To paraphrase Abba, “tonight the super snooper teams are gonna get you”, if one listens to the new Brown policy of training 60,000 shop and hotel workers “t0 deal” with a terrorist attack. However the thing that struck me – and not for the first time – was how the BBC insists on defining the nature of this terrorist threat; you see it comes from non-violent conservative Muslim groups that teach that Islam is incompatible with Western democracy. Note – not RADICAL Muslim groups, oh no, CONSERVATIVE Muslim groups. Well, here’s the deal then; if these really are conservative groups this implies they teach the essential traditions of Islam which in turn would rather indicate that Islam ITSELF is the threat. Will the BBC run with that idea or will it instead continue to use the subtlety of language to associate the term conservatism with the worst dregs of radical Islam?
Shopworkers FFS?
Make way make way… I’m a shelf stacker at Kwik E Mart!
Shurely shome mishtake…..
I just wish Gordon Clown would stop digging when he realises he’s in a hole.
Conservatives are to blame for everything and that message must be spread by Gordon Brown and the BBC at every opportunity, how else can perpetual Labour government be assured?
the government/bbc also seem to be pushing the mysterious phrase “violent extremism” or “violent extremists”.
hmmmm …..just who are these people?
presumably they add the “violent ” so as no to cause offence to non violent extremists who must of course be mollycoddled and talked to / funded by our dhimmi foreign and home office.
The ideological straitjacket of much of the political liberal/left (including key elements at the BBC), fits with Islamic ideology.
1.) Robert Spencer, ‘Jihadwatch’ (2004):
“Exposing Leftists’ Radical Islam Connection”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/003
391.php
2.) Ibn Warraq: ‘New English Review’ (2009):
“Islam as Totalitarianism”
http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/30778/sec_id/30778
3.) Ayaan Hirsi Ali:
“Muslim threat to Europe”
http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_display.cfm/blog_id/20112
Newlabour seem to be intent on recreating the old east Germany here, only the newlabour comrades could lead us into national bankruptcy and then start employing tens of thousands of nonjob parasites and stasi informers!
60.000 spies and informers, arent there enough PCSOs and street safety wardens already?
The UK is being swamped with useless jobsworths enforcing the miriad of new petty laws’N’regulations, real crime goes unchecked and unpunished and Islamists are free to plot against us under the protection of yuman rites while the ordinary people are chased and persecuted for trivial offences against the new all powerful state.
Newlabour claim this new army of street informers is to protect us against terrorism when in fact its we who need protecting from these freedom stealing commissars!
How are these new jobsworths going to spot terrorists, shifty eyed dark skinned hijab wearing lurkers with backpacks?
How are they going to respond to an attack, issue fixed penalty notices to the terrorists?
The BBC offered the usual protection to Jackboot Smith who labours under the illusion that all we need now is more and more state parasites to bleed an already mortally wounded nation.
Apart from the conservative Mussulman and the radical Mussulman, a google search reveals that there is also the “liberal Mussulman”.
This is an individual who is prepared to “. . . adopt the social framework that you (the west) has developed – simply because it is working better than the ones we have, and because it is not actually western, but inherently universal”.
The reason the west’s social framework is “not actually western”, of course, is that the Musullman actually developed most of it first, without anyone really noticing. But the “because” in “because it is not actually western” can be interpreted in no other way than “If it were actually western, we wouldn’t adopt it, so there, infidel pigs and monkeys”.
One suspects the liberal Mussulman is something of fraud. Just another jerker in a burka.
After watching Sky’s coverage of the latest terrorist bill, I switched over to News 24 where the bBC also had its experts talking on the subject.
Frank-Don’t shoot I’m a muslim-Gardener comes out that the main reason there is a terrorist threat in the Uk is because of (wait for it)
Gaza.
Yup Frank the peace loving plumber who shot you and put you in a Wheel-chair did so because of Gaza.
you have them nailed here David.
Its yet another nonsensical contradiction to add to the long list
David Vance,
According to News Sniffer the BBC edited out the word “conservative”, about three and a half hours ago. Looks like somebody slapped a sub-editor wrist. They still don’t say “radical”, though.
