There is an old Bedouin saying that once the camel gets his nose in the tent the body will surely follow.
Sunday Morning Live which asked ‘Are Muslims doing enough to stop the radicalisation of young people?’, was I think pretty groundbreaking for the BBC, at least I have never heard anything quite so open, raising so many contentious and taboo issues.
There were quite a few guests, nearly all Muslim, and there was pretty much a consensus of opinion, Yvonne Ridley aside, on most points.
One issue was that debate is being closed down by conservative Muslims…we all know that as soon as ‘Muslim issues‘ are raised the cry of ‘Islamophobia’ echoes across the Media…they want us to stop talking about Islam.
Which made me laugh because I’d already seen Mehdi Hasan’s response when he heard the question that the programme asked:
Mehdi Hasan @mehdirhasan 11h BBC Sunday Morning Live question: “Are Muslims doing enough to tackle radicalisation?” #sigh
Such people want to close down debate because they know where the debate might lead…and this one on SML proves the point and why, as Peter Hitchens said on the programme, we must stop talking of ‘Islamophobia’ because there is no such thing, it is perfectly legitimate to disagree with what is a political ideology and not a pathology.
And as for Mehdi Hasan, that rabid self publicist and reactionary Islamist…just why does the BBC keep giving him a platform for his rhetoric?….I know the fireworks are fun, Question Time a case in point, but when there are Muslims like Dr Muhammed al Hussaini available, who presents a grown-ups view of the world, why have the ones who throw their dummies out of the pram and present an extremely unlikeable impression of Islam?
The programme blew apart the BBC’s own narrative when it comes to reporting on Islamic terrorism and presenting programmes about Islam…..which is that the terror is a result of Western foreign policy, that the terrorists are not real Muslims, that we cannot talk about the Koran and its meaning, that Islam is a religion of peace, that the majority of Muslims are not ‘conservative’ verging on fundamental, and that someone with a brown skin cannot be racist.
Here are some of the radical, and usually forbidden thoughts, from the contributors to the programme:
A core teaching of Islam is that you must give your life for God….Martyrdom.
There is the slow growth of the idea amongst conservative Muslims that you cannot be part of this society, that their allegiance should be to the Umma, the Caliphate.
I have multiple identities, just one of those is being Muslim.
There is a growing political correctness that won’t allow discussion of Islam and what the Koran means….we are not a living in a brutal desert society with tribal blood feuds.
We must promote intellectual freedom and debate about core theology.
The behaviour stemming from the teachings in religious texts (Bible included) is deeply disturbing…promoting violence and genocide.
Mosques and those who run them can be racist, run as cultural clubs that excludes Western or white converts.
The MCB is extremist and unrepresentative with only 6% of Muslims saying they felt represented by them.
Communal tension is driven by the doctrines in the Koran itself.
It’s a very clever trick to claim someone who commits some crime isn’t a real Muslim just because they do something bad….this disengages with the problem…and doesn’t allow debate and a solution to the behaviour.
Stop talking of Islamophobia, there is no such thing, it is perfectly legitimate to disagree with what is a political ideology and not a pathology.
And finally the solution maybe, they say…..
To challenge the narrative.
Something we have been arguing for on this site for a long time from the BBC…..recognise that Islam can promote violence, that groups like the MCB are extremist and unrepresentative, that claiming any Muslim terrorist is not really a Muslim isn’t any longer credible, that the Koran can drive intolerance and separation between communities…and finally to examine the Koran itself and its true meaning, good and bad….just as they do with the Bible and Christianity.
Whether the outcome of the programme was as intended by the BBC or came as a bit of a shock to them it was a good programme with some very honest contributions.
The camel has his nose in the tent then…..The question is will anyone at the BBC take any notice…and then act upon such valid and challenging arguments and assertions?
Let’s hope the Bedouin were right….but in this case probably not.
“Are Muslims doing enough to stop the radicalisation of young people?”
More appropriate question: “Are Muslims doing ANYTHING to stop the radicalisation of young people?”
“Let’s hope the Bedouin were right….but in this case probably not.”
