Objectively Pro-Fascist
There's a good (and long) post on Obsidian Wings by Eric Martin: This Constitution Kills Fascists, which, in turn, links to a good (and long) article by Johann Hari Renouncing Islam.
So whose actions made the West safer? A big hello to Harry's Place.
But once they had made that leap to identify with the Umma – the global Muslim community – they got angrier the more abusive our foreign policy came. Every one of them said the Bush administration's response to 9/11 – from Guantanamo to Iraq – made jihadism seem more like an accurate description of the world. Hadiya Masieh, a tiny female former HT organiser, tells me: "You'd see Bush on the television building torture camps and bombing Muslims and you think – anything is justified to stop this. What are we meant to do, just stand still and let him cut our throats?"
But the converse was – they stressed – also true. When they saw ordinary Westerners trying to uphold human rights, their jihadism began to stutter. Almost all of them said that they doubted their Islamism when they saw a million non-Muslims march in London to oppose the Iraq War: "How could we demonise people who obviously opposed aggression against Muslims?" asks Hadiya.
So whose actions made the West safer? A big hello to Harry's Place.
8 Comments:
Weak piece.
You might want to consider the de/merits of particular foreign policy stances (whatever they may be) in the round without giving a veto to small numbers of extremists who, it need hardly be said, do not exactly have the national interest at heart.
However, if you think HuT organisers should be given an effective veto over British foreign policy, good luck with making that case. You'll need it.
I Heart Hizb-ut-Tahrir!
Yay, small numbers of extremists with an effective veto over British foreign policy!
Weak piece
Don't make me laugh. There's more intellectual worth and rigorous research in the Sageman/Hari pieces than in the entire output of Harry's Place since its inception. Also it shows that for all his faults Hari still sometimes produces some fine journalism.
However, if you think HuT organisers should be given an effective veto over British foreign policy, good luck with making that case. You'll need it.
If you really think that is what AW or the article is saying then you are, sorry to be rude here, a bit of a cretin.
? It wasn't HuT being given a veto over foreign policy. The war happened, yet HuT lost steam anyway. Now, I imagine that 30% of its traction comes from tabloids promoting Choudhray as a mullah to hate, and 20% of the membership is probably MI5 assets. Note their abject failure to deliver any kind of crowd in London the other week.
Actually it's a bit more depressing than that - to knock the heart out of HuT we don't actually need an antiwar movement that stops evil imperialist bastards from fighting quasi-genocidal wars, we merely need a very large antiwar movement, big enough to convince a few stupid sods that Babylon is not irredeemably deserving of destruction. So we saved some lives here, but not very many in the Middle East. Bugger.
It would also appear that Amnesty's refusal to be cowed by decent idiots into relativising human rights could also play a role in the successful anti-terrorist struggle.
Chris Williams
I thought having the national interest at heart constituted Douglas Hurd-type "realism".
Bit of a slip there:
"Renouncing Islam" should be "Renouncing Islamism", no?
Off-topic (AFAIK), but still: does anyone have any idea what has happened to episode 6 of the current series of HIGNFY? It seems to have gone missing without trace. One of those self-subsuming injunctions, perhaps?
Just remembered the above hasty question - presumably the jump from ep 5 - ep 7 was due to Children in Need.
Post a Comment
<< Home