15 August 2011

A new report by One Law for All explores how the far-Right has attempted to hijack opposition to Islamism for its own ends. It focuses on the British National Party, the English Defence League and Stop Islamisation of Europe/America, and exposes how their activities, associations, opinions and intentions reveal a racist and inhuman worldview, which must be resisted and criticised with as much vigilance as Islamism itself. See report here.

Enemies Not Allies features:

– Evidence of the BNP’s relationship with neo-Nazi and ‘white’ supremacist groups and individuals, including Blood & Honour, Combat 18 and former Klansman David Duke.

– Proof that the BNP’s leadership believe Islamism is ‘the threat that can bring [them] to power’, and examples of how they have tried to use it for political gain.

– Evidence of how senior BNP members have praised the National Front, applauded acts of violence and expressed ‘nostalgia’ for ‘Germany in the 1930s’, while its election candidates have made racist comments and fought with Asian youths.

– Interviews with former members of the English Defence League who left due its bigotry and racism towards Muslims, which they believe is endemic and ‘increasing’.

– Evidence of EDL spokespeople, including leader Tommy Robinson and Guramit Singh, making racist and bigoted comments, as well as justifying or endorsing violence.

– A history of the umbrella group Stop the Islamisation of Europe and evidence of its racism and bigotry, as well as its collaboration with European neo-Nazis.

– Evidence of Stop Islamisation of Europe/America’s racist and alarmist literature and its promulgation of conspiracy theories.

– Documentation of Stop the Islamisation of Europe’s defence of and support for Serbian fascists and war criminals, including Stop Islamisation of America’s explicit denial of the 1995 Srebrenica genocide.

The recent massacre in Norway carried out by Anders Behring Breivik, (who praised the groups discussed in this report), has placed a spotlight on the new ‘Islamisation’ and ‘Crusader’ strain within far-Right politics, and the groups and individuals who promote its conspiratorial worldview. One Law for All’s new report by Adam Barnett and Maryam Namazie provides crucial evidence for the struggles ahead, and argues for greater care in distinguishing between allies and enemies.


1. The report can be downloaded free of charge or a paperback copy purchased from One Law for All for £8.50. To purchase the book or donate to the work of One Law for All, please either send a cheque to our address below or pay via Paypal by visiting: Donate Page.

2. The One Law for All Campaign was launched on 10 December 2008, International Human Rights Day, to call on the UK Government to recognise that Sharia and religious courts are arbitrary and discriminatory against women and children in particular and that citizenship and human rights are non-negotiable.

3. For further information contact:
Maryam Namazie
Anne Marie Waters
One Law for All
BM Box 2387
London WC1N 3XX, UK
Tel: +44 (0) 7719166731


  1. Mrs Namazie you denounce the far right while you yourself are on the far left. A little like the pot calling the kettle black. LOL. While I laud your denunciation of islam,your acceptance of communism is just as prejudicial to individual and human rights. The history of communism while short is no better then the history of islam. Being a communist certainly weakens your credibility in the eyes of the many supporters of a free and secular society.

  2. I'm really surprised that Maryam, who has done so much good, suddenly switches into a scare about this mythological 'Far Right' (whatever that means) movement in Europe.

    For a myth it is. I wrote about it some years ago, and really the European "Right wing" parties are much too different to be lumped into one, big scary group.

    If anything, one should be worried about leftwing extremists, who at least in Denmark are doing much more intimidation and violence than the silly National Socialists, not to mention actual right wing (= small state) movements and parties.

    1. How can it be mythological when they don’t even try or want to hide? .Ah, and “Left-wing-extremists” .. I havn’t seen any examples of it for ages..

  3. (Part two) Even when one looks solely at the basic sources – the Qur'an and Hadith – it is clear that what Muhammad himself did and said varied at different points of his lifetime and according to the circumstances and each group is selective in how they interpret them. Nor is Abrogation – that you love to bring as evidence of the harsh verses superseding the peaceful one – as simple and straightforward as you make it out to be.

