You are calling for this march to be banned from WB

Wrong – learn how to read.

Cheers.

For the Nth time (I can’t be bothered to look back through the thread), I’m not calling for the march to be banned.

You are calling for this march to be banned from WB, you need a better reason than ‘it may upset some people’, I cannot see what rational grounds we can ban this march. Someone kicking headstones down is crimminal damage and illegal, applying for permission to hold a march is not. The law should not allow people’s symbols from preventing others exerising their rights.

As long as he goes through the proper channels and fuffils whatever criteria, then I cannot think of a good reason to stop this march.

Let me get one think straight. I have no doubt that Islam4UK are a pretty rum lot.

I doubt that I would agree with them on much. However, they have the right to hold marches by the same rules and criteria as the rest of us. I have been sickened the way that many people have looked at simple rights and with a theatrical wink to the crowd, we have denied those rights to sections of society, just because it happened to be ‘convenient’ to do so.

I can assure you that I hold no brief for this movement and they would happily remove many of my freedoms, given half the chance. There are sections of the Muslim community that can be their own worse enemy at times. The Rushtie affair and the cartoons being two examples. Unfortunately, they wish to exploit our free speech and use it against us, well that is fine because our values are too important to throw aside, just to save us the hassle of dealing with them.

Not only has Choudary got the right to free speech, but he has a more important and more potent right that goes along with that. He has the right to make a complete wankstain of himself in front of millions of people. I remember David Icke used to be on telly in his shell suit for three solid weeks. He made a twat of himself and he has rarely been on since.

Choudary is a different kettle of fish. I don’t want his type silenced, I want them defeated. I want our system to be proved better than his because it does not need to make up rules as it goes along. Let Choudary have his march, if his mob cannot control themselves and act with dignity then let him make an arse of himself.

If you are going to ban a march then I think you need a better reason than that.

For the Nth time (I can’t be bothered to look back through the thread), I’m not calling for the march to be banned.

AFAICT, the people who up to now have used Wootton Bassett to commemorate their dead don’t want it used as a media spectacle – by anyone. What’s wrong with? Can’t you allow them that little comfort?

So? Why is this march stopping them?

Well, I suppose it’s a bit like someone trampling on my family’s graves and kicking over the headstones. There’s no ‘logical’ argument against disliking them for doing so – I wouldn’t like it though. Some people aren’t as rational as you, Jim. They need their symbols and ceremonies.

Separately:

It occurred to me earlier that this has predictably become counterproductive in terms of drawing attention to the Afghan dead – it has become a media circus because of Choudary’s involvement (and the manner of his involvement). Had he really cared, he would have asked someone to write in a personal and private capacity to the Wootton Bassett authorities asking for their opinion on a march, or requesting permission to march, (whatever is appropriate) and take it from there. Of course Choudary is more interested in seeing Choudary’s name in the papers than drawing attention to the Afghan dead, and chose to proceed differently. Again, that isn’t a reason to ban the march, just another reason to dislike it.

I am not tarring all Muslims with the same brush, but I get the feeling that the bulk of the objection to this march is comming from people who oppose Muslims using WB for a march in mourning of fellow Muslims.

But that isn’t what Choudary claims he wants to do, is it? He claims he wants to march in Wootton Basset in order to draw attention to Afgan casualties etc. He wants it to be a media spectacle.

Well that is a perfectly acceptable tactic isn’t it? If he wants to use his march to gain maximum publicity then is that a legitimate reason to ban a march? It may or may not have the desired effect, but banning a march in an area just becase it is intended to gain his group publicity hardly seems right. If you are going to ban a march then I think you need a better reason than that.

AFAICT, the people who up to now have used Wootton Bassett to commemorate their dead don’t want it used as a media spectacle – by anyone. What’s wrong with? Can’t you allow them that little comfort?

So? Why is this march stopping them?

The implication being that some people deem it ‘inappropriate’ for Muslims to either march or be commemorated in Wooten Bassett. Well, perhaps how they think, but does that mean they are correct? If so, why? Are we saying that we have certain streets for certain people? That Muslims are not welcome to organise a march in Wooten Bassett?

Why do you keep banging on about ‘Muslims’ instead of Choudary & co? Muslims other than Choudary have publicly disagreed with his approach to this. Please don’t tar all Muslims with the same brush.

If it is appropriate to:

Mark the death of Muslims in this war
Muslims to march in such a cause.

In a street in the Country, then it is appropriate to do so in EVERY street, irrespective of how some people feel.

But that isn’t what Choudary claims he wants to do, is it? He claims he wants to march in Wootton Basset in order to draw attention to Afgan casualties etc. He wants it to be a media spectacle.

AFAICT, the people who up to now have used Wootton Bassett to commemorate their dead don’t want it used as a media spectacle – by anyone. What’s wrong with? Can’t you allow them that little comfort?

