The BBC covering up for the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt - as usual

The BBC have a page of news stories about the ongoing crisis in Egypt. The link to that page from the BBC news home page says 'Coverage in full'. Hmmmm.

Where is the coverage of the 58 Christian churches, schools, institutions, homes and shops looted and torched, where is the coverage of the news of nuns being paraded through Egyptian streets as 'prisoners of war'?

Why are the BBC censoring the news coming out of Egypt in order to protect the Muslim Brotherhood?

Why do the BBC love the Muslim Brotherhood so much?

Could the Muslim Brotherhood's Sheikh Qaradawi's comments in 2009 be the explanation?

"Throughout history, Allah has imposed upon the Jews people who would punish them for their corruption...The last punishment was carried out by [Adolf] Hitler. By means of all the things he did to them – even though they exaggerated this issue – he managed to put them in their place. This was divine punishment for them...Allah Willing, the next time will be at the hand of the believers. "

Is this the same factor that explains the BBC's love for Hamas? Hamas whose Charter expresses this truth:

“[W]e believe that the battle between us and the Jews is coming … Such a battle is not driven by nationalistic causes or patriotic belonging; it is rather driven by religious incentives. This battle is not going to happen between Arabs and Zionists, or between Jews and Palestinians, or between Jews or anybody else. It is between Muslims and Jews as is clearly stated in the hadith. This battle will occur between the collective body of Muslims and the collective body of Jews i.e. all Muslims and all Jews. (p. 77)”

It's also odd that the BBC, who are so quick to identify real or imaginary restrictions on the rights of women in the west, never reported that when the Muslim Brotherhood came to power in Egypt they rejected a draft UN declaration calling for an end to "all forms of violence against women". The Brotherhood said it "contradict(s) established principles of Islam" and "undermines Islamic ethics". It does so by "granting equal rights to adulterous wives", "full rights to file legal complaints against husbands", "allowing Muslim women to marry non-Muslims" and "cancelling the need for a husband's consent in matters like travel, work or use of contraceptives".


The BBC's inability to criticise Islamofascists worries me hugely, this added to their massive control of the UK's news media is actually dangerous.

Ken Livingstone, do you still think that Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi is "one of the most authoritative Muslim scholars in the world today" who "has done most to combat socially regressive interpretations of Islam on issues like women's rights and relations with other religions"?

I see that Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the man who Ken Livingstone defended and described as "one of the most authoritative Muslim scholars in the world today" who "has done most to combat socially regressive interpretations of Islam on issues like women's rights and relations with other religions"? has been at it again.

This time the delightful Qaradawi opined whilst in Gaza that "This land has never once been a Jewish land. Palestine is for the Arab Islamic nation,"

Factually incorrect but what do you expect from a man who has previously called for the death penalty for apostates


and describes homosexuality as 'a crime' for which people should be punished?

Sheikh al-Qaradawi also said the following in a speech by aired on Al-Jazeera on 30 January 2009.

"Throughout history, Allah has imposed upon the [Jews] people who would punish them for their corruption. The last punishment was carried out by Hitler. By means of all the things he did to them – even though they exaggerated this issue – he managed to put them in their place. This was divine punishment for them. Allah willing, the next time will be at the hand of the believers."

What do you have to say about your 'progressive' Islamist now Ken?

Do you still stand by this defence of Sheikh al-Qaradawi?



Seriously Ken Livingstone sickens me and I rejoice every day that he is no longer Mayor of London.

You can read more about Sheikh al-Qaradawi here. Maybe Ken Livingstone should look up the word of Taqqiya.

The man who Ken Livingstone calls a moderate and has embraced has been at it again

Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the influential preacher based in The Yemen, a man whose sermons are seen by millions of people, has once again has called upon Muslims and Arabs to rise up and destroy Israel.

In his sermon last Friday, Qaradawi called on all Arabs and Muslims to be "fighters and mujahadeen" and exhorted them not to accept the "humiliation and disgrace" of Israel's existence.

Qaradawi said that the Muslims will be victorious and that the Israelis will have to go back to "the lands they came from."

Qaradawi also stated that Jews support Israel and thus it is necessary for Muslims to support the destruction of Israel.

So what, you may ask? Why does it matter what yet another extremist Islamist cleric is saying to fellow Muslims? Well it does matter because  Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi is the Islamist preacher who Ken Livingstone has embraced and called a moderate voice. Someone who believes or even just says that is fit to be London Mayor, let's make sure that Ken Livingstone is given the free time to associate will all the Islamist extremists and supporters of terrorism that he wants.

It was only as recently as March that we had the news of Ken Livingstone reaffirming his stand to invite and embrace, when London mayor in 2004, the Islamist cleric Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, who condoned suicide bombing against Israeli target. Here are some more incendiary remarks made by Ken Livingstone's moderate embracee:

"Throughout history, Allah has imposed upon the (Jews) people who would punish them for their corruption. The last punishment was carried out by Hitler. By means of all the things he did to them – even though they exaggerated this issue – he managed to put them in their place. This was divine punishment for them. Allah willing, the next time will be at the hand of the believers."

In 2005 defending bombings against Israeli civilians, al-Qaradawi said on BBC's Newsnight that:"An Israeli woman is not like women in our societies, because she is a soldier."

I have also read that Ken Livingstone's embracee also considers pregnant women and their unborn babies to be valid targets on the ground that the babies could grow up to join the Israeli Army.

George Galloway MP - words all but fail me

George Galloway's victory in the Bradford West by-election is disturbing for two reasons.

First it shows that shameless appealing to Muslim youth with a radical anti-imperialist stance works. This has grave implications for the London Mayoral election where Ken Livingstone is following a similar path. Ken Livingstone as I have blogged recently has been promising to make make London a beacon for Islam and refusing to disown the vile Yusuf al-Qaradawi, whilst alienating Jewish and gay voters; this is no coincidence, Ken Livingstone has calculated that he has more to gain from attracting new Muslim voters than he has from losing those Jewish and gay voters who do desert him.

