Mad Mel’s Hate Speech

by craig on November 9, 2012 1:44 pm in Uncategorized

I make mistakes. I have ocasionally regretted something I wrote. However I have never written anything motivated by hatred of another race or religion, yet I am too “extreme” for the mainstream media. But Melanie Phillips, darling of the Mail and the BBC, can write this kind of incitement to religious hatred:

Romney lost because, like Britain’s Conservative Party, the Republicans just don’t understand that America and the west are being consumed by a culture war. In their cowardice and moral confusion, they all attempt to appease the enemies within. And from without, the Islamic enemies of civilisation stand poised to occupy the void.

With the re-election of Obama, America now threatens to lead the west into a terrifying darkness.

Can somebody please show anything I have written which is anywhere near as ill-motivated? Or anything near as barking mad? Yet Phillips is mainstream and I am in some way understood to be “beyond the pale” of accepted opinion. How does this happen?

Islam is a religion. I know a great many extremely good Muslims. There are also some bad ones, just as there are good and bad Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, atheists, you name it. What if I were to write:

“In their cowardice and moral confusion, they all attempt to appease the enemies within. And from without, the Jewish enemies of civilisation stand poised to occupy the void.”

Why is not everybody protected from hate speech? Unfortunately we don’t have an appropriate word as strong as “racist” to describe the kind of vile bigot Phillips is, Muslims not being a race. For Phillips to accuse Obama of conspiring with racial intolerance while promoting evil and hatred herself, is unspeakable.

Actually if Phillips is acceptable as a mainstream commentator, I am proud that I am not.

Tweet this post

206 Comments

1 2 3

  1. Forgive her, for she knows not what she does, Craig. Which is to unite critics of Israel around a commentary not provided by Ron Prosor. And I don’t think the guys in white coats are too far away.

  2. “Actually if Phillips is acceptable as a mainstream commentator, I am proud that I am not.”

    Amen to that.

    Grocho Marx was right. Not a club I’d like to be a member of either.

  3. Komodo

    If she were just an old lady mumbling in the supermarket I would forgive her. But she gets given a massive audience by the Mail and the BBC to spread this hatred. It is serious.

  4. John Edwards

    9 Nov, 2012 - 2:12 pm

    She does seem to have completely lost it this time. I suppose if Mel was now axed by the BBC they would be accused of anti-semitism.

  5. Melanie Phillips is barking mad about Obama, especially now.

    I have been most disappointed, and angry about Barack until now.

    His re-election without the usual help of Jewish Americans has finally gotten him out of their grip, explaining why Bibi is now saying that he is ready to go it alone when it comes to Iran. This is just big talk which could get him in the biggest trouble with Washington if he does so.

    Obama’s re-election is a big setback for the military too which was counting, like the Clintons, on his being a one-term President, explaining why Hillary is now resigning.

    In short, thank goodness that Hispanic Americans and remobilized African-Americans filled the void left by the departure of the Jewish ones.

    I think that Obama is going to be a very different President now. Even the Chinese think so.

  6. …It is serious.
    It is. But it would be far more serious if they employed someone rational to say these things. Hell, only an antisemite would want that associated with his media outlet.

    More seriously,she’s effectively a shock jock or a Glenn-Beck-alike. If she wasn’t good for ratings, she’d be dropped like a shot. And no doubt her contacts are good within the BBC – her husband does the legal stuff too.

    To follow up your excellent point, I suggest submitting, anonymously, but with a contact address, a complete transcript of a lengthy passage of Mad Mel’s*, with “Jewish” (etc) substituted for “Muslim” (etc) throughout, to the Board of Jewish Deputies for consideration. Then publish their response with details of the deception.

    *if you can bring yourself to touch the original

  7. Hi Trowbridge H. Ford!

    “Melanie Phillips is barking mad”. FTFY.

  8. She’s a twit. On Radio 4’s Moral Maze about two progs ago re DRONES she was going potty ‘cos one participant dared to pose the question that DRONE KILLINGS POLICY AND OPERATIONAL DEVELOPMENTS ETC are never democatically discussed. “What’s not to like!” was the superficiality that she resorted to.

  9. KingofWelshNoir

    9 Nov, 2012 - 2:21 pm

    I don’t think your views are regarded as extreme, just deeply unwelcome to the establishment that would prefer not to have its dark heart exposed. Opposing the State’s complicity in torture is a mainstream view, but since you are a former ambassador with credibility and status you cannot be allowed to say it.

    And Melanie Phillips is just one of those people who are paid to be bonkers.

  10. Because human beings are apes first and thinking beings a long way second, it is much more important to most of them to conform to the consensus of the troop than to seek truth. They also have a deep, ingrained disposition to accept self-proclaimed leaders, because a troop of apes needs a strong, decisive, generally accepted leader – and those identify themselves by showing the characteristics of dominance.

    Virtually all the dominant individuals in British and American culture have decided that Jews are collectively victims, and that they cannot therefore do anything bad. Israel is the Jewish state and therefore it cannot do anything bad.

    Meanwhile, every troop needs enemies – apes belonging to foreign, outside troops who wish to steal territory and females, and kill males and children. Those are the ENEMY and everyone must unite against them. This decade, Muslims are the enemy of choice. “We have always been at war with Islam”.

  11. Mind you, I have always felt that The Moral Maze is the BBC’s chief claim to fame. All things considered, it is the funniest long-running comedy show I have ever heard – beating the Goons quite comfortably. (Secombe never made quite as little sense as Phillips, for instance).

    Week after week I listen to The Moral Maze, bubbling with quiet laughter as I hear the stupid, illogical things that collection of “intellectuals” say as they unsuccessfully try to reinvent the rules of debate, while exemplifying every logical fallacy in the book with superbly straight faces.

  12. I think this is aimed at her USA readership, which is I hear big. I wonder what is behind it, getting the mindset of her readership ready for an event that maybe is about to happen ?. I think its called…Preparing the ground.

  13. It’s infuriating that for years, this vicious harridan has been given a platform on (for example) The Moral Maze. Is there a Dave Spart type on, week after week, to provide some sort of balance? Of course not – a toxic presence like hers serves only to ratchet the BBC and the overall centre ground further and further to the right.

    It was this miserable hysteric who helped that freak in Norway justify his terrorist mass murder. Take a few pages out of Mein Kampf, replace the references to “Jews” with, instead, references to “liberals” or “muslims”, and it would be hard to see what was coming from the new Reicht and which was from the original text.

  14. Craig, not just muslims, but also jews or the so called “semites” cannot be considered to constitute a race. hence, it becomes rather difficult to classify any real or imaginary critique of muslims or jews as an incitement of racial hatred.

