HnH's silence over segregated Labour meeting explains how Rotherham happened

Labour have finally broken their silence over the segregated meeting attended by MPs Tom Watson, Liam Byrne, and Jack Dromey and MEP Sion Simon in Birmingham over the weekend. According to a story just published by the Daily Mirror a Labour spokesman is quoted as saying:

"Labour fully supports gender equality in all areas of society and all cultures... the seating arrangements ensured women from Muslim communities could take part."

As Orwellian newspeak and doublethink go, it is pretty standard Labour fayre which translates to "we accepted illegal segregation by sexes rather than illegally denying women entry". Presumably just refusing to attend the meeting unless it was in accord with the law didn't cross anybody's mind as there were votes at stake. By attempting to gloss over such blatant inequality while taking part in it and then trying to excuse it on the basis of 'culture' is such a sickening evasion that we can scarcely believe they had the gall to put out such a statement, not least as the meeting was arranged by Labour councillor Ansar Ali Khan. Surely it would make more sense just to expel Khan for sexism if he is unable to arrange a Labour Party meeting where men and women are treated equally.

Meanwhile, Hope not Hate - the great self-appointed moral arbiter of equality - has so far had nothing at all to say on the subject, and we can't see that changing.

We have blogged before on this subject: The responsibility for the grooming crisis lies within the culture Hope not Hate has infected the Labour Party with , and nothing we said then has changed: if anything, the current sexism scandal simply underlines the double standards at play. In Birmingham, Labour MPs went along with the meeting because they saw not the injustice and inequality of women being segregated, but only the votes that could be delivered by attending. And, of course, there were the concerns that by speaking out, they would be accused of 'cultural insensitivity' and 'racism'. Exactly the same reason that police officers, council officials, Labour councillors and Labour MPs did nothing in Rotherham over child abuse.

Are there any women here? - meeting
addressed by Liam Byrne

Sadly, the meeting at Hodge Hill has proved that nothing has changed either within the Labour Party, or within its associated hard-left, anti-UKIP organisations who pretend to believe in equality, who are the first to shout 'sexism' at UKIP, and yet are right at the back of the crowd mutely acquiescing when it is there in front of them in the own party. The hypocrisy is staggering - if it is against the law for the Christian owners of a B&B to turn away homosexual guests because of their beliefs, then how can it be right for a Labour Party meeting in a community centre to require segregation of men and women?

If nothing will convince you of the cynicism of both Labour and Hope not Hate, then consider these facts: Tom Watson is an active campaigner for Hope not Hate, writing recently how "We did a Hope Not Hate thing in Sandwell". Liam Byrne on his Flickr photostream - and without apparent irony - is pictured addressing several all-male Muslim gatherings in addition to being pictured delivering Hope not Hate leaflets. Sion Simon on his website boasts of meeting local Hope not Hate activists to 'celebrate the cultural harmony we enjoy' - the women were left outside in the rain, we assume.

Liam Byrne delivering (with no sense
of irony) Hope not Hate leaflets

Hope not Hate themselves frequently revisit what they claim is UKIP's sexism; a couple of minutes searching their website will return hundreds of results, with most articles based on a wilful misunderstanding of what was actually said by the UKIP person they are attacking at the time. Despite this, we don't recall UKIP ever having arranged a meeting where women were made to sit separately from men or - as in the case of one meeting addressed by Byrne - where women were excluded altogether.

It is these very double standards which bring us to the heart of the argument. In Rotherham, former MP, convicted thief and Hope not Hate activist Denis MacShane said of the child grooming scandal that:

""I think there was a culture of not wanting to rock the multicultural community boat if I may put it like that. We were aware of the oppression of women within bits of the Muslim community in Britain but....Perhaps yes, as a true Guardian reader, and liberal leftie, I suppose I didn’t want to raise that too hard.”

UKIPs sexism? When did they hold a segregated meeting?

This attendance at segregated meetings is simply putting an official, Labour Party rubber stamp on behaviour which would be unacceptable elsewhere; an acknowledgement that 100 years of women's suffrage, 50 years of Women's Lib and 40 years of equality legislation don't apply if you believe in certain religions. As others have said elsewhere, if the meeting had been segregated by race or by sexual orientation there would have been hell to pay.

