Wednesday, August 24, 2005

Texico, Arabia

More than 40 percent of Mexican adults say they would move to the U.S. if they could, and 1 in 5 say they would do so illegally if necessary, according to surveys released yesterday by the Pew Hispanic Center.

Surveys of 1,200 Mexican adults in February and 1,200 in May, conducted in their homes, show that Mexicans' rising education levels have not weakened the desire to live and work in this country.

More than a third of Mexican college graduates say they would come to the U.S. if they could, and more than 1 in 8 would do so even if they had to enter the country illegally, according to the surveys, the first of their kind.

"Contrary to what people might expect, the inclination to migrate isn't contained among Mexicans who are poor or poorly educated or with limited economic prospects," says Roberto Suro, director of the Pew Hispanic Center, a nonpartisan research group in Washington. "They're distributed across the whole breadth of Mexican society."

Mexicans' willingness to come is driven by a desire to improve their economic status and join friends and family already there, Suro says.

Despite improvements in the Mexican economy, "people with college degrees believe they have greater economic opportunities by migration to the U.S. - even illegally - than they would staying at home," Suro says. Mexicans are coming from richer, urban areas as well as poor, rural regions, he says.

More than half of Mexicans say they would be inclined to come if the U.S. established a temporary worker program.

http://www.tucsoncitizen.com


We're left with the burning question: If Mexicans want to move to the United States because of its obvious beneifts, then why shouldn't Americans, rather than have Mexicans come to America, take America to Mexicans so they can all have a share in it?

And why stop there? If America is good enough for Americans and Mexicans, why not take it everywhere? Indeed, why not take America to Sweden? Why not take it to any place a man can carve ot a home for himself, just like the Swedes did in Minnesota, just like the Mexicans did in Arizona?

We have argued many times on these pages that nation is a myth begun with the treaty of Westphalia, 1648; that nation is invalid on moral grounds; and that in practice it is nonsense to pretend that there are such things as natural boundaries that cannot be violated by the mass movement people resettling even against the will and wishes of the current residents.

We vbase our arguments on the "Melian Dialogue" of Thucyidides, ie. that the stronger will take as they please, and simple prudence dictates the best terms one can get in surrendering rather than in dying in a futile attemp to resist. We argue that William Walker, slave-trade advocate of Tennessee, moving to lands in Central America and conquering and imposing the manifest destiny of America, is a model for future expansion of American manifest destiny. We have argued that the meme of culture is developed and led by intellectuals, and that most people will follow the norms of culture uncritically, regardless of what it is. We have argued that the current state of culture and politics is as it has been for roughly 5,000 years of the Agricultural Revolution, fascist, and that it is the duty of the West to spread the revolutions of Modernity, of the Industrial, French, and American Revolutions across the face of the Earth regardless of the resistence from fascist privilege it meets.

If Mexicans want to live in America, let them: Take Mexico and make it America. Then let them have it. Let all of us have it. We will be one free people every where. Texas in Chiapas. Turn the tables by turning the mind to the unthinkable.

Muddling Through and Through














Conservative politician in Britain
claims
that Islam is like Nazism or Communism; a Muslim in Britain claims he will not allow the demonisation of Islam in Britain; and a British civil servant sums it all up famously be saying the matter needs further study.

If you're thinking, in moments of despair, of turning to the BNP as those who actually understand, from an extremist point of view if not from simple reason and clear observation of reality, to give you hope that at least someone 'gets' it, look at a response from a BNP supporter in the thick of war in southern Jugoslavia:

"A native Swede turned Muslim will kill you for the sake of Islam, and he will not spare you because you are Swedish. You cannot trust any Muslim, regardless."

Well I don't believe this. Yes his religion is telling him to do that. But there is a big difference. Like 70% of Muslims are Arabs, Iranians, and Turkish people. This is very bad and evil animals. Even if they were Christians they would act as they do today.
I think it's more in the genetics in humans. We the white Europeans (not Albanians, because they are the only no-white in EU) are very friendly people. We can not act in the name of Islam even if we were forced into Islam.

The only white people in EU which is Muslim are the Bosnians witch are Slavic (they were forced by the Ottomans), don't act as full-blooded Muslims.
***

The MoD pours tea and sympathy for Sacranie, the Guardian pours scorn all over anyone not far dhimmi enough to please bin Laden, and the Price of Wales is likely a closet Muslim.

Where does Britain go from here?

Cameron compares Islamist extremists to Nazis

Read his speech in full

Matthew Tempest, political correspondent
Wednesday August 24, 2005




The shadow education secretary, David Cameron, this morning seized the initiative in the party's leadership race with a speech comparing Islamic extremists to Nazis....

Addressing the Foreign Policy Centre thinktank this morning, Mr Cameron encroached on the territory of his main rival, David Davis, with a speech devoted to "homeland security" and British values.

In it he warned that Islamist thinking has developed which, "like Nazism and Communism, offers followers redemption through violence".

"Just like the Nazis of 1930s Germany, they want to purge corrupt cosmopolitan influences."

"Jihadism feeds into the bewilderment, alienation and lack of progress felt by many in the Muslim world," he said, emphasising that "it often bewitches the minds of gifted and educated young men".

He also claimed that the west's failure to act in the 1990s fed Osama bin Laden's belief that it lacked the strength to defend itself.

"The lesson from all of this with respect to our presence in Iraq is clear. Premature withdrawal - and failure to support the Iraqi authority - would be seen as a surrender to militant Jihadism. Nothing would embolden the terrorists more."

...Mr Cameron supported the Iraq war, and today compared those "well-meaning" people calling for withdrawal of British troops to "assuage Jihadist anger" to the appeasers of the 1930s who allowed Germany to remilitarise the Rhineland and reoccupy the Sudetenland.
***

In the wake of the home secretary's announcement today on further deportations of extremist Islamic clerics, Mr Cameron also criticised the European convention on human rights.

He told BBC Breakfast this morning: "One of the things that is stopping us is the court cases under the European convention of human rights, that says that no matter how dangerous an individual is to the UK, if there is any chance of him being harmed when being sent back to his country of origin, you simply can't do it.

"I think as a country you have to have got to have the right to say to people who may threaten this country, I am sorry you can't come and we are going to deport you."
***

http://politics.guardian.co.uk
***
Muslim groups warn of radical backlash

Read the joint statement in full

Matthew Tempest and agencies
Tuesday August 16, 2005


A coalition of Muslim leaders today warned that closing mosques deemed extremist and banning radical Islamic groups could fuel a radical sub-culture in Britain.

Nearly 40 signatories, including the Islamic Human Rights Commission and the Muslim Association of Britain, said new measures outlined by the prime minister could lead to Islamic values being "demonised".

The leaders jointly issued a six-point statement in response to the government's response to last month's London bombings.

It said: "We fear that recent events are being exploited by some sections in society to demonise legitimate Islamic values and beliefs and hence consider it appropriate to make the following observations."

[Before they rush into self-justifications we would hope they'd explain what a legitimate Islamic value is. That question is neither born of ignorance of Islam nor of malice. Name a legitimate Islamic value and we'll agree to it if it's both legitimate and Islam rather than something universal, shared by all, and not at all "Islamic" in itself.

If, as seems more likely, the Muslims are excusing murder, then let them explain why it is a matter of demonisation to object to murder.]