Wrong way around: the Bedouin were right, the Islam nose is already in the UK tent and the body is rumbling on, unfortunately all those in the tent are moving aside and letting it happen in some strange reasoning that the tent will stay up!
“Are Muslims doing enough to stop the radicalisation of young people” ?
just look at that programmes viewer vote result 96% of the viewing public say they don t.
Yes! …the VIEWERS, not like the BBC, those that have to put up with this ideologies aggressive association and abhorrent practices … not just pontificate about it, over a latte with an Islamic apologist … So where is the representation of this public? put together with other recent viewer polls over a multitude of issues with Islam
a remarkably consistent view?
The bare truth, so called “radicalising” happens so quickly,(as is often stated) simply because Islamic adherents are halfway there already … their so called “religious” texts, contain their “unchangeable” blueprint.
Islam is supremacist, totalitarian and dangerous, individual muslims themselves may not be, (thank goodness), but the aggressive/bullying tendency
is there, if you have the misfortune to live alongside it,
particularly prevalent, as the community grows.
Where do these Muslims go to calm their mind eh!
The Mosque?? god forbid to the Koran??? the example of Mohamhead! ????? … doesn t take long to see the root problem.
Cowardice by not only this excuse for a national broadcaster, but by politicians too (at present a particular invertebrate intellectually challenged shower), completes a very toxic mix.
Islam is well packaged as the simpering victim, (there has been a long long history of perfecting this facet), but you ask the real people who live right next to it if … that is the case?.
When the leaders of a society allows the rape of thousands of very young girls, over a period of ten years or more, and turns a deaf ear to cries for help, then whether the camel is within or without the tent, is a moot point.
Opposition in the 1920’s and 30’s to National Socialism was obviously an outgrowth of anti-Germanism left over from the 1914-1918 War, and as such, was simply Germanophobia run riot.
Likewise, opposition to Bolshevism from 1917 onwards was obviously an outgrowth of anti-Russianism left over from the 1850’s war, and as such, it was Russophobia, plain and simple.
Or it could simply be that nations against whom you have fought now have ideologies you find dangerous, not least because, in some ways, they are sparked by old hatreds by others of YOU.
But, you see, it’s always your fault. The other fellow is never wrong.
In its reporting of the daily global Islamic jihad massacres, INBBC uses euphemistic language (e.g. ‘militants,’ not jihadists or Islamic terrorists), which relegates the reality of the extreme violence committed explicitly in the name of Islam.
And INBBC does not assist in any efforts to oppose Islamic jihad violence by excusing the Muslim perpetrators on grounds of ‘poverty’ (or some such non-excuse). In fact, many jihadist killers are from well-off families e.g. Bin Laden.
And INBBC gives too much time and attention on Islamic ‘radicalisation’ to Muslim groups. As noted by Alan, they are unrepresentative, self-serving, political interest groups which get public subsidies, which non-Muslims don’t. And such groups do NOT speak for the threatened non-Muslim vast majority in UK. But this is not the impression which INBBC presents.
INBBC hands over ‘the narrative’ of history and ideology of Islam, to Muslims, not to non-Muslims, not to critics of Islam. INBBC is, in fact, actively contributing to the Islamisation of Britain.
For example, whether it’s TV series on Muhammad, the history of Islam in Europe, or the Ottoman Empire, who does INBBC get to present the pro-Islamic ‘narrative’? Muslim, Rageh Omaar.
INBBC is blatantly biased towards ISLAM, and irresponsibly delegates matters relating to Islam (but crucially affecting the non-Muslim majority), to Muslims, and especially to Islamic interest groups. INBBC has put itself into this political straight-jacket and is unable/unwilling to take it off.
http://www.itv.com/news/2013-10-06/uk-imams-agree-to-perform-underage-marriages/….lock up your daughters
As usual the BBC lost the vote massively. They might have got a result more to their liking if they had allowed a postal vote.
I wonder whether the BBC will be giving this in-depth analyses and lengthy debate?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2447720/Clerics-18-mosques-caught-agreeing-marry-girls-14-Four-imams-investigated-undercover-operation.html
Nothing to see here. It’s only a Tiny Minority™, and we must take care lest there be an anti-Muslim backlash in the shires. That’s what the BBC will be more concerned about, rather than the girls’ lives.