The second reason that I find George Galloway's by-election victory disturbing is that is shows that Labour's pro-immigration policies have changed Britain and that balkanisation is here to stay. Thanks to Andrew Neather we know that that massive rise in immigration under the last Labour government was not a mistake but because the Labour government wanted to deliberately open "up the UK to mass migration". Thanks to Andrew Neather's revelations we know that this was at least in part due to a politically motivated attempt by Labour ministers to radically change the country and "rub the Right's nose in diversity".

So we have George Galloway elected MP for Bradford West and the strong possibility of Ken Livingstone being re-elected London Mayor. How's Britain's future looking now?

For more about George Galloway take a look here, where you will find much including his support for the current Syrian regime. For more about Ken Livingstone take a look here.

Ken Livingstone is "far from perfect" but "we can work with him" (updated at 07:30)

Ken Livingstone is "far from perfect" but "we can work with him" these are the words reported by The Standard yesterday as being said by the Green Party's candidate for London Mayor, Jenny Jones.

In fact she has said more than that. In 2011 she ended a piece for her campaign website with this:

'I respect and admire Ken. It has been a privilege to have the opportunity to watch him work. If he returns as Mayor, I hope he will confirm his place in the world as a visionary leader as well as a brilliant player of the game of politics.'

"Not perfect"? "Not perfect"? An interesting choice of words used to describe a man who has embraced a homophobic, supporter of Islamic terrorism - Yusuf al-Qaradawi - and subsequently refused to apologise for this.





"respect and admire"? An odd choice of words to describe a man who stated Jews will not vote Labour because they are rich. "Ken toward the end of the meeting stated that he did not expect the Jewish community to vote Labour as votes for the left are inversely proportional to wealth levels, and suggested that as the Jewish community is rich we simply wouldn't vote for him."

"Not perfect"? An odd choice of words to describe a man who was himself described as "using the words Zionist, Jewish and Israeli interchangeably and did so "in a pejorative manner".

"respect and admire"? An odd choice of words to describe a man who declared that "These rich bastards just don't get it … no one should be allowed to vote in a British election, let alone sit in parliament, unless they pay their full share of tax.
"Cameron's problem is too many of his team have become super rich by exploiting every tax fiddle … [We should] sweep away tax scams and everybody should pay tax at the same rate on earnings and other income."
But himself avoided tax.

"Not perfect"? An odd choice of words to describe a man who declared "Hang a banker a week until the others improve." and that the Conservative party had been "riddled" with gay people.

"Not perfect"? An odd choice of words to describe someone who talks tough on the evils of the press but Andrew Gilligan reports thus:

'Tracey: Talking about boot-licking News International, do you know there have been 26 bylined articles in NI newspapers since the hacking scandal broke in July 2009? The byline, Mr Mayor, is Ken Livingstone.'

"respect and admire"? An odd choice of words to describe an unapologetic socialist who praises Hugo Chavez:


"Not perfect"? An odd choice of words to describe someone who campaigned against the official Labour candidate in Tower Hamlets chosing to support Lutfur Rahman instead.

"respect and admire"? An odd choice of words to describe someone who was paid money to front a programme on the now banned from the UK Press TV :

'Mr Livingstone first appeared on Press TV in March 2009, standing in for former Respect MP George Galloway. Previous presenters on the channel have been paid about £500 per show. Books reviewed on his Epilogue programme include “Zionist Israel And Apartheid South Africa,” “The Invention Of The Jewish People,” and “Israel And The Clash Of Civilizations: Iraq, Iran And The Plan To Remake The Middle East.”'

Ken Livingstone hopes to benefit from the large Muslim vote in London and is courting it with his choice of allies and words. Let's hope that decent people of London of whatever religion, or none, stand up for the rights of the followers of religions other than Islam as well as homosexuals, etc. In fact for all those people the man Ken Livingstone called moderate wishes harm to.

Ken Livingstone is an unredeemed socialist, a former associate of some of the murderers in the IRA, as well as a recent inviter and defender of an Islamist extremist to speak in London. Let's make sure Ken Livingstone never gets his hands on any of the levers of power by being re-elected to bring more shame on this great city.

Leading members of the last Labour government regularly confused reducing 'debt' with reducing 'the deficit' but Owen Jones seems to be even more economically illiiterate

Owen Jones, in his own words, is '...a lefty currently based in Hackney; and I grew up in Sheffield, Falkirk, and above all Stockport (get in touch if you want a list of Stocky-related facts…) I’m a former flunky for unions and Labour MPs, and author of ‘Chavs: The Demonization of the Working Class’, which was published by Verso in 2011.

My ramblings have been published in the Guardian, the Independent, the New Statesman, The Sunday Mirror, Le Monde Diplomatique, Frankfurter Allgemeine, the Morning Star, the New Humanist, Liberal Conspiracy, LabourList, Left Futures, and Open Democracy. I’ve also been inflicted on the public through BBC Newsnight, BBC, Breakfast News, ITV Day Break, Sky News, BBC News, The Big Questions, Channel 4′s 10 O’Clock and various radio stations.'

Here's part of one of his latest appearances on the BBC's Daily Politics this week where he shows either a complete misunderstanding of the difference between wealth and earnings or the typical Labour spokesman's ability to be economical with facts... 'it depends actually!'

Michael Portillo looks even more amused by the interviewee than normally.

So far no mention of this latest TV appearance at Owen Jones's blog, I'm sure it's only a matter of time though!


Owen Jones has form in making stupid or misleading remarks, here's just two.


