London Solidarity Protests Against the G8 Summit 2008Indymedia UK - 7 Jul 2008The G8 2008 is taking place in Hokkaido, Japan, from July 7th to July 9th. As in the past years, people from all over the world are protesting this summit and the capitalist system it represents, both in Japan and in many places around the globe.On Saturday the 5th of July, the International Day of Action Against the G8,there were protests worldwide against this year’s G8 Summit, including London. A picket outside the Japanese embassy took place on Friday the 4th, and for Saturday the 5th, and despite previous harassment by the Metropolitan police, a London Fete Against the G8 was called by London No Borders and other groups to demonstrate in solidarity with the protests in Japan, for the Freedom of Movement, and against Fortress Europe. The Day of Action around the UK Borders Agency started with a Critical Mass bike ride from Brixton to Croydon, the nerve centre of the Home Office’s UK Border Agency, where several protests unfolded.Report | Photos 1 and 2 | VideoFurther plans for days of action and blockades are continuing from Monday 7th to Wednesday 9th around the Summit location next to the Lake Toya in Hokkaido, whilst the Japanesse ‘No! G8 Legal Team’ has issued an international Call for Solidarity actions during this week’s Summit blockades. A daily NO!G8 cafe has been organised to coincide with the G8 mobilisations at the Bowl Court Social Centre, with films, discussions and screenings of footage from Japan.Check the Ticker, the G8MediaNetworkTV and IMC-Japan [Timeline] for updates of worldwide actions and protests.
Is Trevor Kavanagh an Islamophobe?UKWatch.net - 7 Jul 2008You don’t necessarily have to know anything about Islam to be an Islamophobe. Quite the reverse, in fact. The more ignorant about Islam and everything else, the better it is for the hopeful candidate for Islamophobia. So, just because Trevor Kavanagh thinks that “Sunni Iran” is “oil hungry”, don’t think that he can’t possibly be an Islamophobe. The reason this has come up is that Peter Oborne, the right-wing journalist and documentary maker, has recently struck gold with an attack on Islamophobia – a quite unsporting thing for a right-wing commentator of any description to do, so far as his co-ideologues are concerned. Trevor Kavanagh of The Sun, responsible for some of the worst delirium that appears on that paper’s front pages, was interviewed for the programme, took umbrage at the fact that he evidently came across as a guttersnipe, and has composed a bilious response. Kavanagh’s reply, unlike the original documentary and pamphlet that produced it, will be read by millions. His argument, such as it is, boils down to the assertion that there are indeed ‘extremists’ and bad people, doing very bad things, and the implication that these are somehow a manifestation of something essential to Islam. Rather than rely on such antiquated practises as logical argument, which is to The Sun as daylight is to the vampire, Kavanagh relies on the simple procedure of citing approved Muslim voices. For example: In the wake of 9/11, the Muslim head of Al Arabiya TV, Abdul Rahman al Rashed, said: “Not all Muslims are terrorists but, with deep regret, we must admit that almost all terrorists are Muslims.” Is he an Islamophobe? Try watching Syrian-born Dr Wafa Sultan on YouTube as she challenges a furious cleric to name a single Jew or Buddhist suicide bomber. “Only the Muslims defend their beliefs by killing people, burning churches and bombing embassies,” she storms. Is she Islamophobic? Or simply spelling out the facts? Dr Sultan also condemned the way Muslim hardliners “treat women like beasts”. Al Rashed’s stupid comment (stupid, both because it was untrue and because it is liable to feed an atmosphere of violent anti-Muslim feeling) is quite widely repeated in one version or another. Hitchens likes it a lot, for example, as he would. But it was not made “in the wake of 9/11”, (and nor was Al Rashed the head of Al Arabiya television at that time, since Al Arabiya television didn’t come into existence until 2004). The comment was published in a Saudi-run newspaper based in London and Jeddah following the Beslan massacre. It was made at a time when Russian troops had been terrorising Chechnyans for some years – strange to relate, those Russian troops were not, on the whole, of the Muslim persuasion. Wafa Sultan, for those of you who don’t know her, is hardly even worth your attention. She is adored by the Luce media and the NYT, because she says the right things: only Muslims do wicked things, Islam is responsible, Muslims are medieval, the West is enlightened and modern. Were it not for the patronage, she could summarise her views on the back of a postage stamp and mail it to her brain, presently lodged halfway up her colon, and save us all the trouble. I assume no one needs me to rebut the view that only Muslims defend their beliefs by killing people (but if you do, just supply your address and I’ll come and sort you out). Anyway, having run out of native informers, Kavanagh finally resorts to his own expertise: Muslim men are entitled to beat their wives and take more than one wife. Women are automatically suspect, banned in some communities from showing their faces or limbs because they are sexually tempting ? to men. Visit an Arab country, or watch TV shows about them, and you will see plenty of men and boys. Women appear rarely and, when they do, are covered head to toe. The rest are under virtual house arrest, living behind closed doors in ignorance and isolation. We cannot interfere in the way other countries order their societies. But such barbaric treatment of women has been imported and thrives here. The Sun, would you believe it, is now a feminist concern. We can assume that those many forms of misogyny that were not ‘imported’ will now feature as a daily concern in that paper, next to Mandy, aged 23. I doubt Trevor Kavanagh has actually visited an “Arab country” for longer than fifteen minutes, during which time his feet would have been firmly planted in a Mercedes, although I am sure he has seen “TV shows” about them. But which Arab countries is he watching? Oh, it doesn’t matter: I’m sure he is as learned about Egypt, Lebanon, Tunisia, Mauritania, Morocco, Jordan, Syria and Kuwait as he is about Sunni Iran. And I’m sure that when it comes to Muslim populations beyond the Arab world, he could discourse eloquently on the fate of the Indonesian women who stitch his Gucci soles in what is colloquially known as a sweatshop (the 18 hour shift in the high security compounds is like house arrest, only with added slavery). Is Trevor Kavanagh an Islamophobe? Well, he passes the first qualification at least: he doesn’t know shit about Islam.
