Saturday, 8 March 2014

Phil Woolas Verdict: MPACUK Make History

First posted: 11 November 2010

[The MPACUK article follows the comment; after the dotted line.]

The first thing that should said, before the comment, is that MPACUK is a far more dangerous Islamist organisation than, say, the Muslim Defence League or Muslims Against Crusaders. This is primarily because it has a 'moderate' image and it is taken seriously by both Muslims and non-Muslims. It may even have more of a say on things Islamic than, say, Hizb ut-Tahrir, at least in the UK.

It’s very nice to see the militant Muslim Public Affairs Committee (UK) flexing its Islamist muscles again to the 'ignorant' kuffar-'cattle'. However, this piece is just plain bragging. Yes; another victory for MPACUK and therefore Islam. God, they really love their victories, don’t they.

What ‘long haul’, precisely, is MPACUK ‘in for’? The Islamification of the globe? It doesn’t say. And what is this ‘game’ it is playing? A game against the infidel? It doesn’t say here either. But it’s easy to guess.

Ridley claims that Phil Woolas has been ‘rumbled for playing the race and religion cards’. Isn’t that what Ridley is doing, on behalf of Islam? Is that what MPACUK is doing, on behalf of Islam? Isn’t that what every Muslim MP, councillor and journalist does, on behalf of Islam? By Muslim standards, isn’t politics and religion meant to be fused anyway?

She also accuses Woolas of ‘fuelling Islamophobia’. Not that again! There is one thing Muslims like Ridley and MPACUK overlook when they talk about things fuelling Islamophobia. Yes; perhaps it is Muslims or Islam itself which fuels Islamophobia! Is that not even possible?

What’s the worst anyway – ‘seizing on anti-Muslim sentiment in Oldham’ or seizing pro-Muslim sentiment in Oldham? What Woolas has seized is something which already exists! A clear and distinct separation of Muslims from non-Muslims in this northern town; something brought on, primarily, by Muslim self-ghettoisation (or separatism or supremacism – take your pick). Tribal Muslim politics is the fault of, well, tribal Muslims. Woolas, being a typical politician, has simply fixed onto what already exists and that which is already a problem. So perhaps Woolas didn’t need to ‘make white folks angry’. Perhaps they were already angry… but without a political voice to express that anger!

Doesn’t it say it all? Yvonne Ridley (and MPACUK!) actually criticises Woolas for ‘stamping the Union Jack emblem on his campaign literature’. What a disgrace! The Leftist Muslim/Islam enablers, the PC brigade and Islamists like Ridley should have all got together and crucified Woolas Hamas (Muslim)-style.

Again, ‘racial tension’ doesn’t need ‘stirring up’ – it already is stirred up! But not quite. It isn’t racial tension that’s the problem; but Muslim-non-Muslim relations. Oldham has a problem with this divide which it shares with nearly all north-western cities and towns. And Muslim self-ghetto-isation, again, is the main cause of these problems.

Oh, what a surprise, Yvonne Ridley manages to praise one UK politician: Ken Livingstone. I wonder if that’s because Livingstone has his head up the collective Islamic arse in London?

Ridley also lists Woolas’s sins thus:

“He created hysterical headlines about 'Muslim inbreeding' with his comments about the health risks of cousin marriages among Pakistanis. The way he spoke about the issue was as though some Frankenstein-like creatures were filling the baby wards in maternity hospitals around Oldham, Bradford, Burnley and Birmingham.”

But the interesting thing is that she doesn’t actually deny any of these things. What is wrong, to Ridley, is that Woolas dared even mention them! Many more circumspect politicians have also quietly mentioned the problem of ‘cousin marriages among Pakistanis’. This problem isn’t political or social. It’s a biological problem. Ridley can’t make such facts disappear just because they are politically incorrect.

It is also a fact that speaking to people with their faces entirely covered is uncomfortable - to say the least. Thus admitting to your feelings about this, as Jack Straw did in Blackburn, was not an act of Islamophobia either (over the burka). It was a statement of fact. Ridley can’t change realities by crying ‘Islamophobia’ every time someone dares to criticise a Muslim or Islam itself.

Ridley then indulges in her own bit of secularophobia, or whiteophobia, or Britishophobia. She generalises in precisely the way she accuses others of generalising about Muslims or Islam. She says, in the UK, that in British communities ‘binge drinking, promiscuity and pill-popping’ are ‘commonplace’. But that’s alright! Whites, or secularists, or Christians, are the ‘oppressive majority’ and oppressive majorities can never be hard done to.


- 7 Nov 2010, MPACUK's website
Phil Woolas sat pretty for far too long, but take note MPACUK are in for the long haul and in this game it takes as long as it takes.

Allah granted us success and accepted our efforts such that we have a historic outcome.

No rest.

Labour's Fascist Election Strategy Exposed
By Yvonne Ridley
So, former British Government minister Phil Woolas has finally been rumbled for playing the race and religion cards in a political game which has fuelled Islamophobia in the UK.

Two high court judges have ordered that his election as MP for Oldham East and Saddleworth is “void” . Woolas was brought before the court on accusations of stirring up racial hatred and seizing on anti-Muslim sentiment in Oldham by claiming that his rival endorsed a Muslim campaign to remove him.