Owen Jones says he is pro-secularism, but then drifts into a condemnation of anti-Muslim sentiments, why so? I wonder if Owen Jones would agree with Ken Livingstone's support for Yusuf al-Qaradawi and other Labour figures support for Raed Salah (as I blogged yesterday), or if he would stand up for freedom?

I also note that Owen Jones has picked up a lazy rhetorical trick from Barack Obama, or is it a case of 'great minds think alike/fools seldom differ'?



Owen Jones with a Tesco 'slave-labour' claim that even John Prescott looks bemused by, although to be fair that is his normal expression.


Owen Jones a fine example of the sort of person that supports and indeed leads Labour policy.


Thanks to The Commentator via Guido Fawkes for the first video spot.

What is about it about some Labour politicians and Israel?

Just this week we have had the news of Ken Livingstone reaffirming his stand to invite and embrace, when London mayor in 2004, the Islamist cleric Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, who condoned suicide bombing against Israeli target. Since then Yusuf Al-Qaradawi has said the following:

"Throughout history, Allah has imposed upon the (Jews) people who would punish them for their corruption. The last punishment was carried out by Hitler. By means of all the things he did to them – even though they exaggerated this issue – he managed to put them in their place. This was divine punishment for them. Allah willing, the next time will be at the hand of the believers."

The man Ken Livingstone embraced and still refuses to condemn has also condoned Palestinian attacks on Israelis. In 2005 defending bombings against Israeli civilians, al-Qaradawi said on BBC's Newsnight that:

"An Israeli woman is not like women in our societies, because she is a soldier."
"I consider this type of martyrdom operation as an evidence of God's justice."
"Allah Almighty is just; through his infinite wisdom he has given the weak a weapon the strong do not have and that is their ability to turn their bodies into bombs as Palestinians do".

I have also read that Ken Livingstone's embracee also considers pregnant women and their unborn babies to be valid targets on the ground that the babies could grow up to join the Israeli Army.

So that's Ken Livingstone, just an isolated senior member of the Labour party? Well no, there's also Paul Flynn who in December accused the British Ambassador to Israel of having "divided loyalties" because he is Jewish. Would Paul Flynn accuse a British Ambassador to a Muslim country of having "divided loyalties" because he is a Muslim?

But that's just two? Unfortunately not. Take a read of this piece from Harry's Place (posted last October) which lists the various Labour MPs who were scheduled to appear alongside Raed Salah. Who is Raed Salah I hear you ask?

' * He has claimed that Jews baked “the blood of children” into their “holy bread” – the ancient and vicious blood libel.
* He has claimed that 4,000 Jews skipped work at the World Trade Centre on 9/11 and suggested that Israel carried out the 9/11 attacks.
* He has cited so-called Franklin Prophecy: a Nazi forgery in which Benjamin Franklin supposedly warns America about Jews
* He attended the launch of the Mavi Marmara and incited violence on board. At the launch ceremony and on board Mavi Marmara passengers chanted a notorious extremist slogan, commemorating a massacre of Arabian Jews: “Khaybar! Khaybar! Oh Jews! The army of Mohammed will return!”.
* He chuckled at the memory of taunting a Jewish teacher with a Swastika in a friendly chat with fellow extremist Azzam “Kaboom” Tamimi on Al-Hiwar TV, a TV channel based in London that serves the Muslim Brotherhood .
* He wrote an antisemitic poem which used various theological references to Jews, including: “The Creator meant for you to be monkeys and losers … you are the bacteria of all times”, which clearly refer to Jews generally.
* He has admitted funding Hamas, for which he served two years in prison. Hamas leaders have hailed him and rallied to his cause. Recently the terrorist group named a football pitch after him.
* He has been named as a trustee of the Union of Good, a Hamas funding organisation, and has worked closely with Interpal, the British charity that serves Hamas.
* His hosts in the UK have included some of the country’s worst extremists, such as Daud Abdullah and Ismail Patel, and a fellow speaker on his ill-fated tour was to be Ahmad Nofal of the Jordanian Muslim Brotherhood. Nofal too has been banned from the UK.
* He claims that homosexuality is a “great crime” which signals “the start of the collapse of every society”.'

Which Labour MPs were due to appear alongside Raed Salah before the event was cancelled due to his arrest?
Jeremy Corbyn, Yasmin Qureshi and Richard Burden, along with Martin Linton who whilst no longer an MP does run Labour Friends of Palestine.

What is odd is that the Labour leader, Ed Miliband, a man who on occasions appears in the British Jewish press expressing his support for Jews in Britain and for Israel's right to exist in peace, has not uttered a word of reproach to these Labour politicians. Instead Ed Miliband, thought it appropriate to honour two of them and some others at the Labour party conference:

"I want to pay tribute to Simon Danczuk, to Andy Slaughter, and to Richard Burden, first of all, as well as Martin Linton, who is here, for the work they do."

So Ed Miliband are you going to take a stand now against these senior members of the Labour party that you allegedly lead? Not sure? Here's your party's candidate for London Mayor again...

So Ed Miliband is that a sentiment that you can go along with? So Ed Miliband is that the sentiment of someone you are happy to be Labour's candidate for London Mayor?

As for the Jewish Chronicle, the Jewish Weekly News and the rest of the Jewish press in Britain; the next time Ed Miliband tells you of his support for the Jewish community, ask him about how he squares that with his support for Ken Livingstone, Paul Flynn, Jeremy Corbyn, Yasmin Qureshi, Richard Burden, and Martin Linton.

