Crumbling CounterJihad?: Refuting ‘Loonwatch’.

Tags

American Liberty, Barack Obama, BBC, Brigitte Gabriel, Christianity and Islam, Counter-Jihad, Counterjihad, Debbie Schlussel, Defend the modern world, Islam, Islamophobia, Jihadwatch, Kevin Carroll, Multiculturalism, No to Turkey in the EU, Pamela Geller, Race and ethnicity in the United States Census, Robert Spencer, SION, Tommy Robinson, Transatlantic Kerfuffle, United States, Walid Shoebat

Anyone involved with the CounterJihad movement will be familiar with the Website ‘Loonwatch’. As its name would imply, the site is intended to be a satirical antidote to Jihadwatch (and other similar websites).

Normally, the articles posted on Loonwatch are of scant interest (most simply recycle the garbage idea that Islamophobes are somehow guilty of racism), but this past week, a more analytical piece was uploaded that demands greater attention. The piece is titled ‘Crumbling “Counterjihad”? EDL, SION, SIOA and the Transatlantic Kerfuffle’, and its main contention is that the ‘Islamophobic’ movement is falling apart.

The author of the post – ‘Garibaldi’ – writes that “The reasons for the inherent instability in the “counter-Jihad” reflects the fissures in ideological make up between the various personalities, as well as incongruities between their inflated egos.” (Note: ‘Reflects’ in this sentence should be singular)

Garibaldi then cites a history of ‘internecine civil wars amongst the counter-Jihad’ including the following perceived confrontations..  “Debbie Schlussel vs. Brigitte Gabriel, Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer, Zuhdi Jasser, Walid Shoebat, etc… (Robert) Spencer vs. Andrew Bostom. Roberta Moore of the JDL vs. the EDL and now the latest kerfuffle: Geller and Spencer vs. Tommy Robinson and Kevin Carroll.”

While many of the schisms mentioned were (and in some cases still are) real, they are nothing more than symptomatic of a vibrant, democratically-spirited movement with a tolerance for dissent. Indeed, this might contrast sharply with the almost cult-like uniformity typical of Leftist movements.

Debbie Schlussel, to take one example, is a proudly independent cultural critic. The same is true of Pamela Geller. The fact that they sometimes disagree seems hardly worthy of comment. Both espouse the same kind of opinion, face down the same bullies and name-throwers, and expose themselves to the same risks.

Ms Geller’s accusations against Tommy Robinson similarly have been taken out of context here. Both Geller and Robinson remain essentially in agreement over the need to tackle radical Islam, and even if they don’t see eye-to-eye on each other’s methodology, both are one and the same from an Islamist point-of-view.

As for the talk of clashing ‘egos’, this is pretty rich coming from a Left-wing source.  The Anglo-American Left contains such icons of humility as Michael Moore, Laurie Penny and Barack Obama, and unlike those on the right, Left-leaning parties are dominated by University-educated Toffs (try standing for the Democratic Party without a degree).

Garibaldi goes on to offer this catch-all assessment of the CounterJihad tendency:

“All that binds them is Islamomisia and Islamophobia. On the surface their ideological backgrounds provide a motive: a belief in the need to preserve Christianity in the face of post-Modernity and a rise in Secular Humanism, a belief that it is good for Israel and Zionism, a desire to keep White Europe pure, the nostalgic belief that they are the vanguard “defenders of freedom” who will not only save the “West” from a resurgent Islam but harken in a golden age and if not–Armageddon.”

This is a very bizarre attempt to transform virtue into sin. That the CounterJihad tendency attracts a plurality of people from different backgrounds is presented as a flaw. “All that binds them…” is the very subject under consideration. Why wouldn’t it be? 

Regarding the perceived motive of keeping ‘White Europe pure’, this is a pretty hackneyed accusation. If it applies at all, it is only to the wildest Nick Griffin-ite fringe. While such people certainly exist, to tar Pamela Geller with the same brush as the BNP is absurd.

