Quick comment on the Sunday Times article about my supposed comments on Islamophobia and the Holocaust last week. Under the headline Treatment of Muslims 'echoes Jews under Nazis', the newspaper averred that:

ONE OF Scotland’s most prominent Muslims has compared the treatment of Asians in Britain with that of Jews in Nazi Germany.

Except I didn't, and as Martin Sullivan at IW pointed out, if you read my actual comments in the article, you'll see I didn't. The headline of the article contains quotation marks, but again, as you'll see, there is no such quote contained therein.

The article stemmed from this article about anti racists needing to wake up to the reality of Islamophobia that I wrote a few weeks ago. Mark Horne called me and was very interested in only the part near the end about Jews making comparisons to anti-Semitism.

You know when you get a call from the Sunday Times and this is what they want to talk to you about that you should have a sinking feeling. I gave him my opinions nonetheless, even if he seemed totally uninterested as to what Jewish commentators that spurred the article were also saying.

Horne called me twice about this, the second time to actually confirm that I wasn't saying that Muslims were living under Nazi-like conditions, but if prejudice was left unchecked as it was with anti-Semitism, then in years to come it may end up like that.

Still it was printed as it was, providing more evidence that the press seem simply unable to have a mature debate about the issues.

UPDATE: The BNP have hit out at me. Interestingly, despite claims they've reformed, they still call me a "guest" in their country, despite all my years here - and it is all my years.

Comments

[joe90]

Yes I know martin,
somebody knows something about history (or whatever subject is under discussion) reduces you to childish disc jockey inanities.

Hitler accused German-Jewish people of being Jewish-Bolshevik extremists and terrorists threatening the very existence of Germany.

Hard to believe, but then again, we were meant to believe just recently that evil Saddam (who was refered to as worse than Hitler by some of your pals in the British tabloid chip-paper industry, just in case some of their more slower patrons weren't getting the picture they were trying to paint) and his WMD also threatened western civilisation as we know it. With hordes of oriental suicide bombers threatening to....well, you get the picture.

All this demonisation of German-Jewish folk so that Hitler could carry out the same crime as Bush and Blair are currently in the middle of forcing the rest of us to particpate in
ie a racist bloodbath in the Middle East.

Still, according martin von munchausen, the hithero unknown expert on inter-war history, there are no parallels to be drawn between now and then.

[joe90]

Jewish religious groups did not receive funding from the Third Reich's taxpayers.

During the course of the Third Reich, no Jewish group ever formed a 'Jewish Parliament'.

- this is getting a bit tedious even for me, but here is an entry for the 'Judenrats' in wikipedia (where you can wallow in the facts and see where martin gets it all wrong)

Judenrats were councils set up and funded by the Nazis for whatever reason - they still come under the rubric of 'Jewish-only Parliaments-governments' which martin von munchausen states categorically didn't exist

[joe90]

Here is that wikipedia entry again

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judenrat>Judenrat

All the best poeple!

[John Palubiski]

What martin said.

[RandomGuy]

Ah John, I see my comment about merry-go round arguments must have passed over your head (wheeeeeee) as soon as you heard the dreaded "C" word (colonialism). I was surprised that the essence of what I am trying to get across (i.e. the futility of tit-for-tat playground arguments) did not strike you. But only for about a millisecond.

I also see what you try and do with your limited knowledge and blog-gleaned facts when you try and construct truths out of a restricted information set (not to mention a rather narrow-minded viewpoint). See, I have had first hand contact with one of the heads of the Coptic Church in Egypt, and your little tale is very very far from the truth of things as they are presently. So John, I know that you are just a troll trying to stir vileness up with your comments. I must say, if you are trying to be representative of the ordinary citizen, you are failing miserably.

[ainelivia]

Random Guy wrote: - ".... trying to be representative of the ordinary citizen, you are failing miserably."

As indeed are you.

[RandomGuy]

hahahaaa, nice one Aine. Who said I was trying to be? I do not need to fake information and stir up bile while trying to present alleged 'legitimate' British views. Thank god that all my non-muslim mates (and all the normal British folk I know) give the lie to that deception.