The statement criticised the use of the term extremism, which it said had no tangible legal meaning and was unhelpful.

The joint statement argued that the right of people to resist invasion and occupation was legitimate and said that questioning the legitimacy of Israeli occupation was also valid political expression.

[Here we must interrupt to ask just what part of sending suicide/homicide bombers to Israel to bomb Mike's Place, a jazz lounge, and what part of sending mercenaries to other nations to fight against ones own country-men and government is legitimate? It goes beyond divided loyalty into treason. Taking up arms on behalf of declared enemies of ones own nation isn't, except in the warped minds of Muslims, legitimate. It is not "valid political expression" to anyone but an idiot or a mindless ideologue.]

The leaders also criticised the decision to ban the group Hizb ur-Tahrir, which is outlawed in Germany, and which Mr Blair specifically stated he intended to proscribe.

A proposal to ban the group was described as "unwarranted, unjust and unwise" and any disagreement with a political organisation should be expressed through debate, not censorship, the leaders wrote.

The statement, co-signed by Hizb ut-Tahrir Britain, read: "If it is suggested that any laws have been broken by any individuals or groups then this must be proven by due legal process.

"Criminalising the mere possession of certain opinions is the hallmark of dictatorships, not democracies."

The closure of mosques accused of "fomenting extremism" would amount to a collective punishment of the community, the statement warned.

It may "create fear" which could lead to "the very radical sub-culture which we all seek to prevent".

Finally, the Muslim leaders said plans to deport foreign nationals to countries known for human rights abuses was "abhorrent".
***

On issuing today's statement, Massoud Shadjareh, chairman of the Islamic Human Rights Commission, said: "The British Muslim community has always been a law-abiding community and all its endeavours to create a just society have been entirely peaceful.

"However, we will not allow the demonising, devaluing or targeting of the concept of Islam which will we hold very dear."

The Home Office minister Hazel Blears also faced criticism today over the government's new anti-terrorism plans at the latest of the government's liaison meetings with regional Muslim leaders.

The minister for policing, security and community safety was in Leicester today, for a meeting with around 200 members of the Muslim community, where she was told the government's announced measures had the affect of putting an entire faith in the dock.

...Yaqub Khan, the general secretary of the Pakistan Association in Leicester, said: "I think the law on terrorism is making the whole Muslim community stand in the dock.
***

"I think there are lots of people who are opposed to Islam as a faith. This legislation is the type of legislation which has not even been introduced during war time."

After the meeting, Ms Blears said: "We are trying to consult as much as we can but recognise that the events of July 7 quite rightly have caused us to review the situation and we have to have measures in place.

"We will take the legislation through parliament and give it the proper scrutiny."
http://politics.guardian.co.uk


When the smoke clears, next time, we'll have to calmly assess our response. It's increasingly clear that we need someone better qualified to lead this war against fascist Islam and fascist dhimmitude than we have now. From here we suggest that would be you.

Tuesday, August 23, 2005

Freedom Under Attack

In the Islamic tradition of Salman Rushdie and and Theo van Gogh, radio show host Michael Graham has been fired from his job thanks to Islamic pressure group CAIR. The story, thanks to Rebecca at Jihad Watch, outlines the story. Following that is a letter from Hugh FitzGerald on organizing a boycott of the station that sacked Michael Graham. What? Will they kill the man next?

We urge you to forward this story to those you know. If you live within the listening area of WMAL, let the station know you don't want Hamas front-men telling you how to live and what you can hear on your radio. Pass the word. Whisper if you're afraid.

CAIR Crows over Graham Firing

"CAIR Hails Firing of Michael Graham" from CNS, with thanks to Andy Bostom.

An Islamic civil rights group Monday praised the firing of a Washington, D.C., radio talk show host it criticized for claiming that "Islam is a terrorist organization."

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) welcomed Michael Graham's ouster from WMAL following his initial suspension without pay for controversial remarks against Islam.

"Just as Michael Graham has the right to hold bigoted views, so, too, does our society have the right to live free of hatred and incitement," said CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad in a statement.

"We are saddened that Michael Graham would not take responsibility for his hate-filled words, but we do welcome WMAL's action as a step toward reducing the level of anti-Muslim bigotry on our nation's airwaves," said Awad...

Posted by Rebecca at August 23, 2005 05:56 PM
***

What can be done by way of getting not only the attention of WMAL, and its owners, but of all other stations? Appeals to morality or decency will not work. Economic damage can work. How can such economic damage be inflicted? Possibly by all those who are outraged making clear that those who continue to advertise on WMAL, whatever the program, will see their goods and services relentlessly boycotted. This could be announced by a group of listeners at a press conference -- that they will not tolerate this kind of censorship. At the press conference they can quote from Qur'an, Hadith, and Sira about the advice to strike "terror" into the hearts of enemies, and other useful passages (e.g., 9.29). Let the local news, let the newspapers, report. And report too on the boycott, and the urging of others to join that boycott.

It it is a matter of numbers, and of determination. Are there not enough people willing, inside and outside of the WMAL listening area, who are willing to boycott every single one of the companies that advertises on WMAL? Everyone should be delighted to do so.

So who lives in Washington who comes to this site, and who is willing to organize, and announce, such a boycott? It costs nothing, after all. It costs only the intent to choose Goods & Services X rather than Goods & Services Y, Company A over Company B, all based on the fact that Y, and B, both continue to advertise on WMAL.

Posted by: Hugh [TypeKey Profile Page] at August 23, 2005 08:21 PM

Ozlam: What Man? What Booth?


Pay no attention to the man in the booth. I am the Great Oz!

Aren't we lucky? "We're off to see the Wizard, the wonderful minister of Oz. For the cause, the cause, the cause, the cause...."

Compare the number of mutilated Australians and the number of relatives who picked up family body parts from the aeroport due to the bombing at Bali to the number of Australians who'd remember the incident if you reminded them.

Ask the average Australian how he feels about the "religion of peace" adherents and their persecution of the Christian minister and deacon on charges of vilifying Islam in Queensland. Or, dare we ask, was it closer to home? It wasn't in Tas? No?

Oh, never mind. Long ago, far away. Not to worry. The prime minister is going to have tea with the Mossie lads and get them to sort it out fair dinkum, all this enthusiasm and what have you. All is well down under. Right, mate? ***

Summit leader's 9/11 'plot' theory
Trudy Harris
23 aug 05

ONE of the Islamic leaders meeting John Howard today suspects September 11 was a conspiracy and asks "why did 4000 Jews not show up for work" on the day of the attacks?

Abdul (Ray) Rahman Deen also says there were no black box flight recorders found in the wreckage of the World Trade Centre after hijacked planes were flown into the twin towers, killing thousands.

Mr Deen, who is a development officer for the Liberal Party, says it was therefore wrong to blame any group for September 11 "without full facts and evidence".

The comments are contained in a letter sent recently to the nine core members of the peak Muslim body, Australian Federation of Islamic Councils.

Mr Deen, whose family operates a demolition company in Queensland, issued a statement saying the comments were views expressed in the community about conspiracy theories, rather than his own.

Mr Howard said he was pleased Mr Deen had clarified the comments, but AFIC president Ameer Ali, who received the letter, disagreed with Mr Deen saying the comments in the letter were clearly Mr Deen's personal views.

"There are many people who believe this in the community. This a problem and one that we need to confront," Dr Ali said.

