The subjects covered in this blog include Slavoj Žižek, IQ tests, Chomsky, Tony Blair, Baudrillard, global warming, sociobiology, Islam, Islamism, Marx, Foucault, National/International Socialism, economics, the Frankfurt School, philosophy, anti-racism, etc... I've had articles published in The Conservative Online, American Thinker, Philosophy Now, Intellectual Conservative, Human Events, Faith Freedom, Brenner Brief (Broadside News), New English Review, etc... (Paul Austin Murphy's Philosophy can be found here

This blog used to be called EDL Extra. I was a supporter of the EDL until 2012. This blog has retained the old web address.


Monday, 14 March 2011

Abdullah Daud, of the MCB, tries to get more Brits around to his position: the Complete Annihilation of Israel

[Left: Daud Abdullah, of the Muslim Council of Britain, and staunch defender of the democrats and gay-lovers Hamas. Right: Hamas. The MCB is part of the Muslim Brotherhood, as is Hamas. Aren't things simple when you think about it?]

EDL Extra comments on the Guardian article, 'Europe's Israel romance is on the wain', by Daud Abdullah, 14th March, 2011. (Comments are in red.)

In Europe, Israel has historically enjoyed a high level of support, not least because it was perceived as a progressive democracy in a sea of Arab backwardness. [Israel was indeed progressive and indeed still is. (For example, apart from the right to be hung by the neck, what rights do gays have in Islamic countries?) However, after the 1967 war, many on the Left changed their minds on this. Because Israel proved itself to be strong and determined, but, most of all, because it defeated the Brown Exotic oppressed, the Left simply couldn’t support a state and a people like that.

Not only that. Israel ‘occupied’ the West Bank and Gaza as part of a policy of ‘colonial aggrandisement’ – or whatever the Leftist theory is today. No they didn’t! They occupied these areas as defensive moves to defeat an all-surrounding enemy. These additional geographical areas provided the extra security Israel required while still surrounded by Brown Exotic killers who still wanted to obliterate Israel despite their humiliating defeat.] At the same time, most Europeans knew very little about the Israel-Palestine conflict: as recently as 2004, the Glasgow University Media Group found that only 9% of British students knew that the Israelis were the illegal occupiers of Palestinian land. Astonishingly, there were actually more people (11%) who believed that the Palestinians were occupying the territories. [If anything, British students know too much about Palestine and Israel. Actually, what they know is almost exclusively spoon-fed to them by Trot groups like the SWP and by university Islamists – who basically concur on all matters Israel and Palestine. Support of Palestine is quite simply often a political fashion at British universities. The silly students who wear the keffiyah obviously see political hipness as being more important than the facts about Israel and Palestine – and so much more.

Incidentally, any group based at a university, i.e., the Glasgow University Media Group, quite simply cannot be trusted. Most of these groups are deeply ideological and biased. And because the overwhelming consensus at British universities is anti-Israel, despite the perverse inversion of the truth Daud Abdullah is trying to sell gullible and hip Guardianistas, we can be pretty sure that this group comes to the conclusions it wants to come to and ‘discovers’ the stats it wants to discover.]

However, according to a new poll by ICM for the Middle East Monitor, Europeans' perception of Israel has changed decisively, and their understanding of the Israel-Palestine conflict, while still giving some cause for concern, has improved significantly. The survey of 7,000 people in Germany, France, Spain, Italy, the Netherlands and Britain reveals only a small minority (10%) now believe their countries should support Israel rather than the Palestinians, while many more, 39%, think they should not.

This shift in European public opinion may owe something to an improved understanding of the conflict; 49% of respondents were now able to identify Israel as the occupying power. [‘An improved understanding of the conflict’ simply means an understanding which squares precisely with Abdullah’s own understanding. Nothing more. Nothing less. Again, since 1967, most Leftists at university and elsewhere simply see the occupation as ‘colonial expansion’ or the desire for a ‘Greater Israel’; whereas it is really about Israel’s need to defend itself from the killers that Abdullah spends so much of his time defending.] However, 22% still didn't know. This persistence of ignorance [i.e., opinions which differ from Abdullah’s] about issues that have been long established in international law may reflect media bias, or inadequate coverage of the conflict. [Too much coverage, more like. What about the Sudan? Tibet? Pakistani and Iraqi Christians, etc? These far worse problems get but a tiny fraction of that which is spent by BBC Palestinophiles on the Suffering Palestinians.] It could also be a result of campaigns undertaken by the Israeli public relations machinery in Europe. [Don’t be surprised by such words. This man is a fanatical ‘anti-Zionist’ who is obsessed by ‘Jewish conspiracies’, as most, or all, Islamists are. Indeed, I would bet that Abdullah has read the Protocols of the Elders of Zion and thinks it was genuinely written by the Jews. This man’s anti-Jew obsession is as deep as any sea.] Whatever the cause, the shift in public opinion is clearly not mainly due to the success of a pro-Palestinian lobby. [Taqiyya! In my own town alone there have been many pro-Palestine demos and vigils, as well as boycotts against Israel and whatnot. The pro-Palestinian lobby is massive and rules the roost at virtually every British university and, to a lesser extent, at the BBC (forget the Guardian!) and elsewhere.

Why is this man lying so much? I’ll tell you. Muslims are allowed to lie for Islam or for Muslims (or for Muslim Palestinians). It’s called taqiyya and it’s almost as important to Islam as jihad.]