[John Palubiski]

There's no merry-go-round in stating that that the Spanish booted the imperialist Arabo/Muslim colonisers out of Adalusia, Randomguy.

It's a fact, and a fact that may serve as a model for future "decolonisations"

I've a question, Randomguy.

What does it feel like when you find youself on the wrong side of history?

[joe90]

What does it feel like when you find youself on the wrong side of history?

As you seem to imply that you are on it, what exactly is the right side of history?

Why do you derive such delight and satisfaction from the Roman Catholic reconquista of Spain?

What about the ensuing Spanish Inquisition - good or bad and why?

Or the ensuing Spanish conquest of the Mexican Aztecs and the South american Incas - good or bad and why?

[RandomGuy]

John said "It's a fact, and a fact that may serve as a model for future "decolonisations""

Do you mean like in Iraq, John? Hmmmm, maybe I can see your point...

Wrt your question: What does it feel like when you find youself on the wrong side of history?

Please clarify your use of "wrong" and "side"...

[Sohaib]

John Mellor:
I don't see that he's back-pedalling. It seems to me that the import of the Sunday Times article is that Osama claimed that Muslims are suffering ATTACKS like pre-war German Jews were, and that implies physical attacks sponsored by the Government. That's what the writer wanted the readership to assume of Osama's views.

In reality, Osama was indicating something about the "attitudes", "atmosphere", "climate", "sentiment". Making one thing seem the other is an easy matter of words, and that's what Marc Horne has done.

There's another subtext here. It's the one that says "Don't you dare compare the suffering of the Jews to anyone else. Just don't you dare."

Why? Here's what Norman Finkelstein thinks:
http://www.iwitness.co.uk/index.php/2006/12/15/interview-norman-finkelstein/

Martin: "If you are the type of commentor Saeed is interested in attracting, i'm out of here seriously."
-Best news so far today.

[johnmellor77]

Sohaib,
I don't really see that all. Seems to be Osama drew a comparison between the anti-semitic atmosphere in pre-war Europe and the anti-Islam atmosphere in the UK today.
So the current day has echoes of the past and by trying to disassociate himself from comments which can only be taken one day is back-pedalling, I'm afraid.

[johnmellor77]

Sohaib,
I don't really see that all. Seems to be Osama drew a comparison between the anti-semitic atmosphere in pre-war Europe and the anti-Islam atmosphere in the UK today.
So the current day has echoes of the past and by trying to disassociate himself from comments which can only be taken one day is back-pedalling, I'm afraid.

[John Palubiski]

Sohaib, attempting to elevate a non-existant "islamophobia" to the ranks of anti-Semitism is laughable.

When the BNP starts acting like the killer of Theo Van Gogh, then we'll know we're in trouble.

The refusal to accord muslims special privileges isn't racist, rather it is a strategy that is consistent with the goals of equalilty.

If the UK's Muslim want to integrate, then that integration involves associating with the *impure* on the basis of equal to equal.

Take the flak about banning headscarves in France's schools. The Muslimas (or was it just the menfolk?) cried foul and wrung their hands in angst, fearing for their deen.

But how long did that last? Two weeks? Three weeks?

What can I say? The fear and ignorance soon dissipated! In fact, no one even mentions it anymore.

Of course, at first it'll feel a bit rough, a bit strange, but as time goes by integration and even assimilation will procede apace.

The UK has so much to offer that the country's Muslims will come to enjoy embracing its values and its way of life.

[Osama]

Briefly John, the Sunday Times said I was making the comparison between now and the time "under Nazis" and "in Nazi Germany" (see quotes in post above). I think you actually understand that because you avoid such phrases with your careful choice of wording in "pre-war". My comments were about the need to learn lessons about the time quite a bit pre-war at that. If you read anything in what I actually said about Nazi Germany itself, as the Sunday Times claim, then please do inform.

[Osama]

Sorry, I should have specified my comment was for John Mellor.

[Osama]

Oh and LOL @ red top tabloid Sohaib. Shame the humour was lost on some.

