Cummins unstuck
Sir: Rod Liddle (Liddle Britain, 28 June) is mistaken to suggest that only Guardian journalists objected to articles published in the Sunday Telegraph under the pseudonym Will Cummins. My Sunday Telegraph colleague Alasdair Palmer and I (both of whom have written frequently to attack Islamic fundamentalism and Islamist terrorism) protested strongly about them at the time, in the office and — in my own case — in print.
The main reason for our disquiet was that Mr Cummins had not, as Mr Liddle argues, ‘made it clear that his beef was with the ideology, not the people’. In fact he did the opposite, energetically denigrating all Muslims as one identikit, menacing group. In a piece entitled ‘Muslims are a threat to our way of life’, Cummins remarked that, ‘All Muslims, like all dogs, share certain characteristics.’ In response to my mention of the 7,000 Bosnian Muslims massacred in Srebrenica, he asserted that such ‘defeats’ were ‘more a tribute to their incompetence than their humanity’, while describing Britain’s Muslim population as ‘the cuckoo in its nest’ which was closer to ‘a detested kite’. Would Mr Liddle say of these remarks, as he did last week of Cummins’s views on Islam, that ‘the general gist seems pretty sound’?
Jenny McCartney
London N6
Sir: Short of scouting around the BNP’s website, it is hard to imagine a more ignorant collection of rants on Islam and Muslims than those penned by Harry Cummins. They certainly do not merit the congratulatory praise heaped on them by Rod Liddle.
If this sort of routine Islam-bashing is, as Liddle claims, becoming more common, then it is a terrifying prospect. Cummins tried to scare us into believing there is a world where Islam is an evil threat trying to take over the globe. This is the sort of language that, if taken seriously, could incite violence and conflict. Quite where Liddle found any compassion in this stream of invective remains a mystery.
Take the sheer nonsense of Cummins’s statement that the only indigenous Muslims come from Arabia. Nigerian and Indonesian Muslims and white Anglo-Saxon converts will be startled to discover that the only place where Muslims ‘are native’ is thousands of miles away in the sands of the Arabian peninsular. Just where does he think are Christians native?
To cap it all, Cummins believes that Christians are the ‘rightful owners’ of most Muslims lands and the Crusaders were merely trying to get their own lands back as if all the kings of Europe had some sort of real estate claim to the Near East. Debating the role of Islam and Muslims is one thing, but lauding such incendiary lunacy is quite another. Chris Doyle
Director, Council for Arab-British Understanding, London EC4
Previous page
