Racism, Anti-Semitism, Islamophobia And ....

Politics of Distraction and Division

Recently three Jewish Journals decided to print  same front page to show the extent of concern about anti-Semitism in the labour party and to show their disapproval of Jeremy Corbyn. Anti-Semitism is as abhorrent as any other form of racism. Similarly criticism of Jewish people because of their religion or use of religion as an insult is also abhorrent. In recent years issue of anti-Semitism has resurfaced in the western countries including USA. It is mostly related to the rise of the of so called pophiulist/ Far Right parties. in Europe and North America. They have grown at the back of the rhetoric against refugees, migrants and especially Muslims. Their success has emboldened supremacists and neo Nazis both in Europe and North America.

Coincidently, on the same day Times of London published an article by David Aaronovitch with headline “Criticising Muslims doesn’t make you racist”. The paper also carried an article with headline “Sajid Javid orders research into “grooming gangs” however it did not mention religion of the perpetrators. This makes me wonder why David Aaronovitch felt the need to mention religion in his article. Was he trying to fill the gap left by the imprisonment of Tommy Robinson, who also says criticising Islam/ Muslims isn’t racist. Maajid Nawaz didn’t want to be left out and fired a reminder tweet with reference to religion and race and a follow up  tweet referring to now debunked Quilliam report and as usual used the race card saying that the report was written by people of Asian heritage, as if this makes the discredited report legitimate.

The reality is that the rise in Islamophobic and anti migrant was left unchecked by our mainstream parties and mainstream media. They even adopted the rhetoric to suit their political needs and the media provided platform to these unsavoury characters. An example of this normalisation is the above article by Mr Aaronovitch. People like David are buying the rhetoric of the far right and President Trump that religion or race are a factor behind heinous crimes. They haven’t provided a scintilla of evidence to support their claims but the rhetoric has been swallowed by our political and social commentators in mainstream media. Maybe the investigation ordered by the Home Secretary, if conducted without pre conceptions, will put an end to these claims. However, the Islamophobia has become so common and wide spread that I don’t expect it to change the rhetoric.

This normalisation of hate rhetoric made it easier for neo Nazis and Fascists to resurface and latch on to the identity movements. Thing about these neo Nazis and supremacists is that they don’t discriminate against any minorities and hate them equally. However, some people especially those involved in the Islamophobic activity including blame the left for the rise in racism against Jewish community and some even blame Muslims. For the past 2-3 years Labour party, under the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn, has been under sustained attack for not dealing with the issue of anti-Semitism. Either they forgot the following or they are trying to divert attention from it:

- rise of populists like UKIP and the far right that saw BNP/ UKIP electoral success;

-the London Mayoral election, which was fought by the Conservative candidate on racist, Islamophobic and divisive rhetoric;

-  Brexit referendum campaign, which was loaded with racist and Islamophobic rhetoric the rise in racist hate crime after the result;

- election of Donald Trump that emboldened racists, supremacists, fascists and Nazis in Europe and North America.

- Prosecution of members of banned far right group National Action and their anti-Semitic speeches.

- far right supremacist marches with anti-Semitic, racist and anti Muslim slogans in US , Poland, Hungary, Austria, Germany, Italy, etc.;

- Nationalist and racist parties making electoral gains in Europe.

As usual it falls to the left wing commentators to remind people how the rise of far right and their rhetoric has been normalised by the media .

Anti-Semitism has always been just below the surface in European and North American societies. In light of the above it is disingenuous to blame it solely the left/ Labour party. Despite party’s attempts to resolve the issue, some people in the media, Labour Friends of Israel and some Labour MPs along with their conservative counterparts seem determine to keep this issue in the news. They may think that by keeping the matter going they are helping the Jewish community but the experience of minority, migrant and Muslim communities show that continuous discussion about them only helps to normalise racism and Islamophobia. This normalisation leads to dinner table discussions thus creating new generations of racists and fascists.  

When this issue was first raised, it was all about the harassment of certain MPs via social electronic media. It then moved on to trolling of left wing activists and labour member's social media and networking history. This exercise often unearthed comments concerning Israel Palestine dispute. Same method is being used to search old history of Jeremy Corbyn, who has been long life supporter of causes of oppressed people including Palestinians. The matter was then moved on to pressure Mr Corbyn to visit Israel. Then it was suggested that the Labour party should adapt the anti-Semitism definition of IHRA. When the definition was adapted, taking into account select committee concerns regarding some examples concerning criticism of the state of Israel, the campaign took more aggressive and ugly turn. It turned into direct attacks on Jeremy Corbyn calling him Racist and Anti-Semitic.

So the anti-Semitism row which began with aim to protect members and some MPs from online harassment and abuse was hijacked by the Israeli lobby and so called leaders of the Jewish community. These include Stephen Pollard of the Jewish Chronicle, Labour Friends of Israel MPs like Louis Ellman, Margret Hodge, Ian Austin, Board of Deputies and the Jewish Leadership Council. Stephen Pollard lead the way by calling Jeremy Corbyn racist and anti-Semitic which is a despicable attempt to smear a lifelong campaigner against racism. However, this tweet by Chairman of the Jewish Leadership Council, Jonathan Goldstein, saying "this was never about IHRA fight was never about IHRA, it was about the leadership" raises the questions about their motives..

These people have no sympathy with the victims of racism, anti-Semitism or Islamophobia, they have their own agenda. They are exploiting the affinity of Jewish people towards Israel. They are using this issue to distract Jewish people and others to ignore the shift in Israel towards theocracy and discriminative laws making minorities like Druze, Arab and others 2nd and 3rd class citizens. Furthermore, this diverts attention from continuous attacks on Palestinians of Gaza who, despite heavy loss of lives, have been protesting for weeks against occupation and imprisonment in Gaza strip. Instead of devoting column inches and segments to the above, our media is printing and broadcasting propaganda supplied by the above without question and counter arguments.

When people like Stephen Pollard say that the Labour party presents an existential threat to Jewish life in the UK. His comments are those of a fiction writer. The reality is that under the current leadership, he sees a change in the Foreign policy concerning issues in the Middle East. Furthermore, so called leaders of the community are worried about increasing rebellion in the Jewish communities particularly in the younger generation, both here and across the pond in the USA.  They are rejecting the line coming from the elders and the state of Israel and rejecting the radicalising propaganda through the birthright visits and compulsory service in the IDF. They are vocal against occupation, settlements, atrocities, discrimination and racism against Palestinians, Arabs and Druze. They reject the idea that Palestinian struggle is based on religion and not because of occupation. These leaders are using this dispute to scare communities to bring them in line.

