Jeremy Duns Leaves Twitter

Photo by Rebecca Duns

Jeremy Duns has left a message for why he is leaving Twitter (see below) – the author has decided to knuckle down and write some more books. I first encountered Jeremy on social media when writing about Mo Ansar on this blog. When Jeremy became involved, he took it to a whole new level. For detective work becoming a spy, his investigative standards were the ones to imitate when it came to social media. His critics called him a bully; ironic as the very people he took down were more often than not bullies themselves in trying to stop the very thing Duns would expose.

His decision to leave twitter followed an examination of antisemitism on Twitter, one which you can read more about on David Paxton’s blog here. Paxton named “Duns’ Law” as:

Someone who uses the word ‘Zionist’ or ‘Zionists’ on social media to criticize others will also have posted antisemitic material.

Seeing plagiarists challenged about their integrity and charlatans exposed for the frauds they are, all made reading his timeline compulsive viewing. Reading one of his tweets, you just had to go to his timeline to read the full story.

As he swims another lap round an island in Scandinavia, before returning to his secret writers lair, I wish him all the best.

Update:

My thanks to @moomin_kew for sharing Duns’ statement and John Matthews for letting me know in first place.

David Paxton has just told me that he did not originate Duns’ Law but is unsure who actually did. Since telling me this person has been credited. 

Article written by John Sargeant on Homo economicus’ Weblog

Follow @JPSargeant78

My Huffington Post Blog

Email: JSargeant78@gmail.com

An Update On Mo Ansar – Tell Mama Threaten Potential Legal Action

If you are new to the curious world of Mo Ansar you may want to read this post first for more context, though not essential.

The Mo Ansar vanity exercise goes on via Twitter, though now his persona is fighting for islamic orthodoxy, or more specifically for only those that fit a certain criteria for having anything worth saying about reform. Especially after he smears them.

The man that most fits this criteria is, of course, himself. Readily available for media engagements day and night. Those regular slots on TV have dried up since the exposes on him hit mainstream media.

Quilliam and TellMama

Secular progressives and ISIS sit at both extremes. They share efforts to create schism/faux-reform, by twisting Islam to suit themselves.

— Mo Ansar (@MoAnsar) November 2, 2014

Anjem represents Muslims as much as Maajid Nawaz does – that is to say, not at all. Both extremists rejected by mainstream Muslim society.

— Mo Ansar (@MoAnsar) September 25, 2014

Such has been his hatred of the Quilliam counter extremism think tank founded by Maajid Nawaz, comparing them to Anjem Choudary and ISIS. In recent months his anger has included TellMama, the counter anti-muslim bigotry organisation which dismissed his complaint against broadcaster Iain Dale (as did the police) over a Twitter exchange they had. Today all this spilled out on Twitter, as TellMama lost patience with him:

Mo Ansar tweeted (but has deleted while I wrote this piece) that he helped TellMama to grow and that they broke their promise to help with his accusation against Iain Dale.

[Update: someone else (thanks Nick!) took a screenshot here is that tweet:

]

TellMama’s reply:

David Allen Green

Mo Ansar’s claims to speak as a lawyer, and representing himself in court, have been repeatedly questioned.

David never got a direct answer, and this is the tweet he links to:

Interestingly Mo Ansar’s apology tweet, for having given any impression of being a lawyer, has been deleted.

https://twitter.com/jackofkent/status/466367408274698241

Here is the deleted tweet:

(More on “as a lawyer” and David’s comment can be read here note more tweets did exist but they have been deleted)

What Mo Ansar has done though is accuse David Allen Green of harassment for asking Mo to substantiate tweets he has publicly made:

@DavidAllenGreen You are blocked. You know this. I'll ask you once, just once, please stop harassing me.

— Mo Ansar (@MoAnsar) December 17, 2014

And that this has made him a victim:

@BelindaBG I hope Mr Green can move on. He's been blocked for causing annoyance, inconvenience and needless anxiety.

— Mo Ansar (@MoAnsar) December 17, 2014

Top Dog

Thing is Ansar’s claims regarding himself are fair comment. For example that he was top of an Al Shabab kill list:

Yet Mo Shafiq has confirmed the police and security services informed him the threat to them all (including Maajid Nawaz and others) was real, but not drawn up in this way:

@DavidAllenGreen yes I can confirm there was no list as such, like 1,2,3,4,5

— Mohammed Shafiq (@mshafiquk) May 22, 2014

The reason this keeps dragging on is because Mo Ansar keeps drawing attention to these things, without providing any credible evidence. Mentioning yet again he was top of a death list.

After my condemnation of the Woolwich killing, Al Shabab put me on top of their kill list http://t.co/K7w12Apn86 https://t.co/m4d1MNNEQl 1/2

— Mo Ansar (@MoAnsar) November 30, 2014

@terrychristian I live at the top of the Al Shabab hit list. For condemning hate, terrorism and for promoting peace http://t.co/6BI0jiShv3

— Mo Ansar (@MoAnsar) March 18, 2014

@astronomeradam Brilliant. I've had attacks from the far right, put at the top of the Al Shabab kill list, but you – you're the best.

