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.

Embellishment of Maajid Nawaz by Maajid Nawaz

In the world of Maajid Nawaz, he is the man of the moment. He has got a show with LBC radio and is one of the panellists on the Sky News programme the Pledge. He is sharing stage and appearing in blogs with Sam Harris, Ayaan H Ali, Douglas Murray, etc. He has co written a book with Sam Harris and has appeared in a movie, produced by Islamophobes, about his trip to Australia with Sam Harris. He has received a “humanitarian award” from “UN Watch”. He addressed a gathering of people who claimed to be Zionists against the annual Al-Quds March in support of Palestinians. The crowd included Tommy Robinson supporting Football Lads Association members who were also there to protest against the Al-Quds march. He claimed that he was outraged by the Hezbullah flags at the Al-Quds march. He has never spoken against Nazi flags, gestures and Israeli flags at anti Muslim rallies by EDL, Pagida, etc. organised by Tommy Robinson.  

On top of the above Maajid has been offered a settlement of 3.375 million dollars by the Southern Poverty Law Centre. SPLC says that they have been “persuaded” by some influential figures that Maajid has done some work countering anti Muslim bigotry. We are yet to learn of this compelling evidence.

What we know is that all the evidence points to Maajid Nawaz being associated with the Islamophobic activity. Let us start with his radio show on the LBC, he hasn’t presented a single show in which he hasn’t criticised Muslims calling them bigots, extremists, etc. and he promotes his show telling listeners to expect exactly that. that. His treatment of Muslim callers to the show is well rehearsed, his tone becomes aggressive, he talks about things not relevant to the subject i.e blasphemy, sharia, capital punishments, etc, etc. This also gives him opportunity to criticise “the left” for working supporting Muslims like Islamophobia. On the other hand pre arranged callers i.e. Ex Muslims, etc are given every opportunity to criticise Muslims/ Islam. Furthermore, Maajid Nawaz cleverly and shamelessly uses his racial, cultural and religious heritage as a licence to shut down his critics in the mainstream white community and other panellists on the programs such as the Pledge. Maajid doesn’t hesitate to compare Islamism and what he calls regressive left to Nazis.

Maajid Nawaz repeatedly tells exaggerated stories about himself and own importance. He claims that as a teenager he was chased by the Combat 18 thugs armed with knives and hammers but he never came to any harm. The combat 18 wasn’t a street fighting racist group but a highly secretive group with aims to target prominent politicians and other public figures, not teenagers. He claims that he went to Pakistan as a recruiter for Hizbul Tehrir but nothing is disclosed about his success. He also makes a lot about his arrest and time spent in prison in Egypt today. The reality is that he was part of a group of four British prisoners, one of whom was released. The other two were white British and because of them there was pressure on the authorities to do something. Their case was taken up by Amnesty International because they all made allegations of torture. Maajid now says that he wasn’t tortured and he has now fallen out with Amnesty over their criticism of the atrocities committed by the state of Israel against Palestinians in the occupied territories and Gaza. Furthermore, Maajid is a committed critic of those who were actually tortured and held without charge in Guantanamo Bay.

Maajid Nawaz is unashamedly associates, collaborates and supports those active in the field of anti Muslim bigotry, correct term for which is Islamophobia. Maajid Nawaz used to call himself a moderate Muslim and not a reformer. However, he now calls himself a reformer Muslim and claims that he is influencing people like Sam Harris and Ayaan etc. There is no evidence that supports his claims instead his own activities and rhetoric has become similar to his company and he seems to have adopted Islamophobic tropes. Furthermore, he consciously supports racist and far right figures like Tommy Robinson, etc. Maajid’s friend Douglas Murray calls European, far right, Islamophobes, racists, supremacists, like Geert Wilders, Victor Orban his friends. Geerat Wilders recently sent this message to Free Tommy Robinson rally in London. By the way the rally & Tommy Robinson's legal costs are being borne by an Islamophobic, anti Arab/ Palestinian, Zionist and anti refugee organisation called Middle East Forum . The Maajid himself sent a tweet to the British Prisons Minister re his concerns about the safety of Tommy Robinson. He says his concerns were on humanitarian grounds. Similar cconcerns were sent by Geert Wilders & Breitbats Raheem Kassem. Furthermore, he used the imprisonment of Tommy Robinson to blame Muslim and Pakistani communities for Tommy Robinson, ignoring the fact that Tommy has been a racist who turned #Islamophobe. Muslims are neither responsible for his xenophobia or repeated imprisonments for which he pleaded guilty.

