Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

EDL in Tower Hamlets on 20/06

This money that Saudi has pumped into the Ummah has had a definite effect. I'll give you an example, I recently took part in a Nikkah in the midlands, it was completely sexually segregated right up to almost the end of the reception. Nikkahs in the 70s and early 80s in the very same community had un segregated receptions. Saudi money has been pushing their austeer 'southern baptist' burn in the hellfire, the shaytan is everywhere waiting to corrupt you, interpretation of islam since the 1980s.

I think the political impact of Saudi money is overstated; what we've seen in recent years is a universal movement within the Islamic community away from secularized nationalism and towards theological Islamism, which corresponds more directly to the defeat of secular national liberationist projects and their replacement with Islamist intellectual and activist currents (and also the comparative 'successes' of reactionary bodies like the Taliban and Hamas in achieving real power) rather than the direction of cash-flows.

What institutional protection are Saudi princes capable of offering to this Troxy group, anyway? Ultimately, any sway the Saudi aristocracy might be able to wield over the Islamic community is compromised by their overrall commitment to capitalism, and thus the state entities from which Western Capital is organized.
 
I think the political impact of Saudi money is overstated; what we've seen in recent years is a universal movement within the Islamic community away from secularized nationalism and towards theological Islamism, which corresponds more directly to the defeat of secular national liberationist projects and their replacement with Islamist intellectual and activist currents (and also the comparative 'successes' of reactionary bodies like the Taliban and Hamas in achieving real power) rather than the direction of cash-flows.

What institutional protection are Saudi princes capable of offering to this Troxy group, anyway? Ultimately, any sway the Saudi aristocracy might be able to wield over the Islamic community is compromised by their overrall commitment to capitalism, and thus the state entities from which Western Capital is organized.
there are 6,000 saudi princes, many of whom are sympathetic to the sort of vile views on parade at the troxy on 20/6, and of course there is a saudi cleric on the bill
 
i'd love to rub your face in a pavement you tanky piece of shit. you gonna be around in Tower Hamlets attacking muslims at this meeting, eh? maybe we can meet up.
carry on chief, with every post you make it clearer that - as i said above - you know not of what you witter.
 
and every time you try and mess around with perfectly reasonable grammatical constructions you further prove what a pretentious ass you are
 
I think the political impact of Saudi money is overstated; what we've seen in recent years is a universal movement within the Islamic community away from secularized nationalism and towards theological Islamism, which corresponds more directly to the defeat of secular national liberationist projects and their replacement with Islamist intellectual and activist currents (and also the comparative 'successes' of reactionary bodies like the Taliban and Hamas in achieving real power) rather than the direction of cash-flows.

What institutional protection are Saudi princes capable of offering to this Troxy group, anyway? Ultimately, any sway the Saudi aristocracy might be able to wield over the Islamic community is compromised by their overrall commitment to capitalism, and thus the state entities from which Western Capital is organized.

Saudi is considered the 'gold standard' for a lot of Sunni muslims. Despite Saudi's clear breaks with what the Koran says on things like marriage. It pays for the constructions of Masjeeds and pays for Imams to preach its version of Islam. That's a fairly big sway.
 
ahh, ok... I'm very tired, and very over caffinated... but people like Das Uberdog get on my wick... didn't realise I'd descended into barely intelligable hyperbolic parody...

Unintentional hits the spot too. Hopefully Das Uberdog will be sporting a helpful 'I'm the nutbobbins' placard if he shows up on the 20th.
 
the worrying thing is that DU's ramblings are shared by the SWP high command and are probably Trot orthodoxy.
 
have you been living under a fucking rock for the past 15 years? je-zuz... when i actually do try and engage with someone this is the brain-dead inanity i recieve.

Why haven't you provided us with any examples?

Scapegoating is a pretty serious allegation, especially considering the fact that our previous government spent millions upon millions on Muslim communities during its mandate.

The previous government had Muslim ministers, our new government has a Muslim woman minister.

Sure, Tony Blair supported a reprehensible war in Iraq but it wasn't done out of religious motivations. Tony Blair also led Britain into wars against Serbia, was that an example of scapegoating Slavs or Orthodox Christians for a domestic political agenda? What about the boots on the ground in Sierra Leone, an example of racism against blacks?

It's hardly Kristallnacht.
 
how about every piece of domestic 'terror' legislation that's been introduced since 2001? endless policy announcements from the Home Office on a weekly basis under John Reid in the Blair years; attacks on the right to wear the veil, paranoid security threat announcements, often entirely fabricated (such as the Old Trafford incident), i really could go on but tbh the fact you have evidently not bothered to look around at the outside world for the past decade really makes me resent it.
 
