Reality: Muslim parents are clamping down on any political activity

Yesterday the Home Secretary could be accused of grandstanding when he used the Sun newspaper to tell Muslims to watch their children.

Today he stepped into a mosque. He was given a fairly heated reception during the Q&A, though Muslims really must learn about the art of questioning. Heckling came from the Anjum Chowdhury/Abu Izzadine axis. I do wonder who invited them. Visits like this are not publicised in advance. Who told them? George Galloway puts it thus:

The man who harangued you - Abu Izzadine - is a well-known and violent extremist from an organisation your own government has proscribed. Yet he was allowed within punching distance of the British Home Secretary. How ? Why ?

... There are only two conceivable explanations as to how this man, at this sensitive time, was allowed to hijack your Potemkin Village performance today.

Either our police and security services are so fantastically incompetent that Bin Laden himself might have slipped in to beard you at your podium. Or someone somewhere wanted to engineer precisely this confrontation to show you in a certain light and to portray the Muslims of Britain in the most aggressive violent and extreme way possible, as a justification for the utterly counter-productive policies you are following.

Reid did take it all in his stride. He's a smooth public performer, and I doubt anyone else in the government would have been able to pull that off. Totally unflappable. What the headlines tomorrow will all be about though is the insinuation that Muslim youth are planning terror outrages, and their parents aren't doing anything about it. As such this is libellous.

Every few weeks now, the government pop up with some new way to spin the call for the Muslim community to do more. They were caught on the hop by the letter from Muslim leaders in August calling for our foreign policy to be sorted out, and they're not going to let that happen again. The narrative has to be about what Muslims must do, not what the government must do.

The reality on the ground though is that Muslim parents are not allowing their kids to get involved in any political activity. This is repressive enough, but is also dangerous. Muslim youth care about war and occupation in Muslim lands. There are two outlets for this anger: engage politically or go down the extremist path. The former obviously needs to be promoted and bolstered.

Indeed we saw in the build up to the Iraq war, just that happening. However, as police harassment has increased in the last few years, Muslim parents are reluctant to let their kids take part in demos, or partake in anything vaguely political for fear of them ending up being questioned or landing themselves on a CIA watchlist. Let me repeat, the outlet of political expression and dissent needs to be there for Muslim youth. The home secretary and his police forces are clamping down on this.

See also Bloggerheads, Obsolete

Comments

[Sadat]

The Sun is a cheap tabloid that parades teenage girls in the nude on third page for pushing circulation in the ghettos.

If the Home Secretary can get support only from those kind of outlets, then it means the War on Islam flagged by Fascist America has reached stalemate.

[Martin]

Fascist America?

PHHWWOOAARRR!!!!!

[ainelivia]

Ah yes George's "obvious explanations" again and again, it's all a "conspiracy", it's "them and us".

Even a five year old knows nowadays, if you want to self-publicise, get yourself on camera, and what better way to do it? Yes, Mr Galloway, I do wonder how they knew Reid would be at that meeting.

Although he may have a point, albeit not the one he (GG) intended. The Izzadine /Chowdhury axis is all about being as extreme, inflammatory, and insulting as possible; getting one's face in front of a camera as often as possible; and insult the Kufr etc as often as possible; and the un-Islamic government as often as possible, these two guys are doing a grand job of convincing the majority out there that there is an enormous threat to this country; these two want to encourage as much Islamaphobia as they possibly can. And they are doing a good job.

I used to think that it was the George Bush et al and the current US adminstration who worked to keep us all in a permanent state of terror and anxiety, but now we have the arrogant, volatile, and inflammatory Chaudhury and Izzadine.

Why all the fuss and bother about the present government, and the push to create as much turmoil and get as many headlines as possible. Which one of the following Galloway, Chaudhury or Izzadine, is hoping to be Reid's replacement?

[The Antagonist]

"All the world is a stage, and all the men and women merely players. They have their exits and entrances; each man in his time plays many parts."

[George Carty]

Although he may have a point, albeit not the one he (GG) intended. The Izzadine /Choudhary axis is all about being as extreme, inflammatory, and insulting as possible; getting one's face in front of a camera as often as possible; and insult the Kufr etc as often as possible; and the un-Islamic government as often as possible, these two guys are doing a grand job of convincing the majority out there that there is an enormous threat to this country; these two want to encourage as much Islamophobia as they possibly can. And they are doing a good job.

Exactly - the best way for any extremist to build up a power base is to use the opposition's extremists.

