Harry's Place

Jewish Catholic Missionaries are among the worst of all. Lucky she got sacked before she brought in the Hindu Quaker Monks.

“All that is needed for the Triumph of Evil is for Good Men to do Nothing” – Edmund Burke.

Acknowledging there is a problem is the first step, a small step, but taken in the right direction it can lead to a solution. Stop pretending everything is OK because it’s not OK, stop pretending this Islamist issue is just another minor tremor on the political Richter Scale because it’s not, this issue has the potential to turn the ‘people’ into a roaring Mount Vesuvius and turn the ‘Left’ into the ideological equivalent of Pompeii.
Take the step ‘oh men of the left’ and the people will follow, they just want to follow the path of reason, not the path of any particular dogma and certainly not the path espoused by the myriad of extremists, be they left, right, this religion or that religion, yes take the step and trust the people,they are not all children, you know.

Indeed. She should now sue for damages, and demand a public apology.

The fabric of Britain allows this to happen, because we did not anticipate how it could be abused. It is abused, and Muslims constantly do it. Another issue is halal animal abuse meat being introduced into schools that all children have to eat; in one Yorkshire school parents were never consulted. Apart from the ethics of this, there are facts about the hormones released into the blood when animals are slaughtered so barbarically, then consumed in the meat.

Reet, it is not Muslims as a whole who are abusing British society. It is a group of ruthless Islamic extremists who are doing so and tragically as this article makes clear with some success.

it is not Muslims as a whole who are abusing British society. It is a group of ruthless Islamic extremists who are doing so and tragically as this article makes clear with some success.

Well-spotted David All. But, the basic thesis of this post worries me: that there is somehow a legitimate form of multiculturalism.

It is a group of ruthless Islamic extremists who are doing so and when the issues are confronted the other Muslims block, deny, and refuse to consider the issues.

Notably, the ideology the “extremists” use, and its historic and literary context in Islam.

In that respect, I suggest all Muslims, pretty much, are part of the problem. The violent ones do it, the non violent ones don’t but won’t acknowledge its context and ramifications. This cannot be covered up, because Mohammed himself and his war campaign is inexcusable by modern values.

Further, I suggest the majority of Muslims “sympathise” with the violent ones and their tiresome, provocative, and neanderthal agendas (we are victims, Palestine, etc).

The “extremists” are on a spectrum and when you look at the historic and ideological heart of Islam, exemplified by its very leader, they are arguably the “true” Muslims – just like they think they are.

It is open to dispute whether it is more damaging to accusing someone of being an active or potential kiddie-fiddler or to accuse him/her of the unspeakable crimes of “racism” and “bigotry” or – a new one, this, but increasingly fashionable – the dreadful sin of “Islamophobia.”

David T. considers it more significant that this appalling tale is in the pages of the “Independent” than in the pages of the “Daily Mail,” where it first appeared.

Oh, David! Please DO try to get a grip! There are FAR more readers of the “Mail” than there are of the dhimmitude-Independent or the contemptible terrorist-sympathetic Al-Grauniad added together. Yes, we alll know that “Mail” readers are not, well, OUR sort of people but they ARE our fellow-citizens with their own rights, hopes and quite justifiable fears.

Reet is willing to discuss halal slaughter. Just as well for him that he’s not doing this in France, that cradle of the Enlightenment; Brigitte Bardot got into some very expensive bother for her alleged “Islamophobia” on precisely this issue.

Let’s stick to the facts: mass Third World immigration, particularly Muslim immigration, has proven a disaster for the Anglosphere and for every country in Western Europe. Whether one thinks of the grooming of underage girls in Rotherham – a story dropped swiftly down an oubliette of immense depth – or the epidemic of rape in Stockholm and Malmo, the catastrophe has the same causes. Need one even mention the birthrate of the Muslim communities of Europe?

Now name a single mainstream politician who would dare to say such things aloud and still hope to have a significant career in politics.

“It is a group of ruthless Islamic extremists who are doing so”

Up to a point David all.

The Islamic extremists are being given a pass by too many who should be in a position to know better, and also by those for whom no amount of evidence would dissuade from appeasing the repugnant ideology of political Islam.

