Nicky Cambpell asks…..The Kenyan massacre….Why would British people be involved?
…and…he asks…What can we do to stop them getting involved in Islamic radicalism?
The problem is that the BBC doesn’t recognise the problem…..an immediate one being these fundamentalists probably don’t consider themselves ‘British’…until they come to claim benefits or housing of course.
For example this morning we had this from Peter Taylor, the BBC’s expert on Islamic terror…sorry militancy…says that the Islamic ‘duty to fight Jihad’ is a ‘false interpretation of the Quran.’
Until the truth of that ‘duty to fight Jihad’ is accepted and recognised there will never be a solution to the problem.
Campbell has on ‘expert’ and ex-radical Usama Hasan from the Quilliam Foundation who blames radicalisation on racism, alienation and exclusion from society….he was radicalised himself as a student….very excluded then. Campbell takes every word that Hasan has to say as ‘gospel’, the definitive version of things.
Campbell says of course Hasan may have been radicalised by verses in the Quran urging killing of the unbeliever when he was younger…but naturally he now knows the proper context for those verses.
Campbell himself knowing a lot about Islam…calling Wahabis … Wasabis.
Hasan unfortunately gives us the ‘old lie’ that Muslims trot out to defend their religion against charges of being the Religion of the Sword claiming Islam says that:
That anyone who kills another it will be as if they kill all mankind.
Except the verse that supposedly comes from (5:32) doesn’t say that….at least in relation to Muslims. It says it as a command for the ‘Children of Israel’:
‘We ordain unto the children of Israel that if anyone slays a human being – unless it be [in punishment] for murder or for spreading corruption on earth – it shall be as though he had slain all mankind…’
So immediately any Muslim who uses that mis-quote can be dismissed as a dissembler….someone not to be trusted…Mehdi Hasan likes to use the quote…so there you go…another BBC favourite ‘expert’ on Islam.
Perhaps the BBC should have asked Manzoor Moghal rather than the usual suspects for guidance:
Veils, segregated schools and why we risk sowing the seeds of Islamic terror in Britain
We should not pretend that the loud-voiced grievances of the jihadists throughout the world have a shred of justification. The focus of their supposed victimhood varies — they blame anything from American foreign policy to the plight of the Palestinians — but their real aim is the same.
They want to establish a Muslim caliphate across the world, where Islam and sharia law reign supreme. In this religious empire, there is no room for dissent or democracy, no space for compromise or conciliation.
My great worry is that, if the British authorities continue to allow the Islamic hardliners to have their way in the name of choice when it comes to segregating boys from girls in schools, or sharia courts, or insisting that women should be allowed to wear veils in all circumstances, then those hardliners will feel they are pushing at an open door.
We must, sadly, accept that there are people in our midst who want to see a hardline Islamist caliphate in Britain. And while the security and intelligence services are nothing less than heroic in their fight against Islamic extremists, continuing to foil terror plots on a regular basis, our civic institutions have in contrast been far too cowardly in their reluctance to challenge fundamentalism.
The shocking slaughter in Nairobi is the true face of Islamic fundamentalism. And we in Britain should never appease such a mentality.
Unfortunately the likes of Nicky Campbell are all too ready to appease and explain away radicalisation, fundamentalism and terror as a result of racism or foreign policy or a misinterpretation of the Quran.
Time to see the light before we go back to the Dark Ages.
List sent to terror chief aligns peaceful Muslim groups with terrorist ideology
• Quilliam Foundation’s list ‘not for public disclosure’
• File for counter-terror boss branded ‘McCarthyite’
A secret list prepared for a top British security official accuses peaceful Muslim groups, politicians, a television channel and a Scotland Yard unit of sharing the ideology of terrorists. The list was drawn up for Charles Farr, the director general of the Office for Security and Counter-Terrorism (OSCT), a directorate of the Home Office. Farr is a former senior intelligence officer.
Yes, Alan: Islam not BBC (INBBC) is complicit in obfuscating the tenets and history of Islam. INBBC routinely delegates issues pertaining to Islam ( but crucially to the majority non-Muslim population also) to Muslims.
Beeboids are generally ignorant of even a basic education in Islam, which they are unlikely to research and study from independent, non-Muslim sources anyway.