Maajid Nawaz is quick to speak in support of white far right, racists, Islamophobes, and new Nazis but never in support of Brown Muslims subjected to the same treatment. Instead he calls Anti Fascist groups to be named as extremists. Recent example of his support for the far right is his at detention of Laura Southern by UK Border Force and subsequent denial of entry to UK. Without checking Maajid said that she was a Christian conservative. He claimed that she was being barred for distributing “blasphemous leaflet "blasphemous leaflet" during her previous visit to the country. Day before coming to the UK Laura Southern had posted a video about her friends being detained by the UK Border Force. She was talking about Generation Identity’s Austrian co founder Martin Sellner and his girlfriend. Generation Identity is a pan-European movement which is anti immigration and want to deport non whites from Europe. Laura Southern herself doesn’t claim to be Christian but says she is agnostic. Incidentally they were all coming to UK for a meeting with Tommy Robinson.

Both Maajid and the Quilliam foundation, which he says he founded, work to exaggerate negative stories about Muslims and undermine positive ones. Their work is more about self promotion for sake of keeping their backers, partners and followers happy and to give cover to anti Muslim rhetoric. Furthermore, financial rewards remain a motivator in their work. Initially they worked with the government and allegedly produced a list of Muslims for the security agencies. Then they worked with the Henry Jackson Society and Douglas Murray in return for financial support. Later Sam Harris enticed them with a donation of thousands of dollars. Sam them took Maajid to Australia so he could say he has a Muslim friend who agrees with him. Now Quilliam gets funding from the Templeton foundation and in return Israel gets full support from Maajid and Quilliam.    

You may say that Islamophobic rhetoric is in the DNA of the Quilliam Foundation and people working for it. It is not just Maajid who has alliances with the Islamophobic people and organisations but most people attached to the Quilliam have the same work ethics. Here is Haras Rafiq grovelling to notorious Islamophobe Tommy Robinson and saying that Tommy is not racist or white supremacist. Here is Maajid Nawaz statement on the issue. Haras Rafiq and Tommy Robinson were brought together by the BBC’s Daily Politics programme presenter Andrew Neil and Tim Marshal of Sky news , told Haras and Tommy that they need to sort out their issues by talking and shouldn't they be on the same side. Andrew Neil acts as media godfather for the right and has provided platform to many anti Muslim and other right wing activists including Britain First,BNP, UKIP, etc. Andrew Neil is also responsible for introducing Douglas Murray,  Maajid Nawaz to the British public. 

Maajid and Quilliam continue to attack Muslims by manipulating data and presenting as research.For example their report on so called grooming gangs has been debunked in this Twitter thread by Luke Wilson and this article byJ Spooner & J Stubbs. Now Maajid's own colleague at LBC radio Matthew Stadlen is asking why Maajid & Quilliam hasn't publicly responded to this criticism. They, however, continue to quote dodgy surveys as factual information. As far as I know Quilliam has never conducted any research or surveyed Muslims themselves and rely on third party work to make outrageous claims about Muslim minorities in the west. Maajid Only person who had conducted a genuine research at Quilliam was Julie Ebnar in the rise of the far right but she found that Maajid and Quilliam distanced themselves from her research. After the above mentioned Tommy Robinson affair Julia left Quilliam and wrote a book on the subject of the rise of the far right and racism disguised as criticism of Islam.    

