It does look as though Kilroy-Silk felt he had to exercise his inner swine dog (as the Germans say) by stereotyping more or less all Arabs as virtually subhuman. Perhaps he’s been tuning in to ‘Little Green Footballs’ too often. And he certainly knows how to play to the Sunday Express gallery. His denigration of an entire race is simply over the top. If he had made the same comments about Islamists he would merely have been stating a truism. But you can choose to be an Islamist whereas you can not choose to be an Arab: either you are born that way, or you aren’t. I reckon Kilroy-Silk’s vilifications apply to no more than 90% of all Arabs.

His reaction reminds me of Jews who say that ‘the Germans’ were the cause of the Holocaust, or again of Germans who say that ‘the Jews’ were the cause of the Gulag. Both statements are of course true in a statistical sense (in that most leading Nazis were Germans and most leading Communists were Jews, and in that a large minority of Germans supported the Nazis and a large minority of Jews supported the Communists) and yet it is somehow both absurd and unjust to condemn an entire ethnic group for the crimes of individual members.

Why didn’t he have the guts to say something objective and unprejudiced ‘the Koran sucks’ or ‘Islam sucks’ and leave it at that?

The York University middle eastern 'expert' has a major credibility problem. Arabs in Mesopotamia establishing the first city state? I don't think so. They weren't Arabs. Case closed.
However five thousand years or so ago, Jews created a mono-theistic religion and the last time I looked the Jews were still a creative and innovative force in the world whereas those once so wonderful Mesopotamian Arabs...

The CRE has already reported Mr Kilroy-Silk to the police for speaking his mind, and Thought Hitler Trevor Phillips (who only last week was opining on how divisive encouraging people to bring racial suits is) is quoted as saying: "However, given the extreme and violent terms in which Mr Kilroy-Silk has expressed himself, there is a danger that this might incite some individuals to act against someone who they think is an Arab." Ah, yes, just so long as the fascism is to "protect" people from something that "might" happen, it's all right then.

I believe Mr Kilroy-Silk lives in a land where freedom of speech was formerly cherished and fought and died for. He has a right to say what's on his mind. End of story. He didn't incite violence - despite Adolf Phillips' fear that some people "might" think he had. He spoke his mind.

When the Tories get in, they must dismantle this revolting organisation. Meanwhile, I suggest the equally revolting Trevor Phillips pop over to Saudi Arabia to find out more about freedom of speech and lack thereof.

Natalie Solent's comments about the value of safety valves are well taken, but she should not have had to make such basic observations in a free country.

Professor Ashnar talks in standard loony leftie terms: "He does not have a history that goes beyond September 11" she said, presumably knowing absolutely nothing about Mr Kilroy-Silk other than what she'd just had read to her. On closer inspection, her statement is bonkers. Does she mean Kilroy-Silk stopped living on Setpember 11? Did she mean to say "before September 11"? Does she know that in Britain the usage is 11 September? Does she know the exact date the world began 5,000 years ago? Is she totally bonkers?

Does Kilroy-Silk actually "work for the BBC"? Doesn't he work for a production company whose material is bought by the BBC and then transmitted by them?

And are his anti-Arab rants any worse than Tom Paulin's anti-Jewish rants?

*[Professor Afshar] said the article displayed a dangerous "ethnocentricity". She added: "He does not have a history that goes beyond September 11. The world begins on September 11 for him but I would like to tell him that the world actually began 3000 years before Christ."*

Nope. For the Chinese the world started a lot earlier than that. Which is another bit of "my ethnic group started before yours. Nyah!" nonsense. Gotta love it. The final refuge of the incompetent and the idiotic.

As for blaming all Germans for the Holocaust, there's plenty of evidence to support that. Not to be anal about it but the entire theme behind the Holocaust is that it was mass murder organized as an industry. In order to support that industry many, if not all, concentration camps were located near large towns. Amazingly obtuse of the local population to notice tens of thousands of people going in, and nobody coming out. Where did they think those people went to? Out flying with Peter Pan? On vacation along the Danube?

Even during the post-WWII era nobody believed the German populace that they didn't know what was happening in the camps. It's simply not believable in any way. If there was any ignorance at all, it was a wilfull ignorance at best and a proactive desire not to know.

Addtionally I'll point out the massive number of slaves used by the Nazis for factory workers. Again you'd have to be obtuse not to notice them. Or the fact that there was a substantial turnover.

Professor Haleh Afshar, a Middle Eastern expert at York University Light bulb moment.

I wrote the following on the 10th of February last.

#23 mark holland 2/10/2003 03:51AM PST

The brakes on my car are knackered so I took the train to work this morning.

There was a young guy and his dad sat on the seat opposite me. It sounded like the son was going back to university after the weekend. He said that he had to do an assignment about "The resurgence of Islamic whatever with respect to the USA and Isreal". Oh yea? Thought I, "It's due to Reaganomics apparently".

"RUBBISH!" I said - barging in on their conversation. "The Iranian revolution took place before Reagan even got in". It's a shame we didn't have longer to talk as I had to get off at the next stop - I could have ranted (where did Khomeni live before going back to Iran?) - but I did learn he's doing politics at York University. I reckon he should get his money back as he's being brainwashed.

I remember the guy saying his professor's name, as if I'd know it, it was Arab and it was a she.

ed - Your comments are well taken and should command the brief attention span of even the very disconnected Ms Afshar. Someone exercising his right of free speech and having a go at an ethnic group (however unfair it is to condemn them en masse) verbally and practically an entire nation complicit in murdering an ethnic group are very, very far apart.

Saying what you feel like saying does not lead to mass murder or the desire to exterminate an entire race, no matter the self-serving hysterics. Free speech has worked very well in Britain since before (or maybe she meant after, who knows?) Kilroy-Silk "had a history".

The views expressed by the author are not necessarily the views of this corporation.

There's precise disclaimer language, the Sunday Express should have used a tag line.

Kilroy-Silk said "“Apart from oil - which was discovered, is produced and is paid for by the west - what do they contribute? Can you think of anything? Anything really useful? Anything really valuable? Something we really need, could not do without? No, nor can I."

I didn't read the article but the excerpts I have seen are the truth. When did offending Arabs by telling the truth become a crime? As the saying goes: "You want the truth? You can't handle the truth!" The Arabs are incapable of seeing the reality of their existence. Israel is the all purpose scapegoat for this denial.

http://www.mcb.org.uk/letter60.html
article at bottom it is now in linkable form

One measure of a country's dynamism is the amount of foreign language material it translates. This is vital for the flow of ideas and for technological growth. It's worth noting that Spain translated more material last year than the entire Arab Middle East did since the fall of the Abbasid caliphate a thousand years ago.