His comments are a severe blow to the 13 Muslim leaders arriving in Canberra for today's summit with the Prime Minister.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au
***

What is going on in Australia? Are they crazy? Yes, and so is most of the world. So, what is to be done? Maybe we should just give the Muslims what they want and get it over with so we can bury the dead and move on with our lives. But then there's Hitchens.
***

8 July 2005
WE CANNOT SURRENDER
States which shelter these killers will know no peace
By Christopher Hitchens

We know very well what the "grievances" of the jihadists are.

The grievance of seeing unveiled women. The grievance of the existence, not of the State of Israel, but of the Jewish people. The grievance of the heresy of democracy, which impedes the imposition of sharia law. The grievance of a work of fiction written by an Indian living in London. The grievance of the existence of black African Muslim farmers, who won't abandon lands in Darfur. The grievance of the existence of homosexuals. The grievance of music, and of most representational art. The grievance of the existence of Hinduism. The grievance of East Timor's liberation from Indonesian rule. All of these have been proclaimed as a licence to kill infidels or apostates, or anyone who just gets in the way.
http://www.mirror.co.uk
***

Kansas just ain't what it used to be, not like when I was a child. Why, I remeber when even Australia used to be in a state of jahalyyah, if you can imagine such a thing.

Von Herder, Race, and Dhimmitude

The evils of racism cannot occur without the prior theory of race. The theory of race has its original thinkers, and one of the more important of them is von Herder. It's important to us to know of him because of the fascist dhimmi Left fetish of "anti-racism." If we allow ourselves to fall into the word traps of "race" we are then caught in a dhimmitude-induced philobarbarism we'll find it difficult to extract ourselves from. When we accept the false premis of "Peoples" rather than people, cultural identity as opposed to men and women, gender as opposed to you and me, we fall into a trap of post-modernist fascism. Our first duty is thus to define our boundaries of discussion, and one of those excludes the falsity of race, another is identity based on culture. Both are fascist fallacies.

On the origins of the concept of race, and therefore racism, of culture, and therefore cultural authenticity, cultural imperialism, and c., we must look to von Herder. In the interests of fairness we provide the following excerpt from Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

http://plato.stanford.edu:

Johann Gottfried von Herder (1744-1803) is a philosopher of the first importance. This claim depends largely on the intrinsic quality of his ideas (of which this article will try to give an impression). But another aspect of it is his intellectual influence. This has been immense both within philosophy and beyond (much greater than is usually realized). For example, Hegel's philosophy turns out to be an elaborate systematic development of Herderian ideas (especially concerning God, the mind, and history); so too does Schleiermacher's (concerning God, the mind, interpretation, translation, and art); Nietzsche is deeply influenced by Herder (concerning the mind, history, and values); so too is Dilthey (in his theory of the human sciences); even J.S. Mill has important debts to Herder (in political philosophy); and beyond philosophy, Goethe was transformed from being merely a clever but conventional poet into a great artist largely through the early impact on him of Herder's ideas.

Indeed, Herder can claim to have virtually established whole disciplines which we now take for granted. For example, it was mainly Herder (not, as is often claimed, Hamann) who established fundamental ideas about an intimate dependence of thought on language which underpin modern philosophy of language. It was Herder who, through the same ideas, his broad empirical approach to languages, his recognition of deep variations in language and thought across historical periods and cultures, and in other ways, inspired W. von Humboldt to found modern linguistics. It was Herder who developed modern hermeneutics, or interpretation-theory, in a form that would subsequently be taken over by Schleiermacher and then more systematically formulated by Schleiermacher's pupil Böckh. It was Herder who, in doing so, also established the methodological foundations of nineteenth-century German classical scholarship (which rested on the Schleiermacher-Böckh methodology), and hence of modern classical scholarship generally. It was arguably Herder who did more than anyone else to establish the general conception and the interpretive methodology of our modern discipline of anthropology. Finally, Herder also made vital contributions to the progress of modern biblical scholarship.
***
Von Herder is one of the first, one of the most important thinkers on the subject of race as ideological stance. For von Herder, faced with French imperialism at a time when the German speaking people were politically disunited, his solution to French power ws to fall into Germanness as German language, the one thing Germans had in common with each other that they did not share with the French, the one thing that made the Germans exceptional, different from the rest of Humanity. For von Herder, German language meant German identity. And because the French Revolution was one of Modernity, a universalist movement, the German nation, exceptional, embraced the counter-Enlightenment, the feudal reaction of the past glories, the romanticised idiocies of some phantastic mythic time of German greatness.

Against the universality of the French Revolution Germans looked to their own fragmentary German communities as unique and valid in themselves, outside the great sweep of French Modernity, in reaction against it. Where there was rationalism in France, Germany became irrational. If people thought in the German language, as the Sapir-Worf Hypothesis puts it, they became German because they could be nothing else. And because language is not individual, as Wittegstein is at our pains to point out, and as is truly obvious, those who share a language share a culture unique to themselves, eg Germanness. To speak ones communal language, to be one of that culture, is to be seperate from others. To be seperate is to be better than those others who are invading ones own.

There is much to be said further on von Herder's ideology of the exceptional. It lead to the rise of the Nazis, and it lead to the rise of dhimmi fascist Leftism today. When all people are "peoples," then no one is a person. When people speak the same language but are not of the ruling group, as it were, they find other identities, such as the false coin of race to buy and spend in the marketplace of ideas. Von Herder is one of the founding thinkers of race, identity through nation, and of exceptionalism by relative difference.

Belwow we can see where some of this lead.

For an very brief outline of some aspects of the history of fascism, we turn to:

http://www.u.arizona.edu/~shaked/Holocaust/lectures/lec4.html

German Romanticism and Nationalism. Volkish Movement

*Romanticism, in reaction against the rationalism of the 18th century, was a movement in philosophy & the arts, & a set of attitudes, in the latter part of the 18th c., initiated in Germany and England; it glorified feeling, emotion, sentimentality & the special characteristics of the historic past.

German thinkers concretely formulated a romantic nationalism. In Germany, these ideas were expounded by Johann Gottfried von Herder,1744-1803, August Wilhelm von Schlegel, Johann Gottlieb Fichte, and Friedrich Melchior Grimm - German folktales in Grimm's fairy tale, 1812-15. Herder, more interested in culture than in politics; most important contribution: conception of cultural nationalism; put together anthologies of traditional folk culture.

In Germany, nationalism went beyond the commonality of language & heritage." In Germany, sentimentality merged with patriotism to create a mystical concept of Germanness - the Voelkisch spirit. German citizenship was based on an obscure sense of commonality; Germanic blood & German soil created an innate ethos that could not be acquired. Only birth could infuse that volkisch spirit -German essence ... To be German-- truly German-- was not a mere matter of citizenship. ...Clearly, Jews could only pretend to be German; they were forever aliens."1

German nationalism burdened with a romantic quixotic aspect was founded by Johann Gottlieb Fichte. In 1807 -romantic nationalism; proclaimed German ethos to be the seedbed for human perfection; argued against Jewish emancipation. 1808: delivered series of 'Addresses to the German Nation,' rallied German-speaking people to resist French, & spoke of the superiority of the Germans. Anti-intellectual, anti-democratic sentiment woven into German fabric; destructive chauvinism.

