Saturday, 9 January 2010

The Anjem Choudary Debacle (Part 1 of 2)

Anjem Choudary eyes up Islam4UK's aspirations

Everyone has been talking about the Anjem Choudary caper lately - in fact it’s virtually been a wall to wall discussion of it wherever I go amongst the general Nationalist circuit. So, rather than simply agree with everything I have been reading and hearing I thought I would play the role of devil’s advocate and open the discussion outwards towards more alternative positions.

Upon my travels around blogs and forums I must admit that in some ways I have been quite perturbed to discover that Nationalism is starting to deviate into a mellower form, one which is devoid from its traditional European standpoints and is instead being presented as a more general ‘flag waving civic based patriotism’ that’s seemingly high on emotional outrage rather than deeper ideological substance. I have found this to be more predominant amongst relative new comers to the concepts of British Nationalism, but not necessarily exclusively so. Even some of the more established thinkers and some of those amongst the “old guard” of Nationalism are also getting restless and wish to see some kind of ‘action’ happening on the streets to show their dissatisfaction about what is taking hold in this country.

In the latter case, perhaps some are grasping for any incident they can latch on to (that already has support of the wider public) to try and kick start some kind of basis for future civil war or massive civil unrest, but of course I cannot be too certain of such a motive nor speculate about the cocktail of emotional unease that arises with these kinds of situations because everybody is different. I acknowledge that the motivational assertion may be farfetched, but perhaps it is not entirely so whacky for some people who are familiar with the coarser end of society. Perhaps there is even a case for it, as societal revolutions have been sparked with lesser things and the country does need to change its current direction.

If a volatile situation did occur around a situation like this at some point, perhaps with groups who are not loyal to the British National Party such as the EDL, UAF, Islamists and the rival Nationalist parties (who deeply loathe Mr. Griffin and the increasingly “civic” stances the British National Party), it could end up being ‘street action’ which Mr. Griffin (no matter how experienced he may be, and no matter of his status as an elected MEP) will neither be able to control or command.

For Mr Griffin, Mr Brons and Mr Barnbrook - all elected representatives of a legitimate political party – to head down to Wootton Basset and make a symbolic gesture to show their displeasure of this precession taking place is one thing which I would support and commend wholeheartedly. However, I have yet to be convinced that it is a good idea for thousands of British National Party supporters to head down there with a gung-ho attitude in their step. I have yet to be persuaded by all the merits of such an approach that comprises vast numbers of agitated people gathering in an area. At this point of the proceedings however, Mr Griffin has not requested a rally of the troops.

Whilst it is entirely understandable and absolutely reasonable for the supporter base to feel the way they do about the ‘insult’ to our armed forces by Anjem Choudary, perhaps it may be more sensible and rational to look at all the different situations which might be at play here, for example the different arguments which could be made, the different ways of tackling the situation at hand, the different ways things could potentially pan out, what the government may develop as a result of any of this, and so on and so forth. This could perhaps make us better prepared to navigate through such a situation more accurately than what currently appears to be a bull in a China shop seeking to “grandstand” on a matter with what I could only describe as a kind of desire to “show who is boss” to these “extremists”.

Of course, I fully appreciate that it is only natural to feel and act this way as people’s patience with “Islamic extremism” is definitely wearing thin in this country - and it is increasingly easy for all of us (including myself) to get carried away on a crest of the wave to be seen to make some sort of stand against an all too easily identifiable foe, a foe that’s being personified at present by Anjem Choudary.

In both Nationalist and media circles (and even “anti fascist” circles) it seems nobody knows quite what to do. The same questions are being asked all over, such as whether he will or will not march, whether or not the police will stop it, whether he should even be able to march or not, etc.

The “anti fascists” are at present deafening by their media silence on the matter, for their little heads are at risk of exploding over the complexity of the matter which they themselves have wittingly or unwittingly helped create for our country and our society. They don’t know which side to jump to and will probably side with neither to take the coward’s way out as usual, longing for some new and juicy “BNP Scandal” to toil over instead.

The media predictably like to present Anjem Choudary as the pantomime baddie that he is and they like to use the situation to reinforce the ever increasing falsehood that “Muslim extremists” are opposites of the same coin with the British National Party (or Nationalists in general). This is a dangerous falsehood and a misconception that is perhaps being purposefully engineered by the government and the media to shape attitudes and help form future legislation designed to prevent Nationalist sentiments from rising in the country. Let’s make no mistake here, many oppositional groups, individuals, minority groups and even rival political parties have already made noises about how the British National Party should be collapsed, banned, or whatever else.

