Who are these people? Far left is Nick Griffin, the leader of the BNP. "Nick Griffin, is a hardline fascist. Convicted for inciting race hate, he denies that the Holocaust ever took place and believes that Jews are conspiring against White British people." Far right is Abu Hamza. "Abu Hamza ralied against alcohol, adultery, democracy and said Muslims had an "obligation" to fight and kill kuffar (non-believers)." He also, " accused the Jews of being blasphemous, traitors and dirty. This, because of the treachery, because of their blasphemy and filth, was why Hitler was sent into the world." Centre right is Louis Farrakhan. The Nation of Islam is under the leadership of this Honorable Minister. We believe Hamza is a terrorist. But really isn't Griffin the same? Both deny the Holocaust and are tied in beliefs that are not factual, beliefs that cause hatred. The Nation of Islam wants seperatist schools, etc. But are we not one race? The interesting concept is that Griffin is not recognised as a terrorist, but all three might be recognised as racists. All three have issues over the Holocaust, one of the worst FORMS of ethnic cleansing that the WORLD HAS EVER SEEN. ALL THREE PREACH SPERATION, NOT UNITY, HATRED, NOT COMPASSION, ASSAULT NOT LIVE AN LET LIVE. WHICH ONE, THOUGH, IS A TERRORIST?
10 comments:
Dear Black in Blue,
You as every has every right to their own opinion, but could you please enlighten everyone as to why these three people are in your opinion ‘Terrorists’?
Or have you posed the question to get a response?
None of them has been convicted under any anti-terrorism laws and much myth and innuendo surrounds all of them so much so that it is possibly impossible to find an unbiased opinion about them.
Nick Griffin, is the leader of a legal and democratically run (whether we like it or not) political party. The BNP you will find has been in certain areas of the UK one of the few advocacy groups that has sought to assist the sprawling white ghettoes that society seems to have forgotten but exist in every part of the country. These white slums are certainly in the south Islands of depravation within a sea of affluence. The young people have little if any expectations and are constantly reminded of what they do not have and will never have. This I image can do wonders for them? Nick Griffin and ALL the extreme right exploit this, one can hardly blame them for wider society seems to have forgotten them.
Abu Hamza, is a somewhat outspoken and mostly incoherent Islamic cleric who’s expressed beliefs are nothing to do with Islam, but are purely political in nature. In my opinion is off the wall with his opinions, but he is resonating with some young people within the UK, Why? Perhaps for the same reason that Nick Griffin finds a friendly audience.
Louis Farrakhan, is actually a much respected civil rights leader within the USA who is actually supported by the likes of Jesse Jackson and wishes to see a time when Black people are developed enough to take responsibility for their own lives. He does not preach violence nor does he these days preach any hatred towards other faiths (including Judaism), but is strongly against the actions of the Israeli state towards its Arab neighbours and the dispossessed Palestinians. You may actually be rather surprised if you read some of the Minister’s writings on individual empowerment and development then you may not hold such a negative opinion of humour the organisation that he heads.
As for the Nation of Islam wishing separatist schools, well what is the difference in this country where there have be faith schools for centuries, but of course these were Church of England, Catholic or Jewish. We are now seeing that other faiths wish the same right, but are accused of be separatists.
What all these people have in common is that they provide some form of hope to people who do not feel a part of wider society. Perhaps if we look at why such people’s voices are given valuable airtime and print then we will be part of the way to understanding what the real problems that exist within society are.
I do not disagree with you when say that the ‘Jewish’ Holocaust was one of the ‘worst FORMS of ethnic cleansing that the WORLD HAS EVER SEEN’, but so was Ruwanda, and what happened in the former Yugoslavian states, the attempted cleansing of Catholics from Ireland in the 16th and 17th Century, the clearances of the eighteen century in the Highlands of Scotland where people were actually enslaved and shipped off to the Caribbean, the Apartheid years of South Africa, the ethnic and religious cleansing of Tibet since the 1950’s where some followers of Buddhism were actually put to death, the majority being suppressed by the physical force of the Chinese Army and so on the list is endless.
To deny the existence of any of these is insensitive, obtuse as well as pointless. These are ALL historical facts and the genie so to speak has already escaped the bottle. Being a denier of such events is not the great crime in my opinion, but what is the crime is making sure that these events never happen again.
