RUTHFULLY YOURS

Melanie Phillips — the outspoken and brilliant analyst of British establishment hypocrisy and denial over Islamist extremism — has once again become the target of a vicious and wholly dishonest attack for her courageous stance.

Long a hate figure among the weakest and the worst in Britain’s opinion forming classes, her prescient book Londonistan has been lambasted by a Guardian columnist who draws from a bizarre report by the University of Exeter’s European Muslim Research Centre which blames writers such as Phillips for fanning the flames of Islamophobia by having the effrontery to draw attention to Islamist extremism.

Bizarre, indeed deranged, as this line of thinking may be it is an all too familiar illustration of the mindset of a British establishment which simply cannot cope with the consequences of its decades-long love affair with multi-culturalist political correctness.

As Phillips rightly says in her blog in the Spectator (see link below): “The real agenda of this study is censorship by intimidation – to defame and smear all those who comment, however responsibly, on a matter of such intense public importance as Islamic extremism and terrorism.”

For as she explains:

“My argument in Londonistan – which is not about London — is that the British state first turned a blind eye to, and ever since has chosen to appease, Islamist extremism, allowing the radicalisation of British Muslims to gather pace, tolerating the preaching of hatred and doing nothing to stop Islamist subversion through the spread of sharia law. I have repeatedly said that this compromises the safety and security not only of society in general but of those many British Muslims who are desperate for the government to stop the radicalisation and intimidation of their community, and who are horrified by the way in which the British establishment has embraced extremist Islamist bodies and individuals as responsible interlocutors.”

And, referring to the University of Exeter study, she goes on:

“This study claims effectively that such commentary incites violence against British Muslims. There is not one shred of evidence for this. Remarkably, the authors make no acknowledgement of what is overwhelmingly likely to be the biggest reason for animosity against Muslims — the repeated acts of terror and the 2000-4000 potential terrorists within the British Muslim community as reported by the intelligence service, not to mention the refusal by community leaders to take any responsibility for this state of affairs.”

Phillips contrasts the approach of the authors in relation to media reporting and racisim with the consequences of the demonisation of Israel for British Jews:

“Conversely, the authors make no acknowledgement of where truly false and irresponsible reporting has indeed inflamed violence against a vulnerable British minority. The way the British media reports the Middle East incites irrational hatred not just of Israel but also Jews in general. This reporting takes the form of false claims about Israel’s aggressive and illegal behaviour, medieval-style blood libels that Israel deliberately kills Palestinian children, and conspiracies between Israel and America to put the world’s security at risk.”