Sort of like how Ariel Sharon deliberately provoked the Palestinians so he could be elected on an anti-terrorist ticket, or like the 9/11 attacks which were designed to provoke a massive US invasion of the Middle East (which al-Qaeda hoped would eliminate anti-Islamist regimes in the Middle East in the short run, and weaken America in the long run).

[Abdul Wahid]

"There are two outlets for this anger: engage politically or go down the extremist path."

Typical comment of a man who cannot see past politics, who has made political engagement the be-all-and-all option.

There is a third path: the focus of time and energy on cultivating these youth upon a proper and correct understanding of Islam, their Creator, manners, etiquettes, worship, purification.
In this is the true solution, not engaging in corrupt politics assuming that the powers that be will who have not an ounce of taqwa (god-consciousness) will solve the frustrations these youth feel.
It's like a Jew going to Hitler and saying, please stop killing us.
Utterly absurd!

[joe90]

Osama got it spot on in his observation that every few weeks the racist war criminals of New Labour are having to come up with eye-catching stunts and escapapdes, every few weeks now, in order to keep their own crimes out of the headlines -

- after all, we are talking about a government which is guilty of the greatest crime of them all, 'unprovoked aggerssion' against innocent defenceless Iraq -

- and only recently New Labour assisted in the widespread destruction and mass-murder of Lebanon and occupied Palestine by the racist war criminals of Israel.

Also, John Reid ensured security at his well publicised 'meeting' ie PR opportunity with lots of news-media on-hand, was such, that anybody was able to walk in on it -

- this is the New Labour Party that has been screaming about terrorism and the need for extra-vigilance etc etc from the public, but can't be bothered to provide proper security and checks at a meeting for its own Home Secretary, someone responsible for making sure the rest of us are safe and well!

It would be interesting to find out how lax security is for his other public engagements where John Reid slags off parents and their kids about the need for vigilence!

The whole publicity stunt stinks - nothing unusual for Tony Blair and New Labour then!

[joe90]

Here is a wee thread for thought -

http://members5.boardhost.com/medialens/msg/1158787846.html

- with lots of small but beautiful points!

All the best!

[ainelivia]

"The whole publicity stunt stinks - nothing unusual for Tony Blair and New Labour then!" And Trevor Brooksa aka Izzadine and Chaudhury.

Be fair, they are all at it.

Speaking of which, it seems strange to me that left-wing socialists should want to hitch their wagon to right-wing extremists, until I cottoned on to the fact that both groups have a need to save the world through conversion, and Messianic tendancies.

[joe90]

"Be fair, they are all at it."

- most of the stuff you write goes over my head but I have to say this is nonsense -

Blair, Reid are the real extremists, guilty of the worst crime, and crimes, on the statute books, never mind trying to imagine the realities of the horrors they are responsible for - the current case of a British squaddie up on war crimes charges being a case in point (what about his bosses Blair, Reid et al - how guilty are they?)

- spending over £6 billion on Iraqi atrocities alone, since their illegal attack and invasion -

- never mind their recent involvement in the butchery of Lebanese and Gaza civilians (still on-going) and lacing south Lebanon with un-exploded cluster bomblets -

So no, they aren't all at it - only New Labour war criminals are at it, trying desperately to make scapegoats out of their victims, at home and abroad, and create smokescreens to hide their own far more violent on-going international crime spree behind - they are the real actual extremists -
- turning up to heckle at a meeting isn't extremism, it is your democratic right.

Who are these 'left-wing socialists' and 'right-wing extremists' you talk about, you don't give any examples?

[ainelivia]

Joe90, seems I hit a nerve there mate, the game is up, most of the general public have become wise to that unholy alliance.

"turning up to heckle at a meeting isn't extremism, it is your democratic right."

All depends on whether one attends the meeting in order to be part of it or destroy it; you used the word heckle, like it is some game played, or something akin to a disruptive child in a classroom; doesn't want to learn, doesn't want anyone else to learn.

Actually I can't believe it, that you used "heckle" and "democratic right", in the same sentence, one being in effect the art of "sabotage" in connection with democratic rights. Wow. There you have it, a real example of, Left wing socialists and right wing extremists. e.g. "I come to bury the meeting, by heckling". They have so much in common.

[ainelivia]

Oh and before I forget Joe90, because it seems to have slipped through the net of your selective memory.

How much did any British Government spend on atrocities in Ireland over the years of its occupation? Any figures on that?