    Youth offers no protection from stupidity. Young morons become old morons. I suspect that mel, although probably a borderline imbecile, (a qualification requirement for being “mainstream” nowdays) does it primarily for money. Whoever prints her outbursts must pay mel well for performing her extraordinary tricks, just like those entreprising prostitutes who demand and get more money for any “extras”.

  15. technicolour

    9 Nov, 2012 - 2:34 pm

    Nah, Phillips is OK. She may despise Muslims (and immigrants and democrats) but what she really hates is cyclists. “I have lost count of the times I have been forced to fling myself out of the way of cyclists jumping red lights or failing to stop for pedestrians on crossings. Their anti-social and dangerous, not to say unlawful, behaviour is exceeded in awfulness only by their arrogance….”

    How prescient is that? Never mind drones or potential nuclear oblivion: it’s those two-wheely tossers we need to be concerned about.

  16. resident dissident

    9 Nov, 2012 - 2:35 pm

    “Why is not everybody protected from hate speech?”

    Absolutely agree – now do something about it when it appears among the commenters on this blog. Just because Phillips uses hate speech against Muslims it cannot be used as a justification for hate speech against Jews, Isrealis and Americans as frequently happens here.

    You could take the alternative view that freedom of speech is more important – but that allows Phillips and commenters here to both continue with their “hate speech”. But I’m afraid that the two positions are not logically compatible.

  17. Craig, you are certainly right about the seriousness of her propaganda and the collusion of the BBC. After the Israeli attack on the Mavi Marmara aid ship to Gaza on the 31st of May 2010, that murdered nine unarmed civilians, Melanie Phillips wrote in the Spectator:

    “‘Peace convoy’? This was an Islamist terror ambush.

    As the international community rushes to condemn Israel for the violence on board one of the ships in the Gaza flotilla, which left a reported 10 people dead and dozens injured, it is now obvious that the real purpose of this ‘armada of hate’ was not merely the further delegitimisation of Israel but something far worse.
    Gaza’s markets are full of produce, thousands of tons of supplies are travelling into Gaza every week through the Israeli-controlled border crossings, and there is no starvation or humanitarian crisis. It was always obvious that the flotilla was not the humanitarian exercise it was said to be.
    And now we can see that the real purpose of this invasion – backed by the Turkish Humanitarian Relief Foundation (IHH), a radical Islamic organization outlawed by Israel in 2008 for allegedly serving as a major component in Hamas’s global fund-raising machine – was to incite a violent uprising in the Middle East and across the Islamic world. As I write, reports are coming in of Arab rioting in Jerusalem.
    The notion – uncritically swallowed by the lazy, ignorant and bigoted BBC and other western media – that the flotilla organisers are ‘peace activists’ is simply ludicrous.‘Peace activists’ these people most certainly are not.
    And this flotilla was but the latest jihadi attack, deploying the Islamists’ signature strategy of violence and media manipulation. This was not merely a propaganda stunt, but a terrorist attack.”

    The article was available online, but has since been removed. However the BBC immediately promoted it in a companion piece that supported the Israeli commandos and called the murdered activists “not peace activists but ‘peace militants’ out to damage Israel”. This BBC page:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/worldhaveyoursay/2010/06/are_israels_friends_to_blame_f.html

    has the now dead link to the Spectator article promoted in the penultimate sentence. You might think that the BBC wouldn’t promote an article calling it ‘lazy, ignorant and bigoted’ in its approach to Israel, but in fact that’s part of the presentation – the extreme Zionist stance of the BBC is to be criticised as far too strongly biased the other way, so as to suggest that the reality is even more favourable to Israel than is being presented.

    This anti=Muslim pro-Zionist propaganda campaign masquerading as mainstream reporting is not a conspiracy theory: it really is real, dangerous and criminally abusive. We’ll be seeing it intensify during the run-up to the destruction of Iran.

    Alistair

  18. Technicolour,
    I put cyclists up on an old thread to prevent them getting in the way of the current one. You responded there, too. You obviously disagree with me in every possible way, and each separate disagreement must be conflated with all the rest in order to make me look as bad as possible, but out of courtesy to Craig, do it on the appropriate thread. Please.

  19. I believe the term would be “islamophobia”. I used to dislike that word as a poorly formed neologism clumsily copied on “antisemitism”, but sadly it has gained much legitimacy in the last years.

    Very respectfully, Craig:

    Phillips is and has remained a respected member of the media establishment because she knows and abides by the standards of that particular cast. She has been raised in this cast, which gives her a recognisable background for her senior colleagues that open doors for her, but mostly an intimate knowledge what can and cannot be said without upsetting colleagues, powerful patrons and the public (not only ny not offending them, but also by conforming to their expectations). Her mastery of the form is what allows her to utter the sort of statements that you correctly denounce as extreme, without her reputation being tainted amongst the general public.

    You, on the other hand, seem to have been raised to be an articulate technician for diplomatic circles, apt to be understood by literate people on complex subjects. This gives you a poor training for media guerrilla, as the interview with Joan Smith on “Newsnight” proves: you walked into what amounted to an ambush, allowed Smith to divert attention on the irrelevant question of naming somebody, and ended up being shouted down in public. In general, by insisting on one’s moral and intellectual superiority, one appears frustrated by the establishment, which is a shortcut to being labelled a crackpot.

    Power today relies heavily on the aptitude to manipulate the media. Realistically, an efficient contest to the ruling class will have to use these media. It will need to fight the established discourse with its own weapons. I suppose that this is what you seen Julian Assange do when he relinquishes his long hair and leather jacket to don a suit and gradually come to terms with properly tie his tie. If anything, the monstrous nature of Phillips’ views should only reassure us on the power that we will harness then we achieve mastery of the media: if racism can be paraded openly under a thin veil of respectability, the defence of Human Rights should be easier to get across to the public.

  20. technicolour

    9 Nov, 2012 - 3:14 pm

    I beg your pardon, Komodo? The issue is Melanie Phillips. I was quoting Melanie Phillips. I think it’s significant that her insane vituperation is directed at everything from cyclists to immigrants to Muslims. The root is the same.

    Alastair, yes. Strangely, her rabid cyclist rant was removed too. In one way, that’s a good thing: in another, quite terrifying. I’m for free speech but not for free lies, especially on such a large platform. I too think that she should be held to account,for her malicious, fabricated justifications of power; her vicious inhumanity towards its victims.

  21. technicolour

    9 Nov, 2012 - 3:17 pm

    Actually, size of platform has nothing to do with it.

  22. Resident Dissident

    Actually I have deleted quite a few racist comments – nearly all, as it happens, anti-semitic – in the last week. But I fear you are eliding “Disagreeing with Israel” and “Disagreeing with the United States” as antisemitic or anti-American.