The future of the CounterJihad movement is not something that can be safely predicted in detail, but it would take a very uninformed mind to reason that it doesn’t have one. The Jihadist threat is mounting across Europe, and the cause of resistance will grow alongside it.

D, LDN.

Advertisement

Where Now for the English Defence League?

Tags

America 911, American Liberty, anti-Semitism, Barack Obama, British National, Christianity, Civilisation, Counter-Jihad, Defend the modern world, Demographics of Europe, EDL, English Defence League, Islamism, Islamophobia, Kevin Carroll, London EDL, Nick Griffin, No to Turkey in the EU, Race and ethnicity in the United States Census, Rihanna Muslim, Robinson, Tommy Robinson

On Tuesday, EDL leader Stephen Yaxley Lennon (otherwise known as ‘Tommy Robinson) announced that he and co-founder Kevin Carroll are to leave the organisation, in their words to pursue “better, democratic ideas” by which to continue the fight against Political Islam.

Generally speaking, this announcement came as a great surprise to those within the EDL, and the reasoning since given for it by Robinson has confounded much of the liberal press too. Only a month beforehand, he had been tweeting typically hostile comments toward Islam and Muslims, and yet suddenly the former hooligan appeared to have been tamed.

Why? Personally, I’m not sure. Nobody is more shocked by all this than me. According to many different gauges, the organisation seemed only recently in peak health. The EDL page on facebook has never been so popular, with roughly 161,000 ‘likes’ and a second unofficial page with 40.000 more. The demo in Tower Hamlets last month was hardly disastrous, and there is a large and popular outing planned for the coming weeks in Bradford.

But even if the ‘why’ remains shrouded in mystery, the ‘where next’ must now be addressed. Currently, the English Defence League is leaderless. Many thousands of activists face an anxious wait to see who replaces Robinson as their public representative. Some candidates (including the ‘pot-plant guy’ from UKIP) have already been ruled out. I have no nominations of my own.

But a leader must be found soon. The danger of a prolonged state of flux is mass defection. The BNP will almost certainly be eyeing this up. I’ve yet to check the BNP website (I haven’t got the stomach at the moment), but there will inevitably be a semi-literate post claiming the resignations as a ‘victory’ for Nick Griffin. They are, of course, nothing of the kind, but such is the nature of fascist solipsism.

When and if one arises, the most important question for a new EDL leader must not be “What went wrong?” but ‘What can yet be achieved?”

Although Robinson cited ideological reasons for his resignation, there were perhaps other factors involved, such as a declining turnout for demonstrations and lessening media profile. To attain greater victories in the future, significant changes to the core mission of the EDL will be required. To this end, here are five suggestions for the new leader:

1. Reduce the number of irregular demonstrations in favour of larger-scale demos to mark significant occasions (the aftermath of a terror attack/St George’s Day etc..). Make clear to members that their attendance is expected rather than merely desired. Make the rallies pleasant, static affairs with speeches and music, rather than kettling and confrontation.

2. Ensure a number of ethnic-minority spokespeople (especially ex-Muslims) to blunt the accusation of racism.

3. Get rid of the fascistic and irrelevant ‘In Hoc Signo Vinces’ slogan. It has connections with totalitarianism. As a replacement, consider something like the Luxembourgian National Motto ‘Mir wolle bleiwe wat mir sin’ – “We Want to Remain What We Are.”

4. Create a formal membership structure. This will make it possible to expel those who make fascist salutes or threats at rallies.

5. Stand firm on fundamental principles. This is a liberal-democratic country and Muslims are antithetical to our way of life.

Whatever approach is pursued, now is plainly not the time to throw in the towel. The current of Islamisation remains as strong as ever, and the methods hitherto employed by the EDL have borne real fruit. Thousands of patriotic souls have braved all kinds of inconvenience to make a fraternal stand against something toxic and dangerous to our country. They must not be betrayed, or left in want of hope.

D, LDN.