I am very interested in the examples of Arab contributions listed by the Independent at the bottom of the article.

It seems to me both disturbing and very telling that none of those things (assuming that they are accurate) took place more recently than 2000 years ago.

What positive things has Arabic society/culture contributed to the world ... lately?

The Independent article mentions both Mesopotamia and ancient Persia in defense of Arabs. Neither were Arab.

Arab civilization started with Mohammed and his military conquest that spread the language and culture of a remote desert tribe from the Arabian peninsula. All the scientific discoveries of the Arabs occured in the lands that were conquered. But the high cultures of the conquered lands were all snuffed out within 200 years as the intolerance of Islam took hold.

So-called Arabic numerals that are universally used today were taken from the ancient Hindus who were the first to use the decimal system.

The only contributions from Arabs have been negative to the world at large from the time of Mohammed to the present day.

Do the Arab defenders want the truth? They can't handle the truth!

Haleh Afshar is a BBC favourite who is always self-righteously ranting against the "Islamophobia" of our media and people. She's a charming woman herself, of course, being an open supporter of the terrorist group Hezbollah.

The conclusion that free speech promotes racial harmony is not obvious at first sight. Words lead to deeds, one might think, and so, obviously, harsh words will lead to harsh deeds. Nonetheless you may make some headway among sceptics if you ask them whether in their own lives they think it better to bottle up resentments or to voice them before they become explosive.

As Sigmund Freud said, civilisation began when the first man threw not a spear, but an insult.

Haleh Afshar is a BBC favourite who is always self-righteously ranting against the "Islamophobia" of the British media and people. She's a charming woman herself, of course, being an open supporter of the terrorist group Hezbollah.

The conclusion that free speech promotes racial harmony is not obvious at first sight. Words lead to deeds, one might think, and so, obviously, harsh words will lead to harsh deeds. Nonetheless you may make some headway among sceptics if you ask them whether in their own lives they think it better to bottle up resentments or to voice them before they become explosive.

As Sigmund Freud said, civilisation began the first time a man threw an insult rather than a spear.

Interesting how the BBC seems to feel the licence fee payers are interested in obtaining instruction on civilised behaviour from a favoured cadre of bitter, bossy, preachy, hectoring third world immigrant women. Jasime Alihibai (or a word to that effect)-Brown is another one. There may be a few more whose names I've never felt it worth a split second out of my life to note. Their self-righteous opinions are jaw-achingly predictable, self-serving, self-righteous and eventually - one can only hope - self-destructive. Of additional interest (in a boring way) is, coming from backward, bigoted societies, what on earth they think they have to teach advanced Western people. Or perhaps they mistake bemused tolerance for interest ...

>It does look as though Kilroy-Silk felt he had to exercise his inner swine dog (as the Germans say)

Charles: trivial and off-topic, but "Schweinhund" is simply not used any more - I haven't heard anybody say it ever in the five years I've lived in Germany. These days "der innerer Schweinehund" (slightly different word, note the extra e in the middle) is used, but refers to laziness and apathy rather than anger. "Schweinhund" in the sense English people think it has is, like most of the German I learned at school 25 years ago, at best utterly obsolete if not downright wrong.

(Education Blog material there for Brian, potentially, regarding the hopelessness of learning languages in schools / from books)

Charles Copeland says: "most leading Communists were Jews". There were a few Jews in Lenin's politburo - Trotsky, Kamenev, Zinoviev, Sverdlov - but all were marginalized, dead or exiled before 1929. Most leading Communists then and later were not Jews. Even those who were Jews under Jewish law had, by becoming Communists, rejected their own people.

Damned if we do, damned if we don't.

Kamenev and Zinoviev were the defendants in Stalin's first great show trial, in the thirties. I think they lasted a bit longer than 1929. But I suppose it depends on what you mean by marginalised.

Seems Kilroy's had his show dropped by the BBc now too, and a Commons motion has been tabled denouncing him. See: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3383589.stm

A post about who will and who will not be immediately persecuted for 'incitement':

"You'll Be Arrested If You Say That (Unless You're an Imam)"

And just 10 seconds ago, on Radio 4, Trevor Phillips said (referring to the Sunday Express) "nobody reads the damn thing."

So nobody will be incited to anti-Arab violence, then.

There is a difference between using the *wrong* words, and offending a whole race of people by saying they've contributed nothing to the world, they are wife beaters and are responsible for the deaths of thousands of people!

If someone had expressed similar views, in all seriousness, about ALL white people, ALL Europeans or even ALL Britons, I'd feel justifiably angry, wouldn't you?

If someone made that comment about white people, I might reply:

Computer technology, Empiricism, Advanced Medicine, Universal suffrage, Codified Civil Liberties, Women's Rights.

I certainly wouldn't be defensive about the contributions people of European descent have made, and are making, to the world.

I am not suggesting that Arabic peoples have not made, and are not making, such contributions as well. I am simply asking: what are they contributing lately (say, within the last thousand years)?

What Bombadil said.

I take it that Trevor Phillips will now be lobying the Al Jazeera press to sack any Arab journalists who express anti-western opinions through the columns of the 'Arab News' or 'Al Jazeerah' daily newspapers.
This would naturally apply to the presenters of the 'Al Jazeerah' TV news station.
Or does the equality only apply to 'minority races' (who, incidentally, are now in the majority in certain areas)?

To quote Billy Connolly: "The only person you can get away with making a joke or a remark about these days is a WHITE / HETEROSEXUAL / MALE!

Almost every article used by our islamic brethren, watches, cars, planes, guns, you-name-it.....comes from where? When did you last buy an article with a "made in syria" label?
Islam has, unfortunately, never benefited from a much needed Reformation. I do believe that most Moslems are as reasonable & peaceful as their christian/jewish/buddhist/hindu etc. brothers. A minority brings terror to an already miserable World. The message to all muslims should be: get your bloody house in order and do to your radicals as they would do to us.....and YOU.

Robert Kiltoy-Silk has spoken the truth, and the truth hurts.

Just look at the list of Arab Nobel Prize recipients:

1-Literature, 2-Peace (if you still count-in Arafat), 2-Chemistry, 2- Medicine

Now look at the Jewish ones: 10-Literature, 8-Peace, 22-Chemistry, 13-Economics, 44-medicine, 31-Physics

In my opinion the Palestinians deserve the Nobel Prize for medicine - they have created a genetic miracle. Imagine turning a whole people into suicide bombers, thieves, rapists, liars, and lynchers - all of this achieved within two generations.

