Wailing Warsi and her dirty little "Islamophobia" accusations

If Warsi is all Cameron’s got, its not very much. We got Melanie Phillips:

Warsi has  outed herself as a stupid mouthpiece of those who are bamboozling Britain into Islamisation, and  a supporter of that process. She is no different from those who threaten  ‘If you say again that Muslims are extreme or violent we’ll kill you’.

Just whose side is wailing  Warsi on?

Where to start with Baroness Warsi? According to an advance report in the Daily Telegraph of a speech she is making this evening at Leicester University, the Tory party’s co-chairman will say that

Islamophobia has ‘passed the dinner-table test’ and is seen by many as normal and uncontroversial.

Oh really? Prejudice is a hostile view which is unsupported by evidence. Clearly there are people who are indeed prejudiced against Muslims, usually on the grounds of their colour or some more general distaste for foreigners of any kind and their religion or customs. But such people certainly have passed no ‘dinner-table test’ of respectability.

No, what Warsi is calling ‘prejudice’ is talk about Muslim extremism or Muslim terrorism. Because look at what she reportedly goes on to say:

The notion that all followers of Islam can be described either as ‘moderate’ or ‘extremist’ can fuel misunderstanding and intolerance

Remarkable. When people fail explicitly to differentiate ‘moderate’ Muslims from ‘extremists’ they are tarred and feathered as ‘Islamophobic’. But now Warsi says that to differentiate in this way is also ‘Islamophobic’.

Wailing Warsi is a Mohammedan parasite and propagandist. A disgrace as long as she’s allowed near parliament…..

Of course, that’s because what she means is that any mention of any Muslim being extreme is itself ‘Islamophobic’. Now where have we heard that before? From just about every Muslim community spokesman every time there is an act of Islamic terrorism – two words which it is not permissible in such quarters to utter together.

This tactic, as we all know from innumerable examples, is designed to intimidate people into not acknowledging reality and discussing the most pressing issue of our time – Islamic extremism and the war against the free world being waged in the name of Islam. For sure, Warsi reportedly urges Muslim communities to be clearer about their rejection of those who resort to violent acts. But her attempt somehow to pretend that these acts have nothing to do with the fact that they are committed by Muslims all but vitiates her challenge. For if she herself is denying what these acts actually represent, then urging her community to be ‘clearer about their rejection’ of them becomes meaningless.

She is expected also to say terror offences committed by a small number of Muslims should not be used to condemn all who follow Islam. But no-one does so. The suggestion that to condemn some Muslims for violence or extremism is to condemn all Muslims is an absurd canard. People like myself make strenuous efforts always to acknowledge the many Muslims who pose no threat to anyone. Yet that distinction is precisely what Warsi says is evidence of prejudice!

In her speech she is expected to say:

It’s not a big leap of imagination to predict where the talk of “moderate” Muslims leads; in the factory, where they’ve just hired a Muslim worker, the boss says to his employees: “Not to worry, he’s only fairly Muslim”…In the school, the kids say: “The family next door are Muslim but they’re not too bad”.

But hang on — there is a division between those British Muslims who are happy to live as British citizens under one law for all and thus subscribe totally to British and western values of democracy and who thus pose no threat to anyone at all, and those who want instead to live under sharia and as such are attempting to subvert Britain and the west in order to negate its democratic values and human rights and replace them by an Islamic theocracy.

Yet Warsi is saying this distinction is in itself evidence of bigotry. So what does that tell us about her own views about sharia in Britain? Does the co-chairman of the Conservative Party support the encroachment of sharia – or does she want it to be resisted on the basis that as a British democrat she supports secular human rights and one law for all? We now are entitled to demand, in the light of her expected remarks, that the co-chairman of the Conservative Party answers that question.

The fact is that, while a very high proportion of Muslims are neither extreme nor violent, the evidence suggests that a terrifying number are – either supporters of Islamic terrorism (some 2000-plus according to the security service) or those who want to live under sharia law in Britain and/or Islamise the country and its institutions (some 40 per cent-plus, according to various polls).

In such circumstances, it’s remarkable how little prejudice there is against Muslims. And it’s the denial that there is any problem with any Muslims or with Islam, the refusal to halt the process of Islamising Britain and the attempts to censor and stifle discussion that really inflame people to boiling point.

Indeed, there are deeply totalitarian attempts across the west to suppress any association between Muslims and extremism or terrorism and isolate and punish any who make such an association.

Yet now the co-chairman of the Conservative Party has associated her party with such attempts. Indeed, her sinister attack on the media for spreading the ‘prejudice’ of which she complains has to be seen as a direct threat to journalists like myself and others who speak and write about the Islamic jihad against Britain.

