The UAF: Fighting Fascism with Fascism.

June 1, 2013

On the surface, the Unite Against Fascism movement appears to be a promising prospect. A counterbalance to the ignorance and promotion of violence of groups like the English Defence League. Fighting Fascism is indeed a noble cause. It is well known that Fascism tends to gain support during economic downturns. We see Golden Dawn in Greece capitalising on that, whilst the ruling authorities have absolutely no idea how to deal with the growing threat from the far right. And so grass roots, anti-Fascist organisations are indeed welcome, and necessary. But slowly peel away the top layer of the UAF, and we’re left with a rather bleak picture. A stinging lack of consistency, and in fact, we see a leadership closer in authoritarian far-right principles, to the EDL, than either side would care to admit.

On the UAF website we are treated to the names of the elected officials in charge of running the operation. Azad Ali being one of the Vice Chairs. Ali was also community affairs coordinator for the Islamic Forum of Europe. During a Dispatches undercover report a couple of years back, Ali, when asked his feelings on Democracy, implied his rather Fascist tendencies thusly:

“Democracy, if it means at the expense of not implementing the sharia, of course no one agrees with that”.

The Islamic Forum of Europe itself, produced a leaflet in which it noted that one of its main goals was to change the:

“very infrastructure of society, its institutions, its culture, its political order and its creed … from ignorance to Islam.”

And how would that change from “ignorance” to “Islam” be noticable to the ordinary citizen of a Country that Azad’s group wishes to replace democratic secularism with? Well, they kindly tell us:

“Protect yourselves from all types of haram … music, TV, and freemixing with women in that which is not necessary.”

Predictably, in much the same way that the BNP and EDL blame the media for misrepresenting what they say, by presenting, well, what they actually say, the IFE commented:

“I write to express my disgust and disappointment at Channel 4’s wholly inaccurate and defamatory accusations … The documentary is Islamophobic in nature … uses emotive and provocative language … is part of a series of organised, vindictive and orchestrated witch-hunts.”

Equally as predictable, George Galloway referred to the Dispatches programme as a smear campaign. But then, he also noted that he owed his election to the IFE. And of course, let’s not forget that Mr Galloway openly & happily funds Hamas. So I’m not sure such a man is worth listening to when bemoaning smear campaigns against religious Fascists. When calling it a smear campaign didn’t work, Ali simply resorted to subtle threats. On the IFE radio station, sounding like an EDL thug, Ali said of the Dispatches reporter:

“We’ve got a picture of you and a lot more than you thought we had. We’ve tracked you down to different places. And if people are gonna turn what I’ve just said into a threat, that’s their fault, innit?”

Ali also keeps a blog for the IFE, on which, in 2008, he openly lavishes praise on Imam Anwar Awlaki. Awlaki is of course known for being a key player in the planning of terrorist attacks for Al Qaeda, and a key recruiter for such enterprises. He preached to three of the 9/11 hijackers. Azad Ali, the Vice Chair of Unite Against Fascism says of Awlaki, on the subject of US elections:

“….one of my favourite speakers and scholars Imam Anwar Awlaki – of course those of you who know me will know that I disagree with the Shaykh on this matter – however I really do love him for the sake of Allah, he has an uncanny way of explaining things to people which is endearing.”

– Oh that old endearing, lovable mass murdering terrorist.

It isn’t just George Galloway who has a bit of a love affair with Hamas. Ali also praises them:

“Today we read from the leader of Hamas, their strength and courage and sheer determination to stand up to the Zionist onslaught. Let us to do something to help them by holding our government to account for the lack of transparency. Until we have a clear unequivicol and unconditional condemnation of the Zionist state’s terrorist attacks, they can – talk to the hand, cos the head aint listening!”

– Yes! The strength of courage of Hamas. The leadership of Hamas! All praise be to a group that gleefully pronounces in its Charter that:

“The state of truth has disappeared and was replaced by the state of evil. Nothing has remained in its right place, for when Islam is removed from the scene, everything changes. These are the motives. As to the objectives: discarding the evil, crushing it and defeating it, so that truth may prevail, homelands revert [to their owners], calls for prayer be heard from their mosques, announcing the reinstitution of the Muslim state. Thus, people and things will revert to their true place.”