Take for example Professor Ron Geaves (I have moved from a position of academic neutrality to one of active engagement with the Muslim community” April 2006) who is chair of the Muslims in Britain Research Network which includes among its members academics and others such as:

Dr Basia Spalek – University of Birmingham

Dr Laura Zahra McDonald – University of Birmingham

Abdullah Faliq – Director of Training at the Centre for the Study of Terrorism

Dilwar Hussain – Islamic Foundation

Kathryn Blennerhassett – BBC Religion and Ethics

etc

http://www.mbrn.org.uk/members.html

This is a very important report by the Independent. I believe that we have here a template for dissection; a template of Islamist methodology, the bullying and grassroots activism to impose Islamist principle through a soft institution that will be an increasing phenomenon in British schools, and in British civil society, away from the ‘centre’.

We can see how the outer activism of constantly raising sharia possibility, claiming Islamophobia, asserting that Britain is an endemically sick society plagued with an illness of bias against ‘Islam’ feeds into the margins.

The outer, macro activism at the centre formulates the atmospherics; sharia and Islamic identity politics become an agenda for British society, agitated for in the media, through commentary, through lobbying. This is the field of the MCB, MAB, the Ramadhan Foundation, and so on and so forth.

So this becomes an apparently pressing need of our time, this need to ‘embed’ Islamic needs institutionally at various levels of British life, and in the space that opens up in an age of suicide-murder jihadism carried out by British men, it co-opts that dialogue space to assert the further need for institutional attention and debt to the precepts of Islamism and sharia, ostensibly to stop Muslims feeling ‘alienated’ from British society, to equalise the supposed injustices and victimhood of Islam, and of course, to compensate for the sickness in the very fibre and marrow of Britain, this sickness called ‘Islamophobia’.

It is in this atmosphere, away from the centre, at the micro level in which sharia creep occurs, in the margins, in the small towns, the schools, and other soft institutions, in which it becomes possible to invoke the knuckle-duster that the outer macro level activism propagates. It becomes the default assumption, the accepted, asserted narrative, and a decent head teacher can be persecuted, slandered and bullied, her life ruined, in the pursuance of an ideology of Islamification.

It is a sad, sad story, a squalid story of bullying and ruin by cynical, supremacist men. Remember, the actions of these men have resulted in £400,000 of public money, rare resources in a time of recession, being rightfully given to Mrs Connor after the local education board failed in its duty to protect her from this attack, acting in truth for the persecutors and supremacists.

But in it lies something decent and good. And this is the fact that it can be studied under a microscope, understood, and used to notify people of the machinations of Islamist activism at a grassroots level in Britain, and how it feeds into the atmospherics created by Islamist activists at the centre.

A closer interrogation of Paul Martin and Mumtaz Saleem is now required by the media. We need to hear their side of the story, we need to know who they are, we need to ask them some very serious questions, we need to confront them over their slander, bullying and persecution of Mrs Connor, and we need to forensically dissect and display the entrails of their supremacist Islamist agenda for the future health and good of British society.

Jason
8 April 2009, 7:35 pm

it is not Muslims as a whole who are abusing British society. It is a group of ruthless Islamic extremists who are doing so and tragically as this article makes clear with some success.

Well-spotted David All. But, the basic thesis of this post worries me: that there is somehow a legitimate form of multiculturalism.
———————

I agree with Jason’s comment. I do not regard multiculturalism as legitimate in any way. And it is very destructive.

The prevailing fashion isn’t even truly multicultural, it is a continual dishonest attack on traditional British culture, under a banner which proclaims that new Britons find our traditions offensive.

Significant damages would be appropriate, the victim has suffered significant losses after all. But if the local authority pays damages, it should be forced to fire the officials who failed in their duty. It is time Council taxpayers started flexing their muscles.

This story has only hit the media following the relevant court proceedings, in which Ms Connor (a completely non-religious person, incidentally) was awarded over £400,000 in damages. So some good’s come out of it. The two trouble-makers, who were clearly identified as such by the court, are Paul Martin (a rich Muslim convert) and Mumtaz Saleem, who still live in the Woking area and probably deserve some further attention.

