Loyalist were sectarian killings of Catholic civilians.

In The Dirty War, Martin Dillon, an acknowledged authority on the more grisly side of the troubles, makes a similar point: “The UDA and the UVF began a major campaign of sectarian killings. The IRA responded, but not in the same proportions… it must be said that they [the IRA] did not become engaged in an all-out sectarian war like their counterparts in the Loyalist community. The fact that 90 per cent of the victims of the assassination campaign were Catholics testifies that the provisionals maintained their role as an organisation involved in a war with the British Army, UDR and RUC. If there was an attempt to immerse them fully in a sectarian war, it failed”

Of course, both sides did many appalling things, but it is obvious which side was most sectarian. And when we look at the figures, it is hardly surprising that each side is reluctant to have the other marching through its area.

Para 8 – I didn’t say that the Orange Order was akin to the NF, although my use of the NF was not entirely accidental. Henry McDonald reported in the Observer on April 2 2000 that the LVF in Portadown invited over twenty neo-Nazis from Combat 18 for the marching season in 1999. And I won’t even mention the fact that Johnny Adair stayed with combat 18 in Bolton when he left Belfast, or the numerous other connections between Loyalist and far-right British groups. So it was not a “quite disturbing and uneducated allusion” after all.

Incidentally, suppose you allowed unrestricted marching at Drumcree. Imagine who you could have could have following the parade: UDA, UFF, UVF, LVF, Combat 18. Do you really suppose that the right to march and move freely should be absolute in this case?

And is it any wonder the residents of the Garvaghy road are somewhat concerned? What about their precious rights? How do you propose that they are to go about their daily business?

On the subject of anti-Semitism, the IRA established links with the Nazis because of their hatred of British rule in Ireland. Whether at this time any of the members were Anti-Semitic, I don’t know, but your claim that, as an organisation, the IRA was anti-Semitic cannot be right. Robert Briscoe (1894-1969) was a Dubliner and the son of Lithuanian orthodox Jewish immigrants. He was also a senior member of the IRA during the war of independence in the early 1920s, and even went to Germany during this period to procure arms. Throughout the 1930s he was an active Zionist, and he was subsequently elected Lord Mayor of Dublin on two occasions.

Para 9 – The aim of my post was to show that your post was misleading. The actions of Sean Russell have no bearing on this, just as the fact that in 1914 Protestants imported arms from Germany with the intention of using them against the British has no bearing on it.

Incidentally, I lived in Northern Ireland for a long time, so you don’t really have to patronise me by saying, “It’s always good to enlighten the unaware”. I know very well how everyone there, Unionist and Nationalist, distorts the truth for their own ends.

Joe Strummer

- Mike Brearley

From your reply it appears the old chestnut of " It isn't what you say but what you don't say" that seems most apt.

Where to begin with the extracts from your 6th form Big Bumper Book Of Bad British Oppression.?

For a start, unlike the Northern Irish Protestants, Muslims in the UK have not had more than 300 mosques or meeting places deliberately razed to the ground in sectarian arson attacks since the late 1980's. There's an overt comparison I'm sure you'll be able to decipher. I'm also certain that the sight of television pictures of even one Muslim place of worship ablaze in England would have the Home Secretary interrupt her holidays to scurry back to make an Emergency speech to Parliament in response to the fevered media "outrage". I also believe the same Government action would happen if an Ulster Protestant meeting place went up in flames this weekend, which it probably will. No irony intended, no really.!

Anyhoo, back to Northern Ireland. You play the tedious,cliched and discredited Orange State discrimination and repression against Northern Irish Catholics card as the catalyst for the decades long murderous fascist terrorist campaign of the sectarian IRA but there's a small but very important fly in your ointment and that is there was actual MIGRATION of Catholics from the Republic into the malevolent northern Orange Nazi State throughout The Troubles. Yup, that's right ,the disgraceful treatment dished out on a daily basis from thse evil Orangemen to Catholics in Northern Ireland was that bad that their southern Catholic compatriots upped sticks from another country just to get their share as well. Or maybe the superior British NHS, better housing and welfare benefits than the south was worth a few floggings and beatings every day from the SS B-Specials and the local RUC, eh.?

Could you explain why would Catholics from the Republic willingly choose to enter this physical Dante's Inferno of Ulster. ?

No mention from you either of the real reason for the continuous decades of mayhem from the sectarian IRA death squads was that they were only carrying on the Republican tradition of attempting to overthrow the legal democratic process by bomb, gun and murder. What more accurate description of fascism in action is there than that.? The ex-IRA stalwart Sean O'Callaghan would also confirm this point of fact.

You ommitted any response on the Londonderry and border ethnic cleansing of Protestants for some reason I noticed, why was that.?

