now, i haven’t seen the “dispatches” programme yet, it’s on my sky+ box waiting to be viewed. however, i was quite amused to be warned by one naeem darr, who i understand is some sort of spokesman for our old friends the muslim safety forum, to have my complaint ready. helpfully, he then went on to provide me with a set of points to complain about to channel 4 and jim kirkpatrick mp. i reproduce his email in full – and include in bold the bits which he appears to know before broadcast:
Dispatches Islamophobic documentary
Channel 4’s Dispatches is due to broadcast a damaging and misleading programme on Monday 1st March at 8pm. For nearly a year the programme had undercover reporters attending events (including private meetings) of Islamic Forum of Europe (IFE) and passing themselves off as Muslims and friends, but acting as agents provocateurs to solicit replies to use against IFE.
although the mainstream media has already picked up the story, we’re sure that the good folk of wootton bassett would nonetheless appreciate a message of support. it appears that they are the latest stop on the publicity circuit for everyone’s favourite islamist nutjobs, the al-muhajigoon squad. predictably, the edl have vowed to picket the mosques frequented by the leader of the group that currently calls itself “islam4uk” and, no doubt, stephen gash of “sioe” has ordered an extra copy of “soldier of fortune” magazine in his excitement.
in the spirit that got these imbeciles to cancel their most recent demo and, naturally, in tribute to the recent foiling of the detroit pants bomber, i humbly propose the following:
let all who wish to show this truly grotesque man up as the nasty, ridiculous bigot he is – FLY THE UNDERPANTS!
some pants yesterday
By Effendi | Published:
November 25, 2009
Following the news that the Islamic Human Rights Commission (IHRC) will share a platform with the MCB and the An Nisa Society at next Monday’s Select Committee hearing in Parliament, now would be good time to find out more on where it stands on Britain’s pledge to support the Afghan people wrest their country from the grip of al-Qaeda.
This article hosted on the IHRC’s website should go some way to answering that question:
I refuse to buy a poppy for remembrance day, because Britain hasn’t remembered anything at all.
Sentimental rituals such as poppy-wearing only help the collective amnesia. We don’t remember that Britain was defeated in Afghanistan twice in the 19th century, that the mighty Soviet Union was defeated there a couple of decades ago. We don’t remember, or we never learnt, that imperialism is fundamentally wrong.
Also posted in Islamism |
By Guest | Published:
November 5, 2009
This is a guest post by Ali Suburbanite
****
A few days ago, Shahid Malik MP issued a statement in the Guardian in support of the Prevent initiative. Malik is careful to take pains to explain clearly the Prevent agenda; what it is and what it is not.
It is important to set the record straight: Prevent is not about spying on innocent people. Nor is Prevent about criminalising free speech. Recent comments have claimed that the focus of the government’s counter-terrorism strategy, Contest, is nonviolent extremism. This is not the case.
Contest is a counter-terrorism strategy that is freely available online, and which we would urge people to read before entering a debate without all the facts. The primary purpose of Prevent, one part of that strategy, is to protect the public by stopping people becoming terrorists or supporting violent extremism. We would be astonished to find anyone who would disagree with the importance of this work. We know, and have set out publicly in Contest, that we face a real and sustained threat from al-Qaida and al-Qaida-influenced groups. Pretending the threat does not exist would be a failure of the most basic duty of government, which is to protect the public.
By Guest | Published:
October 28, 2009
This is a guest post by Sheikh Spear
****
Iran is a brutal theocratic dictatorship that executes minors, stones adulterous women to death, persecutes religious and ethnic minorities and murders and imprisons non-violent protestors for calling for free and fair elections.
Fareena Alam presenting on Press TV
It is also not exactly supportive of the UK’s struggle against Islamist extremism. The Iranian government is widely believed to have supplied Iraqi insurgents with many of the roadside bombs that killed British soldiers in Iraq, Iran’s leaders have also called for the extrajudicial murder of a British novelist and funded London-based radical Islamist outfits such as the comically misnamed Islamic Human Rights Commission.
One would think, therefore, that the British government would regard employees of the Iranian government as being less than ideal partners for the UK domestic ‘Preventing Violent Extremism’ programme.
By Faisal | Published:
October 22, 2009
This excellent op-ed by Zafar Khalid Farooq, published in the The News in Pakistan, is well worth the read.
The money shot comes at the very end and it is spot on:
Even more worryingly, a new generation is being radicalised, often with the very government funds that are supposed to be countering radicalisation. The British Government’s counter-terrorism strategy is called Preventing Violent Extremism (PVE). In the past three years, 90 million pounds have been spent on PVE. However, by focusing on ‘violent extremism’, as opposed to all extremism, the government has allowed itself to hop into bed with organisations and groups deeply opposed to liberal, democratic values. These groups have ties with the Muslim brotherhood, and our very own Jaamat-e-Islami. Perhaps by joining hands with non-violent extremist groups, the government hopes to provide a defence, a pressure valve if you like, against violent extremism among the angry Muslim youth. But by collaborating with these groups, the government is effectively supporting and funding the Islamist ideology that spawns an illiberal, intolerant and anti-western view.
By Guest | Published:
October 19, 2009
This is a guest post by Alexander Meleagrou-Hitchens
****
For the past couple of days, the Guardian has been running scare stories about the Government’s Preventing Violent Extremism (PVE) programme. Gleefully feeding Islamist propaganda about the government’s supposed demonisation of Muslims, it is an irresponsible and potentially dangerous attack.
PVE is a strand of the CONTEST strategy designed to fight terrorism, and a large part of the PVE strand is the Pathfinder Fund which, through local authorities, allocates funds to local organisations that they assess can help prevent people from becoming radicalised.
The main Guardian report focuses primarily on the use of information sharing agreements (ISA) which have been drawn up between the Metropolitan Police and two councils that receive PVE funding for certain projects. These ISAs specify that PVE funded projects can share with the police detailed personal information about innocent Muslims, including details about their sex life. Having got hold of two ISAs, one from Islington and one from Waltham Forest, the Guardian has presented the Prevent strategy as nothing more than a covert dirty tricks programme designed to create a police state for innocent Muslims.
Also posted in Islamism, Your View |
By Guest | Published:
October 19, 2009
This is a guest-post by Al-Qanaas Al-Masri
****
The Enemy (according to the BMI)
At the risk of sounding like Richard Littlejohn, sometimes you just can’t make it up. In response to the Guardian’s report on Saturday on how the government’s ‘Prevent’ counter-extremism programme is allegedly being used to spy on British Muslims, the British Muslim Initiative, a moribund Muslim Brotherhood front-group run by former Muslim Association of Britain spokesman Anas Al-Tikriti, briefly stirred into life in order to issue a single crazed press-release:
BMI president Muhammad Sawalha said, “This campaign of espionage is a hallmark of totalitarian societies. It is an unfortunate throw back to the Cold War years when spying was the order of the day.”
“We are deeply aggrieved that such measures should be adopted to target law-abiding citizens in a modern democracy”, he added.
By Guest | Published:
October 19, 2009
This is a guest post by Khuram
****
On Saturday the Guardian published a front page article by Vikram Dodd on the Governments PREVENT strategy. This article claimed there were concerns that the agenda was being used to spy and to gather information. On Sunday another article by Dodd stated that influential MPs were going to investigate these allegations. Interestingly, Dodd was also behind what was claimed to be a leak of the new Contest 2 strategy back in February 09, the actual strategy did not include anything of what was alleged. Two important questions need to be asked then: is PREVENT really about spying and is it effective?
