Friday, 9 January 2015

Farage



While France is still suffering the shock of Wednesday’s murders, most politicians uttered the usual statements of condolence etc., but none addressed the elephant in the room.

Most people love or loathe Nigel Farage. He was pilloried by all other UK political leaders on Wednesday for mentioning the presence of a fifth column within Western societies.  Why?  I too believe there is there is a small minority of people living in UK (and other Western countries) who are hell bent on destroying the culture and traditions of their host countries.  

They do this in the name of Islam and of course this reflects on the Islamic population. Rather unfairly all Muslims are tarred with the same brush - but the Muslim population cannot continue to stick their heads in the sand and neither can our political leaders. 'It’s nothing to do with me because I’m peace-loving’ isn’t good enough anymore. Every Muslim needs to become involved in rooting out the minority of radicals in their midst and reporting them to our authorities.

Some years ago Scotland’s football supporters gained a reputation for drunken and loutish behaviour.  They weren’t welcomed at matches overseas. Did the Scots who didn’t have an interest in football say ‘It’s nothing to do with me’?  No. They accepted responsibility as a nation/culture and pressurised politicians into action.  Today, because of intense action, supporters of Scotland’s football team are welcomed all over the world. 

Attitudes can be changed if our leaders accept there is a problem.  For too long we’ve been over-tolerant with those who abuse our country.  We’ve allowed the problem to be buried as we’re only too aware that if it was mentioned we would be labelled racist.  Strangely enough, since the exposure of the 1400 young girls who were groomed for sex in north of England towns, the racist labellers have been rather quiet.  No official heads have rolled as yet for that atrocity and that is, to say the least, shocking.

A change is attitude has to come from all peace and law abiding citizens, not just those directly or indirectly affected by this vile violence.

On the news last night I heard mention of our intelligence services and how poorly funded they are in comparison with other public services.  This needs to be addressed with immediate effect. They work hard, very hard, but with the threats of violence increasing rapidly more manpower has to be employed.  The Westminster government is happy to give the police service more funding to root out stupid remarks made by silly people on social networking websites but are failing to address our basic security.

I have no answers to this serious problem. Our freedoms have been gradually reduced in recent years to suit our reputation as being a tolerant society. Has our tolerance level reduced to soft-heartedness?  Many of my generation were brought up to believe in firmness and fairness. Maybe a return to such values are now impossible.

H/T to Frank for the video.

27 comments:

Dioclese said...

Nicely put, Rosie...

Disenfranchised of Buckingham said...

Spot on

Edward Spalton said...

Hello Rosie,
There was an episode in the earlier trial of Geert Wilders ( at which he was acquitted of Islamophobia or whatever because he had stuck to facts) which was generally suppressed in the mainstream media here.

He had called as a Defence witness an eminent Arabist, a Professor Jansen. Jansen's testimony was so explosive that the judge who had insisted on the prosecution actually tried to nobble the witness by engineering a meeting at a private dinner party.

This became known and the bench of judges ( no jury of course) had to be dismissed and a new one appointed. They too would not allow Jansen to testify in person but did include his written evidence in the record.
Simply put, Jansen's evidence was this. There is not and can never be any such thing as " Moderate Islam" because the faith is defined for all time by its scripture and authoritative commentaries. There are, of course, many moderate Muslims - that is Muslims who are not always fully observant of all the commands of the religion.
These commands include never making friends or peace with infidels. Contracts, treaties and truces are permitted as long as the faithful continue to work for the submission of every last non Muslim to the faith. Only then does the state of war end.
if you read the Muslim accounts of the establishment of the faith after the flight to Medina ( the emigration from which the Muslim calendar dates) you will see that the behaviour of ISIS and of these young men follows the pattern very closely- assassinations, massacres, the lot.

I have occasion to be deeply grateful to our Muslim GP of years ago who was a most conscientious man, making unasked house calls when he was worried about the health of our very young children. So it gives me no pleasure at all to have this knowledge - but there it is and our leaders just cannot bring themselves to acknowledge it.



Sobers said...