ITV goes where the BBC covers up.
Everything thing is lawful? – Nika can be done in Sharia, just move her out to London?
The same “man” works with the police, to speak out about forced marriages? … would that be “kaffir” police?
Anyone notice the same old pattern emerging, lies deceit.
When I woke this morning and put on “Today” there were so many Muslem ladies about, I thought I had the wrong channel.
Came back from my ablutions a little while later, and it had started again.
Turned off in despair.
We have been led by politicians who, since WWII, have managed to declare majority activities such as smoking near criminal and criminal minority activities such as homosexuality the privileged way of life (no Civil Partnerships for the non-rainbow people).
It surely can’t be too difficult to use the same approach to stamping out the alien cult of Islam on these islands? It is so easy to do. What supreme being would choose an illiterate, lying, paedophile, serial adulterer and killer as the best of all men? Couldn’t a supreme being that made mountains to hold the earth down and stop earthquakes have carved out the Koran directly on a spare mountain? Why if the Koran is the direct word from this supreme being is it full of contradictions that a ten year-old could spot? (Don’t be mislead by comparisons with the Bible, a book by many authors, the Koran is THE revealed word of the supreme being – Islam is the Koran and the Koran is Islam.
Such reasons as we seem to be given for not countering Islam is that a) we have to be respectful (why? it sure doesn’t respect anything else) and b) we might be nasty to individual Muslims. The later is just a corporate slander, why can we not be trusted to not attack the individual? Doesn’t a ‘No Smoking’ campaign run the risk that we might want to gun down smokers in the street? Of course not, so what is the difference?
I suspect the real reason is that our politicians and senior civil servants delight in conflict which keeps them in a job.
Couldn’t a supreme being that made mountains to hold the earth down and stop earthquakes have carved out the Koran directly on a spare mountain?
Why would any God do that? It ignores the power of Faith and Faith conquers all. Which is why those who are religious are so dangerous; they don’t recognise the truth but only what they have faith in.
A bit like socialists really.
Albert Einstein: “God does not ‘shoot dice’ with the universe.”
Niels Bohr: “Who the hell is Albert Einstein, to tell God what He can and cannot do?”
Unfortunately, Bohr’s remark, meant jocularly to imply that Einstein ought not implicate an “Intelligent Design” element to his antipathy to the concepts of quantum physics, is a victim of Poe’s Law, as applied by such folks as Qu’ranic literalists. Right up there with the William Jennings Bryan-Inherit The Wind character’s contention that if God made up the rules for the natural order of things, He could also suspend them for the purposes of a miracle to inspire His people. “Credo quia absurdum est, certum quia impossibilis est.” (“I believe [it], because it is absurd, and it is [a] certain[ty], because it is impossible.”) A bit like socialists, too, really.
Do they never wonder that if so many other people can have so much faith in many other religions than faith alone cannot prove a religion true.
Imagine Britain, ruled by a fairy story.
Damn, don’t want to be a spoiler giving away the end of the film.
Glad to read another appreciation for a BBC programme. Interesting to read that you don’t want to hear from Muslims like Mehdi Hasan, just from Muslims who present a version of Islam of which you approve, and that doesn’t make you uncomfortable.
In which case, you can’t really pretend you’re interested in impartiality.
But which version of Mehdi Hasan do you think we should be listening to? The sanitised one, or the real one?
Again with the ‘you’. Who is this entity?
Speaking of selectivity, this was interesting:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/10357915/The-BBC-has-come-to-loathe-those-it-serves.html
Now love & loathe are pretty subjective things, so it’s hard to nail ’em down, but in word & deed what might one suspect governs the BBC mindset as represented, say, by its cheerleaders here?
Then there is simple professional policy.
‘the world overflowed with news – but not on the BBC’
‘You’ could argue that is not the case, and garner a half dozen in support. once they clock on. Hardly seems credible given what has, is and continues to happen in that mystery world that is the BBC newsroom… motivations FoI exempted.
It does seem a shame that when there is so much that matters, globally, the opaque BBC can be trusted above all to focus mainly on the interests of… the BBC.
They, and ‘you’, can’t really be pretend to be interested in much else any more.
