Thursday, 3 February 2011

Islamophobia Watch Watch





- Bob Pitt's article, 'Does Labour Measure Up?' from Labour Briefing

Can you trust someone who runs a website called ‘Islamophobia Watch’? Bob Pitt has to fill his posts on supposed cases of Islamophobia every day. It is also his career, not just in terms of his website but also politically - within London and often in connection with his good friend, who he also sells in this article, Ken Livingstone. Pitt is also a pure Trot, which means that he uses Islamophobia, or Muslims, or even Islam itself, to radicalise people and ultimately to further the Revolution. Thus, being a Trot, he must ‘lie for Justice’. More relevantly, he must hear no Muslim evil. See no Muslim evil. And, more importantly, he must not report on any Muslim evil. He is doing this hypocritical job very well.

This man needs Islamophobia. He craves it. It is absolutely necessary for his political ends. Again, Trots like Pitt must hype-up Islamophobia in order to radicalise. For a start, Islamophobic crimes are lower than anti-Semitic crimes, in terms of the proportion of Jews and Muslims in the UK. Indeed, many who cry ‘Islamophobia’ are themselves anti-Semitic - or ‘anti-Zionist’, as Pitt would probably put it.

In any case, has Islamophobia really ‘reached such a pitch’? I don’t think so. At least not outside the fantasy worlds of the Islamophobia Watch website and other Trotskyite circles. Pitt mentions the EDL’s Islamophobia and cites examples. All it takes is for a single ‘racist chant’ to have occurred for Trotskyites like Pitt to keep on using it as an example of ‘EDL extremism’. (Anti-Semitic chants have also been heard on student demos recently.) Is that the be all and end all of all Islamophobia – what happens at EDL demos? These demos occur around once a month at the most – and in only one town or city at a time. Is that the size of the UK's Islamophobia? In addition, most of these demo outrages have been made up by the UAF or they have happened only once – in the early days of the EDL.

Despite Pitt’s shit, if anything, the ‘mainstream media’ has reacted to the EDL and what it has to say, not the other way around. As usual, Trots like Pitt simply assume that the British public, especially the white working class, can be led like dogs on a leash by the tabloid press. Are Trots led by the Guardian, Socialist Worker and the New Statesman? No. Only white working class people suffer from ‘false consciousness’. Trots like Pitt always see the unvarnished truth, as filtered from masses of Marxist theory and dogma.

Pitt supports ‘progressive causes’ (the new substitution for ‘leftist’ or ‘socialist’ or even ‘Marxist’). Isn’t it ‘progressive’ to fight against a fascist, misogynist death cult like Islam? And what’s wrong with ‘Enlightenment values, secularism, gay rights’, etc. anyway? Are Trots like Pitt against these things now? Have they put all their faith in Islamism and Islam? Or is Pitt saying that these values are really a disguise for good old-fashioned racism? (Such was the basic reality of much 20th century Continental philosophy.)

The EDL does not say that it is ‘attacking Islamism rather than Islam’, as Pitt claims. It says it is attacking Islam/the Koran rather than Muslims. In addition, Pitt seems to have absolute trust in the Islamist organisations which claim to be ‘promoting peaceful change through mainstream politics’. Perhaps this is just another avenue in which the Islamification of the UK can be brought about. The Islamists are fighting on all fronts –including the moderate-Muslim front. (This is what Mohammed himself did in his Meccan period.)

And we also have Pitt’s typical examples of Marxist mono-causation. As if anyone would turn against anything for just a single reason. And we have yet more Trotskyist conspiracy theories! The domain of the politically paranoid. The fuckedheads who believe in mono-causation in all areas – especially when it come to the Jews… sorry, the Zionists.

In any case, I would say that most of the work done by the Muslim Association of Britain would not have been successful if they had not collaborated with Trots like Pitt and the Socialist Workers Party during the anti-war years. The Islamists are using the Trots and the Trots are using the Islamists. But, in the end, the Islamists will almost certainly win.

Pitt does not consider for a moment that the universal distrust of Islam or Islamism may be a result of people having a point. Of course not. Pitt’s alignment with Brown Oppressed Muslims is absolute because they are the only means left for the Trot revolution – which is silly. But Trots are silly. Their theories make them silly. As for Pitt mentioning anti-Semitism? Pitt will have loads of Trot and Muslim friends who are virulently anti-Semitic - and not just ‘anti-Zionist’. You can hear anti-Semitic chants at most SWP-organised demos nowadays.