Forbidden
You don’t have permission to access /current-affairs/uk-news/421–coming-soon–wootton-bassett-march on this server.

Additionally, a 403 Forbidden error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request.

When I try to connect via an anonymous proxy, I get the same result.

To me, it just looks like they are off line. It isn’t something that your ISP is doing.

If correct, your report is very disturbing. Do you have a screen dump or a copy of the text that is displayed when you try to access the site? Possibly a URL might do, if your ISP is redirecting to a generic “forbidden” page.

The implication being that some people deem it ‘inappropriate’ for Muslims to either march or be commemorated in Wooten Bassett. Well, perhaps how they think, but does that mean they are correct? If so, why? Are we saying that we have certain streets for certain people? That Muslims are not welcome to organise a march in Wooten Bassett? What about Aldershot? Where do we draw the line? What about a march to mark holocaust day in Wooten Bassett? What if a group of people objected on the grounds that ‘British soldiers were conscripted, but Jews brought it on themselves’, would you respect their wishes?

What if people decide that they do not want the Army marching down their street for whatever reason? There are a few villages round here that ‘British troops’ would be more than unwelcome and few councils that have attempted to ban cadets from having church parades too.

What if a group of people don’t want a gay pride march in a given street because ‘there is a primary school there and we shouldn’t put temptation in the marcher’s way’, then what? Would we just re-route to avoid unsightly scenes or defend the right of peaceful, legal, marches, irrespective of a few ‘concerned citizens’?

If it is appropriate to:
Mark the death of Muslims in this war
Muslims to march in such a cause.

In a street in the Country, then it is appropriate to do so in EVERY street, irrespective of how some people feel. What is the alternative?

Choudary’s desire to mourn the dead as well as generate maximum impact for his cause is neither mutually exclusive

Well, we’ll agree to disagree in this context.

No doubt you and millions like you want this march to go on in Bethnal Green , away from the eyes of the public and the media;

And then you had to go and ruin it all, by saying something stupid like… that.

In fact, I’m quite happy for him to do it in Parliament Square or near the Cenotaph.

Clearly the parades in Wooten Bassett ARE both politically motivated and partisan as politicians of all sides commented on these parades and have been shown on the media.

I don’t think those who visit Wootton Bassett to commemorate the dead can help what politicians get up to – indeed I’ve heard it said they’d rather politicians didn’t go (as politicians, anyway). Much like when Cameron and Brown were told off for their photos at the Field of Remembrance late last year.

Given the sense of outrage felt that someone would be so ‘insensitive’ as to attempt to commemorate the deaths of Muslims in the same place. I find such outrage (real or mock) difficult to square with the claim of ‘non-partisanship’.

I think (hope) there would be less outrage if a visitor to Wootton Bassett was merely commemorating the deaths of Muslims rather than attempting to co-opt it for the purposes of attracting the attention of a media circus.

As far as I know, this event was totally ignored by the media.

This one?

We would agree on a lot more, if only I could persuade you to stick to Libertarian principles a bit more.

Ukliberty @ 60

Choudary’s character or even his ‘hidden’ motives are not the issue here. We no not extend the right to march to people on how ‘nice’ people are or how ‘appropriate’ such people’s motivation is. We should be judging this march entirely on its merits and is it able to reach objective criteria, not some test on whether ‘we’ think Choudary plays with a straight bat or not.

Choudary’s desire to mourn the dead as well as generate maximum impact for his cause is neither mutually exclusive or a reason to ban such a march. When the Country side alliance march in ‘support of the Countryside’ the fact that they are a front for hunters (many of whom are urban dwellers) and the fact that they want to hold in London, reasons to ban it either. No doubt you and millions like you want this march to go on in Bethnal Green , away from the eyes of the public and the media; by the same token I wish that the Countryside alliance confined their marches to village greens and Country lanes.

Clearly the parades in Wooten Bassett ARE both politically motivated and partisan as politicians of all sides commented on these parades and have been shown on the media. Given the sense of outrage felt that someone would be so ‘insensitive’ as to attempt to commemorate the deaths of Muslims in the same place. I find such outrage (real or mock) difficult to square with the claim of ‘non-partisanship’.

Depends what you consider counts as a ceremony. Supporters of Stop the War read out names of dead Afghans, and names of dead UK troops, at the Cenotaph late last year. As far as I know, this event was totally ignored by the media.

Again, I don’t dispute this unpleasant character’s freedom to march, I just rather he do it elsewhere.

Just out of interest, are there any ceremonies for the Afghan dead in the UK?

The whole “incitement to violence” thing is tricky. Whilst it has been a useful tool for progressives to attack racist shitbags like Griffin for denying the holocaust, i.e. it is a check on society’s racist tendencies that would otherwise go unchecked (and stoked) by the tabloid-dominated media, it’s hard to prove. If someone goes and builds a bomb after having read the Anarchist Cookbook, does that mean we should send the author of the Cookbook to jail for inciting violence? I think the law should be changed to only prosecute people if it can be proven they have directly caused violence.