What it shows is that the pressure (implicit or explicit) put on public bodies by Islamist agitators must be balanced by counter-pressure; we will have to get a good deal nastier, and be prepared to say openly that, though we eschew bias against individuals purely on the ground of their affiliations, we do not want organised Islam to have any more influence in our society than it already has, and that those Muslims who want to live in a more Islamic society have plenty to choose from. And I don’t care much if “ordinary” Muslims don’t like it much; as Reet says, too many of them provide cover for the extremists.

David T
Thankyou for bringing this to my attention.
Good work.

“It is open to dispute whether it is more damaging to accusing someone of being an active or potential kiddie-fiddler…or …the dreadful sin of “Islamophobia.”

Which doesn’t make sense if we criticise Mohammmed’s paedophilia. I wouldn’t even mind if Muslims were honest about it, and said yes it is condemnable but its what everyone did.

They are not honest – they won’t condemn it because Mohammed did it, and use the fact that others did it to dodge the issue.

Point being of course, they all regard Mohammed as a perfect and unquestionable example for humanity.

Bullshit. And the time is getting closer, I think, when such matters have to be openly addressed.

“I do not regard multiculturalism as legitimate in any way. And it is very destructive.”

I think there’s a necessary distinction that has never been made, between ‘culture’ and ‘values’.

Books, food, music, clothes….great, lets have it as colourful and diverse as possible.

Equality for women, free speech, religious tolerance, social integration, religious freedom, capacity for honest reciprocal self criticism….go fuck yourself if you do not fit into these fine attitbutes of British society. Thats my view. Unfortunately, when this huge European influx of Muslims started and then continued, no one considered values; it was all construed in terms of culture.

We are not going to make any progress until we put a stop to this sort of nonsense:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7989108.stm

Why on Earth do Sikhs think they’ve got a natural right to be exempted from knife laws, helmet laws, and health and safety regulations? They haven’t.

It’s all nonsense and let’s not forget this PC nonsense started with militants imposing their religious rules on the rest of us.

Actually it started even earlier – allowing Jewish shopkeepers exemptions from Sunday trading laws and so on.

We need to roll back religion and establish firmly that we have one law for everyone.

Its a legacy of the left’s desire to emphasise ‘different-but-equal’ rather than the ‘trousers on one leg at a time’ commonality suggested by, for example, science, post Watson & Crick. If you are from outside the UK and believe that your religion tells you that Jews,Appostates or Homosexuals should be murdered, we don’t judge. We just say ‘well, that’s a valid point of view but we don’t share it’. Thanks to the post 60s left, we daren’t even say that we disagreee thanks to the notion that disagreeing with people descended from people the British one subjugated is somehow imperialist. Sorry but cannabilism, wife-beating and executing gays is still wrong, as wrong as the Thugee murder cult the British Empire exterminated in India.

Its a legacy of the left’s desire to emphasise ‘different-but-equal’ rather than the ‘trousers on one leg at a time’ commonality suggested by, for example, science, post Watson & Crick. If you are from outside the UK and believe that your religion tells you that Jews, Apostates or Homosexuals should be murdered, we don’t judge. We just say ‘well, that’s a valid point of view but we don’t share it’. Thanks to the post 60s left, we daren’t even say that we disagreee thanks to the notion that disagreeing with people descended from people the British one subjugated is somehow imperialist. Sorry but cannabilism, wife-beating and executing gays is still wrong, as wrong as the Thugee murder cult the British Empire exterminated in India.

More apologists for non-violent Islamist extremists:

Andy Hull and Ian Kearns at the Institute for Public Policy Research:

Non-violent Islamists are much more likely to come across Al Qaeda recruiters and recruits than moderates, who do not move in those circles. And unlike most mainstream Muslim leaders, Al Qaeda’s Islamist critics have the credentials to make their criticism bite. If, as seasoned former counter-terrorism officer, Bob Lambert, observes, ‘Al Qaeda values dozens of recruits over hundreds of supporters’, can the government really afford to do business only with moderates?

http://www.ippr.org/articles/?id=3460

Myopia of the Left, in other words, and a totally useless, abysmal report.

@Clive

Mate – even in 1994 for when I fought Hizb at Essex Uni it was clear, quite amazingly crystal clear that while they themselves notionally eschewed violence, if you hung out with them you could meet one of their chums who’d help you do something a bit sterner than hand out vaguely homophobic or antisemitic leaflets.