So ‘pitching for the white vote’ is bad? Pitt is trying to get the Brown Vote angry. Pitt’s pitch from the Brown Vote, or for Brown support, is of course good. Why does Pitt hate the white working class so much? Is it because they don’t believe in his Revolution – and never have? Oh! That terrible ‘false consciousness’ which controls everyone on the planet except for Bob Pitt and other pure Trots. In Pitt’s world everyone is an Islamophobe, except totalitarian Trots like himself. Hell, he probably even thinks that some Muslims are Islamophobes too – or that they are ‘Uncle Toms’.

Never trust an Islamist or a Trot – both ‘lie for Justice’ and the furtherance of Islam or Trotskyism. And who does Bob Pitt represent? Muslims? Islamists? Trots and Islamists? Or his dinner-party Trotskyite friends somewhere in Hackney or Islington?

So is Bob Pitt is explicitly pro-Islamist? He says that New Labour is ‘anti-Islamist’. Of course a democratic party should be anti-Islamist for the obvious reason that Islamists are anti-democrats – in all respects.

Islamophobia Watch? Don’t ever uncover the Brown Exotic – only uncover White Israelis and the ugly white working class of the UK – the terrible bugbears of London dinner parties. No Brown Exotic can ever do wrong in the middle-class Trot’s eyes – their racism is inverted – Browns can never do wrong – only EDL ‘chavs’ can do wrong. Does this man, Bob Pitt, believe that Muslims, because they are the Brown Exotic Oppressed, can never do wrong? Trot/Marxist theory really takes you out of the realms of the real or the actual. But that doesn’t matter. Only radicalisation and Revolution matter. Trots can be as against Christianity as anyone. Christianity is a White Oppressor Religion. Jesus himself was white member of the Tory Party. He didn’t even wear the Palestinian scarf that so many white first-year students wear. Israel is white. Christianity is white. But Bob Pitt is Deeply Brown, even if he’s from the Home Counties of the SWP.

Trots use Muslims and Islamists to further Leon Trot’s dream of total power against all the evil people who disagreed with him. A Trot can never say a bad word about any Brown Exotic because he/she is an inverted racist. The Bob Pitts of this world think that Brown Muslims can never do any wrong. And they can’t do wrong because they are of vital importance to the White Middle-Class Professionals' Revolution.

So does this Trot support every reactionary and misogynist he meets? Yes he does. Because if the Oppressed Brown is racist, misogynist, and racist or fascist, then that’s OK - the Brown Exotic can do absolutely anything he likes.

These Trots are scum. They lie. They manipulate and they use people. And, yes, they use Muslims.

The SWP is the pure nihilism of politics. It throws you back onto the endless cycle of violence and futility, peppered with endless demos and dinner parties.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
An analysis of Bob Pitt's 'Does Labour Measure Up?' [EDL Extra comments are in red.]

“The Islamophobia Myth” was the title of an influential article by Kenan Malik published in the February 2005 issue of Prospect magazine. It argued that violence, hatred and discrimination against Muslims were at a very low level and that the threat of Islamophobia had been invented or at least greatly exaggerated, mainly by religious leaders hoping to suppress legitimate criticisms of their beliefs and to enhance their own status as community representatives. Malik’s thesis was welcomed in some quarters at the time, including among sections of the left. [Can you trust someone who runs a website called ‘Islamophobia Watch’? Bob Pitt has to fill his posts on Islamophobia everyday. It is also his career, not just in terms of his website but also politically within London and often in connection with his good friend, who he also sells in this article, Ken Livingstone. Pitt is also a Trot, which means that he can use Islamophobia, or Muslims or even Islam itself, to radicalise people and ultimately to further the Revolution. Thus, being a Trot, he must ‘lie for Justice’. More relevantly, he must hear no Muslim evil. See no Muslim evil. And, more importantly, he must not report on any Muslim evil. He is doing this hypocritical job very well.]

Six years on, far fewer people would buy that argument. Hostility towards Muslims and their faith has reached such a pitch that to deny this represents a major threat is simply untenable. [This man needs Islamophobia. He craves it. It is absolutely necessary for his political ends. Has Islamophobia really ‘reached such a pitch’? I don’t think so. At least not outside the fantasy worlds of the Islamophobia Watch website and other Trotskyite circles. Again, Trots like Pitt must hype-up Islamophobia in order to radicalise. For a start, Islamophobic crimes are lower than anti-Semitic crimes, in terms of the proportion of Jews and Muslims in the UK. Indeed, many who cry ‘Islamophobia’ are themselves anti-Semitic - or anti-Zionist, as Pitt would probably put it.]

