I’ve been very impressed at the lack of calls to ban this kind of demonstration.

“give or take some changes of formulation”

Oh, come on. That is an unbelievable statement. These protestors had placards saying that our armed forces should “burn in hell” and that they were “baby killers” – are you seriously suggesting that non-Muslim anti-war protestors would have used these sentiments? Of course they wouldn’t.

These protestors broke the law by ‘breaching the peace’ and through contravening the Public Disorder Act, plain and simple. The police should have shut the protest down without hesitation, as they would have done if the BNP have tried to mirror this stunt during a Muslim parade or festival.

Something has gone awry with the Independent’s political compass

“Instead the march was marred by ugly scenes as pro-war locals, enraged by the protesters’ banners proclaiming “Anglian Soldiers: Butchers of Basra” and their chants of “Burn in Hell”, turned on them and began shouting their own abuse. Police were forced to make two arrests and had to protect the anti-war protesters from the angry crowd.

The protest was organised by former members of Al Muhajiroun, the banned group founded by the radical preacher Omar Bakri Mohammed. Abu Omar and Abu Shadeed were two of the protesters. ”

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/luton-the-enemy-within-1643089.html

I suspect these kind of demos might come at a cost to a few peaceful muslims as well ?

When some perfectly innocent young muslim man is getting the shit kicked out of him by a gang of BNP types – the assailants will usually not trouble themselves too much trying to ascertain if the victim is an active supporter of extremism.

No, ALL muslims must be inherently dodgy (think the BNP supporters) because they are not doing enough to suppress the likes of the organisers of the Luton demo.

There any many reasons for casual racist violence, of course (certain BNP members don’t need a demo to hurt somebody), but this particular episode only adds more fuel to the fire.
Somebody, somewhere will take a beating because of it.

@4, under your revolting logic, because some women behave like sluts, they cause other women to get raped; after all, you can’t expect men to draw a distinction as they all look the same.

BNP Paki-bashers are despicable scum; they should be jailed for a long time; the fact that some Muslims act like dicks is entirely irrelevant and equating the two things is completely wrong.

Personally, I felt sorry for the filth. One minute they’re surrounding the protestors keeping them at bay and then you see them having to turn around and there’s a crowd ten times bigger bearing down on them.
On the news footage I swear you could see their thoughts “can we just walk away and leave the buggers to it?”
Instead they have to protect them and usher them safely away.

Additionally, did you notice how all the cardboard which they used to glue their A3 slogans to were all from Walkers crisps boxes. That Gary Lineaker has a lot to answer for.

Comparisons with previous protests please…

The main post points out (correctly in my opinion) that political capital will be sought from the Luton demo.

Dave Osler even speculates about a certain type of masochism i.e. a protester enjoying a beating by:
[1] a counter-demonstrater, or (preferably)
[2] the police.
because this type of retaliation would exemplify how dissenting muslims are treated once their opinions are expressed in a public place.

It may be fair to say that such actions are revolting (by either the BNP or religious extremists) but isn’t it a case of shooting the messenger if somebody dares draws attention to this mechanism ?

Grow up, john b – political actions have social or political consequences.

“BNP Paki-bashers are despicable scum; they should be jailed for a long time; the fact that some Muslims act like dicks is entirely irrelevant and equating the two things is completely wrong.”

Explain please, other than a visceral reaction to anything right wing, I don’t find it easy to distinguish between the two groups, and I’m fairly sure an eqiuvalent BNP demo, say in response to 7/7 would result in multiple arrests and negative media coverage of a “fascist skinheads on rampage” type rather than hand wringing, tut-tutting and being called a dick on LC ??

I think this is a freedom of speech issue.
In the US there is the Westboro church who protest at military funerals – you know, the “God hates Fags” brigade.
They are allowed to protest because it is their right to. We don’t assume that they represent the views of all Christians. Same applies to the muslims involved in the Luton demo.
Just ignore them

I agree that they should have the freedom to demonstrate – but that just means the state should not step in and remove them. Nothing wrong with protesters who are angry with what they’re doing overwhelming them and marching them off the streets (ideally led by Muslim groups with clear & progressive [sorry for using that word] slogans).