Ken Livingstone makes friends easily.. but the BBC will do their best to protect him

The Jewish Chronicle does not seem like it is having a love affair with Ken Livingstone. On 15 March it reported on 'a secret meeting earlier this month with Jewish Labour supporters' In this meeting it is reported that:

'Mr Livingstone refusing to give any ground on issues that have caused deep concern within the Jewish community. The former mayor, who is neck and neck in the polls with incumbent Boris Johnson, stood his ground on his decision as mayor in 2004 to embrace the Islamist cleric Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, who has condoned suicide bombing against Israeli target'

also that:

 'Challenged on his decision to take money from the Iranian state broadcaster Press TV, Mr Livingstone said it was important for him to get his views across to the Iranian people. He said his role at Press TV was equivalent to the one he once held as a columnist at the Sun. '

Today the JC reports that Ken has been at it again:

'Prominent Labour-supporting Jewish Londoners have written a devastating letter to Ed Miliband expressing their profound concerns about mayoral candidate Ken Livingstone.

The letter, a copy of which has been seen by the Jewish Chronicle, was written in response to a meeting held on March 1st at which Mr Livingstone stood by his decision to embrace radical Islamic cleric Yusuf al-Qaradawi and take money from the Iranian state broadcaster Press TV.

Most damaging for Mr Livingstone is the revelation that he believes Jews will not vote Labour because they are rich. The letter states: "Ken toward the end of the meeting stated that he did not expect the Jewish community to vote Labour as votes for the left are inversely proportional to wealth levels, and suggested that as the Jewish community is rich we simply wouldn't vote for him."

The letter explains to Mr Miliband that Jewish Labour supporters were finding it "harder and harder to consider voting for Ken".

At the heart of the critique is the fear that Mr Livingstone's language when discussing the Jewish community, Israel and Zionism is close to classic antisemitism.

"Ken determines Jews as a religious group but does not accept Jews as an ethnicity and a people and did not respond on this other than to say that as an atheist he found this hard to comprehend. In the same way that Black, Irish, Women and LGBT groups are afforded the right to determine their own identity, many of us feel that Ken doesn't afford Jews that right."

The letter reveals that Mr Livingstone used the words Zionist, Jewish and Israeli interchangeably and did so "in a perjorative manner".

The Jewish Labour figures behind the letter, which include Liberal rabbi Danny Rich and former Limmud chair Andrew Gilbert, express concern that Mr Livingstone has aligned himself with the politics of radical Islam. "The real and more pressing issue is that of the strong perception that Ken is seeking to align himself with the politics of the Muslim Brotherhood and the Iranian regime, whilst at the same time turning a blind eye to Islamist antisemitism , mysogynism (sic) and homophobia."

The authors of the letter added: "We are concerned that this is more about infantile, far-left politics, being seen to take a stance against whatever the anti-establishment or anti-imperialism cause of the moment is."

The letter was written ahead of a meeting between the Jewish communal leadership and Ed Miliband later this month, when the issue of Mr Livingstone will be top of the agenda. '

Seven days until nominations for London Mayor close, it's not too late for Ed  Miliband to show some decisive leadership and choose someone else to represent the Labour party.


So what do you have to say Ed Milband? Anything at all?


Meanwhile I searched the BBC website in vain for any mention of this story. Not a mention although they do manage to mention Ken Livingstone's somewhat shaky defence of his alleged tax avoidance:

'"The difference between Boris and Ken is that Boris pays his taxes - and Ken doesn't."

Mr Livingstone had previously denied claims he has not paid tax on his income, saying he was the victim of a "smear campaign". '

Anybody might be forgiven for thinking that the BBC was in some way trying to protect Ken Livingstone from criticism during the London mayoral election campaign.

Thinking of voting for Ken Livingstone as London Mayor? Are you a woman, a homosexual or Jewish (or any combination)?

Still thinking of voting for Ken Livingstone?

Boris Johnson's a fool

'Boris Johnson's a fool' - so I hear many lefties say. Well I say, better a fool than a vile excuse for a human like Ken Livingstone...

On Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi

Fine words Ken but you know what taqqiya and doublespeak are, don't you?
In case you really don't, here's Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi in his own words


On Christmas


Contrast this with how Britain, Europe and the rest of the Western Christian world is told to accommodate the religion of Islam

On justifying suicide bombs (from 2:15)


On the Jews and Hitler and his hope for the future


What do you have to say about those comments by the man you have invited to London and described as representing 'a more progressive strand of Islam than the Wahhabi sect'? Actually Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi may well be more moderate than the Wahhabi Islamists but that is a question of degree of extermism.

Here's Peter Tatchell on Ken Livingstone and his views of Islamists


So when leftists attack Boris Johnson for being a fool, remember who Ken Livingstone has allied himself with and vote accordingly next year. Ken Livingstone has made his choices and hopes to benefit from the large Muslim vote in London as a result. Let's hope that decent people of London of whatever religion, or none, stand up for the rights of the followers of religions other than Islam as well as homosexuals, etc. In fact for all those people the man Ken Livingstone called moderate wishes harm to.

Ken Livingstone is an unredeemed socialist, a former associate of some of the murderers in the IRA, as well as a recent inviter and defender of an Islamist extremist to speak in London. Let's make sure Ken Livingstone never gets his hands on any of the levers of power by being re-elected to bring more shame on this great city.


As an aside it was the same Al-Qaradawi who led the prayer in Egypt's Tahrir Square following the revolution. The same Al Qaradawi who the BBC represent as being a moderate Muslim leader and who will figure somehow in the future leadership of Egypt; a man who supports suicide bombing of Israel.

What money can buy you

The JC has a special report by Martin Bright that reveals that:

'The country’s most prestigious university for the study of the Middle East provided one-to-one English tuition to Mutassim Gaddafi, the son of the Libyan dictator, who acts as his national security adviser. It also hosts the controversial Egyptian cleric Yusuf al-Qaradawi on the editorial board for its Journal of Islamic Studies.

