NOS AMIS ANGLAIS

Unite Against Fascism: Churchill’s ‘Fascists of the Future’

Posted on March 12, 2012,
in EDL News,

“The fascists of the future will be called anti-fascists.” – attributed to Winston Churchill*

Unite Against Fascism (UAF) have always been a confusing bunch.

In their efforts to ‘stamp’ out fascism they’ve continually petitioned to have our demonstrations banned (an attack on freedom of speech that’s back-fired a number of times).

They’ve also become no strangers to violent confrontation – often provoking trouble at our demonstrations, and more-often-than-not coming out of it with far higher arrest figures than we have.

Importantly, whilst we’ve continually sought to prevent trouble-makers from attending our demonstrations, the UAF’s rhetoric has continued to get more and more extreme. We’re not the only opponents they’ve demonised, called names and regularly refused to engage in debate, but we have the UAF to thank for countless instances where we’ve met with a hostile reception due to the misinformation they’ve irresponsibly spread ahead of our demonstrations.

The all too familiar face of UAF protests

All in all, they’ve behaved in a surprisingly… erm… ‘fascist’ way.

Most of the time we’ve found this pretty hilarious. If it’s not the spectacle of UAF Joint Secretary Weyman Bennett (pictured above) foaming with rage and calling anyone who disagrees with him a racist, it’s the appearance of no more than ten bedraggled students at one of the UAF’s notorious ‘solidarity’ marches. It’s always uplifting when, despite all the threats and provocation, the UAF only manage to muster a few placards and a tambourine.

Of course, some people will be suckered in by the image of brave men and women uniting together to face the threat of fascism, but most will recognise that Unite Against Fascism are nothing of the sort. Some of their targets may well be extremists, but their fixation on the EDL is just embarrassing. They’ve never sought to justify their claim that we are a fascist organisation – just repeated the accusation to anyone who will listen.

Unfortunately, the BBC (amongst others) do continue to do just that. Time and time again, the BBC introduces dimwits like Weyman Bennett as ‘anti-fascist campaigners’ (failing to mention, in this case, that he’s also a senior member of the Socialist Workers Party), and will typically allow his group to slander opponents as ‘racist thugs’ or even ‘Nazis’ without ever querying these wildly inaccurate and incredibly offensive claims. (Luckily, we fare a little better on radio than we do on the television).

We often wonder whether the BBC’s decision to give a platform to people who continually make false and incendiary accusations makes them guilty of incitement. Truth be told, if we were the sort of people that the UAF claim we are, we’d go out and protest against us!

Well meaning activists?

Perhaps now though, they’ve gone one step too far, even for their friends at the BBC. The obvious bias of being headed by former Communist and friend of Islamic extremists ‘Red’ Ken Livingstone was probably strike one, making their surprisingly fascist tactics and love of monotonous and empty accusations strike two. Strike three, however, had to be the appointment of Azad Ali as the UAF’s vice chair.

As Andrew Gilligan reports in the Telegraph, Azad Ali is, quite simply, an Islamic fascist.

Azad Ali is the “community affairs co-ordinator” of the Islamic Forum of Europe (IFE), an Islamist organisation that openly supports Sharia Law, the Islamisation of European countries and jihad. The IFE are also the group that Lutfur Rahman, now mayor of Tower Hamlets in East London, was expelled from the Labour Party for having links with. Rahman was supported in his mayoral bid by the IFE and also by none-other than Ken Livingstone – now Azad Ali’s new boss at UAF. As Gilligan says, small world.

It’s not easy to determine which of these men is the most dangerous, but in case anyone were in any doubt as to Azad Ali’s extremism, the Harry’s Place blog has compiled an authoritative list.

An admirer of prominent members of al-Qaeda, a supporter of Hamas – the terrorist organisation sworn to the destruction of Israel and the Jews (regardless of the possibility of any political settlement) – and an outspoken opponent of democracy, Azad Ali is not a pleasant character. He’s certainly not the sort of person that any politician or campaigning organisation should have any association with, especially since he justified the killing of British soldiers.

UAF supporter is fined for giving Nazi salute

But it seems that the authorities once again have something of a blind spot when it comes to Islamic extremism. Ali tried to sue the Daily Mail for articles that suggested he was an extremist (like the above), and although the court threw out the case, he didn’t lose his job. He even went on to work as an adviser to the Metropolitan Police!

