Dr Joel Hayward is a
pain-in-the-ass
I have a friend called Dr Joel Hayward. He’s a scholar, an academic lecturer, a writer, a poet and a Muslim. He’s also a pain-in-the-ass (but more on that later).
Joel holds various academic posts, including Dean of the Royal Air Force College, Co-Director of the Royal Air Force Centre for Air Power Studies, Head of King’s College London’s Air Power Studies Division and Professor of Strategy (Adjunct) at the Indonesian Defence University.
As a writer, Joel is very versatile – short stories, poems and an absolutely brilliant biography of Admiral Lord Nelson, as well as other non-fiction books about air warfare and a great many articles about Islam in its many dimensions. In recent times, he has written extensively to educate Muslim audiences that the Afghanistan and Iraq situations are not part of a deliberate ‘war on Islam’ by the West – even though that is what Al-Qaeda want people to believe. This is very important work on Joel’s part, if we are ever to end the conflicts and stabilise those countries.
"Hayward is a prolific writer on military history, strategy, operational art and command. ... In this exceptionally well written book he answers his own question [Is there anything new and important to be said about Nelson?] with an eloquent 'yes'."
Lt Col Richard Seamon, USMCR (ret.) U.S. Naval Proceedings
"Stopped at Stalingrad is a first-class publication. It is authoritative ... and an example of how 'new military history' should be written. It should firmly cement Joel Hayward's reputation as a talented writer and a fine historian."
New Zealand Army Journal
The two things which his many former students consistently have said is that he was one of their best lecturers and that he always taught them to question and challenge everything, especially the teacher. You can find many such comments about him on the Internet.
His hairstyle has always been rubbish, though.
Joel is from New Zealand, and has Jewish ancestry. In fact, he became literate in Hebrew, and in his twenties was a member of the New Zealand Friends of Israel. At that time he made several trips to Israel and also founded an organisation called Opposition to Anti-Semitism (OAS), which he headed for its first two years.
In 1991, Joel received a BA from the University of Canterbury in Christchurch, specialising in History and Classics. He then went on to do a MA and then a PhD.
Joel’s MA thesis was on the subject of Holocaust Revisionism. He was supervised and examined by Professors of History from the universities of Canterbury and Waikato, and given an A+ for his thesis – which was judged the best history thesis of his year and won him the Sir James Hight Memorial Prize, awarded for ‘excellence’.
In his thesis, Joel (a Hebrew-literate ‘Friend of Israel’ of Jewish background) probed the extent to which the Holocaust had been planned and organised, the number of gas chambers used and the numbers of victims involved. In no way, shape or form could this be construed as ‘Holocaust Denial’.
Joel’s MA thesis, completed in 1993, was released to public scrutiny in 1999. Unfortunately, certain parties labeled it as ‘Holocaust Denial’ and this spurious claim has haunted him ever since. A committee was formed and the University of Canterbury conducted a lengthy investigation. They concluded that there were errors of research in the thesis, but that Joel Hayward was entirely innocent of any deliberate anti-Semitism or Holocaust Denial. Joel subsequently apologised for the research flaws and even publically apologised to the New Zealand Jewish community who were so up-in-arms about this.
He moved to the UK in 2004, and became Muslim in 2007. (The imam warned him at the time to expect vilification and ridicule, but nothing happened ... until now.)
Joel is the most humble, tolerant, peace-advocating person I know. From a scholarly perspective, he condemns all terrorism perpetrated in the name of Islam – regardless of the justification. He has written extensively on this.
Joel’s website gives a hint of the breadth and depth of his interests and talents.
Recently, he berated Muslims on Facebook who use foul language. I totally agree with him on this. There are many kinds of so-called ‘Muslim’, and the semi-literate ‘gangsta’ kind I find rather distasteful – these are ethnically ‘Muslim’ rather than through belief and practice.
Joel gets criticised by some so-called ‘Muslims’, who claim that he isn’t a real Muslim because he doesn’t have a beard. Well, those cave men can go back to the desert. You only have to look at Joel’s writings to see what an outstanding Muslim he is – educated, knowledgeable, balanced, humble, modest, peaceful. If only there were more like him.
But Joel is also a pain-in-the ass. (Forgive me for using the American form, but it rolls off the tongue better.) You see, he is too gentle, too tolerant, too peace-loving and too humble. It’s really annoying.
Do you remember when Harold Camping -- the American so-called Christian so-called Preacher – predicted that 21st May 2011 would be the Day of Rapture? Well, I posted a joke on my Facebook page about it, on 21st May.
‘I saw my doctor about a pain in my appendix, and he said it could Rupture any time today.’
Most of my friends thought it was very funny, but Joel sent me a private message:
“…You are one of the wittiest writers I have ever read, and I thank God for your talent, but -- in private, not on your wall -- I respectfully ask you to reflect on the wisdom of mocking people of faith even for very mistaken beliefs.”
But I wasn’t mocking Christians in general, I was only mocking those lunatic end-timers who long for the world to end, and ignore what the Bible actually says. For it is written that no-one, not even Jesus, could know the hour … “but only the Father in Heaven.”