The information from London University’s School of Oriental and African Studies is contained in an answer to a Freedom of Information request from Harlow MP Robert Halfon, and Student Rights, an organisation that tackles extremism on campus.

The college confirmed that Mr Gaddafi received private tuition at SOAS for a four-week period in 2006, for which the college received £5,500. The SOAS response also confirms that a distance-learning deal was struck with Al-Fateh University in Libya, just months before the Arab Spring uprisings, in which SOAS received £148,000 for course materials and teaching.

A report from Student Rights, based on the disclosures, shows that SOAS also received donations of £755,000 from the Saudi royal family over the past four years. That money was used to fund the college’s Islamic Studies Centre, and a Journal of Islamic Studies. The editorial board of the journal includes Egyptian cleric Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who has supported suicide bombings and acts as the spiritual inspiration for the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas. Former London Mayor Ken Livingstone caused outrage when he invited Sheikh al-Qaradawi to London in 2004. He has since been refused entry and is also banned from the United States and Israel. In February he returned to Egypt where he led Friday prayers on Tahrir Square.'

So how do the university defend their association with a supporter of suicide bombings, the supporter of a terrorist organisation (Hamas) and a man with rather less than tolerant attitudes towards homosexuals? For more about Yusuf al-Qaradawi take a read here and here.

'The university has issued a lengthy response to the Student Rights report. On the issue of Sheikh Al-Qaradawi’s membership of the editorial board of a journal hosted by SOAS, it said: “Professor Yusuf al-Qaradawi and some other editorial advisers from the Middle East only advise on the Arabic section of the Journal, and not on the English section. His academic peers and Muslim scholars in the UK and across the globe consider him to be one of the most outstanding scholars of the Quran in the Arabic and Islamic world. No political or other consideration was involved in asking him to be on the board.”

It added that comments attributed to Yusuf al-Qaradawi in the Student Rights report, endorsing suicide bombings and the killing of pregnant women were “not compatible with SOAS’s values, or our views on hate speech, and would not be allowed on campus”.'

Does that seem adequate to you? Are SOAS really sayoing that so long as Yusuf al-Qaradawi doesn't make his vile comments on their campus then they don't care what he says elsewhere? Does that mean that they would invite a KKK representative to sit on a board at SOAS so long as he didn't speak out against blacks on campus?

I won't comment on the part of the article about Saudi money because it's all too predictable as Saudi money seems to buy support, or at least lack of opposition from SOAS. Value for £200,000+ a year and some gold cufflinks.

Once again there is the matter of who is a 'moderate' in Islam:

'The lion’s share of the funding went to the Islamic Studies Centre at SOAS, which is headed by Professor Mohammed Abdel Haleem, who also edits the Journal of Islamic Studies. Professor Haleem is widely regarded as a moderate and received an OBE in the Queen’s Birthday Honours in 2008.

However, he is also a trustee of the Saudi-funded King Fahad Academy in East London, which was discovered to have used textbooks describing Christians as “pigs” and Jews as “apes”.

Fellow trustees include the Saudi ambassador, Prince Mohammed al-Saud, and several other members of the Saudi diplomatic mission. In 2007, the school’s principal, Dr Sumaya Alyusuf admitted on the BBC’s Newsnight programme that the textbooks were used, but said the passages concerned had been misinterprested. At the time, Jewish MP Louise Ellman said the school was part of a concerted initiative by the Saudi government to instill extremism in the UK Muslim population.'

I am not sure how those passages could be 'misinterpreted', perhaps someone could explain to this 'ape'!

The article concludes thus:

'The revelations will be deeply embarrassing to SOAS, which has worked hard to allay its image as a centre of Islamist activism.

SOAS fiercely denied that the Saudi donations compromised academic freedom or bought influence. Its spokesman insisted: “SOAS goes to great lengths to ensure that academic and editorial decisions are made with integrity. We do not permit donors or funders to influence academic work (research content or teaching) or the selection of academic staff, scholarships or any other students.”'

I like that wording 'SOAS, which has worked hard to allay its image as a centre of Islamist activism.'. Not 'SOAS, which has worked hard to not be a centre of Islamist activism' just allaying the image not the fact. As for the rest, judge for yourselves.

All thanks to multiculturalism

Graeme Archer's piece in Saturday's Telegraph struck a chord with me and not just because I too am a Finkler and am reading Howard Jacobson's latest novel 'The Finkler Question'. If you read only one broadsheet article this weekend read Gareme Archer's, it sums so much of what Labour's obsession with multiculturalism as a means of 'rubbing the right's nose in diversity' has resulted in.

Here's an extract to give you a flavour:

'A few weeks ago, I crossed the road outside Sainsbury's in Whitechapel. Glued to the lamp-post was a rainbow poster, with a cross through it, decorated with the words "Gay Free Zone" and "Fear Allah". I felt sick. And, yes, resigned. Unconsciously, I mimicked the behaviour of Jacobson's Jewish Londoners: I tried not to think about the implication of what I had seen.

Such stickers soon appeared all over. Not to worry! We were reassured by civic leaders that it was wrong to link these manifestations of hatred with the increasing Islamisation of the borough. Didn't we realise, warned our betters, that by reacting, we might be allowing ourselves to be duped? They could easily be the work of a far-Right group, trying to stir up division on streets that would otherwise hum with quiet multicultural harmony.

They could even, said a "community leader", be the work of that bogeyman de nos jours, the English Defence League. So important was it not to draw the obvious inference (that untackled radical Islam makes the East End an increasingly hostile environment for gay people) that when a small counter-demonstration was proposed, its organisers were smeared as a front for – you guessed it – the EDL. Don't look at the posters; move along, please.