In a week in which we've seen research predicting that our civilisation is about to wipe out roughly a third of the world's species, I suggest that belittling Arab civilisation is somewhat dumb.

http://www.newkerala.com/news-daily/news/features.php?action=fullnews&id=4273

Open letter to Mr. Kilroy-Silk,
I was surprised (and frankly disappointed) to see that you have apologised for your "anti-Arab remarks" in a way that could imply you had indeed been speaking with prejudice!

Would it not have been more correct to say that, while you certainly did not wish to cause offence to anyone, these were nevertheless the facts as they appeared to you at time of writing?

You would of course be happy to hear of different facts - and thereby stand corrected. Therefore the Muslim council etc.should provide you with all the information that would refute your opinion. In other words, if the Arabs have contributed to the world - inventions, aid, medical breatkthroughs, etc. etc. they should say so. If the stories of female mutilation, honour killings, suicide while killing innocent people taught as the highest of aims etc. were all non-existent or highly exaggerated - then the Muslims should say so. If indeed they condemn these practices they should also say so. And if they have an explanation as to why every single trouble spot in the world has as its common denominator an Arab participant, then they should by all means present it.

I know that the BBC, in its usual craven way, did not back you up - but please don't destroy my faith in your integrity by following their cowardly example!
PL

Just wanted to add a quick note of support to the condemmed, ive found it funny that places to add support for kilroy are limited, while places to denounce are many.

I for one have had enough of being told what is acceptable free speech and what isnt, especially when abul Hamza amoung others is left spouting anti-western rubbish in our very own country.

In response to the above open letter, i to am shocked to hear he has basically been forced to recind his comments and apologise, when will this madness end?

"I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the end your right to say it." Voltaire.

It would appear that freedom of speech has died in the UK.

We can be called dhimmi, Kufr, infidel or worse.
be villified for our beleifs and culture.

we are a race that dare not speak its name or show its flag we would be branded as rascist.

enough is enough, Kilroy silk was right in what he said and he should be supported

our democreacy and tolerance are being used against us it is time to call a halt to this

the infidel

This dhimmitude thing at the BBC reminds us of the chilling effect that political correctness has on free debate in academia.

I found myself reading some of the comments on this site with a great sadness. Charles Copeland for example appears to believe that 'only' 90% of Arabs are 'suicide bombers, limb amputators and womenrepressors'. Reid of America states "The only contributions from Arabs have been negative to the world at large from the time of Mohammed to the present day." And on and on go the attacks by those of you who have chosen to write. It doesn't help to hate, it doesn't help to condemn a whole race of people or their culture. Criticise governments - by all means. The UK government, the US government, the Israeli government, the Saudi Royal family, the Egyptian government. All those would be fair criticisms.

I would understand if people on this site simply believed that Robert Kilroy-Silk had the right to express his own views. But the number of you that have so much hate in you is scary, Why?

Since when did anyone have the right to say someone could not express his or her opinion. This is a democracy, with free speech, and the right to be who or what you like provided it is within the laws of the land. Kilroy did not break any laws, he simply said what most of the poeple in this country are feeling. The quotes used by the media as usual are taken out of context for the sesationalism of a headline. Well done Mr Kilroy-Silk, about time we had a voice speaking up for the residents of this country, you have gaiined a new viewer, (if you ever get back on T.V that is!)

I can only agree with the majority of comments which, in a nutshell, misquote Voltaire. We deserve to be shafted by all and sundry when we even go to the extremes of changing our laws to suit 'Ethnic Minorities'. The case of the turban on a motorcycle is a typical one. The government then wonders why there is racial tension... What happened to 'When in Rome do as the Romnas do'?

I applaud the comments made by Kilroy-Silk.The facts are there for everyone to see yet he is condemmed for saying them. I wish all the mamby-pamy pc do-gooders would pack their bags and go to live in the free,open-minded,non-repressive islamic countries where i am sure they will benefit from their 1,500 years of tyranny.
Remember "The will of Allah" on september 11 as quoted by the peace loving fraternity. Could that be used in the same context as the recent earthquake in Iran (the axis of evil) . Oops i shouldn't say that i'm a middle aged atheist white man living in a democracy that would make me a racist . Get rid of religion and you will be part way to some degree of sanity in this world.

Well put Amanda W.

I totally subscribe to the Voltairean edict here and think the Beeb may have gone OTT by pulling his show for the time being (though, as a government institution, there hands would have been tied). He's welcome to spout whatever ill-informed drivel he wants (and the Sunday Express is welcome to recycle it six months later...)

But what a truly loathsome bunch so many of you have shown yourselves to be. Kilroy-Silk's article contained some of the most offensive garbage I have seen in some time. The sort of thing that has seen no small number of Zionazis jumping with joy on these pages (to say nothing of the newly-arrived Arabophobes).

RK-S has already conceded there were factual errors (never mind the pejoratives) and still you red-necks and hayseeds cling to the article like gospel; so desperate are you to see your racist outlook reflected in the mass-media.

God bless you bumpkins, keep reading The Sun, Daily Mail et al.

("William Hicks" - is that your surname or an adjective?)

It is ludicrous that Kilroys comments have brought his show to be axed and caused outrage. What happened to freedom of speech? I completely agree with what he said, the fact that the same article was printed in April 2003 and went unnoticed shows how undemocratic we have become in 9 months.

This is as stupid as when a pub landlord was made to take down a St George flag from his pub.

Firstly, I have very little time for Robert Kilroy-Silk or his wretched programme. Nevertheless, I defend to the death his basic human right to free speech. Kilroy-Silk was only expressing his opinions and was not 'exciting' anybody to do anything.

Remember how the law-abiding Irish citizens of this country were often insulted by the UK media when IRA terrorism was at its height? I do not remember any complaints then.

The real victors of this sorry saga are the Trevor Phillips' thought police, far-right Parties like the BNP, and even the terrorists themselves.

Not one newspaper or commentator has described Kilroy Silk's comments as virulently anti-semitic, which is what they are. I wonder why?