    Anyone with the slightest knowledge of abrogation will know it creates more anomalies than it solves, and today huge numbers of Muslims reject the idea completely – as I did when I was a Muslim.

    Regardless of how you or I wish to define Islam – it is not up to us but those who call themselves Muslims. I would no more impose my view that Christianity clearly considers homosexuality a sin, on a Christian who does not regard it as a sin – than I would impose my view that the Qur'an clearly allows a man to hit his wife on a Muslim who interprets; "Hit" as; "Leave her alone" – regardless of how absurd I may think those views to be.

    We stand against Political Islam and the Islamists who hold harsh and violent views and who have a political agenda to impose Islam and Islamic Laws on others.

    I agree that until the Islamists are defeated, it is extremely difficult for ordinary Muslims to live their lives according to their own 'personal Islam', and this is one reason we fight this battle, for all humanity – including Muslims themselves – who are the greatest victims of the Islamists.

    I find it perverse that people like you want to convince everyone – including Muslims – that moderate forms of Islam are wrong and that the true version is the terrorists' version and that Muslims that appear moderate are just practising "Taqiyyah".

    Of course I realise it is because you need to justify your agenda towards Muslims in general. To convince the public that ordinary Muslims are in league with the terrorists, they cannot be trusted and harsh and restrictive measures must be imposed on them all.

    Even though you say you are against violence against Muslims it is clear from the sorts of people you attract and quote you, that your words have given great encouragement to those who do want to justify violence and aggression against ordinary Muslims.

    You need to look closely at yourself and the the consequences of some of the things you say and the sorts of people supporting you – if you truly care about humanity.

  4. This is my reply to Robert Spencer, who attacked Maryam on jihadwatch.


    My name is Hassan and I am an Ex-Muslim and an Executive member of the Council of Ex-Muslims. I congratulate Maryam for making a clear distinction between our stand against the Islamists on the one hand and your position and that of Pam Geller and groups like SIOE/A on the other.

    I find it amusing how you throw "Anti-Semite" at her much like some Muslims throw "Islamophobe" at anyone who dares criticise Islam, simply because she criticised Israel's tactics during the invasion of Gaza. It seems you have the attitude of anyone criticising Israel's political and military policies is an anti-semite. Just as some Muslims have the attitude that anyone criticising Islam hates Muslims.

    But worse than this your saying that moderates have "no truck" with extremists. I was Muslim most of my life, (I am 52) and my family and friends are Muslim and to imply that I never had – nor Muslims in general have – any problem with people who massacre innocent civilians or behead innocent people is deeply offensive to me. Do you also think the Synagogues and Jews Baruch Goldstein prayed with had "No truck" with him massacring 29 worshippers at a Mosque in Hebron? I suspect not. I guess guilt by association only applies to Muslims – right?

    Unlike you, Maryam and CEMB don't lump all Muslims (or any religious believers) in one boat, nor do we see Islam as a single homogenous entity. We were Muslims and we know about Islam and Muslims very well and have a much better understanding of the issues we face than you. Although we don't believe in Islam, we have no problem with Muslims who wish to follow their own interpretations of Islam so long as they are peaceful and do not try to impose their beliefs on others. Just as we have no problem with those of other faiths who follow it peacefully.

    We are only against the Islamists and harsh, literalist and violent interpretations of Islam and those who seek to impose it on others.

    Contrary to what you may think there is no such thing as "True Islam". There are many different traditions and interpretations and many personal versions of Islam that differ from Muslim to Muslim.

    Of course every Muslim will tell you there is a "True Islam" and it just so happens to be the version they follow. But it is obvious they would say that since they are compelled to preserve the integrity of a religion they believe is revealed by God. But those of us who do not believe that Islam was the carefully planned work of an Omniscient and Omnipotent Creator, but the rather less carefully planned work of the human mind, are under no obligation to defend it's integrity and consistency against all reason, when it is obvious that Muslims have very differing interpretations.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.