But anyway, this just goes to demonstrate that Joel Hayward is just too nice even to have a laugh at end-timers. He totally exudes tolerance, respect, peace and humility. So much so that he disapproves of mocking people of another faith – even Christian end-timers (who I think are an embarrassment even to their own brethren). Because he berates others who do this, this qualifies him as a pain-in-the ass.
You really need to understand this to comprehend the importance of what follows.
Joel’s very well-informed and scholarly writings debunk the current popular belief that Islam is inherently violent, and he is a living example of this. He does explain in depth Islam’s position on war – what constitutes a ‘just war’ and how it must be conducted. Obviously, the killing of non-combatants is strictly forbidden. Nonetheless, sometimes war is an unpleasant necessity – as the Second World War was against the Nazis.
Joel goes to great lengths to explain the early history of Islam and the conditions under which the Prophet Muhammad was operating. Just as the Romans tried to exterminate the troublesome early Christians, so did the pagan idol-worshipping Arabs try to eradicate the irritating early Muslims, with their extremely annoying ‘there is only one God and He’s not a stone idol’ concept.
There were times when it looked as if the early Muslims were going to be completely wiped out. The Prophet had to motivate them, to make them believe that they could not only survive, but endure – even though hopelessly outnumbered. Here Joel makes a comparison with the motivational speeches of Winston Churchill – giving the British people hope when the future looked dire.
“We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender …”
From a Muslim perspective, for Churchill to be compared with Muhammad is a huge compliment to Churchill.
In recent times, Joel has written very balanced pieces on Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya. On the latter, he totally supports the removal of Gaddafi, but urges caution in NATO’s conduct (and how it may be perceived) and, in particular, the avoidance of ‘mission creep’. For whilst it is obvious that we must protect civilians against attack by policing the ‘no fly’ zone, Joel warns that NATO should not become the de facto air force of the rebels (‘of whom we know very little’). All of these writings are clearly labelled as his own opinion.
In summary, Joel Hayward is a scholar, a respected teacher, and he displays exemplary compassion, tolerance, peace and humility.
So it came as something of a shock to see the Mail on Sunday and the Daily Mail both publish a prominent ‘news’ story attacking and totally demonizing Dr Joel Hayward.
The article first appeared in the Mail on Sunday on 7th August, and was repeated in the Daily Mail on 8th August.
The article bluntly portrays Joel as a Holocaust-denying, anti-West, anti-NATO-intervention, anti-British, fascist, Islamist fundamentalist bully, who has published with an institution which has extremist/terrorist links.
If it was satire, it would be hilarious -- but it's evil, vicious and cruel, with no interest in the truth.
This is an utter abomination.
Just when we thought the News of the World had taken British journalism into the gutter, this ‘journalist’ Ian Gallagher has bubbled up from the putrid depths of the sewer with a deliberate and callous attack on a decent human being, using distortion, half-truths and lies.
Taking information from Joel’s own website and Wikipedia entry (and even photos from Joel’s website), Ian Gallagher has twisted and distorted and de-contextualised everything to create a shoddy piece of so-called journalism. It is nothing but an attempt to get Mail readers worked-up and angry about a perceived outrage – that a nasty, crazy, hate-filled anti-Semitic, anti-Western, fundamentalist Muslim is Dean of the Royal Air Force College. What a great story! – except that it’s an abominable lie.
Let’s take a look at Ian Gallagher’s article.
An Ayatollah is a very senior Shia cleric, virtually at the level of Pope. But Joel is neither Shia nor a cleric. So to refer to him as an ‘Ayatollah’ is like referring to someone as a ‘Pope’ just because he’s Christian (even if he’s Protestant), or a Jewish man as ‘Chief Rabbi’ (just because he’s Jewish).
So a deliberately provocative and spiteful headline, which sets the tone for the rest of the article.
Gallagher refers to Joel’s twenty-year-old thesis as if it was contemporary, and strongly portrays Joel as a Holocaust Denier – which is complete nonsense.
Gallagher takes isolated passages from Joel’s balanced writings and presents him as opposing NATO’s mission in Libya – when he’s only urging caution and warning against ‘mission creep’.
An Islamist bully? Anyone who's met Joel knows that he is a softly spoken, cordial, gentle man. He never raises his voice in anger -- his own staff would attest to this. For him to be presented as a bully is utterly despicable.
Then there’s that great line thrown in – “In another article recently he likened Churchill to Mohammed” – without any explanation of what this means. From a Muslim, that’s a huge compliment to Churchill. But in this article, it’s just another hot button to work up the Mail reader.
There is a mention that Joel wrote something for the Cordoba Foundation, which can be linked to extremism apparently. But what did he write in that article for the Cordoba Foundation? The Mail doesn't tell us, but here is an extract:
"The Holocaust of the Jews in the Second World War, one of history’s vilest crimes, involved the organised murder of six million Jews by Germans and others who considered themselves Christians or at least members of the Christian value system."