So, in the 19th c., the Romantic 'Volkish' movement excluded the Jews as strangers and second-class citizens, because
- it exalted folkway and emphasized the purity of the national tradition;
- it evoked the image of a mythical golden past, with a supposed superiority;
- it produced an idealization of the Middle Ages with Christian knights.

Volkish thought attracted Germans frightened by modern age industrialization, urbanization, materialism, class conflicts, alienation. Movement appealed to farmers [and] villagers who regarded industrial city threat to native values; artisans small shopkeepers, threatened by big business; scholars, writers, teachers, students, saw in Volkish nationalism cause worthy of their idealism. Schools leading agents for dissemination Volkish ideas... Volkish thinkers glorified ancient Germanic tribes.

*German see themselves different from, better than English and French. Led them to see German culture as unique -innately superior in opposition to humanist outlook Enlightenment. Volkish held that the German people and culture had special destiny, a unique mission. Volkish thought widespread.

Following the Congress of Vienna in 1815, German hopes for national sovereignty were thwarted by the Austrian statesman, Prince Klemens Wenzel von Metternich. A period of reaction set in, and violent attacks against Jews occurred in many cities of Germany.

Growth of Racial & Political antisemitism. The "New Antisemitism." Biological Racism

Placing the nation above everything, nationalists accused national minorities of corrupting the nation's spirit; and they glorified war as a symbol of the nation's resolve and will. In the name of national power and unity, they persecuted minorities at home and stirred up hatred against other nations. In the pursuit of national power, nationalists increasingly embraced militaristic, imperialistic, and racist doctrines.

*Racism: belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others; discrimination or prejudice based on race. Division of people into races -black, white, yellow- a system of classification without value judgments. Race became racism when innate characteristics were assigned by pseudo-scientists to biological attributes=biological racism.

"Racists asserted that innate racial differences prevent Jews from assimilating with the superior culture of the host countries; ... the old religious bias fed this new strain of an old virus."9

Growth of Racial & Political antisemitism. The "New Antisemitism." Biological Racism

Schleunes: Racism in late 19th c. became an all-embracing doctrine for explaining human behavior, whether it was religious, political, cultural or economic.

Racial Antisemitism and the Aryan Myth

*In the 19th c., national-racial considerations supplemented a traditional, biased Christian perception of Jews & Judaism.
*However, whereas Christian anti-Judaism believed that through conversion, Jews could escape the curse of their religion, racial antisemites who used the language of Social Darwinism, said that Jews were racially stained and eternally condemned by their genes. Their evil & worthlessness derived from inherited racial characteristics, which could not be altered by conversion,' or expulsion.

"Social Darwinism, with its theory of natural selection ... in the late 19th century also provided a rationale for the new antisemitism. The social Darwinist notion of the struggle of races for survival became a core doctrine of the Nazi party after World War I and provided the "scientific" and "ethical" justification for genocide. Jews' destruction is a must." 10

"In a climate of fervent nationalism & jingoism, there were increasing allegations of Jewish 'cosmopolitanism' and 'clannish separatism.' Books & pamphlets appeared in France & Germany alleging that the 'Semites' were responsible for everything that was dark, ... menacing & destructive, whereas all that was pure, creative, heroic & good was the product of 'Aryan' influence. This biological view of human potential & moral worth was, in effect, a pseudo-scientific hotchpotch of the new racial, linguistic & anthropological theories, blended with the vestige of old religious hatreds and fears.

The Jews, it was argued, were racially incapable of improvement. No matter how hard they tried to be German - ... to convert to Christianity -no matter how great the impression of integration, the Jews were depicted as parasitic, scheming, manipulative & venomous, constantly plotting to 'take over' economic control of the state. ...

*Racial theorists - Those who developed theories, which were based primarily on opinions, prejudices, and non-scientific observation, to prove that one race was superior to another.

Racial theorists of the 19th century, were the first to confuse the term 'Aryan' -a linguistic term, with race. The term 'Semitic' also had a linguistic origin). The actual categories of Semite & Aryan were borrowed very loosely from the field of linguistics, in which these terms related to families of languages (and not to 'racial' groups).3

*Aryan - Originally, a term for peoples speaking the languages of Europe and India. Twisted by Nazis, who viewed those of Germanic background as the best examples of "superior," "Aryan race." ) As used by the Nazis, the term refers to a non-Jewish Caucasian, especially of the Nordic type.
***
The German Romantic movement of the late 18th and 19th centuries is essential to our understanding of the modern-day post modernist fascist dhimmi Left because it is a continuum rather than a new form of ideology. Fascsim didn't spring full grown from the leg of Zeus in the 1930, and it didn't die in the 1940s. It began as a clear political and social movment, as opposed to the general state of humanity since the first seeds of the Argircultural Revolution some 5,000 years ago, in the 1780, and it continues to this day.

In this day the Left is fascist, the continuation of fascism from 1945. what we assume is good and decent liberalism of the Left is often nothing but true fascsim, and one place we can look to discover its roots is in von Herder's exceptionalism of the Volk. When one group is special, then others ae special too in their own ways, maybe. And maybe special in ways that aren't very pleasant. When we break people into groups rather than people as individuals, we can create races, we can create communities, we can assign privilege. We'll come back to this topic over and over for the duration of this blog. For now we'll turn to one of our favorite historians.

Below is a review by a brilliant and, one might suggest, one of the few sensible historians of our miserable time. Our focus here is on comments regarding von Herder, and the extra detail should shed some light on the current moral/cultural relativist theory in the West. For reasons of reader fatigue we present only excerpts of this review.

http://www.sydneyline.com

Historiography and civilization
Keith Windschuttle
Washington Times

May 9 1999

While refugees from Kosovo stream across borders and talking heads in television studios debate the merits of the Serbian and NATO cases, one name unlikely to be mentioned as responsible for the current debacle is that of the German philosopher of history, Johann Gottfried von Herder. Apart from those who have studied the history of ideas in the late eighteenth century, Herder is largely unknown. Yet he deserves to be recognized as much as his later compatriot Karl Marx as an architect of many of the disasters that have befallen Europe in the twentieth century.

Herder was the man who originated two of the most influential concepts of the modern era: cultural relativism and self-determination. He said that people who constitute a language group, no matter how small and undistinguished, have their own culture which cannot be judged by outside standards and which are authentic in their own terms - all cultures are equal but different. He also argued that all unique cultures deserve to determine their own destiny -- every culture should form a nation.

Though Herder was a conservative, his ideas let loose on Europe the then radical concept of nationalism. Within a century, the wars of German unification were waged to enforce the idea that all German volkes must be affiliated to the German state. In the twentieth century the extension of this idea produced the First and Second World Wars. Under Hitler, its logic led to the extirpation of those who did not qualify as part of volk culture.

One of Herder's disciples was the great nineteenth century German historian, Leopold von Ranke, who, after reading a collection of medieval folk ballads, wrote a history of the people among whom they had originated, the Serbs, thereby inspiring the awakening of their national identity from its centuries-long domination by the Ottoman Empire. Though Serbian aspirations were subsequently curbed by the rise of the new empire of the Soviets, the collapse of Communism has seen their revival in the 1990s. Herder's romantic nationalism is today represented in the Balkans by the sinister euphemism of ethnic cleansing.