Misreporting MuslimsUKWatch.net - 7 Jul 2008Imagine if you picked up a newspaper to discover the following headline, “Gay sickos’ Maddie kidnap shock”. What would your response be? Or perhaps if you read, “Christmas is banned: it offends Jews”. Or even, “Black people tell us how to run our schools”. You would probably be offended and outraged in equal measure ? and rightly so. In modern Britain, it is no longer acceptable for the media to engage in such egregiously inaccurate or recklessly bigoted coverage of minority groups. There is, however, one glaring exception to this rule ? Muslims. As writer and broadcaster Peter Oborne points out in tonight’s Dispatches on Channel 4, these rather shocking headlines have already appeared in our national press, but only in relation to Britain’s Muslim minority. In the wake of 7/7, the press has been given free rein to effectively demonise the Islamic faith and its two million adherents in this country. Dispatches commissioned Cardiff University’s school of journalism to carry out a unique study of the content and, above all, context of almost a thousand articles written about Islam and Muslims since 2000. The Cardiff researchers discovered that over two-thirds of stories identified Muslims either as a source of problems or as a threat ? not just in the context of terrorism but on cultural issues too. In fact, this year for the first time, the volume of stories focusing on cultural differences overtook those related to terrorism. Over the entire period, more than one in four stories contained the rather pernicious idea that Islam is dangerous, backward or irrational. As a practicing Muslim and as a television journalist, I find myself awkwardly straddling the divide between British Islam and the British media. With my journalist’s hat on, I recognise and support the very legitimate desire of the media to cover, and comment on, the growing terrorist threat to this country from “homegrown” extremists. (Dispatches has a long and proud record in this area.) With my Muslim hat on, however, I grow tired of having to also endure a barrage of lazy stereotypes, inflammatory headlines, disparaging generalisations and often inaccurate and baseless stories. Did a local council, for example, “ban Christmas” to avoid offending Muslims? No. Did Natwest remove its piggy banks to avoid offending Muslims? Not at all. Did a “Muslim hate mob” vandalise a house full of British squaddies? Nope. To pretend that this relentlessly negative coverage of a marginalised minority has no effect on community relations or on integration is naive, if not disingenuous. Portraying Muslims as different and dangerous can have serious repercussions, and tonight’s Dispatches draws attention to a growing number of Muslims who now live in daily fear; some because their homes are repeatedly vandalized, others because they have suffered devastatingly violent attacks. In an exclusive ICM poll (pdf) for the programme, a third of Britain’s Muslims say they or their family members have suffered abuse or hostility since 7/7, and over two-thirds of the wider British public think that prejudice against Muslims has increased. Yet, at the same time, a majority of the public also continues to believe that the religion of Islam is to blame for the bombings. Three years on, it is time to stop conflating the actions of a tiny minority of extremists with the entire Muslim community or the whole religion of Islam. It is time for newspaper editors, reporters, columnists and commentators to stop the negative stereotyping and fear-mongering that reinforces the public perception of Muslims and Islam as strange, foreign and threatening, and further alienates and stigmatises an already vulnerable community of British citizens. As Peter Oborne points out, “There is an urgent need for a change in our public culture.” ————- Dispatches: It Shouldn’t Happen to a Muslim was broadcast last night at 8pm on Channel 4, and can be viewed online on 4oD. Peter Oborne and James Jones have written a pamphlet to accompany the documentary, entitled ‘Muslims Under Siege: Alienating Vulnerable Communities’ (.pdf).