In Tuesday's paper, we read of the trial of five Muslim men, who admitted "grievous bodily harm with intent": that is, they attacked and maimed Gary Smith, a religious education teacher from an East End school. They were recorded on the way, saying: "This is the dog we want to hit, to strike, to kill." Mr Smith, in their opinion, had been insufficiently pro-Islam. But what's the scarred face of one schoolteacher when set against the need to keep the peace?

There's more, a lot more. A young Asian chemist has received death threats for refusing to wear a veil. You know, the veil that some people tell us is a sign of female empowerment. A Muslim councillor was given similar treatment, for dressing in too Western a fashion.

So I'll tell you what I never want to hear again. I never want to listen to a politician, living somewhere far, far removed from Bethnal Green, uttering a sentence like: "On the one hand, the Islamic extremists… On the other, the equally offensive English Defence League", as though the two have independent but morally equivalent aetiologies. I don't expect philosophical grandeur from any government. But I do expect its representatives to understand the difference between cause and effect.

The cause of all this is not just Labour's immigration policy, or the Human Rights Act, or the fawning of Ken Livingstone over Yusuf al-Qaradawi (a preacher who'd like to put me, and other homosexuals, to death). First, Labour enacted legislation that taught minority groups that their grievances had legal recourse (rather than suggesting that in a good society, we all need to be able to get on). This has spiralled into today's culture of fear – you think I'm not scared to write all this down? And when – as in Tower Hamlets – minorities come into conflict, the response of the rulers is entirely predictable: the group with the most votes wins.'

What's happening in London's East End is just starting to happen in Golders Green and other places in London will not be too far behind. Thanks to multiculturalism, militant Islam is on the rise in London and elsewhere in Great Britain and we will probably not be able to stop it. Thanks Tony, thanks Jack, thanks Labour.

It's the return of 'Israel Apartheid Week'

The David Horowitz Freedom Center's chilling video about the campaign in US college campuses and elsewhere to destroy Israel. I defy any Jew to watch this video and feel scared. I defy any right thinking non-Jew to do the same.

Please note the quotation from the man Ken Livingstone invited to London and defended by saying that he represented 'a more progressive strand of Islam than the Wahhabi sect'. Does this sound 'progressive'? Does this sound like the words of a man that the mayor of a multicultural city like London should welcome?

"Throughout history, Allah has imposed upon the [Jews] people who would punish them for their corruption. The last punishment was carried out by Hitler. By means of all the things he did to them – even though they exaggerated this issue – he managed to put them in their place. This was divine punishment for them. Allah willing, the next time will be at the hand of the believers."

Those words were part of a speech by Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi aired on Al-Jazeera on 30 January 2009. What do you have to say about your 'progressive' Islamist now Ken?



Thanks to Theo Spark and American Power for the spot.

Egypt's 'secular' revolution

The western media's reporting of Egypt's recent uprising kept minimisingthe role of the Muslim Brotherhood in particular and militant Islam in general. So it was with no great surprise that I read in Al Arabiya that:

'For the first time since he was banned from leading weekly friday prayers in Egypt 30 years ago, prominent Muslim scholar Yusuf al-Qaradawi will lead thousands in the weekly prayers from Cairo’s Tahrir Square on Friday.

Sources told Al Arabiya that a military force will accompany the head of the International Union of Muslim Scholars from his home to Tahrir Square, provide security for the prayers and accompany him back to his residence.

Al-Qaradawi last delivered a Friday prayer sermon in Egypt in 1981 after the assassination of former President Anwar el-Sadat.'

Al-Qaradawi, now what do we know of him? Here he is praising Hitler's anti-Semitism...


Al-Qaradawi's views on beating women and killing homosexuals are well known, except it seems to those at the BBC and to Ken Livingstone who refer to him as a moderate. Here's something about Al-Qaradawi that you may have missed; last year Harry's Place reported that, per The Elder of Zion,

'The 8th Annual Doha Conference on Interfaith Dialogue is to start tomorrow, but prominent Islamic Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi is boycotting the conference, according to Palestine Today.
The reason? Because there will be Jews there!
He participated in the first, second and third conferences because they were centered on Muslim/Christian dialogue. But he refuses to participate when Jews attend, quoting the Koran 29:46 ["The Spider"], “Do not argue with People of the Book….” [the verse goes on to make an exception of certain types of arguments, and then an exception to the exception, against those Jews who "oppress," if I am parsing the verse correctly.]
Qaradawi said, “So why should we dialogue with the Jews, who… shed blood, and violated the sanctities, and burned farms, and destroyed homes… .. to sit with them on a single platform?”
The article does not say “Zionist Jews” but merely “Jews.” He has met with the Neturei Karta in the past, though.
The rest of the Koranic verse makes clear that Islamic “dialogue” with other “divine” religions is limited to telling them about Islam. Which makes it more like a monologue.”'

 So how have the BBC reacted to the news that Yusuf al-Qaradawi will lead thousands in the weekly prayers from Cairo’s Tahrir Square on Friday, the square that so many BBC journalists have reported from over previous weeks? The answer is of course, by ignoring it.

For more about the delightful Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi take a read of some previous articles of mine.

"Controversial" Muslim cleric?

Do read to the end of this piece...


The BBC are reporting that "The controversial Muslim cleric Yusuf al-Qaradawi has been refused a visa to visit Britain. The Home Office said the UK would not tolerate the presence of those who seek to justify acts of terrorist violence."

Finally; took the Labour government long enough didn't it...


The report has the usual suspects sounding off:

"Reacting to the decision, the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) called it deplorable, and said the government had caved in to unreasonable demands spearheaded by the leader of the Conservative Party, David Cameron.

Inayat Bunglawala of the MCB said the decision had "worrying implications for freedom of speech". "Whatever one may think of some of Qaradawi's views, the way forward is surely to allow them to be aired and then, if appropriate, to challenge them openly."