You also miss the point regarding the civil right of free assembly and expression on the Queens Highway, maybe deliberately so but I'll explain again anyway in more simpler terms for your understanding.

It is irrelevant whether it is the Orange Order,the Notting Hill Carnival, Gay Pride, even the BNP, etc, the public highway belongs to all to express cultural, religious,political identity whether we approve or not. Maybe that concept is confusing you a tad.?

To say that there would be no trouble at Orange marches if the march wasn't held at all was facetious and not worthy of a response as this could apply to any gathering. The Gay Pride march as an example, despite causing offence to many people goes ahead each year.

Considering the London St Patricks Day parade is also clearly a sectarian march would they be held culpable if attacked for the simple act of being there as you say with the Orange Order.?

The London Notting Hill Carnival annually sees gun crime, drugs, even murders on occasion, should this also be banned for the obvious reasons.? Are you seriously suggesting that there would not be hell to pay if Gay Pride or the Notting Hill Carnival was banned or their marches re-routed due to locals disapproving.? Or more likely are these quoted three London groupings above given different special status in comparison to Orangemen.?

I would suggest they clearly are which brings the crucial matter of civil rights into disrepute and bias against the Orangemen. All of the above should face no restriction of assembly or expression in a free society.

As for the famous case of the Orangemen at Drumcree, everyone knows that Sinn Fein /IRA deliberately "organised" phoney residents groups, even to the extent of bussing in known hooligans from nearby towns to foment violence to stop the Orangemen from their traditional parade to a church service. What isn't also known is that Protestants were intimidated and eventually ethnically cleanse from their homes on the parade route to create another one of these "Catholic areas" you frequently mention.

Finally, in regards to the intrinsic and historic anti-Semitism within the sectarian and extremist Roman Catholic IRA ideology, you quote ONE solitary tokenist Jewish figure, Robert Briscoe, as evidence that it never ever existed.

To equate the personification of evil that was the IRA's fascist-in-chief Sean Russell's collusion with Hitler's Nazi regime, the main order from Berlin to the IRA being to round up the tiny Irish Jewish community for immediate deportation to the death camps in mainland Europe in the likelyhood of a German victory in WW2, to the UVF receiving arms from Germany in 1912 is frankly laughable if it wasn't so surreal and distasteful.

That prominent British Jewry paid for the UVF guns in the first place betrays your ignorance to an extraordinary degree and how they feared for their co-religionists in a future anti-Semitic Catholic Ireland. ( It is also important to note that it was the modern-day UVF expelled the BNP from Belfast at gunpoint. )

The IRA were also aligned to extremist right-wing Catholic groups throughout the 1920'S until the 1950's. There is no end to the close links to the IRA and right-wing anti-Semitism.

Try FAIR-www.victims.org.uk

Zkharya

Mike Brearley,

did you ever read 'The Hebrew Lesson' by Wolf Mankevitz, or 'Trinity' or 'Redemption' by Leon Uris?

There's also a certain Dublin square named after one Chaim Weitzman, is there not?

Ann

Joe: hear, hear!

Jean

One of the most shocking things about Oborne’s Mail article and his “Dispatches” film “It Shouldn’t Happen To A Muslim” was the way in which, first in the newspaper feature, Oborne raised the issue of the veil:

“So it was sad, therefore, to see Straw, a decade later, joining in the chorus against Muslim women wearing the veil.”

Then in the film he took at least one interviewee (Michael Gove) to task for their resistance to the veil.

This is how far the paralysis has bitten into this country. People who dare to say that the veil is damaging to the social fabric of society are hounded.

Just look at the contrast with this story from France:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1034412/Veiled-Muslim-woman-denied-French-citizenship-amid-concerns-radical-religious-views.html

“France has denied citizenship to a veiled Moroccan woman on the grounds that her 'radical' Islam is incompatible with French values, a legal ruling revealed.”

See, Peter, plenty of other people can see the sense in doing away with the veil. As others point out, they’re not very keen on it in Turkey either. Just over the channel, the authorities are much more in sync with Jack Straw than with people like Oborne, although he only advocated voluntary dispensation of the veil.

Just away from the Oborne film, it was also revealed this week that Switzerland is to have a vote on banning any more minarets from going up because one of the Swiss parties has recognised that Islam is not just about religion. It is indivisible from politics. :

The party that has drawn attention to the issue says that buildings with minarets on symbolise a “political-religious claim to power, which challenges fundamental rights".

In its view Islam "places religion above the state and... completely contradicts the federal constitution".

Precisely.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/switzerland/2273439/Swiss-to-vote-on-minaret-building-ban.html

Why is it that so many other Western countries get what British people like Peter Oborne don’t? All the evidence is that the more concessions that are made to Islam outside the mosque the more that are then sought. Once a weakness in political will is spotted by Islam, it simply doesn’t stop trying for more. And the end result?

