For the Palestinians, not political Islam.
About three hundred people marched through central London on Sunday 7 October as part of the “Al Quds Day” march organised by the Islamic Human Rights Commission.
In fact, the IHRC has nothing to do with human rights and everything to do with rabidly right-wing political Islam. As the Awaaz/South Asia Watch group, which campaigns against all varieties of religious fundamentalist politics originating in South Asia, puts it, the IHRC is one of a number of UK Islamist organisations which “adhere to the ideology of the ‘absolute rulership of the clerics’ and ‘Islamic government’ advocated by Khomeini and developed by other representatives of political Shi’ism.”
Similarly, Al Quds Day has very little to do with “solidarity with the Palestinians”, as its organisers claim, and a great deal to do with support for Hamas, Hezbollah and the Iranian state. It was invented by Ayatollah Khomeini as a way of mobilising the people of Iran in an orgy of rabid chauvinism against Israel (al Quds is the Arabic, and by extension the Farsi, for Jerusalem) and, of course, support for their “own” government.
The 7 October demonstration in London was openly and proudly in support of the Iranian regime and its clients. Disgraceful, then, that it received official support from Respect, with George Galloway speaking at the closing rally. (Though, interestingly, there very few if any SWPers there: is asking your members to participate in that would be an embarrassment too far?)
Workers’ Liberty members took part in a small counter-demonstration which was initiated by David T from the website Harry’s Place, but also included contingents from Outrage!, the Worker-Communist Party of Iran and Class War. (Unfortunately, it also included two Iranian nationalists waving the shah-era flag.) As the Al Quds demo went past, the counter-demo chanted: “Support the Iranian people’s fight / for workers’, students’, women’s rights”; and “We support the Palestinians / not Ahmedinejad’s opinions”.
In addition to participating in the counter-demo, some of us joined Peter Tatchell on the main demo, to try to intervene and talk to people. As you can imagine, we didn’t get a very positive response: we were accused of being “Zionist agents”, “spawn of Satan” (yes!) and so on. One female comrade had a group of women spit at her, demanding to know what she knew about women’s rights in Iran. Moreover, a crowd of young men started shouting “Paedophile” and “Child-killer” as soon as they recognised Tatchell.
However, a small group of hijab-wearing women did approach him and say they were glad that we were there: hope for the future, I suppose...
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer-friendly version
Standing for Israel
You don't support the Palestinians by standing shoulder to shoulder with zionists waving Israeli flags! And then making an alliance with Harry's Place who were calling for Israel to totally destroy Lebanon last summer.. utterly shameful!
A couple of links I found on indymedia:
http://www.inminds.co.uk/qudsday2007.php
http://www.inminds.co.uk/article.php?id=10214
(this last link is particularly damming of AWL)
"Innovative Minds" website
The website you quote is full of chauvinist crap, but the the article you cite as "damning" of the AWL is particularly ridiculous:
"These two from Workers Liberty thought they would liberate "oppressed Muslim women" by handing them condescending leaflets telling them that their Al Quds demonstration is "not about support for Palestinian rights" but is about "demonising" Jewish people! We would say to the couple - Instead of acting in such a colonial "we know whats best for you" manner why didn't you engage one of our sisters in a conversation. They can think for themselves and are very articulate at expressing themselves. Instead of telling her what her demonstration is about why not ask her?"
We really did go out of our way engage people in conversation (the point of coming to the demo), and some of the women on the demo came up to Tatchell at the end and thanked us for coming and saying what we did. But we have no qualms about what we think of the demo, its aims, and what was said over the tannoy - "Peter Tatchell paedophile, Peter Tatchell child killer".
I don't see how it was "colonial" of us to hand out leaflets which explained our politics? It's not that "we know what's best for them", it's that we think our politics are right and we're prepared to argue with people about them! Surely the position of the SWP etc. - you should never voice your disagreements with the politics of anyone who happens to be from a different religious/"racial" group - is simply patronising.
The police kept us apart from Al-Quds protestors, several of whom were screaming abuse and spitting at us, but we nevertheless spoke to a few people, even Hezbollah t-shirt wearers.
As for the Harry's Place thing - we had different leaflets and propaganda from them, and we didn't bring along any Israeli flags. I think that they were absolutely wrong to do so, since it's wrong to pose the issue in terms of Palestine vs. Israel - the problem with the demo was that, far from being pro-Palestinian, it was a rally for Hezbollah and the Iranian government.
That said, I hardly see how a website full of pictures of Hezbollah flags can refer to people holding Israeli ones as "fascists". Hezbollah are vile homophobic, anti-semitic, anti-women's rights and anti-working class clerical fascists, and admitting that has absolutely nothing to do with qualifying our support for Palestinian self-determination.