Not only is this an attempt to censor debate, but it is an example of the Orwellian discourse by and about the Islamic world in which words have come to mean the precise opposite of what they actually mean. It is the mind-bending formulation which, in the mouths of some Muslims, effectively says to the west: ‘If you say again that Muslims are extreme or violent we’ll kill you’.

It is essential that this kind of verbal bullying and blackmail is faced down. Yet now the co-chairman of the Conservative Party has associated her party with this mind-twisting intimidation.

Over at Coffee House, James Forsyth has disclosed that the text of Warsi’s speech wasn’t cleared with Number Ten. It will be very interesting to see how much of what has been trailed survives and how much will be, ah, finessed. But whatever she actually says later on, the damage has been done. For this is what she was intending to say. And that tells us everything we need to know about Baroness Warsi.

Instead of using her unique platform to defuse extremism by telling a few home truths to the British Muslim community about its inflated and perverse sense of its own victimisation, Warsi has merely poured fuel onto the flames.

Warsi has now outed herself as at best a stupid mouthpiece of those who are bamboozling Britain into Islamisation, and at worst a supporter of that process. Either way, how David Cameron now deals with her will tell us much about how the Prime Minister will deal in turn with the great civilisational crisis that Britain now faces.

10 thoughts on “Wailing Warsi and her dirty little "Islamophobia" accusations”

  1. Want Islamophobia off the menu Warsi then tell your violent fellow CULT members to stop their WORDWIDE acts of terror and intimidation. Please dont try the isolated extremist, disturbed individual EXCUSES they dont wash anymore.

  2. Wailing Warsi Grievance Theater

    Muslim leaders back Lady Warsi’s comments on Islamophobia

    (You bet they do. And once again, they hide behind da Joooozzz)

    Tory chair’s claim that anti-Islam views are now seen as normal prompts warning of some Muslims feeling ‘apart from society’

    Muslim leaders tonight backed the Conservative party chairwoman, Lady Warsi, after she claimed Islamophobia had “crossed the threshold of middle-class respectability” in Britain and was now seen as normal and uncontroversial.

    The Muslim Council of Britain warned the spread could be “the beginning of something horrendous” in a British society with an estimated 2.4m Muslims.

    At Leicester University tonight Warsi claimed that parts of the press had embraced casual Islamophobia and that other parts of society including employers and even school children would be next.

    Warsi said that people were fed up of “the patronising, superficial way faith is discussed in certain quarters, including the media”, adding that Muslims are too often baldly characterised as either moderate or extreme.

    “It’s not a big leap of imagination to predict where the talk of ‘moderate’ Muslims leads. In the factory, where they’ve just hired a Muslim worker, the boss says to his employees: ‘not to worry, he’s only fairly Muslim’. In the school, the kids say ‘the family next door are Muslim but they’re not too bad’.

    “And in the road, as a woman walks past wearing a burqa, the passersby think: ‘that woman’s either oppressed or is making a political statement’.”

    “You could even say that Islamophobia has now passed the dinner-table-test,” she said, accusing Polly Toynbee, a Guardian columnist and Rod Liddle, a Sunday Times columnist, of invoking Islamophobia.

    Her comments were the most strident intervention yet in religious affairs by a member of the coalition government and there were reports they had not been cleared by Downing Street. David Cameron’s official spokesman said: “She is expressing her view. He agrees that this is an important debate”.

    Gulam Noon, the curry magnate, and Akeela Ahmed, chief executive of the Muslim Youth Helpline, were among other leading British Muslims to supported Warsi.

    “Islam is under attack, there is no doubt,” said Noon. “It is the responsibility of the press, the government and the Muslim community, to deal with it.”

    Ahmed warned that young people increasingly feel Muslims are viewed as being different or apart from society.

    “I have Muslim friends who complain they go out after work and it is ok for their non-Muslim colleagues to make jokes about people with long beards or wearing burqas,” she said. “If you were to replace the word Muslim with black or Jew, you would be jumped on straight away as racist or antisemitic.”

    Ibrahim Mogra, chairman of the mosques and community affairs committee at the Muslim Council of Britain, said Warsi was correct to try and tackle growing anti-Mussim attitudes which he said have been partly been caused by the public becoming “desensitised” to anti-Muslim messages in the media in the wake of Islamist terror attacks in the US and Europe while he said Muslims’ positive contributions to British society attract less coverage.

    “When I reflect on the tragedy of the Holocaust I think about how the Jew was persecuted as a misfit and somebody not to be trusted, as an alien. The drip, drip of hatred and bigotry by the Nazis led to them being described as rats and murdered in a horrible way.