And where were you and your associates then? Protesting the inhumane treatment of Irish people? How the British used to view us in the words "if you are Irish you are guilty?"

Where were you then? Protesting on our behalf? When? Where? Where were any of these extremists protesting (they claim) on behalf of "human rights" currently; did they give a flying donkey about the Irish? and the horrendous injustices meted out to both the country and it's people? And that is just in the 1980s?

Or is it that you suddenly woke up as you see history repeating itself and you wonder who will be next on the demonising and scapegoating agenda?

[thabet]

I do wonder who invited them.

AFAIK, Omar Brooks lives in the area.

[Osama]

Abdul Wahid, I gave two options in a particular context. I didn't mention a whole lot of things that people also need to do like eat, sleep and wash their backsides.

Read your seerah. The Prophet (saw) did his prayers, yes. He also engaged more than just a little bit of politics.

[joe90]

Well its not my fault you mistake discussion on a discussion board for 'nerves being hit',
I've already contributed to this blog and also this actual discussion. I suppose that was also my nerves being hit rather than me just discussing stuff I find interesting with other people interested in the same stuff. That's me for you!

You equate some big-mouthed 'extremist' heckler at an obviously well orchestrated and PR-managed New Labour publicity stunt with war criminals guilty of murdering 100s of 1000s of people - that is not the proper equation and its not even close..
The current British government and Hitler are guilty of the same crime, of which there is no worse crime that can be committed - that is the proper equation.

John Reid, in the day before this well-publicised meeting, was given plenty of space in Rupert Murdoch's 'The Sun' on the very same subject he turned up the next day to pontificate on to this particular local British-Muslim community -
- a community that happened to contain some people who weren't camera shy or reticent when it came to public speaking
- also the security was non-existent which for a British Home Secretary who is in charge of major elements of British state security seems rather odd
- which lead me to believe this was a stage managed photo opportunity, a PR stunt nothing more - one of many that comprise a sequence designed by New Labour to scare the British public, promote scapegoats for their own crimes and failings and keep their own horrible crimes out of the news

You seem reluctant to acknowledge we're talking about the British government here whose free-speech, you claim, is being gagged and whose meetings are being sabotaged. Is that really what is going on here - that people are being allowed freedom of speech?

We are talking about the British Home Secretary here - since when is he ever not going to get the chance to get his own point of view across?

Does he really need to turn up in area, where his officers have recently raiding homes and shooting people (and I can only imagine the kind of stop and search harrassment the folk of the area are being subjected to because the look 'asian') in order for people to be able to understand his arguments?

Why was the big-mouthed heckler give so much free publicity for then ?
Why not publicise other points of view at the same time?
This kind of confrontational aggressiveness suits the New Labour and western establishment - war criminals like John Reid can preen themselves on the fact they are seen to be democratic and open, but their 'opponents' are irrational and filled with hate!
So it isn't about New Labour war crimes abroad, which is causing so much trouble - it is about British society at home and the extremists in its midst!

Could you tell me who and my asociates are?
You haven't given me any examples of these 'socialist left' and exteremist right' elements you talk about.

And you seem to be on the wrong blog - as far as I can make out, this isn't about British crimes against the Irish - this is a blog about British-Muslim people which also happens to be Scottish as well, which is one of the reasons I am here - to help people in my local community who I think are being subjected to an outrageous smear and scapegoat campaign by the British Establisnment and its organs -
- so why are you here?

[joe90]

Here is the latest thoughts from the ever vigilant and, er, thoughtful members of the MediaLens.org messegeboard,
on Right Horrible Dr. John Reid grandstanding before the already assembled members of the objective and impartial British media

http://members5.boardhost.com/medialens/msg/1158915278.html>How the BBC works

Here is a list of the masscares of innocent defenceless Lebanese people that Dr John and his democratic moderate and civilised colleagues of the British government are repsonisble for

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JustPeaceUK/message/19670>massacres perpetrated by the Israeli Army in Lebanon

I don't have the latest figures to hand for the number and locations of British massacres perpetrated on the innocent defenceless people of occupied Palestine, Afghanistan and Iraq -

http://rafah.virtualactivism.net/news/todaymain.htm>RAFAH TODAY
- but here is the great Mohammed Omar who lives inside Gaza in Rafah City - Israel's recently constructed Warsaw ghetto for sub-humans of the wrong ethnic-type

http://www.marchforjustice.com/shock&awe.php>'Shock and Awe'
- this gallery is always publicised, at the top of the shop, on the always brilliant 'Information Clearing House'

[joe90]

I don't want to labour the point,
but I was just following the thread of the small MediaLens.org discussion and someone helpfully provided this link -

http://www.respectcoalition.org/?ite=1171>Reid 'fiasco' - Salma Yaqoob on TV - George Galloway letter

- to one of Scotland's greatest sons and finest exports!