In North America and Western Europe, however, the historic track record of these ideas in fostering the most primitive kind of tribal hubris is blithely ignored. In our own societies, cultural relativism and self-determination remain inviolable, self-validating concepts from which the aura of innocence still shines. The past twelve months alone have seen them gain some remarkable endorsements. Canada, for instance, has just given one fifth of its lands to the Eskimos and the English Parliament seems determined to see Scotland become an independent nation.

Perhaps this is why, in his discussion of Herder's role as a philosopher of history in the book reviewed here, Donald Kelley in Faces of History: Historical Inquiry from Herodotus to Herder[1] feels no obligation to discuss his ideas critically nor to mention their disastrous consequences in central and eastern Europe. Indeed, Kelley toes the line of the prevailing Western intellectual establishment by defending Herder on these very grounds.

In Herder's time, the philosophes of the French Enlightenment made a clear distinction between those societies that had attained the higher plane of civilization and those who languished as barbarians. Herder's cultural relativism, however, would have none of this. There could be no barbarians since all cultures were authentic. As Kelley explains: "Herder's point was that in contrast to the civilization of scholars and philosophers, culture could involve the whole people (Kultur des Volkes) and so represented the best road to an understanding not only of history but also of human nature."

Today, there are very few Western historians who dare to use the word "civilization" because of the politically incorrect value judgement embedded within it. Almost none, however, would shy from the term "culture". Indeed, the field of "cultural studies", a combination of literary theory, criticism and ethnography, which owes its central ideas to the principles founded by Herder, has been the fastest growing area of the humanities in America in the 1990s.
***
Those of us who see his [Herodotus'] compatriot, Thucydides, as the first genuine historian, emphasise the latter's pains to get his facts right by using "only the plainest evidence", but especially by his efforts to distance himself from his own political system and religion. By attempting to report objectively on the Peloponnesian War, Thucydides took a profoundly revolutionary step for both himself and for the legacy his work has bequeathed. To look down, as it were, upon your society and become a critic of your own practice, is a characteristically Western notion and, indeed, one of the great strengths of Western culture-possibly even its greatest strength. We now take this notion-the attempt to be objective and self-critical, rather than subjective and self-defensive-so much for granted that we assume it is a perfectly natural thing to do, whereas to many other cultures it has long been something shocking.

Kelley, however, will have none of this. He adopts the position of the German hermeneutic theorist Hans-Georg Gadamer who claims that our use of language makes such self-awareness impossible. Kelley doesn't argue for this position, he simply asserts it, as if Gadamer's authority is sufficient to make it so.
***

[A] proper account of the Western historical tradition might have been used to show how this tradition contributed to the development of a genuinely civilised world view -- how it developed a distaste for ethnocentrism and racism and came to regard all human beings (though not all human cultures) as fundamentally equal, albeit equally flawed. Such an account might also have been critical of those theorists like Herder and his successors who rejected the Enlightenment in favour of the narrow-minded, tribal concepts of cultural demarcation, ethnic destiny and rule of the volk.

1. Donald R. Kelley, Faces of History: Historical Inquiry from Herodotus to Herder, Yale University Press, New Haven
***

Von Herder and other of the Counter-Enlightenment, are today the public intellectuals who form the public meme. And yet few know of them, what they wrote, or why we assume that their works are our opinions. The concept of race is one such idea most take as axiomatic: we are something that others are not.

For the Left fascist dhimmis, the Islamic world is something quite different in and of itself, equally valid for its own internality, ie. it's Muslim victims. To create a false identity of race or of other identity is to seperate people from Humanity, assigning some rights and others not according to accidents of birth and circumstance. If the is exceptionalism, there is no universality. If there is no universality, then of course Islam has a right to enslave its populations, and we must honor its expection to the universe of others. That, dear reader, is in our opinion, a fascist postion that we refuse to accept, based as it is on nothing at all but wind.

We will again return to this topic. It is essential that we see clearly the origins of fascism to see the Left as fascist, and thereby to decide if indeed we are fascists too.

Monday, August 22, 2005

Islam In Britain

So long as the likes of Sir Iqbal Sacranie and the members of the Islamic councils of Britain are in charge of the Islamic discourse in Britain, extolling the virtues of such as Maududi, praising the governance of Shari'a states such as Pakistan, then Muslims in Britain will continue to whip each other into frenzies of religious madness; and they will kill you.


The British are lame, hobbled by their own smug superiority, clinging to their sanctimonious dhimmi fascist cliches as if it were the voice of God speaking commandments. Below we have three pieces on Islam, the first being excerpts from al-BBC in which Sacranie explains that he wishes to have a more exclusive "Holocaust Rememberance Day" memorial, one that doesn't focus on the devastation of the Jews, but that focuses on the terrorists of Palestine, Chechnia, and Kashmir. For once, and likely not for a long time again, the BBC picks up the ball and runs toward the goal posts.

But to be fair, not all agreed that the BBC did an honest or accurate job of journalism, and we present some excerpts from south west Asia to give some balance.

And with the talk of Maududi and the glories of the tribal areas of Pakistan that Iqbal Sacranie thinks are so great, we turn to Africa for the opinions a a jouralist who is none to happy with the West.

We follow those posts with more on Sacraie and excerts from the MOD praising and cloying treatment of a terrorist poligion. And then more on Sacranie and the state of the nation of Islamic Britain.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama

This year's Holocaust Memorial Day was organised by the government to mark the 60th anniversary of the most shameful event in modern European history.

Tony Blair, Prime Minister: For many here today, the Holocaust survivors, there is no need to state this day's significance."

John Ware: While some Muslims went, the MCB chose to stay away.

John Ware: You supported the boycott.

Sir Iqbal Sacranie: Not the boycott we did not boycott it, what we said¿

John Ware: You didn't go to it.

Sir Iqbal Sacranie: No. That doesn't¿ a boycott has a¿ a boycott has a total.. a different connotations. It denies the... We do not deny the fact that that¿

John Ware: Well how would you define your non presence at Holocaust Day, being the only faith group that wasn't present, how would you define it?

Sir Iqbal Sacranie: No, that was wrong, there were people who attended from the Muslim faith.

John Ware: No, the Muslim Council of Britain. How would you define.. if it wasn't a boycott, how would you define your decision not to attend?

Sir Iqbal Sacranie: Indeed, a very principled position we have taken. Of course we share the pain and the grief of our Jewish friends when they.. when they suffered the pain through the holocaust, but the point is that it has to be taken all of them.

John Ware: The principle the MCB say they were defending was to make Holocaust Memorial Day more "inclusive".

They wrote to the Home Office saying they would only attend if the event included "the sufferings of all people" and in particular what they called

"Other ongoing genocide and human rights abuses around the world, notably in the occupied Palestinian territories, Chechnya Kashmir etc." John Ware: If it had been a principle.

Sir Iqbal Sacranie: Yes¿

John Ware: I would respectfully suggest you would have included all kinds of conflicts all over the world involving not just Muslims but other faiths. You chose Kashmir, Chechnya, Palestine, in the reverse order.

Sir Iqbal Sacranie: If you look at the statement, and I would strongly advise you to look at the statement, advise you to look at what was the document which was submitted to the Home Office which made it absolutely clear that it is all atrocities¿ Rwanda, Bosnia, it happened to be the fact, it is there, the vast majority of atrocities that we have seen in these modern times have been Muslims.