Despite Maajid’s claims of working against anti Muslim Bigotry and apparent change in his twitter activity, he remains committed to his alliances with Islamophobes. He celebrated his “win” over SPLC with some of these people. He is like a teenager who wants to be with the clique of cool but cruel kids. To please the clique he says things which sometimes even surprise them. This can be seen in his podcasts with Sam Harris where he made a  joke at the expense of the Prophet. Maajid also agreed with Sam that like him Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch had suffered unjustified reputational damage and that he would have no trouble in working with him. His immaturity could be seen in the reaction on Twitter to the offer of settlement from SPLC.

Maajid Nawaz cleverly and shamelessly uses his racial, national, cultural and religious heritage as a licence to shut down his critics in the mainstream white community. He probably applied the same tactics with SPLC and used his friends such as those who gave him “humanitarian award” (I call it bribe) through UN watch, for his criticism of the UN Human Rights Council. UN Watch employs people who are anti Arab, anti Palestinian and Islamophobic. One such person is Richard Kemp, who was successfully sued for libel by Muslim politician, Baroness Sayeeda Warsi, for calling her supporter of extremists and Jihadists. Maajid Nawaz has also criticised Baroness for working with grassroots organizations& for asking for investigation of Islamophobia in the Conservative party. Fault of the Human Rights Council, criticism of Israel for the atrocities being committed in occupied territories and Gaza against the Palestinian people and continuous land grab for illegal settlements occupied by mainly by North American Jewish people. I sincerely hope that SPLC haven’t been hoodwinked as Maajid’s employer LBC radio had been who thought that Maajid had received humanitarian award from the UN. Although it is curious that Maajid received SPLC offer approximately a month after his speech after receiving the award. Notice the usual reference to Combat 18, etc.    

Only silver lining in this sorry affair is that the settlement money will be paid by SPLC insurers and comes with strings attached that money to be spent on fighting anti Muslim bigotry. Hope that means community based projects and not those sponsored by the establishment. It is probably the conditions of settlement which are making Quilliam and Maajid anxious and he is desperate to meet with Mr Cohen of the SPLC. After very public pressure he seems to have secured a meeting with the SPLC and he is taking director of Quilliam Haras Rafiq with him. Maajid has even started to tweet differently but it is not going down well with his followers and he started to losing twitter followers. He is back to his usual style of tweeting now.  

Despite Maajid’s claims of working against anti Muslim Bigotry and apparent change in his twitter activity, he remains committed to his alliances with Islamophobes. He celebrated his “win” over SPLC with some of these islamophbic people & tweeted "I don't fuck around". As usual he exaggerated (lied) about effects of his listing by Thompson Reuters. He is like school teenager who wants to be with the clique of cool but cruel kids and to please the clique he says things which even surprises them. This can be heard in his podcast with Sam Harris where he made fun of the Prophet of Islam and agreed that another Islamophobe, Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch wasn’t a bad man and he would have no trouble in working with him.

From the actions of Maajid Nawaz a reasonable person will conclude that he is involved in politics of distraction, deflection, division and destruction. He distracts people from real issues by making strawman arguments to protect Israel and her supporters, who happens to be all the people he associates with. He deflects people by providing cover for people like Sam Harris, Ayaan, Tommy, etc. by supporting their arguments and by saying no such thing as Islamophobia. He acts to destruct communal harmony in the Western society by sowing seeds of suspicion against minorities and their struggle for equality. 

I do hope that SPLC would see the ugly truth and reconsider their offer.

Why Not Be a Muslim for a Day, Mr Nick Cohen

When an outspoken Muslim gains some prominence, sooner or later they find themselves targeted by a campaign to discredit and undermine them. We have seen it time and time again. The list includes Journalists Mehdi Hasan, journalists and editorial staff of the Guardian and most recently Assed Baig of the Channel 4 News. Muslim Politicians and elected officials like Mayor of Tower Hamlet, MPs and Members of the House of Lords, etc also come under attack. Currently London's mayoral candidate Sadiq Khan MP is in the firing line from the opponents including the Prime Minister. Prime Minister used the parliamentary privilege to attack Sadiq Khan, the leader of the opposition and made unsubstantiated claims of extremism against an Imam Suliman Gani.