As I have said before legislation does not change things but the actions of individuals do.
I have posed the question......Is there such a thing as a Nation of Islam for example? Why do people wish to seperate faiths off in this way? Is this not the intrinsic problem of racism verses faith?
I do not disagree that Civil Rights is important. Of course it is, and it will continue to be a rapid movement in the US.
I agree with you also about the other forms of ethnic cleansing.
Extremists, in my opinion, propose hatred. Perhaps Farrakan cannot be equated to the other two. However, today is seperatist schooling the answer to cohesion?
If Hamza is a terrorist, then so is Griffin because they both terrorise.
Dear Black in Blue,
Terrorism and separatism are two very distinct things and they are not necessarily even connected.
There are many terrorists who have grown up in what was not a separatist society whereas there are even more people who have grow up in a separatist society that have and never will become or support terrorist activity.
Terrorism is presently being demonised and the word is being used without thought by many people. As I pointed out before, white society has had single faith schools for centuries and this has not led to the wholesale slaughter of other cultures (Mmmmm thinking on that, I could be wrong).
People who do not or wish not to invest fully in the community cohesion agenda seem to feel that the fault for fragmentation lays at the schools gates. This is clearly not true but it has become the sound bite that is commonly heard. Separatism comes from enforced deprivation and marginalisation of selected communities who are not able to fully engage in wider society. The specific suffering communities do not have the means to change their lot, but wider society has.
It’s about time we stopped labelling the minority communities as the cause of the problem, if wider society was more inclusive and dismantled the not so hidden barriers to equality then things would move on, but unfortunately we live in a class ridden society that thrives on having an under dog category.
Nick Griffin and Abu Hamza are no more terrorists than the many politicians, senior police staff and other senior movers and shakers within statutory organisations who thwart the Community Cohesion Agenda moving forward for their own reasons such as ‘Power’ and ‘Prestige’. You and I know of too many people who are now ‘Experts’ in this field and whilst nothing changes they retain their positions.
Less talk and more action is required.
One man's terrorist might well be another man's freedom fighter.
Just look at the current scene in South Africa: Nelson Mandela, once imprisoned in connection with offences associated with armed struggle, was the recipient of the 1993 Nobel prize for Peace. He is now, of course, a highly respected international statesman.
The situation in Ireland might eventually be just as edifying!
In short, Black in Blue, if someone makes you feel uncomfortable, then you can call that person a terrorist, if it makes you feel better.
But be aware that he may consider himself to be an upright revolutionary or a justified freedom fighter or even an anarchistic social reformer, and others may well chose to honour him as such.
In balance, it would all seem to depend upon where the power lies and who has enough political will, and the ability to enforce that will.
In olden days there was a political doctrine that "Might is Right". Is that where society is now? If so, would it explain what is happening?
Or do we need the Hegelian dialectics of "Thesis Antithesis Synthesis"?
Roger
P.S. contrary to what Serendib states, I understand that Abu Hamza does have a conviction for an offence contrary to the Terrorism Act 2000; that would seem to indeed qualify him appropriately as a terrorist.
Dear Roger
I stand corrected, you are right. He has been in prison since 2004. Sorry this was sloppy of me.
Still, as for being a Terrorist, as you rightly pointed out Nelson Mandela was convicted of such as well as was Ghandi as were many of the early champions of the Israeli State (Oops shot myself in the foot on that one).
I can remember back to my early days as a close protection officer within the Police when an instructor states that whomever we were protecting we should be judgemental for we could find ourselves one day protecting someone who was once considered as a terrorist and against the very society that we were engaged in protecting. Little did I realise that this would come to pass, perhaps not for me but certainly for many of my colleagues.
I am a supporter of allowing the likes of Nick Griffin to speak up. He may be slick and wriggles out of making directly bigoted comments, but unfortunately for him his supporters do not have these very same skills and reveal the BNP for what it is a single issues party that wishes to hail back to a time that never existed and establish some form of white utopian society that clearly will be have no contact with anyone else on the planet for fear of being ethnically and culturally watered down. It would be seen as comical if their rhetoric and actions were not so unsavoury. They could easily be a story line in a film such as ‘Hot Fuzz’ (by the way, I laughed from start to finish, it was so real).