Reality is that today Jewish community is fully integrated and they are not part of any ethnic monitoring except may be for the purposes of census. Their path to equality, despite being Europeans was difficult but they found home in the Labour party and rest is history. Today they are represented in every political and unfortunately they also part of groups that are racist and Islamophobic. If we accept that society has a anti-Semitism problem then we accept that it is reflected in the Labour Party. Same could be said about parts of the Muslim, and other minority communities. We all need to work together to eliminate it. We have done it before and we can do it again. Labour members know that the Jewish community has been and continues to be an ally of disadvantaged and minority communities in their fight for rights, justice and equality.

There is no point in comparing experiences of the BME communities today with the past experiences of the Jewish communities as each community is different. However, when people like Jonathan Freedland start to compare current dispute with the Labour to the struggles of the black and ethnic minorities and start mentioning McPherson report, you have to say something. He clearly doesn’t know the circumstances that lead to the report. The report was written in the last century but the struggle for equality and rights continues in the 21^stcentury. There is still racism, discrimination and inequality. The push back against so called political correctness has given licence to people to be vile and hateful. Furthermore the institutional racism remains as bad as ever as seen in the hostile environment and the Windrush scandal.

We are used to the rhetoric from the establishment and MSM commentators that BME minorities and Muslims don’t integrate. Well so called hostile environment and scandals like Windrush make it difficult. However, when people do work hard to achieve success they are judged by different standards and often face abuse not only on social media but from colleagues too. For example Diane Abbot received more abuse than all her parliamentary colleagues put together. David Lammy was attacked for highlighting harsher and unequal treatment of BME communities in our criminal justice system. Sadiq Khan faces double whammy of hate for being Asian of Pakistani heritage and for being Muslim. Attacks on Sadiq Khan don’t just come from locals but from racists and bigots of Europe and North America including President Trump. Sayeeda Warsi came under attack for resigning from cabinet because of differences on policy concerning Israeli attack on Gaza and lately for highlighting racism and Islamophobia in the Conservative party.

This brings me to the issue of Islamophobia and the question, if Islamophobia is another form of racism? The simple answer is Yes as Islamophobic rhetoric has been adopted by known racist and supremacist groups and fact that it mainly affects Brown Muslims. However, the answer to this question is not that simple. While the foot soldiers are the same old racist groups, Islamophobia emanates from high echelons of political power, influential media publications and broadcasters and the literate. Everyone knows who these people are therefore I won’t go into details. Anti Muslim rhetoric has also been adopted by various groups for their own agenda. These people include anti migrant/ refugees, racists, nationalists, neo Nazis, Israeli lobby, new atheists, supporters of Monarchy in Iran, ex Muslims, etc. They are supported by so called reformist and moderate Muslims like Maajid Nawaz, who provide cover by saying that the term Islamophobia is misnomer.

Like racism, Islamophobia is an international phenomenon. However, there is one group which is a constant in their overt and covert support for Islamophobic organisations and individuals. This group is the Israeli lobby in the West, especially in the US. While these people do not represent wider Jewish community, they are high profile and have resources to cause maximum harm. They are ideologically motivated and like any other extremist have sinister agenda. They aim to sow seeds of division and divert attention from Israel Palestine conflict. These people were behind placing Islamophobic adverts on New York underground and full page adverts in the papers. They take their lead from the right wing government of Israel and there is no shortage of it.

They are influenced by the racism and Islamophobic rhetoric coming from the right wing government of Benjamin Netanyahu who relies on the far right and fundamentalist parties. Mr Netanyahu has tried to rewrite the history by saying Hitler didn't want to kill Jews but was persuaded by Mufti of Palestine. He also made racist comments about Arabs during an Election Day video message. Furthermore, he has  been building alliances with far right leaders in Europe like Viktor Orban, despite his party’s history of anti-Semitism. And we know of his influential relationship with Trump and people in his administration like his security advisor John Bolton who has spent a lifetime in spreading hate against Muslims.

The barometer for building these unholy alliances seems to be if you are anti Muslim we will overlook your racism, fascism and anti-Semitism. We have seen this in other instances such as Tommy Robinson, an anti Muslim bigot, who in every step of way, has been supported by Israeli lobby. During his recent stint in prison, an American Israeli Supporting Islamophobic group, Middle East Forum funded protest marches for his release and paid his legal costs. In one of these marches a radicalised Jewish speaker proclaimed himself to be a Jewish Nazi .

Recently a journalist abi Wilkinson unearthed Baron Danny Finkelstein's connections with Gatestone Institute which is well known for its support for Israel and its racist, anti refugee, anti Muslim activity. Its board members include Douglas Murray of Henry Jackson Society and Raheem Kassam of Breitbart. Danny Fikelstein's defence, he wasn't aware of their Islamophobic and racist activity and that Gatestone listed him as board member without his knowledge. He said he asked them to remove his name and distanced himself from them. His name was listed for two years from 2015-17 and he hosted an event for them only couple of months ago, at House of Lords. He also said that he was being attacked for defending Jews As though supporting Jews and anti Muslim bigotry were somehow linked. Danny Finkelstein has been defended by many people in the Jewish community including David Aaronovitch.  

From Sam Harris, Bill Maher to Maajid Nawaz, Melanie Philips, Pamela Geller to Geert Wilders and from Douglas Murray, Nick Cohen to Ruben report, there is one thing in common. They are Jewish, have Jewish heritage or support Israel. They are not only anti Muslim activity but are critical of Muslim and non Muslim groups fighting for equality, justice and those who are active against fascist and racist activity i.e. Black Lives Matter, Antifa and Hope not HateYet no one talks about this issue, whether it is David Aaronovitch, or Stephen Pollard or any other political/ social commentators. 

Final thought: Racism of any kind is abhorrent and we all need to unite to eradicate it. Furthermore, it is not racist to criticise a state which enacts and enforces discriminatory laws and commits atrocities against people under her occupation.

Guess Who is Defending Tommy Robinson!

I look forward to the articles by Douglas Murray of the Spectator and Henry Jackson society. My anxious wait is in a vein hope that maybe just maybe he will talk about something interesting and change his topic to something more akin to the title of his previous “think tank” named “the centre for community cohesion”. I am not talking about the work of this think tank, which was to create divisions rather than cohesion.  Alas week after week I am disappointed to see that his talent remains limited to calling people anti-Semitic and his rhetoric continues to be anti Muslim and anti migrant/ refugee.