John Ware: You've cited Rwanda in your statement?

Sir Iqbal Sacranie: It is, it was cited there, it's been quoted time and again.

John Ware: In your statement to the Home Office?

Sir Iqbal Sacranie: Indeed it is. It's clearly been mentioned."

John Ware: It's true - the MCB did cite Rwanda - but only after the story broke accusing them of boycotting Holocaust Memorial day.

When the MCB published their letter to the Home Office it mentioned by name only Palestine, Chechnya and Kashmir.

***
Observer's investigation into the Muslim Council of Britain was ill-researched

22nd August, 2005
by Fe'reeha M. Idrees
Freelance Journalist

As a staunch supporter of the mainstream media it was shocking for me to read The Observer's front page investigative piece last week detailing "radical links".

My complaint is not that the newspaper's Martin Bright wrote against the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB), but that it printed an ill-researched feature built on loose assumptions and arguments.

The Observer's primary hypothesis, that the MCB has extremist views and links with a radical organisation in Pakistan, was far fetched to start with.

Pakistan has extremist organisations, a legacy of the Afghan jihad during General Zia ul Haq's regime, but Jamaat-e-Islami, the party mentioned by Bright, cannot fall in the above category.

The party has a traditional view of Islam which may not coincide with Western ideas, but by the same standards that do not allow an extremist Mullah to spread hatred against the Western lifestyle, it should not be a cause of discomfort for a British reporter. (More:)

http://www.asiansinmedia.org
***

Inside Another Den

Ebow Daniel | Posted: Monday, August 22, 2005

From Kashmir to Bosnia and from Mogadishu to the Jolo islands of The Philippines it was clear that Muslims everywhere were at the receiving end of international politics as defined and determined by the US, its Western allies and their preferences or interests. For these extremists, until and unless the US was brought to its knees, it was very likely that the Qoranic injunction to seek the welfare of the entire Ummah would remain unfulfilled, reason for which something had to be done.

It must be noted that all the recognized terrorist leaders strictly adhere to the extremist teachings of Maulana Maududi, Hasan al-Banna and Syed Qutb and have managed to hoodwink lots of adherents globally by continuously playing the religious card so effectively to promote their cause.

Contrary to the belief that Baghdad is the sole cause of the attacks on London, this writer is inclined to assert that the roots of the recent violent acts are attributable to the organizing principles that underpin life on both sides of the Durand Line between Pakistan and Afghanistan. This stretch of land that is home to the restless tribes of Pakistan and Afghanistan, notorious for their morbid opposition to the United States and its allies and seeking to secede if possible, is also widely believed to be the hiding place of international persona-non-gratis like Osama bin Laden, Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar and Mullah Omar.

The tribal enclaves of Baluchistan, the North West Frontier Province, the Kunar Province and Waziristan to name but a few contain some of the most hostile and lawless peoples on the face of the planet. The lawlessness in the area is ironically the means by which their livelihoods are sustained for it permits the trade in opium to flourish in an intricate network that ensures that warlords, international renegades and terrorist godfathers, together with their cohorts are never in want or need irrespective of the freeze on their assets held abroad.

It is with some of the proceeds of this illicit [opium] trade that the myriad of madrassas are run and supported to become hatcheries for the production of human explosives. Of notable concern in this intriguing sequence is the establishment of mobile training camps to run alongside the madrassas.

Unfortunately terrorists have no regard for the law as they are driven more by a combination of warped religious fervour, morbid hatred and strict adherence to the instructions of their mentors.

It is for this reason that London is likely to experience even more devastating attacks before the end of the year. (More)
http://www.accra-mail.com
***

Sir Iqbal Sacranie, Secretary-General of the Muslim Council of Britain, responds to the Observer reports

Sunday August 21, 2005
The Observer


Last week The Observer published a front-page article, a two-page investigation and an editorial, all seeking to question the Muslim Council of Britain.

The Observer claimed to have uncovered the MCB's 'roots in the extremist politics of Pakistan'. What roots, though? The reporter, Martin Bright, said senior MCB figures had stated that Mawlana Mawdudi - the founder of the Jamaat-i-Islami party - was an 'important Islamic thinker' (and indeed he was) and that they shared some of his views while disagreeing with others.

The Jamaat-i-Islami party happens to be a perfectly legitimate and democratic Islamic party, which through an alliance with other parties is actually in power in the North West Frontier Province of Pakistan. [cont.]
***

We wondered about that, and went to wikipedia for some insight:

[Today, the line is often referred to as one drawn on water, symbolizing the porous border between Afghanistan and Pakistan. The line has come under special attention of late, as it has become notorious for allowing Taliban fighters and terrorists to freely travel back and forth, finding safety and shelter in the autonomous Pashtun regions of the Federally Administered Tribal Areas.

NWFP continues to have an image problem. Even within Pakistan it is regarded as a "radical state" and a "backwater." In reality [?] the NWFP has been the most stable and peaceful of Pakistani provinces. The plagues of sectarianism, terrorism and insurrection have not been a problem in the North-West Frontier. www.wikipedia.com]
***

So much for that. Let's continue with Sacranie:

[cont.] The Observer's editorial condemned the MCB's refusal to attend the Holocaust Memorial Day while neglecting to mention the reason. The MCB has called for a more inclusive 'Genocide Memorial Day' and believes that this would make the 'Never Again' subtext of the day more effective and pertinent in a world where the past few years have witnessed carnage in Srebrenica, Chechnya and Rwanda. By singling out the Holocaust Memorial Day as a central reason to criticise the MCB, The Observer confirmed the MCB's argument that there is indeed an 'Israel test' to which British Muslims are being subjected.
http://observer.guardian.co.uk

***
It's our position that Islam is a fascist poligion. We look at so-called moderates such as Sacranie, see him obfuscating and lying, praising Maududi, the ideologue who is cause of the deaths of millions of Indians in the civil war that erupted in 1948 at the creation of Pakistan, and we see Sacranie praising one of the worst hell-holes on Earth, N.W Frontier Province, Pak., as a fine place. Few of us require any further knowledge of the inherent fascism of Islam than what we came with, but it's nice to see in print the words of the fascists themselves.

It's not so much fun when we see the words of the British government, in the following case the MOD, praising Islam:

From: M.o.D., U.K.

CDS attends Armed Forces Presentation to the Muslim Council of Britain Published

Monday 14th March 2005

The Chief of Defence Staff, General Sir Michael Walker, and a small team of senior officers gave a presentation to the Muslim Council of Britain's governing body at the Islamic Cultural Centre, Regents Park on 12 March 2005.

The event was hosted by Iqbal Sacranie, the Secretary General of the Muslim Council of Britain and Dr Ahmad Al-Dubayan, the Director General of the Islamic Cultural Centre.The aim of the presentation was to speak directly to leaders of the Muslim community to explain what is being done to ensure that the Armed Forces is genuinely inclusive and representative of the society it exists to serve; to address any concerns and questions Muslim community leaders have about Muslims serving in the Armed Forces; and, more generally, to increase awareness of career opportunities on offer for young people, in particular those from the Muslim community.

The Chief of Defence Staff said:

"I would like to pay tribute to the Muslim Council of Britain's invaluable work to promote better community relations and increase knowledge and understanding of the Muslim faith within British society. The Muslim Council of Britain has made a real and lasting contribution to the creation of a just and tolerant society.