Workers Liberty got it wrong
I'm sure the the muslim "women on the demo came up to Tatchell at the end and thanked" him for calling them terrorists and for attacking Hamas, the elected government of Palestine! Next you'll tell us they thanked AWL for attacking their head scarves as "symbols of oppression".
You say: "I don't see how it was "colonial" of us to hand out leaflets which explained our politics" - Thats not what you were doing - you were explaining to them what THEIR politics was - telling them that they are not marching for Palestine, telling them that they are marching to demonise jewish people, etc. is pretty condescending and in this context I have to agree with them "colonial". Also, judging by the photos of all the jews supporting the quds demo the latter charge of the demo "demonising jewish people" is ridiculous - one of their key speakers was a rabbi for goodness sake!
I think the problem was that AWL was conned by iranian dissident groups, who have their own agenda (I notice shah royalist flags in the photos), in to believing the demo was something it wasn't and then it found itself on the wrong side with printed leaflets accusing rabbis of being anti-semetic and placards accusing a pro-Palestine demo of being "a rally for the Iranian government". Going by the speeches on their web page, I notice that not one speaker at the demo even mentioned Iran! (apart from Galloway who said it was a bad idea to bomb Iran).
On the separate issue of Hezbollah, I think most will agree that it is a legitimate national resistance movement and your accusations against it are baseless. For starters, on Hezbollah's alleged anti-semitism - please read:
http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2007/02/06/is-nasrallah-an-anti-semite/
Some replies
> I'm sure the the muslim "women on the demo came up to Tatchell at the end and thanked" him for calling them terrorists and for attacking Hamas, the elected government of Palestine!
We're not claiming that those women agreed with us on every, or even most, points; or that the fact they approached Tatchell is decisive for our argument. But are you claiming that this incident is invented?
> Next you'll tell us they thanked AWL for attacking their head scarves as "symbols of oppression".
Erm, no. On a demo where people shouted solidarity with Hezbollah and accused Peter Tatchell of being a paedophile and child-killer (no answer on that, I notice - perhaps you claim that this was invented too?), we didn't think women wearing the veil was the most important issue - particularly in the case of women who came to speak sympathetically to us. But it's bizarre that, as someone who presumably thinks of themselves as a Marxist, you can deny that the veil is oppressive.
> You say: "I don't see how it was "colonial" of us to hand out leaflets which explained our politics" - Thats not what you were doing - you were explaining to them what THEIR politics was
Ah, so socialists aren't allowed to critique other people's politics and expose what we regard as false self-presentation? If the BNP held a demo "against cuts in local services", we would have to accept their version of it? It would be illegitimate to say to white working-class people attracted to it that it wasn't really a march about services, but about attacking black people and migrants? But, of course, you patronisingly apply different standards to brown people, whose reactionary ideas are beyond criticism.
> Also, judging by the photos of all the jews supporting the quds demo the latter charge of the demo "demonising jewish people" is ridiculous - one of their key speakers was a rabbi for goodness sake!
"All the Jews" - about a dozen Neturei Karta people! Jewish Taliban, viciously bigoted Jewish chauvinists who reject Israel's right to self-determination because its impious, contradicts God's plan for the future of the world etc. These fundamentalists are always wheeled out as decorations for Islamist demonstrations, and cited as evidence that no anti-semitism is involved. An odd argument from those on the left who insist that Zionism and anti-semitism are twins - but are then willing to get into bed with these people!
> I think the problem was that AWL was conned by iranian dissident groups, who have their own agenda (I notice shah royalist flags in the photos)
Who do you think conned us exactly? There was one royalist flag on the demo; probably we should have insisted it be taken down, but the overwhelming bulk of it was made up of leftists: AWL, Class War, Worker-communist Party of Iran, various independents. We distributed a leaflet hailing the Iranian revolution of 1979 and distinguishing between it and the theocratic counter-revolution led by the Islamists: hardly a monarchist line is it? We sold copies of the supplement we produced a year or so ago celebrating the Iranian revolution.
> in to believing the demo was something it wasn't and then it found itself on the wrong side with printed leaflets accusing rabbis of being anti-semetic
Vicious fundamentalist rabbis of lining up with anti-semites? Yes. In the same way that, to Malcolm X's horror, the Nation of Islam allied with American Nazis? Does that mean that those Nazis weren't racist?
> and placards accusing a pro-Palestine demo of being "a rally for the Iranian government".
Al Quds day was launched by the Iranian government!!! Do you deny this?
Will have to read the stuff on Hezbollah and anti-semitism another time.
Reply
> it's bizarre that, as someone who presumably thinks of themselves as a Marxist, you can deny that the veil is oppressive
A woman choosing to wear a veil is no more oppressed than a woman choosing to wear a sari, a skirt, or any other article of clothing. Yes the veil differentiates her from most other women and identified her as a minority - a muslim/asian/arab - its her choice. And in light of this, to pick on the veil strikes of xenophobia.