[joe90]

This completely tickled my fancy for some reason -

"Why weren't catholic priests and the republican Irish asked to do more against the terror campaign of the IRA? Because it would have been looked upon as extremely patronising and insulting and I've little doubt the Irish population would've told them where to go in no uncertain terms."

http://members5.boardhost.com/medialens/msg/1158948739.html>Hugely disappointing: Paul Routledge joins "Muslims should do more against terror" brigade.

PS
For the attention of the Webmaster (one of the most bombastic titles ever invented - a nerdy little geek with no friends or social life etc etc)
The comments function doesn't seem to accept copy and pasted links - they always get printed out as ordinary text, rather than a hyperlink

pps
http://umkahlil.blogspot.com/2006/09/action-alert-peace-one-day.html>Action Alert: Peace One Day
Happy Peace Day!

[joe90]

There you have it, a real example of, Left wing socialists and right wing extremists.

Here is Jonathan Cook on the origins of this absurd smear campaign - anyone critical of western governments and their foreign policies and those of Israel, gets tarred with the brush being some kind of supporter of 'extremism' -

http://www.osamasaeed.org/osama/2006/09/reality_muslim_.html>From the New "Anti-Semitism" to Nuclear Holocaust
How Israel is Engineering the "Clash of Civilizations"

All the best folks!

ps
sorry to have reproduced the link to the letter of George Galloway MPs which was already referred to as part of Osama's article - a slight mistake there!

[ainelivia]

"who I think are being subjected to an outrageous smear and scapegoat campaign by the British Establisnment and its organs".

This is not new, it's a repeat of the 1970 -80s, when it was happenning to the Irish community. That is the connection. I'm suprised you don't see that.

[ainelivia]

And the other similarity is that attention is being given to "extremist views", and not "representative" views by media organisations.

The effect being that the current government and any future government will attempt to bring in draconian so-called security legislation that will affect all.

For example: media were unable to use voices of IRA representatives and had to use actors voices instead. And I wonder are we likely to see this repeated?

[joe90]

Well,
using minorities within communities as scapegoats isn't peculiar to 1970-80s nor the Irish - it is a device commonly used by powerful establishments throughout history to disguise and deflect their own responsiblity and accountability onto weak, defenceless, innocent people and groups.

And as for civil liberties,
well they already have been eroded -
- people are kept incommunicado in British prisons with no rights of even basic habeaus corpus, some call Belmarsh Prison the UK's equivalent of 'Guantanamo'
- as for peoples rights abroad being attacked by the UK government - well there is the UK's unprovoked attack on Iraq leading to 100s of 1000s of deaths and 'prisoner abuse' etc etc -
- as well as people's rights in Aghanistan being eroded, there is the UK's recent participation in crimes against Lebanon and Occupied Palestine.

The right to free speech in Britian is seriously attacked when people who express legitimate concerns and question UK government policies and actions are portrayed as nothing more than left-wingers holding hands with violent extremists.

The Real Extremists -
I noticed on the UK Channel 4 News on Monday, 7pm, Foreign Secretary Margaret Becket (live from the UN in New York) stated that the UK did all it could to get a ceasefire arranged between Israel and the South Lebanese Resistance Movement in the recent fighting between them. She said the UK did everything it could could stop the fighting basically. Which is a lie!

Scottish airports were used by the US-Israel to shuttle munitions to the scenes of Israel's carnage. The UK directly intervened in the conflict on behalf of Israel.
In the last few hours before the ceasefire took effect Israel sprayed the whole of south Lebanon in cluster bombs in a final effort to ethnically cleanse the area. Bombs which probably travelled through Scotland, but which were stopped from doing so, due to protests at airports (by small group of people - lefties holding hands with extremists no doubt) and direct action by the always brilliant Trident Ploughshares WMD Inspectors
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5382192.stm>'Million bomblets' in S Lebanon

And in their own words, Gazan victims of the effects of UK government support for the racist war criminals of the Israeli government -
http://rafah.virtualactivism.net/news/todaymain.htm>Rafah Today

Could you tell me who my associates are, I've already asked you but have had no answer?