– The “State of Evil” naturally being anything that isn’t fundamentalist Islamic. Ali is wrong to promote Hamas as simply a force that wishes to prevent any further Israeli aggression against Palestinian Muslims. This isn’t the goal of Hamas, and never has been. Their goal has always been a resurrected Caliphate, under the shoddy assumption that the entire Middle East is Muslim. Hamas are not angry at Israel’s aggression, they are angry that Israel isn’t Islamic. This is the very epitome of Imperialism. How do we know this? Well, we can start by looking at their Charter, in which Part III Article 11 states:

“The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine has been an Islamic Waqf throughout the generations and until the Day of Resurrection, no one can renounce it or part of it, or abandon it or part of it. No Arab country nor the aggregate of all Arab countries, and no Arab King or President nor all of them in the aggregate, have that right, nor has that right any organization or the aggregate of all organizations, be they Palestinian or Arab, because Palestine is an Islamic Waqf throughout all generations and to the Day of Resurrection.”

Their distinct lack of dedication to any peace effort, is also noted in their Charter:

“…the so-called peaceful solutions, and the international conferences to resolve the Palestinian problem, are all contrary to the beliefs of the Islamic Resistance Movement. For renouncing any part of Palestine means renouncing part of the religion; the nationalism of the Islamic Resistance Movement is part of its faith, the movement educates its members to adhere to its principles and to raise the banner of Allah over their homeland as they fight their Jihad”

– Their entire Charter reads like one long anti-semitic, violent, anti-democracy, anti-anything that isn’t Islamic, rant that isn’t all that dissimilar in tone and pronouncements, to those of Fascists like Anders Breivik. It seems extremism comes full circle. Imperialism, and nothing else.

Azad Ali’s motives for fighting the Fascism of the Nationalists like the EDL is not the same as the rest of us. We value our secular, democratic system. We value the heroes who have fought for centuries to get to where we are now, the philosophers that have shaped our way of thought. We value the forward march of equality for gender, for sexuality. We value the right to believe whatever you wish and be treated equally under the Secular law. Ali values none of this. He is fighting groups like the EDL, because they don’t fit into his Theocratic dream for the future of Britain. On his blog, Ali quite disturbingly writes:

So, since we are all working our socks off, in different ways, for the resurgence of the Khilafa, I have one question who would you give bayyah to today and what would you say are the qualities needed for them to get your vote? Please, no essays or dissertations!

– Here, Ali is wishing for an Islamic candidate to stand for election, on the platform of dismantling our entire Parliamentary secular system; to be replaced by a Theocratic Caliphate. This would naturally include far less rights for women (whom, according to Hamas’s charter, are to only be educated in how to keep a household in order), homosexuality crushed viciously, and anything the Fascists deem to be “haram” banned…. goodbye Glastonbury Festival, you banquet of immoral hedonism, you, with your… music.
How is this putrid philosophy any better, or more respectable, than that of the BNP or EDL?

The love fest with Hamas keeps going, with Ali. After declaring that he’s working his socks off for a brand new Islamic Empire, he announces to us all, his ideal candidate:

“My vote for the title of Amir al-Mu’mineen would have to go to the Palestinian Prime Minister, Ismail Haniyeh. Not only is a motivational leader, with political depth and skill, but also he is a Hafiz of the Qur’an, Mashallah!”

– Ismail Haniyeh is a top political leader of Hamas, who, upon hearing of the death of Osama Bin Laden, said:

“We condemn the assassination and the killing of an Arab holy warrior. We ask God to offer him mercy with the true believers and the martyrs.”

– Azad Ali would like to see a candidate like Haniyeh stand for election in a secular democratic country like the UK. A man who praises Osama Bin Laden, leads Hamas, and wishes to see a global Islamic Empire. Fight against Fascism? Are you kidding me?