    “This situation is nowhere near that but there is always a beginning for everything. I hope this is not the beginning of something that could be horrendous. We said ‘never again’ and we have to nip this in the bud.”

    Others pointed to the rise of groups such as the English Defence League which have mounted violent protests against Muslims in city centres as evidence of growing bigotry.

    Ghaffar Hussain, a spokesman for Quilliam, a counter-extremism think tank established by former Islamic extremists and part-funded by the government, said :”While Islamist terrorism and Islamist extremism pose a clear danger to our society that needs to be tackled, this cannot justify the demonisation of Muslims as a whole.

    “British Muslims have a right to live their lives without fear of attack and without being discriminated against because of their religion.”

    But Warsi’s comments appear to have riled parts of the Tory right. Lord Tebbit, said she should not have spoken out.

    “I would have told her to go to our Christian churches and listen to what was said about her religion and those who practise it, then to the mosques to hear what is said in some of them about the Christian faith and those who practise it (or about Buddhists, Jews, or even those who have no faith at all).”

    Liddle defended his right to attack Islam as a religion.”There has been a growing racism against Muslims which is appalling and undemocratic, but I think that stems from a failure to distinguish between Islam and Muslims,” he said.

    “Having a go at Islam is fine, but having a go at Muslims, not all of who will agree with all its tenets, is not. I am an Islamaphobe if Islam is homophobic, encourages the subjucation of women and punishes apostasy.”

    Muslim reaction

    Gulam Noon, chairman of Noon products

    “I haven’t personally come across any casual Islamophobia, but it is there, underlying. Islam is under attack, there is no doubt. It is the responsibility of the press, the government and the Muslim community to deal with it. When people talk about Muslims over the dinner table, they say this one is rational, this one is extremist. That happens. People should be more responsible.”

    Akeela Ahmed, chief executive, Muslim Youth Helpline

    “What she says chimes with me. Young people feel that Muslims are viewed as being different or apart from society. That has been an unarticulated undertone before, but since 9/11 and 7/7 the rhetoric has been more focused on Muslims and it’s not about being black or brown it is focused on religion. I have Muslim friends who complain they go out after work and it is OK for their non-Muslim colleagues to make jokes about people with long beards or wearing burqas. If you were to replace the word Muslim with black or Jew, you would be jumped on straight away as racist or antisemitic.

    “I was on the bus on Oxford Street recently and police were arresting a woman wearing a burqa. Another passenger said they do it a lot because they hide things under there [implying a bomb or weapon], and started asking me why us Muslims are like that. They didn’t feel this was socially inappropriate.”

    Lauren Booth, a TV presenter, converted to Islam in October 2010

    “We have a really cheapened debate in this country about good Islam and bad Islam and we also have this idea that Muslims don’t like it here, that they object to Christmas and that sort of thing. In my five years in Muslim communities, I have yet to meet anyone who wants to ban Christmas.”

    “I was at a bus stop in Richmond during the cold snap [when the bus service was limited] when a colonel type carrying a cane and I were talking about how there weren’t enough buses. He said he’d send all the bus drivers to Siberia and that would teach them. Then he said ‘those muslims, they can all leave the country too and go back to where they came from, they don’t like it here anyway’. I was wearing a loose headscarf and I was shocked by what he was saying.

    “On another occasion, I visited an old college friend who I love dearly. It was the first time I had seen her since I had converted. Our children were playing together. She said things like ‘it was a dangerous religion, a lot of them are violent, it’s a bit extremist isn’t it?’ All those words that litter our speech were there. I thought, how do I begin to untangle that knot? She was shocked to hear that Islam was spiritual and that Muslim prayer is close to meditation and we wish well in the world.”

    Ibrahim Mogra, chairman of the mosques and community affairs committee at the Muslim Council of Britain

    “The baroness is right to bring this debate to the forefront. I am hearing of incidents of verbal abuse and attacks on Muslims more frequently than ever before and those that are carrying out the attacks need to be engaged. Protests against building mosques were unheard of 10 years ago and in fact people used to feel quite warm about the prospect. But now the opposition is very loud and vociferous. Take halal meat: we don’t expect non Muslim Britons to eat it, but the EDL portrays us as changing the British way of life. Halal is under attack and scrutiny in a way that kosher food never was. Every aspect of Muslim life is being portrayed as a non-British thing. We do not wish to harm our country. This is where we raise our families and this is where we live and work. The more anti-Muslim bigotry is displayed, the more we fear our young people will take matters into their own hands.”

  3. * Take halal meat: we don’t expect non Muslim Britons to eat it, but the EDL portrays us as changing the British way of life.

    Really? How many schools and institutions have “thought it best” that only halal food be offered, “so everyone can eat”?

