Mick Hartley

Politics and Culture

recent posts

email me

  • Policing gender expression

    It’s a tough competition, but surely Nadia Whittome must take the title as the stupidest MP in parliament.

    Policing people’s gender expression is precisely what the trans movement is all about. Boy playing with dolls? – off to the gender medics with you, turn him into a gruesome facsimile of a girl.

    She’ll never get it.

    Akua Reindorf:

    The reason transactivists keep losing the argument is that they don’t trouble to acquaint themselves with what the other side actually thinks. @NadiaWhittomeMP seriously believes gender critical feminists want to go back to a time when “gay people weren’t in their face”. Wild.

  • Violating the constitution

    Men raping women in women’s prisons – a violation of the constitution or not? A question for our times.

  • Hating Jews

    Rod Liddle in the Spectator

    ‘Listen to what the man on the left of the camera has to say about Israel, the man who is addressed as Nick,’ a radical Corbynista friend suggested to me the other day in a social media message designed to change my mind about the Middle East. It’s part of a sustained campaign on his part which dates back at least ten years and is usually conducted with good grace, if never accord. So I listened to what this chap Nick had to say, with growing hilarity. Not because of what he said – which was what you might expect from a rank anti-Semite, but because of who he was. For it was none other than Nick Griffin, the former leader of the British National party.

    Mr Griffin has, in the past, referred to the ‘Holohoax’ which he believes was fabricated by wartime propaganda and has been an ‘extremely profitable lie’. My friend had never heard of Nick Griffin. But how interesting that this is where the left is now getting some of its bullets from. Its anti-Jew bullets. Hitherto, directly quoting from Nazis, or neo-Nazis, was kind of verboten for them, except of course among the Palestinians themselves, who at least have the decency to make it absolutely clear that they wish the entire Jewish race to be wiped from the Earth and whose pre-eminent political movement, Hamas, has that goal written at the heart of its founding constitution.

    Not any more. The Overton window on Jew-hating has shifted so far that even the most extremist comments from people who have pictures of Adolf pinned up in their basements are now considered… well, I suppose kosher isn’t the word – halal, maybe.

    Very good. There could hardly be a clearer demonstration of the degree to which sections of the left have now completely lost the plot – because of an obsession with Palestine, and brains addled with “settler colonialism” and “from the river to the sea”, and other vacuous slogans which have taken the place of critical thought.

    I had previously been of the generous – and naive – opinion that the white left hates Jews because it hates Israel. That through the inevitable contact with the people who call themselves Palestinian and their Muslim supporters, there was a gradual erosion of the boundaries between loathing Israel and, as so many Muslims do, loathing the people who live there. You end up nodding along when they say the Jews control the media and armaments and capital, and eventually you end up painting virulently anti-Semitic daubs in an art gallery in Margate and thinking how clever and right on you are and down with the Pallys.

    But this was wrong, I think. It is the other way about. They hate Israel because they hate Jews. We all need somebody to hate and for the left, Jewish people have come to represent a plethora of things they already hated: capitalism, the West, military competence, industrial competence, education and a hostility to the religion which they come close to worshipping themselves, Islam. In a sense Israel is simply an embodiment of those already-present loathings.

    It is true the Overton window had already moved quite sharply over the past ten years or so in tandem with the rapid growth of our Muslim population and its growing political weight. That is in there somewhere – but perhaps only to the extent that this growing section of our community gives licence to the real feelings the white left already had. A white left which can show you racism in a handful of dust – except where the Jews are concerned. Then, it simply doesn’t exist.

    So when four ambulances are set on fire, it is easy to spot the anti-Semitic white lefties. They are the ones asking why the Jews have their own ambulances, or the ones suggesting it was a false flag attack by Mossad, or that this wouldn’t have happened if it hadn’t been for Gaza. These idiots are not only enemies of the Jews – they are enemies of the rest of us too.

  • The Tariq Ramadan story

    Remember Tariq Ramadan? Handsome and charismatic, and an Oxford professor, he was for a while, as the acceptable face of Islam, the darling of the progressive classes. Christopher Hitchens, citing Paul Berman’s “The Flight of the Intellectuals”, noted the contrast between the liberal intellectual response to Ramadan and to Ayaan Hirsi Ali:

    “Look here upon this picture, and on this …” In the left frame, a privileged young Swiss-Egyptian academic, whose father and grandfather were pillars of the Muslim Brotherhood and who has expressed strong sympathy for the jihadist preachings—and social and moral precepts—of Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, purveyor of fatwas and self-described “Mufti of martyrdom operations.” In the right frame, a young woman from Somalia who has endured genital mutilation and forced marriage, made her escape to Europe, spoken out for the rights of women, seen a colleague of hers murdered for the same advocacy, abandoned religion for the values of the European enlightenment, and now conducts her life under permanent police protection.