Hardly worth a compelled £145.50pa at the very least.
‘Interesting to read that you don’t want to hear from Muslims like Mehdi Hasan, just from Muslims who present a version of Islam of which you approve.’
How on earth have you deduced that?
You seem to be happy with the BBC having a hate-spouting Islamist on speed dial because……..what? He’s of a religious/ethnic minority and he should be allowed to air his grievances regardless of how offensive he is? Can you imagine a regular slot for Tommy Robinson with hand-picked audiences guranteed to greet his very word with fanatical applause?
This site exists to highlight BBC’s bias and lack of impartiality. On the latter score, you might like to name a moderate Muslim voice who also makes frequent appearances on the BBC – you know, someone who denounces the off-line hateful and divisive rants of Hasan. Or maybe they can’t find anyone prepared to speak up, perhaps because they’re all shit scared.
Are you really suggesting that Hassan’s ‘version’ of Islam is somehow benign? a version that makes non-believers into non-humans?
If your siting Hassan is an example of Islamic tolerance and understanding ,then I think you have exploded the myth of the moderate Muslim
I truly hope your wrong an such thing does exist ,but Hassan aint it
I think you’ve misread my post, Stewart.
It was meant for Maurice – sorry
There’s nothing sadder than a troll, Maurice.
AT least we have one or two on our side. I have a lot of time for Mr Nazir Afzal OBE, Chief Crown Prosecutor for the CPS North West. He is a consumate professional, who does not let race religion colour or class cloud his judgement. He is someone I fully respect and admire.
It is called integration into British society, something that Hindus, Sikhs, etc, have managed reasonably well.
First Muslim to present Today. Note how she portrays the acceptable face of Islam?
Did somebody leave, was the job advertised, was she the best person for the job? Who knows, but she certainly ticks a few boxes…
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2448411/I-told-Id-wear-hijab-I-said-I-dont-think-Today-programmes-Muslim-presenter-wont-wear-veil.html
you mean THIS Mishal Hussein?
20 Jews not enough apparently
I wonder what number would satisfy Ms Hussein or Al Beeb for that matter
Maybe we can have a Misha & Mehdi’s Blooper reel, where there’s what they come out with to play to one audience and what they come out with for another? All courtesy of the BBC propaganda or censorship system, depending on what they want to push or cover up.
Not enough dead civilians to bring to her audience around the world, thanks to effective state protection systems on the part of one side, to satisfy her bonkers moral equivalence? That mindset is mind-boggling.
Never saw this clip before. Thank you for sharing it.
I just called her not unattractive. This has shown her to be truly ugly to the core in every way.
Wow. Her face gave it all away there. Which is ironic in the circumstances.
What a Bitch!!!!
A very revealing clip showing her true self.
So as she sees it , it would be quite acceptable for a maniac to randomly shoot a gun into peoples houses as long as not too many were killed ? Amazing lack of any rational logic………. but that is Islamist s for you.
Urgh,that interview made me feel sick. Her eyes were ablaze with the flame of jihad.
What a disgusting excuse for a human being………unhappy that only 20 dead…….
Interesting anecdote.
Wondering a bit about this:
‘“But you’ll have to wear a hijab one day.”
Given these adherences to codes are mostly claimed back to tradition (often less than correctly, by her own interpretations), this seems to predict an evolving intrusion and imposition into the future, here in the UK, exported from the ME.
Shame she, and the BBC seem not to be intrigued by such a mindset prevailing more and more here. And being indulged enough to take root.
As a not unattractive lady, once face coverings become mandatory, her appeal and bankability may reduce, leaving her in Selina Scott territory.
It makes me wonder whether when the time comes in this country for moderate Muslims to stand up and be counted against the Islamofascists, such as the one on the train who insisted Hussain should be wearing a hijab, it will kick off big time and indigenous Brits (apart from the Islamofascist-supporting Extreme Left) will all be mere spectators on the sidelines as yet another Islamic civil war brings yet more torture, death and destruction – this time UK-style.
Is she the one that ‘ticked all the boxes’ or was that some other?
She can tickle me any time she likes!
Hoo! Hoo!