What makes this particularly sickening is that clearly it's not even a misunderstanding -- it's deliberate, deceitful and callous to link Joel to extremism due to an article he wrote, and not reveal that the content of the article is completely the reverse of what the Mail is trying to portray.
The Mail article itself reveals what triggered this off. Someone with a grudge against Joel wrote a letter to the Mail and (on condition of anonymity, of course) made all these allegations. Gallagher then pulled some isolated facts from Joel’s website, arranged and distorted them to create the worst possible impression and the most devastating character assassination, and created the best story he could.
Joel has been writing and speaking as a Muslim for years, and even very recently told Muslim audiences – in defence of the West – that he had never been attacked for being Muslim, that the fact that he could be Muslim and Dean of the Royal Air Force college proved that there was no concerted, deliberate plan by the West to attack Islam and kill Muslims. That is just propaganda by Al-Qaeda to get Muslims worked up, instead of analysing each complex situation to truly understand what is going on.
But complex, nuanced analysis is too much for Ian Gallagher. It’s all black and white to him.
The 'information' sources for this article appear to be:
- A malicious letter from an anonymous source.
- Joel's Wikepedia entry.
- Joel's own website (very selectively quoted).
What outstanding journalism!
I spoke to Joel about this article. He was clearly deeply upset. He said that Gallagher phoned him and spoke to him for about five minutes, but that he had no interest in gaining any perspective. His questions were very perfunctory and accusatory, of the nature of ‘Do you deny that …?’ It was clear that Gallagher had already constructed the article and was just playing lip service to journalistic professionalism.
When the first article came out, Joel was stunned and in a state of shock at how he had been portrayed. His wife cried all day. His aged mother called from New Zealand, also crying – the local press had picked up the story.
I told Joel not to take this personally. In the war between truth and falsehood, the latter has only one weapon – lies. Ian Gallagher is a soldier of falsehood and constructing lies is his profession.
In recent times, a motley collection of media people, politicians and bloggers have been constructing and propagating a conspiracy theory that Muslims are poised to 'take over' the West and impose Islamic law on everyone. Part of this sinister masterplan is that Muslims (both overt and covert) are assuming positions of significant influence in western society. (If you actually know any Muslims, you will be aware that they aren't unified and couldn't organise a p***-up in a brewery -- not just for religious reasons.)
Such dark and frightening prospects create the concept of the sinister 'other' who is a deadly threat to 'our way of life' and must be stopped before it's too late. Paranoid individuals absorb all this, and get a sense of self-worth by having a cause to fight for and an enemy. Then they blow up buildings and kill people.
Everyone who participates in this lunacy must bear some responsibility for what happened in Norway.
A few Mail readers have responded predictably, with outraged comments questioning how someone like this could possibly hold such an important post, and berating what this implies about the state of the country (decline and fall). Well, he can hold the post because this is all lies and distortion.
But an interesting phenomenon has arisen. I urge you to go the New Zealand web pages and look at the comments left by Joel’s former students. What a different perspective that gives!
Also, go to Joel’s own website and see all the material there. You will find virtually everything that’s written in the Mail article, but in context.
The impression you will get from the website is that Joel Hayward is a decent, scholarly, intelligent, gentle man. And that impression will be entirely accurate.
Historically, I actually used to have a lot of empathy with the Daily Mail. They published the first newspaper review of my book, and it was absolutely stunning – they gave it a full page with a huge photograph. I was very much aligned with the DM’s views on law and order, uncontrolled immigration, runaway multiculturalism, and the threat to the general ethos of this country. I have written for the Daily Mail in the past and been paid for it.
But this vicious attack and character assassination of a decent human being is totally unacceptable. Ian Gallagher is truly a master at what he does – select some facts and then organise and present them in a way which conveys the opposite of the truth, to make a great 'story' which will outrage readers. Mission accomplished.
Because he’s a pain-in-the ass, Joel told me that he chooses to forgive those behind this smear. He says that they are operating out of ignorance, rather than true evil.
That is going too far. I think we should hate them. But we don’t need to take revenge, because it will be taken care of. “For as a man soweth, so shall he reap.” We will each enjoy the fruits of our karma.
Many people who know what Joel is really like wrote to the Comments section in protest, but their comments never appeared. And the Mail then closed the page to further comments rather abruptly.
I'm not the only one who knows that something is wrong here.
Minhaj-ul-Quran International -- a prominent, peace-advocating inter-faith organisation -- had this to say:
'We commend Dr Hayward for his extensive efforts on his own time as a volunteer worker with Muslim youth and community groups to teach them about the value of integration, multiculturalism, interfaith dialogue and especially about the evils of terrorism and extremism. Dr Hayward has supported several Minhaj-ul-Quran International de-radicalisation workshops at which he has been very effective at explaining the motives and methods of terrorism as well as developing strategies for de-radicalising youth and hopefully preventing another terrorist atrocity. This is highly valuable work and it is unbelievable that Dr Hayward’s well-known efforts were not included in the character-assassination article.'
Right now, we need to stand up for Joel Hayward ... because the next person they lie about and demonise could be you or me. Please circulate this as widely as possible.
Imran Ahmad
Recent Comments