He obviously is happy with this static state of intellectuality probably because it attract funders. He has found supporters of this limited talent in the UK, across the pond in the US and through the channel tunnel in the mainland Europe. Not to mention support from the Spectator and the BBC which provides opportunities for regular appearances on the News and ethics programmes. Such appearances often include his friends and fellow beneficiaries of funds from the Gatestone Institute, the Quilliam gang. I am not sure if the Quilliam lot could be classed as his friends, as they receive funds from organisations of which Douglas is a director. And it seems there is no limit to the funding for Quilliam and Henry Jackson Society activities, details here , here and here . Furthermore, quilliam also recieved funding from Sam Harris along with royalties for joint appearances and a joint book. 

Anyway his latest article/ blog ,published on 9^th of January, gives false headline as he did for his article on the anti war protest during the Israeli attack on Gaza in 2014. The current article headed “Cologne exposes a crisis in our continent, yet parliament is debating Donald Trump” is nothing more than a defense of Tommy Robinson. May be because, Tommy Robinson is setting up an English branch of the anti Muslim party Pegida. Tommy also attended a rally in Cologne where he declared, we are men, we protect our woman that’s what men do. Although his disparaging remarks about Mrs. Merkel did not go down well with the organisers. It seems Germans still respect their leaders.

This support for Tommy Robinson reminds me courting and grooming of Maajid Nawaz. He was also picked up, after he lost all support from the Muslim community,and propelled into the mainstream as a profit of reform (before you say it spelling mistake is deliberate). The reformist title was borrowed from Ayaan H Ali. It seems Tommy Robinson is another addition to their project. Because while the Quilliam and Maajid Nawaz etc. are projected as reformer to the educated and literati classes, Tommy Robinson would be a foot soldier to appeal to the disaffected lower classes. So, on the one hand Maajid Nawaz will spread the message that there is no such thing as Islamophobia and on the other, Tommy will spread the phobia through Pagida. Tommy has already been given all clear by the Jewish Chronicle for not being anti-Semitic. Now Douglas is asserting that the establishment has been mistreating Tommy while allegedly letting Muslims off the hook. This neatly fits into the narrative of discrimination against white lower classes and favoritism of BME communities.

At the time when Muslim and BME organizations including charities are coming under sustained attack on the recommendation of people like Quilliam, Nick Cohen and Eustonites, Harry’s Place, etc. this alleged victimhood of Tommy Robinson will be a good distraction. Today any organisation or individual who comments on or oppose the governments “Prevent” agenda is being attacked. Universities and other institutions who allow them onto their premises are set upon by the media. To borrow a phrase from Nick Cohen if they succeed silencing Muslim individuals and organisations then “What’s left” will be the Quilliam. That will give real meaning to the George W Bush’s misguided banner of “Mission Accomplished”.

Talking of Nick Cohen, another self proclaimed Liberal and leftist and the author of What’s Left, he has been busy. Did you know that there is a Wikipedia entry , created in December 2015, for the phrase "Regressive Left". If you read the entry, you will say Nick’s figure prints are all over it. Although he has given full credit for coining the phrase to Maajid Nawaz, a little research will show that the phrase has been borrowed from this site.. In any case the word regressive was first used in taxation to show variation of tax according to income. Regressive tax was a good thing though, as it dropped down if your income fell. In a recent interview about resignations and sackings of shadow ministers, Ken Livingston described the sacked and resignees as hard right. In my view this description of resignees/ sacked shadow ministers perfactly fits Nick Cohen and his politics.

The description of Tommy Robinson as a victim of the establishment will soon change to his right to free speech. That will be an hypocritical stand by Douglas Murray and co, who fund an army of snoopers in the false guise of "student rights". They criticise Universities, student unions and University staff for allowing discussion and debate on University premises. Our Universities are famous and admired for their ability to discuss and debate important issues of the day and produce tomorrow’s leaders. However, these people don’t care about the damage to the reputations to our Universities in the international market. They are happy to sacrifice peace and co existence in favour of maintaining purist and supremacist ideology of the far right. In short they want to undermine the community cohesion which took years to build.

Paris Tragedy, Clichés and Cycle of Backlash

Two weeks ago Paris was hit by the massacre of its inhabitants who were enjoying the start of weekend. A total of 130 people lost their lives and hundreds were injured. The loss of innocent life said to be the highest since the world war. Most of us were in a shock and were trying to get our heads round the extent of the tragedy and feeling sorry for the friends and families of the victims. A group of people, however, could not wait for the blood of the victims to dry and started to exploit the tragedy for their twisted agendas. They were firing up tweets, blogs and rants on the media, generally spouting hate. Their behaviour was against all human values of sympathy and respect for the dead. Following is a sample of their tweets:

Barefoot Syrian refugees with
her 3 young children in Europe

 The target of these tweets, refugees fleeing war zone of Syria and other conflict zones. These people have been criticising European Governments for allowing Brown Muslim Refugees into the white Judeo- Christian West. These hate preachers and fear mongers have been opposing the policies of the European Union, in particular the German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Threy cheered countries like Hungry for putting obstacles in the miserably hard journey of refugees, which has taken lives of thousands. This exploitation of Paris tragedy shows the depravity of these people. Despite their hateful views, they are the respectable face of the racism/ Islamophbia. In fact some of them are part of a network of Islamophobic industry including the Gatestone Institute and their subsidiaries like the Henry Jackson society and supporters of sub-subsidiaries such as the Quilliam foundation. These are the respectable faces of the hate mongering fraternity. Together they inspire, incite and radicalise ordinary people who don’t just tweet vile abusive and threatening tweets but put that in practice. The inflammatory language used by our media and Politicians doesn't help. The use of words like hoards, swarms and swamping doesn’t help.

When something like Paris tragedy happens clichés such as “they hate the West“ are banded about. However, no one explains that why the large parts of the West like, Germany, Italy, Switzerland, Sweden, Norway, etc are spared of such attacks. Why only countries involved in the conflicts have been targeted by these people? Of course there are other clichés like “they hate our values”, “they hate our lifestyle” and “they love death while we love life”. This message is reinforced with “they are barbarians and savages”. This language stems from the feelings of superiority and racist attitudes that are prevalent on both sides of the Atlantic. The attitudes which have been responsible for deaths of unarmed black people in the US and gave rise to the black lives matter movement. This kind of language is also designed to cover up the failures to integrate generations of descendants of migrants who are the main culprits in Paris like tragedies. Furthermore, it is easier to blame people far away for the atrocities than accept the circumstances leading to the enfranchisement of own citizens.

