Subscribe to The Spectator

Friday 10 February 2012

Latest issue

Buy the current issue

Jobs at Telegraph

Against Manicheanism

Sunday, 14th March 2010

My old mate Andrew Gilligan lacerates the BBC in this week’s magazine, for having allowed a member of the Islamic Forum of Europe onto Radio Four’s usually genteel “Any Questions”, and indeed having allowed the East London Mosque (which is run by the “extremist” IFE) to host the programme. At first sight, it is a little odd, especially if you fish around for comparisons. You can imagine the fuss, for example, if Any Questions decided to interview Nick Griffin of the BNP. But it is perhaps beyond imagining if Any Questions were to broadcast from the BNP’s headquarters, with the audience staffed full of BNP supporters and the chairman of the panel behaving with exquisite deference to Mr Griffin. The IFE is many times more viciously bigoted than the BNP, and blood-thirsty to boot, so Gilligan is right when he accuses the BBC of libtard credulity.

However, the central point of Andrew’s piece is that the BBC shouldn’t allow such speakers onto Any Questions, because it “legitimizes” them and “betrays” moderate Muslims. This is surely wrong. We need to hear what maniacs have to say just as much as need to hear what, say, Edward McMillan-Scott has to say, and perhaps more so. I have never been terribly keen on the Manichean approach to Islam which divides it into two mutually hostile camps, extremist and moderate. There is much in moderate Islam which I find repulsive and, uh, extremist – its views about homosexuality, for example, and apostasy. And it is this false split – extremist/moderate which enables idiotic politicians and policemen to assert that suicide bombings are “nothing to do with Islam”.  I suspect that counter to what Andrew asserts there is a fair amount of support for the IFE within the certain sections of the Muslim community. Let’s hear that voice from time to time.
 


Blogs: Martin Bright | Susan Hill | Alex Massie | Melanie Phillips | Coffee House | Faith Based

Actions: Print this article  |  Email to a friend  |  Permalink   |   Comments (21)

Post this entry to:   del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit

Comments

Post a comment


Your comment:*

Your name:*

Your email address:*
(We won't publish this)

*Required information

Please click the button only once - your comment will not be published immediately

THX1138

March 14th, 2010 11:46am

Andrew "Press TV" Gilligan "lacerates" the BBC for having islamic extremists on Radio 4 while he takes blood money from Press TV the mouthpiece of the Iranian Government the biggest islamic extremists of the lot.. Irony is most certainly dead at The Spectator!

Abu Siyaasah

March 14th, 2010 2:03pm

Quite right. Double standards are not considered 'double' in Auntie's epistemology.

I notice the Beeb haven't posted the transcript yet...

ed gein

March 14th, 2010 2:33pm

The islam/islamism split is a media fiction which allows them to delude themselves.

No more no less.

skydog

March 14th, 2010 4:19pm

''The IFE is many times more viciously bigoted than the BNP, and blood-thirsty to boot''

And you've only just realised this?

''But it is perhaps beyond imagining if Any Questions were to broadcast from the BNP’s headquarters''

The BNP don't maintain an HQ. Possibly because the peace-loving retards pf the ANaL and their ilk would peaceably bomb or burn it to the ground.

NJM

March 14th, 2010 4:49pm

Any Questions:
http://tiny.cc/LMVfx

wrinkled weasel

March 14th, 2010 4:55pm

This is about the moral vacuity at the heart of the BBC which substitutes objectivity and impartiality for "fairness", a plank of political correctness which has as much real meaning as the rest of the nihilistic liberal claptrap the BBC comes out with.

The move to give these extremists a platform is not noble or clever. It is born out of intellectual confusion.

Mrs Mugabe

March 14th, 2010 7:12pm

Not sure Rod. Think how support for the BNP shot up after that ludicrous idiot Griffin was allowed to appear on Question Time. I remember remarking to Robert at the time, the Beeb has well and truly shot itself in the foot on this one. Unfortunately, giving these people airspace has the effect of bestowing them with some sort of legitimacy. As the sainted Margaret so pithily commented "just starve (them) of the oxygen of publicity on which they depend".

Noa Zrk

March 14th, 2010 7:38pm

Rod

An excellent analysis.

For the BBC freedom of speech should means the right of all to express and hear views without fear of threat, intimidation or mediation.

The BBC used to be the benchmark and arbiter of such values, now it has none.

HairyNoddy

March 14th, 2010 9:42pm

Never mind that the mere presence of these cretins in Britain completely justifies the existence of organisations like the BNP.

Maggie

March 15th, 2010 10:50am

I heard that Any Questions. It was a sort of bloodcurdling display of unmediated ochlocracy. Three of the panel, the chairman and the baying mob lined up against the aimiable Ken Clarke. It was absolutely horrible. Afterwards, I felt like going out and buying a gun in case any of those savages came anywhere near me.