I dont know about the "nation of islam" guy in your post, but this is a video of an african american separatist that would seem to be urging terrorism;
http://wakeupopenyoureyes.blogspot.com/2007/01/wake-up-open-your-eyes-leftist-and_30.html
And nelson mandella *was* a terrorist. He put tyres around the necks of blacks, tied them up, filled them with fuel, and burned them to death. I can show you photo's. His wife - spit - winnie mandela made a speech and in it she said "with tires and matches we will set africa free" and i saw a video of nelson mandela singing 'death to the white man' too.
Naturally i think your very wrong when it comes to the assertions you make against nick, but that almost goes without saying and i know who is going to get my vote.
abu hamza is the terrorist. hes the only one who has committed a terrorist act. he is the only on who has preached MURDER not just hatred of other races.
and i disagree i the strongest possile terms about you equating griffin and hamza in your reply to serendib. to say they both terrorise is glib at best and offensive at worst.
griffin has some unpalatable views, thats without doubt but to say he and Hamza who has been guilty of murder and terrorist offences in other countries is incredibally insensitive.
ive read your blog for a while now and without wanting to start a row it seems that both you and Serendib seem to want to excuse racism and hate from muslims or blacks but castigate whites for the same.
ive enjoed reading your writing but this is all a step too far. cheers all the same
Dear Cookie Monster,
I am proud to say that I do my bit to follow the Mandela approach whilst tackling bigotry "I have fought against white domination, and I have fought against black domination. I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony and with equal opportunity….”
I have worked in a field within a ‘Service’ that has for all its existence been tokenistic towards the issues of combating racism and other forms of bigotry. Often the likes of Black in Blue and notable others have had to stand alone offering an alternative opinion which was not wanted by an establishment which had already made its mind up.
I am far from being some of ‘Black Rights’ radical wishing to tear down British society and all that it stands for. All I desire is a society and especially a Police Service which provides a high quality of service delivery to ALL, which is modelled on the individual needs of others in an ethical manner. This is not hard to do and can be done at all times no matter what the circumstances are.
I am sorry that you perceive both Black in Blue and myself differently, but there we go, we cannot win over all of the people all of the time I suppose. It is odd, but true but many of our biggest critics are themselves people of colour, but there again given the length of imperial and colonial history that such peoples have be subjugated to this is perhaps not so surprising.
If the stance that we take does not fit in with your experiences then I am both surprised but pleased for you, but we will continue to speak up for the voiceless within a service that does not wish to or seem to understand how to listen. This deafness is not confined to just the sphere of diversity, but ALL aspects on communication both internally and externally. I can assure you that ALL the 'ism' are alive and well in the Police even after a quarter of a century of so called Race and Diversity training. The fact is internally women are still not represented in ALL aspects of policing in the numbers that they should be. This is true also of 'Out' gay staff as well as people of colour to mention just three groups. If we cannot get out act together internally how on earth can we expected to provide an equitable and appropriate service externally?
Now, both Black in Blue as well as I and similar minded people are aware of pockets of excellence and we do actually try to spread the word, but crowing on about how successful the service is will not change anything from my experience, it merely sits back and quotes these examples back to us as some form of clarification that ‘All is well’.
I am not a follower of Islam and certainly do not support any form of extremism that causes harm to others, but this does not mean that I am in the Islamophobia camp either. If history has taught us anything then it is that we need to be aware of any form of intolerance for if it goes unchecked the next act will be greater in its ferocity, ultimately ending up in our own destruction.
I wish you well in your life, but sorry I will not and cannot apologise for highlighting concerns and fears that together with others I hold. Perhaps you have the ability and power to ‘walk away’, others do not..
Mahatma Ghandi once said and very much lived to the statement ‘That although one may stand in a majority of one, the truth is still the truth’.
If you search my blog for Ghandi, you'll find that im a big fan ;)
BNP member, you might be a fan of Gandhi but I am not so sure Gandhi would be afan of yours. Seperatism, in my opinion, is the cause of racial tension between ethnic groups.
Post a Comment