(NB Defenders of the indefensible: Notice that DV is not calling for the BBC to state that all Muslims are jihadi nutters, or that Islam is an irredeemably violent religion, full stop, which cannot co-exist with modern society. He is calling for the BBC to call the violent nutters “radical”. That ought to put the lie to claims that this is nothing more than an Islam-hater blog.)
Why don’t they have Majid Nawaz or someone like him on every day calling for Muslims to protest against jihadi violence? Where are the QT panels about how British Muslims should be following the example of the recent anti-violence protests in NI? The BBC should be highlighting that attitude across the programming spectrum, instead of relegating this voice to the World Service. That actually would be upholding their Charter. The fact that they haven’t been doing this all along is a testament to their intellectual failure.
‘Islam ITSELF is the threat.’
Yup, David, got it in one.
Actually I like one eyed McSnot digging himself a deep hole. I just hope there is a JCB around to fill the thing in with him at the bottom of it.
once again showing your lack of knowledge about Islam and terrorism, David. ‘Conservative’ Islam is not the greatest term, granted, but it is clearly referring to a strict interpretation of the Koran, as practised in Saudi Arabia for example.
They are not associating conservatism (ie. British conservatism) with Islamic conservatism. I had never heard such a ridiculous suggestion before seeing you make that claim a while back on this board. Again, you drawing your own conclusions and opinions, yet presenting them as though they are somehow widely accepted.
Once again showing your lack of knowledge about Islam and terrorism.
Gus Haynes | 24.03.09 – 5:35 pm |
You to a T.
You do not know the first thing about it. You have no understanding whatsoever of the level of threat facing the UK today.
You do not understand where the bulk of that threat is coming from, their ideology, their stategy, their funding. You clearly cannot grasp that, from 1990 onwards, successive governments have failed to address the situation, being poorly advised from the outset by the Security Service. Something which has led our allies to despair and now culminating in the CIA having to devote 40% of it’s resources in combatting Islamic extemism to the UK because our own capabilities are now so woefully inadequate. Something that the Labour shits in power know full well but are terrified to admit to the British public.
For Goodness sake, if you cannot come out with something coherent then sod off.
I was listening to Radio 4 this morning.Around 9 o’clock there was a bunch of women discussing feminism.Adding to the discussion was a Muslim who continually claimed that Mohammed was a feminist and that was why women’s action groups are flourishing in the middle east!Yes and Gordon Brown’s got stereo eyesight.
The semantics of “conservative” and “radical”, et al, may be important, but the fundamental mind-boggling stupidity of this “on the hoof” idea is of much greater concern. It seems certain that Gordo has never had to deal with the shop-assistant who has difficulty operating the till; nor the “security” man who looks the other way when something obnoxious is happening right in front of him.
Just more people who will have a tick-box check-list; a second-string to the already useless cardboard cut-out pretend-police that we’ve got now.
I hear the 60,000 are going to be issued with special ‘Brown Shirts’. The insignia on the arm is going to be a little black cross thing, turned on it’s side.
I almost felt sorry for Jacqui Smith this morning. What a fine pickle she’s got herself into now. She’s teetering on a tightrope between ‘jeopardising social cohesion’ in other words rivers of blood, aka civil war, and appeasing radicals with funding and a sympathetic ear so they’re left to commit a massive atrocity unhindered.
Which ever way she topples she’s between a rock and a hard place and risks losing a vote or three. Oh well; should have thought of that earlier. Too late now.
I wouldn’t put much faith in Maajid Nawaz and the Quilliams. Although they are critical of radical ideology they still justify Muslims’ sense of grievance by blaming Gaza and foreign policy.
It boils down to making a choice between Ed Husain or Ayaan Hirsi Ali who say, respectively – there are moderate Muslims – or there’s no such thing, it’s just Islam. Slow jihad or regular, I tend to go for the latter.
During that item on the Tory thread above, by way of illustrating ‘the mad and the bad’ Mark Mardell quizzed MEP Mogens Camre from the Danish anti-immigration People’s Party.