No genuinely anti-fascist organisation would ever invite a proven fascist like Azad Ali to join their leadership team. The fact that the UAF have done just that is a gross insult to all those who are genuinely committed to combating the spread of intolerant and authoritarian ideologies.

But, of course, this is not the first time we’ve been grossly offended by the UAF. Their continued insistence that we hold ‘extreme views’ is irritating, especially given that our Mission Statement makes very clear that we’re supporters of liberal democracy and passionate defenders of the rights and freedoms that all are free to enjoy In this country. It is the UAF – and their leader – that have shown a continued willingness to associate with extremists.

But the line was most certainly crossed by the UAF’s appalling exploitation of the tragedy in Norway.

When Anders Breivik shot and killed 77 people (many of them children) we all felt a terrible feeling of loss. Breivik, who in his rambling ‘manifesto’ dismissed the EDL as dedicated anti-racists with an ideology wholly inconsistent with his own, had, nevertheless, based his actions on what he believed to be the surrender of his native Norway to the forces of Islamisation. His anger echoed the betrayal that many in Europe feel at their governments’ blunt refusals to address the problems with continued Islamic immigration. But rather than protesting peacefully, he instead did his country a great disservice by embracing the very extremism that we are all used to fearing from Islamic terrorists.

Is this the face of anti-fascism?

His sanity continues to be under discussion in Norway. Whatever the doctors decide, few would claim that the authors he cited (from Melanie Phillips to Fjordman), or the people he claimed to be inspired by (from Winston Churchill to Jeremy Clarkson), should share any culpability for his crimes. Unlike many Muslim preachers, academics and activists (including many at the IFE), they did not justify of encourage any acts of violence. Despite this, the mood amongst those who are collectively known as critics of Islam (of which the EDL is a relatively new member) was marked. We all felt a renewed responsibility to speak out against extremism, and to justify why peaceful protest continues to be of great importance.

The UAF’s reaction was rather different. Shortly after the atrocity they produced a poster. It showed a picture of Anders Breivik alongside a picture of EDL leader Tommy Robinson. The caption read, ‘Different Faces, Same Hatred’.

We’ve not commented on this until now because, quite frankly, how do you comment on something like that? If, heaven forbid, there is another would-be Breivik sitting undiscovered somewhere in Europe, then it will be the example of people like Tommy Robinson that will be our best hope to defeat this kind of extremism – not the UAF. People are angry and frustrated. The best example they can be set is the concerted commitment to peaceful protest that comes from genuine respect for the rule of law and the noble traditions of this country, not name-calling, incitement and promises to ‘smash’ your opponents.

How dare an organisation that sees no problem in offering a senior role to a man who is a proven supporter of terrorists claim that we are motivated by the same warped ideology as Anders Brevik!? It’s as hurtful as it is idiotic. One man, one psychopath, sharing similar, but far from identical concerns to the EDL, committed an unspeakable act of terrorism. His ideology was his own, cobbled together from whatever he could find, and you will not find a single statement ever issued by the EDL that could even go close as to justify such an act.

Compare this to the threat posed by Islamic terrorism: countless cases, countless examples of incitement, from the words of Muslim preachers to the actual Islamic scriptures, there is a constant pattern underlying a constant need for change and reform. But we will never put the face of a moderate Muslim leader next to the face of a terrorist and suggest that they share the same hatred. Never. The world just isn’t that black and white, and it’s not fair to pretend it is.

Socialist Worker supporters of the UAF prepare to ‘smash’ the EDL and BNP in Tower Hamlets. Of course, the BNP were not welcome at our demonstration – but why let that get in the way of a provocative and misleading poster?

Despite this, we’re willing to assume that most UAF supporters are well-meaning folk (a courtesy they’ve certainly not extended to us). We may make the occasional jokes about their apparent lack of personal hygiene, but most of the time we’re focused on the arguments because, ultimately, that’s what’s important. We think they’re wrong to claim that our criticisms of Islam and the government’s approach to dealing with Islamic extremism go too far. We think our criticisms are valid, and even if our opponents think they’re not, surely we should have the freedom to express them?