Noticed in the credits yesterday that the programme on the Ottomans was by the ‘Religious and Ethics dept’ of the bBC. Only the bBC could micromanage down to this level and have a separate dept. If there were such dept then it should have been sponsored by the History dept. As Omar the presenter stated on many times that the Ottomans were driven by the expansion and wealth of their empire and religion was a distant second place.
Too much risk that a historian would favour what is true over what is acceptable.
If there were such dept then it should have been sponsored by the History dept
Why? Was there any actual history in it or was it a chap in a blue shirt and chinos wandering around the Med pointing at stuff? You know, the usual fare from the BBC.
Who the BBC deploys, as staff or ‘expert guest’ on matters Islam does intrigue…
http://order-order.com/2013/10/07/mehdis-muddle/
They either fish in a very limited pond, or simply prefer to savour the taste of rot.
INBBC: relegating Islamic jihadist, Al-LIBY’s links to UK.
‘The Times’ (£) has as a front-page headline today:-
“Manchester asylum link to jihadist held in Libya”
[Excerpt]:-
“The al-Qaeda leader captured by US Special Forces in Libya at the weekend had been granted political asylum in Britain.
“Anas al-Liby, 49, who was seized at gunpoint in Tripoli in one of two simultaneous raid in Africa, arrived in Britain as a refugee in the mid-1990s and lived in the Cheetham Hill area of Manchester.”
‘DAILY MAIL’-
“Manchester link of al-Qaeda commander captured in daring US Delta Forces raid as it emerges Jihadist gave Scotland Yard the slip 13 years ago after being given asylum in the UK”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2447532/Al-Qaeda-commander-Abu-Anas-al-Liby-snatched-Libya-US-Delta-Force.html
INBBC:
[Excerpt from INBBC Profile of him]-
“He is believed to have lived in Manchester.”
In Al-Liby’s profile, INBBC avoids words- ‘Islam’, ‘Muslim’ and ‘Jihadist’.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-24418327
INBBC’s Muslim presenter, Mishal Husain, says she won’t wear the burqa/niqab garments. But is she prepared to oppose the wearing of such garments in public in Britain?
INBBC has another TV programme tonight on Malala, the brave Pakistani victim of the Islamic jihad Taliban.
But will INBBC let the views of a Pakistani schoolchild decide UK public policy towards Islamic jihad?
Please note: something as vague as ‘education’ is NOT the answer to the Taliban, especially when that ‘education’ is dominated by the recitation of the tenets of Islam, as it is in much of Pakistan.
And note, the latest Islamic jihad threat to the Malalas of Pakistan and elsewhere is not education of girls, but humour and criticism of Islam:-
“Taliban: ‘We targeted Malala Yousafzai because she attacked Islam and make a jokes on Islam’ — and would try to kill her again”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/10/uks-home-secretary-says-british-muslims-using-syria-for-jihad-terror-training-ground-then-returning-.html
Will INBBC emphasise the threat to British non-Muslim majority presented by Islamic jihadists using their bases in Britain to extend their
Islamic jihad activities from Syria?
Or is INBBC politically sympathetic to such ‘ radicalised’ activities?
‘JihadWatch’:-
“UK’s Home Secretary says British Muslims using Syria for jihad terror training ground, then returning home”
[Excerpt]:-
“Theresa May seems in her remarks to have blandly and complacently accepted that the Muslims who travel from Britain to Syria and train for jihad simply must be admitted back into Britain. Yet when the jihadist imam Omar Bakri left Britain for Lebanon a few years ago, he wasn’t allowed back in — and May didn’t hesitate to ban Pamela Geller and me from the U.K. for opposing the same jihad that these ‘Britons’ are now returning from Syria to spread. She is, in other words, quite mad.”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/10/uks-home-secretary-says-british-muslims-using-syria-for-jihad-terror-training-ground-then-returning-.html
Corrected link to above:-
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/10/taliban-we-targeted-malala-yousafzai-because-she-attacked-islam-and-make-a-jokes-on-islam-if-we-foun.html
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/10/taliban-we-targeted-malala-yousafzai-because-she-attacked-islam-and-make-a-jokes-on-islam-if-we-foun.html
There are two main reasons why Islam has been allowed/ encouraged to take such a cancerous hold on our country: the Labour Party and its PR wing, the BBC.