Ali doesn’t stop there. He keeps reiterating his intense opposition to secular democracy, by echoing the thoughts of Hamas:

“Of course I am still convinced that participation is correct, but my contention is that it should be on our terms, and not on terms set by others. Why allow ourselves to be boxed in by “rules” that are clearly designed to destroy us in this world and the hereafter? These rules are underpinned by the notion of secularism that is followed by immorality and basic deconstruction of the pillars of what a good society should be based on, according to God. This is manifested in almost every Western government’s foreign policy in the guise of spreading democracy. If only they would spread freedom!”

– The rather curious line “I am still convinced that participation is correct” that precedes a tearing up of Western democratic and secular ideals, can only be seen as essentially a far-right Islamic rehash of “I’m not racist, but….“. The point being, he is convinced democratic participation is correct, just not Western Secular Democracy, which is full of immorality solely based on the fact that it isn’t ordained by his particular God.
The theme running through a lot of far-right Muslim commentators, is indeed rooted in their utter contempt for liberal, secular values. As much as some would like us to believe that it is Western aggressive foreign policy that Islamic fundamentalists like Ali are responding to, it really doesn’t play out when we read what they have to say. It is an excuse. A game of victimhood whilst promoting an eerily similar imperialist, and fascist agenda, they claim to be fighting against. They really do dislike, and wish to see dismantled, Western secular liberalism. This cannot be seen to be all that different from the authoritarian, far right principles espoused by groups like the BNP.

If we are to unite against Fascism, we must unite against all forms of Fascism. Including that coming from dangerous and vicious extremists like Ali. The UAF website says:

“Fascists and racists are trying to take advantage of the terrible murder of Lee Rigby to whip up racism and hatred for their own anti-democratic ends.”

– I couldn’t agree more. And that is why I cannot support an organisation that claims to be a beacon of anti-Fascist principles, when one of its key players, praises Hamas, loves Awlaki, wishes to resurrect a barbaric, backward, Theocratic Empire, and considers those of us who value secularism and democracy to be inherently immoral. This is nothing more than fighting Fascism with Fascism.


The Extremes of Woolwich

May 23, 2013

The horrendous murder of a British soldier – Lee Rigby – savaged on the streets of south east London yesterday, sparked an outcry across social media that I don’t think I’ve quite seen before in this country. A backlash that threatened to spill over into violent clashes on the streets. This is the dark side of social media. And it came from two extremes, with equally as repugnant statements.

The far right Nationalists used the attack, to highlight their hate for all Muslims, and in fact, anyone with slightly darker skin, as a group. They, in their ignorance, seem to be under the impression that a fringe Al-Shabaab supporting maniac, is somehow a perfect representation of British Muslims as a whole. They took to the streets, disgustingly attacking Mosques and shouting abuse at anyone who doesn’t fit their narrow band of what is deemed correct. Upon social media, they issued thinly veiled, as well as quite blatant threats, alongside vicious racism, that in my mind, can only be described as inflicting terror also:

Untitled-1

Untitled-2

Untitled-1

4

Untitled-8

But it wasn’t just the far right Nationalists who vented their propaganda, and hate. Then came the apologists, and their predictable attempts to deflect blame from the guilty, onto the West in general. Unwilling to accept or even acknowledge that Al-Shabaab are responsible for murdering innocent Muslims also. They instead choose to over simplify the World, into two camps: Islam v Enemies of Islam – much the same way that the EDL do, only a little more subtle with their tactics. As if believing in the same God as people you’ve never met, in a country thousands of miles away, is some sort of justification for senseless murder. The victim mentality:

r3r

Untitled-3

Untitled-4

Untitled-9

Untitled-7

Untitled-5

Untitled-6

Thankfully, the majority of social media remarks upon the murder in Woolwich, were both respectful and decent, from Muslims and non-Muslims alike, focusing on the murdered soldier. This marked the difference between moderates, and extremes quite intensely. The moderates seemed entirely focused on expressing shock and sorrow at the loss of a life in such a brutal manner. Those on the extremes, did not seem too interested in the loss of life, and the unthinkable tragedy his family have just had inflicted upon them, choosing instead to focus on either how much they dislike all Muslims, or how things like this only happen, because of British foreign policy. It seemed an easy way for the extremes to score very cheap and easy points.