Still, despite the lunatic leadership, and despite the apparent willingness to ‘stamp us out’ rather than engage in discussion, we still imagine that decent people join or support the UAF because they genuinely believe that they are a force for good – a force that opposes fascism and other forms of extremism.

But surely no one can be so blinkered to believe that an organisation so intimately connected with Islamic extremists can speak convincingly about the ‘threat’ posed by groups campaigning against Islamic extremism!?

Lutfur Rahman joins the UAF outside the extremist East London Mosque

Quite simply, they’re in bed with the enemy. But this appointment goes well beyond a simple error of judgement. For example, when UAF National Officer Martin Smith promoted and defended the Holocaust denier Gilad Atzmon (along with George Galloway), it seemed to fit nicely with the UAF’s long history of turning a blind eye to antisemitism (a fact that even the Guardian picked up on). The UAF also have a long history of supporting the terrorist organisation Hamas (again, along with George Galloway) and have supported the Muslim Council of Britain’s boycott of Holocaust Memorial Day.

These aren’t the activities of a group that is genuinely committed to combatting extremism. Worse than simply being an ineffectual joke, the UAF have started to use the guise of anti-fascism to actually enable and support Islamo-fascism. Rather than fighting authoritarianism and intolerance, they attack our freedoms, whilst supporting Islamic supremacism – the most intolerant of ideologies.

Whether the UAF were ever genuinely committed to anti-fascist activism is hard to say. Some of their members may well be genuine anti-fascist campaigners, but the decision by the leadership to allow the UAF to become little more than a far-Left rent-a-mob allied to Islamic extremists should surely lead any such members to reconsider their affiliation with the group. You don’t ‘unite against fascism’ by allying with fascists.

Whilst the term ‘fascist’ isn’t necessarily always easy to define, it’s probably fair to claim that it can be used to describe both the far-Left and the far-Right. The term ‘far-Right’ is thrown about a lot (often by the UAF, and often without there ever being any explanation of what they mean by the term), so we should at least do any well-meaning UAF supporters the courtesy of explaining what we mean when we claim that the group has become ‘far Left’.

The UAF’s Martin Smith (centre) shortly before his arrest for assaulting a police officer

We mean that the UAF is authoritarian, reactionary, and violent. Their beliefs may be rooted in the noble desire to see people getting along, but they’ll threaten to ‘smash’ anyone who challenges their idyllic view of the world. They’ve become so critical of everything they see around them that they’re willing to embrace any anti-British ideology. No wonder Islamic extremism is such a great fit. And no wonder they hate anyone who is proud of this country.

The UAF are actually becoming dangerous. Their one great success has been convincing people that they are anti-fascists (making anyone that they protest against automatically a fascist). Why, we’re often heard people ask, would the UAF be protesting if their targets weren’t actually fascists? It’s a fair question, and as long as it goes unanswered the UAF will be able to continue misrepresenting both their critics and their allies.

The real danger is that they’ll be able to protect individuals like Azad Ali from being exposed as the extremists they are. But they can only continue to act as a successful public relations tool for extremists for as long as they are treated as genuine anti-fascists by politicians and by the media.

Last year the Prime Minister, David Cameron, made it clear that the enemies of European liberal democracy are those who spread what he described as ‘Islamist extremism’. He said:

Europe needs to wake up to what is happening in our own countries. We need to be absolutely clear on where the origins of these terrorist attacks lie – and that is the existence of an ideology, Islamist extremism.

Given the UAF’s appointment of a man who is clearly an ‘Islamist extremist’, surely the time has come for David Cameron to follow the example set recently by Mike Hancock MP (Liberal Democrat) and remove his name from the list of politicians who have declared their support for the UAF?

Above: A short compilation showing the UAF in action.

* Update, 14/03/2012: Although these words are often attributed to Winston Churchill, some have questioned whether he did in fact ever utter them. But that’s besides the point. Whoever said this words was expressing a concern that in their virulent attacks on all those they claim to be fascists, some of the self-styled ‘anti-fascists’ could one day become that which they once sought to destroy. The day you invite an Islamic extremist to join your leadership team is the day you lose any right to lecture us about extremism.

ùùùùùùùùùùùùùùùùùùùùùùùùùùùùùù