It is sadly this same approach which has seen Labour councils across the UK face similar problems with paedophilia, or as it is now politely called, 'Child Sexual Exploitation'. We saw in Rotherham - and heard from then MP MacShane - that Labour didn't want to rock the boat for fear of being called 'racist'. Council employees, police officers and politicians alike were infected by this top-down fear of being branded with the one label which is guaranteed to halt any career in its tracks where Labour are involved. And so - just like Watson, Byrne, Dromey and Simon - they held their tongues, and let thousands of school age young girls pay the price of their right-on political correctness.

What we should be worried about is the law against Islamophobia promised by Laobur leader Ed Miliband should he become Prime Minister. We wonder which crimes could then be reported by the media: would reports of the Rotherham scandal and the Birmingham meeting be considered Islamophobic?

 Here in the UK, most of us were brought up to believe that justice is blind, and took that to mean that we were all equal before the law, without excuse. When will Labour, Hope not Hate and their bully boys in Stand up to UKIP and Unite Against Facism learn that a crime is still a crime even if the person committing it is a Muslim?

Lowles cries crocodile tears over Paris magazine he formerly called 'Muslim haters & counter-jihadists' who were 'asking for it'

Before today, Lowles was suggesting that
they 'deserved it'.

Crocodile tears are much in evidence today at the offices of Hope not Hate. After spending years
labelling anybody who criticises Islam as a racist or fascist, HnH director Nick Lowles today offered a message of 'solidarity' with the journalists killed at French magazine 'Charlie Hebdo'.

It is reported that the journalists were at an editorial meeting for a special edition due to be called 'Sharia Hebdo', something which before today Lowles would have called them Nazis for.

Lowles 'solidarity' overlooks his comments in 2012, when he attacked the pubishers of Charlie Hebdo as 'counter-jihadists' & 'Muslim haters' and complained of their publication of cartoons. His conversion to the cause of free speech has come rather late for the dead journalists. In case he forgets what he wrote, he said:

"The so-called 'Counter-Jihadists' (real definition ‘Muslim haters’) know full well that an incendiary video, poster, cartoon or burning will create a reaction from extremists across the world. ...... last week there was the Innocence of Muslims video. This week we have a French satirical magazine, Charlie Hebdo, publishing obscene cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad. Next week we will have Pam Geller's outrageous "savage" posters.... These Muslim haters...."

He then goes on to say that people like those at Charlie Hebdo are 'asking for it' -

"These Muslim haters know that any stupid stunt is going to cause a reaction, and probably a violent one at that.... The Muslim haters know that the images of Islamists attacking buildings and murdering people only reinforce the view of some that Islam is a violent and intolerant religion...."

We don't normally link to Hope not Hate, but the article can be found here - read it quick before they edit it.

And so today's statement comes as something of a shocking volte-face for Lowles when he now states

We wonder what it will take for Lowles and his motley crew of apologists for radical Islam to grasp that the beliefs of the fundamentalists are directly opposed to the basic liberties we all enjoy in the West, and that labelling people who point this out as 'fascist' and 'racist' is not only counter-productive, but lends a spurious support to the radicals who use Lowles words to justify their continued radicalisation of western congregations.

Meanwhile, on Twitter, Lowles is desperately denying that he said what he clearly did -

 

Which can be compared with the quote from his article above. Lowles and the truth remain strangers. We feel obliged to repeat his own words - does it sound like he's 'clearly talking about the people behind the Innocence of Muslims film' to you? No, us neither:

 

"The so-called 'Counter-Jihadists' (real definition ‘Muslim haters’) know full well that an incendiary video, poster, cartoon or burning will create a reaction from extremists across the world. ...... Last week there was the Innocence of Muslims video. This week we have a French satirical magazine, Charlie Hebdo, publishing obscene cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad. Next week we will have Pam Geller's outrageous "savage" posters.... These Muslim haters...." 

Standing room only at Jewish Chronicle sponsored public meeting with Farage

We've been busy with other things for the past few days here at Nope, not Hope, but a picture has come to our attention this evening which we felt we had to share with the hypocrites at Hope not Hate.

According to Hope not Hate, these are xenophobes awaiting
Nigel Farage's speech.......

Tonight, UKIP leader Nigel Farage is addressing a meeting organised by the Jewish Chronicle 'somewhere in NW4' - sadly, the meeting details have had to be kept secret since Hope not Hate started sending along their UAF bully boys to disrupt UKIP events.


Now, we know that Nick Lowles and his colleagues are used to addressing rows of empty chairs, so we feel we should explain that the picture shows guests - who had to apply for tickets in advance - at tonight's meeting. This is what a busy meeting looks like.