Then there are the Muslim student bodies which come under sustained attack. So when we see attacks on Malia Bauattia, newly elected president of the Student Union, it is neither shocking nor surprising. Furthermore, Muslim groups and individuals highlighting injustices, raising concerns about inequality and discrimination are constantly targeted in the mainstream and social media. Even Muslim children and their education doesn’t escape the scrutiny. Parents Teachers and school governing bodies have all come under attack on the whim of zealot officials and sensationalist media.

You don't need to say or do anything to be subjected to this scrutiny, just need to declare you are a Muslim. However, if you happen to be outspoken Muslim or in the public eye, you will be targeted by certain people to who would devote time and resources to find something incriminating, no matter how old or irrelvat. A recent example of this is the case of a 20 year old Muslim councillor, Aysegul Gurbaz, who may have posted 3-4 tweets between the age of 14 and 18. Another recent example was the attack on Assed Baig, again for 3- 4 tweets 2-5 year old and tweeted long before his employment with the Channel 4 News. In the first case the incriminating discovery was made by the campaign against anti-Semitism and in the second case by Guido Fauks, a right wing political blog. Both cases then appeared in the Daily Mail.

I am certain that I will be branded anti-Semite and not anti fascist for what I am about to say. In all of the above cases two things are prominent Israel lobby along with the right wing establishment supporting media. The question is why deploy resources, both human and in monitory terms, to try to dig dirt on Muslim individuals and organisations. They do not deploy these resources on every Journalist, politician, student body, education establishment, etc. Talking of students and educational bodies, when so called Trojan Horse story was in the news we saw helicopters flying around taking pictures of schools, teachers, governors, parents and pupils. The same situation occurred in the case of the Iqra school. There was no privacy and no concerns about the safety of the people being filmed. Compare that to the recent story of missing boys and the illegal and unsafe schools of the Jewish community. The reporters were prohibited from identifying students, teachers and the locations of schools. There was no interrogation of Jewish leaders instead the BBC Newsnight presenter had a very civilised almost jovial conversation with various Jewish leaders, politicians and educationalists. There was no outrage at their support for such schools.

Incidentally all these people who attack Muslims call themselves "liberals" but what does it really mean. One definition I found says "willing to respect or accept behaviour or opinions different from one's own". These so called liberals have closed minds and are not open to discussion and debate. They have scripted rhetoric and ideas which they want to enforce on others. They not only abuse and misuse the term liberal they also abuse other terms like moderate and medieval. To be moderate is to be average, modest and ordinary but these individuals have extreme views about monitoring activities of Muslims from birth to death, labelling them from Islamist to extremist and demonising them in a way that it restricts their opportunities.

As far as the term medieval is concerned, historically it refers to the era between year 500 to 1500 after the loss of Roman Empire. Everything related to this term relates to history of disarray in the European continent. It has nothing to do with the rest of the world's civilisation, culture, trade and inventions. Basically people are judging rest of the world with their own bad history. Their limited knowledge of the rest of the world and historyis not based on reality but tainted by own experiences.

Recently Nick Cohen wrote a piece titled Why I am becoming a Jew and Why you should, too . This piece is an attack on the left in particular the Labour Party and Jeremy Corbyn, Muslims of the West and alleged rise in the anti-Semitism. This is not the first time he has written on this subject, in fact the article is a rehash of his article written in 2009. There is a common thread in both articles warning left to stay away from Muslims in Europe and that Muslims and dark skinned people are the new fascists of Europe.