Two points. We shouldn’t enact or abolish laws because they are ‘useful tools’ for progressives or reactionaries. The Inchoate Offences came into being (and they are Common Law offences, with a history stretching back as long as England has had law at all) because of a general belief that the person whipping a crowd into violence is as culpable as the people that heed him. That remains a philosophically sound position.

The second point is that writing an instruction manual on how to make a bomb is not incitement. Writing a pamphlet calling for bombs to be placed so as to kill the infidel (or the gays, or the Protestants, or meat-headed South African opening batsmen) is incitement. Incitement is, in fact, pretty easy to prove – but the decision as to when to prosecute is overwhelmingly more political than is usually the case.

The tabloid media created this monster – we find ways to defeat them, and Andy goes down with them.

Agreed, while I think Choudary’s a dodgy mo’fugger there’s no need to join the tabloid tumoult every time he looks for attention (I would, however, support tactics such as these*).

[*] Without, perhaps, the flag n’ marines, but you see what I mean.

You’ll never believe it, mate, but I agree with every word.

I wince every time I hear a TV bulletin begin with the words ” a British soldier ” because it means I am about to hear that another young life has been squandered in a fruitless and unjust war. And we hear little of the Afghan casualties who have died defending their country from the invader.

It’s about time the people of Wooton Basset mixed some anger along with their respect for the dead.

You have to accept that for a section of our society (not just Muslims) Wooten Bassett has become a symbol of something else. They find it quite sinister and symptomatic of a stomach churning hypocrisy within British culture. I am not interested in that debate here. Whether they have a point or not is a different thread. However, what I do believe is they have a right to feel that way and they have a right to express that feeling in a peaceful demonstration (in the broader sense of the word) on the streets of this Country. These streets are owned by everybody, not just the families of the war dead. Wooten Bassett belongs to all of us, not just a select few who choose to fetishise the armed forces. I cannot remember such parades for the victims of the IRA at the time when many more young men came home in boxes.

Choudary is right, a march down ‘Paki’[sic] streets would have zero impact on the British media or even the British consciousness. No doubt many people in Wooten Bassett feel that these ‘mussies’ should stick to their own area. If so, then Choudary has made perhaps the most eloquent point of all. There are millions of people in this Country who think that Muslims are not ‘our people’ and are sickened by the thought of them using ‘our’ streets, the same streets that ‘our boys’ go down when they return from being killed by Muslims. I have seen and heard the vox pops regarding this march. I have heard the cries of outrage and the ‘it’s disgusting’ etc, but why is it disgusting? What is disgusting about mourning the innocent people who die in war? Why is it wrong to remember those slaughtered to bring security to the West?

I do get why this causes the Left problems, BTW. We who defend freedom have to defend people who we profoundly disagree with and people we would rather not be bothered with. I am often accused of being on the side of ‘the terrorist’, ‘the paedophile’, ‘the rapist’ etc, just because I oppose the death penalty and imprisonment without trial.

I get it. For many of us we are tired of trying to explain to the fuckwit in the pub that free speech and freedom to demonstrate extends, even to ‘paki scum’ [sic] and ‘poofs’[sic] and that standing up to them causes grief and this is one time we cannot be bothered to defend, so it would be easier to let it slide, ‘just this once’, ‘just this once’ is once too often in my book.

He’s devious. A few years back he was downing beers and shagging girls. The guy has no Islamic qualifications or education to speak of, and just wants his 15 minutes.

Hmm. I think the freedom of expression we have in this country should extend to the freedom to call for the freedom of expression of others to be curtailed. As such, the litmus test Will describes in 54 is not valid – I’m sure we even have Anjem ‘Andy’ Choudhary on record as calling for the death of those who drew the Motoons. People might say if he calls for other people to be killed/silenced, that gives the state the right to kill/silence him. I disagree.

The whole “incitement to violence” thing is tricky. Whilst it has been a useful tool for progressives to attack racist shitbags like Griffin for denying the holocaust, i.e. it is a check on society’s racist tendencies that would otherwise go unchecked (and stoked) by the tabloid-dominated media, it’s hard to prove. If someone goes and builds a bomb after having read the Anarchist Cookbook, does that mean we should send the author of the Cookbook to jail for inciting violence? I think the law should be changed to only prosecute people if it can be proven they have directly caused violence.

Ben I’ve read a lot of your work over the years and admire your commitment to anti-war stuff, especially when the UK centre-left (particularly within Labour) is forgetting about how horrible war is. That’s why I think we need to target our criticisms of phenomena like Andy directly at their sources – the tabloid media – rather than at the symptom – Andy himself – because doing the latter only gives him more attention. The tabloid media created this monster – we find ways to defeat them, and Andy goes down with them.