    I do not read all comments. As I said in a comment a few days ago, if a comment appears anyone believes to be racist, flag it up via the contact button at top of page and I’ll look at it for deletion or not.

  23. technicolour

    9 Nov, 2012 - 3:37 pm

    In fact this is a winder problem than Phillips, of course. The Mail and others actively want their commentators to be extreme: will push them to be so, if they’re not already. It’s part of generating ‘interest’ eg winding up, and spreading fear among, their readership. Fear and frustration sell.

  24. Pauline Barten.

    9 Nov, 2012 - 3:41 pm

    Your views are not extreme , they are truthful. When i read something that you have wrote , i am in no doubt that is what you really think . The media do not operate that way . The press are not independant , they are establishment . They tell us what they think we should know . Truth and independant thought do not come into it . Melanie Phillips is a nasty piece of work , and venom like this is not journalism . It’s propaganda .

  25. I don’t see a problem with applying the term ‘racist’ to Melanie Phillips rants against Muslims.

    While it is perfectly correct and rational to point out that Islam is a religion rather than a race, it is not the same interpretation of Islam that Ms Phillips holds.

    Forget the fact that there are many white Muslims, particularly in the old Yugoslavia, and that the world’s most populous Muslim nation is Indonesia, these are not the Muslims she has in mind. She is talking of the Muslims that ‘look like’ Muslims in her own blinkered view.

    When Islam is used as a code to refer to people of a specific region, i.e. the Middle East, Iran and Pakistan, then we shouldn’t defer to her code, but rather her intent.

  26. Trowbridge H. Ford (9 Nov, 2012 – 2:12 pm)is wrong to claim that American Jews opposed Obama.

    In fact, Obama won 70% of the Jewish vote – 4% less than in 2008, but still an overwhelming majority:
    http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2012/al-monitor/obama-jewish-vote.html

    American Jews (like, also, British Jews) vote significantly to the left of other people/groups of similar socio-economic status.

    American Jews overwhelmingly regard domestic issues as of greatest political importance to them. Israel comes very low down their list of concerns:
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mj-rosenberg/american-jews-do-not-put-_b_1857035.html
    _____________________________________________________________________________

    People like Sheldon Adelson, on the extreme US/Israeli right, although massive bankrollers of the Republicans (and Netanyahu), are highly unrepresentative of mainstream Jewish American opinion:
    http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2012/06/14/sheldon-adelson-willing-to-spend-100-million-to-beat-obama

  27. Snickid 9 Nov, 2012 – 3:47 pm
    “Obama won 70% of the Jewish vote”

    Very interesting to know. It reinforces my belief that all the racism and nationalism stuff is largely contrived to create divisions. It’s an old game that we still fall for.

    The battle isn’t christian v muslim. Nor scots v english. Etc etc.

    It’s us against the ruling elites.

  28. technicolour

    9 Nov, 2012 - 4:09 pm

  29. @Technicolour

    Sorry, can’t see it. I’ve no fecebook account.

  30. @Phil: that is old news, but it is well worth repeating because it disproves both those whose advertise Israel as a crucial issue for Jews, and those who see Israel as the “tail that wags the dog” of the USA. In fact, Israel is more of a pet project gone wrong for a WASP demographic, much like Northern Ireland was to the UK, or Algeria was to France: it’s not that anybody from there has any real influence on you, or that you have seriously crucial interests there, but you’ve invested so much in it and you’ve grown so accustomed to it that you can’t see yourself dropping it. Until a good reason comes along, at which point those who counted on you being committed to the hilt get a nasty surprise…

  31. “It is essential for mankind to have new leadership! The leadership of mankind by Western man is now on the decline, not because Western culture has become poor materially or because its economic and military power has become weak. The period of the Western system has come to an end primarily because it is deprived of those life-giving values….”
    .
    Sayyid Qutb wrote this in the 60’s. How prescient he was!

  32. technicolour

    9 Nov, 2012 - 4:17 pm

    Phil, not sure how these things work – thought it was publicly available. Drat, was a sweet cartoon about two sides firing on – each other’s leaders.

  33. Nuzothie 9 Nov, 2012 – 4:11 pm
    “@Phil: that is old news”

    Of course. But it is worth repeating considering the nationalists tones that even appears on this site.

  34. Imho, rather than protecting *everyone* from hate-speech, I’d suggest we should protect *nobody*. I argue this for three reasons:

    1. The idea of “hate speech” corrupts the principle of “free speech”. For example, genuine criticism of Israel’s foreign policy is often tarred with the brush of antisemitism.

    2. When certain forms of racism are illegal, they go underground. That makes them hard to counter. For example, we all know what the BNP really stand for, but Griffin is quite clever at staying just the right side of the legal line. This makes him harder to counter; it makes it more difficult to beat him in open debate, and it makes his words seem just reasonable enough that those who are not politically-minded could be seduced by them (many BNP voters aren’t racists, they just see the “British Jobs for British workers” line, and fail to spot the subtext).

    3. It ghettoises the vulnerable groups. To commit hate speech, it must be against a specific, minority, “other”. But we make it worse when we prosecute for that. If someone says something cruel and anti-gay, then we should prosecute for nastiness, rather than homophobia: prosecuting the latter reinforces the very distinction we are trying to equalise.

  35. @Phil: I fear it’s worse than nationalism: there are a whole lot of people who take the so-called “end of ideologies”, add globalisation and extrapolate that nation-states are becoming irrelevant, and that the major issues of the 21st century will be religion (and, they concede, “cultural” or “civilisation” issues, but linked to religion). That comes from people like Tony Blair, whose centre-left pedigree did not predestinate to roll back progress all the way from the 16th century (his whole “Globalisation, development and the role of religion” tour). We live in a crisis of the Western world-view, and thinly disguised racism is becoming more and more acceptable in polite company due to that.

  36. @Richard: this is of course a noble idea, but it is easier to have in a society that has not been traumatised by nazi rule or occupation. Free speech is well and good to a German or a French, but they will always retain a visceral feeling that some sort of speech is a public security issue — not in a Bradley Manning sort of way, but from a Beer Hall putsch perspective.

  37. Ben Franklin (head honcho CIA Office for Craig Murray Operations)

    9 Nov, 2012 - 5:54 pm

    Trowbridge; I see someone has beat me to it. Sheldon Adelson and the Koch brothers got around a 1% rate-of-return on their investment for the bleatings of the Jewhadists and Teahadists. (oh, is that hate-speech? Mea Culpa)

    http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2012/al-monitor/obama-jewish-vote.html

  38. Ben Franklin (head honcho CIA Office for Craig Murray Operations)

    9 Nov, 2012 - 5:56 pm

    Komodo; You are an extremely polite poison lizard.

