±«Óătv

So the Chairman of the East London Mosque admits that the mosque owns the premises from which the bookshop is run and from which hate literature was sold. I trust Mr Bari's protestations of innocence about what was being sold there will be subject to close scrutiny by Newsnight. For example I'm sure Mr Watson is even now applying due diligence and is busily investigating the scope and nature of all relationships between those who run the bookshop and those who run and worship at the mosque. Or am I being somewhat naive

Gordon Neil,

The burden of proof here is not on Mr Watson to investigate 'the scope and nature of all relationships between those who run the bookshop and those who run and worship at the mosque'. Rather, it is on Policy Exchange to explain why the relationship is so strong that they did not feel it necessary to mention in the report that the book was bought from the bookshop and not the mosque. So no, I would not say that you are being naive, but rather that you have missed the point.

Newsnight certainly seem to have done themselves proud in this case. I applaud them for showing far more rigour in their reporting of the research than the other media organisations which parroted and sensationalised the findings of this dubious report.

It is surely time to question whether this was a one-off quality control failure, or whether Policy Exchange's research is systemically biased.

are any of these books illegal? or could they be ordered through any high st /online bookshop? I know you can get maududi books and Qutb's 'Milestones' [that sets out the intellectual architecture of Al quaeda] at a big online store.

if they are not illegal then what is all the noise about. You can find books on anti abortion, anti animal rights etc that one one might also regard as 'hate' .
So should one ban all books with hate in them [and who shall decide which one to burn?] or is is it only the 'mulsim' ones?

Mistress76uk (#4). Just remember, back in September, Newsnight was doing pretty much the same as Policy Exchange over the East London Library. It was running with another neocon 'think-tank' back then.

/blogs/newsnight/2007/09/wednesday_5_september_2007.html

What one should perhaps be asking is why Newsnight has done a volte face.

Not a word from them on this to date.

Incidentally, 40/10 = 4.

Mistress76uk (#4). Just remember, back in September, Newsnight was doing pretty much the same as Policy Exchange over the East London Library. It was running with another neocon 'think-tank' back then.

/blogs/newsnight/2007/09/wednesday_5_september_2007.html

What one should perhaps be asking is why Newsnight has done a volte face.

Not a word from them on this to date, looks like 'SOCKS' all over again.

Mistress76uk (#4). Just remember, back in September, Newsnight was doing pretty much the same as Policy Exchange over the East London Library. It was running with another neocon 'think-tank' back then.

/blogs/newsnight/2007/09/wednesday_5_september_2007.html

What one should perhaps be asking is why Newsnight has done a volte face.

Not a word from them on this to date. 'Socks' all over again?

Incidentally, 40/10 = 4.

Mistress76uk (#4). Back in September, Newsnight was doing pretty much the same as Policy Exchange over an East London Library, except back then it was running with another neocon 'think-tank'. This is not the first time.

/blogs/newsnight/2007/09/wednesday_5_september_2007.html

What one should perhaps be asking is why Newsnight has done a volte face. There hasn't been as word from them on that to date. Is this 'SOCKS' all over again?

What criteria do ±«Óătv editors use to ascertain what's worth running with? Why criteria does it use to determine who it acknowledges as sources? Why does it pay so much attention to self-publishing (well resourced) 'think tanks' which seem narcissistically/psychopathically to have no reservations at all about telling the world how important their own shoddy 'research' is?

As someone who has visited the mosque, it's obvious to me the bookshop is separate. Researchers could easily have ascertained that the bookshop is independent from the mosque. The Times was right to apologise.

The Policy Exchange report gives the clear impression that the books were obtained from the mosque. I can only suggest two possible explanations for this appalling mistake: either the research was woefully inadequate; or, more worryingly, Policy Exchange deliberately sought to mislead in order to smear the mosque. I think there's probably much more to be investigated here, if not by Newsnight, then perhaps the police!

Hi,

The reason why this "story" ran everywhere, including the ±«Óătv1 6pm news, was because it fulfilled all involved's pre-conceived prejudices; in other words, their bigotry.

It is disingenuous of Newsnight to pretend, As much as I love NewsNight, that it's own group-think/production team do not, at least in part, subscribe to these prejudices by the knowledge that they had already filmed a report ready to run, but some cursory, bbc-guideline following at the very end of the process, fortunately, raised enough doubts for newsnight to pursue a proper investigation of the doubts -in other circumstances, it would simply have run the original report with all the mosques statements of denial being read-out (only in part) and be completely ignored and unbelieved.

Hunility means you look at yourself.

Yours sincerely,

Quevoni

P.s.
Does newsnight/bbc only believe information it approves of should be emenated into the ether.....???