However, MM, as much as I despise this group, the BNP are worse. There is a qualitative difference, unless this group are fascists too (but I’ve not seen anything yet to suggest that they are).

I cannot see that the BNP are worse ? How so , on account of racism ….. hardly

I think David Ostler has a point here if they were nice white haired old baby boomer vintage regurgitating their John Lennon rubbish it would be more of a cause for laughter than dismay. These are more or less the terms in which a spokesman for the Muslim Voice ( or something like that ) defended them on the Television . He said , if they had been English there would have been nothing like the reaction .

That is rather the point isn’t it , they are not English .What we are actually seeing is the English looking at a foreign community that have caused nothing but trouble , murdered , abused, and at every turn advertised their loathing of England , the country which , in my view foolishly , took them in, and continues to tolerate their bile
Yes we will get on with it , we will not ban demos and we will attempt to remain tolerant and retain as much Liberty as security will bear under the circumstances .Is there anyone left though , who does not look back and wish New Labour had not let in such an ghastly problem in the first place? . Think how much better off we would be without Muslims.

Nothing but trouble and we have troubles of our own

Oh Newmania, you’re so right… there were no Muslims in the UK before New Labour….

And how much better off we would be withouth their culture? For a start the crusades would have made more money.

Give us a call when you’ve come back from Planet Spang.

For the love of Jehovah, someone produce a list of usefull Muslims for Newmania to get confused over. I just don’t have the time or inclination for teaching nursery lesson history right now…

8/11 – I was replying to A&ECN’s hypothetical about the BNP beating up Muslims. Kicking the shit out of someone is worse than going on a march to say that people are bad, wouldn’t you say?

“Think how much better off we would be without Muslims.”

You’re an out-and-out racist, Newmania. I’m not pussy-footing around, there’s no other way to describe that.

You didn’t respond to my hypothetical at all, john b – you simply went into ad hominem mode (revolting logic, etc).

My point was that a provocative demo might have consequences, and that certain victims may well be muslims – for some reason you started raving about women getting raped.

I agree with Zac (9) that these protestors are akin to the ‘God Hates Fags’ lot, wishing hellfire and damnation upon their opponents rather than singing ‘Give Peace a Chance’.

Let them protest – and protect them from the violence they hope to provoke – but let’s not confuse a protest against one side with opposing war itself.

Tim F – there is perhaps a quantitative difference in that the BNP cannot be ignored as a force in electoral politics whilst these people (Al Muhajiroun) can be. Although in terms of the general ideologies more people have been killed in the UK in recent years as a result of Islamist-inspired terrorism than the neo-Nazi equivalent, so that could count for something….

I don’t think there is that much of a qualitative difference.

“Al Muhajiroun put up posters around unis proclaiming: “The last hour will not come until the Muslims fight the Jews and the Muslims kill the Jews.” As a result, it was outlawed on campuses by the National Union of Students in 2001. ”

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article5889411.ece

These people are nasty racist shits, just more turned on by religion than by secular concerns.

Nasty as they seem, I’d still argue fascism is worse. That’s not in any way meant to excuse this group; if you think as I do that the BNP should not be entitled to free speech because they’re fascists then that distinction is important. However for the people here that think my views on dealing with the BNP are counter-productive, I can see that it’s a moot point.

Muslims are not a race so I am certainly not a racist . I think you are objecting to a generalisation about an ethnic group , perhaps this is not always helpful but I can quote Orwell in my defence on the principle
‘Till recently it was thought proper to pretend that all human beings are very much alike, but in fact anyone able to use his eyes knows that the average of human behaviour differs enormously from country to country. Things that could happen in one country could not happen in another’
Obviously this is the case , and just so between ethnic groups .

