First there was the story about a 15-year-old girl who was arrested for burning a Koran and posting a video of the act on Facebook. She may be charged with “inciting religious hatred”.But Muslims in Britain need not fear: an All-Party Parliamentary Group on Islamophobia has now been established. In the future anyone who insults Muslims or denigrates Islam will be held to account by the people’s elected representatives.
Government counterterrorism officials warn that threat level is estimated to be “severe” during the upcoming 2012 London Olympics, and the risk of terrorism is even higher at street parties and other side events. If you look at both those articles, however, you’ll notice that the word “Islam” is not mentioned once.
As far as Her Majesty’s government is concerned, Islam has nothing to do with terrorism. Despite the fact that more than 99% of the world’s terror attacks are committed by Muslims who fight jihad in the name of Allah, Mohammed and the religion he founded never impinge upon the “narrative”. There is only “terrorism”, which is committed by “violent extremists”.
And also, of course, the “Islamophobes” who slander the peaceful Muslims.
God help Britain.
As a Thanksgiving Day present from the Colonials to Blighty, here’s a reminder that things in Albion were not always this way. The poem below is by the renowned tragic Romantic poet Percy Bysshe Shelley (1792-1822):
To The Men of England
Men of England, wherefore plough
For the lords who lay ye low?
Wherefore weave with toil and care
The rich robes your tyrants wear?
Wherefore feed and clothe and save,
From the cradle to the grave,
Those ungrateful drones who would
Drain your sweat — nay, drink your blood?
Wherefore, Bees of England, forge
Many a weapon, chain, and scourge,
That these stingless drones may spoil
The forced produce of your toil?
Have ye leisure, comfort, calm,
Shelter, food, love’s gentle balm?
Or what is it ye buy so dear
With your pain and with your fear?
The seed ye sow another reaps;
The wealth ye find another keeps;
The robes ye weave another wears;
The arms ye forge another bears.
Sow seed, — but let no tyrant reap;
Find wealth, — let no imposter heap;
Weave robes, — let not the idle wear;
Forge arms, in your defence to bear.
Shrink to your cellars, holes, and cells;
In halls ye deck another dwells.
Why shake the chains ye wrought? Ye see
The steel ye tempered glance on ye.
With plough and spade and hoe and loom,
Trace your grave, and build your tomb,
And weave your winding-sheet, till fair
England be your sepulchre!
— Percy Bysshe Shelley
Hat tips for the news stories: Gaia and DF.
26 comments:
Quote:
In the future anyone who insults Muslims or denigrates Islam will be held to account by the people’s elected representatives.
end quote.
It's like a totalitarian republicanism.
The community of common interest is defined as Muslim in a nation which is actually plural.
What a smokescreen!
The only solution is to vote/join the BNP.
That England, that was wont to conquer others,
Hath made a shameful conquest of itself.
-- Shakespeare, Richard II
The baron said:
"In the future anyone who insults Muslims or denigrates Islam will be held to account by the people’s elected representatives."
Not true. They are a misguided committee manipulated by a moslem pressure group. They are hardly going to call citizens to parliament to account for themselves.
The only way they will have any meaning if they recommend a new law and parliament is stupid enough to pass it. Unlikely.
What is appalling is to see British MPs getting involved in the spread of Islamist fundamentalism or Extremism.
You say "... more than 99% of the world’s terror attacks are committed by Muslims who fight jihad in the name of Allah, Mohammed and the religion he founded ..."
How would you back that up? I made that claim in discussion with a liberal friend who challenged me on it, and I found that I could not show evidence that it was true, either for worldwide attacks or attacks on US targets."
Let's not get ahead of ourselves: APPG's have no powers they are merely discussion fora. However this is a deeply depressing development, because it is another step towards the statutory recognition of this monstrous non-sequitur "Islamophobia".
The IOC's 10 year plan really does seem to be coming along very nicely.
*GUFFAW* Obviously I meant the OIC!
Quote:
The only way they will have any meaning if they recommend a new law and parliament is stupid enough to pass it. Unlikely.
end quote.
With respect.
I'm from America, and pressure does amazing things to lawmaking. Precedent is the only thing the British system has on its side at the moment-- a moment in which Muslims say the West has no traditions at all.
fuzzyface73 —
How would you back that up?