The issue arises particularly with Islam because its so decentralised. There's no-one in charge. Thus when you compare to say the child abuse scandal in the Catholic Church, where there is a body that can be sued, that can be fined, that can enforce its decisions on the entire church, there's nothing like this in Islam. You just have a mass of competing interpreters of the Koran (the Imams), none of whom have anyone over them in authority. So if Imam A says its OK to be a suicide bomber, there's no-one to excommunicate him from Islam and declare him an apostate.

I think the only solution to the problem in the West is that the State must legislate that all mosques become part of a larger organisation (an Islamic church body if you like) and be accredited, and be closed down if they step outside the (as we are repeatedly told) peaceful nature of Islam. Some amount of control must be taken over the decentralised nature of the religion as it is today, because we can't go on with this cuckoo in the nest.

oldrightie said...

Discipline demands leadership. We no longer have such people, bar possibly Farage. An Establishment of fops, appeasers and weaklings. All in thrall to political correctness and celebrity status.

Joe Public said...

I second Dioclese's comment.

Reasonable people accept the tenet "When in Rome, do as the Romans".

The Koran expects "When in Rome, demand the natives adapt to our beliefs, standards etc."

Aided & abetted by weasel UK politicians for the following Political Correctness:

The ‘Stephen Lawrence Inquiry Report’ recommended that the following definition of a racist incident should be adopted by the police, local government and other relevant agencies:

‘A racist/religious incident is any incident which is perceived to be racist/religious by the victim, or any other person.’

A Londoner could perceive that a Celtic goal vs Rangers is racist/religious; and hey presto, a crime has been committed.

Employees particularly in the public sector are paranoid about taking adverse decisions affecting a 'minority' personage, because there's virtually no defense to a claim that someone perceives being slighted.

A whole sub-genre industry has been created within the legal profession to profit from such fear.

http://www.cps.gov.uk/publications/prosecution/rrpbcrleaf.html

JRB said...

When it’s a Muslim gunman = an entire religion is guilty

When it’s a Black gunman = an entire race is guilty

When it’s a White gunman = it is just a mentally troubled lone wolf individual

Edward Spalton said...

Well JRB,
It's certainly not the Quakers, Seventh Day Adventists, Christadelphians, Methodists, Baptists, Presbyterians, Anglicans or Catholics who are doing these things, is it?

Edward Spalton said...

Sobers

Just try to get an imam or any practising Muslim to say publicly that it should no longer be part of their creed that any Muslim who stops being a Muslim should be killed.

They cannot say it because they too would be guilty of Shrk ( apostasy) if they did. .

They can only say not now, not yet.

Our pharmacist was a very urbane Kashmiri with whom I happily discussed the world and its ways. It was the time of the controversy over Salman Rushdie's book and I chanced to mention it.
He changed utterly, his face contorted and he spat " He must die!"
It was like a glimpse into the inferno - certainly a completely alien view of the world.


JRB said...

Well Edward Spalton

Prey tell me, of what race/religion were :-

Anders Breivik, Utoya Norway, killed 77
Derrick Bird, Cumbria England, killed 12
Michael Ryan, Hungerford England, killed 16
Thomas Hamilton, Dunblane Scotland, killed 16
Marc Lepine, Montreal Canada, killed 15
Eric Harris, Columbine Colarado, killed 13

- they are certainly not Muslim, nor are they Black
(one was Anglican, one was Presbyterian, two were Catholic)

Joe Public said...

@ JRB said...at 20:31

"When it’s a Muslim gunman = an entire religion is guilty"

CharlieHebdo Murderers - "We have avenged the prophet"

Boko Haram - nothing to do with Islam

Al Qaeda - nothing to do with Islam

ISIL - nothing to do with Islam

Apologists - "It had nothing to do with Islam"

"I won’t link these attacks perpetrated by ultra-Muslims with Islam lest it cost me a few votes in GE2015"

Sky News a few hours ago: French President Francois Hollande calls #ParisAttacks suspects "fanatics that have nothing to do with Islam" [Suspects???]