Denial seems to be the name of the game when comes to wars and its consequences. It has been used by the Pentagon after bombing weddings and hospitals etc. Denial of the motives of attacks on the westerners and on the western soil is also part of the same strategy. Recently, Ken Livingston made remarks about 7/7 bombers on a tv programme, saying that they (bombers) gave their life because of a political cause and our actions in Iraq and Afghanistan. Blair supporter Matt Forde, who was also a panelist on the same programme, tried to shut Ken Livingston by claiming that it was offenssive to the victims of 7/7 bombing. It is this kind of bullying which is keeping us from discussing the real issues, which are keeping us in a cycle of unending violence. The reality is that only one of the mass murderers of Paris was known for his IS supporting activities. The rest were not known to be religious or known for any extremist tendencies. Some of them ran a bar which was closed for illegal activities, couple of months before the atrocity. It seems that they had become radicalised within that short period of time. Furthermore, at the time of their murderous activity they were high on drugs, not on any kind of religious fervour.      

It is the people like Maajid Nawaz and the sponsors of Quilliam Foundation with their rhetoric of ideology, who have been spreading fear of Islam and Muslims. Then they turn around and claim that there is no such thing as Islamophobia. Over the years, they have been casting increasingly wider net to label all Muslims as Islamists, non violent extremists, etc. The reality is that apart from a cultish group of approx. 200 to 300, which doesn’t believe in the democratic society, the vast majority of Muslims have always taken part in the democratic processes. There have been Muslim councillors and lord mayors going as far back as 1970s and 1980s. There are number of Muslim MPs and ministers in the cabinet and shadow cabinets. The reality is that Quilliam, their sponsors and so called prevent programme is doing real damage to the active participation of Muslims in Politics, Education, Employment, Media, etc. Maybe that is the goal of their sponsors; to undermine, disenfranchise, and suppress the voice of the Muslim community.  

Coming back to the Paris tragedy, there was an immediate backlash from the French in the form of bombing of the alleged capital of Daesh, Raqqa. Bearing in mind that France is already bombing in Syria, why didn't they bomb Raqqa before? Is it because the risk to the civilian population is greater in Raqqa than in other places? If that is the case then how bombing Raqqa civilians will improve their security? Now France has asked UK to join them in the bombing campaign over Syria, where risk of killing civilian population is greater. Although our Government has made an unconvincing case to join France in the bombing campaign in Syria, they may still get approval from the parliament. There is however a concern about the alleged remarks attributed to the PM David Cameron, that people opposing the proposed action in Syria are terrorist sympthisers. This unfortunately confirms that debate is suppressed at the highest level.

After the Paris attacks media talked about backlash against the Muslim citizens of the West. It was an odd prediction as they had nothing to do with what had happened in Paris. However, the backlash has happened, mainly due to the media rhetoric and headlines like in the Sun below. We must not forget the wide spread incitement and abuse on the social media.

The results are painfully clear to the victims of Islamophobic/ racist attacks. Although victims of such abuse are people of all ages, often it is the women who bear the brunt of this hate crime. Most victims are targeted because of their obvious visibility as Arabic/ Asian appearance and this sometimes results in attacks on other brown coloured non Muslim communities too. Women are targeted for such abuse as they are doubly visible as Muslims because of their colour and dress/ hijab and because, like the terrorists, they are probably considered a soft target.

Politicians are no better in addressing the problem. Only the Labour MPs have raised the issue in the Parliament. Shadow equalities minister Kate Green MP raised her concerns about the staggering 300% increase in, already high, Islamophobic attacks. As far as the Government is concerned, they have been busy enacting/ introducing annual instalments of counter terrorism/ extremism legislation / regulations. The Prime Minister has been making major speeches on the prevention strategy. PM and his minister's strong statements and so called prevent programme, has created an atmosphere of suspicion affecting whole of the Muslim community. The role of this approach in the increasing number of Islamophobic attacks and discrimination, affecting daily life from education, employment, public service to charitable activities, can not be denied. Government's reliance on selected individuals and organisations for advice and consultation and not the mainstream communities is responsible for some of its ill thought policies. Unfortunately some of the advisors are motivated by their own agendas. This became clear in the saga of the Cage UK, an organisation named by the Prime Minister in one of his speeches. As it happens the courts disagreed with the assessments made by the people advising him and attacking the charitable status of the organisation.

During the debate on Syria, conservative MP Rahman Chishti raised his concerns about the use of the words Islamic State, which have been abandoned by the UN, US, EU, France and many more, in favour of the Arabic name Daesh.  He said to the PM that the using Islamic State instead of Daesh was giving rise to Islamophobia. PM David Cameron’s response was that dropping Islamic State in favour of Daesh would risk losing the public. Obviously what he was more concerned about losing public support to extend bombing strikes in Syria. Furthermore, he was probably worried about the loss of support from the right wing press and organisations. This supports the idea that such terms are often used for political purposes which is a reckless attitude as it has devastating consequences.

 PM has at many times said that the UK government operates strong anti extremism policies, which he says are the toughest in the world (even Gatestone Institute calls it draconian). However, it seems the government has failed to conduct a thorough impact assessment. Apart from paying lip service, the government has shown no enthusiasm to tackle the scourge of Islamophbia. During the attack on Gaza in 2014, criticism of Israel was described as anti-semitic, by people like Douglas Murray. This is not to say that their weren’t anti-Semitic incidents, there were. This resulted in a robust response by the government to reassure the Jewish community and a parliamentary report on the issue was published.

Now that the parliament has voted to extend the bombing campaign into Syria, there is a risk that any negative implications will undoubtedly result in backlash against the Muslims. Therefore, it is imparitive that the Government reassures the community by acknowledging the existence of the problem of Islamophobia and take steps to reassure the community. Furthermore, it should consult mainstream Muslims to develop strategy to counter and safeguard Muslim citizens. This is important as anti-Muslim hate crime can only lead to disenfranchisement, which is believed to be a major factor in so called radicalisation. 

Pushing Back Boundaries but, ....