Daniel,

I fear you are the one missing the point . Peter Barron and Richard Watson have consistently failed to address the central charge of the report - That mainstream Islamic institutions which have great influence upon Muslims in this country are associated with the dissemination of extremist literature. A charge that these institutions, in belatedly contesting some receipts, have apparently not denied. Given that we have a huge numbers of Islamic adherents involved in plots against this country and its people and that many of the British Mosques espouse a salafist doctrine that provides the ideological underpinning for extremists , the activities of these mosques should be a target of close interest from both journalists and researchers. The PE did so, I suspect, primarily because the ±«Óătv and others, with the honorable exception of Channel 4, were bottling it, That like the receipts authenticity is an issue than can never be proved one way or the other . The fearless journalists of Newsnight, who ever so minutely and critically examined the PE Receipts and demanded from PE an exceptional burden of proof, proved curiously deferential to the Mosques and unquestioningly accepted their denials. No critical analysis there then. That double standard reflects badly on the credibility of Newsnight journalism. Far from doing themselves proud, Newsnight have rather exposed their limitations and its not pretty.

Gordon (#11) "Given that we have a huge numbers of Islamic adherents involved in plots against this country and its people and that many of the British Mosques espouse a salafist doctrine that provides the ideological underpinning for extremists, the activities of these mosques should be a target of close interest from both journalists and researchers."

But isn't research supposed to find out what is the case, rather than just assume something is true and go out to furnish the evidence? or put another way, don't real researchers supposed to go out and try to falsify their assumptions? Do you think that's what Policy Exchange does?

Can I ask how you know that "we have a huge numbers of Islamic adherents involved in plots against this country" and that your other assumptions are sound?

Gordon Neil,

Your argument may be elequent but your logic is complete bonkers.

The burden of proof here lies with Policy Exchange, as they have made the accusations against the mosques.

The burden of proof, for accusation of falsifying receits, lies with The Newsnight, as they have made THIS accusation.

I believe Newsnight gave enough forensic evidence to back up their accusation.

The policy Exchange has failed to do so, and until they do, I don't think any one should take this report seriously.

The 'central charge of the report' as you have put it, is irrevelant at this stage, until the authenticity of the report is varyfied.

Ed tells Gordon to get some perspective?, I'm sorry Ed I think you will find it is you that needs to gain some perspective.

Offensive literature was found, and found in a mosque, so at least in TWENTY mosques racial hatred was being condoned, yet you Ed tell Gordon to get some perspective!!.

I have read many of your posts Ed, and you are quite clearly from planet see no evil hear no evil, never-mind Ed, I am sure that you will be singing a different tune when Labour are voted out and the Conservatives start taking action against the bigots, and I suggest that people who sell books which demean woman alongside Christians are quire learly bigots.

Truth hurts does it not Ed?.

#15 Try to take a different perspective. It's precisely this naive PC (cultural marxist) 'don't demean women' line which accounts for the critically low birth rates observed throughout Europe, and which have led to high S Asian immigration. If you want to see what 'demeaning women' comes down to, sample the proliferation of pornography on satellite TV in recent times. Try BabeStation. Then think about what the Muslim 'extremist literature' is trying to prevent. What's really extremist is the way we are behaving in the 'free-world'.

This proliferation is because females have been rendered 'free' to earn their own living and fend for themselves. But in reality, they've just been given the freedom to sell themselves. This in turn has helped drive up property prices, as well as contributing to an expanding consumer base which banks and others can then make more money out of.

This is just about making money out of more people. Give women economic freedomn/equality and you double your consumer base and create new, easy markets. The Muslims see this and oppose it, knowing that it threatens family life/birth rates.

Those who want to make money, therefore vilify Islam.

Most Westerners haven't got a clue what's been going on. They've just been swept along by the propaganda.

@15 Hi,

I find it entertaining when bigots call out others as bigots without any self-awareness or sense of irony.

Better to see peace, then fear [see yoda], some people need fear to be their centre of gravity, their motive in life.

Perspective allows context and wisdom:
What's demeaning to women, if you're such an enlightened man, then how would you know and how could you be sure of your dogma.

If 6 of the most obvious recipts were found to be false/questionable, then what is to prevent the others also to be?

However, it's the fundamental premise of the question/"investigation" that shows' certain people's prejudices":

Do people have a right, a freedom, to think, to learn, to consider?
Are these documents illegal; are you going to dictate what is "approved"; if they're not illegal, is your anti-plural power-trip so great that where the law can't be used [yet], they will be shamed and penalised to succumb to your will and beliefs -not dictatorial at all!