Others have said New Labour cannot be blamed but they can. The percentage of migrants in the UK increased by only just over 1% in 30 years – from 4.5% in 1961 to 5.8 % in 1991. It then accelerated, doubling to 11% in 2008. Oops , that would be….New Labour then. ( Actually until 1996 government statisticians assumed in their population projections that net immigration would be zero over the long term )
. New Labour policy measures have deliberately increased immigration .The abolition of embarkation controls (begun in 1994 and completed in 1998) The Primary Purpose Rule( 1997 the requirement that the applicant should show “that the marriage was not entered into primarily to obtain admission to the United Kingdom” was abolished. Immigration by spouses has increased by over 50% since then. )Asylum obviously ,Economic migration – (The number of work permits issued has trebled since 1997. )
Now the fact this has all; done no economic good was authoritatively established by the Economic Affairs Committee of the House of Lords. Oh dear …. so the up side is what ?

I am not saying ‘send `em ‘ome…’ or any thing. I am not saying they are all alike, or that none make a contribution . I am not saying we should separate out one group now living here ., god no ,
No no its done now; we must make the best of it and “learn the lessons “.I am just making the obvious point that Muslim immigration has been especially problematical; and since they add nothing would it not have been a good idea not to have had it .
I mean we can argue all day about how or not bad it is for Muslims to be shrieking abuse at British troops who risk their lives to protect us , I `m not that fussed personally , I doiubt they burst into tears . I just say its one more thing we could do without .When you look at it from the other direction , what do they do that’s any help , most people would agree we would have been better off by far without them.
No shock, why do you think Labour keep going on about new immigration controls ? ( effect 6000 ..ha ha ) .because they know everyone knows it has been a mistake . I do not say, by the way t,hat Islamic society may not work perfectly well , I just say , for us , letting in this ethnic group has been all bad , no good a mistake and we must learn from it .

“Muslims are not a race so I am certainly not a racist”

Exactly the justification the BNP use when they use “Muslim” as a synonym for “Asian” in their literature to sidestep laws on incitement to racial hatred.

Then how may I differentiate between Muslims and Hindus without causing offence, is one permitted to say anything that is not positive about such a group ?

The demontrators are perfectly entitled to demonstrate and The Anglians are perfectly entitled to march through towns from which they recruit . People are perfectly entitled to draw conclusions from the actions of the demonstrators and Muslims which chose not to criticise them. There are many races and religions who have fought and still fight for this country- people from the West Indies, Nepal and Fiji to name but a few. J. Beharry, from the W Indies was awarded The VC. Noone questions their loyalty. No minority has risen from the Sikh, Hindu or Buddist communities which calls into question their loyalty to this country. In fact the actions of the minority of Muslims is making it far more difficult for all ethnic minorities. Sir Gulam Noon, a Muslim from India has criticised much of the Muslim community for not better integrating into this country.

Manners Maketh Man. The manner which a minority of the Muslim community present themselves to Britain means that many people question their loyalty. As they say in France ” A person must be loyal with their stomach and their heart”. The British are perfectly entitled to say to people if you so hate this country why do you not leave and travel to one which is more preferable to your taste, without being accused of racism . Many of the protestors who have benefitted in any kind from the British welfare state is a hypocrite – they have bitten the hand which fed, educated, healed and sheltered them.

Criticism of the actions of a minority of Muslim is not racism or Islamophobia, especially when you place it alongside the actions of another immigrant J. Beharry VC. Below is J Beharry’s citation for the VC.