Saudi is considered the 'gold standard' for a lot of Sunni muslims. Despite Saudi's clear breaks with what the Koran says on things like marriage. It pays for the constructions of Masjeeds and pays for Imams to preach its version of Islam. That's a fairly big sway.

well how come the veer towards more reactionary forms of Islam have only been occurring since the 80s and the success of the Taliban against the Russians (alongside the destruction of the secular and left-wing movements like the PLO in Palestine and general lefty modernization projects like that of Nassers, etc)? sure, the Saudi's played their part in the destruction of these campaigns, but you can hardly claim that the reversion to this belief isn't a desperate move in the absence of a practical alternative to fighting imperialism?
 
how about every piece of domestic 'terror' legislation that's been introduced since 2001? endless policy announcements from the Home Office on a weekly basis under John Reid in the Blair years; attacks on the right to wear the veil, paranoid security threat announcements, often entirely fabricated (such as the Old Trafford incident), i really could go on but tbh the fact you have evidently not bothered to look around at the outside world for the past decade really makes me resent it.

The previous government's policy on civil liberties was absolutely atrocious.

The government cynically used September 11th and the 7th of July as an excuse to attack the freedom of the individual. For example, the Racial and Religious Hatred Act from 2006 has effectively curtailed our right to free speech. However, as much as I disagree with this act, as I do much of the anti-terrorist legislation, it has been applied to Muslim and non-Muslim alike.

In any case, none of this legislation is aimed at the average Muslim and I'm still waiting for an example of the state scapegoating the Muslim community.

As far as attacks on the veil are concerned, Jack Straw may have been insensitive in suggesting that Muslim women should not wear the niqab or a burqba but quite frankly to suggest that he or any other mainstream British politican suggested an outright ban of the garment is misleading. In any case, there is a huge difference between wearing a woman covering her hair and a woman covering her entire face. Jack Straw criticised the latter, not the former. Most Muslim women do not cover their face.

I suppose what I am looking for is any examples of the state actually persecuting Muslims for being Muslims, or suggesting that Muslims are responsible for the ills of the country... something like that. That is what scapegoating is and you haven't provided any examples like that.
 
how on earth can you say that stop and search powers under section 44 aren't impacting upon ordinary muslims? what about state propaganda about 'radical mosques' or central diktat that Imams have to rat on children 'at risk of radicalization'? huge cctv presences in Islamic neighbourhoods (as recently uncovered by the Guardian in Birmingham) and massive surveillance operations overhwelming any reasonable assessment of risk? have you seriously missed all of this?
 
how on earth can you say that stop and search powers under section 44 aren't impacting upon ordinary muslims?

This legislation is regularly abused, however those who it is used against are often non-Muslim.

what about state propaganda about 'radical mosques' or central diktat that Imams have to rat on children 'at risk of radicalization'? huge cctv presences in Islamic neighbourhoods (as recently uncovered by the Guardian in Birmingham) and massive surveillance operations overhwelming any reasonable assessment of risk? have you seriously missed all of this?

State propaganda about radical Mosques? Uhh, I'm not sure what you mean by that. Do you mean reports of extremist views in Mosques in the mainstream media? Well, that does come up in the media but I would imagine that is because there are Muslims who hold these views! When extremist reactionary views are held by Christians, this is brought up too! See http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2010/apr/05/religion-christianity-andrew-brown

I haven't heard about disproportionate amounts of CCTV in Muslim communities though it doesn't surprise me... but again, it's not as if Muslims are specifically watched by CCTV. Aren't we the most watched country in the world?

In any case, even if any of this WAS aimed exclusively at Muslims then none of it would be an example of the state scapegoating the Muslim community for the ills of the country.
 
this is insane - every single one of these powers and developments has disproportionately affected the Muslim community. What, do you want the State to actually produce an officially Islamophobic statement of intent before you'll see any kind of anti-Muslim agenda at play?
 
their professed ideological agenda is totally and utterly compatible with the State's project of social control, and with the establishment's scapegoating of migrant communities. surely you can see that!? the biggest argument the mainstream press have against the EDL is that they're uncomfortable watching ordinary people take these 'legitimate' views into their own hands and doing something about it, where they should rest their faith in the arbitrating powers of the state's legal and judiciary functions.

Which state are you talking about? EDL aren't connected to the British State at all.
 
this 'threat' from radical Islam is non-existant. the very real threat from black London gangs is far more prevalent on the streets of London

The major difference being that London gangs can claim to come from London which neither the twats preaching misogyny at the troxy or the edl bussed in from the midlands can.

What about you das? where are you being bussed in from?
 
Back
Top Bottom