"This decision will send the wrong message to Muslims everywhere about the state of British society and culture", said Muhammad Abdul Bari, secretary-general of the Muslim Council. He said Dr Al-Qaradawi was respected as a scholar throughout the Islamic world."

The campaigning group, the British Muslim Initiative described the ban as "disgusting and outrageous" and said it was "an unwarranted insult to British Muslims and all Muslims around the world"."



The Independent, friend of the Muslims and enemy of Israel, has a blog that includes this section "like it or not, Qaradawi isn't really seen to be all that radical by many and has, until now, been allowed into the country a number of times before. Although Qaradawi is very much a conservative jurist, he is also seen to be one of the more progressive conservatives who has shown reformist tendencies and tried to marry traditionalist Islamic ideals with the modern world. He has in the past supported suicide bombings in Israel but has equally been vocal in condemning other terrorist atrocities such as 9/11 and the Madrid bombings."

Let's examine that more closely... Qaradawi is apparently a conservative but a progressive conservative with reformist tendencies - a few examples would be appreciated.

But the piece de resistance is the last sentence "He has in the past supported suicide bombings in Israel but has equally been vocal in condemning other terrorist atrocities such as 9/11 and the Madrid bombings."
I think the point being made here is that as he only supports suicide bombings in Israel, not "the occupied territories" but Israel, then that is OK because Israel and Israelis don't really matter.

PMQs 30 Jan 2008

I await Hansard's "definitive" version of what was said in Prime Ministers Questions today, but I could have sworn that Michael Martin (the incredibly pro-Labour Speaker of the House) said something along the lines of "let the Prime Minister answer in his own way". This was when Gordon Brown was singularly failing to answer a straightforward question from David Cameron as to whether Gordon Brown will be allowing Yusuf al-Qaradawi into Britain. Gordon Brown's first reply was "an announcement will be made soon.. we do not expel people from this country other than through proper judicial processes...". David Cameron came back pointing out that "This is not about expelling someone, this guy wants to come to our country... thinks that gay people should be executed and encourages people to turn their bodies into bombs... Does the Prime Minister think that Yusuf al-Qaradawi should be allowed in or not? A simple one, yes or no" Once again Gordon Brown "He is not in our country, the issue is (pause to look at briefing notes), the issue is, the issue is should he (jaw sag and some anguished chewing). Now Speaker Martin interrupts the laughter from the opposition benches at Gordon Brown's inability to answer (or possibly understand) a simple question. "Allow the Prime Minister to answer the question... Order, in his way" Cue laughter from the opposition benches and even a smile from Speaker Martin. When your tame Speaker is laughing at your inability to answer a simple question, even Gordon Brown must realise that he is a laughing stock.

Even the front bench toadies have stopped looking at Gordon Brown with feigned admiration. Harriet Harman tries not to look at him and the sixth former on the other side of him, I think, just looks embarrassed.


The other interesting question came from Vincent Cable. Vincent Cable answered a straightforward question about the economy, negative equity and a return to boom and bust. Gordon Brown's answer contained some strange statistics that just did not ring true; I believe that Gordon Brown may have been comparing (as he so often does) apples and oranges.
"Mortgage repossessions are a fifth of what they were over the last few years over the 1990s" - bad English but his choice of periods is of course comparing a period of artificially credit enhanced boom with that of a period coming out of recession.
"Mortgage rates have averaged 5% when they averaged 11% before 1997" Over what period did interest rates average 11% before 1997? What were interest rates in 1995-1997 for example?
"Avoided any quarter of recession over the last 10 years" I wonder how long he will be able to boast of this?


I also heard Gordon Brown resort to his favourite soundbite "Opportunity for all, not just for some", only the once this week.

Gordon Brown did as he likes to do resort to accusing David Cameron of just using rehearsed lines; the words - pot, kettle and black come to mind.



I have just realised that rather like an England batsman trying to pick Shane Warne's "wrong-un", I can now spot when Gordon Brown is lying - it's quite easy - his mouth is open.

Yusuf al-Qaradawi

I see that Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi will be "gracing" our shores again soon. It seems that Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi is in need of medical treatment and would rather be treated in a hospital in a decadent Western country than in a hospital in Riyadh or Cairo or Islamabad. I wonder if we can arrange for him to be treated purely by Jews, homosexuals and other infidels, or even better why don't we tell him to get his treatment in France where he has been receiving treatment previously.

BBC biased in favour of Israel!?

Whilst researching for a piece on Ken Livingstone and Yusuf al-Qaradawi, I came across this article on "Sourcewatch" about "Labour Friends of Israel". In it Labour Friends of Israel (LFI) is described as "a Westminster based lobby group working within the British Labour Party to promote the State of Israel". There is much on the funding of the Labour party by LFI members and trips to Israel, the tone is very censorious but no more than I would expect from Sourcewatch. However the sentence that caught my eye was in the "Taming the Media" section. It reads "LFI has used its influence to intimidate British media into adopting an openly pro-Israel position. A recent study by the Glasgow University Media Group revealed the systematic bias in BBC and ITV’s coverage of the Israel-Palestine conflict which often reproduces the official Israeli narrative uncritically, whereas very little time or detail is devoted to the Palestinian side." Yes Glasgow University's Media Group thinks that the BBC is biased in favour of Israel! I think that says a lot about the politics of the Glasgow University Media Group. The Sourcewatch article continues "Some, who dared to criticize the Israeli position have faced bans, as Faisal Bodi, of BBC Radio 4’s The World Tonight did. According to Bodi, LFI members play a "crucial propaganda role, carrying the flag for Israel in parliament, and lobbying editors to toe the Israeli line". Tim Llewellyn, a Veteran Middle East correspondent for the BBC, has gone to the extent of calling BBC’s reporting on the Israel-Palestine conflict downright “dishonest”. He has attributed it to the “unremitting and productive” efforts by “Israel's many influential and well organised friends". However, this still did not preclude LFI’s Andrew Dismore from expressing “concern” about the BBC for being “anti-Israeli and biased towards the Palestinians." This charge could not have been more frivolous given that BBC has referred to Jerusalem as Israel’s ‘capital’ – a view otherwise shared outside of Israel by two out of the world’s nearly two hundred countries."