Happy serene Christmas,

QUEVONI

I saw this PARABLE about the Policy Exchange, and I thought I would share it with you. Now, am not saying the Policy Exchange are thieves, though that remains to be seen, but this parable is nevertheless apt as their core message seems to be 'never mind our methods, focus on our message, dimwits':

A thief is caught red-handed with stolen goods in his possession. The police explain to him that if he confesses, it will work in his favour but the thief views the police as mentally inferior and therefore susceptible to his higher skills of blusterous argumentation.

The thief assumes the confidence of an innocent person and launches an offensive dismissal of the evidence arguing with bravado: "Forget about the stolen goods you found in my possession, it's not important. The main thing is my testimony to you!" The only problem is that the police have seen it all before. It is known as "the pretentious criminal who thinks everyone other than himself is stupid and therefore gullible".

Dear Commentators,

Thanks to ALL those intelligent souls who have expanded my intelligence / wisdom, inc. the off-links.

Best wishes,

Quevoni

Dear Commentators,

Thanks to ALL those intelligent souls who have expanded my intelligence / wisdom, inc. the off-links.

Best wishes,

Quevoni

What I saw was a man getting very upset because he was being accused of lying and several men staying very cool even though they were being accused of lying.

The modern mentality is in serious trouble if we allow pre-modern communication systems to dominate.

Modernity has thrown up many challenges and with great thinkers like Matthew Collings around we can get through this period of self-doubt.

The media cannot sustain its disdainful attitude to popular culture, hence the excellent X Factor take on party politics, and popular culture is our greatest hope for survival of modern thought in an era in which the intellectual elite prostrates itself before forces of traditionalism - localism, multiculturalism, pluralism, family and health, environmentalism - yet, in its cosseted naivete, fails to recognise the power of.

I am confused. Are Newsnight saying that no Islamist extremist literature is available at any UK Mosque?

That is absurd - the public know this material is freely available at many UK Islamic outlets.

I cannot understand why Newsnight has exposed itself to ridicule like this.

British Muslims risked their lives obtaining this evidence - yet to listen to your output you would be left with the firm impression that the Policy Exchange report is a tissue of lies. That is patently not the case.

Just why the ±«Óătv is positioning itself to be "defender of the Islamic faith" is a mystery - can't you actually do some investigative journalism yourselves & find out some real truths instead of the "pro Islam at all costs" propaganda you seem to wallow in these days?

The East London Mosque is renowned for radicalism and Dr Bari, the leader of the extremist MCB organisation (the Sinn Fein of the Muslim world) is an apologist for extremist behaviour.

Alan (#26) Please tell us what specific behaviours you are tacitly referring to when you write of 'radicalism' and his being an 'apologist for extremist behaviour'.

Direct quotations or other objective evidence of his behaviour would be very helpful.

Policy Exchange is claiming that you submitted 18 of the receipts to forensic exam, is this true? See their website.

Omar (28)

We put all 18 through the ESDA test which can show if one document was resting on top of another document when it was written.

That is the only test we did on all the receipts we had. We didn't investigate the circumstances surrounding the receipts beyond the five about which we originally had suspicions (and a sixth which subsequently came to light) or contact the mosques involved.

Peter

Just thought I would add, have been going through the Wikipedia edit history for its Policy Exchange page and lo and behold, we find wholesale deletions of any criticism of work produced by Policy Exchange traced to an IP address corresponding to policyexchange.co.uk....

Luckily Wiki are on to this and an administrator is now watching the site.

It's already had to be "reverted" in 2 days for vanadlism!

Some Facts!

Tory-linked think tank Policy Exchange
• Its policy director, Dean Godson, worked for the Reagan administration in the US as special assistant to the secretary of the Navy.
• John Lehman was a signatory to the The Project for a New American Century and was special assistant to the jailed former Telegraph owner Conrad Black.
• Charles Moore, former Daily Telegraph and Spectator editor, made the case for public debate about whether the prophet Muhammad was a paedophile, is the Policy Exchange chairman.
• Charles Moore replaced Policy Exchange's co-founder, Michael Gove - author of that rallying text for British neocons Celsius 7/7 - and now David Cameron's education spokesman.

So called think tank Centre for Social Cohesion (against Muslims living in Britain)

• Douglas Murray, Director of Centre for Social Cohesion- Neo-Con (Crusader-Christian Fundamentalist).

• The Rt Rev Dr Michael Nazir-Ali, The Lord Bishop of Rochester, is on the Advisory council of the Centre for Social Cohesion.

• Lord Carey of Clifton, former Archbishop of Canterbury, is on the Advisory council of the Centre for Social Cohesion.

• You might also wish to view the video “Jihad against the West” where Melanie Philips and Douglas Murray were doing their demonic best to create social incohesion in the UK.