Private Beharry carried out two individual acts of great heroism by which he saved the lives of his comrades. Both were in direct face of the enemy, under intense fire, at great personal risk to himself (one leading to him sustaining very serious injuries). His valour is worthy of the highest recognition.
In the early hours of 1 May 2004 Beharry’s company was ordered to replenish an isolated coalition forces outpost located in the centre of the troubled city of Al Amarah. He was the driver of a platoon commander’s Warrior armoured fighting vehicle. His platoon was the company’s reserve force and was placed on immediate notice to move.
As the main elements of his company were moving into the city to carry out the replenishment, they were re-tasked to fight through a series of enemy ambushes in order to extract a foot patrol that had become pinned down under sustained small arms and heavy machine gun fire and improvised explosive device and rocket-propelled grenade attack. Beharry’s platoon was tasked over the radio to come to the assistance of the remainder of the company, who were attempting to extract the isolated foot patrol.
As his platoon passed a roundabout, en route to the pinned-down patrol, they became aware that the road to the front was empty of all civilians and traffic – an indicator of a potential ambush ahead. The platoon commander ordered the vehicle to halt, so that he could assess the situation. The vehicle was then immediately hit by multiple rocket-propelled grenades.
Eyewitnesses report that the vehicle was engulfed in a number of violent explosions, which physically rocked the 30-tonne Warrior. As a result of this ferocious initial volley of fire, both the platoon commander and the vehicle’s gunner were incapacitated by concussion and other wounds, and a number of the soldiers in the rear of the vehicle were also wounded.
Due to damage sustained in the blast to the vehicle’s radio systems, Beharry had no means of communication with either his turret crew or any of the other Warrior vehicles deployed around him. He did not know if his commander or crewmen were still alive, or how serious their injuries may be.
In this confusing and dangerous situation, on his own initiative, he closed his driver’s hatch and moved forward through the ambush position to try to establish some form of communications, halting just short of a barricade placed across the road. The vehicle was hit again by sustained rocket-propelled grenade attack from insurgent fighters in the alleyways and on rooftops around his vehicle.
Further damage to the Warrior from these explosions caused it to catch fire and fill rapidly with thick, noxious smoke. Beharry opened up his armoured hatch cover to clear his view and orientate himself to the situation. He still had no radio communications and was now acting on his own initiative, as the lead vehicle of a six-Warrior convoy in an enemy-controlled area of the city at night.
He assessed that his best course of action to save the lives of his crew was to push through, out of the ambush. He drove his Warrior directly through the barricade, not knowing if there were mines or improvised explosive devices placed there to destroy his vehicle. By doing this he was able to lead the remaining five warriors behind him towards safety.
As the smoke in his driver’s tunnel cleared, he was just able to make out the shape of another rocket-propelled grenade in flight heading directly towards him. He pulled the heavy armoured hatch down with one hand, whilst still controlling his vehicle with the other. However, the overpressure from the explosion of the rocket wrenched the hatch out of his grip, and the flames and force of the blast passed directly over him, down the driver’s tunnel, further wounding the semi-conscious gunner in the turret.
The impact of this rocket destroyed Beharry’s armoured periscope, so he was forced to drive the vehicle through the remainder of the ambushed route, some 1500m long, with his hatch opened up and his head exposed to enemy fire, all the time with no communications with any other vehicle. During this long surge through the ambushes the vehicle was again struck by rocket-propelled grenades and small arms fire.
While his head remained out of the hatch, to enable him to see the route ahead, he was directly exposed to much of this fire, and was himself hit by a 7.62mm bullet, which penetrated his helmet and remained lodged on its inner surface. Despite this harrowing weight of incoming fire Beharry continued to push through the extended ambush, still leading his platoon until he broke clean.
He then visually identified another Warrior from his company and followed it through the streets of Al Amarah to the outside of the Cimic House outpost, which was receiving small arms fire from the surrounding area. Once he had brought his vehicle to a halt outside, without thought for his own personal safety, he climbed onto the turret of the still-burning vehicle and, seemingly oblivious to the incoming enemy small arms fire, manhandled his wounded platoon commander out of the turret, off the vehicle and to the safety of a nearby Warrior.
He then returned once again to his vehicle and again mounted the exposed turret to lift out the vehicle’s gunner and move him to a position of safety. Exposing himself yet again to enemy fire he returned to the rear of the burning vehicle to lead the disorientated and shocked dismounts and casualties to safety.
Remounting his burning vehicle for the third time, he drove it through a complex chicane and into the security of the defended perimeter of the outpost, thus denying it to the enemy.
Only at this stage did Beharry pull the fire extinguisher handles, immobilising the engine of the vehicle, dismounted and then moved himself into the relative safety of the back of another Warrior. Once inside Beharry collapsed from the sheer physical and mental exhaustion of his efforts and was subsequently himself evacuated.
Having returned to duty following medical treatment, on 11 June 2004 Beharry’s Warrior was part of a quick reaction force tasked to attempt to cut off a mortar team that had attacked a coalition force base in Al Amarah. As the lead vehicle of the platoon he was moving rapidly through the dark city streets towards the suspected firing point, when his vehicle was ambushed by the enemy from a series of rooftop positions.
During this initial heavy weight of enemy fire, a rocket-propelled grenade detonated on the vehicle’s frontal armour, just six inches [15cm] from Beharry’s head, resulting in a serious head injury. Other rockets struck the turret and sides of the vehicle, incapacitating his commander and injuring several of the crew.
With the blood from his head injury obscuring his vision, Beharry managed to continue to control his vehicle, and forcefully reversed the Warrior out of the ambush area. The vehicle continued to move until it struck the wall of a nearby building and came to rest. Beharry then lost consciousness as a result of his wounds.
By moving the vehicle out of the enemy’s chosen killing area he enabled other Warrior crews to be able to extract his crew from his vehicle, with a greatly reduced risk from incoming fire.
Despite receiving a serious head injury, which later saw him being listed as very seriously injured and in a coma for some time, his level-headed actions in the face of heavy and accurate enemy fire at short range again almost certainly saved the lives of his crew and provided the conditions for their safe evacuation to medical treatment.
Beharry displayed repeated extreme gallantry and unquestioned valour, despite intense direct attacks, personal injury and damage to his vehicle in the face of relentless enemy action.