  39. Ben Franklin (head honcho CIA Office for Craig Murray Operations)

    9 Nov, 2012 - 5:58 pm

    ” I’ve no fecebook account.”

    I see what you did there, Phil :)

  40. “Why is not everybody protected from hate speech?” – You may not like the my view on this Craig, but I’d say it’s because the whole ‘hate speech’ thing was principally designed for just one particular sub-set of society. Anything else is either periphery e.g. Re: Blacks, or can be ignored e.g. Re: Muslims/Islam.

  41. Ben Franklin (head honcho CIA Office for Craig Murray Operations) 9 Nov, 2012 – 5:58 pm
    “I see what you did there, Phil”

    Unfortunately it was a typo Ben. But I shall forever use it from now on.

  42. Melanie Phillips continues on her path to incite hatred of other thinking, that why Anders Breivig choose her mindset for his manifesto.

    Mad Mel is a fascist in the true meaning, she believes in the chosen one’s occupying the moral high-ground, above the world community and its legally binding resolutions.
    When it suits them they use justice systems as and when, to legitimately claim back their property and wealth, and to pursue those who wronged humankind.

    Their fierce long journey to gain lands that belong to others thought, is an outrageous crime against humanity and should never be forgotten. One bad thing committed against them, some 80years back, has been used to trance the world, blinding it from seeing the same evil committed by Israel on the Palestinian’s as was done to them.

    I pity you Melanie Phillips, for you are just as human as others, and you are filling in the time between birth and death with hatred for others, call it an occupation even.

    Thanks for pointing out this hyena of the journalist world for what she is Craig.

  43. technicolour

    9 Nov, 2012 - 6:14 pm

    I thought Komodo was being extremely polite there too, like a schoolboy when the teacher comes in. Liked the appeal, on Craig’s behalf, of course, too. Very sweet.

    There is also failbook, and (my favourite) facebuck.

  44. technicolour

    9 Nov, 2012 - 6:56 pm

    I’d love to send Melanie Phillips to Gaza, although I doubt they would want her. I wonder if she has ever, for a second, thought, or hoped she might be wrong. Fine writing, Nevermind.

  45. Craig. she’s written a whole book on this theme. I’ve not read her latest article but the choice quote you give us is a metaphor for everything she writes about be it drugs, crime, Jimmy Saville (I kid you not!) to Obama.

    That woman fought the corner of the MMR hoax and its progenitor, the former “Dr” Wakefield, for years. Millions of anxious parents read that MMR is dangerous and could lead to autism. Thanks for her total misunderstanding of very basic science, kids now attend schools where children are not vaccinated against killer diseases. Her latest broadside on “arrogant” and murderous medics is aimed at the Liverpool Care Pathway for the dying. She uses anecdote as a weapon to aim at the medical profession. The science of epidemiology is of course nonsense in her mind.

    One of her articles attacking scientists (morally bankrupt etc etc) proposed intelligent design as the only plausible explanation to describe the complexity of cell biology. These awful, arrogant scientists who tout evolution have got it all wrong because they don’t have the evidence to explain the missing link. Melanie is right and Dawkins & co. are spiritually empty, left-wing liberal intelligentsia islam loving anti-semitic lunatics!

    She’s upset too many people when writing for the Spectator costing them several tens of thousands in compensation. Brillo got rid of her. Now she’s holding court with the Daily Mail readership and graces our airwaves on the awful “moral maize” on r4 – thankfully confined to the wee small hours of a saturday night.

    A deranged and lunatic woman who unfortunately writes very well and has a love of hyperbole and anecdote that has no peer in Fleet Street.

  46. English Knight

    9 Nov, 2012 - 7:42 pm

    Pamela Geller too, its just that the truth about 911 is slowly going mainstream and it seems they want us goyim looking the other way, at mo muzzy (of Rochdale!). If the devils so want us to hate the muzzies, I am tempted to have a peek at their Book – just to find out what it is that geller/phillips are so much afraid of?!

  47. @Nuzothie interesting points. honest criticism.

    Mad Mel writes extremely well. There’s a superficial cogency and rationality to all her work for the Mail. Her themes are relentlessly the same. But dig a bit deeper especially into her attempts to engage with science and its obvious she is f*cking clueless and totally out of her depth. The way she relentlessly promoted ex “Dr” Wakefield and his academic fraud led one blogger to call her a crank-magnet. (http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2009/05/06/melanie-phillips-crank-magnetism-in-acti/)

    At heart she is a conspiracy theorist. Be it medics, islamists, anti-zionsists, environmentalists, evolutionary biologists: if there’s a whiff of an alternative explanation she’s writing about it by laying into them using her absurd view of the world to justify her position.

  48. ‘Why is not everybody protected from hate speech?’

    Perhaps because if they were christians and muslims wouldn’t be allowed to say people who don’t accept their absurd and vile superstitions will be sent to hell and tortured for ever by a benevolent just and merciful god.

  49. We can argue about voter choices, based upon hit-or-miss exit polling, until the cows come home – and I still stick to my claims about Jewish-American support for Obama – but the proof will be in Washington’s policies towards Israel as the showdown with Iran takes place, and Bibi tries to increase his standing in its upcoming elections.

  50. Henry Forester

    9 Nov, 2012 - 9:04 pm

    It is my view that this woman is a complete and utter DINGBAT. I read her articles for their comedy value and they really do make me laugh myself silly.

    However, when one considers the effects of her ravings, it is not the least bit funny for many people.

  51. Phil:
    ” I’ve no fecebook account.”

    A friend of mine would call it arsebook, but really this takes the cake!

    Like you, i shall too hereon…

  52. Chris Jones

    9 Nov, 2012 - 9:56 pm

    Craig – with all due respect – what you called for regarding the dissolvement of sovereign countries and an EU totalitarian state was just as dangerous and ill judged,if not more so, than many of philips’ ramblings

  53. Technicolour:

    “In fact this is a winder problem than Phillips, of course. …”

    TC was that deliberate or just a Freudian slip? Just curious.

    Your point overall is totally valid in this age of corruption we live in.

  54. One has only to look at her list of publications to which she contributes. It silently says a lot….

  55. Melanie Phillips serves a very useful purpose for the ‘Establishment’ – those who have a lot of power – in that firstly, she states things openly that others would like to state but might be reticent to ‘go first’ about and so then gives them license to follow suit – she is a weather-vane in that regard, though no doubt like her extremist US counterparts – Michelle Bachman et al – she probably sees herself as Joan of Arc. Secondly, she makes most of the (for want of a better term) ‘imperialist, warmongering establishment’ look moderate and tolerant – a bit like Nick Griffin did on that episode of the BBC’s ‘Question Time’. Thirdly, she provides drama and a sort of freak-show eloquence – in essence, she taps into the same vein as ‘Big Brother’, that dominatrix who used to present a silly quiz-show (I forget her name) and all those shouting, screaming chefs/businessmen, etc. She, and they, operate through spectacular ritual humiliation and basically, bullying. They, of transiently uber individuals, she, of entire communities. I am told by someone who knows that she was exactly the same in her approach to colleagues when she was a Left-winger. Personality does not really change.