The media certainly have no concerns about labelling the British National Party as similar “extremists” to the Muslim fanatics – or lumping British National Party members and its supporters together with the likes of the “English Defence League” and various fringe Nationalist groups who tend to present Nationalism in entirely the wrong way, such as by focussing on the wrong targets and taking the wrong kinds of action.

With relatively few exceptions, the recent media has pathetically tried to quell the disquiet about the transformation of our society both racially, culturally, and Islamically by reeling out small examples of “moderates” – such as in one article where a family of Muslims from Wootton Basset have supposedly been joining in the crowds that have lined the streets in respect for the dead soldiers passing through the town in hearses. An interesting point about this particular media article struck me as I read towards the end - the ‘example’ Muslim father who was featured in the tale just happens to be a member of the "Racial Equality Council" for the last ten years. Now, what are the chances of that eh?!


'I have been a member of the Racial Equality Council in Swindon for ten years and I am on the management committee of the Al-Habib Islamic Educational and Cultural Centre in Swindon,' says Mr Latif. 'I travel regularly to Birmingham, Bristol and Reading where my children and grandchildren live. And I have never met anyone who knows or agrees with Choudary.'

Well, if he has his head up all this "interfaith dialogue" nonsense and ventures amongst those circles on his travels then he is hardly likely to be any voice of authority on the wider situation. Nor would he be fully in tune to all sectors of the population, particularly those who find organisations like the "Racial Equality Council" to be a farcical rag bag of special interest groups and communist sympathisers peddling their leftwing nonsense into society.

This media slanting is done in some pathetically thinly veiled attempt to say “see – they are not all frothing at the mouth, bad and problematic!” and therefore throw the focus off the more sobering thought of the general future which is coming to our towns and cities in the upcoming decades. Yes, we are all fully aware that not all Muslims are supporting Choudary’s methods or equally share his vigour towards Islam – but that doesn’t exactly make what’s happing to the country in a general sense right or acceptable either.

Regarding the proposed demonstration which Choudary has planned, I haven’t absorbed myself into it too much but I have been slightly perturbed at the lack of objective thinking amongst the newer ranks when it comes to the question of whether he should be permitted to demonstrate or not.

Modern British Nationalism (in my view) should not solely be about “patriotic” feelings alone – but also about presenting a modern form of the conservative side of our ideology regarding nation and civilisation; such as freedom from the overbearing state, freedom of speech, freedom of association, rights to protest, and its long association with general libertarian principles that have underpinned the previous success and evolvement of our country and our wider European continent.

Some people seem to confuse “Libertarian” with “Liberal” when they are not the same thing at all. This confusion has led to all manner of misunderstandings, to the point where some nationalists have actually been suggesting (in a roundabout way) that those who would allow Anjem Choudary to march are supporting Islamic extremism and insulting our war dead. This viewpoint is highly insulting to long established Nationalists and free thinkers. Are those soldiers really out there to bring “freedom” only to be used as a product of restricting freedom back home? That is a controversial view perhaps, but maybe it is one that is worth making anyway.

Some have proceeded to mock the position of the very idea of letting him protest, and glibly remark about the much touted “human rights nonsense” that is often moaned about in the Daily Mail for example (something that we all know blights our modern society) - as though it is an embodiment or extension of it to let him protest. Some have even had the audacity to suggest that individuals who would allow a protest are ignorant of Islam - and are all too keen to remind us that “Islamic extremists won’t give you those rights”. Yes, we are well aware of that thank you. We are not all uneducated, ill informed or ‘wet behind the ears’ – but whether Islamic extremists would offer the same freedom to us is not really the point of the matter to be honest, especially at this moment in time.

Such is the emotional rollercoaster that this kind of protest stirs up amongst already Nationalistic and Patriotic minded people alike, we are in danger of seeing an emergence of supporting intolerance and the overturning of fundamental European principles within the ranks of the British National Party support base - whether it manifests itself in suggesting the government ban the protest for being “offensive” or “provocative” etc, or more widely by setting up groups to “ban the burkha” for example - although they are certainly understandable positions to take.