Robert Spencer (of ‘JihadWatch’) gives some indication what non-Muslims are up against in the following conversation with Michael Coren:
“Robert Spencer on the Michael Coren Show:
The Islamic war on free speech and more”
(video clip)
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/09/robert-spencer-on-the-michael-coren-the-islamic-war-on-free-speech-and-more.html
Nicky Campbell: What can we do to stop them getting involved in Islamic radicalism?
The MSM is so confused. They keep asking what radicalized young men and women? Was it going to Pakistan, Somalia, Egypt?
Or were they self-radicalised?
The answer is that core teachings of Islam mandate violence against non-Muslims. It is the Koran and the Hadiths. As we cant ban the Koran from Britain, what with internet and all, we are left with a problem that we have inflicted on ourselves. This is fatal wound unfortunately.
There is way though.
http://frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/in-the-name-of-islam/
mirror.
this morning bbc 5live news, has a long segment on how? … of course?, and … why? Nairobi has nothing to do with Islam, on and on it goes
This is just before Panto Campbell, has the supposed “Your Call” listener??? phone in.
oops! just one more to fit in ahem … “these terrorists represent ONLY themselves” … “nothing to do with ANY? …. religion”
the phone in? …
why? oh why? ….(eyes to heaven) tell me WHY!??!?? are there brit muslims among the mass murderers?
… you couldn t make it up …. cue a long monologue from W-nk (security … don t panic!) Gardiner , with accompanying approving sighs from “the Dame”.
you know I would call in yet, again myself … but believe me there really is no point, I don t need an inquisition this morning.
In the UK muslims are the victims here? oppressed? disenfranchised? … why? oh why? “because the Quran contains only mercy and peace” does no one see the truth of Islam?
understand all muslims around the world are being victimised …. ya da ya da ya da!
off switch
90% of Top Newspaper Headlines Censor Islam in Nairobi, Pakistan Attacks
Dare a top newspaper journalist to play connect-the-dots and chances are he’ll fail miserably – at least with drawing the line between Islam and terrorism. In Nairobi, Kenya last weekend, Islamist militants took over a high-end shopping mall and began executing non-Muslims. In Pakistan, Islamist suicide bombers detonated at a Christian Church on Sunday.
Yet on Monday, September 23, 90 percent of the top ten (via circulation numbers) daily newspapers’ headlines in the United States censored the words “Islam” and Muslim” from Nairobi and Pakistan reports. One – the New York Daily News – didn’t even have a headline for the latest Islamic terrorist attacks. That’s journalism at its finest.
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/katie-yoder/2013/09/23/90-top-newspaper-headlines-censor-islam-nairobi-pakistan-attacks#ixzz2fus2vtIG
This is not just then MSM but ALL leading politicians in ALL Western countries.
There is more to this then meets then eye.
i am getting sick and tired of nicky campbells touchy feely stockholm sympathy in looking for reasons why these poor oppressed muslims living in the uk want to go around the world blowing themselves up and shooting babies and children in the head as witnessed in kenya the past few days,how many times have we heard these waste of time debates on nicky campbell show when there is the latest terrorist attack,just a waste of time going around in circles looking for excuses for these child murderers,what nicky campbell should be asking is this,why are there not christians in this country doing the same thing and blowing themselves up abroad and killing innocents.look what happened in pakistan this week with the church getting bombed and 80 christian people murdered.are christians from all over the uk and europe flooding to pakistan and kenya and egypt to fight a holy war against there muslim oppressors.i dont think so,the root of all this islamic terrorism lies within the koran and this fascism,racism and zenophobia that is be learnt and taught in this book called the koran that is sowing the demons of terrorism in young muslims head that we seem to witness on a daily basis all over the world,that nicky campbell is what you should be discussing on your phone in.
All these phone in shows are a complete waste of time, it’s back and forward, like ping pong, nothing is gained or to be learned, it’s the same subject matter regurgitated every couple of months,
Usually there’s 5 classic topics
1. Should we bring back hanging ? Yes, No, Yes, No, Yes, No, blah , blah, etc etc.
2. Should we legalise drugs ?
3. Should we leave the EUSSR ?
4. Do you believe in ghosts ?
And the timeless stand by
5. Have you ever seen a UFO ?
Mind numbingly tedious.