Well, I would start by visiting The Religion of Peace. He has carefully chronicled every Muslim terror attack since 9-11, and lists more than 16,000 of them.
Now, you might take issue with some of them being called “terror attacks”, since they probably include some honor killings and so on. So let’s say there have been only 5,000 Muslim terror attacks (or attempted terror attacks) since 9-11.
Now: how many terror attacks by non-Muslims have there been since 9-11? How many can you name?
I, on the other hand, can recite a long string of jihad attacks, right off the top of my head without even going to TROP to look them up. There are jihad terror attacks in India almost every day.
I doubt you can discover 50 non-Muslim terror attacks since 9-11. And if Sri Lanka is kept off the list (since those were internal operations, not exported to foreign countries as the Jihad is), the number tends towards zero.
A solution for the UK - campaign for the BNP or "white supremacism" to be an officially-recognised religion?
It worked for the Jedi Knights, so why not for those who believe whites are special?
In which case, what fun it would be to see British courts dealing with the dilemna of whether to try those who "incite religious hatred" against the BNP...
FilthyKaffir:
I suspect the percentage of terrorists in muslim nations IS 100% Muslim, however, those nations generally allow little if anything in the way of dissent. Remember, the Saddam regime has only been gone for a short 7 years - the regimes of Saudi, Syria, Egypt, etc. are still open or repression 24/7. IOW, their Home Governments do not put up wit Jihadis as we do in the West. DrShalit
Comment in more readable form.
Response to fuzzyface:
Half an hour of googling "terrorism + statistics + religion" (and other combinations) produced a decided paucity of results. If I were given to conspiracy theories, I might be excused for concluding there existed a concerted effort to hide the connection between religious ideology and commission of terrorist acts -- oh, perish the thought!
Nonetheless, here are some findings and a question:
1. The Religion of Peace material cited by The Baron, above.
2. From Statistics on Terrorism, Arrests and Outcomes Great Britain, 11 September 2001 to 31 March 2008, http://www.statewatch.org/news/2009/may/uk-ho-terrorism-arrests.pdf :
Religion of prisoners (Table 13)
The majority (91%) of terrorist prisoners classified themselves as Muslims. For the 17 domestic extremists/separatists, 3 classified themselves as Church of England, 3 Buddhist and 8 gave no religion or described themselves as agnostic. (p. 8)
And: From Table 13 Self-declared religions (1) of terrorist/extremist prisoners in England and Wales at 31 March 2008 (p. 27):
107 of 117 prisoners identified as Muslim. That is, 91.4% called themselves Muslims. Assuming Muslims comprise 10% (deliberately an overestimate) of the British population of 62 millions, some not-so-complicated calculation of ratios yields the stunning, not to say terrifying, result that, in the UK, Muslims are 172 times more likely to be imprisoned for terrorist violence/plotting than non-Muslims. The population-adjusted percentage of Islam-inspired terrorism, then, is 99.4%. That’s just in a nominally Christian country, Great Britain. What might the percentage be in, say, Iraq, Pakistan, Somalia, Egypt; and the list goes on, and on, and on…?
3. Did your liberal friend offer any alternative statistics, from any authoritative sources?
I seriously hope that fuzzyface will reply to these comments.
the connection between religious ideology and commission of terrorist acts
Define "terrorist act".
It's been said that the suicide-vest is the poor man's B-52. We have to admit there is truth in that.
The recently-defeated Tamil Tiger guerrillas (Hindu-Dravidians, 30-year insurgency to secede from Sri-Lanka), alone, disprove the "99%" idea.
Some others off the top of my head:
-- South-American groups from Marxist insurgents to the drug gangs (50,000 killed in drug violence in Mexico in three years, is it? Colombia once had world's highest murder rate?)
-- The communist-terror groups across Europe active within living memory,
-- The IRA,
-- The ultraviolent African "anti-colonialists" of recent decades. Their terrorism was the wanton massacre of white farm families, from Mau-Mau to Mugabe to the hundreds of South African white farmers even in 2010 who've been killed.
Alleging "terrorism" (whatever that's supposed to mean) is the almost-exclusive purview of the Muslim today is clearly false.
Info on Anti-white terrorism in South Africa:
3,758 white farmers killed 1994-2010 (full documentation at link). Over 100 dead white farmers in year 2010 through mid-November. More severely injured.
