A week ago Paul Weston, chairman of the party Liberty GB, was arrested for quoting Churchill on Islam.
The BBC reported this but didn’t seem to think it significant and the issues, suh as freedom of speech or indeed the issues raised by Weston himself, worthy of exploration…how different the benevolent coverage for the Muslim suicide bomber, or someone encarcerated in Guantanamo Bay, or a ‘community leader’ claiming Muslims are alienated and victimised, radicalised by British foreign policy.
Wonder what the reaction would have been if Paul Weston had quoted Churchill’s statements from his ‘History of The English Speaking People’s’:
On dealing with quislings and appeasers….
‘It is the primary right of men to die and kill for the land they live in, and to punish with exceptional severity all members of their own race who have warmed their hands at the invader’s hearth.’
Or on the foolishness of those who adopt the customs and beliefs of the invaders:
‘Step by step they were led to practices which disposed to vice – the lounge, the bath, the elegant banquet. All this in their ignorance they called civilisation, when it was but part of their servitude.’
From that we take a leap to Halal meat, its unannounced introduction into non-Muslim’s diets and the BBC’s reporting of the issues.
The BBC stuck pretty rigidly to the technical issues surrounding Halal slaughter and concluded that there was little difference between the way animals slaughtered for Halal meat and non-Halal meat are treated…if stunned.
This of course dodges the question of religion and the fact that Muslims will object loudly and aggressively if given non-Halal meat but non-Muslims, because they don’t complain so aggressively, are fed Halal meat without any regard for their beliefs or concerns.
As far as slaughtering is concerned there is no reason why animals for Halal slaughter shouldn’t be stunned as long as they are not killed by that ‘stunning’.
According to this study animals not stunned feel the pain of having their throat cut, as you might expect:
Blood must drain completely from an animal to comply with religious requirements but some claim this doesn’t happen in stunned animals. However a study shows that there should be no objections to stunning as blood drains just as fast from a stunned, and unconscious, animal as from an unstunned one, and as long as the animal is only stunned and not dead this is permissible:
On the technical side the BBC is correct but the issues are deeper than purely ones of animal welfare and are symbolic of the way that Muslim culture, practices and belief have been forced upon the rest of the population by either commercial enterprises looking to cut corners and make a profit (selling Halal to all but not able to sell non-Halal to all) or Establishment organisations looking to appease Muslims whilst dismissing the concerns of the non-Muslims…often as the BBC’s ex-DG Mark Thompson said they don’t pack an AK47 at the end of the day:
“Without question, ‘I complain in the strongest possible terms’, is different from, ‘I complain in the strongest possible terms and I am loading my AK47 as I write’,” he said. “This definitely raises the stakes.”
Imagine the uproar if it was deemed that only non-Halal meat was to be served or sold in the UK….but no one was told….Instead we have the opposite, the ‘Trojan Sheep’ fed to us by commercial enterprises all too willing to ride roughshod over sensibilties in the search for a quick buck (as they do also with cheap immigrant labour) and an Establishment all to ready to appease an aggressive minority many of whom make veiled threats if they don’t get their way…‘the youth will be angry and we can’t guarantee to control them.’
Essentially people are being forced to adopt Muslim culture either because it is easier and cheaper to make everyone conform to the minority rather than make separate arrangements for that minority…or, heaven forbid, make the minority conform to the norm.
Going to be a bit of a nightmare when the Sikhs, Hindus, Jews, Buddhists, Pagans, Jedi Warriors all want equal billing and their own brand of belief catered for…literally or otherwise.
The BBC has long been famous for its grovelling approach to Islam….whether Room 101’s approach, or Nicky Campbell’s craven prostration and self-abasement when talking of Islam and of his great respect for it, or Thompson’s admission that Islam gets special treatment due to the unique nature of any likely complaints.
With that in mind this article from the New Statesman might make interesting reading:
The author, David Selbourne, was asked by John Kerry to write a briefing paper on the Islamist threat. He explains here what he told the US secretary of state and why he feels progressives have allowed themselves to be silenced by frightened self-censorship and the stifling of debate.
A beheading in Woolwich, a suicide bomb in Beijing, a blown-up marathon in Boston, a shooting in the head of a young Pakistani girl seeking education, a destroyed shopping mall in Nairobi – and so it continues, in the name of Islam, from south London to Timbuktu. It is time to take stock, especially on the left, since these things are part of the world’s daily round.
There is an objective historical need, and duty, to record radical Islam’s many-sided and determined advance upon the “infidel” world. Most still do not know what manner of force – the millions of peaceful Muslims notwithstanding – has struck it. And, with its own arms and ethics, it will continue to do so, perhaps till kingdom come.