The practice of “jihad” (i.e., “struggle”) as a proactive tactic is not obligatory upon Muslims where to do so would be fruitless and would carry no honour– such as a Muslim who runs up and down the street, in a kufr nation, shouting “convert, or die!” to little old ladies, landing in chokey for doing it. Most Muslims would say about the fellow, even if they thought perhaps his heart was in the right place, that it was silly of him to do so and reflect badly on them. This isn’t, after all, a case of bringing the Qu’ran to idolatrous Bedouins and Berbers, attacking sinful pagans who have no compunction against killing you first.
But one must be aware of the fact that Jihad, defined as Defence of the Faith, has always been required at all times of every Muslim; this view is so commonplace as not even to be a matter of controversy. This does not entail necessarily picking up a gun or anything of the sort– Anjem Choudary, to my knowledge, doesn’t brandish weapons. One takes whatever one wants to take as an affront to Islam, and uses it as a way of rabble-rousing in the ethnic communities in which Muslims predominate: “The kufr must learn they cannot insult Islam and then pay no price for doing so– Muslims defend their God! We must teach them to fear God and His righteous judgment upon them! We must tell them they cannot prevail in the long run! There is no god but God, and Muhammad is His Prophet! God is great!”
When you have repeatedly been told your own culture has been evil, and is the incarnation of Satan, you do one of two things– if you are an indigenous person, who has been inculcated with all kinds of political correctness, you meekly agree, and you discover you really have no principled way to fight these people after you’ve acquiesced. And if you are an immigrant, hearing the same sort of thing about your desert-brigand religion, you shout, in effect (and sometimes verbatim): “Silence! I kill you!”
And there you have the difference between “us” and “them.”
‘Jihad’ or in German ‘Mien Kampff’
Same ideology, same aims, same apologists in the free world….and eventually the same outcome as the world goes up in flames.
Nicky Campbell” why would ”British ” people be involved ?”
Because they’re not really British, duh !
Spot on. Just because the Labour Party has been giving out UK passports with packets of cornflakes ,doesn’t mean that the recipients are British.
i am very surprised that the muslim public affairs committe has not been added to this list of radical islamist groups operating in this country,new labour washed there hands of the muslim council of britian when they woke up to there extremism.well done to the quilliam foundation for exposing these radical muslim groups who have been posing as moderate…..shttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/journalists/andrew-gilligan/7908273/Police-Muslim-forum-headed-by-Islamic-extremist.html…is this the same azad ali who took over as vice chair of the uaf when martin smith had to stand down when accussed of alleged rapes of female members of the socalist workers party..i think so
…
re: “…Usama Hasan from the Quilliam Foundation who blames radicalisation on racism, alienation and exclusion from society….he was radicalised himself as a student….very excluded then…”
Hmmm… what Mr. Hasan needs to understand is that sometimes people are excluded because they’re arsholes.
I seriously doubt this man is an “ex”radical.
Maybe young Sima has an insight?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/24204742
Tulip being off today on World Health duties?
Good to know R1 audiences are assured of such balanced, represtative reporting.
One can’t help but feel the narrative is rather under stricter control now than ever.
It’s just possible some negative views prevail because of recorded actions vs. the 24/7 ‘tell it often enough’ efforts of the BBC’s evidently vast cadres of ‘reporterettes’ hired to tell us how e should think.
Such propaganda is unsavoury and in being so overt, destined to make what’s bad much worse.
And after a very busy weekend for the followers of Allah (Kenya,Pakistan,Yemen.Syria,Egypt and Turkey) where they have gone well out of their way in which to peacefully impress people with their ability to promote their peaceful ways.(Not) The bBC comes out with with ubiquitous “Islam is a victim” card as per usual:
Quarter of young British people ‘do not trust Muslims’
Read up on how nasty racist non islamic youths don’t understand Islam because they don’t integrate with…..Muslims:
More than a quarter of 18- to 24-year-olds in Britain do not trust Muslims, a BBC Radio 1 Newsbeat poll suggests.
Of the 1,000 young people questioned, 28% said Britain would be better off with fewer Muslims, while 44% said Muslims did not share the same values as the rest of the population. Some 60% thought the British public had a negative image of Muslims. An adviser on anti-Muslim hatred said the findings suggested young people needed to mix more. Akeela Ahmed, from a cross-government working group on anti-Muslim hatred, said: “These findings indicate that we need to ensure young people are mixing at local levels and that they’re working on projects together so that people can get to know Muslims and vice versa.”
and guess what’s to blame for the young for not trusting Muslims:
there was “a serious and systemic problem of racist, anti-Muslim reporting within sections of the British media”.