Computer? China
Empirism ? is it a good invention
Medecine ? China, Africa
Suffrage ? late 20's
Civil liberties ? ask a non white 20 years ago if he could be a doctor or lawyer and practise, ask a woman if she could work as a boss in an office or hight responsabilities
Nobel peace ? may be some country need to prove some thing to other
rapist, thieves ?? are you talking about the americans in vietnam or the Christian soldiers in bosnia
So many effort made by the "democratic countries" for their best comfort and still no sign of positive result for the poor in their own country and the one far away.
Yes the attitude of the richest Arabs country are questionable
but its up to the government to stop their money dance with them. but then its hard to bite the hand who feed you so generously, after all tou have to sell this big toys.
Mr Reid with your" can you handle the truth" its a kind of truth you would have proclaim as a revisionist truth, an arab is born arab not muslim.

Computer? China

?? Possibly the abacus was invented in China ... but the general-purpose programmable computer is singularly the invention of Europeans and descendents of Europeans. Charles Babbage, Alan Turing, Bletchley Park, ENIAC, UNIVAC, etc.

Empirism ? is it a good invention

Yes, absolutely. Do you like the electricity you are using, on the computer you are using, to post to this comment thread on the internet? Empirical methodology was critical to developing the science underlying all those things.

Medecine ? China, Africa

Advanced Medicine ... notice that Africa doesn't send doctors to Europe to help treat outbreaks of disease there. The West sends doctors to Africa, where presumably they still have access to their traditional medicines, to treat the plethora of illnesses there which have been largely eradicated in the west.

Suffrage ? late 20's

Yes ... so what? That is within the last 1000 years.

Civil liberties ? ask a non white 20 years ago if he could be a doctor or lawyer and practise, ask a woman if she could work as a boss in an office or hight responsabilities

Codified Civil Liberties. Bias and discrimination still exist, as in every society. That is why it is so important to have Codified Civil Liberties.

Nobel peace ? may be some country need to prove some thing to other
rapist, thieves ?? are you talking about the americans in vietnam or the Christian soldiers in bosnia

????? I can't parse that bit ... are you replying to something?

All of the above avoided the original question: what has Arabic Culture contributed to the world within the last thousand years?

Here, I'll start: the writings of Kahlil Gibran are very nice. Arabic culture added some elements to chess as it passed through on its way from India to Europe.

But that really isnt much to show for all that time. What else?

By the way, on further reflection:

Civil liberties ? ask a non white 20 years ago if he could be a doctor or lawyer and practise, ask a woman if she could work as a boss in an office or hight responsabilities

is just patently ridiculous, at least if you are talking about the UK, or the United States (as far as I know personally). 20 years ago is 1984, chum. There were a lot of non-white people and women doing all of those things 20 years ago. Maybe you meant 40 years ago?

I am kind of surprised to read all these comments on this web site. one would think that people in the 21st century are more likely to be more aware of what is going on around them, other than solely being driven by media.
My dear friends, maybe it is true arabs are now going through a down period, but one can never deny that arabs have put a solid base for what we call today Medicine, physics, chemistry, astronomy, engineering and so many more..
Life is a cycle, everyone makes a contribution, it is true arabs these days are not doing much, but keep in mind that each civilization builds on what its predecessors had accomplished.
I am sure a lot of you know Thomas Edisson, Alexander Graham Bell, but none of you have heard of Ibn Sina, al-khawarizmi, al-razi and so much more.

Without these people, our lives today wouldn't be the same.
arab civilization

your link text goes here

I never said Arab culture hadn't made contributions. I asked what they had contributed lately (1000 years). Your reply seems to suggest: nothing, they are in a down cycle.

If that is true, why is Kilroy-Silk's article a problem?

Has anyone actually read this article? If so, where? I don't feel I can comment until I've seen what he actually said rather than what he's been interpreted as saying by various groups with their own axes to grind. I've seen headlines reporting his insult to Moslems but no extract I've seen mentions Moslems. He's been quoted as claiming his article refers to arab states rather than arabs, a big difference.

In answer to some of the points raised since I last posted...
The reason it's so hard to find sites in support of Kilroy is that the 'Politically-Correct Brigade' have unfortunately become the majority. When questioned, they agree with many of the relevant FACTS raised by Kilroy, but would never dream of saying it. Thay have willingly gone with the P.C. flow and surrendered their right to freedom of speech.

To answer AMANDA and BASIL...
The hatred in the postings here isn't directed globally at Arabs. It isn't hatred either. It is anger.
Anger at the way our lifestyle and standing in our own country is being eroded in favour of these peoples.
Would you feed & take care of your neighbour's children, then give the leftovers to your own?
I'm afraid, like it or not, the basic instinct of survival is still indelibly stamped in all of our DNA.
Until this alters you will always have this type of reaction against anything which we (rightly or wrongly) perceive to be a threat to our existence.
It's called Human Nature.

To quote LOFTE...
Almost everyone I have spoken to (the ones who are not afraid to say it, that is), have...
'had enough of being told what is acceptable free speech and what isnt, especially when Abul Hamza amoung others is left spouting anti-western rubbish in our very own country.'

By the way LOFTE, the government pays him around £100,000 a year in benefits for the privilege of expressing these extremist views against them. MAD WORLD OR WHAT?
Where was Trevor Phillips when Abul Hamza was spouting HIS racial & religious hatred?

I lived in Saudi for 7 years. We had to pray in secret. Churches, chapels and any showing of Christian worship was a punishable crime against Islam.
Yet muslims in London & Birmingham worship in some of the largest mosques in the world. (I think the largest in Europe is in London...don't quote me)

How can diplomatic relations allow such one-sided concessions? Money I'm saddened to say. The Saudis were paying around £14m for each Tornado fighter, and God-fearing America were raking it in from the oil. So who gives a damn about OUR equality when there's that kind of loot at stake?
Well it's payback time guys... lets face it. In a few years time we will experience what being a minority is really like.
I got no unemployment benefit when I returned because I hadn't fully paid my NI stamps while abroad. It didn't count that I HAD paid 21yrs Tax & NI before I left.
Yet an asylum seeker could get immediate income support on arrival, having contributed nothing.

With regards to history...
Hey, wasn't it the Americans who sold the Indians whiskey... then sold them guns? Look at how they eventually did quell them 'pesky injuns'. The 'Native Americans' were almost wiped out.
Assuming I can still quote from the Bible without being accused of religious bigotry...

Hosea 8:7 'For they have sown the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind: it hath no stalk: the bud shall yield no meal: if so be it yield, the strangers shall swallow it up.'

Have the American government learned nothing?

Let's get this current Asylum and Aid mania into perspective...
Charity does and should always begin at home.
I would willingly help someone push their car regardless of their skin colour or religion... I just don't expect to have to give him mine if it can't be repaired. Even if he & his family do need it more than me and my family.
We don't hate them.
We hate the system that allows them to be more equal than us.

greetings from california! saw hoop-t-do on local tv report.

in my opinion kilroy-rice is absolutely correct!

he has NOTHING to apoligize for!