Are all these anti-white terrorists in South Africa secret Muslims?
fuzzyface73,
the Baron has already answered your question, but let me comment
1) what if it is 90% or 80% would that change anything? Not for me.
2) common sense tells you that the figure is about right.
3) do you really think facts will change your liberals friends mind? I doubt they will.
hailtoyou: Define "terrorist act".
Oh joy, it seems that we've got ourselves a moral relativist who appears to have bought into the microscopically minced wording that Islam uses to define "terrorism". What's next, define "is"?
It's been said that the suicide-vest is the poor man's B-52. We have to admit there is truth in that.
What truth? Your offensive moral equivalency doestn't pass even a simple stench test. The BUFF (Big Ugly Fat Fella or B-52) has never been used in an openly declared campaign of intentional genocide. The "Palestinian" terrorists all share a common goal of killing every Jew on earth.
What's more, during combat operations, "Palestinian" terrorists routinely neglect such niceties as actual uniforms unlike the honorable men and women who fly America's strategic bombers.
Feel free to compare a terrorist's bomb vest to any of a variety of Nazi or Communist Russian and Chinese warplanes. They have more likely been used in the sort of genocidal campaigns that those "Palestinian" terrorists have their sweat-soaked wet dreams about.
hailtoyou defining a terrorist attack is easy, terrorist attacks go for the soft, non military targets, in other words they target civilians, their only purpose is to kill and terrorize civilians. The B52s on the other hand are used on military targets, granted our enemies these days like to hide their military targets among civilians but that simply places the civilian deaths on their hands. When I was in the Army the Geneva Convention said that if military targets are placed in civilian neighborhoods the civilian deaths are the fault of the people putting the military positions in civilian neighborhoods.
Nobody in a honorable military organization has deliberately targeted civilians since WWII, the Islamic terrorists almost always target civilians. Study military history and tactics before you start moral equivalency that way you won't sound so uneducated.
hailtoyou: You are correct. Jihadis are POOR, but it is the form of their poverty which must be exposed. Indeed, Jihadis are MORALLY POOR. Another word for moral poverty is EVIL.
Thus, Jihadis are EVIL.
Richard, so targetting civilians with the intent to intimidate them is terrorism.
Terrorist Menachim Begin. He was the ringleader in the King David Hotel bombing-atrocity in Tel Aviv.
Begin's bald-faced atrocity, his "terrorism", killed 91 people, mostly British, and wounded scores of others, many of them crippled for life.
This was 1946. Jews in those times did not have a state apparatus in the Levant, nor a military, so they used terror-bombings against British civilians (the "occupiers") to advance their cause of statehood. Do you parallels here??
(Terrorist Menachim Begin later became the 6th Prime Minister of Israel, 1977-1983.)
Zenster wrote:
the microscopically minced wording that Islam uses to define "terrorism"
Many groups attack non-military targets in an attempt to demoralize an enemy. This is after Richard's definition. What is yours?
If one defines terrorism as any "military-esque" act committed by a non-state entity, then the American rebels of 1775-1781 were "terrorists". No one recognized U.S. independence yet. (Possibly France, but just to spite Britain).
so targetting civilians with the intent to intimidate them is terrorism??
Well, you see: some terrorists fight; for a goal that is attainable and just, others just terrorize because they are frustated, horny, ashamed and agressive and so kill and torture and maim for nothing at all.
They kill because they feel big and important when others suffer, it makes them feel they are mighty warriors, fighting for a cause, instead of poor humiliated hysterics. So they have a very good reason not to recognize that their cause is unattainable, bogus, silly and unjust..
Their 'struggle' is not about the 'loss of land' or a legitimate grievance; it is simply jihad. They are poor hysterical idiots who let themselves be duped to fight and die for 'the honour' and ‘face’ of pathetic fat, old fools and crooks, who sit at home in the meantime sipping coffee while watching thèm die
You don't actually believe that peace will come in the middle east if you were given all of Israel? And you dó know that you would still not be living in a decent, humane and honourable society if 'the palestians' had not gambled and squandered 'palestine'?
On second thoughts - don't tell me; it has all been said already. You poor fools simply will not hear. So by all means, struggle on - to the death, my brother! :-)
Post a Comment