And how does the bBC finish its poor Muslim article:
“The message from this government is unequivocal – there is no place for anti-Muslim hatred or any kind of hatred in Britain, and we are committed to tackling this unacceptable scourge,” he added.
Victims bBC?
The real victims here are in Kenya,where the authorities are trying to identify those people who couldn’t name the mother of Mohammed , becasue they had their hands and faces cut off by followers of Islam.
All the fault of the media, eh!
Well which media outlet has the greatest audience? Why Al JaBeeBa of course. We can expect them to redouble their effort to enlighten/re-educate us.
Oh that is in hand, don’t you worry. Watch out for even more obfuscation and cover-up as a means of addressing these poll findings.
I don’t like what I’ve seen of muslims either……..never really was aware of them until September 11th but I’ve seen plenty since.
Similar here, but for sure they are getting more brazen.
The ten of thousands that have arrived post 9/11 aside, I would hazard a guess that there were zero burka wearers in the UK in 2001, it seems 9/11 has given them the confidence to stick two fingers up to us.
If Burka rage is a recognised condition, my condition seems to be worsening….
9/11 was a day that shaped the future of the world, forever. It raised awareness in people that had never taken note before of Muslims and their barbaric ideology. Combined with this acknowledgment of the faith was a division; you’re either with us, or against us. September 11th forced people of all ethnicities and religions to make a choice:
– Appease Muslims to avoid negative repercussions.
– Oppose what they stand for and face the wrath of the liberal left’s toxic tongue.
Generally speaking, not many people were aware of Muslims before 9/11, but since that day, the growing fear of the religion and the idiocy of the left has left us in a position where any opposition/condemnation of the religion will find yourself scrutinsed and labelled by sycophantic do-gooders. Nicky Campbell being a prime suspect.
I get the feeling that the BBC wouldn’t even be reporting this theocratic terrorist massacre if it wasn’t its obligation. If it’s one white woman being racially attacked by four Muslim women, however, the BBC ignores it (this happened a few years ago, the disgusting thugs were acquitted and the boyfriend of the victim was condemned by the judge for defending her with reasonable force. Moral is don’t ever go to Leicester under any circumstances). When it happens the other way around, the BBC is all over it like a fly on a turd.
I’m not sure what to make of the Quilliam Foundation. They do something like this, which is sound, yet go on Nicky Campbell saying it’s got nothing to do with Islam, but is about poverty, alienation, and the usual leftist claptrap.
I see the Quilliam Foundation as part of the problem; it is made up of Muslims, and so propagandises for Islam, is publicly subsidised, and is deferred to by e.g. U.K government/MSM as a source of truth about Islam, and encourages non-Muslims not to study or research Islam for themselves.
Quilliam was set up by ex-Hizb ut-Tahrir Muslims, and now U.K governments (Labour and Coalition, over recent years) subsidises it. As an Islamic organisation, it criticises e.g. Geert Wilders, Israel, and supports the wearing of the burqa in public in UK.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quilliam_(think_tank)
Interesting that “anti-muslim hatred” is being used in preference to “islamophobia”. Too many people, for our masters, are not cowed by being labelled islamophobic, so a term that very largely unjustly, accuses critics of islam as the violent haters of individual muslims, had to be found.
Those of us non-muslims who sincerely wish muslims well and therefore sincerely (if also self-interestedly) wish them free of islam, are slandered by this new label – and that is the intention behind its use.
Exactly. I expect to see this term used more and more to stigmatise those who refuse to cow tow to Islam.
Clearly any ‘anti-Islam’ statement a person makes is now de facto ‘hate speech’ and they will be prosecuted accordingly.
Peter Taylor was for decades the BBC’s expert on Republicanism, the IRA and Irish ‘terrorism’. Almost every in-depth programme the BBC made was made by him. He inculcated two generations of Britons with his view.
The result was utter confusion and incomprehension in Britain and a war which never ended because the IRA thought they were winning as they assumed the BBC view was the British view.