Unlike the right to free speech and the ability to protest freely, I tend to switch back and forth in my views on the burkha. This is because on the one hand I am insulted by its presence and what it stands for/suggests about men and society, that I am insulted by its alien nature to western civilisation (and how it is as a symbol of conquest in that regard) and that I would love the smell of victory to finally pull some rank on what is taking shape in our society with these people......but at the same time do we really wish to be a nation that has to enforce perceived freedom onto people and tell them what to wear? Are we (as nationalists) better off letting those communities split off from wider society so they are seen even more strikingly as a significantly different sector to ourselves and thus allow them to wear items that generally wind the public up and right into our arms? I do loathe these things when I see them on the streets of my country and I would find it much more comfortable if they were banished - yet is personal comfort and the obfuscation of our nations’ situation in this way really a good thing?

When the Swiss voted in favour of banning more minarets being built, I was overwhelmingly glad about the stand they taken and what it signalled - finally, a European nation had refused to submit! I even had a few celebratory beers that night to share a sort of bask in their glory at sticking two fingers up to their elite riddled state and their country’s colonisers. France seemed like it could put forward a similar concept, in addition to trying to ban the full face veil on the streets of France. In some ways I would again cheer at the stand being made - but at the back of my mind regarding both the Swiss vote and the looming legislation in France, I have to remember that banning symbols, banning towers, even the banning of more Mosques themselves are futile actions if the demographics that would otherwise command them can swell along regardless. The actual Muslims themselves are not going to go away quite so easily.

Although it is seemingly unpopular to say so, I have struggled with the same kind of questions about the Choudary procession. Despite the fact that I would probably enjoy a similar stand being made to Islam in this country as the Swiss and French seem to be doing in theirs, at the moment I say let him protest wherever he likes - not only because it may make the "ostriches" see what’s coming to this country in the future, but also because I am generally a libertarian minded person and despite not liking Islamic ideologies (or its desires to create a global caliphate/ummah), I do value the right of free protest and free speech – which, if we care to remember for just one moment– are the very kind of things why we rally against concepts like Islam ever being dominant here in the first place.

In fact, I don't see how the police can come up with an excuse to ban it in ordinary circumstances, because in theory it is a "peaceful" protest and arguably a "legitimate" one under the law - no matter how distasteful or provocative I or others may find it. I for one certainly do find it both provocative and distasteful. I find Mr Choudary's spite, venom and insensitive statements about 'rapists' and 'butchery' directed towards our soldiers as individuals to be totally inappropriate and not really befitting of a precession like he wishes to lead. For the time being, I will assume he will not be issuing such messages or waving such placards and will instead be imitating the solemn decorum that is associated with the town he intends to protest through.

Choudary has pulled a bit of a blinder here with this stunt, because if we curtail his rights he emboldens Islam by saying we are hypocrites and that our founding civilisation values are hollow, and if we say we are against it in general, we arguably haven’t a real leg to stand on (if he behaves himself) because he is not commemorating the dead insurgents who have been fighting against our soldiers - but innocent civilians which our government and the Unites States have killed with their mistaken or ill gotten involvement there.

On this point, we are perhaps to some degree on the “same side” of the mythical coin – or are we Nationalists and general citizens of this country not supposed to care at all, in any way whatsoever, about the deaths of many thousands of innocent people in this mistaken adventure into lands which should not really be any of our affair?

I don’t wish to see Muslim civilians in Afghanistan die; with the misery and loss those families also have to bear in these circumstances. I don’t “hate” Muslims throughout the world, people I have never even met, and nor do I enjoy them being killed. I just do not desire for my own country and wider Europe to be Islamified and repopulated in the future - and yes, naturally as an indigenous British person I mourn the loss of our own people and our own troops first and foremost. This is human nature.

At this point of the article I feel that I need to make it absolutely clear that I am in 100% support for our troops who are out there doing an almost impossible job - and that I absolutely commend them for their bravery and effort on behalf of this country, even though I do not agree with them being sent there.

Anjem Choudary has been clever here. Some suggest he picked Wootton Basset solely to “put the knife in” to the remembrance of our war dead and cause ultimate insult – and no doubt that is indeed part of his game – but it is not necessarily the sole reason.

He knows he will get maximum coverage for doing so in that location, and publicity is what he is about. This is why he is even doing it in the first place, to make a point for his followers and his religion so that they gain attention. He could silently commemorate whoever he likes in the privacy of his own home or do it elsewhere if he is so concerned about the death toll, but that isn’t his real modus operandi. In addition to ruffling peoples’ feathers and pouring salt in the wound, he gets to promote his group in the national media outlets and as such he has been on the BBC and on Sky News etc umpteen times so far. Off the back of the publicity, and the outrage it has caused, he has now even had the nerve to blackmail the Prime Minister of this country by saying he will call it off if he gets a 'one to one' TV debate with Gordon Brown.