No doubt the motives will be discussed, there will be those who claim Islamic extremism is fostered entirely by Western foreign policy, being as they tend to be, so naively unable to accept that negative and wholly unacceptable interpretations of their own faith might shoulder some blame. There will be those who claim to be “defending” England, without accepting that the terror they apparently deplore, they themselves are guilty of handing out, frightening decent Muslim men, women and children who have done nothing wrong. But it is important to remember that at the heart of this entire situation, is a family who have lost a loved one, in such a horrendous manner. I feel for the Muslim community of Woolwich over the next few days and weeks. The possible violent and completely unjustified retribution against an innocent community, is shocking to the rest of us, but terrifying to the people living it.

“An extremely popular and witty soldier, Drummer Rigby was a larger than life personality within the Corps of Drums and was well known, liked and respected across the Second Fusiliers”

– MoD statement.

I feel for the family of Lee Rigby, of 2nd Battalion the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers, who so heartbreakingly leaves behind a 2 year old son, and who, in the most tragic circumstances, lost his life yesterday.


THEY BAND ENGERLUND SHIRTS N STUFF!

May 23, 2010

There are a ridiculous amount of Facebook groups (such as this one) and pages dedicated to telling me that the police have banned people from wearing England shirts, and flying England flags, incase it offends foreigners. An example, of one of the comments in that group, shows just how perfectly English and proud of their culture, history, and especially their language, they truly are:
“England till i die… And know 1 will tell me what to do with my flags or tops to wear, fuck the pakiz!!! Dont try and take over OUR country OK.”

“know 1” will tell him what to do with his flag!!! Know 1!!!!

It is obviously bullshit.

Every year, people tend to shout, pathetically; “OMG THE MUSZLIMISTS R TRYNA BAN CHRISTMAS CUS ITZ OFFENCIVESE N STUFF!!!11”. It is rubbish. It always amazes me that the majority of people in those facebook groups who claim to be “standing up for England“, manage to quite effortlessly rape the entire language. Or, of course they claim St Georges day is being banned, because it might offend people who are either gay, muslim, black, or anything that doesn’t fit into their narrow vision of what makes one “English” (which apparently, is simply limited to being racist, angry, ignorant and supremely illiterate). For example, I have decided for the next ten seconds, I will embrace what it means to be English, as perceived by a very select few idiots:
“DER WEL BAD!!!!11 TRYNA BAN ENGERLUND FLAGS N TAKE OUR WOMAN N DEY DONT EVAN TALK ENGLUSH ON DA FONE OR ANYFING. WERE GUNNA LOOSE SHACKESPERE TO DA MUZZIES!!!!11”
Sadly, ignorance is pretty damn easy. I might get used to it. Let me just let off some steam first.

No one, anywhere, has ever told you that being proud of England, is racist. Never. What I will tell you is, if you claim you’re proud of England because it’s for white people who aren’t muslim, then yes, you’re a racist. I find it ridiculous that people try to define what it means to be an abstract concept. I find it even more ridiculous that people will join groups like the EDL, thinking they are defending their weak and rather ugly version of what it means to be English. I didn’t realise it was “English” to join violent racist groups of hooligans, who threaten Journalists for printing negative columns about them. What amazes me, is that EDL and BNP supporters, can actually read.
The NUJ recently showed that a few journalists received death threats from the EDL. The police are currently investigating it.
One of the EDL’s chief strategists is a man called Alan Lake. He advises the Sweden Democrats on immigration policy. His immigration policy isn’t simply “extremists are evil”, it’s “anyone who isn’t like us, is evil”. Much like the EDL, who claim to be anti-extremist, yet will sit protesting outside mosques, that have no connection to extremism whatsoever. It’s just a group that people can say “LOOK! A SIKH JOINED!!! THAT MEANS WE’RE NOT RACIST!!!”
I don’t particularly care if they suddenly become non-violent (which is impossible, far-right organisations have a bit of a history of violence). They are still vicious, nasty little shits.
It is one of those groups, that appeal to the stupid, by using “clever” language to manipulate political and social discourse, make people feel they are a part of something, and to sustain itself, there must be an “other” an enemy, who they can direct their hate at. Muslim extremists, Christian extremists, and now Nationalist extremists are doing the same thing. And if people fall for it, so be it. I’m proud that i’m not as idiotic as them.