“The message from this government is unequivocal – there is no place for anti-Muslim hatred or any kind of hatred in Britain, and we are committed to tackling this unacceptable scourge,”
Following an atrocity in which devout Muslims carefully selected and killed non-Muslims (including small children and a pregnant woman) I fail to see why the government are worried about anti-Muslim hatred. It is Muslim hatred that is the problem. Muslims aren’t the victims here.
“… no place for … or any kind of hatred in Britain …”
Pull the other one, it’s got bells on!
The following types of hatred are not only tolerated but encouraged: hatred of so-called ‘racism’, the BNP, fascism, ‘Islamophobia’, The Tea Party, English nationalism, sexism and ‘homophobia’.
Other kinds of hatred are acceptable: for the UKIP, the Conservative Party, Mr Murdoch and his newspapers, the Daily Mail and its readers, Israel, US Republicans and George W Bush, bankers, City of London people, etc.
“Other kinds of hatred are acceptable”
And, of course ………….. Fatcher !
Oh Andy!
Muslims aren`t the victim here?
Didn`t that old lady shout abuse at a mosque in Sevenoaks?
Did you not hear of that red paint daubed on a mosque in Hinckley?
And were Saladin ,Tamerlane or Genghis actually allowed to see Gareth Pierce or Michael Mansfield, let alone get a one-on-one with Krishnan or Jon?
NO!
Sorry Andy…Muslims are forever victims…has Lee Rigbys family paid compo to the MCB for bending that fender back in May?
Justice for Michaels Clio!…that is the level of the BBCs concern for the coming meltdown in this country.
Nice to see Mr Mansfield be reprimanded for aggressive questioning after the jury passed a note of complaint to the judge. Took the wind out of his sails no doubt. ‘See Mr Mansfield for half an hour sir? That will be £500 please.’ Very left-wing i must say.
In the U.S, BBC-Democrat also performs the political propaganda role of only supporting, and not criticising Islamic organisations there.
So, BBC-Democrat does not report:-
“Somali-American tried to stop Al-Shabaab jihad recruitment in U.S., so Hamas-linked CAIR called him an ‘Islamophobe'”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/09/somali-american-tried-to-stop-al-shabaab-jihad-recruitment-in-us-so-hamas-linked-cair-called-him-an-.html
Where are BBC-Democrat reports criticising CAIR?
For BBC-Democrats-
“PAMELA GELLER, WND COLUMN:
CAIR CULPABLE IN MUSLIM MALL MASSACRE”
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2013/09/pamela-geller-wnd-column–2.html
For BBC-Democrat to ignore in its reports on America:-
“New York: Three Muslims charged with fighting for al-Shabaab jihad terror group”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/09/new-york-three-muslims-charged-with-fighting-for-al-shabaab-jihad-terror-group.html
Also for BBC-Democrat to censor:-
“Hamas-linked CAIR on possibility that U.S. Muslims participated in Kenya jihad mass murders: ‘Who cares?'”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/09/hamas-linked-cair-on-possibility-that-us-muslims-participated-in-kenya-jihad-mass-murders-who-cares.html
Um. With you all the way, but Islam is not a race, it is a religion. It’s an important distinction.
True, but the BBC, the Guardian and fellow travelers are implying that it’s ‘as good as racism’ to criticize Islam.
When you have a agenda to push then the meaning of words becomes infinitely malleable.
Stuart’s contribution, corrected, for ease of reading. Blocks of same case unpunctuated text are very hard for older eyes to read.
stuart says:
September 25, 2013 at 12:29 am
I am getting sick and tired of Nicky Campbell’s touchy feely Stockholm sympathy in looking for reasons why these poor oppressed Muslims living in the UK want to go around the world blowing themselves up and shooting babies and children in the head as witnessed in Kenya the past few days.
How many times have we heard these waste of time debates on the Nicky Campbell show after the latest terrorist attack? It’s just a waste of time going around in circles looking for excuses for these child murderers. What Campbell should be asking is this – why are there not Christians in this country doing the same thing and blowing themselves up abroad and killing innocents?
Look at what happened in Pakistan this week with the church getting bombed and 80 Christians murdered. Are Christians from all over the UK and Europe flooding to Pakistan and Kenya and Egypt to fight a holy war against their Muslim oppressors? I don’t think so; the root of all Islamic terrorism lies within the Koran, and the Fascism, racism and xenophobia that is taught in the Koran is sowing the demons of terrorism in young Muslims’ head. Terrorism that we witness on a daily basis all over the world – that, Nicky Campbell is what you should be discussing on your phone in.