[ainelivia]

Questions? Have you answered any of mine?

I was puzzled why you keep on asking about your "associates", until I reread some of the comments.

Anyone who seeks to portray, what they consider the "other" side as "extreme". You are doing this, in the tone of your rethoric here, and the government do it in theirs.

Therefore seeking to create the polarisation of people into sides, groups etc. As if people can't think for themselves without being aligned with some group, ideology etc. So I see little difference in the approach, or the manner of the spin. You oppose the government with a great deal of energy. What do you propose as an alternative?

"The right to free speech in the UK is seriously attacked when people who express legitimate concerns and question UK government policies and actions are portrayed as nothing more than left-wingers holding hands with violent extremists."

The right to speak in this country, is seriously attacked, when unless it is the "speech-think-group approach" the individual is attacked for their opinions. Where are the opinions of the majority, whatever their political views are. That is what "free speech" is. The right of each and every person, irregardless of race, belief, gender, personal beliefs or political affiliation etc.

Your filled with information comment is one-sided. The governments actions, as regards foreign policy, do not reflect the feelings of a great many people in this country. Again you want me to see it as one side right, and one wrong. And it just is not that simple.

If you continue to attack what most people feel is a fairly valid system of government, then you will find your views questioned. If you continue to write as though you are the only one with any moral conviction, and everyone elses morals' are in question, then your morals and agenda will be questioned.

You are seen as you portray yourself. And to dismiss years of colonial oppression as "something that happenned everywhere", whilst it was happenning on every British person's doorstep, yet they choose mostly to stick their heads in the sand, until of course the miners strike and then, ah then they knew, that she didn't make exceptions, well that's one of history's lessons come home to roost.

There's my answer.

[joe90]

I didn't realise there were any outstanding or relevant questions that I hadn't addressed - care to re-state them in a simple to understand format.

Most of what you have written doesn't make grammatical sense to me, but I'll try to reply.

First,
I am accused of writing rhetoric but you yourself don't seem to know what it is you have been writing about.
You accuse me and my 'associates' of holding hands with extremists. Your main point which seems to have slipped your mind. I stand accused of undermining democracy, free-speech and supporting extremism which is a heady important charge against me. Yet you are blithe about awarebess of your own argument and charges against me and my 'associates'!
Talk about rhetoric and empty accusations!
I have associates and an 'ideology' and a side but you refuse point-blank to tell me what these are. Well I can't argue with that. I stand accused of an un-named unmentioned crime. There is no defence for such a charge and no guilt either.

Second
The British government has been committing crimes against the Irish, which is terrible, but by the end of your screed you are sticking up for the British government and its way of doing things. So which is it, you condemn the the British government or approve of them?
Is the British government extremist war criminals or not? You say they are and they are not, although I'm not quite sure as your statements don't seem to make all that much sense when put together as a coherent group.

I am accused of 'polarisation' but you yourself seem to be defending the British government and attacking them at the same time - British war crimes abroad are OK in your bizarre book, as long as the Irish aren't the victims. Of course, after the miners strike then history happened or something or other!! Completely lost me there.

Third
Criticisn British government war crimes has nothing to do with criticism of democratic liberal government - where have I said I think democracy is rubbish or people aren't entitled to express their own views? That is exactly what I'm not saying or what good people like Osama and British-Muslim folk in general are saying. Yet the British government and the British media are trying to imply that Islam the 'British way of life' are, somehow, incompatible. It is the British government, and the British media, who are incompatible with democratic attributes such as accountability, responsibility, open-ness, honesty, morality etc etc, as I have shown above. If any of these facts are wrong please correct them for me and give me counter-evidence and counter-arguments and sources for the following -.
1 The British government did take part on the recent attacks on Lebanon and Gaza.
2 The Britisg government is guilty of 'unprovoked aggression' against Iraq and is guilty of war crimes against Afghanistan.

Terrible as terrorism, war crimes are much worse and are causes of terrorism. I see nothing extermist about stating a simple empirical observation which is backed up by the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal, no less. If that isn't enough of an authority for my argument, then what would satisfy your peculiar standards, or is that me just being rhetorical again?

I don't mind my views and morals being questioned at all. I positively invited criticism and thrive on it. That is why I join in discussions on blogs, read books, listen to the radio etc. I never said I was perfect or that I know everything. I'm not the Pope. I'm just another bloke.

[anon]

Erm, what did Izzadeen say that was extremist, inflammatory etc. Didn't he just heckle?