    Finally, Craig, the views espoused by such as Phillips are racist. Bigotry too, of course. Most Muslims in the UK, and indeed, in the world, are brown, yellow or black, and it’s very obvious that the no longer widely acceptable familiar form of racism elides well with cultural racism and the perceived difference b/w these two, deeply entangled, phenomena has been a means of obscuring the basic rubric of hate. The same thing applied to anti-Semitism in Europe. It’s all racism.

  56. And of course, Melanie Phillips is part of the Far Right Islamophobia industry. Think, Senator Joseph McCarthy and you get the picture.

  57. Neo Liberal hypocrisy is also a great danger – many people (on here and elsewhere) feel it is perfectly acceptable to attack,stereotype and be utterly prejudiced against people who could be described as white conservative Christians – (if they are american and republicans,however moderate, they are automatically the devils spawn of course) but yet recoil in horror with any judgement or stereotyping of any religion or group of people other than white Christians. The lack of balance in the debate can be quite worrying

  58. – Not that white (or brown,pink yellow,green) conservatives have to be conservative either – i’m sure they come in as many varied forms as Muslims,Hinduists,Buddhists, Paganists,Shintoists, Aethists and Agnostics

  59. (corrected) – Not that white (or brown,pink yellow,green) Christians have to be conservative either – i’m sure they come in as many varied forms as Muslims,Hinduists,Buddhists, Paganists,Shintoists, Aethists and Agnostics

  60. Indeed, Chris. Hatespeak emanates from all groups and there are good people in all groups. Yet politically-speaking, the Far Right (defined in this configuration as ‘Mad Mel’ et al) and the Christian Right/Tea Party Right (eg. the ‘Teavangelicals’) in the USA get enormous mainstream airtime and have massive amounts of money and so are able to project their systematised propaganda widely and, to some extent, to leverage mainstream discourse/policy. They are promoting an even greater concentration of power in the hands of groups/elites who already wield power – even if individuals withion the groups promoting this do not. Whereas someone like Craig Murray gets nothing like the same exposure – that was the point Craig was making in his post.

  61. One of the “wonderful” features about the UK is the panoply of laws – common and statute – that can be deployed by the state and private individuals against those who prove themselves “akward” in order to suppress dissent.

    With this in mind, I wonder if anyone has ever thought of launching a private prosecution against Philips? I’m sure there’s some weasely law she could be held to have broken (how about “incitement to racial or religious hatred”?

    As some commenters have said, substitute the word “Jewish” for “Moslem” and shed have been in court years ago.

  62. Further to my comment of just now, I seem to remember that not so long ago someone got 6 months or so for posting “grossly offensive” comments to the effect that British soldiers in Afghanistan should go to hell (or something along those lines).

    So a prosecution of the mad one should be possible, shouldn’t it?

  63. Suhayl: You are quite right about the likes of Mad-cow Mel, and clearly she’s got an eye on the very successful counterpart hate-merchants in the States. Ann Coulter is an example of someone that can be relied upon to give a “controversial”, not to say bigoted and outrageous, point of view from the neo-fascist right. Basically, a rent-a-mouth reactionary who are always willing to surprise at the depths they will plumb.

    However, it’s not altogether a bad thing – I was trying to get into this on the “Obama drones on” thread. These far-rightists – with their racism, homophobia, sexism, indeed every bigotry known to man – have become attached to the right-wing establishment and their parties. They can’t control them anymore, there is too much money being made, and cheap popularism, in being decidedly on the irrational end of any debate. This is what happened when the US teabaggers were given licence and set loose – they’ve made the party they adopted unelectable, and the leaders have lost control of their own monster.

    What we need to do is highlight this insane hate-talk, and make the right-wing parties own it. It’s all yours, white-boys – see if you can paper over this screech-owl that apparently speaks on your behalf. The more they speak, the more they are encouraged to go ever further, the more distance they put between society and the party they have attached themselves to.

  64. There you go once again Suhayl-instantly equating Christianity with the right – and not only the right but far right. Can you see how blinkered you sound while trying to make others sound blinkered??

    “They are promoting an even greater concentration of power in the hands of groups/elites who already wield power – even if individuals withion the groups promoting this do not. Whereas someone like Craig Murray gets nothing like the same exposure – that was the point Craig was making in his post”

    ….i have to say, that also is impressively blinkered – you do realise neo cons and neo liberals work for the same people? You’re talking about the politics of 1820 not the modern reality of 2012…

  65. Ben Franklin (head honcho CIA Office for Craig Murray Operations)

    10 Nov, 2012 - 1:00 am

    Glenn; I suspect Mel and Coulter are just good marketers who know how to sell fishwrap. If they actually believed the drivel they dispense, they would have to contend with the smell of a crabalocker fish-wife, and I doubt they would tolerate. :)

  66. Tend to agree with Ben above.

    BTW, how about one of the regular commenters on this board looking into the possibility of a private prosecution and reporting back here?

    Unless of course your concern is limited to gassing away ad nauseam on the board, scatching each others backs, frelaying conspiracy theories and acting self-important…

  67. Habbabkuk: Start a fund, mate, and we’ll see about presenting a prosecution right after you’ve worked out the legal case for it. It’s tricky, though – a private prosecution would be on the grounds of personal damages. So I guess we’ll just have to be scratching each others’ backs, [f]relaying conspiracy theories and acting self-important in the meantime.

    *

    Ben: If we could churn out any old bilge that would be guaranteed to hit the NYT best-seller list before it was even started, and distributed so widely they might as well be falling out of boxes of cornflakes, who among us would not be tempted? 😉

    *

    Chris Jones: Thanks for the reminder, these far-right whackadoodles are invariably self-professed God-fearing Christian devotees. Some are genuinely deluded and think some Middle-East inspired Armageddon will make a sufficiently high pile of bodies, that the Baby Jesus will be satisfied and come slithering down the pile of corpses, to bring about The Second Coming. (See http://raptureready.com/)

    But most of these far-right supposed Christian pundits are even worse than that: just cynical exploiters of the faithfully deluded.

  68. Glenn – i have to admit that you’ve rather neatly proven the point i was making. Stereotyping Christians as invariably being far right whackos shows a considerable lack of understanding on your behalf and sadly demonstrates how so many have been hoodwinked in to the blinkered attack on Christianity in general. Extremists are extremists whatever they may or may not be associated with.