.... while these people are closet racists.

This meeting, following as it does Mr Farage's visit to the Ghousia Mosque a couple of weeks ago, would seem to indicate that - far from being the xenophobic little Englander and closet racist which Hope not Hate constantly accuse him (and UKIP as a whole) of being - he is actually rather successful at reaching all sections of our community.

This is why they fear UKIP so much, and why they have given up fighting racism and fascism in favour of playing at party politics:

With 7 Oxford men sentenced for grooming, why is HnH silent on Imam Karmani's initiative?

News broke today of the sentencing of 7 men in Oxford for a string of sex offences against young girls. Now, I may just be scaremongering, but something about their names - Akhtar Dogar, Anjum Dogar, Kamar Jamil, Assad Hussain, Mohammed Karrar, Bassam Karrar and Zeeshan Ahmed - suggests that these men may have something in common beyond living in the Oxford area.

I don't intend to spend hours examining links between grooming gangs and Islam - it is sufficient to

Imam Alyas Karmani - his initiative
to tackle sexual grooming through an
Islamic 'Khutba' to be read in mosques
is being ignored by HnH

say that there is an increasing amount of evidence to suggest that this is an increasing problem, particularly with men from the Indian sub-continent. Whether there is a direct connection to Islam or whether their religion is incidental makes little difference to the victims.

As I have blogged previously, there is action being taken within the Islamic community to combat such crimes. Imam Alyas Karmani in Bradford has prepared a Khutba to be read in mosques during Friday prayers tomorrow. In it, he sets out beyond any doubt how such crimes are against the true teachings of Islam, and he aims to have it read in 500 mosques around the UK.

The Imam is also a Respect Party councillor in Bradford. Regardless of personal feelings or political preferences, this is an initiative which deserves respect, as Karmani - like many within the British Muslim community - recognise that it is their community which has the best chance of tackling such issues successfully, and I have said before that I feel he should be applauded for taking a stand which will not be universally popular.

What is particularly surprising then is the continued silence of Hope not Hate, both on the issue of grooming, and on Imam Karmani's initiative.

It seems to me that this represents little more than a betrayal of everything they are supposed to stand for. Sections of the far-right are already near-hysterical, painting all Muslims with the same brush and undoubtedly using the recent spate of convictions of groups of Islamic men as a powerful recruiting tool. Hope not Hate have the opportunity to use their e-mail database - the largest in the country, if their own words are to be believed - to spread far and wide information on Karmani's initiative, and to show that the actions of these men are not representative of the wider Muslim community.

Instead, we have a self-imposed silence on the whole issue.

I do not know whether this is because Imam Karmani is a Respect Party councillor in an area where Respect are making huge inroads in the Labour vote, or whether it is because by admitting that a problem such as this may exist, Hope not Hate will find themselves saying some of the things that those they condemn also say.

Whatever the reason, it is a further demonstration that there is much more Hate than Hope going on in their organisation. If it can not use its influence to promote an initiative which will blunt the advance of the far right, then we have to ask once again what is Hope not Hate for?

Imam Alyas Karmani stands up for hope, while Hope not Hate betray their principles

Imam Alyas Karmani

Readers of this blog will be aware that Hope not Hate pays little more than lip service to the existence of Islamic hate preachers, even though Al Muhajiroun features on their list of hate groups. While every public indiscretion of UKIP members - who do not feature on their list of hate groups - is publicised in full detail, Anjem Choudhary, Al Muhajiroun's leader, has escaped any form of personal censure.

Even worse than this deliberate absence of condemnation for groups which seek to spread hate is their failure to highlight the efforts of Imam Alyas Karmani in Bradford to combat the grooming of young girls by Muslim men, something which is widely recognised as a problem. Imam Karmani - who is also a Respect Councillor - has issued a Khutba to be read in Mosques during Friday prayers on the 28th June and which is intended to drive home to worshippers that such actions are not acceptable in the eyes of Islam. His goal is that it should be read in more than 500 mosques across the UK.