2/10 for the original. Apologies if English is not your first language – if it is, I suggest adult literacy lessons, there are very good these days and will help you hugely
Thanks for posting that again its worth reading twice.
Stuart’s contention that the difference in reaction to aggression and oppression by world wide (and therefore culturally diverse) Muslim and Christian communities, completely undermines the “this has nothing to do with religion” meme relentlessly promoted the BBC. Is incisive and one that have not seen articulated in that sense .
Similar complaints that the BBC report the oppression of Christians (entirely real) entirely differently to the way they report the oppression of Muslims (mostly imagined) yes, but not the specific point that Stuart has made here.
I would say that I am sorry if my poor grammar has caused you any discomfort , but frankly my dear….
Now I’m confused. Are you Stewart or stuart? It’s stuart’s grammar that is the point at issue here. I’m guessing you really are Stewart, on the basis that you found where the capital letters live.
No its definitely Me (In the consensus reality sense of Me )
I felt motivated by feelings of solidarity
to jump to the defence of my name-sake .Even though he spells it wrongly
Dear Confused of BBBC,
Don’t be. It doesn’t matter*.
Best,
A. Fellow Poster
*if of a hall monitor bent, one might chip in with a ‘this is to do with BBC bias, how, again?’ snark, but I do love a grammar nazi spat. Especially as any who kick one off will now be looking over their shoulder with every keystroke. Unless, of course, just a drive by merchant playing a person to distract from their message.
Like the photo in the article….the woman on the right seems worried about being recognised.
Well, you say woman. It could, of course be anyone under that lot, including a bearded male from the FBI’s most wanted list. Which is why the wearing of the bloody things should be discouraged, not encouraged.
Quite the bevy of demure Asian beauties… Possibly.
Have to say I have not seen the V sign used with such gusto in an age, and then by a skinhead. Shared values maybe.
As to Ms. Modesty, maybe she has taken those ‘we’re watching’ posters by various government agencies (and the BBC of course) to heart. They do target the home- based ladies most.
From the article:
‘A secret list prepared for a top British security official accuses peaceful Muslim groups, politicians, A TELEVISION CHANNEL and a Scotland Yard unit of sharing the ideology of terrorists.’
Oh dear, al-beeb has finally been rumbled!
‘even the Islam Channel, which provides television programmes for Muslims on satellite.’
Never mind, got my hopes up there for a second…………
Both Nick Clegg and Barak Obama quoted that 5.32 piece of shit in order to tell the muppetry that Islam was indeed “peaceful”…but the likes of Atta and Bin Laden seem to have misinterpreted it.
Thankfully, the BBC….and aforesaid quislings…know better than over 1000 years of Islamic jurisprudence.
Yet the excitable umma choose still to trust in Bin Laden and Al Azhars finest, and not the likes of Clegg and Obama.
They are right to do so…about time, WE did a bit of checking to mock and howl down the dissembling jahilliya…whether we vote for them or not.
They`re too stupid to check…we`ve no excuse as this post of Alans confirms.
INBBC: still politically protecting Islam.
On Radio 4 ‘World at One,’ presenter Ms Kearney, seems to express surprise, saying, in interview with Archbishop Welby, that she had just been reading about the global extent of the victimisation of Christians in Pakistan, Syria, Egypt and Kenya.
In the course of the section of the interview on the massacre of Christians at a church in Peshawar, Pakistan, no mention was made of ‘Islamic jihadists’ nor of ‘Muslims’.
So Islam-compliant is INBBC in its global output that it employs no-one of the stature of Christian, Raymond Ibrahim to analyse the nature of the threat to Christians of Islamic jihad and Sharia law.
http://www.raymondibrahim.com/
“The silence of our friends – the extinction of Christianity in the Middle East”
By Ed West.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2013/09/the-silence-of-our-friends-the-extinction-of-christianity-in-the-middle-east/
The Radio 4 ‘World at One’ Kearney-Welby audio clip (9 mins) is here:-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03bdw8h
Archbishop Welby is a remarkable and talented man, but he has little of the influence of the BBC. A typical BBC interview which dances around describing the persecutors as Muslims. Apparently any Muslims who criticise the murders can readily be described as ‘Muslims’ without any qualification or quibbles of terminology, however any Muslims who execute these murders cannot be described as ‘Muslims’. That’s according to the BBC, but I do think this threadbare narrative is increasingly falling on stony ground. At no point in the interview were the attackers or attacks laid at the door of Islam.