  69. Craig, I think the MSM don’t like you because you’re a rogue – unpredictable, independent, straight-talker. That kind of disposition cannot be harnessed, owned and reused to sell the latest political messages. So you get ignored. But Melanie Phillips is useful and manageable, as some have observed here. She helps normalise ideas that should seem outrageous to a reasonable person and clears the way for political proposals that appear moderate by comparison.

    But as for hate-speech – let it be. Political correctness has enough power to harrass and silence the lone voice of reason without giving it another weapon. Hate is a valid primary emotion – we hate Melanie Phillips don’t we? And free speech is what gives this blog power. And so we are free to speak hatefully about MP and her ilk.

  70. Ben Franklin (head honcho CIA Office for Craig Murray Operations)

    10 Nov, 2012 - 2:27 am

    Chris; I think the semantics of the word ‘Christian’ has some running in circles, including me, until your last comment. Please excuse me if I say anything which might offend, but truth, as someone said, is like iodine, it sometimes hurts as it heals.

    The prejudice against Christians, is somewhat like the local issue of American/UK connivance. The core is hypocrisy.

    Many conflate the word ‘Christian’ with the hobnobs who purport to represent the Great Teacher, but like the Scribes and Pharisees, his contemporaries just as they derogate those hypocritical National governments who espouse one thing, but practice another. There are, many who live the life of Christ, but in comparison with the majority, they are few.

    Does that make some consolation, or have I misunderstood?

  71. Ben – the issue of mass hypocrisy is obviously very true – Blair and Bush et al did a pretty good job of soiling/slashing and burning the good name and values of real Christainity (do unto others etc).Anyone with an ounce of common sense could see from the start that it was all a charade though surely…

    However,it is very ironic/telling to see Craig writing a piece pointing out how prejudice and bigotry against Muslisms is unforgivable but long time supporters of Craig saying the equivelant prejudice and bigotry against Christians is fine and dandy

  72. Chris J: I was careful to make clear my comments were about the far-right whackadoodles who purport to be Christian. You chose or just happened to ignore that, and replied as if those comments were about all Christians. Was that really accidental?

    Regardless – Muslims are forever castigated for not rooting out the crazed elements among their ranks. There is some truth to that, notwithstanding the fact that when they try, it often backfires into some “sting” operation against the very people these decent Muslims are trying to dissuade from doing harm.

    Virtually nothing is ever said about the excesses of right-wing evangelicals, the hate-mongers and race-baiters, when it comes to Christianity. They have to own their far-out insane fringe, just the way the Muslims do, and bring them back to some sort of rationality. They are completely failing in that duty.

  73. being married to BBC’s Joshua Rozenberg obviously helps!

    Joshua Rozenberg
    Rozenberg began his career in journalism at the BBC in 1975…
    Rozenberg is married to fellow journalist Melanie Phillips.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joshua_Rozenberg

    btw, altho an attack on Iran might be slightly less likely under Obama, it is worthwhile remembering – from Chicago Tribune 2008:

    Barack Obama: The first Jewish president?
    Chicago circle nurtured him all the way to the top
    Abner Mikva, the Chicago Democratic Party stalwart and former Clinton White House counsel, offers a variation on that theme. “If Clinton was our first black president, then Barack Obama is our first Jewish president,” says Mikva, who was among the first to spot the potential of the skinny young law school graduate with the odd name…
    http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2008-12-12/news/0812110155_1_barack-obama-bettylu-saltzman-jewish-vote

    Capers Funnye
    Capers C. Funnye Jr… is an African American who is the head rabbi of the mostly African-American 200 member Beth Shalom B’nai Zaken Ethiopian Hebrew Congregation of Chicago, Illinois… He is also the first African-American member of the Chicago Board of Rabbis, serves on the boards of the Jewish Council on Urban Affairs and the American Jewish Congress of the Midwest, and is active in the Institute for Jewish and Community Research, which reaches out to black Jewish communities outside the United States, such as the Beta Israel in Ethiopia and the Igbo Jews in Nigeria. The organization was founded by Funnye in 1985 as a direct offshoot of Wentworth Arthur Matthew’s Commandment Keepers. He was ordained a rabbi by the Israelite Rabbinical Academy in 1985. In 1996, Funnye was the only official black rabbi in the Chicago area recognized by the greater Jewish community. He earned a Bachelor of Arts degree in Jewish Studies and Master of Science in Human Service Administration from the Spertus Institute of Jewish Studies in Chicago.
    ***Funnye is the first cousin once removed of Michelle Obama, the wife of 44th United States President Barack Obama…
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capers_Funnye

    other major Obama mentors include Lester Crown, son of billionaire industrialist, henry crown, and attorney Newton Minow, of Sidley Austin, where Barack & Michelle Obama met each other. Minow’s daughter taught Obama at Harvard.

  74. a final example…hawks endorse BO in jerusalem post in september:

    Ross, Dershowitz: Obama has Israel’s back on Iran
    Dennis Ross and Alan Dershowitz, high-profile supporters of both Israel and US President Barack Obama, told The Jerusalem Post Thursday they were confident the president would support Israel should it attack Iran in a last-ditch effort to stop a nuclear bomb, and that Obama would attack Iran himself if necessary…
    http://www.jpost.com/USPresidentialrace/Article.aspx?id=285780

  75. “Virtually nothing is ever said about the excesses of right-wing evangelicals, the hate-mongers and race-baiters, when it comes to Christianity. They have to own their far-out insane fringe, just the way the Muslims do, and bring them back to some sort of rationality. They are completely failing in that duty”

    …yep agreed with that sentiment allthough you miss out the bit that Christianity in general has been under sustained attack and undermining for quite some time now.But if what your also vaguely trying to claim is true-that these extremist evangelicals are imposters taking advantage of the genuine good values of Christianity, then you shouldnt (in my view) feel the need to insinuate that Christianity, whatever the politics or not of the person,equates to being far right or whacko. Incidentally – have you any views on the dangers of the far left as well? Extreme aethists as well while we’re at it?

  76. She thinks Obama is a ‘secret Muslim’, doesn’t she? She’s a ‘birther’, isn’t she? She’s not just a bigot, then. She’s stark staring bloody mad.

  77. It’s a mistake to use terms like “barking mad” in relation to Mel. I used to call her Mad Mel as a lot of people do, but the truth is that she knows exactly what she is doing, which is playing to her American and mostly Jewish audience and defending, as she sees it, the interests of Israel. Israel is best served by a strong West which does not have any truck with Islam; she wants them strong morally but weak in their identity with other Christians (like Arab ones). Her audience will read her articles online and approve even if much of the domestic readership will shake their heads and say “this woman’s mad”. The same is true of a lot of the extremely Islamophobic right-wing blogosphere, although the agenda isn’t always just about Israel.