"I would also like to emphasise my personal commitment to creating Armed Forces which reflect more fully the religious, cultural and ethnic diversity of the society we serve. In return we can offer fulfilling careers and high quality training and education."

Responding, Mr Sacranie said:

"The MCB welcomes moves by our Armed Forces towards greater recognition of the needs of its Muslim recruits. The establishment of the post of a Muslim Adviser to the Ministry of Defence and the recently proposed appointment of an Imam to cater for the spiritual welfare of British Muslim recruits are both commendable steps.

"We hope that we will see increased numbers of British Muslims taking up positions in our Armed Forces just as they have done so in other sectors of our society. For this to be successful, however, it is imperative that the high reputation of our armed forces is zealously protected and maintained and not allowed to be tainted by any misbehaviour or illegal actions."

There are just over 300 personnel in the Armed Forces who have declared their religion as Islam

The Armed Forces are committed to creating a working environment in which everyone is not only valued and respected, but encouraged to realise their full potential, regardless of race, ethnic origin, religion, gender, social background or sexual orientation.

Religious belief is treated as a private matter but, recognising the unique and demanding circumstances of Service life, the Armed Forces aim to facilitate and support individuals' spiritual needs where they can, subject to vital considerations of operational effectiveness and health and safety.

Service dress regulations take account of cultural and religious differences, such as permitting individuals to wear items of religious significance. On occasion, there may be some restrictions regarding clothing worn in an operational environment, or where health and safety is an issue.

The Armed Forces make every effort to cater for all special religious dietary requirements. Halal (as well as Kosher and vegetarian) meals can be provided in Service Mess Facilities and are normally readily available in the form of Operational Ration Packs for operations and exercises.
***

It's not all sweetness and light. Sacranie gets upset with England when it doesn't follow the dhimmi line as completely as he'd wish it to:

Muslim leaders in feud with the BBC

Muslim Council official claims Panorama is 'pro-Israel'
Observer investigation reveals group's extremist links


Martin Bright, home affairs editor
Sunday August 14, 2005
The Observer


Britain's most powerful Islamic organisation was accused last night of failing mainstream Muslim Britain after it complained of a 'pro-Israel agenda' at the BBC in a Panorama programme on the faith to be aired next week.

In an extraordinary letter obtained by The Observer, the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) has told director general Mark Thompson that the Panorama investigation of organisations representing Muslims in Britain, will 'inflame mistrust'.

The letter will be used by critics of the MCB as evidence that it is out of touch amid growing concern that it does not represent moderate Muslims.

A separate Observer investigation into the group has revealed its roots in the extremist politics of Pakistan. Its secretary general, Sir Iqbal Sacranie, and media spokesman Inayat Bunglawala have both expressed admiration for the late Maulana Maududi, founder of the radical Jamaat-i-Islami party, which campaigns non-violently for an Islamic state in Pakistan.

Maududi, a prominent figure in the 20th century Islamic revivalist movement, was a virulent anti-feminist who believed Muslims should struggle to rid their countries of Western influences. The Islamic Foundation, an affiliate of the MCB with close and influential links to the government, was founded by Khurshid Ahmad, a prominent member of the Jamaat-i-Islami.

A second affiliate, the strictly orthodox Jamiat Ahl-i-Hadith, based in Birmingham, practises a form of Islam which demands strict separatism from mainstream society. Its website describes the ways of 'disbelievers' as 'based on sick and deviant views concerning their societies, the universe and their very existence'.

The MCB is a loose structure of more than 400 affiliates, and there is no suggestion they are all extremist.

The BBC programme is thought to be highly critical of some MCB affiliates for their links to extremist Islamic ideology. Panorama, reporter John Ware is thought to challenge Sacranie over his boycott of this year's Holocaust Memorial Day, his attendance at a memorial service for Hamas leader Sheikh Yassin and his equivocal stance on Palestinian suicide bombers.

The letter from Bung-lawala, sent last Thursday, repeatedly refers to the 'pro-Israel lobby' at the BBC, which is said to be behind the programme, although it does not specify who it means. Bunglawala says: 'It appears the Panorama team is more interested in furthering a pro-Israeli agenda than assessing the work of Muslim organisations in the UK.

He regrets that 'the Panorama team seem intent on creating mistrust by serving the interests of the pro-Israeli lobby and undermining community relations'.

The letter goes on: 'The BBC should not allow itself to be used by the highly placed supporters of Israel in the British media to make capital out of the 7 July atrocities in London.'

A senior BBC source said: 'It's plain wrong - insulting - to suggest we have an agenda and frankly preposterous.'

Sacranie said: 'We are concerned that the test of whether we are doing good work in the UK is whether we pass the Israel test. We have a clear position: we oppose the Israeli occupation. But our prime concern is with the Muslim community in this country.' Since 7 July he believed the MCB had been subjected to 'a campaign orchestrated by the pro-Israel lobby'.

A BBC spokeswoman said last night: 'The BBC rejects completely any allegation of institutional or programme bias and is confident the Panorama programme will be fair and impartial.'

The BBC has not been known for its pro-Israeli stance. In July 2003, Danny Seaman, the Israeli government's head of press, accused it of 'demonising and vilifying' the state of Israel.

Some leading Muslims are also critical. Abdul-Rehman Malik, of the Muslim magazine Q-News, said MCB leaders should clarify its position on suicide bombers. 'You cannot be equivocal about innocent people. An innocent person in Tel Aviv is the same as an innocent person in Baghdad or London.'

Last week, novelist Salman Rushdie, given a death sentence by Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran after the publication of The Satanic Verses, criticised Tony Blair for promoting Sacranie as a moderate voice.
***

But really, who is out of control in Britain? It's not just the Muslims bombing commuter trains. Look at the article below to see Her Majesty's government at work with the followers of Maududi, and think how much they'd love to see a shari'a state version of the old public school dorm where they gained their fondest memories:

Radical links of UK's 'moderate' Muslim group

The Muslim Council of Britain has been courted by the government and lauded by the Foreign Office but critics tell a different and more disturbing story. Martin Bright reports

Sunday August 14, 2005
The Observer


The Muslim Council of Britain is officially the moderate face of Islam. Its pronouncements condemning the London bombings have been welcomed by the government as a model response for mainstream Muslims. The MCB's secretary general, Iqbal Sacranie, has recently been knighted and senior figures within the organisation have the ear of ministers.

But an Observer investigation can reveal that, far from being moderate, the Muslim Council of Britain has its origins in the extreme orthodox politics in Pakistan. And as its influence increases through Whitehall, many within the Muslim community are growing concerned that this self-appointed organisation is crowding out other, genuinely moderate, voices of Muslim Britain.

Far from representing the more progressive or spiritual traditions within Islam, the leadership of the Muslim Council of Britain and some of its affiliates sympathise with and have links to conservative Islamist movements in the Muslim world and in particular Pakistan's Jamaat-i-Islami, a radical party committed to the establishment of an Islamic state in Pakistan ruled by sharia law.

One of the MCB's affiliate organisations, Leicester's Islamic Foundation, was founded by Khurshid Ahmad, a senior figure in Jamaat-i-Islami.

Another is Birmingham-based Jamiat Ahl-e-Hadith, an extremist sect whose website says: 'The disbelievers are misguided and their ways based on sick or deviant views concerning their societies, their universe and their very existence.' It urges its adherents not to wear Western hats, walk dogs, watch sport or soap operas and forbids 'mingling and shaking hands between men and women'.