Islam is given political superiority over everything and everybody else.

Joe Strummer

Forgive me, but I forgot earlier to wish everyone a Happy Orange Day today.!

Best wishes on this memorable day to those of all faiths and none around the world that commemorate and celebrate our hard fought victory for civil, democratic and religious freedoms.

phil

Joe Strummer-shlonshe .hope thats how you spell it :)

Mike Brearley

Joe Strummer – Though I stand everything I have said – apart from some of the sarcasm, perhaps - I don’t mind saying at all that I hope you had an enjoyable Twelfth. I have many Protestant friends in Northern Ireland who will have been celebrating as well. Like your remarks pertaining to Nationalists, my comments upon Unionists are directed at actions and attitudes, not at the people themselves. (Unfortunately, it rarely seems like this, because in the blog format you have to be as brief as possible, with the result that people fill in the other details of your views according to stereotypes). It is great to see among both communities the growth of probably the most important quality to be found in any society – respect for the other side.

Incidentally, the reason why I have always supported the present agreement in Northern Ireland is not unconnected with the last point. It respects the rights and aspirations of both communities, even if it can’t give them everything they want.

J. Isaacs

Joe-Happy Twelfth as well. Thought I'd give you a congratulatory chorus of The Sash to help you celebrate:
My father wore it as a youth
In bygone days of yore
And on the Twelfth I love to wear
The sash my father wore.

J. Isaacs

BTW Joe and everyone - there are two brilliant versions of The Sash on You Tube. You have to type "the sash by bin laden" and "drumming gorilla the sash" into the You Tube Search box.

Irfan

"These remarks are simply disgraceful and totally unacceptable."

Just one thing....please keep taking your daily tablets

KateA

Dear phil - My reply to your thoughts has, unfortunately disappeared into the ether.

In brief, I said: The regard you speak of is mutual and, NO, you were not included in my reference to 'useful idiots' and NEVER COULD BE. However, I did express surprise at your 'reading'.

I have no problem with any immigrant group which respects the laws and culture of Britain. That said, it is a dangerous delusion when thinking people choose to deny the evidence of their own eyes and ears in regard to the inverted logic of Muslim complaints.

The number of silent, decent Muslims who genuinely wish to live at peace in a democratic state is not quantifiable. Nonetheless, opinion polls consistently show substantial percentages in conflict with all enlightenment and secular values.

In view of that clearly expressed dissent and the accompanying violence, it is essential we ask: what would happen if demographics and colonisation make Balkanisation of England a viable possibility.

Prior to 1933, the majority of "decent" Germans were not National Socialists. It is still a fact that a gigantic administrative machine (manned by ordinary people) was required to facilitate the extermination of the Jews.

So, since we know that the stated political objectives of the Muslim Brotherhood is conquest of this sovereign state, measures are required to combat such ambitions.

In any other European country, the use of democratic freedoms to subjugate the native population (as advocated by Ramadan) is deemed treason. If Muslims claim citizenship of Britain whilst working to impose a vicious and alien culture, they are guilty of treason.

Other Europeans, namely Denmark and Switzerland, have moved to control aggressive demands but In Britain these are being met with appeasement and 'softly, softly' tactics. The more given, the more demanded. The briefest of research will show that, in Islam, weakness in any form is despised. The demands in Britain intensify because the British government is despised as weak and in thrall to oil-rich Arabs. No matter what one's personal opinion of individual Muslims, there is no denying the reality of the 'invasion'.

'Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer
Things fall apart, the centre cannot hold
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed......
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity....

What rough beast, its hour come round at last/ Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?' (WB Yeats)

phil

Dear Kate A its always good to hear from you and I thank you for your kind remarks -we do agree with one another of course, it was only the remarks on Shahid Malik that I felt needed clarifying anyhow -it has always been clear to me that the Muslim community must exert their influence for the good of all countries that have welcomed them and if they do not ,they deserve the opprobrium that they get.I believe many of them are terrified of raising their heads above the parapet and risking alienation within their own community.only education can improve that position and I think it will come with a natural integration into our way of life as it has in all other immigrant groups -at least that is my hope -warm regards phil

Ann

Quite so, Kate.

In law, MacPinnochio is also guilty of treason, namely seeking to give away British sovereignty without the will of the people.

Joe Strummer

Thanks to everyone for the kind wishes on Orange Day.!

I'm now getting too old to celebrate the way I used to. lol

charles soper

What a fantastic read, trolls notwithstanding (Imran Khan, Latchford etc).
Well said Melanie, and seconded by KateA especially, Malik should hand his head in shame over these despicable comments, for all his past efforts at 'balance'.