    Which of these two individuals garners the most respectful attention from our liberal intellectuals?…

    Which one needs police protection and which one is the darling of the PEN petitioners and the liberal academy? Which one is opposed to theocracy—the original form of totalitarianism—and which one is a stealth apologist for it? Most of all, perhaps, which one deserves the vague yet never quite neutral title of “fundamentalist”? The answers to these questions will help us to understand the impasse of cultural masochism to which we have brought ourselves.

    Now Ramadan’s been sentenced to 18 years by a Paris court for raping three women.

    Douglas Murray in the Spectator from 2017:

    For many years, the grandson of the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, Tariq Ramadan, has been one of my closest enemies. In Switzerland and France this Islamist dauphin had a slightly hard time establishing his reputation. This was not just due to his poor scholarship (the basis of which lay in a fawning book about his grandad) but also to his double-speak in public debate and (at best) borderline Islamist views. In France these views were most famously exposed in a television debate with Nicolas Sarkozy in which Ramadan infamously could not bring himself to condemn the stoning of adulterers outright, merely calling for a ‘moratorium’ on the punishment.

    In Britain, Ramadan had an easier ride – one greased for him by St Anthony’s College Oxford, various departments of government and a range of people in prominent positions who decided that Ramadan was just the sort of Muslim leader Britain needed. Needless to say, I diverged from this view and for years (most recently in Cambridge earlier this year) found myself opposing Ramadan in studios and debating forums.

    Now the news emerges from France that the Muslim Salafist turned secularist, Henda Ayari, has reported Tariq Ramadan to the French authorities. The charge against Ramadan – filed at the Rouen prosecutor’s office – accuses him of rape and sexual assault. Ramadan strongly denies the allegations and has vowed to file a counter-complaint.

    I make no judgement. The law will need to take its course. In the meantime I wonder whether or not Ramadan should be grateful that he will be judged according to the rules of French justice. If he were judged according to the Sharia then his accuser’s word would be worth half that of his own and he could get away from it scot-free even if he is guilty. On the other hand, if he is guilty then French justice could save him from being stoned to death.

    More from Paul Stott in 2024:

    For a period, especially following 7/7, Ramadan was a poster boy for those in authority in this country who sought an Islam that the West could not only do business with, but more importantly feel comfortable about. Bright-eyed, handsome and articulate, Ramadan proved to be a very successful salesman, with audiences as diverse as the Metropolitan Police through to the leftist European Social Forum. 

    Ramadan’s talk of reform, a European Islam and apparent doubt about Islamic hudood punishments (these include amputation, stoning and flogging) were music to the ears of his audience. In his memoir, the former Head of Scotland Yard’s Muslim Contact Unit, Bob Lambert, thanks Ramadan in the acknowledgments. In 2008, Ramadan addressed the ‘Countering Insurgency and Terrorism’ conference, jointly organised by the Swedish National Defence College and UK Defence Academy.…

    In 2014, Professor Ramadan sat on Baroness Warsi’s Foreign Office Advisory Group on freedom of religion or belief. Such commitments did not prevent Ramadan moving in elite circles in areas hardly known for such freedoms, most notably the Gulf. The post he formerly held at Oxford is officially known as the His Highness Sheikh Hamad Bin Khalifa Al Thani Professor in Contemporary Islamic Studies, and is made possible by a benefaction by the Qatar Foundation, running into the millions.

    Despite the seriousness of the accusations against him, Ramadan’s status ensured lofty support. In 2017, when accusations about Ramadan first emerged in France, concerns that they were motivated by his status as a ‘prominent Muslim’ ensured that the University of Oxford allowed him to continue teaching for three weeks, before granting a leave of absence. Eugene Rogan, Director of Oxford’s Middle East Centre stated: 

    ‘It’s not just about sexual violence. For some students it’s just another way for Europeans to gang up against a prominent Muslim intellectual. We must protect Muslim students who believe and trust in him, and protect that trust.’

    Here an element of snobbery also emerges; it is hard to imagine a university porter being given leave of absence, or attracting academic supporters, in such circumstances. In 2018, when Ramadan was remanded in custody in France, Muslim lobbyists MEND referred to a ‘weak accusation’ and demanded his release on health and human rights grounds. 

    By 2020, Ramadan had been released but remained indicted, prompting dozens of academics, politicians and activists to denounce the French legal system in a round-robin letter. Their number included high-profile broadcasters and the great and the good from the Islamic world.