— Mo Ansar (@MoAnsar) January 21, 2014

In other news, for speaking out against terror and extremism, I was named number one on the Al Shabab most wanted kill-list. Nice. #MoReview

— Mo Ansar (@MoAnsar) December 31, 2013

Funny old day. Albeit I'm still named at the top of Al Shabab's kill list, today we have hardline EDL, secularists + extremists complaining.

— Mo Ansar (@MoAnsar) October 29, 2013

Call the police

Why would anyone want to single themselves out so belittling the threat to others? What sort of person crows publicly about being top of a death list, but complains bitterly about tweets as harassment when the police see no issue? Who phones employers demanding they sack someone for sending a tweet?

@sanjeedah As its in the hands of the police now, suggest you don't take action that may be considered a call for your friends to harass me.

— Mo Ansar (@MoAnsar) July 18, 2012

And here is the tweet:

@sanjeedah So you know, I will be reporting you to the local constabulary under the malicious communications act. Expect a summons.

— Mo Ansar (@MoAnsar) July 15, 2012

Yes calling someone a cunt on Twitter is worthy of a police investigation then going before the courts. Except of course, it was not in the end.

Now what is Mo Ansar’s problem?

@MoAnsar @steveplrose: worked for years to build us up! Mo You really are a fantasist. Truly a fantasist, who puts vexatious claims in

— Tell MAMA UK (@TellMamaUK) December 18, 2014

However, let me leave the final word to Mo Ansar who despite smearing, petty tactics and wasting police time gives some sage advice he would do well to follow.

Post Script:

Of course Mo Ansar threatened David Allen Green as well

https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/545235850951655424

Article written by John Sargeant on Homo economicus’ Weblog

Follow @JPSargeant78

My Huffington Post Blog

Mo Ansar and Martin Luther King

It was only a matter of time before Martin Luther King and Mo Ansar would be spoken of in the same reverend tones. Modesty did not forbid Mo Ansar from being the one to do so. With Mo’s experience, drawing on comparisons between himself and King, we may not have understood what the world needs to acknowledge. That Mo Ansar is the 21st Century’s MLK.

Do not take my word for it – here is Mo Ansar’s Facebook post:

“Out of suffering have emerged the strongest souls; the most massive characters are seared with scars” ~ Khalil Gibran

Many of you will know about my background of engagement in grass roots activism serving and supporting our communities. Over the last few years, this resulted in my increased profile in the media.

Although at times it has been difficult, with attacks and criticism from all sides that have turned many heads and hardened some hearts, I have tried to stay true to what is right and perhaps controversially, I have never shied away from using that platform to promote peace, tolerance and understanding. My stance against those seeking to undermine Muslim communities, to perpetuate a civil rights crisis and create an environment of fear, hostility and prejudice between us all, between people of different races, beliefs and walks of life, to create a new McCarthyism, resulted in – not unsurprisingly – a vicious and concerted smear campaign waged against me by a number of unholy interests.

Some are easier to ignore than others, whether broadsheet or red-top tabloid; I won’t do those ridiculous smears the honour of reiterating them here, but after reading this letter sent by the authorities to Martin Luther King, dressed-up as a correspondence from a member of the Black community, I understand better how this hate manifests and how terribly scared the establishment is about change.

In this letter, disclosed recently, the neoconservative establishment calls MLK a colossal fraud, a liability and a filthy liar. They say he is no clergyman. Most disturbing of all is how they press for him to commit suicide. Whilst privately and publicly I’ve had almost all the same correspondence, often using the same phrases, it has also served to remind me of the value of belief in God. Knowing others far better than us, have shared the experience, should serve to strengthen us.

Faith is a thing which keeps you strong in the darkest of times. It is a thing which helps you withstand the harshest of storms. So, my advice is to believe and stay strong.

This from someone that supports the right of people in Bangladesh to demand the blasphemy law should mean death, who calls secular progressives extremists like ISIS, who considers Maajid Nawaz an extremist like Anjem Choudary.

Mo Ansar does not promote pluralism, tolerance or free speech. He cannot even see the contradiction in supporting a petition he claims not to want realised for de-selecting Maajid Nawaz as prospective MP (while Maajid received death threats). Nor that when asked if sharia conditions met, meant amputation is an acceptable punishment, the correct answer for a claimed theologian is not I need to check with a theologian. Nevermind “speaking as a lawyer”

Despite the expose on Mo Ansar (read about the “smears” he does not want to repeat or address here) he has been courted again by mainstream media. This has always been about the credibility, and the opinions, of Mo Ansar. However, he tries to use the Muslim community as a shield rather than confront the evidence of what he himself has said and claimed.

There is no place for bullying, racism and intimidation – let alone threats to his life anymore than Maajid Nawaz. His words are enough to show his character, which as Martin Luther King said  is what we should be judging people on.

When it came to character assassination, the smoking gun was found to have Mo Ansar’s fingerprints all over it. All we did was point at the body of evidence. Lumping us in with the vile racists and anti-muslim bigots is regrettably the only way he deals with criticism.