The point is that fuss about the Kilroy-Silk piece - and why no furore the first time it was printed? - is being made with the deliberate aim of curbing speech.

And there are specific political factors at play here...

Mr. Charles Copeland,

The statement that "Most Leading Communists Were Jews" has no basis in fact what so ever, and I strongly suggest you take a Russian history course or at least read a credible book on the subject. The Jews, due to the fact that they were so viciously persecuted in Russia, did support Communism, a system which at least in theory would finally grant them equality and respect, in large proportions, however, the majority of both leading and regular members of the party were ethnic Russians.

Must just say something about Kilroy and his comments about 'Politically Correct' I totally agree with him. Everyone it seems are treading on egg shells in this country afraid to utter anything for fear of 'offending' someone. I guess we could offend virtually everyone with anything we say these days. I've given up on 'Politically Correct' Ive got so confused with whats right and wrong Ive gone back to the good 'ole days. We've all gone made with it.
I speak my mind and I make no apology for it any more. Did you know that 'Brainstrom' has been exonorated. The Epileptic society denounced any knowledge of ever saying that it could offend people who had epilepsy, in fact they use the term 'brainstorm' and had no idea where it originated.... probably some do-gooder! So its official - you can you 'Brainstorm' - I go with Kilroy, why should he be penalised for having an opinion and voicing it. And the BBC are total 'woosess' for taking the program off, here we are again, walking on egg shells!!

I would like to offer my support for Mr Kilroy Silk.
Freedom of speech doesn`t Kill people, Turning the wrong way down a street in one of Englands Northern towns seems to be a life or death throw of the dice,
I am sick of all this PC with regard to our non British cousins, what we say amongst us all should be taken equally, good and bad, its just talk,
I am Welsh and have been brought up in a cosmipolitan dockside area, People must learn to get on and respect eachother, Talk is Talk, Kilroy should be allowed like anyone else to speak as he feels.

Kilroy has every right to say he doesn't like arabs because he is perhaps racist, and probably never knew an arab or had an arab friend. However, to say that arabs never gave us anything means that some stupid people out there may actually believe this, and for this factual inacuracy alone he deserves to be banished from the media. For the introduction of alogorithmic modelling into maths which has made things like this web forum possible ,the Arabs deserve a fairly long sabatical in my book.
sites like this encourage an unfortunate tendancy for people to overvalue their own opinions, some opinions aired here are based on pure fiction and distortion like the claim about translations made earlier, where is this person getting their 'facts' from.

It is very difficult if nigh impossible to quantify a relation between race and intelligence. What is more likely is that there is a relation between intelligence and the prevailing culture. It is a fact that Arabs, whether Muslim or not, have lived in the closed system of an Islamic culture. In such a culture, questioning is not part of the ethos. Thus when one posits a lack of creativity in Arabs, what one is really implying is the closed Islamic social system, and ‘Arabs’ is a mere shorthand.

Then there is the additional fact that invention and particularly invention in abstract thought, arises only in settled societies. This is plainly obvious, as a nomadic herder society, just does not have the resource or the time to sustain an individual's indulgence in abstract thought. OTH, a settled society does, and encourages individuals in this mode of activity.

Thus all the great inventions of mankind rise from settled societies and none from the nomadic tribal ones. The inventions and discoveries from the ancient world come from settled societies such as Greece, Mesopotamia, Persia, India, China and ancient Egypt. And none of them are Arabs. Arabs were, right until the nineteenth century, essentially tribal nomadic societies. One sees this even now in wealthy Saudi Arabia, as rich Saudis play/pretend being nomads.

These two social situations in the Arab-cum-Muslim world, may be the reason for the lack of any lasting human creativity from that region.

Whatever maybe the reasons for such a lack of creativity, what Kilroy-Silk wrote, is not on the whole wrong. And even if he were, there is no reason to subject him to harassment of this sort.

Islam and the Koran is in dire need of a thorough fisking and kow-towing to the likes of the Muslim council of Britain, does nobody any good.

OpinionsAreNotFacts:
The Arabs DID NOT INVENT ALGEBRA. Mathematics has a long history of development in Greece, China, India and Mesopotamia. It is typical of Arabs to claim that Mesopotamians were Arabs. They were not.

To be fair, the Arabs did introduce the decimal number system and the concept of zero to Europe. But both these inventions were the product of Hindu mathematicians. The Arabs were the messengers rather then the originators of the message.
The one mathematician that the Arabs claim as their own is Al-Khwarizmi. He certainly lived in the area of Baghdad but was not an Arab, but Persian.
The title of his text on Algebra got distorted in translation to Arabic, and thus we have Algebra. This text, containing some solutions, were not the product of his mind, but a collection of the works of others. He could be regarded as the Editor.

But even in the field of Algebra, the Greeks and Hindus, several centuries prior to Al-Khwarizmi, were more advanced then he. For instance Al-Khwarizmi solved quadratics but these were developed by the Hindu mathematicians who gave general solutions rather then particular ones. Al-Khwarizmi also ignored negative solutions, as he did not understand the concept of a negative number. This despite the fact that Hindus had the general solutions and the concept of negative numbers.

Given the trade routes of the time, it is conceivable that Al-Khwarizmi got most of what he wrote from India. It is also conjectured that Al-Khwarizmi travelled to India to study Maths. Quite possible. And in any case Al-Khwarizmi was a Persian and not Arab.

Given the primitive times, it is unlikely we will ever know the exact truth, but I find the Arab mentality of stealing other people's ideas and claiming it as their own, very distasteful. Though it seems to go with the general nature of Arab tribal society, where brigandage is considered a honourable profession. It is unfortunate that such a trait persists even to the modern era.

Oh dear.

Freedom of speech... Great and all that. Say what you like.

But if Rod Liddle can be sacked by being anti-Countryside Alliance, then Kilroy should likewise get the boot for even more openly partisan and frankly xenophobic.

Some the arguments which are backing up some of his throwaway comments here sadden me into thinking that a rather frightening proportion of the country agree with this kind of discourse. By using the nobel prize - a western instition exsisting within the paradigm of western academa and culture - to claim that Arabs have done nothing for modern civilisation is utterly rediculous and shortsighted.

As for Kilroy, well, it wasn't a particularly good show anyway....

Having contributed to, and followed the posts in this highly thought-provoking forum about Kilroy, I suddenly had a thought...