I also notice the BNP put up some wondrous candidates for MP and council elections this year.
Ken Booth, who referred to Auschwitz as a holiday camp for people, much like Disneyland.
Lynne Mozar, who when confronted by someone who simply questioned her economic policy, replied “fat slag”
Mathew Tait, who said that the the Equality and Human Rights Commission court case had forced the BNP to accept “people who we would wish to not have in our country really to be members of our party”. Damn them, for making you accept black people.
Mike Shore, who left the National Front in 2003, to start up a British version of the Ku Klux Klan.
Richard Hamilton, the BNP said they’d suspended him because he is a known Hitler supporter, who hates “niggers“. Apparently they didn’t suspend him for long.
Chris Beverley, refused to condemn Hitler, and said he doesn’t dislike him.
Ian Meller, fined £400 after being caught with a chair leg, threatening a gay guy, simply for being gay.
Barry Bennett, who said recently “I believe in National Socialism, WW2 style, it was best, no other power had anything like it,” ‘he wrote. “The ideology was fantastic. The culture, nothing like it. If it was here now, I’d defect to Germany.
Tess Culnane, was National Front candidate until 2008.
Jeffrey Marshall, when asked about David Cameron’s son who died, said “We live in a country today which is unhealthily dominated by an excess of sentimentality towards the weak and unproductive. No good will come of it.”

The Nation State is very much a part of this whole Nationalist debate, something that goes back over four hundred years.

The Nation State came around about 16/17th Century. It actually evolved through Protestantism. As Henry VIII started to question the legitimacy of the Pope, the Parliament of the day granted full power over the Nation of England, to the King. Something that hadn’t ever been done before. Thomas Cromwell was the key to it all. It was his legislation. He also completely reformed the way politics was conducted, by introducing a sort of bureaucracy and departmental governing and National institutions, which had never been done before. Protestantism was the basis for an emerging Nation State. To build that Nation State among the minds of the Kings subjects, required building a sense of National unity. Which was odd, given that Kings and Queens of Europe were marrying and producing children who were half English, half Spanish. Or Half French, half Italian, and so on. It was also odd, given that whilst the King and the Nobles still lived in luxury, the majority of the people, including the army, lived shit lives of squalor. The King and Court didn’t seem to give much of a shit about their people for most of the time. The problem was, that most people felt a sense of connection with the rest of Europe, due to their Catholic roots. They felt a strong bond with the Papacy. That now needed to change. The King and Court needed to direct that sense of loyalty away from the Pope, and toward the Crown. But the King is simply someone who lives and then dies. So basing a sense of loyalty on something far greater was needed. The State was born. The idea of England as a unified set of principles, was born. The King had to use a psychological weapon of some sort to persuade the people, that when they go to war, they are going to war for the good of England. What difference would it make, who was in control of England? Whether it be a French King, a Scottish King, a Spanish King, or an English King? They were all the same, with the same system. They were merely using the lower classes, to protect themselves and their wealth and status. And so with the onset of Protestantism (which wasn’t down to any religious reason, and was entirely down to a King and his council getting a little too power hungry), the government of the day, now had a complete say over the way their Country was run. Europe was governed by the Papacy in Rome before that. Even England, up until 1534 was pretty much governed by Rome. The Holy Roman Empire stretched across Germany and Austria and Belgium. It was one big nation. And it worked for Centuries. In fact, for the majority of British history, as i’ve stated before, from the year 0 to 2010, we were a strict Catholic country. Catholicism, is our traditional connecting value.

Fast forward 470 years, and America and Britain are now telling their people, especially those in the lower classes that they should put their lives on the line, in a war for the good of England and Britain and the rest of the World. When, on the contrary, those ridiculously brave men and women are dying, for the good of American and British business interests, and in fact, merely perpetuating the problem of Islamic extremism World Wide. I’m only surprised that it’s the extremist Muslims who have been the first to snap. I would have put money on it being the Latin Americans.