• Website of Centre for Social Cohesion is ripe with anti Muslim material.

• The Rt Rev Dr Michael Nazir-Ali’s latest views on Muslims reflect the views of the Centre for Social Cohesion.

I agree with Gordon that we should focus on intitutional policies rather than isolated practices

Unlike Adrienne I do not restrict 'research' nor 'science' to counting and hence certain cultural influences are clear to me by virtue of having lived here all my life and having had the good grace to study some formal theory with which to frame my observations and experiences. But tragically the influx of postmodernist theory into academia has sucked the science out of the social sciences and replaced it with a plethora or plurality (that empty grail of the postmodernists) of uncontestable perspectives hence any debate of the actual merits of or indeed preferences for particular cultural traditions is prohibited.

within the sex industry are a good many women who are organised in a trade union and are proactive in developing their careers. the concept of selling one's body is entirely ideological/cultural.

most westerners know full well what is going on but are prevented from voicing their concern due to legisaltion brought in to protect the curret european political strategy

Ed - Islam has not been hijacked, it is pursuing its normal modus operandi as evidenced by its history and evolution.

007 makes the situation clear. the crusades had resurfaced in a modern format. who is right depends on which ideology you favour. their are no answers, only beliefs.

#32 "Unlike Adrienne I do not restrict 'research' nor 'science' to counting and hence certain cultural influences are clear to me by virtue of having lived here all my life and having had the good grace to study some formal theory with which to frame my observations and experiences."

You sound proud of that. I don't know why. You don't appear to know what rearch or science amounts to.

If what one thinks and says isn't driven by representative data and replicable measurement, one risks thinking nefariously ('theoretically') driven by unrepresentative sampling, i.e prejudice (however long was has lived somewhere - 'there's no fool like an old fool'). Most people trust their own personal experience far too readily (even though it's demonstrably biased in terms of sampling and is more often wrongthan right), and yet most bitterly resent having this pointed out and don't easily learn from correction either. (See Kahneman's Nobel, or Rachlin's work, and it's not just people who are prone to this).

There's very little 'science' in 'social science' (see Meehl 1978 "Theoretical risks and tabular asterisks: Sir Karl, Sir Ronald....").

By sending half the population into higher education (more giles than boys note) we have had to dumb down higher education. Now people call looking something up in a newspaper 'research'!

Learn to take criticism.

And I'll learn to better proofread :-)

The reason you don't know why i sound proud of qualitative research is because you don't understand or agree with it - an ideological standpoint. i personally believe that we would have a more effective social research heritage if qualitative research were on a par with quantitative and ditto women academics on a par with males. granted the wearing of head scarves would reduce much of the flagrant sexual harrassment of female researchers in universities but for ideological reasons i believe we have to promote equality for both qualitative research and women with hair in science.

#35 The problem with qualitative 'research' is essentially technical. Most of what's written in the social 'sciences' means all things to all people, in that it depends on meaning, argument and rhetoric rater than measurement, i.e. it depends on verbal aesthetics and fashion rather than anything tangible and replicable. The social sciences and humanities are disproportionately chosen by 'females' at university (and beyond). They also tend to dramatically avoid the quantitative sciences. Given the dominance of education by females over the past few decades, the cost for 'pursuit of truth' has been high. We could argue about that, but I think you'll find it's a fact.

wappaho (#35) Please note: People who have something to teach you will not agree with you.

That's WHY they have something to teach you. Those who don't understand that, or who resent it, are uneducable.

Adrienne,

at present the social sciences are based on rhetoric it is true - it is the legacy of postmodernism, as you say, everything becomes merely a perspective with no concrete reality -

ironically this is the same political philosophy that allowed the wearing of headscarves on the basis that all cultures are merely perspectives and that no single culture is 'real' in the sense of 'ahead in evolutionary terms'.

in addition, the power structure of the public sector is such that science is policy based rather than vice versa, putting yet more pressure on for gloss and spin on top of rhetoric.

however, there are some signs that the postmodernist paradigm is lifting. some day soon someone is going to do for society what darwin did for biology and we will get social science back to notions of evolution.

where i disagree with your posts is that you seem to have all the science and stats at hand but you extrapolate linearly and evolution is not linear even though it is forward moving.

problems in the present do not necessarily imply a need to revert to past more primitive states but to continue to find ways to advance

fiona mckeown is an example of what can be achieved. she is a single mother with many children and few moneys and yet she has taken on a state that we know to be corrupt and mysogynistic and has won.

your extrapolations would never have arrived at that possibility - unless you were extrapolating from celtic culture.

education has not been 'dominated' by women, it has been avoided by men