His campaign aimed to “make white folks angry” at his opponent, the Liberal Democrat’s Elwyn Watkins, as part of a desperate bid to retain his seat in the run up to the May 2010 general election. Whipping up hysteria and rhetoric that could make him a Tea Party candidate in America, Woolas is now barred from the House of Commons and ordered to pay £5,000 and costs to Mr Watkins.

He says he will seek a judicial review but it’s not looking good – as he stands there exposed for what he is, Labour has put a barge pole’s distance between themselves and the disgraced politician. The Westminster Village is said to be reeling in a state of shock … but why? I exposed the political scumbag way back on February 18 2008. Actually, my exact words to describe the government minister at the time were “an odious, rancid, little creep.”

This is what I wrote: “One of the biggest Islamophobes sitting in Government is Phil Woolas, who deserves further scrutiny in this column. He was the minister for race relations in the autumn of 2006 when he intervened in the row over the classroom assistant Aisha Azmi by calling for her to be fired. Aisha was the girl who work a niqab over her face whenever a male colleague entered the room, but by the time he and the media had finished you would have thought Aisha spent her entire teaching days in a full face veil. This is the MP who during the last General Election stamped the Union Jack emblem on his campaign literature and highlighted 'anti-white racism' as a vital issue in his Oldham constituency. His mates told him it was political suicide and that he would lose his marginal seat but in fact his votes increased and sent the anoraks in Labour’s spin machine into statistical overdrive. They realised then they didn’t need to try and win back the disaffected Muslims who ditched Labour over Iraq and Afghanistan. So instead of trying to bring them back into the fold, these cynical politicians opted instead to stir up racial tension as a means of appealing directly to the white working-class vote”.

The Woolas shock election victory after the disastrous Iraq war was achieved by using the race and religion card – his politics of hate was a winning formula and Tony Blair’s backroom strategists loved it … once they’d recovered from the shock, for the truth is they had written off Woolas as a political casualty of the 2003 war since he was based in a marginal constituency with a large Muslim community.

The actions of Woolas triggered a new New Labour strategy which sought to encourage columns and online blogs written by aggressive secularists and so-called progressives to make Islam-bashing trendy. It was a poison which began creeping in to newspaper and magazine columns as well.

Those driven by racism also joined in the fun seeing Islamophobia as the last legitimate refuge to peddle their race-fueled hate. Phil Woolas was the man responsible for making Islamaphobia a national sport and while I'm sure he will be repulsed by the activities of the British National Party and the English Defence League they thrived in this atmosphere.

There were a few notable exceptions within the party including London Mayor Ken Livingstone who refused to enter in to political Muslim-baiting and at one point some sections of the media turned on him damaging his own political campaign in the English capital.

Meanwhile in the last General Election Labour ruthlessly deployed the politics of fascism to win popular votes and approval. Using the ‘Woolas’ model they placed the politics of religious identity at the centre of public debate, in the same opportunist way that Jorg Haider's Freedom Party did in Austria and Pim Fortuyn's List Party had previously done in Holland. Geert Wilders went on to take the hate to new levels. The fire of Islamophobia rages across Europe today. Control orders, the use of secret evidence, tougher anti-terror laws - all aimed at the Muslim communities - came to define the Labour government's role in the ill-conceived War on Terror.

This incendiary atmosphere of growing Islamophobic intolerance continued to be ignited by the actions of the then Government minister on Race, Phil Woolas, who cynically drove the bandwagon through Muslim communities at every available opportunity.

He created hysterical headlines about "Muslim inbreeding " with his comments about the health risks of cousin marriages among Pakistanis. The way he spoke about the issue was as though some Frankenstein-like creatures were filling the baby wards in maternity hospitals around Oldham, Bradford, Burnley and Birmingham.

Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, both stirred the political pot of religion and racism, the latter wading in to Jack Straw’s niqab row with gusto. It seems every Labour minister was scrambling over the backs of others to attack Islam and Muslims.

Meanwhile, the enemies of Islam are still circling in politics and the media. They are trying to force Muslims to adopt an Islam which is servile to the West, a designer Islam that can be picked up and taken off like a pair of Jimmy Choos.

What have they got to fear from Muslims in Britain who simply want to uphold family values which were once held so dear in British communities before binge drinking, promiscuity and pill-popping became so commonplace? There is no reason why Muslims can not contribute positively to Britain and elsewhere in the West without diluting their faith. It is not asked of other communities so why single Muslims out for special treatment?

The Commons Speaker, John Bercow will now have to decide whether to wait for further legal proceedings or immediately call a by-election for Oldham East and Saddleworth. The political power is now back with the people of that constituency – good people of faith and no faith.

I would urge each and every one of them to vote, and vote for the politician who best suits their ideals … someone who is prepared to serve the people and not manipulate voters by trading on fear and hatred.

Hopefully the downfall of Woolas will serve as a salutary warning to all of those who indulged in the fascist politics of race, religion and fear.

* British journalist Yvonne Ridley is the European President of the International Women's Union and a patron of the London-based human rights organisation CagePrisoners

No comments:

Post a Comment