The left continues covertly to celebrate US foreign policy blunders and defeats, while the naive see jihadists as a minority of “fanatics”. It is not so simple. To add to the confusion, President Obama’s stances, however well intentioned, have made their own contribution to the Islamic renaissance. Or as he expressed it in a speech in Cairo in June 2009, America and Islam “share common principles . . . of justice and progress, tolerance” – tolerance? – “and the dignity of all human beings”.
The non-Muslim world is too unaware of what is afoot, hobbled by its wishful thinking and lack of knowledge, and whistling in the dark. In a position paper I wrote for him [John Kerry], I set out a list of the failures that the west, and especially the US, has on its hands. Among them are the failure to recognise the ambition of radical Islam; the failure to condemn the silence of most Muslims at the crimes committed in their names; the failure to respond adequately to the persecution of Christians in many Muslim lands; the failure to grasp the nature of the non-military skills that are being deployed against the non-Muslim world – skills of manoeuvre, skills in deceiving the gullible, skills in making temporary truces in order to gain time (as in Iran); and, perhaps above all, the failure to realise the scale and speed of Islam’s advance.
“If things continue like this,” I told friend Kerry, “the history of our age may one day be written under a caliphate’s supervision.” I added brashly: “Get your aides to read the Quran. Keep political correctors at bay,” and “stop looking for the emergence of Jeffersonian democracies in Muslim lands”. “It has gotten me thinking,” he replied; and after further exchanges, “I agree with a great deal of what you’ve said.”
Islamists make no bones about their aspiration for “mastership of the world”, as Mohamed Badie, the Muslim Brotherhood leader, put it in December 2011. Muslim (and not merely Islamist) disdain for “the west” is also growing; in July 2012, the speaker of the Iranian parliament described it as a “dark spot in the present era”.
Such confidence, or arrogance, is easily understood. For these are times in which conversions to Islam in western countries are accelerating.
To the aid of Islam has also come the betrayal by much of today’s left of its notionally humane principles, as Christians are assaulted and murdered (shades of what was done to the Jews in the 1930s) and their churches desecrated and destroyed from Egypt to the Central African Republic, from Iran to Indonesia, and from Pakistan to Nigeria. Islam can kill its own apostates, too; in many Muslim countries denies reciprocity to other faiths in rights of worship; and seeks to prevent reasoned discussion about its beliefs by attempted resort to blasphemy laws.
So where is the old left’s centuries-long espousal of free speech and free thought? Where is the spirit of Tom Paine? The answer is simple. It has been curbed by frightened self-censorship and by the stifling of debate, in a betrayal of the principles for which “progressives” were once prepared to go to the stake.
And just as some Jews are too quick to call anti-Zionists “anti-Semites”, so some leftists are too quick to tar critics of Islam as “Islamophobes”.
To add to such falsehoods come the illusionists of every stripe, with their unknowing, simplistic or false descriptions of Islam as a “religion of peace”. Even today’s Pope – as the Christian faithful were being harried, persecuted or put to the sword in Nigeria, Syria, Iraq and beyond – told the world in November 2013 that “authentic Islam and the proper reading of the Quran are opposed to every form of violence”. But read the text yourself, and you will see that jihadists can find plenty justification for the acts they commit, even if most Muslims are pacific.
The present renaissance of Islam, additionally provoked, as ever, by western aggressions against its lands, is an old story of swift movement and conquest, as in the 7th century. Is something like it stirring again? Perhaps; you decide. In 50 years’ time the world will know for sure.
Karl Marx was wiser than the Pope. In March 1854, he wrote that for “Islamism” – the word was already in use – “the Infidel is the enemy” and that the Quran “treats all foreigners as foes”.
The BBC, and many others, some all too well connected to the Saudi Royal family or Qataris, are in denial about what the Koran says…or all too willing to adopt the practices for themselves and others…that ‘servitude’ Churchill spoke of.
Even today as Boko Haram marauds around Nigeria slaughtering hundreds in the name of Islam the BBC insists that it is poverty and inequality that drives them…never mind the name, the beliefs or that half of Nigeria has been Islamised and Christians made to submit or be chased from the north of the country.
What will it take to make the likes of the BBC admit that the Koran inspires this radicalism, that the Koran urges conquest and colonisation, that the Koran entraps its adherents and is designed so that the Religon will always expand, grow and eventually dominate any society it infiltrates?
Until the BBC et al does admit that, and they recognise the problem for what it is and what it means for the future, there will never be any resolution.