Maybe a trip to Biased BBC or a look at parts of USS Neverdock, this Stephen Pollard article, thisHonest Reporting article (and many others) or maybe this piece from Martin Walker in the Times.

Ken Livingstone and Yusuf al-Qaradawi

From The Guardian's Comment is Free comes an article by Martin Bright, political editor of the New Statesman. He writes about the Labour government's "love affair with radical Islam". Much of the article is worthy of reading, so do so BUT the line that caught my idea was this one "Just this month, the British government paid for Yusuf al-Qaradawi to attend a conference in Turkey to discuss the future of European Islam"

That's the UK government paying for Yusuf al-Qaradawi (the well known part of the Muslim Brotherhood leadership) to travel to Turkey.

Here are some of Yusuf al-Qaradawi's views, taken from Wikipedia:

"Qaradawi on homosexuality
On June 5 2006, on the Al Jazeera "Sharia and Life" programme he regularly features on, al-Qaradawi reiterated orthodox views on homosexuality. When asked about the punishment for people who "practise liwaat (sodomy) or sihaaq (lesbian activity)", al-Qaradawi replied: "The same punishment as any sexual pervert - the same as the fornicator." (MEMRI translation)"

"Qaradawi urged the Taliban to reconsider its decision to tear down the Buddha statues in Afghanistan in 2001. He was quickly criticized for supporting "idol worship". Upon meeting with leaders from the Taliban, Qaradawi reversed his position and praised the act of the destruction of the statues."

"Suicide bombings
Qaradawi strongly supports Palestinian attacks on Israeli targets, including against civilians, believing they are legitimate form of resistance. Qaradawi claims that hundreds of other Islamic scholars are of the same opinion.

Defending terrorist bombing against off duty soldiers Qaradawi told BBC Newsnight that:

"An Israeli woman is not like women in our societies, because she is a soldier."
"I consider this type of martyrdom operation as an evidence of God's justice."
"Allah Almighty is just; through his infinite wisdom he has given the weak a weapon the strong do not have and that is their ability to turn their bodies into bombs as Palestinians do".
At the press conference held by the organizations sponsoring Qaradawi's visit to London, Qaradawi reiterated his view that "martyrdom operations" are a justified from of "resistance" to Israeli occupation. In the past, Qaradawi has justified such terrorist actions on the basis that all Israel civilians are potential soldiers since Israel is a "militarized society.""



In case you had forgotten, Yusuf al-Qaradawi is the Islamic Cleric that Ken Livingstone believes is "a progressive figure". You can read about Ken Livingstone and Yusuf al-Qaradawi here. You can read Ken Livingstone's justification for inviting al-Qaradawi here, noticeable by its absence is any mention of al-Qaradawi's support for terrorist attacks on Israel - you may want to look at my piece on the Clash of Civilisations conference where Ken said "I would not have a created Israel... it was a travesty..", at this point. You may also want to take a look at Harry's Place for thsi article from 2005 exposing Yusuf al-Qaradawi's views on homosexuality


"Having said this, I should stress here that Muslim jurists have held differing opinions concerning the punishment for this abominable practice. Should it be the same as the punishment for fornication, or should both the active and passive participants be put to death? While such punishments may seem cruel, they have been suggested to maintain the purity of the Islamic society and to keep it clean of perverted elements...As to the issue of how the homosexual person is judged in an Islamic State, the Companions of Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessing be upon him differed among themselves on this issue, and this led to different views maintained by Muslim Jurists. For example, in the Hanafi school of thought, the homosexual is punished through harsh beating, and if he/she repeats the act, death penalty is to be applied. As for the Shafi`i school of thought, the homosexual receives the same punishment of adultery (if he/she is married) or fornication (if not married). This means, that if the homosexual is married, he/she is stoned to death, while if single, he/she is whipped 100 times. Hence, the Shafi`i compares the punishment applied in the case of homosexuality with that of adultery and fornication, while the Hanafi differentiates between the two acts because in homosexuality, the anus (a place of impurity) may also be involved while in adultery (and fornication), the penis/vagina (which are reproductive parts) are involved. Some scholars hold the opinion that the homosexual should be thrown from a high building as a punishment for his crime, but other scholars maintain that he should be imprisoned until death."

Maybe someone should tackle Ken Livingstone about these views of his "progressive figure". If you do then I suggest that you not be Jewish or work for the Evening Standard or a Rupert Murdoch owned media outlet or have been to public school or drive a car or indeed do or be anything that in our Mayor's view might disqualify you from being able to question anything that he knows is the correct thing to do.

Do I need a whole new blog just to cover Ken Livingstone?

The Daily Telegraph today reports that Ken Livingstone wants to turn Parliament Square into a paved pedestrian piazza and major tourist attraction in time for the 2012 Olympics. Part of the plan will involve moving the eight "listed" statues in the square, including that of Winston Churchill. The other statues are of other great statesman " Abraham Lincoln, Robert Peel, Lord Palmerston, Jan Christian Smuts, Lord Derby, Benjamin Disraeli and George Canning. There is of course also the compulsory statue in Ken Livingstone's London - that of Nelson Mandela. I presume that if Ken decided to just keep one statue it would be Nelson Mandela's rather than Winston Churchill's. Alternatively maybe Ken would replace them all with just one statue to represent all that is best with his world view - that of Yusuf al-Qaradawi.