As ever he is welcome to reply.

Article written by John Sargeant on Homo economicus’ Weblog

Follow @JPSargeant78

My Huffington Post Blog

Why Banning Extremists Is Wrong

The British Government thinks we are children. Easily led by those that know the art of oratory. Gullible. To be twisted round the finger of any subversive sectarian megalomaniac. Theresa May, British Home Secretary, wants to ban people for subversive speech. We the people, cannot be trusted to act responsibly based on what we hear. Our elected representatives can filter for us. Long live big brother.

If we are really concerned about the likes of Anjem Choudary poisoning minds to take up violence to overthrow democracy, banning him from our television screens is the wrong way. Britain tried that with Sinn Fein. We ended up with either subtitles but no sound; and then an Irish actor lip synching when they were talking.

Ian Hislop, editor of satirical Private Eye, remarked he wanted to hear Gerry Adams to see if he smiled when asked about the people the IRA had killed. There really is no better way to hold anyone to account by knowing exactly what someone has said, how they said it, in what context.

We make much of the liberty to think and voice our opinions. The line that most free speech advocates draw is an incitement to kill. For which laws currently exist, along with counter terrorism legislation. The Home Secretary risks making Choudary a victim for Islamists to rally for with the new proposals. Young people, with radical religious notions of changing the world, will have an officially state stamped underground movement. How nice of us to signal that for them.

We should be concerned that the Conservative Coalition Government’s first instinct is to gag people to save democracy. Rather than to tackle the ideology from the ground upwards – with education and a direct path to civil society engagement. In an internet global communication age, ideas spread. Force people underground, the darkness becomes less penetrable. Beware what grows down there.

Personally I like knowing who the extremists are and what they are saying. It allows for a counter narrative. Civil society knows how to respond to people who are anti-pluralistic, hate filled, loathsome parasites. Who feast on the freedoms we offer, in order to try and destroy it.

Responding with utter contempt and derision. We need to promote people engaging with the wider community and adopting values of pluralism. That we can disagree about religion, and many things, yet live together in peace. That democracy is not weakened by individuals having many different thoughts in the market place of ideas. It makes us stronger.

This is not about tolerating the intolerable. We have laws designed to deal as I have said with counter terrorism. We are now moving to where certain insensibilities will be made illegal. A democratic government will always try to undermine human rights with a populist move. Anjem Choudary banned from the airwaves would be popular. As would banning neo-nazis.

Except I have not seen skinheads with swastika tattoos on Newsnight. I have seen plenty of Islamists being interviewed. Crucially also, seen them challenged. Giving a platform for sensationalism and ratings is irresponsible. I would argue however, that the media are the ones revealing what Islamism is, and countering it.

The government is not. It will state Islam is a religion of peace. It will not publicly countenance that within Islam is the seed of theocracy, violence and intolerance. As it exists in all religions. The rise of religious extremism – that even Buddhists are massacring Muslims in Burma with monks approving – should be a wake up call.

The need for a counter narrative is there. That though means challenging such concepts as divine revelation, the infallibility of scripture, that human discourse has moved on since angels took their place on the battlefield with men. That though makes people like Mo Ansar call Maajid Nawaz an extremist, and accuse Tom Holland of trolling Islam.

The government recognises the problem, but not the solution. One of the reasons is preciously because it is the government. A body of conflicting needs to be met: electability, foreign relations and domestic public relations. Let alone conflicting ideas how to meet these challenges.

There is however agreement that you, dear citizen, cannot be trusted to act responsibly. It is not that the government distrusts Anjem Choudary. Rather, the government distrusts you to react correctly.

That should concern you as much as the media giving a public platform to fanatics. You have a right to listen, to speak, and think for yourself.

Never let anyone take that away from you. Or else democracy has been overthrown.

Article written by John Sargeant on Homo economicus’ Weblog

Follow @JPSargeant78

My Huffington Post Blog

Update on Frances Barber and Mo Ansar

Some more background (see previous post) on the allegation by the Dr Who actress that Mo Ansar bullied her by impersonating herself on twitter. With help by Jeremy Duns, whose own sonic screwdriver unlocks social media to the outside world, this might not be the case.

Here you can see the actress Frances Barber exchange with Mo Ansar on stoning:

Mo Ansar links to this tweet of his:

You can read about my concerns about Ibrahim Hewitt here and why I hope his book is not in the school library – a private school he owns and runs.

It is an example of Mo defending people who need challenging for their extreme views of society and Islam. Regrettably that might get lost in this twitter storm that may have been caused by mistaken identity.

It now looks like the account Frances Barber referred to above may belong to an actual EDL supporter with the same name who has debated Mo Ansar. Not an impersonator.

Here Jeremy Duns points out:

This is getting more convoluted than a Dr Who plot for the uninitiated. Thankfully we have Jeremy Duns flying a Tardis to navigate tweets.

Await to see what Frances Barber has to say, in the ongoing saga of Mo Ansar.

Article written by John Sargeant on Homo economicus’ Weblog

Follow @JPSargeant78

My Huffington Post Blog