“After Kenya, no more turning the other cheek to those who hate us”
By Allison Pearson.
(‘Telegraph’ -paywall).
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/kenya/10333477/After-Kenya-no-more-turning-the-other-cheek-to-those-who-hate-us.html
Help! For some time I have trying to understand what constitutes racism. Most dictionary definitions state that it a belief that your own race is in some way superior to others.
The BBC advice is that if someone does something or says something that you think is racist then it is. This isn’t much use other than to say that anything and everything is potentially racist. For instance if I don’t like a curry or a bowl of bird’s nest soup, and this upsets the person who cooked it for me, can they construe my dislike as racist?
I don’t think that Britons or Europeans are in any way superior to other races so I’m not a racist by the dictionary definition. On the other hand I much prefer to live in the England that I grew up in and not one in which alien cultures are increasingly widespread and difficult to avoid. If this preference, however politely expressed, was to give offense to someone, would I be guilty of racism? Surely by the BBC definition I would be, but how can I be guilty of a crime for just preferring to live in the culture that I was born into?
Also if I find some behaviours of some communities offensive , eg their treatment of animals, are they guilty of being racist. Surely by the BBC definition they are, but I am white so perhaps not, but I just wondered.
I think many share your confusion.
Remember those HSBC adverts that warned of the pitfalls of doing business abroad, avoiding cultural gaffes? Imagine what an HSBC advert for foreign business people thinking of visiting the UK might be like. – Don’t wear black, it is the colour of ‘death’; Don’t cover your face, you will look like a criminal; Do make eye contact with strangers, a smile or a nod puts them at ease. Quite simple really.
Yet the majority culture is now expected to ‘accommodate’, not to a visitor, a basic politeness, but to people who profess, we are told, ‘share our values’.
The BBC’s female interviewee who is currently doing the rounds can’t hide her contempt, “what some people think!”: I will not integrate and I don’t care what YOU think!
Despite the best efforts of the BBC we see the actions of the supremacist cult of Islam here and around the world. We see it’s inability to ‘accommodate’ in Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Syria, Egypt, Pakistan…etc. Yet we pre-judge we are told.
No to pre-judge is to decide BEFORE the evidence. I think we have seen enough evidence to come to a conclusion without fear or favour and to imply otherwise, as our ‘masters’ do is an insult to the people of the UK.
A previous post mentioned the interview with Michael Nazir Ali
for some Radio 5 crapola yesterday.
In a sane world, Nazir Ali would be just the man to lead a correct Christian response to the beheadings, the tortures and the sheer evil persecution of Christians in Muslim lands-that once were Christian in many case, and certainly have Christian roots that go deeper that Islams.
Yet Nazir Ali-A Christian with first hand experience of what Muslims do to apostates like himself when they are allowed to-in NOT being interviewed by the BBC except to accuse him of being racist or a backwoodsman.
The BBC prefer their snake oil salesman who`s been a clergyman for a few years to speak for the Church of England.
And-sadly-so too do the rest of the CofE…which is why they`re a supreme irrelevance to anybody but the politer end of the BBC.
I see trouble ahead…
INBBC spends a lot of its time and our resources supporting ISLAM.
It has carried out another ‘survey’ to show that many non-Muslims are ‘prejudiced’ against Muslims, not to show that many Muslims are prejudiced against non-Muslims, or worse.
In its item (at about 5:50 pm on ‘PM’ programme) on this today, the word ‘prejudice’ was used as a fact, as the was the Warsi-OCI favourite invented word against non-Muslims, ‘Islamophobia’.
For the education of non-Muslims at INBBC:-
‘Islamophobia’
By D. Horowitz & R. Spencer.
(75 page PDF pamphlet.)
Click to access Islamophobia.pdf
Great read-well worth it.
Note those Runnymede Trust names on their sourcing document…a\ couple of Thought for the Day types of ecumenical matters, and loads of Muslims.
Thank you Runnyweed!