Its an easy mistake in any conflict to take you disdain for your enemy’s beliefs and charicature it until them seem stupid. Its a fatal mistake to assume that they actually are idiots and plan your military action accordingly. I’m Irish enough to know that viscerally – its what the British did there, underestimating their foe until the poor dumb Irish gutted them in 1918, ushering in unconventional warfare (see Michael Collins).

The Left go one step further and assume that the religious motivations of Islamists are merely a manifestation of false consciousness and are properly understood as the oppressed fighting the capitalist oppressor. The fact that Hitler and Mein Kampf showed broader humanity that not taking nut jobs at face value can end in tears is secondary to their quasi-religious dogma. Blair scrapping Clause 4 was a poor substitute for dismantling this kind of shoddy thinking.

Yes, Shaun, I can see a philosopical approach to this contest might prove useful, hence I will quote some Sun Tzu back at you, in lieu of a more intelligent reply:

“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.”

- Sun Tzu

“Its an easy mistake in any conflict to take you disdain for your enemy’s beliefs and charicature it until them seem stupid. Its a fatal mistake to assume that they actually are idiots and plan your military action accordingly”

Indeed. This rot has been damaging British society for decades, because Muslim scumbags were construed as eccentrics and nutters not worth the time of taking them seriously.

NO ONE was arrested for calling for the murder of Salman Rushdie, on British streets. It was not a joke, or the Muslim equivalent of a student rag stunt, as the Vin Gogh incident illustrated. And remember this was before Iraq, before Afghanistan, before all the Muslim whining about those subjects.

What it was, was just one example of the serious problem of Islam in Britain that to some extent culminated at 7/7.

No government has ever adressed this, and while it has started to change in the last few years the damage has been considerable.

Thanks for the link to the Indy article- that’s a proper treatment of the subject.

To me what this sorry episode shows is that the Commission for Racial Equality/EHRC is not fit for purpose. They have created an atmosphere where this could happen, and now the public purse is £400k light.

The judge pointed at the Islamists as the real racists of the case, so where was the CRE at the time to set the record straight?

This goes to the highest levels in local government. The EHRC is a spectre that haunts LEA officials and prevents them doing their job effectively. It is therefore not fit for purpose.

Agree with those who point out that those who appease the Militant Islamists whether out of fear of being calling Islamophobic (which appears to be as publicly deadly as being called a Communist or a Communist sympathizer was during the Cold War) or out of some sort of political gain or out of idealogical need to be anti-Western/pro-Third World are the other half of the threat, the other side of the coin so to speak, that the Militant Islamists poses to the rest of the world.

Back to the Woking case. Fair enough that the LEA were made to pay £400,000 damages to the headteacher who had done such an outstanding job. But what about the other victims of the LEA’s misguided (and possibly illegal) actions, the children who missed the opportunity to get an above-average education? What compensation have they been awarded for the harm they have suffered?

Echoing Joe Camel, what is the situation at the school currently? Is it a faith school or not?

It is the CRE/EHRC that is really in the frame after this case.

The Surrey council officials took the side of the bad guys in this case, and the judge blames it on their fear of the CRE.

If the CRE/EHRC has created an environment where this kind of Islamist activity can flourish at a cost of £400k to the taxpayer, then it is not fit for purpose.

“this need to ‘embed’ Islamic needs institutionally at various levels of British life”

The key word here is “needs”, or in other words what is really meant here is the constant sense of Islamic “entitlement” and the endless whining, bullying and threats when this “entitlement”, this “gimme gimme”, is not met with instant capitulation.

And there is plenty of capitulation all across the political landscape.

accused of ‘Islamophobia’ by a clique of self-appointed and ideologically driven ‘community leaders’ is almost a perfect metaphor for the current attack on true multiculturalism

While other commentors rightly point out that it is Islamists, both “violent” and “non-violent”, that are the problem, it is wrong to believe that the smearing of people by false accusations of racism and Islamophobia is limited to just Islamists.

Sadly, I have twice faced official complaints of racism, both made non-Islamist Muslim ex-neighbours (”Islamophobia” wasn’t around in those days). Once followed a quite innocuous request for a guy to move some of the six cars he was selling on the street so that the rest of us could park, and the other by a charming guy who played rap music at full volume till the wee small hours.