> If the BNP held a demo "against cuts in local services", we would have to accept their version of it? It would be illegitimate to say to white working-class people attracted to it that it wasn't really a march about services, but about attacking black people and migrants?
Perhaps we should hold the mirror to ourselves - the AWL were part of a demo by zionists waving israeli flags shouting "terrorist" at arabs and asians in the streets of london - was that really about some girl being executed in Iran or was that about "attacking black people and migrants"?
> Jewish Taliban, viciously bigoted Jewish chauvinists who reject Israel's right to self-determination
That says it all - if a jew rejects the zionist state they are branded vicious bigots and are the "jewish taliban"! Perhaps I was wrong and the AWL really do belong under those israeli flags with the fascists.
> Vicious fundamentalist rabbis of lining up with anti-semites..
Full coverage of the demo - photos, audio, video is on their site - I've gone through all of it so i want to know what exactly is anti-semitic about it? Throwing loose accusation of anti-semitism at opponents of israel is not helpful to jewish people and may actually harm them.
> A woman choosing to wear a
> A woman choosing to wear a veil is no more oppressed than a woman choosing to wear a sari, a skirt, or any other article of clothing. Yes the veil differentiates her from most other women and identified her as a minority - a muslim/asian/arab - its her choice. And in light of this, to pick on the veil strikes of xenophobia.
I don't "pick on" the veil; I defend people's right to wear it without harrassment; I (and the AWL) opposed the French government's ban on young women wearing it to school. But it isn't just the same as people wearing eg a short skirt. My sister, for instance, sometimes wears short skirts; if you said "Alison, as an experiment, how about not wearing the skirt but wearing some trousers?", she could do it. Similarly, she sometimes wears a headscarf - a headscarf, as a fashion item, not a veil. She can happily take it off wherever she wants.
The vast majority of women who wear the veil, in contrast, feel they CAN'T take it off. They feel that if they do (unless it's only in front of their husband, father etc) they will behaving shamefully.
The veil is part of imposing this sense of shame, of controlling women's sexuality and curbing their freedom.
> Perhaps we should hold the mirror to ourselves - the AWL were part of a demo by zionists waving israeli flags shouting "terrorist" at arabs and asians in the streets of london
A demo made up mostly of leftists at which one person - was it even one person? I can't remember, but I'll take your word for it - had an Israeli flag. At which some Iranians, most of them misguided communists (WCPI), shouted "terrorist", at which point they were roundly denounced by others including members of the AWL for exactly the reasons you indicate. And part of the reason we went on the main demo as well, regardless of the reactionary politics behind it, is to make clear our solidarity with Asians and Arabs in Britain against racist oppression.
> was that really about some girl being executed in Iran or was that about "attacking black people and migrants"?
See above. A very large minority of the counter-demo were Iranian. A large number of its participants have been active campaigners for migrants' rights etc etc. It wasn't a question of "black people and migrants" - in fact you are the first person to suggest that. We have been called Islamophobic, but no one else has suggested we are anti-migrant.
> That says it all - if a jew rejects the zionist state they are branded vicious bigots and are the "jewish taliban"!
Erm, no, it says that the far right religious group we are referring to are reactionaries. I realise there are some Jewish socialists who also reject Israel's right to exist. While they are very marginal and, more importantly, I don't agree with them, I don't categorise in the same way as obscurantist religious bigots. The fact that you do is astonishing...
> Full coverage of the demo - photos, audio, video is on their site - I've gone through all of it so i want to know what exactly is anti-semitic about it?
What's anti-semitic about it is the fact that it's part of a movement launched by the government of Iran in order to boost chauvinism against Israelis (a government which also denies the Holocaust etc etc).
I notice you haven't replied on the accusations thrown at Peter Tatchell - eg paedophile, child-killer?
PS One more point: what
PS One more point: what people say about their politics is clearly important. I don't deny that. So, contrast:
AWL: makes 100% loud and clear that we oppose bigotry against Muslims, oppose anti-migrant attacks, oppose Israel's occupation of the Palestinians, are for the Palestinians. (Hence the chant used by everyone on the counter-demo, which I noticed you haven't mentioned: "We support the Palestinians, not Ahmedinejad's opinions...)
Al Quds: any statements of opposition to anti-semitism? Any statements critical of the Iranian government?
If there are, I'd be interested to see them...
reply
> I don't "pick on" the veil; I defend people's right to wear it without harrassment
Do you deny that the AWL are on record as describing the wearing of headscarf by muslim women (and only by muslim women) as oppression, as expressing the inferiority of women, and even an expression of the ownership of women by men? Such a position seems even more extreme than that of the french racists.
