Mehdi Hasan
Alerted by Martin to the kerfuffle at HP over Mehdi Hasan, the new senior politics editor at the New Statesman (not to be confused with the other, truly great, Mehdi Hassan). Just had a brief scroll through the young fellow's ouevre.
Item: Here Hasan argues that going on Press TV is a good thing, because it can "help foster much-needed dialogue and debate between the west and the Middle East". He argues this by (rightly) pointing out the hypocrisy of the likes of Rod Liddle and Dominic Lawson attacking “Iran’s British stooges”, but fails to address the substantive point that propping up a totalitarian regime's propoganda machine can never be right.
Item: Here he claims that the Quilliam Foundation think that using the term "the Muslim world" is "a phrase conceived exclusively by radical Islamists for nefarious propaganda purposes", when in fact they say nothing of the kind, but sensibly call for a stop to constructing an imaginary homogenous Muslim "community", not least because that kind of homogenising view plays into an anti-Muslim racist "clash of civilizations" worldview.
Item: Here he says that Obama's Cairo speech won't stop "the Muslim world" from hating America, only stopping its support of Israel and, er, of Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Pakistan and the Gulf states, will they stop. In this article, he quotes as an authority one Michael Scheuer, Ron Paul's foreign policy adviser, who recently called for Osama bin Laden to nuke America ("The only chance we have as a country right now"). Here, Scheuer is returning a favour; Bin Laden once said ""If you want to understand what's going on and if you would like to get to know some of the reasons for your losing the war against us, then read the book of Michael Scheuer in this regard." Scheuer is also, unsurprisingly, part of the Walt and Mearsheimer "Israel Lobby" conspiracy theory fantast world:
Item: Here Hasan argues that going on Press TV is a good thing, because it can "help foster much-needed dialogue and debate between the west and the Middle East". He argues this by (rightly) pointing out the hypocrisy of the likes of Rod Liddle and Dominic Lawson attacking “Iran’s British stooges”, but fails to address the substantive point that propping up a totalitarian regime's propoganda machine can never be right.
Item: Here he claims that the Quilliam Foundation think that using the term "the Muslim world" is "a phrase conceived exclusively by radical Islamists for nefarious propaganda purposes", when in fact they say nothing of the kind, but sensibly call for a stop to constructing an imaginary homogenous Muslim "community", not least because that kind of homogenising view plays into an anti-Muslim racist "clash of civilizations" worldview.
Item: Here he says that Obama's Cairo speech won't stop "the Muslim world" from hating America, only stopping its support of Israel and, er, of Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Pakistan and the Gulf states, will they stop. In this article, he quotes as an authority one Michael Scheuer, Ron Paul's foreign policy adviser, who recently called for Osama bin Laden to nuke America ("The only chance we have as a country right now"). Here, Scheuer is returning a favour; Bin Laden once said ""If you want to understand what's going on and if you would like to get to know some of the reasons for your losing the war against us, then read the book of Michael Scheuer in this regard." Scheuer is also, unsurprisingly, part of the Walt and Mearsheimer "Israel Lobby" conspiracy theory fantast world:
GARY ROSEN:If you could just elaborate a little bit on the clandestine ways in which Israel and presumably Jews have managed to so control debate over this fundamental foreign policy question.
SCHEUER: Well, the clandestine aspect is that, clearly, the ability to influence the Congress—that’s a clandestine activity, a covert activity. You know to some extent, the idea that the Holocaust Museum here in our country is another great ability to somehow make people feel guilty about being the people who did the most to try to end the Holocaust. I find—I just find the whole debate in the United States unbearably restricted with the inability to factually discuss what goes on between our two countries.[source]
Comments
Because he's voiced an opinion about the lack of coverage of white terrorists, he's suddenly classified as extreme?? Are you really that threatened?
Dear oh dear.
Byrne and Hasan commissioned the interesting "It shouldn't happen to a Muslim" (Peter Oborne for Despatches) earlier that year.
Hasan is only 30...
For more see Dorothy Byrne is a sucker « Engage; Mehdi Hasan: The big transfer of the season in TV news - Media, News - The Independent
NS: "James Macintyre is political correspondent for the New Statesman. Before that he was a reporter at the Independent [that's when he wrote Hasan's profile] after moving across to print journalism from television, where he was producer of LWT's Dimbleby programme [where Hasan also worked before he joined C4] and BBC1's Question Time." Wonder what schools they went to?
Secondly, in his Press TV article, where exactly does he state that he is "supporting the theocratic regime in Iran as it brutally suppresses its citizens?" As far as I can tell, he is merely voicing an opinion on using Press TV to ones advantage to communicate. Iran hasn't suddenly become brutal and suppressive over it's citizens and yet the journalists mentioned in the article only now decided to have a problem with Press TV - why not before?
As for the Quilliam foundation, I rather not take advice about the "muslim world" from an ex-Islamist and again it's an opinion designed for debate.
How all of the above makes him extreme, I am still struggling to understand!
PS You also note Bob, that he commissioned the Dispatches on Islamaphobia - any thoughts on the scene where Obourne shows a series of headlines and replaces Muslim with Black, Gay, Jew and the appalled reactions from the punters in the shopping mall? They didn't seem so appalled when the headline read Muslim... - no Islamaphobia there then?
2. He doesn’t state that he is "supporting the theocratic regime in Iran as it brutally suppresses its citizens"; he simply is: by giving Ahmedinejad a platform on Channel 4 (probably) and by legitimising Press TV.
3. I would rather take advice about the Muslim world from an ex-Islamist than from an Islamist or from an Islamist fellow traveller. Some of the most dedicated anti-fascists I’ve met were youthful members of the NF who saw the error of their ways.
4. I didn’t use the word extreme myself – I am quite an extremist on many issues – so won’t reply to that point. What all of the above does add up to, however, is someone quite unsavoury, and it is a shame that the New Statesman have been taken by him.
5. I don’t quite get your point on Dispatches. I thought the documentary was interesting (as I said above). I think that anti-Muslim racism is a serious political problem today, and that it needs combating. However, this man is not doing that good cause a favour.