    * Harrow councillors quizzed over halal school meals row

    * SCHOOL dinners for thousands of pupils in Britain will contain only halal meat from next month.

    * Parents’ outrage over halal-only school dinners planned for primary schools

    * Parents outraged over halal-only school dinners in Britain

    * Parents angered as every pupil is given halal school meals

    Not expected to eat it – just not given a choice.

  4. Warsi’s speech was a disgrace. She called on the Pope to attempt to make Europeans less Islamophobic and to increase Muslim-Christian dialogue. It apparently escaped her notice that the Pope is in fact a Christian leader, who spoke out on behalf of the Christians in Pakistan and Egypt, and was roundly told to shut up by Muslims. In no way is it his responsibility to ‘combat Islamophobia’ when he isn’t even allowed, in Muslim eyes, to speak out in protection of people of his own faith.

    The sly insinuation that Islam is inherently no more dangerous to life, liberty and human rights than is Judaism is quite wickedly false — and all too telling.” Melanie Phillips H/T ScaraMouche

  5. eye on the world:

    Never mind the “Islamophobia” canard. Accusations of “racism & bigotry” work just as well:

    Yesterday, a member of the British Government made a speech about how Muslims are maligned in the UK, how Islamophobia is rife and how prejudice against Muslims has “passed the dinner-table test” and become socially acceptable in the UK. Is this true? Are Muslims the new Jews of Western Europe. Let’s look closer at how Muslims are treated in the UK.

    The Islamic Population in the UK in the past 10 years has grown by approximately 1 million. For all the talk of acute polarization against Muslims, would not the trend be downward instead of upward? An upward, I should add, which shows growth figures much larger than average.

    In the UK, it is perfectly safe to parody any faith bar one. For example, if i was to place a Bible in an art gallery and allow people to deface it, that would be classed as art. Do the same to the Koran or, worse, burn it, and then you get arrested.

    In the UK, if I was to get caught speeding and gave the excuse I was in a rush to see my other wife (meaning I had two wives), I not only would be in the dock for speeding but also for being a bigamist. But hey, it worked for Mohammed Anwar.

    In the UK, if I object to my working practices (working with dogs/alcohol/women/gays, etc.), I would be sacked. Play the Islamic card – and the offending object will be removed.

    In the UK, if I was to excuse my violent behaviour on the state of Israel, I would be sacked. Yet if I was a Muslim, that excuse would be perfectly acceptable.

    In the UK, if was to build anything without planning permission, that building would not be given retrograde permission and be knocked down. Call it a mosque – and nobody questions you.

    So, in light of all of the above cop-outs afforded to Islam, why do Muslims being out the victim (Islamophobic) card when actually they not only have more freedoms in the West than in most Islamic countries. They actually have more freedoms than everybody else in Non-Islamic lands.

    In Islamic countries, religious bigots get around their murderous bent by playing the religion angle. So in Pakistan you have the blasphemy card where if anybody tries to catch you out you call them a blasphemer, they get arrested (usually killed) and you get away scott free. Wish to oppress non-Muslims? Play the pious Muslim card. Wish to kill somebody? Call them an apostate (which is how terrorists refer to their Islamic victims). Kill a Muslim by mistake (usually in double figures)? Refer to them as martyrs. In every instance of wrong doing Muslims play the righteous card in which to get off scott free.

    However, in Western countries Islam isn’t the dominant faith, and freedom of speech is a given. So what do you do when the press reports bad news (which for the past 10 years has been on a daily basis)? Why, you play the Islamophobia card in which to try and whitewash the ugliness carried out in the name of your faith. The problem for Islam is nobody (bar the usual suspects) believes them anymore. This is why Muslims in the West play the ‘Islamophobia’ card because, unable to whitewash the ugliness carried out in their name by using religion, they use the racist bigot card in which to try and achieve the same result.

  6. Anglophobia or Islamophobia – What’s the Real Problem?

    There is a reason why Islamophobia goes around the dinner table like bad curry, it’s the same reason that Hinduphobia and Sikhphobia don’t. The UK has sizable Hindu and Sikh populations, but they don’t chop off heads, plant bombs, groom little native girls for the sex trade, curse at soldiers or trumpet that they plan to take over the country and implement beheadings for anyone who leaves their mad cult.

    The very word is the tipoff. Islamophobia. There’s a difference between bigotry and fear. Bigotry is directed at people you have power over. Fear is the relationship you have with those who have power over you. No one is afraid of people who eat different foods, listen to odd music or non-violently worship a strange religion. They might be hated, but not feared. On the other hand being afraid of those who think they have an Allah given right to murder your children in cold blood– is not entirely unreasonable.

    More here

Comments are closed.