> My sister, for instance, sometimes wears short skirts; if you said "Alison, as an experiment, how about not wearing the skirt but wearing some trousers?", she could do it. Similarly, she sometimes wears a headscarf - a headscarf, as a fashion item, not a veil. She can happily take it off wherever she wants. The vast majority of women who wear the veil, in contrast, feel they CAN'T take it off. They feel that if they do (unless it's only in front of their husband, father etc) they will behaving shamefully. The veil is part of imposing this sense of shame, of controlling women's sexuality and curbing their freedom.
If you follow this reasoning then you must surely oppose all clothing and see it as "curbing freedom"? If you asked your sister to walk down the street top-less then no doubt she would feel she CAN'T do it as she will feel shameful doing it. The point is that everyone draws their own line in the sand as to what is acceptable for them. Their decision is influenced by the society and culture they come from. Your sister might decide she doesn't want to show her chest - a muslim woman might decide she doesn't want to show her hair. Who are you to condemn the muslim girl as "oppressed" for her choice whilst lauding your sister as "free" for her choice? To impose our culture of someone else is imperialism.
> A demo made up mostly of leftists at which one person - was it even one person? I can't remember, but I'll take your word for it - had an Israeli flag.
The photos show only two types of flags were displayed in the counter-demo - the israeli flags (photos show several) and iranian shah royalist flags. I'm sure the arabs, asians, jews and iranians in the demo got the message loud and clear!
> At which some Iranians, most of them misguided communists (WCPI), shouted "terrorist"..
The WCPI are a real problem - they have a history of jumping in to bed with anyone who opposes muslims (including the BNP!)- this then rubs off on anyone seen with them.
> And part of the reason we went on the main demo as well, regardless of the reactionary politics behind it, is to make clear our solidarity with Asians and Arabs in Britain against racist oppression.
Now thats funny.. you went to the main demo not to taunt and disrupt it but to show your solidarity with their asians and arabs.. I suppose thats why the police threw you out.. and judging by the photos I see you also brought the israeli flags to the main demo for added support and solidarity..
> It wasn't a question of "black people and migrants" - in fact you are the first person to suggest that. We have been called Islamophobic, but no one else has suggested we are anti-migrant.
I was merely quoting your words to show the mirror analogy - not calling you anti-migrant.
> I realise there are some Jewish socialists who also reject Israel's right to exist. While they are very marginal and, more importantly, I don't agree with them, I don't categorise in the same way as obscurantist religious bigots. The fact that you do is astonishing...
Thats bizarre - you oppose the anti-zionist religious jews and call them bigots because their case AGAINST israel is a religious one. Yet the only case FOR Israel is also a religious one - that god gave it to them - other than that its purely a colonialist project like any other in history.
> What's anti-semitic about it is the fact that it's part of a movement launched by the..
Ah ha, so you couldn't find anything anti-semitic about this march so are now drudging up the zionist/neo-con lie on Iran knowing full well it is not applicable to this demo.
> AWL: makes 100% loud and clear that we oppose bigotry against Muslims, oppose anti-migrant attacks, oppose Israel's occupation of the Palestinians, are for the Palestinians.
Firstly AWL is itself bigoted towards muslims - clearly seen from your own double standards regarding the head scarf, secondly AWL is against Palestinians because is clearly opposes a boycott of israel which grassroots Palestinians under occupation have called for - and it opposes demos in support of Palestine - quds day. I wonder if its a coincidence that the most common slogan on the quds demo placards that you opposed was "boycott israel"..
> Al Quds: any statements of opposition to anti-semitism? Any statements critical of the Iranian government?
According to their page on the demo - and they back it up with actual sound recordings - the official chants of the demo included "Judaism is okay, Zionism no way! Judaism is here to stay, Zionism no way!" - shows that they support jews and judaism but oppose zionists and zionism - clearly a statement of opposition to anti-semitism. As i mentioned previously none of the speakers even mentioned iran as the demo was about palestine! To call it an iranian demo is ridiculous - lets be fair, the quds rally had 6 speakers - yes 3 were from muslim groups, but 2 were from Respect and 1 was from a jewish group. I am sure if the jewish speaker wished to speak about anti-semitism he could have done so, but as the demo was about palestine he chose to speak about palestine.
> the chant used by everyone on the counter-demo, which I noticed you haven't mentioned: "We support the Palestinians, not Ahmedinejad's opinions...
The chant which people on the counter demo have mentioned in their blogs (apart from "terrorist") is "No to Hamas, No to Hezbolla, No to the Islamic Republic" - this is also shown on the quds website with an audio sample as evidence. Clearly "We support the palestinians" chant is at odds with the chant "no to hamas" - the palestinian peoples democratically elected government.