“You are quoted as saying Muslims just want to breed, to kill us all” he sneered.
Mogens Camre said that was a false interpretation of something he’d said right after 9/11.
Imagine Mark Mardell quizzing Mohammed Atta before 9/11: “You’ve been quoted as saying you’re going to fly planes into the twin towers and kill 3,000 people” Mad and bad, eh?
Mark Mardell could sneer all he liked but Mohammed Atta of the religion of peace would have had the last laugh..
Labour’s got it right on this one.
Cassandra | 24.03.09 – 11:18 am |
I think you’ve hit the nail on the head there. They will not be used to fight terrorism anyway. How can they?- the left won’t even admit who the enemy is. They will not be used to “combat terrorism” and like every other “inititive” brought out by this government it will have all the “unintended” cosequenses. It will be the ordinary Joe Public who will suffer from these snoopers – terrorists will just carry on regardless.
Jon | 24.03.09 – 10:17 pm |
Been through airport security recently?
Me, white, grey hair, 60 something carrying 3 year old daughter in the company of 40 year old wife behind some burka clad idiot following 3 steps behind a bearded wonder who looks straight out of Ali Baba and the 40 thieves
Who got stopped and patted down? No prizes for guessing.
This new ‘initiative’ will fall foul at the first hurdle, that being “stereotyping” what ever that really means and those involved having to “balance” their reporting in.
“Hello Mr. Plod I’ve just seen Mrs Smeggins down the post office getting her pension. I’m sure she was concealing a bomb. Description? Yeah sure. She’s 93 with snow white hair and staggering about on a zimmer frame.”
Anyone who believes that the meaning of the Koran can be radically changed according to the hermeneutic is read by simply hasn’t read the Koran. Gus Haynes doesn’t know what he is talking about.
—
“Liberal Muslims” are either lying or stupid.
“Will the BBC run with that idea”
Given that the HYS team censor any and all comments that point out that Mohammed was a paedophile who said that the end would come when his followers killed all the Jews while allowing the inaccurate and childish “ILLEGAL WAR STOP INVADING THEIR COUNTRIES SUICIDE BOMBING IS JUSTIFIED” BS, the answer would be no!
Frank Gradner and all at the BBC underplay the threats implicit in all the hundreds/thousands of young men who travel from Britain to Pakistan – many of whom get involved with terrorist outfits.
I happened on this story at Sky TV – but look down at the foot of the webpage – Sky has a slew of stories about Islamists, terror, and all their medieval cruelty. All dated in the past few days.
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Pakistan-Britons-Who-Trained-With-Extremists-Linked-To-Al-Qaeda-And-The-Taliban-Dossier/Article/200903415247530?lpos=World_News_Article_Related_Content_Region_9&lid=ARTICLE_15247530_Pakistan%3A_Britons_Who_Trained_With_Extremists_Linked_To_Al_Qaeda_And_The_Taliban_Dossier
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Pakistan-Taliban-Militias-Brutal-Control-In-Swats-Slaughter-Square/Article/200903415247575?lpos=World_News_Article_Related_Content_Region_6&lid=ARTICLE_15247575_Pakistan%3A_Taliban_Militias_Brutal_Control_In_Swats_Slaughter_Square
JohnA
Yes; SKY NEWS seems to be on the case of the severe terror threat of Islamic jihad in Britain now from some Pakistanis:
“CIA Terror Fears over British Pakistanis”
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Pakistan-US-Terror-Attack-Fears-Is-Boosting-Surveillance-Of-Pakistanis-In-Britain/Article/200903415247451?lpos=UK_News_Article_Related_Content_Region_10&lid=ARTICLE_15247451_Pakistan%3A_US_Terror_Attack_Fears_Is_Boosting_Surveillance_Of_Pakistanis_In_Britain
The BBC seems to have a policy of playing down such Islamic jihad threats in Britain, not wanting to connect such threats to aspects of Islam, nor to Labour’s continuing policy of mass immigration from Muslim countries.