We have, over the past two decades, created a climate of fear around race, to the benefit of chancers and wrongdoers. Such people have long recognised the debilitating effect that an accusation of “racism” can have on an individual or an organisation, and have used it to good effect (so much so that even senior police officers are now wheeling it out in petulance at not being promoted). Can we really be that outraged or surprised when Islamists do the same?

David All, I suspect that the word “islamophobia” is approaching its sell-by date as a weapon of deadly intimidation. Some people are already prepared to agree openly, “Yes, I am an islamophobe,” though they are probably still only a small minority. The trouble is that it was a badly coined word in the first place. Anything called a “phobia” is usually an irrational fear or weakness of some kind, such as claustrophobia, arachnophobia, and so many others. But there’s nothing irrational or weak in refusing to be pushed around by thugs and bullies. Nobody ever called the resistance movements in occupied Europe “naziphobes”.

I read the article and see Erica Connor as an admirable person. Pity that the financial settlement wasn’t much larger to emphasize the injustice that she has suffered.

Serious condemnation of the LEA which I assume is the London Educational Authority.

This all happened on Ken’s watch. That explains it all.

Anything called a “phobia” is usually an irrational fear or weakness of some kind, such as claustrophobia, arachnophobia, and so many others

Phobias are RATIONAL fears to the people who have them. They are only IRRATIONAL to th ethird person observer who says “How can anyone be frightened of a tiny spider (for example)”

I don’t know why the better word “Islamistphobia” isn’t brought into use as it identifies who people are really worried about. “Islamaphobia” tends to be taken as “fear of Muslims” or “angst against Muslims”.

When we create the word “Islamistphobia” we can be proud to use it when we are saying how much we hate the Islamists who hounded this Head Teacher. “Yes, we are concerned at your political jihadist attack on this Head Teacher in order to manipulate a selfish policy exclusively for the benefit of Muslims and your own ego to the detriment of the majority and non-Muslim pupils. Are we Islamistphobic. Yes we are!”

Phobia is probably not a useful concept to introduce into this discussion as it is too often used in the context of pathologies experienced by individuals rather than societies.

A common sense approach would be to avoid any use of this term in conjunction with Islam or Islamist, concentrating instead on what some Muslims say and do.

Clap

LEA = Local Education Authority

Ken for once is blameless

“Islamophobia” is a myth. It doesn’t exist as a discrete entity. I wish we’d eradicate the very word from our vocabulary.

Bertie

LEA = Local Education Authority. Ken, for once, is blameless

Apologies to Ken. (Wink and cross my fingers).

Joe Camel

Nobody ever called the resistance movements in occupied Europe “naziphobes”.

lol well put :)

I am trying to promote the word ‘Islamosceptic’ as an alternative, meaning rationally sceptical about the tenets of Islam rather than irrationally scared of Muslims per se.

All decent people should happily describe themselves as “anti Muslim”,
as in anti Fascist, anti Nazi etc. Isplamophobia is a contradiction in terms.

There are decent people who have been brought up in Muslim lands,
just as there were decent Germans who wore swastikas in the 1930s,
because they had no choice.

But most “British Muslims” are Islamist Fifth Columnists.
It’s not disguised racism, because New Labour has not had to coin terms such as Sikhophobia or Hinduophobia , because those religions are not here as colonizers.

When two million “moderate British Muslims” take peacefully to the streets of the UK in defence of free speech, & no caving in to extreme Muslim demands. I’ll revise my ideas

Martin

Surrey County Council is still claiming, amazingly, it is in the right over this. The Chief Education officer at the time (the post had one of those right-on titles new labour are so fond of) moved on last year. She is I believe now Chief Education Officer for a west country local authority. (Don’t know which one, Plymouth way I think). It is particularly surprising that high Tory Surrey of all places should indulge in this sort of thing.

I think it is probably because Maybury on the edge of Woking is a run down Pakistani ghetto with large numbers of people shambling around it in Asian dress looking fairly poor as do the shops (I have to drive through it regularly). It sticks out like a sore thumb from the surrounding area.

I assume the education authority thought they were accommodating local sensibilities by appointing Paul Martin (a convert who is Treasurer of the mosque), with another local “businessman” to be school governors of the local school which has a very high percentage of muslim pupils.

