Andrew Gilligan har restituert seg fra Kelly-saken og blitt en meningssterk journalist som ikke kvier seg for å gå løs på utbredte oppfatninger.
Han skriver at britisk ytre høyre består av «rabble». BNP falt sammen og English Defence League er «rabble».
Det påstås at det feier en høyrevind over Europa som drives av anti-islam og anti-muslim-stemninger, og at muslimer opplever økt misbilligelse. For Storbritannia stemmer ingen av delene, skriver Gilligan.
Antall anmeldte saker har falt, og muslimer får stadig større plass i det politiske liv, uten at man kan merke noen backlash.
In England and Wales, the number of racially or religiously aggravated offences has fallen by 11.4 per cent over the last four years for which figures are available (though there was a rise in faith crimes last year). These statistics are not broken down by the faith of the victim. But in London, where they are, anti-Muslim crimes dropped by 10 per cent last year alone. Since 2003, Tower Hamlets, the capital’s main Muslim area, has seen hate crime halve.
The Tory chairmanship, once home of Norman “Cricket Test” Tebbit, is held by a Muslim woman. The number of Muslim MPs doubled at the last election, some elected for entirely non-Muslim seats (Bromsgrove, Gillingham, Stratford-upon-Avon) with no backlash whatsoever. Continental moves to ban minarets and the niqab have gained no political traction at all in Britain.
Likevel hevder muslimske talsmenn at de føler økt fiendtlighet, og deres britiske affilierte støtter dem i at trusselen kommer fra høyre, ikke islamister.
Dette er påstander som spres på aljazeera.com og man kan regne med at påstandene vekker gjenklang.
“Nationalists pose a bigger threat than al-Qaeda,” asserted one Robert Lambert, a co-director of the European Muslim Research Centre at Exeter University, on the al-Jazeera website. The Islamist threat, he said, was “minimal” by comparison. Ibrahim Hewitt, the head of a charity called Interpal, wrote that “the new Right is on the rise across the West” thanks to “the collusion of Western governments”.
Dette er synspunkter som har lett gjennomslag i mediene. Disse talsmennene har ingen problem med å komme til orde. Lambert har kommet med alarmerende påstander.
Nå brukes 22/7 som eksempel på hvor hatefull stemningen mot muslimer er blitt.
To even suggest equivalence between years of Islamist terror and the far Right, based on a single, awful case, is deeply dangerous and false.
Not that Bob Lambert needed even a single case. Last year, he published a report claiming that there already was an outbreak of what he quite seriously called “terrorism” against Muslims in Britain, with an “alarming rise” in anti-Muslim hate crime.
Ytre høyre ligger nede organisatorisk. Men begår de vold og terror, stemmer det at det er økende terror fra ytre høyre?
Over the past decade, half a dozen or so white British Right-wingers have been convicted of possessing explosives and other weapons. But all were loners not acting in concert with any group. Breivik appears, for now, to be the same. Links to a global fascist conspiracy have so far proved elusive.
In contrast, there have, over the same period, been 138 convictions for Islamist-related terrorism in the UK, many relating to serious, carefully organised, often multinational plots against specific targets involving substantial numbers of people. Lambert’s claim that “nationalists pose a bigger threat than al-Qaeda” is only true for two small regions of Europe (the Basque country and Corsica) and completely ignores al-Qaeda’s far from “minimal” death toll. Over the last 10 years, nationalist terrorists, even counting Breivik, have killed about 200 Westerners; al-Qaeda has killed about 4,000.
Men det mest alvorlige er påpekningen av at mens talspersoner for islamister er velplassert i samfunnsmassystemet, har ikke ytre høyre noen tilsvarende posisjon. Ikke at de bør ha det, men ingen stiller spørsmål ved tenketanker, institutter og organisasjoner som betales fra utlandet og har tvilsomme kontakter.
Peddling false conclusions in defiance of the evidence is, of course, the worst crime in academia. But Lambert, whose Exeter unit is heavily funded by Islamists, is less an academic, more a spokesman for his paymasters.
In his article this week, Ibrahim Hewitt wrote: “If you are a Muslim [in Europe today], you are eyed with suspicion and must go out of your way to ‘prove’ your loyalty to a state which, if the truth was made known, would get rid of you if only it had the guts to pass the necessary legislation to do so.”
That’s not so different from the paranoia of Breivik, convinced that his government wanted to expel white people from his country. But there is one big difference. Hewitt is no lone online ranter. His group, Interpal, is among the richest Muslim charities in Britain. It is banned in the United States, accused of bankrolling groups which support terrorism (Interpal denies this and has been cleared by the Charity Commission). Hewitt runs an influential school. Bob Lambert works at a respected university.
White extremists are rightly shunned by mainstream politicians. Muslim extremists are courted by the likes of Ken Livingstone. White fundamentalism and Muslim fundamentalism need each other. But white fundamentalism, unlike its Muslim counterpart, does not have a presence in legitimate institutions. The white Right should not be ignored by the security authorities – but it would be dangerous to divert our attention from the real threat.
The British far-Right is nothing but a rabble
The threat of Islamist attacks far outweighs that from loners with no political clout