Main menu:

Recent posts

Categories

Archives

Donate

To help keep HP running

 

Or make a one-off donation:

Open Season on Mehdi Hasan?

Mehdi Hasan has been the subject of a great number of posts on this site. To my mind all of them have been based on facts and one or other poster taking issue with his opinions on various subjects. From the Middle East to domestic British politics Mehdi is unlikely to find friends here.

And that’s fine.

But when exactly did HP become a pulpit from which anonymous priests preach to a willing choir of zealots?

I’m one of the critics of Mehdi who disagrees with a great deal of what he has to say. I’ve seen his arguments criticized effectively and to be honest it really isn’t very hard to effectively criticize someone who said ‘those’ things about the ‘kuffar’.

But that’s not what happened here the other day. The other day we cross posted an article that implied a left wing/Islamist conspiracy centered around Mehdi Hasan. There was no real analysis, there was no really effective interpretation of data, simply a bunch of mean spirited comments attacking a high profile Muslim journalist.

Hasan didn’t need to write an article chastising the Muslim community for its latent anti-Semitism but he did it anyway. He didn’t need to be honest with the general public when talking about his conflicted views about homosexuality but he did it anyway. In doing so he shed light on topics ┬áthat aren’t discussed enough and he did it from the inside, from a personal perspective.

In writing about anti-Semitism and homophobia Hasan went out on a limb. He must have known that the organised Muslim community would close up while liberals would argue that he hadn’t gone anywhere near far enough. But he did it anyway and I respect him for it as should others. As for implying that he wanted to write for the Daily Mail in order to pursue some shadyIslamist agenda rather than furthering his career?

What the hell was that all about?

The invective published here against Hasan had nothing in it that brought something new to the debate (whatever debate that is) and represents nothing more than an anonymous attempt at character assassination by someone who really isn’t Shakespeare.

Is this really what we’re all about?