In the Wrong Direction

Not a day goes by when a section of the British society is not in the news headlines. Even if there was a serious tragedy in the world affecting 100s, it would not trump the action / perceived actions of an individual from this community. Such coverage is deliberately normalising the issues which were made taboo by decades of struggle. This continuous highlighting of issues affecting the community is pushing back the boundaries but in the wrong direction. This is happening because every action and inaction of the community, is being looked through the tainted glass of prejudice. This prejudice is affecting more than the community in question.

Recently Channel Four broadcasted a documentary, presented by Trevor Phillips, a former head of the Equality and Human Rights Commission. The documentary titled “Things We Won’t Say About Race That Are True”, seems to be based on the old stereotypes. However, he failured to acknowledge, that the old stereotypes had in the past, given rise to hatred, violence and atrocities rarely seen in the human history. Therefore, it is important to fight old and the new stereotypes to prevent this happening again. While the documentry has been criticised by activists like Lee Jasper , it was welcomed by the right wing media such as the Daily Mail, which published this, incorporating his article. It is not surprising that only people they found to agree with him were couple of Tory MPs. The Mail, which is not a fan of the Equality or Human Rights, couldn’t help to have a dig on Trevor Phillips himself, stating that he received salary of £112,000 for 3.5 days work.

                                                           Cartoon by Operation Black Vote

Trevor Phillips’s only achievement was to merge the various branches of the Equality into one. I personally don’t think that this achieved the goals previously set by the various independent commissions. As the head of the EHRC, Trevor Phillips had started from the complacent belief that the equality, especially in the field of race had been achieved. His actions to merge various branches of equality commission were more to do with empire building than reality on the Ground. Since then we have seen case after case revealing institutionalised racism and discrimination not only in the field of race but also of gender, disability and the under privileged. The Rotherham case is as much, if not more, of institutionalised discrimination against the under privileged white community who’s complaints were ignored, of groomers being from a certain section of community. This is supported by the Oxford council’s admission, that their failures to investigate such cases properly had nothing to do with any political correctness.

Unfortunately, Trevor Phillips has allowed himself to fall into the trap of increasingly blurred lines made possible by the continuous headlines and reckless media coverage using inflammatory language. The mainstream media and the Politicians have muddled the equality issue with stereo types. It is now normal to hear Xenophobic language when discussing immigration, racism when discussing Islamophobia, macho attitudes when discussing sexism, derogatory remarks when discussing disability, label of anti-semitism when discussing Israel/ Palestine conflict and rhetoric of freedom of speech, while inciting hatred against Muslims.

The social media has also played a role in this normalisation of pushing boundaries in the wrong direction. People think that they can get away with typing their inner most dark thoughts in the anonymity of the Internet. We have seen threats of rape and violence against women, blatant lies and stereotypes to spread religious, racial and other forms of hatred. Unfortunately, the bigots take comfort in the knowledge that they have the support of respectable figures on the internet and in mainstream media. The trends on the twittersfield become headlines for the 24 hour media, hungry for more and more headline fillers. So tweets about halal/ kosher food become national headlines.

The recent example is the Clarkson fracas with an Irish producer, which turned out to be a serious unprovoked physical and verbal racial attack. For few days it looked that, like many times before, Clarkson would survive the latest mess of his own making. BBC did everything possible to keep Clarkson on their books but as more and more witnesses came forward, they had no choice but to ignore the tank carrying one million signature petition. The petition is the perfect indictment of the prevailing attitude in sections of the society. Despite the tragedy in the French Alps, BBC gave prominence to its decision to not to renew contract with Clarkson. BBC journalists gave his sacking disproportionate air time. They made arguments about his value, for bringing 50 million pounds, and made light of the physical assault, describing it as 30 second incident. It is this kind of attitude that minimises the gravity of similar actions against minorities.

The common thread, in majority of Clarkson's misdemeanours, is the race including the latest incident that included remarks about the victim being Irish. Although, he has been equally vile towards, women, disabled, etc. he receives admiration for not being PC, as though this is something to admire. Astonishingly, he received support from high profile people including our Prime Minister. It is this kind of support which normalises, racism, sexism, Islamophobia and victimisation of other disadvantaged groups, sick and the poor working classes. Such racism also affects the unity of the United Kingdom, as throw away remarks are made about the Scots, Welsh and the Irish for political gains.

I am not an expert on any of the issues listed above but as a member of ethnic minority group with migrant and Muslim heritage, I have views on these topics. We are witnessing the erosion of minority rights earned after long and hard struggles. I say earned as it took decades of fight with the overt, covert and institutionalised racism and discrimination. The equality Acts of 1977 did not work because of the reluctance of the establishment to implement them. This resulted in demonstrations, which were classified as riots despite it being reaction to provocation of discrimination and attacks by organisations like National Front and combat 18. Only after these “riots” and the Lord Scarman’s report, things started to improve. So from the passing of the Act in 1977, it took another decade to see changes especially in the public sector and the public services.  

Fast forward to the second decade of the 21st century and we find that all those prejudices, we thought had been left behind, have resurfaced. Only this time the problem has returned in a respectable form, in our politics, media and in the literati. It has spread like a virus from mainstream politics to the gutters of racist EDL and Britain First. An example of muddle alliances is Tommy Robinson, who still supports EDL, Pagida, Britain First and UKIP but is friends with the Islamophobic new Left, LibDem PPC Maajid Nawaz, and the disgraced Tory PPC Afzal Amin. He openly tweets Islamophobic and racist material on the internet but somehow keeps friendship with this diverse group of people. Maybe he is the new symbol of diversity.

The racist and fascist organisations always had the backing of powerful and influential people. It’s not different today as powerful members of the media, politics and literati, supporting the racist and Islamophobic individuals and groups. They are helping to undermine the progress in the equality field, by spreading fear through the xenophobic rhetoric of immigration and Islam. They cleverly use, all encompassing Islamophobic narrative, that includes all the traits of the Far right. It includes immigration, racism and misogyny . No wonder that people like Richard Dawkins, his followers and the organisations under his patronage claim that no such thing as Islamophobia. The same view expressed by others like Sam Harris and lately by Maajid Nawaz who even issued a Fatwa stating that there is no such thing as Islamophobia. If anyone thinks that the Islamophobia doesn’t affect others, they should read this SAALT report by the US Asian community highlighting the diversity of communities affected by Islamophobic attacks.    