Hamas (whom the EU removed from the terror list in December) newspaper publishes photos of the terrorists, calling them "the heroes of France invasion"

Boko Haram murder nearly 2000 women, children and elderly http://bigstory.ap.org/article/b2d7a0252dd04676b20697bd39356fcc/7-kids-reunite-parents-lost-nigeria-islamic-uprising

Yesterday, the Saudis began a punishment of one of their citizens. By the grace of Allah, it was spread over 20 sessions, rather over a single session. But that helps, 'cos it's a spectator sport to them:

http://www.ryot.org/video-saudi-arabia-blogger-raif-badawi-flogged-public/909705

And finally:

https://windsorcoactforamerica.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/violent-koran-verses.jpg





subrosa said...

Thanks Dioclese.

subrosa said...

Good to see you DoB.

subrosa said...

Hello Edward, I do remember reading about that incident. You may have brought it to my attention.

There’s an article in the Independent which may interest you.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/charlie-hebdo-paris-attack-brothers-campaign-of-terror-can-be-traced-back-to-algeria-in-1954-9969184.html

subrosa said...

Good points Sobers. It seems so called leaders can be self-appointed rather than democratically elevated to the position by their peers.

subrosa said...

Couldn’t have put it better myself OR.

subrosa said...

Perception = silencing as per the SL Inquiry Report Joe. I don’t think I’ve seen many losers when those ‘offended’ take their complaint through the courts.

subrosa said...

I don’t agree JRB. I think the relevant cultures have to accept some responsibility though.

subrosa said...

Hamilton wasn’t a loner, he socialised quite a bit. He had strange ideas though and they were evident to many around him. However, they did nothing. That’s why the inquiry evidence is locked away for generations.

I’m unable to comment on the others JRB as I didn’t follow the cases in any depth.

subrosa said...

Thanks for your input Joe.

Edward Spalton said...

JRB
None of the criminals you mention claimed Christian justification for their actions.

Fifteen years ago, I was campaigning to " keep the pound" in the centre of Derby. A group of Muslim missionaries had set up their stall largely blocking access to St Peter's Church. I went to have a discussion with them, as it was likely they had votes. Their leader was a very well spoken young man with an educated Oxford accent.
When I suggested that people who came to live in this country should respect its laws, he replied " For a Muslim, that is oppression". It was not a meeting of minds! Later I said " but surely if you come to live in our country.." Quick as a flash, he came back " It is not your country, it is Allah's". So I came home, read the Koran and some of the authoritative commentaries and found that what he said was entirely consistent with the teaching.
A lady of my acquaintance, a kindly, neighbourly soul lives in Glasgow and was on very good terms with her Muslim neighbours. When the Twin Towers atrocity occurred, she was sorely shaken to see these same neighbours whooping and celebrating. She is now more reserved. It was a rude awakening.
Islam means submission and it is we whom the scripture and teachings of that religion and ideology command should be made to submit.


English Pensioner said...

Muslims will very rarely speak out against something that a fellow Muslim has done, regardless of whether they agree with it or not. They certainly will never ever speak out against something that a Muslim has done to a non-Muslim, as their religion preaches that all non-believers should submit to their religion and thus whatever is done to a non-believer, it is totally acceptable.
There is no argument against their beliefs, they are all written down and must be obeyed to the letter, unlike most other religions where their Holy Books are regarded as guidance rather than the letter of the law.
I object to them claiming that my dislike of their religion is Islamophobia. The definition of a phobia is an irrational dislike of something; my dislike of Islam is certainly not irrational, I surely have every reason to dislike, or even hate, an organisation which wants to kill me for not submitting to their beliefs.

JRB said...

Why did these killers coldly murder Ahmed Merabet – a fellow Muslim, as he tried to protect French citizens?
Why did Lassana Bathily – a fellow Muslim, hide and protect a group of Jewish shoppers?

I would suggest it is because they showed the true spirit of Islam - or the true spirit of any religion come to that, to show care and compassion for ones fellow man.
What we have witnessed in Paris is simply the manifestation of criminality and evil.
That evil may try to convince itself and others by pretending that it has some greater quasi-religious or political purpose, but it remains forever fundamentally evil far removed from any religion or any form of democratic politics.

