It has often been pointed out that the real threat to the West is not Islamic violence, the Hoy War ‘Jihad’, but the cultural Jihad in which Islam slowly builds a dominant position through a process of demographic change, population increase, the cultural cringe of those afraid to ‘offend’ and not stand up for their own values and culture, a fear of the ‘native’ Establishment of being called racist/Islamophobic and thus refusing to challenge Muslim behaviour as well as granting special, favoured status upon Muslims….ala Rochdale or Rotherham or where they are promoted to positions, such as the Chair of the Tory Party, that are only given because of the supposed need to appease and placate the Muslim ‘community’. Then there is the practice of Muslim lawfare and media Jihad where Muslim activists launch endless legal challenges to any laws or regulations or inhibitions placed upon them that restrict their desire to practice their religion completely as they like as well as an orchestrated campaign of intimidation against media organisations in order to scare them into not publishing or broadcasting anything that reflects badly on Islam and Muslims.
Today we have a classic example as the Muslim Council of Britain launch a complaint at the BBC for daring to allow Douglas Murray onto the airwaves (H/T Pounce)…
Yet again it is the Daily Politics, Jo Coburn this time, the female Andrew Neil, that asks the hard and ‘controversial’ [for the BBC] questions.
The MCB naturally doesn’t complain about the airwaves being filled with a relentless stream of pro-Islam programmes from the BBC or the more usual constant reassurances the BBC serves up about the ‘religion of peace’ as well as the excuses and downplaying of Islamically inspired terrorism and the support for the Islamist narrative that Muslims are victims of the West and that all the problems in the Middle East and further field [Manchester] can be traced back to ‘duplicitous British’ activities over the last century…as Jeremy Bowen tells us.
As Boris said medieval ‘Islam’, not violent Jihad, may well be the actual problem…incompatible as it is with Western, progressive, liberal values.
Sara Khan demonstrates the problem…she’s not violent, she’s not ‘radical’, she in fact campaigns against such things…an yet…and yet…she still adheres strongly to the ‘Faith’….a faith that has some extraordinarily unpleasant and violent commands which just aren’t part of other religions. Does she consider herself Muslim first or British? An important consideration and test of identity when it comes to foreign policy….do you oppose ‘British’ foreign policy because it, in your opinion, impacts badly upon Muslim countries…and oppose it solely on the basis of those countries being Muslim? You have chosen your dominant identity then…Muslim first…your loyalty is to the ‘Ummah’ not Britain. Which could be a problem.
The BBC’s programme ‘Muslims Like Us’ was very instructive and showed the reality….even the ‘westernised’ Muslims were Muslim first and held strong views antagonistic to British foreign policy and culture…. ‘British values for me are colonialism, institutional racism and theft, and genocide.’ What it also showed was how a minority of extremists could dominate the community as the less ‘radical’ and less determined backed away from confrontation and let the radicals dominate and control the house.
The programme of course wasn’t meant to develop like that…as I’ve said before...’Far from turning people’s perceptions about Islam and Muslims on their heads this programme just reinforces them’…..It shone a light, unexpectedly I’m sure, onto some dark secrets that need to be discussed….and that’s where the likes of Douglas Murray come in saying the ‘unsayable’ unless the MCB gets their way.
From the Spectator…Douglas Murray and Haras Rafiq [not Mehdi Hasan as in the photo]….note Rafiq saying the problem stems from within those Muslim ‘community leaders’ and groups who have access to the ‘Establishment’ and thus have the influence to ensure the narrative is theirs, and who are homophobic, anti-semitic, who create the victim mentality, the otherisation…it is not Al Qaeda or ISIS that radicalises Muslims, they merely tip over the edge Muslims who are under the sway of those ‘community leaders’ who thrive on identity politics, those who create the ‘prism’ that so many Muslims see the world through such as the West is bad and the cause of all the Muslim world’s problems..and ISIS says ‘thankyou very much’….which is pretty much what we’ve said and urged the BBC to consider…the root cause is ‘Islam’ and the values it instils and the identity and loyalty it creates…not all Muslims are terrorists but most terrorists right now are Muslim…because of that command in the Koran to ‘defend’ Islam and the false belief that Islam is under attack.