A&ECN: actually, I did respond to your hypothetical; it’s just that you didn’t bother to think about the analogy. Blaming these demonstrators for future assaults by BNP arseholes on ‘innocent’ Muslims is as revolting – and is exactly the same thing – as blaming ‘slutty’ girls on t’telly for rapes on ‘innocent’ women. No, it’s the rapist and the Paki-basher who are responsible, and *only* them.

You also don’t get the concept of ‘ad-hominem’, in that it only applies to irrelevant personal insults (or compliments). If you make a revolting argument and I call it revolting, that’s legitimate comment, not ad-hominem. If I’d instead called you fat and ugly, that would have been ad-hominem.

OK, john b, have it your way, there will be no repercussions and we shouldn’t even be mentioning the possibility of consequences.

I’m sure these protests will go along way to fostering better community relationships in Luton, and elsewhere.

TimF @18:

Nasty as they seem, I’d still argue fascism is worse.

Hmmm. You seem to be conflating National Socialism, and Fascism, with fascism here.

I agree with you that fascism is awful. I also agree that Nazism and militant religious fundamentalism are awful. The BNP are not just fascists, they’re also inheritors of the Nazi agenda. The militant Islamists, who are not inheritors of that agenda at all, are still fascists: they fulfill every diagnostic criteria for that term.

Fascist ideologies are such ideologies as are primarily distinguished by authoritarianism and unchallengeable disciplinary models: ones in which the accusation is sufficient if it comes from a fascisti. The hard core of the international Islamist political movement very clearly fits that description, as does the Republican base in the American Bible Belt. Neither of them are Fascists, in the sense, political inheritors of the specific programs and attitudes espoused by Mussolini and Hitler.

In other news, when did people stop remembering Godwin’s Law?

1. There is absolute proof that more muslims are killed by muslims – why are they only hurling abuse at British soldiers?

2. Who are the real muslims? The “Al Muhajiroun” consider themselves true muslims and the rest fallen while the rest supposedly non militant muslims see themselves as the true muslims and the “Al Muhajiroun” as non muslims. I can see why people get fed up and tell them both to go home.