ISN'T IT GREAT?

No matter what side of the fence you're on, you are free to come on here and argue the toss all day long, without fear of having your door kicked in and your computer stuff smashed up at any moment.
And what's more... we're all alive and uninjured at the end of it... and if you're totally honest, a little more educated in the process.

I thought the BBC's 'Have Your Say' page... subtitled "Your chance to debate the issues and ask the questions that matter",
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/default.stm

may prove to be a good starting page to show that there are some people supporting Kilroy. However, apparently you can't have your say on THIS news item (arguably one of the biggest headlines of the week) since it doesn't appear anywhere, even after I sent an e-mail requesting that we should all be able to debate the subject.

Sorry BBC this won't do. You became involved in this affair when you took the show off the air. Indifference and burying your head in the sand now is as loathsome as you perceived Kilroy's remarks to be.
The page now has a response from Mr. Kilroy stating... "I'm disappointed that the BBC didn't feel able to support me."
"I said to it that I understand its need to say that the column is nothing to do with it and the views are nothing to do with it, but my impartiality on the programme has never been a problem."

Sorry mate... you're on your own. You should move to Channel 4 if you want to air innovative or controversial views.
The Beeb will keep their heads down on this one. It's too hot to handle for their liking.
The only 'dangerous' person they've given a job to is Jeremy Paxman... and he'll be warned over what he can & can't say on this one.
Or will he value his freedom of speech too much to heed them?
I await this week's Newsnight with baited breath.

Quote:
'The death of democracy is not likely to be an assassination from ambush. It will be a slow extinction from apathy, indifference, and undernourishment.'
Robert Maynard Hutchins (director for Encyclopædia Britannica)

If you wish to read the full article it is printed in it's entirety at this link...

http://www.mcb.org.uk/letter60.html

Reading it is sure to throw up a few more points for discussion.

Incidentally, I tried to find it using Google... but was told 'Your search - "christian council of saudi arabia" - did not match any documents.'
I then realised how stupid I was, and entered "Muslim Council Of Great Britain" and got 338 results.
No surprise there then.

Naturally it is a letter of complaint to the BBC from the Muslim Council Of Great Britain...

DP - I find your very gross and inaccurate generalisations very distasteful, indeed. But then, you are on the RK-S bandwagon, so I would expect the same level of inaccuracy.

Did you write that yourself, or cobble it from 'Orientalism for Dummies'?

Alan Millar – at least you have been literate and mannered in your post. No less offensive, mind - but mannered. As such, you merit a considered reply.

There is a disenfranchised proletariat rump whose opinions are informed by this sort of xenophobic, populist crap. They have been around for a lot longer than the Arabs have been in Britain. Whether it involves beating up on the Irish, folks from the Caribbean or sub-continental Asians, such folk have never needed too much prompting.

You don’t need me to cite the instances of anti-Arab/Moslem violence that has been perpetrated on your isle in the last few years. And, before you assume I’m talking from afar – I lived in London for over five years.

My god man, just look at some of the dribble of people who share your opinion. From 'Dan in California': "In my opinion kilroy-rice is absolutely correct"

... there are a number of morons who haven't even read the damn thing, don't even know who Kilroy-Silk is and are still desperate to pin their colours to his Arabophobe masthead. I didn’t think Littlejohn needed a prop, but there you go…

I would be utterly fascinated if to see what kind of 'support' RK-S would have garnered from you folk if he whipped out a few gross and similarly offensive generalisations about the 'other' semites...

"It was the wrong e-mail attachment" indeed.

Right, okay Basil. Put your money where your mouth is: immigrate to Saudi and try to lead the same life you lead in the UK or some other modern western state, so long as they're still either western or modern. Try to pratice Christianity or a non-Islamic religion openly. Try to date. Go ahead, make the attempt to express your well thought out opinions on issues of the day. Good luck mate.

Nice one BASIL

The violence you mention is indeed a sad reflection on the inability of some people to communicate.
I'm disappointed we have almost had to go 'underground' to discuss this issue. The forums on the mainstream news sites are avoiding it like the plague.
We teach by talking and we learn by listening. Violence is not a form of communication.
I hope I'm speaking for most of the Kilroy-Silk supporters when I say we are not all rushing to join the BNP.
We only want to maintain our national identity, rights and equality in our own country without every little non-PC slip of the tongue being pounced upon.

Where did the phrase 'Politically Correct' come from anyway? The two words are a contradiction in terms.
Maybe it was a mis-spelt e-mail that originally said 'Politically Corrupt'!

Bataille

Try using your vote if you're black in Florida.
Try praying in school in the USA.
Try becoming a CEO if you're black in the USA.
Try becoming President if you're black in the USA.
Try staying off death row if you're innocent but in the wrong place at the wrong time and black in the USA.

Try being an Arab, for that matter, and doing any of these.
Or try being an Arab in the camp in Cuba, held without trial and not given the rights either of a civil prisoner or a prisoner of war. Liberty? Truth, Justice and the American Way?

It's great to be rich and white in much of the western world, much as it's great to be in the Ba'ath party in much of the Arab world. Hell, enough money, you can buy a Presidency in either of them...

BATAILLE ...your observations apply to not only Saudi but many other oppressive countries.
The other form of communication I forgot to mention is the peaceful demonstration or protest.
Try organising or taking part in one of them in Saudi, Saddam's Iraq, or indeed any country run by a dictatorship.

Alan, it pains me to admit it, but we might even reach consensus on this one!

I take your point that this is a hot potato; i haven't been able to find much on the mainstream sites in terms of forums. And I appreciate the need for a more robust debate on the issue of national identity, without walking on egg-shells.

But it doesn't change the fact that RK-S's sentiments were incredibly crude. Do you think it right to tar an entire people with the broadest of brush strokes? Because that's what he did. He *could* have said there are elements of extremism that need to be addressed. But he didn't... he said Arabs were "suicide bombers, limb-amputators, women repressors".

He went on to confuse Arabs with Iranians and gave us this charming notion: "They should go down on their knees and thank God for the munificence of the United States". I'm sitting here, trying to think of a sentiment that would better play into the hands of the extremists and for the life of me, I can't...

Does he regret those words? Only insofar as it will impact upon his career. And all the qualifications in the world ("I was only referring to the regimes"), won't change the fact that he was happy to voice such sentiments in the first place.

Bataille, it's barely worth dignifying your dribble with a response, but it pleases me no end my post irked you to that extent... :^)

But I must say, I find it hysterically amusing that you've cited Saudi as the best option for me - the one regime that is propped up by the west more than any other. Oh, the irony is killing me!