“BBC Told Reporters Not to Describe Mall Murdering Jihadists as ‘Terrorists’”
By Daniel Greenfield.
http://frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/bbc-told-reporters-not-to-describe-westgate-jihadists-as-terrorists/
And, of course, the following applies to INBBC:-
“MEDIA SELF-ENFORCES SHARIA: ‘ISLAM,’ ‘MUSLIM’ ‘JIHAD’ CENSORED FROM 90% OF NEWSPAPER REPORTS ON KENYA, PAKISTAN ATTACKS”
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2013/09/media-self-enforces-sharia-islam-muslim-jihad-censored-from-90-of-newspaper-reports-on-kenya-pakista.html
An interesting viewpoint from one of the posters re’ George R link:
“Hitler observed that if a lie is told often enough people will begin to believe it. The media by refusing to tell the truth about the ideology behind the carnage we have just seen is aiding the spread of a lie. The violent and the stealth jihadists alike know that to refuse to tell the truth as the media does is to ultimately aid them. ”
Anyone who supports the BBC care to comment?
“Anyone who supports the BBC care to comment?”
The bias-deniers have been remarkably quiet lately. BBC cutbacks having an effect?
France’s TV state broadcaster ‘France 24’ has:
“Global jihad: smoke signals from Mumbai to Nairobi”
http://www.france24.com/en/20130924-global-jihad-nairobi-mumbai-al-qaeda
That’s two geezers on the left and right of the picture above, never seen women with welders hands…
Don`t seem to miss any chance to dress up in their wives clothes do they?
No wonder all the Saudi “Victorias Secret” stores in those malls for the elite just HAD to be staffed with men, until recently.
I suggest that we raise those hemlines so we can see if their lags are hairy or not…Immac is haram, I`d have thought; so those Stanley knives could be put to better use in shaving them…so 17th Century, and therefore the Green econutz would approve.
Make it a law-no more stupid that Home Information Packs is it?…and much safer.
In the meantime-I`ll get Fifi to work with me in developing a suitably seductive lingerie range for those Muslim nutters so fearful of their inner Fatima.
And didn`t some knicker bomber demand to be sodomised for sexual jihad…with the rather sad excuse that his rectum could pack more semtex if those chums of his would only give him a good seeing to.
Interesting nexus where gays meet Islam isn`t it?
And no Khalid…hanging round girls schools and childrens homes or hospitals does NOT make you a man…try Anne Summers or Avon instead eh?
BBC-Democrat has this vague headline:-
“US state department issues global threat warning”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-24276954
But how does the threat compare to you, BBC-Democrats, with that of ‘Tea Party’?
OT bar there being a history of the Graun rather setting the scene, this seems all too predictable in predicting where the BBC goes next…
@guardian: Kenya’s Somalis fear violent backlash in the wake of Westgate terror attack: http://t.co/oreZHR7946
Girls from Amsderdam off as we speak to emote with the true victims of others’ crimes?
Actually outside these fair shores, there may well be cause for some concern.
Koran teaches that whoever kills an innocent, it is as if he has killed all mankind; and whoever saves a person, it is as if he has saved all mankind.” So said Obama is his speech at Cairo on June4, 2009, intended to the Muslim world.This quote is taken from verse 5:32 of the ” Koran”.
Let us first quote the full verse and see what it says (Yusuf Ali translation):“[005:032]
On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person – unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land – it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, itwould be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our apostles with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land.
”The first thing to note is that, the command (allegedly of Allah) applies to the “Children of Israel”(i.e. Jews). It does not apply to Muslims. Probably, that is why you find a lot of killings of innocent civilians by extremist Muslims today. The extremist Muslims read nothing but the Koran and know their stuff better than the moderate Muslims and non-Muslims who don’t read the Quran.
Secondly, the verse does not use the word “innocent” anywhere, in any translation, which you can see at this link from Islamist site.
Thirdly, a person can be slain for (i) murder or (ii) for spreading mischief in the land (fasad).
Now what is spreading mischief in the land (fasad)?
The next verse 5:33 says:The punishment of those who wage war against God and His Apostle, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter;
Let us see from other ayats, what this “spreading mischief” means:
Quran7:103: Then after them We sent Moses with Our signs to Pharaoh and his chiefs, but they wrongfully rejected them: So see what was the end of those who made mischief(Mufisdoon).
[So rejecting prophet /not converting to Islam is“mischief” and non-Muslims can be put to death]