    Will there now be apologies, and mea culpas? We probably shouldn’t be holding our breath.

  • Olympics by sex

    Though of course trans-identified women – trans men – can still compete in the women’s events. To be absolutely clear.

  • The wrong captain

    A former BBC staffer writes for SEENinJournalism about the appointment of trans-friendly Matt Brittin as the new BBC DG.

    Cards on the table: I want the BBC to survive and thrive. I worked there for decades and there are many, highly professional people still there, who do their best every day to hold the line for public service broadcasting.

    And that’s why so much rests on the appointment of the new DG. It’s also why I’m alarmed about the coronation of Matt Brittin….

    What should be stories about crime, education, medical treatment, law, and sport are still either ignored, tiptoed round or misrepresented for fear of the fury of internal and external trans activists. If you want to look for yourself, check out all the times BBC news stories refer to male people as though they were actually female. Even now, rapists, murderers, mass shooters, and deceased alleged child abusers are gifted with “she/her” pronouns because that’s what they wanted, copy is never historically changed, and that’s still in the BBC style guide. The impact of this isn’t just to insult the “lived experience” of the victims, but also to mislead the public. Which circles us back to trust.

    As more than one person has said: if you’re prepared to tell a big, obvious lie for ideological reasons, what else are you being dishonest about? Yes, the style guide – used as a shield by the Complaints Unit to defend the indefensible – has been somewhat updated, but turning this tanker round is going to take time. The right captain is vital because the wrong one could be a disaster.

    So Matt Brittin. He has he/him pronouns in his LinkedIn profile, which is not a good start. Joining in the catechism of the “be nice, not accurate” side doesn’t exactly scream Impartiality Champion. His effusive post in 2023 on “Transgender Awareness Week is another clue (not least because there’s no hint of awareness that there is any conflict of interests between this group of employees and, say, female ones).

    As I understand it, to this day the BBC lets male staff use female loos and showers if they say the magic words. Given his trans celebration, whose side do we think Mr Brittin is on? Will he ignore the Supreme Court Ruling on the 2010 Equality Act? And if he doesn’t respect female staff, why would female licence payers trust him?

  • Needing a decisive outcome

    Here:

    The past 3½ weeks of war have confirmed what we have known for nearly 50 years—Iran’s revolution is a threat to global security and economic stability. We can’t let Iran hold the U.S., the United Arab Emirates and the global economy hostage. A simple cease-fire isn’t enough. We need a conclusive outcome that addresses Iran’s full range of threats: nuclear capabilities, missiles, drones, terror proxies and blockades of international sea lanes.

    Also:

    “What Israel is doing to the IRGC—stopping a genocidal regime from acquiring nuclear weapons—is a gift to humanity.”

  • Letting down Iranians

    We’ve heard about BBC Arabic. BBC Persian, it seems, has its own problems. From the Times:

    A former head of BBC Persian has warned that the service’s reputation has been “shattered” by its coverage of the Iran war because of a failure to reflect the mood of many ordinary citizens.

    Sadeq Saba, who was head of the Farsi-language service for seven years from 2009, has claimed that BBC Persian has lost credibility with swathes of its audience who welcome the international attacks designed to help overthrow the regime.

    “When you go to anti-regime demonstrations in London, people are saying: ‘Death to Ayatollah BBC.’ A lot of people now hate BBC Persian,” Saba said. “Its reputation has been shattered.”

    They fail to register the anger of the Iranians against the regime, just as they largely ignored the slaughter of tens of thousands in January.

    We are shocked.

  • Not a woman

    The Crown Prosecution Service, no less – “Woman found guilty of murdering her ex-partner”.

    He is, of course, a man. They’re lying to us. Still.

    Update: CPS post now deleted.

  • The Palestine Cause

    Jamal says that in 1991, after Iraq invaded Kuwait, Palestinian leader Arafat said in a speech before the Arab League that “the Kuwaiti problem will be solved only after the Palestinian Cause.” Palestine was a cause, but Kuwait — invaded and burnt down by a fellow Arab country — was only a problem. In 1991, only 12 out of 22 Arab League members voted against Iraq, six Gulf countries and the six others were bought off by wealthy Gulf governments.
    This round, the line is even clearer since aggression is not by an Arab League member against another, but by a non-Arab foreign country against Arab countries, and yet, the Arab League is shameful and so are countries like Iraq, Algeria, Sudan’s Burhan government and West Libya government.
    The Gulf is hurt and will not forget how fellow Arab countries let it down, like always citing Palestine as a distraction. When the shooting stops, I expect a few Gulf countries to rush to normalization with Israel. My money is on Kuwait, perhaps Saudi Arabia too.