Have you ever been to the Middle East? Because I most certainly have... and - wait for it, because this will truly rock your world - it is not the homogenous block you and the likes of RK-S make it out to be.

There are differing levels of free speech across the board. Saudi is not the same as Lebanon, for example... and yes, it is entirely possible to openly practice Christianity in parts of the Middle East. Not all of it, I will readily concede, but most certainly sizable parts of it. Because - and I have to repeat this, as it is clearly a paradigm-shifting sentiment for you - they are *not* all the same!

Utterly mind-blowing, isn't it?

god knows how you people ever got an armada together basil ;)

I see no immensely offensive stuff in his article, I also see it as incredibly outrageous to take his show off the air, he's been doing that show for so many years, he always tried to defuse racism/bigotry in his shows when it came up whenever I watched it, in an understanding way btw, not a 'SILENCE you will be taken out and shot for voicing your opinion' but in a way more in the vein of 'let's keep civilized, and think a sec before you speak, and we are all humans after all, look at yourself' etc
So to take a dump on a guy who has proven his reliability so much for the BBC is about as rude as you can get I think.

As for the Arabs, I think that yes, I see how he says ignore those that say the west is loathsome and the Arabs are nobel, yet at the same time nod approvingly if someone blows himself up to kill a few western people, I think that it is indeed what we westerners term 'civilized' to have a little less of that.

The muslim community often says 'that's not typical muslim' but isn't it? isn't allah all about 'destroy the infidel dogs'? Now I know many muslims in the west aren't like that, but to draw a silly parallel, if a catholic is pro abortion can he speak for the religion then?

If we attempt to speak of arabs OR muslims as a group then we must take reality into account somewhat, the reality of averages, and indeed of loudmouths too, because even if they are a minority as the moderate muslims in the west claim, they all too often run the show in this world, be it in the east or west or anywhere.

I think the apology of kilroy might have been wrong but it again illustrates his attempt of keeping civilized.
I say a column is a column and is there to be a little controversial, to stimulate discussion, nothing wrong with that.

I think the anti-racism guy showed his real and ugly NAZI-like face during this event, and the BBC their cowardly yellow belly.

Oh and if the muslims want to equate arabs with religion, please don't do that to the west, I and many more are atheists and proud of it dammit.

ay up 'fawlty' (what, are you my evil mirror image?)

i'm just going to cite your passage...

"isn't allah all about 'destroy the infidel dogs'?" and leave it at that.

I could say isn't Christianity about "crusades" "child-killing embargoes" and "cluster bombs"? Trouble is I can see it for the irretrievably stupid statement that it is.

You really need to read less A4-sized literature, old bean...

It is a crazy world we live in. Kilroy has a right to freedom of speech, I have the right to agree or disagree with his or anyone's opinion on anything, There is far too much big brother rubbish going on, people are leaving the UK by the bucket load, they are sick to the back teeth of having their human rights dumped on by politically correct idiots. Kilroy should set up his own digital channel and put two fingers up at the BBC, who are being stupid over this in my opinion, well ott, Linda

I'm sorry to tell you I used the old bean and didn't repeat any a4's at all, and yes and no, indeed the christian bible is also full of vile stuff, however the western christians preach a very much altered bible and think 'god' and 'jesus' is all about peace nowadays.

As I stated I am an atheist, so don't counter my argument with 'the christians aren't bad?' because I do not consider the west as 'christian' as much, although Bush is pretty much a religious nutter I hear, we still have separation of state and religion somewhat I hope, I'll read the news later to see if they got rid of that yet though, sigh.
I'm certainly am not going to defend christianity with any great effort, but common, listen to any religious leader, the muslims aren't exactly selling allah as a nice chap.

I have personal experience with foreign muslims and their poorly hidden disdain for non-muslims is hardly a secret.
You should hear the things their sons call western women on the street for instance..

And being an atheist is something I would not go shout on the streets in any arab nation frankly, would you? or any religious nation to be honest, or a Bush fundraiser..

pfft now the morning show is having a go at kilroy, trying to paint him as a silly ridiculous nutter, amusing, as if sunday morning show hosts are selected on intelligence or any other worthwhile quality apart from being dull

The reason I mention the 'infidel dogs' is because that's not a cry of a few extremist, it's a common view, whereas that crusades business ended years ago for most of us (apart from Bush and Tony perhaps?)
as for embargoes? hmm, got a point with that one, as for cluster bombs ya, another good point, westerners are pretty much sodding idiots too :(

O wait, I could argue the embargo was UN and voted for by arabs/muslims also, although I agreed with saddam at one point when he said he met all stipulations and it should be ended, it was Bush who is as you know rather insane that would not budge.

And soon we will have reached the middle ages too, still, at this time some remnants remain of civilization (I think.. perhaps) so we got a slight edge :P

Oh I want to add one thing in the interest of honesty, I think that guantanamo bay thing is as barbarian as any cutting off hands etc.
Perhaps more so.

The simple destruction of 2 buildings is cascading us into the middle-ages.

Fawlty -

Damn, what are you doing being so reasonable? I was ready for a stoush on this one... :^)

I think we're in agreement that religion is a cloak of justification for some pretty vile things, be it in the name of Islam, Christianity, Judaism - you name it and someone will find a passage to justify it.

I will say this much however - you're letting your own belief system (and let's face it, atheism takes just as great a leap as faith as monotheism...) and disdain for organised religion (and their attendant cultures) colour your judgement.

What RK-S spewed out was quite offensive, it really is as simple as that.

I'm not the first and won't be the last to observe there would have been such a furore if he had directed even a *quarter* of that sort of invective in the direction of 'Jews' or 'blacks' in the west. And it strikes me as disheartening that someone as clearly intelligent as yourself would want to align yourself with such bile.

But that's the neat thing about Arabophobia - it's the one form of bigotry that's still OK across the board. You can be the most fervent anti-Arab and still keep your right-on credentials.

For a long time it was the Jews, then the Germans (who still appear to be fair game, but only with the red tops) and now - since, I don't know, let's say 1948 - it's the Arabs. Human nature, I know, but deeply dispiriting all the same.

I can't really have a go at you, as we appear to have too much common ground. Except I'm an agnostic... hedging my bets and all that!

Hmm, I can't deny my views are 'coloured' by my uhm, views ;)

And yes, it was racy what he said, not offensive in a big way in my view, but surely stopping his show and suing him etc over this is too much, it's racy but not racist in a legal sense I think.