3. As a Jew, if I know the members of Al Muhajiroun want me dead, is it racist/fascists/mean for me to then think the world and definatly Britain mightbe a better place without them?

Anyone have any questions?

I meant “answers” questions I’ve got enough of my own!:)

Newmania – “Muslim immigration has been especially problematical”.
Funny that statement as my guess is that those demonstrating were probably born here and as such are British. The guys that did the tube bombings were also born here too – one was of West Indian descent. So even if you could ‘send them home’, where exactly would you be sending them too?

Lilliput – “3. As a Jew, if I know the members of Al Muhajiroun want me dead, is it racist/fascists/mean for me to then think the world and definatly Britain mightbe a better place without them?”
Replace Jew with Black, replace Al Muhajiroun with NF/BNP – so get rid of all white BNP memebers then??

Funny that statement as my guess is that those demonstrating were probably born here and as such are British.

Oh quite , I was only suggesting we did not let any more in , the fact the problems go on and on makes it even worse . UK Muslims have been an unmitigated disaster but we are stuck with them now

Lindsey Germaine, a Jamaican-born Briton who converted to Islam.

This was the MF who blew up the carriage I was travelling in from Kings Cross. He was born in Jamaica – maybe the weed got to his brain and drew him to the Aylesbury mosque – G-d only knows but I bet there are not many native Muslims in Buckinghamshire!

John B – “8/11 – I was replying to A&ECN’s hypothetical about the BNP beating up Muslims. Kicking the shit out of someone is worse than going on a march to say that people are bad, wouldn’t you say?”

But that isn’t the choice is it ? The choice is between being blown into very small pieces for no other reason than happening to be wrong place/wrong time vs getting a kicking for belonging/not belonging to a particular ethnic group. Neither are especially appealing admittedly, but I’d chose that latter if given the choice – wouldn’t you ?

May I just make it perfectly clear.

I am NOT advocating any form of violence against law abiding muslims, or even the protesters in Luton, for that matter.

I’m sure most of us here would agree that (relative) freedom of speech should trump religiously motivated drivel.

No, I was merely expressing a view that this type of extremism might fuel racially motivated violence (which I DO NOT condone) while a random muslim victim, would, most likely, have no sympathy with the slogans appearing on the placards in Luton.

@29. My point is that ‘they’ are already in. ‘They’ are not ‘Muslims’, ‘They’ are extremists. You cannot stop extremists coming here, or would you also like to stop all Irish Catholics just in case they are Real IRA?
It seems the points you originally made boil down to simple ‘racism’ for want of a better term.

They get to demonstrate, however crassly they like, because of free speach. However I do think such demo’s provocative counter demo’s should be kept some distance away – just to stop trouble developing. If that had happened, they wouldn’t have got half as much press as they did.

I quite agree, a proper functioning democracy should go as far as possible down the road of freedom of speech including the right to demonstrate.

However, a true democracy would have consulted the people on whether they wanted to share their territory with people of an alien race and religion – potentially unto the point of becoming a minority in their own country. A referendum perhaps?

Funnily enough I don’t recall any such vote in the last fifty odd years and I rather suspect that had such a vote taken place the outcome would be an immigration policy quite unlike the one in force today, one which would render the Luton demo impossible due to lack of turnout i.e. zero.

I should note that I dont think our army should be in Afghanistan now.

“Muslims are not a race so I am certainly not a racist”

Exactly the justification the BNP use when they use “Muslim” as a synonym for “Asian” in their literature to sidestep laws on incitement to racial hatred.

And thus a liberal shuts down his perception when it inconveniences him. The BNP have to sidestep the law, you sidestep reality.

In the context of the UK most Muslims are of Asian origin. Blurring ethnic & religious distinctions is useful in tying up immigration restrictionists. The problem with Asian Muslim immigration is both ethnic and religious. Islam could be seen as a useful group ethnic strategy from their point of view.

Your pretense that race has nothing to do with anything infects the law and precludes any serious debate at all. People end up blathering cobblers about Islamofascism.