For years the bBBC has pushed ‘political correctness’, where only one viewpoint is allowed, and Muslims have taken full advantage. But they have gone even farther, creating their own bBBC ‘Asian’ network, encouraging them to think that they are separate from the rest of us and important enough to have a whole bBBC channel devoted solely to them.
‘Multiculturalism’, the Labour mantra taken by Muslims to mean apartheid, where they live apart from the rest of us, is ingrained in the bBBC ethos. The bBBC mindlessly parrots cries of ‘racism’ and ‘Islamophobia’ against anyone who dares to question the medieval culture. They stack their programmes with rent-a-gobs to give the impression that their minority view is normal. They refuse to report Muslim crimes, especially against women: sexual abuse of white girls, mutilation of their own children, and murder (‘honour killing’) of any who try to break free.
It would take a thousand broadcasts of programmes like Sunday Morning Live to overcome the bBBC’s cover-ups of the past couple of decades.
Either the BBC are slavishly following the PC doctrine to such extremes they have totally lost touch with reason, or they honestly believe Islam is beyond criticism.
I cannot imagine that (just to cite one example) any other political or religious group would have gotten away with the segregation of women – a common practice in Islamic meeting places in this country including mosques, universities and (from personal experience) weddings (er, not my own wedding you understand) – without it being relentlessly scrutinised and howled over on the BBC by speed-dialled feministas and Nicky Campbell (what’s the difference? – Ed.).
They have lost touch with reason as has the entire liberal elite in media/ politics/ education.
Add to that a dose of real fear and it all becomes clear.
No point in arguing with them or listening to their rubbish.
The worst generation in our history .
Dear sir Arthur,
Your two main reasons are fine, but don’t forget there’s a government in place which is not Labour. And has been since 2010. And what are they doing to improve things? Sweet FA, thats what, apart from campaigning for another 80 million turks to enter a borderless EU.
Oh, and banning the likes of Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller from entering the UK.
Because of what? Oh, they have been identified as extremists.
Doesn’t it make you fucking weep with rage!
What a bunch of useless wankers we have in government.
That is an insult to wankers!
Dysgwr_Cymraeg,
Yes, you’re quite right. But another of Labour’s cunning ploys made it hard for any successor to change their treacherous policies, namely the Human Rights Act (introduced by Mrs Bliar so that she could make millions of pounds out of us, just like her husband).
Basically, we have no rights whilst foreigners have the right to do whatever they want in our country.
EGYPT.
‘Atlas Shrugs’-
“MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD SUPPORTERS VIOLENT PROTESTS IN EGYPT LEAVE 51 DEAD”
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2013/10/muslim-brotherhood-supporters-violent-protests-in-egypt-leave-51-dead.html
INBBC’s Mr Muir says that Muslim Brotherhood is not violent!
How does he know? He quote Al Qaeda’s al-Zawahiri!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-24427345
“Looks Like ‘Nuclear Bombs Exploded There’:
Description of Coptic Villages Attacked by Brotherhood”
by Raymond Ibrahim.
http://www.raymondibrahim.com/from-the-arab-world/looks-like-nuclear-bombs-exploded-there-description-of-coptic-villages-attacked-by-brotherhood/
‘INBBC’s Mr Muir says that Muslim Brotherhood is not violent!
How does he know? He quote Al Qaeda’s al-Zawahiri!’
Making the BBC a sort of ‘just a few old men referencing each other’ forum too? Only there charging folk for their having the privilege of bending truth on matters of life or death.
I can certainly see why the Flokkers see closing BBBC down as priority.
EGYPT.
Politically embedded INBBC’s SOMMERVILLE propagandising for Muslim Brotherthood:-
“The resilience of Egypt’s Brotherhood”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-24434574
Alternative:-
“Inside Egypt’s Terrorist Camps: Torture, Rape, Mass Murder”
by Raymond Ibrahim
(Aug. 2013.)
http://www.raymondibrahim.com/from-the-arab-world/inside-egypts-terrorist-camps-torture-rape-mass-murder/