You show me any article in any national paper that is not offensive to at least 1000 people in some way.

And he said it was written during heated times, and accidentally resubmitted at this time

I wonder, do you agree he was always devoid of any of this 'bad' behavior on his show?

I'm not especially anti-arab btw, well I am anti many people 't is true, but I only single out arabs on odd days :D

I didn't write the article, what offends me severly is pulling his show and falling all over him to this extend, if people said 'sod off fool' that would be ok in my book, it's just how this is handled.

Western civilisation is worth defending.

The Left wants to destroy Western civilisation, because it is "capitalist"...it has no qualms about aligning with Islamists.

Like Saruman aligning himself with Sauron, the Left believes it can emerge victorious.

Ay up Fawlty,

Straight to your points...

> it's racy but not racist in a legal sense I think.

Now, I don't want to get too smug on this one, but this somewhat proves my point. In that I think what he wrote was *very* racist. And it gets back to my earlier point about Arabophobia being OK - people just don't see it as such because they're inured to it. It's the done thing.

Bear in mind, he never made the disctinction he's trying to delineate at the moment (now that his career is on the line). Namely, this referred to *all* Arabs.

OK, time to get explicit - transpose 'Arabs' with 'Jews' and replace the cliches "suicide bombers, limb-amputators, women repressors" with "money hoarders, land-grabbers, industry-dominating".

Are you offended? Because both lines of reasoning make me sick to the pit of my stomach.

If you still don't find it offensive, then I say congratulations, you are a well-rounded misanthrope!

But I would put it to you that a sizeable majority of folk jumping up and down with joy at RK-S's sentiments would have been appalled at my suggested replacements (and rightly so). And there's the rub...

> You show me any article in any national paper that is not offensive to at least 1000 people in some way.

I can't argue with you there - indeed you're probably being conservative with your numbers... :^)

> And he said it was written during heated times, and accidentally resubmitted at this time

Yes, but it was actually subbed the first time, to take out the more contentious stuff. This time it appeared in all its bigoted glory...

> I wonder, do you agree he was always devoid of any of this 'bad' behavior on his show?

Hard for me to say. When I was living in London I actively avoided his show - it was somewhat lowbrow and gave me a migraine. Having said that, he always came across as a closet bigot. In that he could be quite small-minded, but was quick to clip people over the ear if he felt they were getting a bit out of line. Which is another way of saying he had the lexical ability to tart up what he was saying, whereas his constituency - dozy housewives and the chronically unemployed, from what I could see - weren't always blessed with his 'subtlety'.

But I take your point that it could have been handled with a little more common sense and it's all OTT.

I would love to have seen someone like, say, Hanan Ashrawi take him on in a debate. That would have been far more satisfying. Not only female, but Christian to boot! And a proud Arab... that would have confused him no end. Then she would have torn him a new arsehole (intellectually speaking)

hmm, well frankly I see countless cases of the same about jews, and what about Livingston about Bush. and many people about americans for instance
It's all views, many/most I disagree with, but sure, speak your mind.
It's only a problem if it entices hate in the sense of going out and killing people or making their lives miserable in extreme ways, well I think he was a bit late for that, didn't the parliament and the US president and senate and congress etc etc already do that?

In america they have papers that are I hear largely dedicated to blaming the jews for most everything, from the weather to tooth decay btw.

Freedom of speech is a precious gift for all, for the arabs for the muslims for jews for you and me and everybody, let's be a little careful with it he.
I think the caution should lie in favor of freedom not with a few being offended.

True btw, show is lowbrow and all, but he contained himself excellently and the freaking BBC should stand with their people, I mean since the first publication he made countless shows didn't he, no-one complained, this is all a bit lame

I bet he wouldn't have run away from a discussion btw, he's every day in discussion after all, that's what I mean, if it is so bad let's expose it in a fair and open way, glad we agree

btw thanks! I am a misanthrope, show me a flaw in that view and I'll be impressed.

As for land-grabbing, let's stay away from that in this discussion, I think you can see why, too religiously orientated for my taste anyways :/

hmm, I think this stuff is getting a bit too much about fawlty and basil now come to think of it, perhaps I should STFU a while.

Closing words though (you saw that coming I bet) did you actually read the whole article? because sometimes I wonder if you use these extreme descriptions if we read the same thing.

Mr.Kilroy-Silk was absolutely right!!! But hey,...the truth hurts.

Where will I find (in Internet) the Article of Robert Kilroy-Silk in Sunday Express?

Where will I find (in Internet) the Article of Robert Kilroy-Silk in Sunday Express?
Thanks

FAWLTY...
You made an interesting point when asking 'did you actually read the whole article?'

Maybe all people postings to this forum from this point on should open by stating if they've read the article or not.
Tying in "READ IT" would help us all.
I posted the link to it already but here it is again.

http://www.mcb.org.uk/letter60.html

There certainly are a lot of unnecessary generalisations in his statements, but there are also a lot of (conveniently?) unpublicised FACTS in there as well...
"We have thousands of asylum seekers from Iran, Iraq, Algeria, Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries living happily in this country on social security... ...there is not one single British asylum seeker in any Arab country."

On a lighter note, his rant at the end of the article with regard to 'loony' George Galloway and the 'other half' of his crazy-gang act Clare Short is absolutely hilarious :-)

By using the invented term - Zionazis, Basil has in an instant, disenfranchised any point he was trying to make, by demonstrating that he is an anti-semitic bigot.

It has become a favourite ploy of the Palestinians and certain left wing elements to try to demonise anyone who doesn't agree with their particular, warped brand of politics liberally mixed with terrorism.

The right to freedom of speech is supposed to be enshrined in law, and yet unless you are non-white you cannot make any comments that might criticise the behaviour of people or states who seek to destroy our way of life and our system of supposed democracy.

The BBC had no right to suspend Kilroy-Silk's Show - a decision made after an orchestrated campaign by the people that he was writing about - he did not make any non-politically correct comments on his show, and until such time as he has been proven to have broken any laws, by what he wrote in the Sunday Express, they have no right nor reason to take action

Basil, please do carry on using the invented term "Zionazis", because you simply destroy any basis for your warped point of view by insulting another state and people. But hey, it must be OK, because they are jews and not arabs (sarcasm intended)

Will all those left leaning journalists who endlessly smear America and Americans along with Jews and Israel now face the sack? Will all those Muslim "community leaders" who articulate their hatred of "the West" now find themselves unemployed? Of course not. – this is a blatant case of double standards.