For those of us who feel that Imams should play a more visible role in combatting the rise of Islamic extremism, Imam Karmani's initiative is to be welcomed, and is perhaps a sign that moderate Islam is capable of rising to the challenge. What is more puzzling is Hope not Hate's failure to even mention his initiative. What is the point of calling your organisation 'Hope not Hate' if all you are interested in is the 'Hate', and only certain types of hate at that? The key to their silence is Karmani's 'Respect' affiliation. In Bradford, Labour are seeing support haemorrhage in two directions - to UKIP on the right, and to Respect on the left, as evidenced by George Galloway's election as MP. Because of this, Karmani's initiative will fail to gain the support of Hope not Hate. Not because it is not worthwhile. Not because it is wrong. But because the Imam represents the 'Respect' Party and not Labour, and to push his initiative would be to admit that Labour - like Hope not Hate - has no answers, and indeed caused many of the problems

 By failing to promote initiatives such as Karmani's, Hope not Hate - who have access to a considerable audience - are helping to create the impression that there is no action within the Muslim community to tackle these problems. Their silence allows the EDL and the BNP to condemn Islam as something to be feared, because Hope not Hate is too mired in party political allegiances to shout from the rooftops the message of hope contained within Karmani's initiative. They would rather allow their silence to act as a recruiting sergeant for the far right than stand up and proclaim what should be their core message - Hope, not Hate.

We make no secret of our support for UKIP. And we would be lying if we said we supported much of Respect's policy platform. But this is an issue which cuts to the heart of the problems of Islamic extremism, and one which is beyond the nonsense of partisan politics. Karmani - whatever his political allegiance - is tackling a problem, and I urge UKIP supporters to share his message and to show that we are big enough to embrace good ideas whatever their political or religious source. Common sense is common sense.

So I say this to Nick Lowles and his Hope not Hate comrades. Shame on you, for betraying your core principles. Shame on your silence which allows hate to grow and lies to spread unchecked. And shame on your shoddy attempts to put your own personal allegiances ahead of an initiative which will clearly aid better relations between communities. Your blinkered attitude and political partisanship makes you no better than those you claim to oppose. For many years, you attacked the BNP, and ran with the slogan 'Not in my name', only for us to find the tables are now turned, and an increasing barrier to harmonious relations between communities is not the BNP and the EDL, but Hope not Hate and your refusal to back initiatives like Karmani's. If you must continue with such wilful blindness, be aware you do so on your own and not in my name. 

Read more about the Imam's initiative here Click here

More hypocrisy from HnH as pictures of Anjem Choudhary drinking and smoking resurface

As if further evidence were needed of Hope not Hate's desperation to target UKIP while ignoring other organisations which actually pose a risk to race relations in the UK, it is worth noting the attitudes displayed to one which it lists as one of its targets - Al Muhajiroun.


Headed by Anjem Choudhary, the group numbers among its former members the two Woolwich killers - one of whom was described by Choudhary as a 'nice guy' - and is responsible in large part for the perversion of Islam into a hate-filed vehicle of repression, at least in the UK.

Over the last few days, pictures of Choudhary during his days as a student at Southampton University have been published in much of the media showing him smoking, drinking beer and posing with a copy of 'Mayfair' magazine: all things he now rails against since he became a 'strict Muslim'. This is akin to having photographs of Nick Griffin attending a synagogue in a skull cap in his youth, or Tommy Robinson with his Islamic girlfriend in her burq'qa.

You hardly need to imagine the gloating articles that Hope not Hate would publish on their website, touting the hypocrisy of Griffin or Robinson/Yaxley-Lennon. I wouldn't much care, as I have no time for either of them. And yet after this photographic scoop of Choudhary - whose organisation is officially a Hope not Hate target - what do we find? Not a single word. Not a single photograph. Not a single comment.

What I can't understand is how Hope not Hate justify such negligence. Their methods in the past have always included ridiculing the leaders of organisations which peddle hate, and they have frequently made use of photographs and quotes which the leaders of such organisations have made in the past. So why the kid gloves with Anjem Choudhary? Why - despite having a whole page describing why Choudhary and his organisation is a hate group - have they not followed the precedent they have set in mocking the hypocrisy which is clear from the photographs?

Admittedly, these photographs are not new: they first surfaced back in 2009 in an article in the Daily Mail, but they have re-surfaced, and featured heavily in The Sun a couple of days ago. Needless to say, after the recent prominence of Choudhary and his group, they are more than topical, and yet HnH has instead focussed on a trip to Damascus by Griffin, and attacking the BBC for allowing Robinson on the 'Today' programme on BBC R4. Naturally, it has also continued its campaign against UKIP, as featured on this blog yesterday.

The question we must ask Nick Lowles and his fellow travellers at Hope not Hate is simple: why? If you are genuinely against hate - and are serious about including Al Muhajiroun amongst the hate organisations you oppose - then why the silence which seems nothing but rank hypocrisy?