Trevor Phillips, in his article attacked the idea of multiculturalism, and said that in multicultural Britain Muslim children may have a narrow view of the world. At the same time he blames France’s non multiculturalist system for the murder of Charlie Hebdo cartoonists. He can’t have both ways. Like many others he doesn’t want to acknowledge that children of migrants have a greater knowledge of the world than their white counterparts. There is a high chance that they are bilingual, they have visited developing countries of their  parents/ grandparents heritage. They probably have the first hand knowledge of struggles of people around the world. They are more likely to have a wider world view through the international media.

Trevor Phillips also talked about the young girls who had gone to the war torn Syria. Again his views seem to have been based on stereotypes rather than facts. It is clear that these girls had normal family life and were happy at school and were A grade students. The question to ask is about their experiences outside of school and home. What I have learnt from two groups of girls interviewed by the BBC News and BBC Newsnight. The first group interviewed was hijab wearing and they said that they had experienced racist, Islamophobic and Misogynistic attacks, because they way they dressed. The second group was interviewed by Evan Davis for Newsnight. They weren’t hijabis and they also said that they also feel that the society doesn’t accept them because of their colour and race. When they said they understood why girls would leave their comfortable life for a warzone, Evan Davis said that their comments could be interpreted as apology for terrorism. Not surprised that the BBC did not release these videos, while other videos like the interview with Ayaan H Ali were released immediately after the broadcast.

There are some people who have spoken out against the Islamophbia but not enough. In a recent appearance on the BBC Question Time, broadcasted on 18^th March, Will Self said that his students overwhelmingly think, that the Muslims are the most oppressed minority in the UK today. In the same week Matthew Parris wrote an article, in the Spectator, titled "Anti Muslim Prejudice is Real and Scary" . Unfortunately his lone voice is drowned by Douglas Murray’s weekly articles in the Spectator, who also wrote this and his other prejudicial gems include this vile article and this . 

It has become respectable to have Islamophobic prejudice and thanks to the false scandals such as Trojan Horse and the Cathy Neman tweets, it has spread from the mainstream media to the school playgrounds. Our universities are being monitored by the new humanists and the Henry Jackson Society supported group Student Rights. Their activity is not dissimilar to that of Hitler’s Nazi Youth. If we want to have a fair and equal society then we must confront this last respectable prejudice. Our failures to do so will have wider implications for all.  

Don't Talk About It, Its Not the Right Time

The appalling murders in France have rightly started the debate about the freedom of speech. However, at the same time people are being told that it is not the time to talk about the issues which are absolute relevant to the unity of the communities and are vital to stop such incidents happening again. This happens everytime such incidents happen and it is never discussed and addressed. Instead narratives are developed to create divisions, stereo types and prejudices, which can only lead to discrimination and feelings of not belonging. These feelings are then exploited and cause some people to act in a manner which is not conducive to a cohesive society.

The solidarity march in Paris today was to promote unity and inclusiveness for all. The impressive and historic attendance was a spectacle to hold with people of all faiths, colours and nationalities attending in large numbers. There were lot of moments to remember, like a Muslim Mayor of a Town who had come with his Jewish Businessman friend. Both were wearing placards, the Mayor’s placard said I am a Muslim and I love Jews and the Jewish friend was wearing placard saying I am a Jew and I love Muslims. The Jewish businessman spoke better English and said that the Muslim mayor had started a programme for teenage children from different races faiths and backgrounds to meet and learn about each other. Then there there was a Muslim man who gave white roses of peace to passer bys Jews and others. There was a Jewish woman who had moved from Israel to France, 20 years ago, and she was there with her Muslim friend but both also expressed their fears for the future. People were there with their children and elderly relatives with messages of peace and desire to live in peace and harmony. There were lot of young people whose parents / grandparents had moved to the country. Its this unity of young generation of descents of migrants and young white French that gives hope for a more tolerant future. 

The march was also attended by some leaders and high officials of the world. Some leaders tried to make political capital out of it and others were grateful to be invited. British Prime Minister was talking about security and measures to limit our freedoms further. Despite being told to stay away Netanyahu turned up, he used the well rehersed rhetoric of fighting Muslim extremists (Palestinians) and rise of anti-Semitism. He offered safe sanctuary to Jews in Israel, not surprising as more than 30% of Israelis want to leave the country for better careers and futures. One of the considred views of humanity and unity of all races, colours and beliefs and non belief came from an Italian Prince. Unfortunately he doesn’t have any power to bring about changes he was talking about. One Sky commentator and his guest agreed that this kind of unity procession was a better way to create cohesion, integration and unity than the proposed legislations limiting our freedoms.

Despite the positives of the march, one must ask questions whether the crowd represented all of the French communities. Was it just a gathering of the great and the good and middle classes and what efforts were made to include the marginalised and deprived communities where these murderers had come from. The neighbours of the culprits had nothing to say about these men except good things like they held doors, they helped people to carry shopping, they helped the disabled, they were quite and polite, etc. Even the person at the print warehouse, where they were finally killed spoke about their humanity. We now know that the brothers who carried out the Charlie Ebdo massacre were orphans, one of them was homeless the other had committed string of petty offences. They were born and bred in France and didn’t have any particular roots abroad. Yet they felt the need to travel abroad and make contacts with people with extreme views.

One person interviewed on the BBC said that there was abject poverty in the ghettos of Paris. Children were literally starving and young girls were prostituting themselves to survive. Another person who owned a restaurant said there was wide spread discrimination against the  descendants of the migrants from North African and Arab countries. He said while he had employees from various racial backgrounds such as Mali, Ethiopia, etc, there were no go areas for these young people and majority of restaurants will not employ young people from minorities like Arabs and Africans. One Muslim said that there are restrictions on the liberties of people with regard to expression of religion, clothing and even food. There is also the problem of increasing attacks on Muslims and their places of worship both before and after the murders at the Charlie Ebdo. There is no legal protection against Islamophobia anywhere in Europe.

Slowly it is becoming clear that the Charlie Ebdo wasn’t just a satirist magazine, it allegedly also promoted xenophobia, racial and religious hatred. It has also emerged that the Magazine had sacked one of its employees for anti-Semitic activity, but not for racial hatred or Islamophobic. It is clear that Charlie Ebdo wasn’t a popular magazine in any sense with only 60,000 copy print. The magazine mainly catered for the high society, which influence the opinions and policies of the government. It would be interesting to see if the proposed government funded million copies will contain similar material as alleged above.