Jamaat-i-Islami activists in Pakistan have been involved in protests against images of women on adverts in public places. The organisation's founder, Maulana Maududi, was a fierce opponent of feminism who believed that women should be kept in purdah - seclusion from male company. Although the MCB's leadership distances itself from some of these teachings, it has been criticised for having no women prominently involved in the organisation.

Last week, Salman Rushdie warned in an article in the Times that Sacranie had been a prominent critic during the Satanic Verses affair and advised that the MCB leader should not be viewed as a moderate. In 1989, Sacranie said 'death was perhaps too easy' for the writer. Rushdie also criticised Sacranie for boycotting January's Holocaust Memorial Day ceremony. 'If Sir Iqbal Sacranie is the best Mr Blair can offer in the way of a good Muslim, we have a problem,' said Rushdie. A Panorama documentary to be screened next Sunday will also be highly critical.

The MCB has now written to the BBC's director general, Mark Thompson, to complain about the programme in which reporter John Ware will challenge Sacranie to justify his boycott of Holocaust Memorial Day and clarify the MCB's position on Palestinian suicide bombers. In the letter, Inayat Bunglawala, the MCB's media spokesman says: 'It appears that the Panorama team is more interested in furthering a pro-Israeli agenda than assessing the work of Muslim organisations in the UK.'

The origins of the Muslim Council of Britain can be traced to the storm around the publication of the Satanic Verses in 1988. India was the first country to ban the book and many Muslim countries followed suit. Opposition to the book in Britain united people committed to a traditionalist view of Islam, of which the founders of the Muslim Council of Britain was a part.

The MCB was officially founded in November 1997, shortly after Tony Blair came to power, and has had a close relationship with the Labour government ever since. Its detractors claim it was the creature of Jack Straw, but his predecessor as Home Secretary, Michael Howard, also played a role in its establishment as a semi-official channel of communication with British Muslims. It remains particularly influential within the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, which has a little-known outreach department which works with Britain's Muslims. The FCO pamphlet Muslims in Britain is essentially an MCB publication and the official ministerial celebration of the Muslim festival of Eid is organised jointly with the MCB.

The Observer has learnt that the MCB used its influence in Whitehall to gain a place on the board of trustees of the Festival of Muslim Cultures, planned for next year. This extravaganza is designed to demonstrate the diversity and vibrancy of Muslim culture. The festival is funded by the British Council and has Prince Charles as its patron, but it has been told that it will need to be compliant with Islamic 'sharia law' in order to gain the MCB's full support.

The organisers are now concerned that the festival will lose political backing if they invite performers who are seen to be 'un-Islamic'.

Festival organisers already hope to invite the Uzbek singer, Sevara Nezarkhan, who does not wear the headscarf or 'hijab' and has worked with Jewish 'klezmer' musicians. It also intends to exhibit the 14th-century world history of Rashid al-Din, which represents the human form and the prophet Mohammed himself, thought by some strict Muslims to be forbidden. Other performers could include the Senegalese musician Youssou N'Dour and the Bangladeshi-British dancer Akram Khan.

The Observer understands that the Foreign Office insisted that the festival organisers involved the MCB before they would give them their full backing. As a result, an MCB nominee has been taken on to the festival's board of trustees. One source close to the festival organisers said: 'We constantly found our efforts were being blocked and it kept coming back to the MCB and its sympathisers within Whitehall.'

The chairman of the festival's trustees, Raficq Abdulla, said: 'We will welcome the MCB's trustee and hope his contribution will prove valuable. But we insist that the festival is not dominated by any ideology. The aim is to capture the values of Muslim cultures and bring them into the British mainstream. We are not here to be the mouthpiece of any Muslim organisation.'

The strain of Islamic ideology favoured by the MCB leadership and many of its affiliate organisations is inspired by Maulana Maududi, a 20th-century Islamic scholar little known in the West but hugely significant as a thinker across the Muslim world. His writings, which call for a global Islamic revival, influenced Sayyid Qutb, usually credited as the founding father of modern Islamic radicalism and one of the inspirations for al-Qaeda.

In Maududi's worldview all humanity was split into believers (practising Muslims) and non-believers, whom he describes as 'barbarians'. He was deeply critical of notions such as nationalism and feminism and called on Muslims to purge themselves of Western influence.

In 1941 he formed Jamaat-i-Islami and remained its leader until 1972. His writings do not advocate terrorism. But the language of Jihad in Islam, written in 1930, may seem violent to a Western reader: 'The objective of Islamic "jihad" is to eliminate the rule of an un-Islamic system and establish in its stead an Islamic system of state rule. Islam does not intend to confine this revolution to a single state or a few countries; the aim of Islam is to bring about a universal revolution.'

Abdul-Rehman Malik, contributing editor of Muslim magazine Q-News, said: 'Maududi saw the world in the same way that Sayyid Qutb saw the world: they both divided humanity into true believers or those in a state of ignorance. Many of the affiliates of The Muslim Council of Britain are inspired by Maududi's ideology.'

Malik said that its leaders needed to be clearer about its position on suicide bombers. 'You cannot be equivocal about innocent people. An innocent person in Tel Aviv is the same as an innocent person in Baghdad or London. The MCB has never clarified any of the critical issues and now the chickens are coming home to roost.'

The MCB's Inayat Bunglawala said he had a deep respect for Maududi and defended the MCB's affiliation to Khurshid Ahmad's Islamic Foundation. He said: 'Maududi is a very important Muslim thinker. The book that brought me to practise Islam was Now Let Us Be Muslims by Maududi. As for Jamaat-i-Islami, it is a perfectly legal body in Pakistan. There is no suggestion that the Islamic Foundation has done anything wrong. They have done fantastic work in publishing literature on Islam, including works for children.'

A spokesman for the Islamic Foundation confirmed that Khurshid Ahmad was chairman of its board of trustees. 'The Islamic Foundation does not have links with the Jamaat-i-Islami. We promote assimilation, integration and encourage community cohesion. We do publish books by Maududi, but we feel these are books of merit to British Muslims.'

Sacranie said he believed that recent attacks on the Muslim Council of Britain were inspired by a pro-Israeli lobby in the British media. 'The MCB carries out its activities through its affiliates. There are more than 400 organisations involved, representing 56 nationalities. Yes there is a following for Maududi in the UK. I am not a scholar, but in many areas I am inspired by what he has to say and in others I am not.'

There is no suggestion that Sacranie and other prominent figures in the Muslim Council of Britain are anything but genuine in their condemnation of the terrorist bombings of the 7 July. But their claims to represent a moderate or progressive tendency in Islam are becoming increasingly difficult to sustain.

The biggest test for the MCB will be its reaction to the more challenging aspects of the Festival of Muslim cultures. On this Sacranie was clear: 'If any activities are seen to contradict the teachings of Islam, then we will oppose them. If you organise a festival in the name of Islam then it must be Islamic. We will advise them accordingly.'

There are those in Britain struggling to transform the austere image Islam has in this country, including the organisers of the Festival of Muslim Cultures, who will not find his words reassuring.
***

It's clear that the bum-boys of the Britsh civil service are working for the Muslim terrorists who kill the British public.

But: "What is to be done?"