The Article doesn't mention of the modern day white far right and neo Nazi groups sweeping through Europe. This is probably because they have been persuaded that presence of the dark skinned minorities/ Muslims is the only threat to the Judeo-Christian Europe. Jist of the argument, in both articles, is the same, only thing which has changed is that Nick is no longer a member of the Labour party and there is more emphasis on the left in particular attacks on the Labour party and Jeremy Corbyn. Could it be that the party embraces true liberal principles and it is on the side of the ordinary people that provides minorities including Muslims; support and opportunity to participate in the democratic political process.

While Mr Cohen continuously talks about anti-Semitism, which by the way is more to do with his affinity with the state of Israel, he denies the existence of Islamophobia. He regularly criticises Muslims, Islam and Palestinians but says nothing about the excessive persecution and suppression of Palestinians. He doesn’t criticise the fundamentalist religious coalition which is in power in Israel and their two tier justice system. The fact that the state of Israel governs over as many Jews as Arab and Palestinians with Muslim and Christian faith, criticism of Israel can not be considered anti-Semitic. Only way it could be regarded as anti-Semitic if Israel is considered solely religious Jewish state which will be contrary to the position of her and her supporters that Israel is a modern democratic state.

Whether he admit or not Nick Cohen not only promotes a certain rhetoric which can only be described as racist Islamophobia. Furthermore, time and time again he comes to the defence of others involved in the same activity. A classic example is this article in the Spectator. The headline states that “Richard Dawkins attacks Christian bigots as well as Muslim”. But when you read the article he doesn't provide any example of attacks on Christians. Nick Cohen uses the classic form of defence by attacking Muslims and in a convoluted way he justifies Richard Dawkins racist and Islamophobic activity. He talks about Nahla Mehmoud and how she had suffered in Sudan. Would he do the same for Malia Bauattia, who had fled terror in Algeria, only to find herself facing racism, discrimination and accused of anti-Semitism and being supporter of terrorism. Would he criticise this article by Hannah Weisfeld which belittles NUS motion against anti-Semitism, passed with the support of Malia Bauattia

In the above article Hanna Weisfeld provides the clue to the Islamophbic rhetoric coming out of these people. She says that 93% of UK Jews say that Israel is part of their identity and have an afinity with Israelis. There is nothing wrong with that except when, it becomes obsessive as this tweet by Toby Young suggests, it becomes dangrous. In contrast poll after poll of British Muslims show that they have 80+% feel loyalty to Britain. Furthermore, despite being migrants, refugees or descendants of migrats and refugees and having relatives abroad, they show no such afinity with other countries. Yet their loyalty is questioned again and again, just because they want to voice an opinion about wars and devastation it brings to the lives of ordinary people. 

Nick Cohen, an atheist, has seen the light and has accepted that he is a Jew and want others to be the same. He is not alone to show such sentiment about his religeon. The reality is that New atheism is all about religion and most of its figure heads have affinity with their or their parents. Be it Richard Dawkins who has more than soft spot for Christianity or Sam Harris who supports Israel because of his Jewish roots.

For a Jewish man to become a Jew is not really a big step, and it hasn't made a slight bit of difference to his rhetoric. Nick Cohen should try to be a Muslim for a week or just for one day, may be then he would realise how hateful and hurtful his rhetoric really is.

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. 

Freedom of Speech and the Rhetoric of Blasphemy

Since the Charlie Hebdo Murders, freedom of speech has become the mantra of the phobic community. To add Muslim angle to the mantra and to stay on course for inciting hatred against Muslims, Blasphemy has been added into the mix. Maajid Nawaz even presented a motion for free speech and right to blaspheme, at the Liberal Democrat spring conference. Being a Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for the Liberal Democrats, he should have known that UK abolished the blasphemy law in 2008. Furthermore, the freedom of expression is enshrined in the law. Not surprisingly, Maajid’s motion and its adoption by the Liberal Democrat conference received praise from people like Nick Cohen .    