While the France was preparing for the solidarity march, a debate was being held at the BBC studios for the programme the Big Question, with main topic of incident in Paris. The host of the programme is well known for his prejudice and collaboration with the Islamophobic community. This was reflected with the choice of guests disproportionally in favour of his views.  It was like having a match where the referee was in cahoots with one team. He failed to give enough time for reply to Raza Nadim of MPAC. It is becoming a norm for the BBC to give platform to people like Douglas Murray of the Henry Jackson Society and the Gatestone Institute and Quilliam’s front man Maajid Nawaz, to spread the narrative of division, fear and hate while gradually dropping the voices of reason. Douglas Murray said that it wasn’t the time to discuss the alleged inflammatory material and editorial of the Magazine. He made the laughable claims that Muslims were trying to enforce Sharia on the mainstream community and that the Islam was to blame for the actions of the perpetrators. Maajid Nawaz’s rhetoric is well known and is not  worth repeating. Nabila Ramdani a French Algerian Journalist puts it better in her Guardian artcle why French Muslims shouldnt be blamed. For that matter we need to get away from blaming whole of the Muslim communities for the crimes of the few and start confronting those who are creating mischief of this kind for own goals.    

To say it is not the time to discuss these issues is to ignore the real causes of disconnect, frustration and helplessness, which are leading to people acting out of character and committing acts of violence. The solidarity message need to be filtered through to the above mentioned deprived communities which exist in all of our societies. In reality they exist in all countries accross the world developed, developing, Western, Eastern, Muslim and Non Muslim. The lazy rhetoric to ask Muslims to do more, blaming the religion and rhetoric of back door sharia and the harsh language by politicians has been tried, tested and has failed. These people who carried out atrocities were born and bred in France. They were the product of French society. Therefore, to blame any other society, culture or religion is farcical and we are all to blame for our failings not just the one community.

Its time pay attention to the above mentioned deprived and discriminated communities. They include people of all races religion and colour. We need to provide comfort, assurance and support to these communities before someone else does and exploit them for their own agenda. Don’t just blame the religion and ask communities to do more as it reinforces the idea of separation not cohesion. We all have a responsibility to our young; don’t treat them as foreigners as their roots are here, treat them as citizens. Dont let people with extreme dark agendas of creating divisions and hatered talk and listen to the voices of reason in all communities.

Freedom of Speech and Hypocritical Alliance

I had started to write this before the brutal, unnecessary and unjustified Murder of the French magazine Charlie Hebdo staff and 2 Police Officers. My thoughts are with the bereaved families and the French people of all persuasions. From the information available so far it seems that the attack by these criminals was motivated by revenge for the publication of cartoons of the Prophet Muhammed (pbuh).

From what I know about the life of the Prophet (pbuh), the perpetrators actions contravene the way he lived his life. He did not seek revenge or harm against those who had caused him pain and discomfort. I know that some of the Islamophobe Industry will disagree and will try to produce disputed texts, etc. However, that doesn’t change the fact that they are wrong.    

Speculations are a plenty on the mainstream media and of course the playground of the dark forces the Social media, to jump on the bandwagon and try to capitalise on the tragedy. The morality of these people and the hypocrisy of these people who demand that the Muslims community as a whole should condemn the actions of criminals, did not utter a word of sympathy towards the bereaved families. These are the people who would object to the abhorrent images published by the terrorist groups and then publish them on their websites and tweet them. These are the people who would claim a moral high ground but then defend the atrocities committed by governments. These are the people who create the fear of others and then claim that no such thing as Islamophobia

 That brings me to the topic I had originally started to write. On Friday 2nd January the Independent newspaper ran a front page article, about online Islamophobia and increasing Muslim hate incidents. After considering the matter over the weekend and it’s impact on the him, his organisation and his allies, on Monday 5^th January Maajid Nawaz  Tweeted. Bearing in mind that Monday was the day when anti Muslim demonstrations were bring held in Germany , organised by a Neo Nazi group called, Pegida. While the demonstrations did not achieve any significant numbers in most of Germany and a large number of Germans came out in opposition, they did achieve attendance of around 18,000 in Dresden, an area with little or no immigrant/ Muslim population. The Germen Chancellor Angela Merkel condemned Pagida as haters. Wish our leaders had shown such leadership.

The 'timely' tweet by Maajid Nawaz was retweeted by the usual suspects. They included  the Atheists fraternity, Secular Fraternity, Ex Muslim Fraternity and various Islamophobes including the star pupil of Quilliam's academy of Counter Extremism, Tommy Robinson. Although there are different Titles of these Fraternities, often it is the same people who appear under different banners. Tommy Robinson openly supported the Pegida organised demonstrations and encouraged his supporters to attend. From Tommy's tweets is clear that not only that his supporters and EDL members attend the demonstration but as he boasted 'the lads made contact with the leadership'. So we can safely assume that the Dresden demonstration was not just attended by locals but also their affiliates from across Europe. Maybe that is the reason for the high attendance numbers. Of course our media like the BBC is incapable of doing the simple deductions.  

After the signal from Maajid his comrades sprung into action, including the self declared master of 'sarcasm' Richard Dawkins, who tweeted . His subsequent tweets were about religion not being a race and so on. He, however, failed to elaborate what he was trying to say. Was he trying to say that being Islamophobic or Anti-Semitic wasn’t racist or that it was ok to be anti-Semitic or islamophobic as it wasn’t racist. Only he knows what he meant but whatever it was, it was in defence of people like Tommy Robinson and anonymous twitter trolls like Jihadi Joe and Spellchecker. In the recent days the twitter accounts of both of these trolls had been suspended by the Twitter. Mr Dawkins took up their case and despite clear evidence of their bigotry he claimed that they were brilliant satirists like him. While he was successful in getting their accounts (not sure if he deserves the credit) he was criticised by most of the Atheist community for his support of the bigoted anonymous trolls.

This point by Maajid and others that the criticism of Muslims/ Islam is not racist, xenophobic or Islamophobic, has no logic except that that is their point of view. The fact is that long before Maajids’s conversion, this has been the stated position of Mr Dawkins and others like Bill Maher, Sam Harris and their followers. So it is not an original thought of the Chair Maajid, it is the next stage in his evolution.  The Lawyers Secular Society also responded to Maajid Nawaz’s tweet and published this  tweet  and published an article on their website. If we apply the logic of these lawyers then the term anti-Semitism could also be said to mean nothing, as Semite mean a collection of races of Middle Eastern region. Therefore, to use it as a term for the hatred of Jews is as illogical as their claim about Islamophobia.
   