Dixon

March 15th, 2010 12:31pm

Of course Rod you are being diplomatically disingenuous. That is, I am assuming that you are well aware of the fact that the biggest bone of contention in the blogosphere is the persistence of this fantasy that "Islamism" is distinct from "Islam". The only real distinction is that which is analagous to the distinction between people who categorise themselves as "c of E" and people who actually go to church. Or between those who go to church for weddings chritenings and funerals and those who live it 24/7. The "extreme" Muslim is one who most truly embodies the core of Islam. The "moderates" are Friday Muslims who, under the provision of "takfir" are argued by the others as not being Muslim at all.

radgie gadgie.

March 15th, 2010 3:31pm

We need a party that will deal with a BBC which has complete contempt for those who fund it.

Baron

March 15th, 2010 7:50pm

The notion that any public organisation that interprets events could be impartial could only be entertained in a country that favours statism, presided over by the enlightened cabal of the few, rather than the vibrancy of thought by the many. It has worked here because the capacity of the great unwashed to endure it seems limitless. This, of course, is a fallacy. When pushed too far, their endurance can snap, and the consequences that result may not be very pretty.

Murdoch may be missing on a golden opportunity. If he were to buy Channel5 and ‘fox’ it, the advertising revenues would be mouth watering.

Mrs Mugabe @ 7.12:

Not unlike your husband you seem to be unable to figure what causes what. It wasn’t the airspace that gave NG legitimacy. It was the around 1mn of the great unwashed who cast their vote for the idiot that did it. If he didn’t get the votes would the BBC have obliged?

Mrs Mugabe

March 16th, 2010 7:02am

Baron, I apologise. I see now that perhaps I should have added the word 'unwarranted' before the word 'legitimacy'. Would a polite response to my shameful blunder have been too much to ask - you colonialist pig?

Mr Grumpy

March 16th, 2010 1:26pm

'There is much in moderate Islam which I find repulsive and, uh, extremist – its views about homosexuality, for example, and apostasy.'

Then why, pray, do you call it moderate?

Baron Pippin II

March 16th, 2010 5:26pm

Mrs Mugabe @ 7.02

steady on, Grace, this ain’t the CIF blog, it’s the Spectator, and the blog of the soft spoken and gently indecisive Liddle.

more to the point: in the good old days when pigs colonialist had a say the good burghers of your country didn’t starve. A weird choice in this unfair world of ours, don’t you think? Freedom on an empty stomach, or a belly full with Smith in charge.

still, may I respectfully suggest you stick to what you know best like seizing farms and stuff?

Ramos Bickerdike

March 16th, 2010 7:04pm

THX 1138

Look here, do you think you have this irony thing quite worked out?

St Bruno

March 16th, 2010 9:42pm

Here we go again!
A piece by Rod Liddle descending into rabid rants by people who, basically, just show their love of Islam and the ultimate demise of Britain as we know it.

I have come to the conclusion that Mr Liddle is just an agent provocateur for the There’s Nothing British about the BNP while conveniently forgetting that there is also nothing British about Islam in any of it’s forms.

gareth

March 17th, 2010 2:50pm

Rod doesn't know what Manicheanism is - as this article demonstrates.
The dumbing down of life continues with conflicted socialists blurring the meaning of words.
The split between moderates and extremists doesn't exist Rod if they both follow the Qu'ran literally - which is in fact what all Muslims do.

Tendryakov

March 17th, 2010 8:13pm

I feel I should point out some blatant Islamophobia in this programme. In order to promote that common stereotype of Muslims that they are easily angered, excitable and shout a lot, the BBC repeatedly dubbed canned shouting, whistling and catcalling in the background. I've seen the same tactic used in Question Time programmes broadcast from solid white Middle England, where they try to promote the stereotype that middle-class English people are restrained and reasonable, in which case they dub on subdued quiet applause. Occasionally, they even dub canned silence, to suggest a very thoughtful audience. Something's got to be done about it.

sinister

March 31st, 2010 1:43pm

jesus you lot are paranoid!

Rod Liddle
Cartoons

Search this blog

Rod Liddle's blog archive

sponsored links

Spectator recommends

Spectator classifieds

THE PRESENT FINDER

1,700 Unusual Christmas Presents Request Catalogue 01935 815 195 Quote SPEC10 for 10% discount www.presentfinder.co.uk

OLIVE BRANCH FLORISTS

Pimilco based Florist with online ordering Web: www.olivebranch.net Tel: 020 7630 1868 Fax: 020 7233 8844

RUFFS Bespoke Signet rings

62 Shore Road, Warsash, Southampton, SO31 9FT Telephone: 01489 578867 Web site: www.ruffs.co.uk