Whilst the bBC informs the kuffa that Didsbury mosque is a place for peace:
Manchester attack: Bomber’s mosque has ‘a lot to learn’
A mosque attended by the Manchester bomber says it needs to be “more proactive” in encouraging young people away from extremist ideologies. Didsbury Mosque was identified as one of the mosques attended by bomber Salman Abedi and his family. Fawzi Haffar, a trustee of the mosque, told BBC Panorama: “I have to be truthful. We have a lot to learn, [we] have to be more conscious”. He said the mosque needed “proper policies” in place to deter extremism.
A real Muslim (not the plastic ones found at the bBC) tells it as it is:
Listened to it. You would never hear such a discussion on albeeb which is tragic. The mysoginistic nature of the MANCHESTER attack as well as the treatment of young white girls by Pakistanis and their like in front t of the wilfully blind agencies in English towns will also not be discussed – even on wimmins hour ( happy to be told I am wrong ) instead it will be alibi brown or a sista saying how bad whitee man is and it’s our fault a young innocent 22 year old boy killed 23 and injured 70 more
Al Beeb must have been desperate to find a Muslim victim of the attack but I don’t think they succeeded did they? I know this comment is sick on week after the mass murders and I can only imagine what relatives and friends are feeling now…I don’t know any of them but do pray for them
I fear for Douglas Murray because he is one of the few to speak the truth in public and, unlike Tommy, not been rubbished …yet.
Douglas gets to say what he thinks because of the none confrontational manner in which he goes about it.
He keeps his cool with those who get all ”shouty” and quietly but firmly makes his points, beta maledom does have its advantages, i respect him for being something i cannot be, i do not possess the patience if they raise their voice to me, or get threatening their going down……………it has always been, and always will be, every man for himself.
Yes Manx he certainly keeps his cool which makes for bad tv. He is definitely in the wilderness and when I saw him on al beeb ( a Brillo programme) I could not believe his common sense views got past the albeeb Orwell Department . Voice in the wilderness like Tommy R
Douglas articulates the concerns of the vast majority of British people on this, but what is extremely worrying is that there are no politicians I can think of giving voice to his arguments, let alone suggesting policy changes. They are either stupid or scared. UKIP post Nigel disappointingly have no joined-up strategy either.
Murray is right in his analysis as far as he goes, but there have been lots of books on this topic. There was Melanie Philips book. “Londonistan – How Britain is Creating a Terror State Within” from 2006. Ed West “The Diversity Illusion” of 2012. The German version of the book “Deutscland schafft sich ab” by Thilo Sarrazin was also a best seller in Germany in 2012 and outraged the usual suspects by using German government statistics to show the unwelcome consequences of mass muslim immigration. It’s 2017 and after the Willkommenskultur debacle and the “migrant crisis” Merkel is as popular as ever and well on her way to winning the September elections. As early as 2003, Alan M. Dershewitz explained why pandering to Middle East Terrorism since the Munich Massacre in 1972 has led to the growth of terrorism worldwide in his book “Why Terror Works”. Essentially, the answer to terror is counterterror.
The muslim community in Britain pays no price for acts of muslim terrorism. Supposedly, the nonexistant backlash is more horrendous to contemplate than actual mass casualty muslim terrorism. Counterterror by paramilitaries in Northern Ireland secured a stalemate. “Tit for tat” killings ensured that the catholic community was less enamoured of IRA violence when they risked equivalent terror. Of course, even comtemplating such measures would remove the political elites from the “moral high ground” – the ideal vantage point to view the slaughter.
“Does she consider herself Muslim first or British?”
The oft used (and to me loathsome) term ‘British Muslim’, says it all. We don’t describe ourselves as British Christians, British Catholics, British atheists etc. We say we are English, Welsh, Scottish, Northern Irish or, if required, British. This is what our hearts say we are.
I think Gisela Stuart said she could consider herself British, but never English or Scottish etc. I guess if pushed she might describe herself as British German.
But the ROPers rarely describe themselves as just ‘British’ or ‘British [country of origin]’ – it is almost always ‘Muslim’. The conflation of nationality and religion seems wrong. A British passport to them is just a means to an end – a convenient piece of paper. They are Muslim at heart – not British, nor perhaps even their country of ethnic origin.
Apologies to all here for stating the obvious again.
No it’s puzzling. “Home-grown” terrorists, patriotic to the core, born in England yet never refer to themselves simply as English. What’s all that about, innit?