National Pride created by an elite set of rulers has never been about celebrating a common ancestry, or a common ethical standard. It has always been about Imperialism, either by force, by economic means, or by a mixture of both.

Nation States evolved during the colonial era, and are simply a left over of the colonial days. We drew straight lines on Africa. Go look at a map of Africa. It is divided almost into perfect squares. Do you think that is biological? It REALLY isn’t. We didn’t care about the tribes and who they identified themselves with. We just needed an easy way to know what land we’d decided were ours, and which were French owned plots of African land, for the purpose of slavery and exploitation.

Thomas Paine writing in section 3 part 2 of “The Rights of Man” over two centuries ago, says of the difference between the old Monarchical past and the new Globalised, democratic future;

“The one encourages national prejudices; the other promotes universal society, as the means of universal commerce.

The Nation States in Europe worked fine when we could strictly regulate trade, and capital and the influx of slaves. When economies were National. It embedded itself into our way of life, pretty quickly. It helped build our economy, so when we eventually became far more capitalist, we had a strong basis to work from, we had a massive advantage. Now, if you want the benefits of a globalised economy; cheap imports etc, then Nation States are hugely contradictory to that aim. If your borders are pretty much fully open to goods and to capital and are not rooted to their Nation of origin, and that capital is always looking for the best return on investment, then saying things like “British jobs for British people” is so unbelievably 17th Century Colonial reasoning, it’s not even worth trying to argue against. If capital and goods are able to flow freely across the World, then it stands to reason that labour should not be chained to it’s nation of ‘origin’, and so with labour comes different philosophies and cultures from Countries that have been colonial and protectionist for centuries. If you are the owner of a company, and you are looking for the best return on investment, and a Pakistani man applies for the same job as a white British man, and the Pakistani man is clearly better at the job, far more likely to raise profits, which in turn helps to create new jobs, why on Earth would you choose the Pakistani man? National identity is not compatible with Capitalism, because building a wall around popultion, is like building a wall around capital. It isn’t compatible with the aims of a globalised economy. It is only going to damage the country in the long run.

Our impact on the World, is quite real. The decisions that are made at the Bank of England, or at Westminster, can and do directly affect people in places like Afghanistan and African Nations. We call them “developing” because we assume that unless they follow our economic structure and accept that our way is the best way, they can never be “developed“, even if they are perfectly happy with the way their World is. We demand that they open their markets by lowing tariffs and removing any support for local farmers. We then flood their markets, and given that they don’t fully understand what a market based economy actually means, they are forced to give up everything they know, and succumb to our ways. We then put their wives and their kids in factories under appalling working conditions, for little or no money, working most of the day and night, so we can buy cheap shit from Primark, and then say “Well at least they’re earning” as if that’s justification. We cannot get away from the fact that we have a huge impact on the “developing” World, for our own benefit, and those people have absolutely no say over it. Illegitimate power. So who are the real victims of some abstract culture war, you dumb xenophobic, racist fucking idiot.

I do think National Identity is a human creation. And so, an abstraction. It isn’t real. We have assigned land masses to groups of people, and are deeply suspicious and unwilling to accept people who were born on other land masses, as being similar to us. We think that others, who were born on the same land mass as us, are the same, share the same beliefs and ideals and that no one else could possibly understand, and so they are “other”. It is nonsense. An abstraction.

The real social connections between people are based on ethical standards, but they are not rooted to a particular land mass indefinitely. Nor is it based on biology. If you identify your ethics, your standards, and your reasoning, to a particular culture, if that particular culture is the way you live your life, then yes, you are apart of that culture.

Pride in your Country, especially at times of international competition like the World Cup is great. I will be wearing my England shirt, for much of it. It is a time when people should indeed feel a real part of society in an increasingly individualist World. However, that sense of shared identity should be open to all who consider themselves a part of it, not just a few who happen to be white, and xenophobic.

There, now that I’ve got that off my chest, back to being an idiot:
“OMG DEY R SAYIN DAT ITS WRONG 2 SMEAR POO IN A MUZZIES FACE NOW INKASE IT OFFENDZ DEM!!!!!1 FUKIN POLITICAL CORECTNESS!!!1”