  78. I noticed things in her book “Londonistan” which suggested she was writing for an American audience, such as the use of “Prime Minister Blair” (which nobody here ever called him), false observations (like claiming London was full of women wearing niqab, which it’s not) and errors of geography (like claiming that Mark Cross was in the heart of Sussex, when in fact it’s just outside Tunbridge Wells, which is in Kent, and it’s less than an hour’s drive from London, which is what made it convenient for Abu Hamza and his chums).

  79. Chris Jones
    ‘Blair and Bush et al did a pretty good job of soiling/slashing and burning the good name and values of real Christainity (do unto others etc).’

    Maggie found a pulpit to announce that the lesson of Christianity
    is not altruism/socialism/thinking about the needs of others but looking after no. 1. Personal responsibility no longer means taking responsibility for others, but only looking after oneself.

    After Maggie, Melanie Philips seems quite sane to me. Just because she has become a dotty old lady on the BBC doesn’t mean she has any teeth.

  80. Resident Dissident

    Freedom of speech. The purpose of discussion as you very well know is to tease out the truth. I spent today digging overgrown clods of couch grass from former flowerbeds, whacking their roots with my fork in order to clean the earth for another crop. So please don’t knock freedom of speech. Hatespeech is there as a tool for all to get to the well-concealed truth, including why political Islam is in alliance with Zionist ultra conservatism in Syria and across the Muslim world.

    This alliance is a large and dangerous weed which stings like a nettle and tears like a blackberry bush. They sit in London on Socialist benefits and support the neo-con Zionist cause where they think they can get a little patronage. And they hate the power of freedom of speech to tease out the truth.

  81. There is nothing worse, apart from direct disbelief in God, than hypocrisy. The hypocrisy of David Cameron who asks the British people to chip in to help others while stuffing his friends’ pockets with lucrative contracts to privatise the NHS and lucrative building developments on land that was purchased cheap because it had no planning permission inside the green belts.

    If Melanie Phillips rants tease out the truth, more power to her sagging jowls and pelvic floor muscles. She started as a socialist but when socialists get a little money in their pathetic pension pots they swing to the right, lift up the drawbridge to their puny castles, and the terrorism which ruthlessly established the entity of Israel has to be droned dead in Pakistan. The people who are being killed by drones in Pakistan by the political Islam/neocon alliance are individuals and their families who are knowledgeable and observant of their faith, fair-minded but firm in their dealings with others.

    Melanie Phillips ideas on the morality of drones attacks as gushed on the Moral Maze last week are that the targets are all plotting against the West. What a gross projection of her own hypocrisy and malice. The false flag operation that was 9/11 was thought up by the people who are being hit by drones, but by well-heeled Arabs mixing in the circles of George Bush.

  82. I can do 1 + 2 =3, but I didn’t check what I wrote. Sorry.
    There should have been a ‘not’ in the last sentence:

    ‘The false flag operation that was 9/11 was NOT thought up by the people who are being hit by drones, but by well-heeled Arabs mixing in the circles of George Bush.’

  83. she’s allowed her execrable ranting BECAUSE she is a jew……….

  84. Gilad Atzmon hits the nail firmly on the head:

    “How is it that Melanie Philips is getting away with openly promoting vile Islamophobia in our midst ? How is it that she and other Zionists prevail ,exactly where the EDL and the BNP fail? Why is Melanie Phillips a celebrity, whilst the BNP’s Nick Griffin is regarded as a vile racist, and a social outcast?

    ….I believe that the answer is devastating: within our so called, liberal democratic, allegedly ‘tolerant’ discourse — it is only right wing Jews who are entitled and allowed to spread xenophobia and hatred.

    This is hardly surprising, because unlike contemporary Westerners, who seem to be more than confused by their colonial heritage and notions such as nationalism, racism, expansionism, biological determinism, religion, and self-loving, Israel and Zionism actually celebrate all of these symptoms, in the open.

    It is far from surprising then, to see Israeli flags and Jewish symbols popping up in many far right gatherings in the UK and in other European countries, because Israel, it seems, makes racism look kosher.

    The shocking ideological resemblance of the thoughts and ideals of the fearsome mass murderer Breivik and mainstream Zionist advocates such Melanie Phillips, Daniel Pipes, David Horowitz, and Harry’s Place should surely be a bright red alert for any sensible humanist.

    If we want to save our society from being dragged into a violence with no end, we must de-Zionise every possible aspect of our culture, media and political institutions.

  85. Spamtasticus

    10 Nov, 2012 - 9:56 am

    ‘The false flag operation that was 9/11 was NOT thought up by the people who are being hit by drones, but by well-heeled Arabs mixing in the circles of George Bush.’

    The 5 dancing Israelis.
    Israeli messaging company Odigio.
    Larry Silverstein.

    All controlled by well heeled Arabs eh? The 5 Israeli guys have admitted on Israeli TV that they were in NY to ‘document’ the attacks, see it on Youtube for yourself. No-one seems curious about how they knew the attacks were going to happen.

  86. Actually – Phillips IS a racist – like Ann Coulter is – when she spouts anto-Islamic crapola. Just because we know Islam isn’t a race doesn’t mean they don’t think it is….but I’m afraid we are never going to educate these idiots. At least Coulter is too old to breed now so can’t damage the gene pool. Not sure about Phillips.

  87. Guano should listen to Ian Crane here.

    Ian R Crane at the Open Mind Conference 2012, Skanderborg Denmark. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ciV56pGENc8

  88. All controlled by well heeled Arabs eh?

    Ever heard of a coalition? You know, millions of UK Liberal Party members like Craig being dragged half smiling , half screaming into a deal which has brought Thatcherism back into power. Is Craig ‘controlling’ UK policy because he decided to embrace a political cause that has betrayed him.

    My point is that Zionists always betray the political entities that cut deals with them so why is Political Islam trying to cut a deal with them in Syria? Will they never learn, in spite of the advice of their own religion?

  89. ‘The Islamophobia Industry’, by Nathan Lean – recommended reading.

    http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Islamophobia-Industry-Manufactures-Muslims/dp/0745332536

    I find it interesting that those who tacitly or openly support the Far Right like to pose constantly as victims, when in the USA in particular, there are billions of (the union of uber-Zionist, rightwing Evangelical and Neocon) dollars behind their movements and when the movements have systemic links with major political parties, eg. the Republican Party. ‘Mad Mel’ is one propagandist for them, and here they are, tacitly supporting everything she says. To slam the Far Right Evangelical Christian Zionist fanatics of the USA (or indeed, the uber-Zionist fanatics in the UK) is not to be anti-Christian, any more than to slam the fanatical Islamists is to be anti-Muslim. What nonsense. How can people defend these views? Really, if we are honest, now instead of focusing on a critique of the Far Right as exemplified in the persona of ‘Mad Mel’, which is the subject of this thread, it seems to me that soon we will again be moving towards the UK-centred arguments with which we are all too familiar on these boards. Soon, no doubt there will be posts about immigration and it will be conflated with ‘Sharia law’, Bradford child abuse/prostitution rings and so on and we will be dancing again to the Islamophobic concerto of the Far Right in both the USA and UK.