Anyone who has some knowledge of their faith or faiths in general knows that, no faith or faith scriptures mention blasphemy. Furthermore, all faiths support freedom of thought and speech because that's how faiths spread. So where does this term and idea comes from, if not from religion or faith. As far as I know the blasphemy was first constructed and introduced by the Christian or cannon law. In the UK it was adopted into the common law in the 17^th century and was only abolished in 2008. It was mainly introduced in common law to maintain the supremacy of the Church of England over other factions of Christianity.

A different form of blasphemy law was introduced in the colonies by Britain. The purpose of this law was more administrative than religious. As colonial rule expanded, it brought previously independent Hindu, Christian and Muslim areas under colonial administration. Furthermore, Britain needed to give protection to the missionary work by her clergy and newly converted subjects. So the aim of this legislation was to maintain order and to prevent communal violence. To date it remains on the statute books of these former colonies.

The reason such laws remained on the statuette books is that the newly independent countries were based on newly created borders which didn’t exist before the colonial rule. Furthermore, these new borders contained diverse communities, thus the need for this administrative tool to protect minorities not the majority religions. The prime example of this is the states of India and Pakistan. The laws in both countries protects, although not successfully, all religions not just the majority religions.

UK has abolished the blasphemy law, which mainly protected Christianity but it enacted new legislation with a view to protect minorities. The Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006, is similar to the version introduced in the former colonies and is an administration tool. The act also preserves the right to freedom of speech/ freedom of expression but outlaws hate speech. Similar laws can be found on statute books of most European countries. Even France, the bastion of secularism, maintains laws for freedom of religion and against hate speech. It is another thing that such laws are rarely enforced and are flouted by the Far Right and “New” Atheists or anti-theists, secularists, humanists, etc.

As well as introducing the motion at the Lib Dem conference, Maajid Nawaz has also written an essay on the topic of Blasphemy. He starts his essay with the claim that the religious Prophets had blasphemed against the prevailing social constructs of that time. In other words when prophet Muhammad (pbuh) told people that burying daughters alive was wrong or Jesus spoke against money changers for profiteering from misery or Moses preached against pharaohs brutal rule, they all committed blasphemy. By that logic, Martin Luther King, Nelson Mandela and today Palestinians, etc are blasphemers against the oppressive apartheid systems.

Maajid Nawaz’s convoluted arguments of cultural relativism, neo- oriental liberalism, can be summarised in few simple words. Western liberal society is monolithic and has no room for other cultures, identities, values or rights to equality. This attitude clearly ignores the fact that Majority of Muslim and other minorities in this country are born and bred here and regards themselves as British. When they go on holiday to Europe, North America, East or West they introduce themselves as British. Its people like him and other phobes and racists who want to give them the labels of their heritage. Hypocritically, Maajid Nawaz and co get on their high horse, when talking about other countries and protection of rights of minorities and cultures. Lecturing them to protect their religion, rights and cultures while doing the opposite here.

His position seems to be that minorities fighting for equality and maintaining their identity is a bad thing. On the other hand he claims, without providing any evidence, that there are minorities within the Muslim Minority who are experiencing victimisation. The fact is that himself and the so called ex-Muslims have aligned themselves with the powerful fascists, racists, New Atheists etc. They are deliberately provoking and attacking the Muslims and minorities. He includes himself in those minorities and hypocritically plays the victim card while criticising UK minorities for playing victim card. As usual he maintains that the majority of Muslims are extremists and are trying to impose Sharia and blasphemy on the liberal society. He is not interested in the socioeconomic situation and the attitude of some in the host community towards the minority communities, which has ghettoised some communities. Instead he claims that far right is profiting from the feeling of victimisation of the majority community. His attitude towards the orient and globalisation of the world ignores the fact that orient didn’t just provide the spices, silk, tea wealth; it also influenced and shaped the so called western values.