In an ever shrinking austere world xenophobia has sadly become the norm and we fear and distance ourselves from those who are not us.

Edward Spalton said...

JRB

It all depends what you mean by the "true spirit of Islam".
If you start at the very beginning (a very good place to start), you will see that the Muslim calendar begins with the Hegira - the migration of the prophet and his friends to Medina where they established a very successful, rapidly expanding state.

Their methods are described in the writings which are accepted as authoritative by believers. You will find the accounts very similar to the tactics used by ISIL, Boko Haram and Al Shabab today - as well as by those enthusiasts, grown up amongst us and the French. And they claim this example as their holy, infallible inspiration worldwide. It is part of the foundation, unfortunately inseparable from Islam as a whole because the basic religious claim is that the revelation is the final word of Allah to Man this side of time. There can be no "New Testament".

Now, of course, not all Muslims are like this - as was the evidence of Professor Jansen, mentioned in my earlier post and as I discovered from the ministrations of our respected Muslim family doctor.

Muslims of the extreme sort are not at all reluctant to take the lives of fellow believers(or anyone else) when they believe it will benefit the cause of the faith.

If you look at a map or aerial photograph of Gaza, you will see that it is a heavily built up area but large parts of it are not. Yet Hamas always launch their rockets against Israel from amongst the most populous areas, preferably next to schools etc, knowing that the Israeli counter-battery response will produce eminently telegenic pictures of pitiful civilian casualties (a cause to which I am pleased to donate - a mangled child is a mangled child)

Quite rightly, they reckon that these pictures will be more helpful to their cause than anything else. If they were to put their rocket batteries in the unpopulated areas, only their own gunners would get killed.



They have pulled stunts of similar and more deceptive sorts from the Balkans to Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere. Somehow or other, the Western media never really gets round to mentioning it.

Of course, Western interventions have added much, much more than its share of suffering and misery - on bogus pretexts like Tony Blair's "Weapons of mass destruction" . In doing so, they have made the Middle East and elsewhere immeasurably more unstable and have been the best possible recruiters for the fundamentalists.


A phobia is an irrational fear. I think we have fourteen centuries of very plain evidence to show that it is eminently reasonable to fear the politico/religious creed of Islam which has always been one of conquest.

Pretending that it is something other than it is does not help.




subrosa said...

EP, the Islamophobia is just another label uttered by those who wish to close down discussion. I doubt if it exists.

subrosa said...

I’m making an assumption here JRB. Those Muslims killed were in the service of the non-believers and therefore were against Allah. Or maybe they were killed in error.

It seems the Koran was cited at all killings but that’s only hearsay.

Of course there are Muslims who live by the values of ‘do unto others ...’ but far too many Muslim Ieaders have been allowed to preach hate without restriction. All in the name of tolerance.

Our ‘tolerance’ will be our downfall.

Edward Spalton said...

Charlie Hebdo was a pretty grubby satirical magazine. It has now appeared with a depiction of the prophet shedding a tear and the "Je suis Charlie" catchphrase. What rot!

The satirists of pre-literate Arabia were the poets and the prophet was very touchy about them. The following story is recounted in the Sunna, a compilation of pious stories of the prophet and his exemplary behaviour for legal precedent and emulation by his followers.

When he established his Islamic state in Medina, the alternatives for the inhabitants were conversion, expulsion or death (just the same as with ISIL/ISIS). His very first victim was a poetess, Asma Bint Marwan, who had made uncomplimentary verses about him.

He sent one of his followers by the name of Umayr who duly stabbed her to death whilst she was nursing her child.
Muhammad praised the killer. The following morning, the surviving members of the family became Muslim.

Allah's verdict on poets generally (especially those who mocked the prophet) was that they were inspired by Satan and had gone astray (Ref 52:29)

The young men who killed the French satirical journalists acted entirely within this tradition.

Related Posts with Thumbnails