This decisive shift appears to be primarily a consequence of Israel's violation of international law, specifically its actions in Gaza, the 2010 attack on the humanitarian flotilla, its settlement expansion programme, and the construction of the separation wall. [Whose ‘international law’? The international law of an anti-democratic United Nations? Or a European law which is obsessed by Israel’s crimes to the ignorance of so many far worse problems in the world?]

There is, across Europe, a growing rejection of Israeli policies. Its blockade of Gaza was said to be illegal by 53% of those polled (16% thought it legal) – an appreciation of the international legal opinion that recognises the siege as a form of collective punishment and a violation of the Geneva conventions. [This man has a strangely Platonic view of what is legal and what is illegal. More correctly, he has such a Platonic stance when it comes to Israel; but not when it comes to the multitude of crimes committed by his fellow Muslims and Islamists throughout the world which far outshine in evil whatever Israel is supposed to have done.

When we hear about ‘law’ or what is ‘illegal’, from Islamists and Leftists, we should immediately ask: Who or what is saying that these things are illegal? Are they democratic organisations which are saying these things about Israel? Do they reflect the views of the British people and other Europeans?

Isn’t there a fantastic bias being shown against Israel which is often displayed by these phoney accusations of illegality blasted almost everyday at Israel? Why don’t these law-obsessed Islamists (yes! the irony!) and criers of ‘illegal’ ever say the same about the Sudanese regime, the Pakistani state, the Iranians, and even the Chinese in Tibet? Why just Israel. Israel. Israel? Has this got anything to do with the 1,300 year old Islamic tradition of Jew hatred and the shorter tradition of Leftist Jew hatred?]

While it is important to note that those polled saw fault on both sides, 31% considered Palestinians to be the primary victims of the conflict, while only 6% thought Israelis the primary victims. A third of respondents believe Israel is not a democracy, while fewer than half believe it is, and most of those surveyed (65%) agree Israel does not treat all religious groups the same, compared with 13% who believe it does. [Clearly, the subtext here is that Abdullah believes that Israel is not a democracy because it has the audacity not to want to be killed by Abdullah’s friends in Hamas.]

European policy on Palestine can no longer be said to reflect the values and aspirations of the people. The survey confirms a disturbing level of disconnect between public opinion and governments' actions. Whereas the EU took a decision in 2003 to place Hamas on its list of terrorist organisations and preclude it from any negotiations, 45% of those polled said it should be included in peace talks, while only 25% said it should be excluded. (A recent survey by the Institute for Jewish Policy research also found that 52% of British Jews support negotiating with Hamas for peace.) [What’s with all the stats? Is Abdullah trying to impress us with them and thus prove that he’s only an objective academic after all; not a fanatical anti-Jewish Islamist? Actually, everything is subtext or unspoken here. He’s blinding us with stats but rarely explicitly interprets them. Yet, despite that, it is easy to see what his interpretation of all these stats is – in each and every case.

Why is he hinting rather than stating what he thinks these stats mean? Because he’s wants to retain some kind of objective academic standing despite the fact that we all know that this man is a fanatical anti-Jew and a radical Islamist to boot. Abdullah seems to think that the academic ruse of blinding people with stats will hide the fact that he’s got a blatantly anti-Israel agenda here. More to the point. Why has he chosen this pseudo-academic style for the Guardian when he writes like a proselytising madman for Islamist journals and for his own Muslim Council of Britain?]

Similarly, a clear majority of Europeans (58%) are against changing the law to make it easier for those accused of war crimes to visit Europe [does that include convictions for Islamists and for Islamoterrorists; or is he talking exclusively about – yes, you guessed it! – Israeli ‘war criminals’?] – a ringing indictment of governments that have either changed or are attempting to change their laws to protect Israeli war crime suspects. [I wonder if Abdullah has ever said a single word about Muslim or Islamist war criminals. Maybe a few words about Arab governments which are not Islamic enough for him or are 'too close to Western Governments'. But what about the Islamist and Muslim war criminals in the Sudan, in Iraq, in Afghanistan, in Pakistan, etc? No. Never a word; just like our own Salma Yaqoob. Taqiyya!] The Conservatives are committed to changing the law, yet only 7% of the 2,000 Britons polled would support such a change – the lowest figure in Europe.

The results of this study coincide with the epic changes engulfing the Middle East. Given the systemic discrimination by Israel against its Arab population [Is that why they can vote, form their own political parties, join the Knesset, etc. in Israel? Not much true democracy like that in Abdullah’s favoured countries, eh? What a disgusting hypocrite this man is.], it is only fair to ask what the reaction would be if it was faced with mass civil protests by its Arab citizens demanding equal rights. Europe's romantic view of Israel has long been on the wane. Its 20th-century image as the battling underdog in a hostile neighbourhood has been shattered by its actions. European governments should bring their policies into line with universally accepted human values. Anything less will be a betrayal of the democratic standards Europe claims to uphold.


  1. This repulsive great ZERO can only jump on the bandwagon with those that killed and enslaved his ancestors. He is a black West Indian and a useful idiot for arabs. They call all blacks "abeid" a word which means both black and slave. There was an article in Daily Mail a couple of days ago about a pakistani who called a black cameraman abeid. Total scum!!

  2. Pity some members of EDL can't see the similarities between mozlem killing of Charlene Downes and the massacre of the Israeli family at Itamar. Because mozzies are already saying that UK is mozlem land. Give it time...