It takes a nation to protect the nation
LibDems labelling HJS as "far right". Douglas Murray was ostracised from the Tory party. Anyone who criticises islam is regarded as "far right". Even Student Rights is now being cast in that vein.
Looks like Douglas Murray needn't have bothered trying to keep clear water between him and EDL.
Presumably Harry's Place and One Law For All are going to be designated as "far right" too. Peter Tatchll better keep his head down, or he too will find himself lumped alongside Enoch Powell, Hitler, Genghis Khan and Tamerlaine. Oh, hang on, the latter could never be "far right" no matter how many people he killed, because he was a muslim.
Since WW2, which world leader proudly declared himself a fascist? The muslim leader Mawdudi. But he can't be a fascist because, by defintion, only those opposed to islam can be considered fascist.
Politicians are deserting counter-extremism group Student Rights, the Huffington Post UK can exclusively reveal, following the group's controversial campus extremism report, as well as links with a far-right society.
One MP has already resigned as an advisor for the organisation, whose recent study was criticised by student leaders as a "witch hunt", while another is considering following suit.
Tom Brake, Liberal Democrat MP, has left the Student Rights' board, shortly after resigning from the Henry Jackson Society think tank. The Carshalton and Wallington MP threw the towel in following comments from the HJS' senior executive Douglas Murray.
In an email, Brake told HuffPost UK blogger Hilary Aked: "I am no longer listed on their website and I have also asked for my name to be removed from the Student Rights advisory board."
Brake has already been replaced by Ghaffar Hussain, director of training at the Quilliam Foundation, another group which "challenges extremism".
Labour MP Jim Fitzpatrick is also looking to distance himself from the group.
Aked emailed Fitzpatrick voicing her concerns about Student Rights' "poor research methods and muddling the debate about extremism with the issue of segregation on campuses".
Fitzpatrick, MP for Poplar and Limehouse, replied saying he had requested his name be removed from Student Rights' advisory board "in light of these developments" and the group's "recent conduct".
However Fitzpatrick has since told HuffPost UK he has asked to be removed from the board but "decided to seek a meet with them first to clarify some recent issues before doing so completely".
The MP declined to disclose which issues he would be discussing.
Aked, a student at Bath University, said: "It's a positive sign that two MPs have decided to disassociate themselves from Student Rights, a non-transparent pressure group with no legitimacy among actual students and a track record of producing shoddy research.
"As a project of the Henry Jackson Society whose political support is also hemorrhaging because of Douglas Murray's Islamophobic statements, this further dents its credibility and hopefully it will reduce the platform the mainstream media gives it to spread its toxic narrative which only serves to whip up fear and mistrust."
LibDem Councillor Lord Monroe Palmer said he would not be resigning immediately but as a result of the study he would "monitor" his position as advisor as well as future Student Rights reports.
Student Rights' campus extremism study, which was published in May, was heavily criticised by student communities - both Muslim and non-Muslim. Mohamed Harrath, a student union executive at the London School of Economics, said the group was trying to "ramp up" the effects of Islamophobia on Muslim students.
"There is only one voice that is speaking about extremism on campus and it [Student Rights] completely distorts everything", he said at the time. "Other voices must be heard."
Pete Mercer, vice-president welfare officer for the National Union of Students dubbed the report a "witch hunt".
“We would welcome an open and balanced discussion about gender issues and religion but it’s important that contributions aren’t hysterical and that the word ‘extremism’ isn’t thrown around without justification," he said. "A witch hunt which makes sweeping judgments about student Islamic societies without knowing the details denies the women involved the very equality it claims to wish for them."
Following the backlash over its report, Student Rights released a statement blaming newspapers for "inaccurate" headlines which read: "At no point did we try to claim that our figures were representative of all student events, and those... who have an issue with inaccurate headlines should remember that for many media outlets the temptation to round up to the nearest exaggeration is often difficult to resist."
Other political figures on the advisory board include Robert Halfon, a Conservative MP, and Rt Hon Dr Kim Howells, a former Labour MP and minister of state.
Student Rights has yet to comment on the recent events.
Yes, its a great example.
But in the end all he was doing was defending, and if you defend all the time, eventually you will lose, like Constantinople.
If he attacked and humiliated, she would struggle to walk away, because she'd look like she was retreating in shame.
The girl could be attacked as a splittist / sectarianist / tribalist seeking to get benefits for her own people.
Or she could be attacked for electoral fraud, by seeking to import voters on her side. Extra insults can be added to these terms to beef it out along the same lines.
The classical position is that if she walks away while he is hurling ad hominem insults at her, she retains the moral high ground. Yes, that was the 20th century. That was then, this is now.
The Fantasy world of the Left.
Here's an Australian politician writing in a British newspaper about an American organisation he's never seen nor interviewed.
On Proud Boys (whose leader isn't white):
"three of those who [Allegedly] participated in a gang [Allegedly] assault in New York in 2018 were [Allegedly] affiliated with [Allegedly] racist [Allegedly] skinhead crews [Allegedly]long known to local [Allegedly]antifascist and antiracist organisers"
There are half a dozen levels of indirection in this claim that Proud Boys were associated with fascists. And the ultimate aim of the article is to "prove" that Trump was a racist/fascist.
This is what passes for journalism. Doesn't matter what Proud Boys say their views are, The Guardian gets to be the arbiter of what their views are. Their actual views are censored & suppressed so the TechnoFascists can say what the views of the censored are. Just as in 1984 the enemy Goldsteirn never gets to speak for himself - his views are always mediated through Big Brother and The Ministry of Truth.
The retarded Guardian readers will remember that this article "proved that Proud Boys was a fascist group".
Leftists like Brendan O'Connor truly have no shame, and a totally twisted sense of right and wrong. He says plainly that 500 of his people moved over to 50 of the other 'non-persons', and attacked them. That's 2 wrong actions right there, and 2 incriminating facts in law, for a charge of assault. But for Brendan, it's all good stuff because he knows he is always in the right. Just wait till it Muslims do the same 2 things to you Brendan, then you might realise how pernicious your view is.
The Left can't see their own delusions. Just like with Brexit, Trump, etc. They spent 4 years trying to derail Brexit. They could only stop Trump by electoral fraud.
Leftist newspaper reports on how Leftist voters are saying they will not vote for Macron next election.
Alison Sargent told France24 that the left-wing newspaper Libération has suffered a backlash for reporting on their front page that Emmanuel Macron has lost support from left-wing voters. The political commentator stated that Libération were accused of giving French voters permission to break the "sacred political pact" between left-wing and right-wing voters to come together in order to stop a far-right politician from getting into office.
The oligarchy demand that Leftists ignore shifts in public attitudes unless these shifts support the project of corporate globalisation/immigration.
The public are prepared to cross the ideological chasm (or at least not shore up their side of it). The oligarchy demand that this not be reported/recogized.