Monday, October 03, 2005

Even when you’re right, you’re wrong

The producers of Panorama have been ‘listed’ on the Islamophobia-watch website run by Mr Bob Pitt and Mr Eddie Truman. The pair of them delight in listing anyone who says anything critical about Islam – whether they are Muslim, ex-Muslim, a women’s or gay rights activist, a secularists, a political dissidents from the Middle East, an exile from the Islamic Republic of Iran, or a refugees from the GIA – you name it: say anything vaguely critical of Islamic fundamentalist or political Islamism, and according to Pitt and Truman you’re an “Islamophobe”.

So this was no surprise. What they didn’t respond to however was the Panorama team’s perfectly reasonable reply to the objections cited by the Muslim Council of Britain to the programme ‘A Question of Leadership’ – which I covered after it aired in August.

Not satisfied, the good ol’ Pitt standby of “smear by association” kicked in. According to Bob, the Panorama team must be wrong because, (gasp) a journalist writing for the Telegraph agreed with them. Of course, Pitt-logic dictates that if a centre-right newspaper comes to the same conclusion as you do, then you must be a neo-Nazi sleeper agent.

Of course, the MCB have a fresh set of grievances against Panorama. I suspect these won’t get any further since the first batch was rubbish, so why would the backup plan be any better?

Of course, this isn’t the first time I’ve pointed out the absurdities of Islamophobia-watch (and I’m sure it won’t be the last).

There is no point in defending yourself or providing evidence. It will all be ignored, Panorama. For Islamophobia-watch, even when you’re right, you’re wrong.

UPDATE: Hahahahaha! Now this article has been ‘listed’ on Islamophobia-watch. Notice how once again Pitt tries to smear by association: Panorama’s John Ware must be wrong and must be an Islamophobe because some guy called Anthony Browne supports him, and of course because I also thought Panorama’s response was reasonable… so I must be an Islamophobe for thinking it was reasonable and then they must also be Islamophobic because only an Islamophobe would support them, and oh gawd why bother…

For a reasonable discussion about Islamophobia (not Pitt’s fantasy version where ideas are defended instead of people) see this article by Paul Anderson and this one by Phil Edwards.


Post a Comment

<< Home