Therefore he isn't such the swivel eyed idiot many people say he is. He is perhaps more smart, shrewd, articulate, and factual about the teachings of Islam and the Hadith than we as a country generally like to give him credit for. He has the media, the government, the prime minister of Britain, wider society, the police, and all the “antifascist” groups and affiliates over a barrel and in a quandary – and he knows it.

I also heard that he is one of the top men within Sharia Courts in London, taking part in training Imams to uphold the Sharia. If this is the case, one must assume he is okay with the government (or unstoppable by them to do as he pleases), and therefore he actually does speak with some authority on matters of Sharia Laws, Islam and the teachings of the Koran and Hadith. I cannot confirm or deny this status at present, but it would not surprise me in the slightest were it to be true.

Surely, if it was true, this would be yet another blunder by the ruling elites of this country and another embarrassment for Gordon Brown who likes to suggest Mr Choudary does not and cannot ever speak for Islam in any shape whatsoever. Remember, for the Labour Party, such ideas and attrocities by fanatics are to be termed "anti Islamic activities". Gordon Brown, or anyone else in any of the three main parties could not possibly go up against Anjem Choudary without exposing the reality that he really is following Islam as prescribed, or looking totally foolish with their ignorance - such as when Anthony Blair informed the Muslims that he kept a copy of the Koran next to his bed, had "read through the Koran twice" and had read it "from front to back". I guess you need to be a Muslim or knowledgeable about the Koran to know why that sound-bite was such an obvious lie and a complete joke.

My own view as a Nationalist is that we cannot seriously protect the values of our western civilisation by starting to renege on the very foundations of our own society. Sadly, this may mean letting Choudary speak up - and not starting to have (for example) "official dress codes" for our country as it is not our tradition to enforce such things on a national basis like they do in Saudi Arabia or other Islamic states.

Nor do I think we should start with the idea of having "zones" or regions of the country where people can or cannot make their point heard with a protest. People need to remember that what they can ban for him can come to all of us next, and there is little point in Nationalists allowing themselves to be put under the same bracket as Islamist extremists by the state and by the media only to then have their perceived “offence” to society similarly curtailed also, being banished into what could effectively resemble a wilderness where nobody will see or hear what we have to say. Some people, after all, find our viewpoints to be disturbing to them. This is why some free exchange of ideas and expression is essential. If we cannot win the argument with our ideologies and our values against Islamic extremism then surely that is a very poor state of affairs to find ourselves in.

Many people in the country like to call Choudary a "nutter" (or a “ranter” as The Sun would probably say)......but many of us understand Choudary is nothing like a nutter - he is of sound mind and of sound understanding of the true Islamic faith he claims to represent. He is only doing what it says on the tin, and it is the rest of them who are not as dedicated or perhaps all that appreciative of how he chooses to go about it.

It is unclear what percentages of Muslims hold stances to his degree, but even if it is only 10% it represents a rather substantial demographic which is a direct threat both now and through their future children. These are children who will be brought up in environments with those same convictions of belief - and children who will have been surrounded by a generally more Islamic compliant society in general to support them. As can be witnessed around the world wherever Islam has a hold, the weak and the timid always fold under the will of the stronger adherents. Nobody may desire for it to happen, even Muslims themselves, but it normally does so of its own organic accord.

Regardless of those percentages who may share the exact views of Choudary in the country, let us not forget that a broader demographic of Muslims are also dedicated to upholding the same broad values and systems of life which Islam brings to society as Choudary aspires to establish in this country - whether it takes 50 years or 150 years. After all, it is what they believe to be good and for the betterment (to some degree or another) of our now decadent liberalist society comprising of a mix of hedonistic selfish morons and antisocial cretins. That is why they are followers and practisers of the ideology and willing upholders of the systems of life it requests of them to uptake as ‘Muslims’. Islam in all its various guises is a very conservative religious doctrine, not a happy clappy liberalist 'anything goes' doctrine.

Islamic extremists like Anjem Choudary are actually the easiest people to deal with in our society, not the hardest. This is because they are clear, open and direct about their aims and they tell it how it is. Choudary is perhaps more a comic book villain who personifies a particular problem emerging in our country – somebody who perhaps gets too much attention by Nationalists and BNP supporters. This is probably because it is easy to understand and easy to rail against such a clearly defined bogeyman - compared to acknowledging and actually dealing with the uncomfortable wider scheme of things that we face.

In part two, I shall go on to explain why I believe this to be the case.

No comments:

Post a Comment