He talks about reformation but forgets that so called reformation came from within the Christian community not from outside. It is not the job of the so called ex-Muslims, Atheists or Quilliam to tell Muslims what to do. Muslims, for centuries both under Muslim rule and non Muslim rule co existed with various sects, cultures and religions. There were and still are inter religion, race, and sect marriages all around the world. There are no elected religious political parties anywhere in Muslim majority countries. Only countries where religiously influenced parties or persons are in power are India, Israel and the USA. People like Ayaan H Ali are not bothered by the election of fundamentalist religious party being in power in India. They are not bothered by the persecution of the low cast Hindus or religious minorities. They ignore the role of religion in Judicial and political systems in Israel or US.

As usual Maajid Nawaz is providing cover to his friends, who are involved in the racism, islamophobia and bigotry. The people, who have made a career out of their fascist activity by creating divisions and hate preaching. These people include Tommy Robinson, Sam Harris, Douglas Murray and Ayaan H Ali. Maajid and his friends use the rhetoric of freedom of speech to voice their bigoted views about the Muslim minorities in the west. They play the divisive games by praising some minorities while criticising the others. For example, Tommy Robinson would tweet praise about Sikh and Jewish minorities, while continuing his vile rhetoric against the Muslim minority. Recently Tommy Robinson tweeted guidance about recognising Sikhs by their turbans and to respect them. What this means is that everyone else of brown skin such as Sri Lankans, Arabs, South Americans, Indians, etc whether Christian, Hindu, Non Muslim, are a fair game. However, differentiating the Sikh women from Muslim women isn’t that simple so they remain open to the misogynistic attacks by his followers.  
  
The other thing Maajid and others say is that they have the right to offend. The question is what is the motive behind the offensive activity i.e. cartoons. Is it freedom of speech/ expression or there is sinister politics behind such cartoons. When Chris Moos and his partner appeared on a BBC programme and displayed their t-shirts bearing cartoons, what message were they relaying? Prior to their appearance on BBC Chris Moos and his partner had worn the same t-shirts at a university, during fresher’s week.  They had a stall purporting to promote atheism but their t-shirts had nothing to do with promotion of atheism. You don’t promote something by offending people, you antagonise them. If they wanted to promote the message of humanism and atheism then why didn’t they wear the t-shirts Richard Dawkins sells in his shops? Clearly their intentions were not about promotion of their ideology but to create divisions among students. Dawkins was so impressed by Chris Moos and his partner’s actions that he awarded him the humanist of the year award, but ignored his brown partner.

The fact is that such actions have nothing to do with freedom of expression. Neither are they satirical, as claimed by Richard Dawkins. They are deliberate attempts to stigmatise and dehumanise Muslim and minority communities. They are a copy of the Israeli rhetoric to dehumanise Palestinians by spreading lies i.e. Palestinians use their children as human shield. As it happens all of these groups and individuals are open supporters of Israel and her policies of suppressing the Palestinians. Sam Harris and Ayaan H Ali have openly agreed with IDF propaganda that Palestinians use human shields. Whether it is Tommy Robinson, Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Ayaan H Ali, Nick Cohen, Douglas Murray or Maajid Nawaz, they are all working with a clear political agenda. They give legitimacy to the war on terror which to date has claimed more than 2 million lives. Their role is to distract the populations of the West from what is happening around the world and keep them in a state of paranoia and fear.
     
A cursory look at the twitter activity of these people will tell you that neither of the above activity do anything to further their cause or belief. Instead you will find a common thread in their tweets. You won’t find Quilliam and Maajid addressing the Muslim youth with counter extremist message or Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris preaching atheism. You will not find Nick Cohen criticising Israel or Douglas Murray writing anything other than demonising of the Muslims and other minority communities and accusing them of anti-Semitism and homophobia. You won’t find Ayaan H Ali making civilised conversation about her rhetoric of reformation but inciting violence and supporting suppression of Muslims and minorities. You don’t even need to look at Tommy Robinson tweets to know his vile views, yet he has received admiration from all of the aforementioned.

Don’t be bamboozled by the rhetoric and sound bites by polished performers, always look beyond the glossy exterior and you may find the ugly truth of bigotry, Xenophobia, racism,Islamophobia, etc

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.