[johnmellor77]

Osama,
The term Nazi Germany covers the period from 1933 to 1945, when Hitler was in power. Six years of that is definitely pre-war.
Anyone with half a brain knows you were drawing parallels between those situations.
I feel sorry for you though, it must be difficult always speaking in sentences that never convey what it is you mean!

[Osama]

OK never mind, I thought I'd have one last stab in case you were someone looking for sincere dialogue.

As I said - and you ignored - if you do find where I drew the parallel between now and said period between 1933 to 1945, let me know.

[joe90]

Pre-war Europe and Nazi Germany are not the same thing at all, as anyone interested in the rise of the European dictatorships of this period would understand, Hitler's being only one of them. Pre-war Europe includes tons of stuff that has nothing to do with Nazi Germany. History doesn't get any simpler than knowing what labels to use for what topic is being discussed.

The street violence and thuggery between the various political Weimer Republican groupings is quite unbelievable. It started practically as soon as WWI finished and therefore the Nazis, the Freikorp etc were in buisness almost throughout the whole inter-war period.

How did Hitler manage to get to power in 1933 - did he suddenly appear out of nowhere John, just like your mindless petty objections?

The UK has so much to offer that the country's Muslims will come to enjoy embracing its values and its way of life.
- yes, such as British Nazi Party apologists who hold innocent British people accountable for some Dutchman murdered abroad!

We don't hold people accountable for the crimes of others John - this is liberal democractic UK, not Nazi Germany. It seems you can't actually distinguish between the two yet, never mind being able type out 'pre-war europe' when you mean 'nazi germany'.

So tell me what these UK values are and what it's way of life is John?
I am eager to know what it is that awaits outsiders who manage to make it into this utopian state of yours.
By the way who elected you as its spokesperson or do you need a qualifiation for this post of yours?

[Sohaib]

JMellor:

It is not valid to take the words "Nazi Germany" and change them to "pre-war Germany", because Germany was Nazi for some years before as well as during the war.

Likewise, it is NOT VALID to take the words "pre-war Germany" and change them to "Nazi Germany", because Germany existed (in whatever forms) for MANY years before the Nazis!

And hatred for Jews surely didn't just start in 1933. Or did it? Please enlighten...

[johnmellor77]

We didn’t get to the situation in world war two out of nowhere,” said Saeed.

“Hitler was a product of a German society where anti-semitic attitudes had existed unchecked for decades. We have got to listen and learn from what happened there and be vigilant. "

Do you mean to say that the treatment of Muslims is only similar to the pre-war anti-semitism up until the point the Nazis came into power in 1933?

I think you'll find that it was then that German anti-semitism really kicked off although, to be honest, Europe had been pretty hostile to Jews for centuries.

Or should I just assume you agree with me - after all, you always seem to mean the opposite of what you say.

[Osama]

"Do you mean to say that the treatment of Muslims is only similar to the pre-war anti-semitism up until the point the Nazis came into power in 1933?

"I think you'll find that it was then that German anti-semitism really kicked off although, to be honest, Europe had been pretty hostile to Jews for centuries."

By jove I think he's got it! Though point of my comments being - don't you think the Nazis fed a little bit from that long unchecked anti-Semitism? They didn't design and patent it themselves in 1933.

[joe90]

There are two 'johns' in the above comments and it is very easy to get them confused Sohaib mate,

'john 1' does state -
http://www.osamasaeed.org/osama/2006/12/quick_comment_o.html#comment-26836871>pre-war Europe
- and not Nazi Germany as he seems to be claiming!

Such care and concern for the victims of state-sponsored racism - it brings a real feeling of pride at being British knowing how much more civilised we are than the old nazis, who were nothing but a bunch of xenophobic ignorant boors always going on about how great Germany would be, if it wasn't for the foreigners coming over here, abusing our hospitality, dressing up as women and escaping through british customs to avoid the law, blah blah

[johnmellor77]

Osama,

(1)You say a long-history of unchecked anti-semitism led to the horrors Jews (and many others) suffered in the second world war.
(2)You say this is similar to the abuse Muslims are being subjected to now and that this needs to be stopped.

How then is (2) not in some way an "echo" of (1)? You imply quite clearly that (1) happens when (2) is not stopped.

It's you that have drawn a direct line between the two events.