Unfortunately these people had their own agenda, which they set about imposing on school, headteacher and other governors. The Chief Education officer at the time must have approved the persecution of the headteacher, implicitly at least, probably due to the usual misguided view of treating Muslims as separate and different and entitled to be so.

Just to add that, hardly surprisingly, Surrey education services are given an outstanding rating by Ofsted.

“Surrey’s very best childcare, education and skills praised in Ofsted’s annual report 2007/8.

Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Education, Children’s Services and Skills, Christine Gilbert, said (about Surrey):

“It’s encouraging to see so much outstanding provision across all areas of education and care and I pay tribute to all who contributed to this success. “

Anna Wright, director of Schools in the above article, whom the Head Teacher says sided with the extremists against her, also moved on, in 2006 to be Director of Education and Children’s Services at Reading. Press Release at the time: Jon Hartley, lead councillor for education and children’s services, said: “Anna Wright has extensive experience of working with a wide variety of schools.

“Her leadership will help us continue our ambitious programme of changes, to ensure Reading schools will be able to provide the best opportunities to local children.”

“The story was first told in the Daily Mail. Now it is in the Independent. Let’s hope that this now means that it is taken seriously.” – David T.

I rather suspect the opposite. The insulation of the liberal left is complete and more likely is the “let’s have all the facts” long form of prevarication. I detest ‘The Daily Mail’, but it has no following to appease. ‘The Independent’ does.

Multiculturalism was and remains a project of white liberals without sufficient grasp of realities; realities which inevitably arise when people of very different backgrounds and cultures have to live side by side. The daily life which is, unavoidably, a series of contacts and exchanges between vastly differing assumptions and expectations. In a fete, fair or theme park atmosphere these contradictions are trivial, even engaging. But as they impact in daily life, they are its very substance.

It is not sufficient to be merely against reaction (phobic). Liberal progressives should proclaim what benefits open and plural societies have produced – not simply drunken women in the streets – celebrating those qualities in people’s lives which have given so much to so many and continue to be the most widespread means by which progress for all can be delivered. What can be placed against this record which is not coercive or dictatorial?

But most “British Muslims” are Islamist Fifth Columnists.

Let me guess, you’ve never spoken to a Muslim have you? I prefer the phrase anti-Islam to anti-Muslim.

Phobias are RATIONAL fears to the people who have them. They are only IRRATIONAL to th ethird person observer who says “How can anyone be frightened of a tiny spider (for example)”

Bernard Levin, in one of his memorable pieces, describes with great frankness his own arachnophobia. He makes it quite plain that he was always fully aware that there was no rational basis at all for his fear of spiders and that it was indeed a “condition” in the medical sense.

My own long years of arachnophobia, in what was thankfully a very much milder form than Bernard Levin’s, came to a sudden end one Saturday morning a few years ago in an unforgettable incident lasting no more than a minute or two, involving a young relative’s pet tarantula. I remember very clearly the realization that dawned on me while I was still down on my hands and knees, poking under the fridge with a broom handle and murmuring, in what I hoped were cajoling tones, “Pussy! Pussy!” (for want of a more specific term). It wasn’t that I had lost my fear of spiders, it was that I had never in fact been afraid of spiders at all. I had only imagined that I was afraid of them, and now I had seen through the sham.

Reet, it is not Muslims as a whole who are abusing British society. It is a group of ruthless Islamic extremists who are doing so and tragically as this article makes clear with some success.

When will we see the death of “the-tiny-minority-of-extremists” line?

Yes, the agitators were islamist, but the lack of any muscled opposition on the part of ‘moderate’ Muslims amounts to a tacit approval of this assault on their part.

Everyone claims that the majority are moderate, but when push comes to shove, and when it’s time to stand up and be counted, these moderates are nowhere in sight.

Mz Connor ‘claims’ she had the backing of the majority, but cannot offer up any real proof for such an assertion.

David All “… it is not Muslims as a whole who are abusing British society. It is a group of ruthless Islamic extremists who are doing so and tragically as this article makes clear with some success.”

You appear to contradict your earlier post which quotes Edmund Burke by not mentioning that the “good men” among them stood by and did absolutely nothing.

That should be the focus of action in future – the encouragement of those “good men” (and women) not to bystand by giving them our unstinting support.

How long do you Brits think you can run around putting your fingers in the holes in the dyke that are appearing everywhere? Every day it’s some new encroachment of your rights.