    Someone earlier on this thread suggested that Jews didn’t vote for Obama – that is not true; it is estimated that 80% of Jewish people voted for Obama this week (and the same last time around). It is true that the pro-Israel organisations/lobby massively funded both the McCain and Romney campaigns and openly view Obama as an enemy, whom they try to demonise as “a stealth Muslim”. This is because, while clearly he is a solid supporter of Israel, he is not quote fanatical enough a supporter for their purposes.

    Glenn, thanks for your very lucid comments.

  90. In my view, Islamophobia is best understood in the context of a number of social and political trends in Europe, including the rise of ‘fortress Europe’ in relation to refugees, the war on terror, and the rise of the far-right. In my mind, the most articulate spokesperson of this perspective is Liz Fekete:

    http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0745327923/ref=cm_sw_r_tw_dp_y9JNqb0CH19YR

    Fekete’s analysis of the 2011 Norway attacks and Anders Behring Breivik is easily the best I’ve read on the topic. Fekete draws attention to the politics and people who inspired him, including Melanie Philips:

    Fekete, L. (2012) The Muslim Conspiracy Theory and the Oslo Massacre, ‘Race and Class’ 53(3), p.30-47

  91. King of nothing

    10 Nov, 2012 - 12:54 pm

    The ramblings of Meleficent* are indeed odious but she’s merely preaching to the perverted. The only people who take her seriously are the people who take her seriously and no-one takes them seriously. Besides, her moral maze appearances are easily outweighed by Jeremy Hardy on the News Quiz.

    *if you don’t get the reference look up Disney’s Sleeping Beauty.

  92. “To slam the Far Right Evangelical Christian Zionist fanatics of the USA (or indeed, the uber-Zionist fanatics in the UK) is not to be anti-Christian, any more than to slam the fanatical Islamists is to be anti-Muslim”

    ….glad to see clarification on that. Unfortunately many on here don’t practice what you preach; making sweeping statements and insinuations against christians both in Europe and America, often adding to the mix the horrific crime of being a white or conservative Christian – unforgivable sins that obviously equate to full blown racism, bigotry and narrow mindedness of course. Feed them to the lions – the sequel

  93. Thanks, Yakoub – excellent link and resource.

    Okay, Chris, I do understand what you’re saying, point taken, thanks very much.

  94. why to criticize the prostitute rather than not the brothel she works for? Who owns that place? Does anyone know?

  95. technicolour

    10 Nov, 2012 - 5:07 pm

    Villager – it was a typo! But probably a Freudian one.

    Chris J: Where are these comments? I seem to be seeing bizarre stuff being pulled out against people who are Jewish eg they’re doing something bad – and then turn out to be Jewish, in which case there are lots of ah ha! noises. Am finding it really quite uneasy.

    Btw, Mary, to change the subject: were you suggesting that all Palestinians who work with Jewish people are ‘collaborators’? I’m sure you weren’t. But your comment made me wonder if, since you’re (rightly) passionate on the subject you had taken time to watch ‘To Shoot an Elephant’ – the documentary where the team are embedded with the Gazan ambulance crew? It’s available on youtube.

    Anyway, the early Christians were thrown to the lions because they refused to fight under the Roman empire, as I think someone has already pointed out. Nothing, automatically, wrong with being a Christian senator, but a Christian senator who is pro-war is quite another thing. Certainly proper Christians are being demonised – look at the resignation of the canon of St Paul’s, who supported the (Christian) principles of Occupy.

  96. Ben Franklin (head honcho CIA Office for Craig Murray Operations)

    10 Nov, 2012 - 5:28 pm

    Yakoub;

    The Social Sciences might explain a lot about islamophobia, but there is something far simpler to understand.

    When the Red Menace folded in 1989, the Mil/Ind Complex needed a reason to exist/thrive.

    They just changed colors of fear to more emphasis on ‘brown’ as the new Machiavelli.

    We must have enemies somewhere…..Look over there !!

  97. Chris Jones
    ‘ the early Christians were thrown to the lions because they refused to fight under the Roman empire ‘

    Isn’t that a bit like suggesting that UK Muslims are unpopular because they are against UK foreign policy? They are unpopular because people are disturbed by their rejection of the doctrine of God sharing His Divinity with somebody/something else.

    Similarly, the early Christians were preaching Jesus’ pbuh doctrine of the Oneness of God at a time when Jews themselves were under the influence of Roman sacrificial polytheism and Mithraism from their West and Sunworshipper and Hindu avatarism, the Zombie-like indestructibility of reincarnated Holy men from their East.

    They had been doing a roaring trade ferrying stuff between the Mediterranean and the Persian Gulf. The temple of Solomon had been rebuilt. The last thing they wanted was a prophet, Jesus pbuh, calling them back to the worship of the One God.

    No doubt there were Melanie Phillipses of the time, i.e. Jewish traditionalists telling the Roman authorities that the followers of Jesus pbuh were terrorists who were planning to destroy the world as they knew it, and the morality of lions/drones picking out suspects in a circus/GPS system compared with letting these dangerous ideas undermine the status quos.

  98. doug scorgie

    10 Nov, 2012 - 6:04 pm

    New Zionist propaganda organisation; Zionists Breaking the Silence.

    From Haaretz today:

    “The launch of the Zionists Breaking the Silence campaign, headquartered in the Zionist Organization of America premises in Tel Aviv, was accompanied by an exhibition of photos in which IDF soldiers are shown helping Palestinians or making humanitarian gestures toward them.”

    It was launched to counteract the website: Breaking the Silence, where Israeli soldiers testify their actions and experiences under the occupation of Palestine; a website the Zionists clearly object to, as reality is exposed, so propaganda must be utilised to maintain the myth that ”the IDF is the world’s most moral army.”

  99. No of course not Technicolour, Sorry if it read like that, It was something to do with being told by a smudger that a Palestinian was partnering an Israeli cook about to do a TV series here after I had mentioned the programme. You know if Palestinians and Israelis can work and play together everything is A OK. The Occupation and occupiers don’t get mentioned.

1 2 3

Powered By Wordpress | Designed By Ridgey | Produced by Tim Ireland | Hosted In The Cloud