When the racist hooligans of the English Defence League take to the streets in towns and cities across the UK brandishing placards with slogans such as “We will never submit to Islam” [what’s wrong with that ‘slogan’?], chanting “Burn a mosque down” [All it takes is for this chant to have occurred once for Trotskyites like Pitt to keep on using it as an example of ‘EDL extremism’. (Anti-Semitic chants have also been heard on student demos recently.)] hand on occasion breaking through police lines to rampage through Muslim areas smashing shop windows and assaulting passers-by, who could seriously claim that Islamophobia is a myth? [Is that the be all and end all of all Islamophobia – what happens at EDL demos? These demos occur around once a month at the most – and in only one town or city at a time. Is that the size of UK Islamophobia? In addition, most of these demo outrages have been made up by UAF or they have happened only once – in the early days of the EDL.]

The EDL and its ideology did not emerge in a political vacuum. When its leaders claim that Britain is undergoing a process of “Islamification”, that the existing legal system is being supplanted by sharia courts or that mosques are potential organising centres for terrorism, they haven’t thought up these ideas by themselves. These are themes constantly promoted by papers like the Express, the Mail, the Sun and the Daily Star, and it is this mainstream right wing Islamophobia that inspires and legitimises the more thuggish forms of anti-Muslim bigotry practised by the EDL and other far-right groups. [If anything, the mainstream media has reacted to the EDL and what it has to say, not the other way around. As usual, Trots like Pitt simply assume that the British public, especially the white working class, can be led like dogs on a leash by the tabloid press. Are Trots led by the Guardian, Socialist Worker and New Statesman? No. Only white working class people suffer from ‘false consciousness’. Trots like Pitt always see the unvarnished truth, as filtered from masses of Marxist theory and dogma.]

Indeed, Nick Griffin has openly stated that the BNP aims to “take advantage for our own political ends of the growing wave of public hostility to Islam currently being whipped up by the mass media”.

While Islamophobia is predominantly a right wing political phenomenon, but by no means exclusively so. Because this campaign against a minority community is framed as an attack on their culture rather than their ethnicity, it has been able to win the backing of people with otherwise progressive political views who would recoil in horror from traditional racism based on skin colour. [Isn’t it ‘progressive’ to fight against a fascist, misogynist death cult like Islam?] Liberal and leftist Islamophobia is typically couched in terms of a defence of Enlightenment values, secularism, feminism or gay rights, but the effect is to reinforce the right wing narrative of British Muslims as an alien presence and internal threat. [What’s wrong with ‘Enlightenment values, secularism, gay rights’, etc? Are Trots like Pitt against these things now? Have they put all their faith in Islamism and Islam? Or is Pitt saying that these values are really a disguise for good old-fashioned racism?]

Islamophobes of left and right will often claim that they are not attacking Islam as such but rather “Islamism” – a term that is applied so broadly as to cover almost all Muslim organisations which involve themselves in political action, the aim being to blur the difference between those groups promoting peaceful change through engagement with mainstream politics and those advocating violence. [The EDL does not say that it is ‘attacking Islamism rather than Islam’. It says it is attacking Islam/the Koran rather than Muslims. In addition, Pitt seems to have absolute trust in the Islamist organisations which claim to be ‘promoting peaceful change through mainstream politics’. Perhaps this is just another avenue in which the Islamification of the UK can be brought about. The Islamists are fighting on all fronts –including the moderate-Muslim front. This is what Mohammed himself did in his Meccan period.]