It’s no surprise that the BNP’s rise and New Labour’s demise are linkedUKWatch.net - 7 Jul 2008On Wednesday evening around 7pm, the Reverend Roger Gayler, vicar of St Marks parish, went to answer a knock on the door. It was the night before the Chadwell Heath byelection for Barking and Dagenham council in Greater London, and Gayler had recently written an open letter to his flock. “I rarely enter the party political arena and do so very reluctantly, but as a matter of Christian principle I feel this time I must,” he wrote. “The [British National party] would divide our community, spread fear through lies, and reduce services to those in our community who most need them (they proposed huge cuts in services for the elderly and young people in their budget). They preach the politics of hate.” The man at the door was Robert Bailey, BNP leader on the council. He was clearly agitated. “He asked me whether I’d written it,” recalls Gayler. “I said ‘yes’.” “This goes against the democratic process,” said Bailey. “It’s all part of the democratic process,” replied Gayler. “You’re just a fascist,” said Bailey, and then scrumpled the letter and threw it at the vicar. “There was no shouting or screaming but it was obviously a visit from a very rattled person,” says Gayler. The next evening, in Dagenham’s council chamber, a multiracial team of council workers tallied the votes. The BNP had 12 seats on the council and was hoping this would be their 13th. In the end, a seat vacated by Labour was won by the Tories by a comfortable margin. Nothing strange there. The BNP candidate came third with 25% of the vote in a ward the party had never contested before. Sadly, there seemed to be nothing strange there either. Terry Justice, the Tory victor, said he looked forward to working with all his fellow councillors. When I asked Margaret Mullane, the Labour candidate, what she made of the size of the BNP vote, she said: “You’ll have to ask the BNP about that really.” Leaving Dagenham civic centre, with the clock nudging closer to midnight, I felt I was heading back to the 30s. Bailey is not the only one who should be feeling rattled. True, under the circumstances, the fact that they didn’t win could be regarded as a victory. But those circumstances are dire. The BNP’s advances have been spotty – still limited to particular towns and regions. But over the last decade those spots have become larger and more widespread. Back in 1993, its gain of a single council seat in London’s Tower Hamlets produced a brief, but intense, moment of national introspection. Today it has more than 50 councillors in around 20 councils plus a member of the London assembly. By increments it has become an accepted, if contested, fact of British municipal life. For all the talk of Islamo-fascism – that desperately belligerent phrase that some hurl about in the hope that it may one day land on a coherent meaning – plain old-fashioned fascism is the force truly making gains. Elsewhere in Europe, where the far right runs councils and holds cabinet seats, things are far worse. In Italy, the state recently started fingerprinting Gypsies, along with a promise to take Gypsy children not attending school into custody. In Switzerland, the far right is in government. In Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France and Italy, hard-right, nationalist and anti-immigrant parties regularly receive more than 10% of the vote. In Norway, it is more than twice that; in Switzerland, the figure it is almost three times as much. If our Enlightenment values really are under threat, then the primary challenge seems to be domestic – and far more familiar and entrenched than some would have us believe. This is not a handful of young, nihilist men with backpacks – it is marginalised communities with ballot papers. None of this denies or excuses the rise in jihadism. Indeed, it is only possible to make an effective stand against either by recognising the potency of both. The “tolerant, liberal” society that immigrants – particularly Muslims – are being told to join has long been eroding. While multiculturalism has been under assault, nostalgic visions of a mythological monoculture have been given a new lease of life. Just as there is more to racism in Britain than the BNP, the BNP’s rise tells us more about Britain than just racism. It is a canary in the mine – an early warning system signalling the complacency of our political culture in which our political class has been complicit. Trapped in a hopeless spiral of negativity, people will vote against anything – immigration, the Tories, Ken Livingstone, Boris Johnson, Scottish nationalism, Gordon Brown or Europe, to name a few. But it seems a long time since large numbers of people voted for anything. So the fact that the BNP has performed best in Labour strongholds should come as no surprise. Its rise and New Labour’s demise are linked. The government is failing even on its own modest terms. Child poverty and pensioner poverty are up. Economic inequality is now greater than under the Tories. Inflation is rising, house prices falling, and last week workers were again asked to tighten their belts. Never mind no return to boom and bust – many feel like they are about to crash and burn. People are desperate. There is nothing inevitable about this shift from despondency to demagoguery. Black and Asian people are overrepresented among the poor and vulnerable, and they aren’t voting for the BNP. Nor are the overwhelming majority of white working-class people. Nonetheless, the trend has always been likely and logical. A party that has its historical roots and electoral base in the working class and then fails to advance the interests of that class will engender cynicism. New Labour’s electoral project is based in no small measure on the calculation that the poor have nowhere else to go. A small but determined minority have retreated into their laagers in search of solutions and solace. However, New Labour’s decision to follow them there made no sense, either morally or strategically. Following the strong showing of the BNP in Burnley, Anthony Giddens, the architect of the third way, spoke of being “tough on immigration and tough on the causes of hostility to immigrants”. Tony Blair prioritised “crime and social behaviour” and “immigration and asylum”. But these populist responses hold no sustainable answers to the particular and urgent material needs of the white working class. Incarcerating asylum seekers or bashing the niqab built no houses, created no jobs and educated no children. That does not, in itself, necessarily make them wrong – but as a response to the concerns of Labour’s base they were worse than useless. New Labour’s legislative shortcomings made a BNP revival possible; the government’s rhetorical excesses made it electorally palatable. Given its huge majority, Labour could have made the case against racism and xenophobia. But rather than stand on principle, it has preferred to pander. Having ducked the major challenges, it has left it to the likes of Rev Roger Gayler to literally face the consequences of the failure head on.