The fact is that the Islamophobia is now an internationally recognised term to define anti Muslim hate, propaganda and to spread fear of Islam and Muslims. The failure to acknowledge this suggests that these people do not accept any form of rights of Muslims of protection from harassment, intimidation and violence. It is this attitude along with suggestion that Islam is an alien religion not compatible with the secular democratic values of the west is not only bigoted but dangerous. Then we are living in strange times when with the aid of CGI anyone could become a star, when a karaoke singer could become pop star with the help of technology and no original material, any man could become journalist with autocue and plagiarised material and anyone become politician by learning to dodge questions and quick answers without thought.

I was very much heartened by the Journalists, commentators and members of the public, interviewed by the BBC. Despite attempts by the BBC presenters provocative and divisive questions the interviewees were calm and calculated and refused to blame the religion or the majority of Muslim community for the dreadful action of murderers responsible for Paris massacre. Instead they were worried about the exploitation of the event by the Far Right organisations and were opposed to the Islamophobic and xenophobic tendencies of these organisations. BBC's own cultural correspondent Tzvetan Todorove, who happened to be French was interviewed for the BBC Newsnight. He said that he was worried that the murders will strengthen Xenophobic and Islamophobic attitudes in some quarters. He also eloquently pointed out that there was no such thing as absolute freedom in a secular democracy and citizens have responsibilities to the society. Today on the Question time Liberal Democrat voiced the same sentiment and said that in our democracy people have freedoms within the law not absolute freedom as some have been suggesting.

Therefore, the notion of absolute freedom to cause offence and hurt is a basic right of secular society is contradictory to the principals of the secularism. Then the new Secularism and Atheism has mutated into something un recognisable from founding principle. The new values are extremist tinged with hate, bigotry, xenophobia and of course Islamophbia. Their hypocrisy becomes clear when they say they want to maintain a Judeo-Christian culture. Not surprising as it is the same crowd acting under different banners. The true secularism  protects all religions and does not allow people to discriminate people or denigrate their rights, on the basis of their beliefs, culture and race. Furthermore, the promotion of the idea that Islam is an alien religion is also a false propaganda. The Islam as a religion belongs to these lands and shore like as any other religion / belief and so do the Muslims. Any belief other than that is bigoted, racist xenophobic and yes Islamophobic.

On the day of the French Murders the Islamophobic fraternity was very busy on the social media, Hundreds of tweets a minute were being fired. They were not only spreading hate they were demanding that the media should defy normal procedures and publish show offending cartoons. Not surprisingly these included known suspects like Tommy Robinson, LSS, Ex Muslims forum, Secularists, Atheists and of course BBC's own Nicky Campbell. BBC and other news channels interviewed hundreds of experts commentators from all around the world and of course they included Quilliam’s, Maajid Nawaz and Douglas Murray of The Henry Jackson Society and Gatestone Institute. These three organisations and above mentioned are most active in the Islamophobic activities and spreading hate and fear of Islam Muslims and fear of persecution in the Muslim communities and then clam there no such things as Islam phobia. BBC allowed Nigel Farage to get away with remarks that there was a fifth column in the midst of us. It was only Jon Snow of Channel Four who confronted him and Geertt Wilders about their xenophobic and neo Nazi stand. 

Due to my addiction to the News, Current affairs and politics, I had the misfortune to watch the Daily Politics Show today, hosted by Andrew Neil and Joe Coburn. The guests included two “opposing and respectful specialists” Maajid Nawaz and Douglas Murray. As expected there was no considered discussion but regurgitation of old rhetoric of Islam being responsible all atrocities in the West and Maajid Nawaz begging for funds. Furthermore these supporters of freedom speech were upset that Media had been using Muhammad Shafiq to comment on the Paris events.

This hypocrisy of advocating free speech while seeking to ban others from speaking has stifled the debate within the society the Muslim community and has given Islamophobes a free hand to spread fear and hate. By supporting and demanding bans in the Educational establishments, media, and public life, these people have created a vacuum of positive role models and have suppressed the free thought. Yes some people will have a point of view or an interpretation of the holy scriptures which is perverted but by banning them and driving them underground you deny the Muslim Community to challenge and debate such notions. The state sponsored censorship of thoughts and views is creating an atmosphere of fear and helplessness in the Muslim Community and this pressurised bottling of emotion is and will result in the undesired outcomes which we all want to prevent.

As it happens I also watched the late programme this week on the BBC where I had to suffer the ridiculous analysis of the Paris event by Andrew Neil. I was, however, looking forward to some sense of balance from the announced guest, David Aaronovitch. However, I was disappointed, because while advocating freedom of speech, David Aaronovitch promoted the idea, that those who don’t agree with his interpretation of freedom of speech, they can move to different countries. The hypocrisy is that even if some people move to different part of the world, they will still be subject to his long standing support for the interventionist policies. In other words you are not allowed to live a peaceful life whether they are in the west or in any other part of the world.

Then he suggested that Muslim should hold large demonstrations like they do when Israel commits atrocities in Palestine as though atrocities committed by state are equal to the murders committed by criminals. I didn’t see him organising or attending such demonstrations against Israel, which by the way were multi racial, multi faith and non faith individuals. Neither it seems he had the ability to organise demonstration of any kind. The heart of matter is that all those who are vocal in criticism of Islam and Muslims happen to be extremist supporters of Israel. These are the people who labelled demonstrations against atrocities in Gaza as anti-Semitic. These are the people who instead of promoting unity as a nation are promoting divisions.

Andrew Neil and David Aaronovitch wanted British media to publish certain cartoons from Charlie Hebdo to “spread the fear”. It would definitely cause the offence and spread the fear in the Muslim communities. While it is acceptable for people to cause offence, it is clear that people has a right to take offence otherwise what is the point. If people are not allowed to air that they are offended without fear, intimidation and bullying then where will that bottled pressure go? Muslims do not need to apologise for their beliefs and certainly do not need to abandon their country on the say so of some Journalists like Andrew Neil, David, Nicky Campbell or Politicians like Nigel Farage.     

Following are some of the tweets to give you a flavour and you decide which are racist, bigoted, xenophobic or Islamophobic or all in one.
http://mobile.twitter.com/TRobinsonNewEra/status/552803726772420608?p=v
http://mobile.twitter.com/TRobinsonNewEra/status/552783220962787328?p=v
http://mobile.twitter.com/TRobinsonNewEra/status/552574856001507328?p=v