Some of the fiercest critics of political Islam have been supporters of the Iraq war like Observer journalist Nick Cohen, who suddenly discovered that Islamism posed an existential threat to western civilisation after the Muslim Association of Britain emerged as a leading force in the organisation of mass anti-war protests. [Typical Marxist mono-causation. As if anyone would turn against anything for just a single reason. In any case, I would say that most of the work done by the MAB would not have been successful if they had not collaborated with Trots like Pitt and the Socialist Workers Party. The Islamists are using the Trots and the Trots are using the Islamists. But, in the end, the Islamists will almost certainly win.] For others, hostility towards Islamism stems primarily from the fact that politically engaged Muslims are vocal critics of the Palestinian people’s oppression by the Israeli state. Here Islamophobia is harnessed to the Zionist agenda of delegitimising political support for the Palestinian resistance. [More Trotskyist conspiracy theories! The domain of the politically paranoid. The one who believes in mono-causation in all areas – especially when it come to the Jews… sorry, the Zionists.] The result of all this is a mood of resentment and antagonism towards Muslims, their beliefs and their organisations that extends across the political spectrum and through all sections of society. [Pitt does not consider for a moment that such a universal distrust of Islam and Islamism may be a result of people having a point. Of course not. Pitt’s alignment with Brown Oppressed Muslims is absolute because they are the only means left for the Trot revolution – which is silly. But Trots are silly. Their theories make them silly.] There are clear and very worrying parallels with the rise of anti-Semitism in the early decades of the last century. [Anti-Semitism? Pitt will have loads of Trot and Muslim friends who are anti-Semitic and not just anti-Zionist. You can hear anti-Semitic chants at most SWP-organised demos nowadays.]

What has the Labour Party’s response been to this rising tide of Islamophobia? “Mixed” is the best you can say. In some cases Labour has shamefully adapted to the prevailing anti-Muslim mood. [‘Mixed’? Well, Trots like Pitt are never ‘mixed’ about any subject. They are always absolute. Only totalitarian absoluteness will bring radicalisation and then Revolution.] One example of this was the disgraceful propaganda put out by Phil Woolas in Oldham East and Saddleworth during the 2010 General Election, the purpose of which was to “get the white vote angry” by claiming that the Lib Dem candidate was in an alliance with Muslim extremists. [Pitt is trying to get the Brown Vote angry.] A Labour campaign leaflet featured headlines such as “Straight talking Woolas too fair for militant Muslims” and “Lib Dems in mosque planning permission stitch-up”. Woolas’s election agent suggested privately that traditional Conservative voters who were unhappy about backing the Tories’ Muslim candidate might be persuaded to support Labour rather than the Lib Dems “if we can convince them that they are being used by the Moslems”.

During the by-election that followed the court decision to disqualify Woolas, Jack Straw made a further pitch for the white racist vote by endorsing the myth of Asian grooming. [‘Pitching for the white vote’ is bad. Pitt’s pitch from the Brown Vote or Brown support is of course good. Why does Pitt hate the white working class so much? Is it because they don’t believe in his revolution – and never have? Oh! That terrible ‘false consciousness’ which controls everyone on the planet except for Bob Pitt and other pure Trots.] His accusation that some men of Pakistani heritage regard young white women as “easy meat” won him the admiration of the Daily Mail’s Melanie Phillips who hailed his stand against “Muslim sexual predators”. This was nothing new for Straw. In October 2006 he condemned the Muslim face-veil as a “visible statement of separation” and revealed that whenever a constituent visited his surgery wearing one he asked her to remove it. [In Pitt’s world everyone is an Islamophobe, except for totalitarian Trots like himself. Hell, he probably even thinks that some Muslims are Islamophobes too – or that they are ‘Uncle Toms’.] Predictably, Straw’s remarks unleashed a vicious media campaign against veil-wearing Muslim women, with “Ban the burkha” headlines splashed across the front pages of the right wing press.

That same month the then Communities Secretary Ruth Kelly announced on behalf of the Labour Government that there would be a “fundamental rebalancing of our relations with Muslim organisations”, which involved sidelining the Muslim Council of Britain with its 500 affiliates in favour of an obscure outfit called the Sufi Muslim Council that barely had five members. [Pitt is clearly an expert on Islam in the UK. Or is that Islamism in the UK?] In 2009 Kelly’s successor Hazel Blears took the opportunity to break relations with the MCB entirely, on the basis of an accusation that one of its leading figures, Daud Abdullah, had signed a document “advocating attacks on Jewish communities all around the world” – an accusation that was completely untrue. [Never trust an Islamist or a Trot – both ‘lie for Justice’ and the furtherance of Islam or Trotskyism.]

The severing of links between the Labour Government and the MCB was partly due to the latter’s refusal to remain silent about the role of British foreign policy in enabling advocates of violent extremism to get a hearing among disaffected Muslim youth. The Sufi Muslim Council by contrast was viewed favourably because it placed the blame on Islamist ideology and let the Government off the hook. (The same reasoning lay behind the decision to funnel large sums of public money into another divisive and unrepresentative organisation, the Quilliam Foundation.) [And who does Bob Pitt represent? Muslims? Islamists? Trots and Islamists? His dinner-party friends somewhere in London?]