There are 33 million poeple in Algeria, most of whom are Muslim and presumably, if the bien pensants are correct, mostly moderate. And yet no one has stood up to protest the treatments of the country’s Christian minority.

You have narcissistic Muslims all across Europe making strident demands that go virtually unopposed, and yet these “rights” demanded and obtained by Muslim “moderates” in Europe would never, ever be extended to religious minorities in their home countries.

Meanwhile we wring our hands about “Islamohpobia” and then rush to install footbaths and prayerhalls at every gov’t office, school and university, and this, without every receiving any reciprocity.

http://www.journalchretien.net/breve16638.html

Meanwhile we wring our hands about “Islamohpobia” and then rush to install footbaths and prayerhalls at every gov’t office, school and university

It is really that bad in Canada?

It is really that bad in Canada?

Yep, the demands just never end.

But some of us are starting to fight back, and gov’t is finally waking up to the threat.

Amused,

You’re right I “misspoke”. Anti Islam is a highly respectable stance.
Anti Muslim sounds personal.

I’ve met, & liked, several people from Islamic backgrounds, but they were Muslims like many of us are C of E, very much lapsed.

The one practicing Muslim lady I know keeps away from mosques (”they’re after your money”) & openly hates Jews. She calls the UN the Jewnited Nations. She’s not a friend. But in fairness, she thinks she has a very good deal in the UK, & is no terrorist.

Martin

“It is really that bad in Canada?”

“Yep, the demands just never end.
But some of us are starting to fight back, and gov’t is finally waking up to the threat.”

Rave on, John P., rave on. Christ-almighty !

She calls the UN the Jewnited Nations.

If only!

Joe Camel

Nobody ever called the resistance movements in occupied Europe “naziphobes”.

No they just guillotined them. I watched a very harrowing film the other day based on the White Rose German anti nazi movement in Munich centering on Sophie Sholl’s involvement and eventual execution. Those nazi’s certainly knew how to quell dissent and were admired by many Muslims like Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Mohammad Amin al-Husayni who visited Hitler to gain support in removing both Jews and the British. Another naziphile admired by the MCB was Abul Ala Maududi founder of Jamaat-e-Islami whose aim was a global caliphate based on nazi methodology. And they have the utter effrontery to wave the jews=nazi banners at hamas parades. They are quite pathetic. And pig ignorant of their very own awful history to boot.

Cipriano @ 8 April 2009, 7:53 pm

“This story has only hit the media following the relevant court proceedings, in which Ms Connor (a completely non-religious person, incidentally) was awarded over £400,000 in damages. So some good’s come out of it. The two trouble-makers, who were clearly identified as such by the court”

The way to deal with doctrinaire hard-line elements, of any variety, who have got elected to School governing bodies, is to quietly and effectively organise to get other people elected at the end of their term.

There are examples, so I’m wondering why this didn’t happen in the Woking case?

Shaun Pilkington @ 8 April 2009, 8:51 pm

“The Left go one step further and assume that the religious motivations of Islamists are merely a manifestation of false consciousness and are properly understood as the oppressed fighting the capitalist oppressor. ”

That’s far left conspiracy theorists. But the broader mentality of people whose thinking is more about what they are against than what they are in favour of come close.

Alan -

“The way to deal with doctrinaire hard-line elements, of any variety, who have got elected to School governing bodies, is to quietly and effectively organise to get other people elected at the end of their term.

There are examples, so I’m wondering why this didn’t happen in the Woking case?”

You’re dead right, and I assume (on no evidence, except a lifetime’s observation of human behaviour) that people couldn’t be arsed. That’s the disgrace. In the Labour Party, to which I still belong despite everything, it is axiomatic that members with children at school stand for parent-governorships. However, the two arseholes in question seem to have been parachuted in by the local authority despite not being parents.

Alan Ji: “That’s far left conspiracy theorists. But the broader mentality of people whose thinking is more about what they are against than what they are in favour of come close.”

Well, I sort of see your point. But, like many other people, what I’m in favour of is people just getting on with their lives and allowing everybody else to get on with theirs, and that needs no action from me. It’s only when people stand in the way of that that any action from me is required. So yes, I am more concerned with what I’m against, because what I’m for can look after itself.