In repudiating the country’s largest Muslim organisation the Labour leadership was also succumbing to pressure from an anti-MCB campaign conducted by John Ware in his 2005 Panorama documentary A Question of Leadership and Martin Bright in his 2006 Policy Exchange pamphlet When Progressives Treat with Reactionaries: The British State’s flirtation with radical Islamism, both of which portrayed the MCB as a nest of Islamist extremists.

Last year we saw a similar capitulation by the party leadership to an anti-Islamist witch-hunt [So is Bob Pitt is explicitly pro-Islamist? Of course a democratic party should be anti-Islamist for the obvious reason that Islamists are anti-democrats – in all respects.] when the NEC blocked Lutfur Rahman [the pure and incorruptible Islamist – perfect mate for Trots] from standing as Labour’s mayoral candidate in Tower Hamlets. The decision followed a campaign by Telegraph journalist Andrew Gilligan to expose Lutfur as an ally of “Islamic fundamentalists” at the East London Mosque [Don’t ever uncover the Brown Exotic – only uncover White Israelis and the ugly white working class of the UK – the terrible bugbears of London dinner parties.] who had supposedly infiltrated the Labour Party as part of a plot to transform Tower Hamlets into an Islamic state. [No Brown Exotic can ever do wrong in the white middle-class Trot’s eyes – their racism is inverted – Browns can never do wrong – only EDL ‘chavs’ can do wrong.] The people of Tower Hamlets delivered their verdict on the NEC’s acceptance of Gilligan’s paranoid fantasies by electing Lutfur as an independent mayor with a massive majority. [Does this man, Bob Pitt, believe that Muslims, because they are the Brown Exotic Oppressed, can never do wrong? Trot/Marxist theory really takes you out of the realms of the real or the actual. But that doesn’t matter. Only radicalisation and Revolution matter.]

In the interests of balance, it should be added that the Labour leadership’s record on Islamophobia has not been all bad. [Isn’t that nice of Bob?] To its credit, the last Government did introduce the religious hatred bill in an attempt to provide Muslims and other multi-ethnic faith communities with the same legal protection as Jews and Sikhs (who are defined as mono-ethnic and covered by the law against incitement to racial hatred) – only to see the legislation sabotaged by an amendment drawn up by Lib Dem peer Lord Lester. [Is it by Trot-definition to be against a religion? No. Trots and others can be as against Christianity as anyone. Christianity is a White Oppressor Religion. Jesus himself was a white member of the Tory Party. He didn’t even wear the Palestinian scarf that so many white first-year students wear. Israel is white. Christianity is white. Bob Pitt is Deeply Brown, even if he’s from the Home Counties of the SWP.]
However, it is prominent figures on the Labour left who have set an example to the rest of the Party in taking a firm and principled stand against the upsurge in anti-Muslim bigotry. [As exists in Trot minds. Who use it to further Leon Trot’s dream of total power against all the evil people who disagree with him?] Jeremy Corbyn, for example, has established warm relations with the North London Central Mosque in Finsbury Park since Abu Hamza and his gang were ousted in 2005 and has rejected attempts by the likes of Gilligan and the Quilliam Foundation to smear the present management as dangerous extremists. [A Trot can never say a bad word about any Brown Exotic because he/she is an inverted racist. The Bob Pitts of this world think that Brown Muslims can never do any wrong. And they can’t do wrong because they are of vital importance to the White Revolution of Bob Pitt and the Trots.]

During his eight years as Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone worked closely with organisations like the MCB and the British Muslim Initiative in defending the capital’s Muslim communities and he was uncompromising in his refusal to bend to the forces of Islamophobia, notably in resisting the hysterical attacks that followed the welcome he gave to Yusuf al-Qaradawi during his visit to London in 2004. [Does this Trot support every reactionary and misogynist he meets? Yes he does. Because if the Oppressed Brown is racist, misogynist, and racist or fascist, then that’s OK because the Brown Exotic can do absolutely anything.] The struggle to get the Labour Party to purge itself of Islamophobia and adopt a more sensitive approach towards representative Muslim organisations will be greatly strengthened if Ken is returned to City Hall in 2012. [These people are scum. They lie. They manipulate and they use people and, yes, they use Muslims. The SWP is the pure nihilism of all politics. It throws you back to an endless cycle of violence and futility, peppered with endless demos and dinner parties.]

No comments:

Post a Comment