Tired and Emotional

It can only get worse

British Multi-Culturism

General Sir Charles Napier

The experiment of mass immigration undertaken in Britain since the 1950s, with the subsequent addition of multi-culturism to this toxic trial, has lead us to our present state of affairs. However, there could have been another form of multi-culturism for our country, as originally practiced by General Sir Charles Napier (1782–1853), Commander-in-Chief in India. A delegation of Hindu locals approached him complaining about the prohibition of Sati — the custom of burning widows alive on the funeral pyres of their husbands — and his response was:

You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours.

Now that’s the sort of muscular multi-culturism I would not mind being put into practice, especially with all the demands for the introduction of Sharia law within our country.


Muslim Timing

Mark Steyn on top form:

I believe the old definition of a nanosecond was the gap between a New York traffic light changing to green and the first honk of a driver behind you. Today, the definition of a nanosecond is the gap between a Western terrorist incident and the press release of a Muslim lobby group warning of an impending outbreak of Islamophobia.

The Mask Slips


Yesterday, Muslim leaders met Ruth Kelly to discuss how to combat extremism. The Independent reports:

Muslim leaders have urged Ruth Kelly, the Secretary of State for Communities, to support Islamic family law in Britain to stop youths joining Islamic extremists.

In other words, let’s adopt Sharia Law within Muslim communities — extremist and fundamentalist by any definition — to curb the rise in fundamentalism! Thus the real motives of Muslim ‘community leaders’ are exposed.

That would be the thin end of a very nasty wedge.

Muslim or British?

One feature of the recent mainstream media’s commentary, and that following last year’s London bombings, is surprise and incomprehension that British-born Muslims should identify so strongly with the travails of Muslims globally — feeling the pain of the Ummah — that they are prepared to take up terrorism. From the Pew Global Attitudes Project — Muslims in Europe:

Religion is central to the identity of European Muslims. With the exception of Muslims in France, they tend to identify themselves primarily as Muslim rather than as British, Spanish, or German. In France, Muslims are split almost evenly on this question. The level of Muslim identification in Britain, Spain, and Germany is similar to that in Pakistan, Nigeria, and Jordan, and even higher than levels in Egypt, Turkey, and Indonesia. By contrast the general populations in Western Europe are far more secular in outlook. Roughly six-in-ten in Spain, Germany, and Britain identify primarily with their country rather than their religion, as do more than eight-in-ten in France.

In Britain only 7% of Muslims consider themselves British first while 81% consider themselves Muslim first, this is comparable to Pakistan (8%:87%) and worse than Jordan, Egypt, Turkey, and Indonesia. That means 1.2 million British Muslims consider themselves Muslim first. This is the reason for the growth of Islamic terrorism within our country: based within self-supporting and self-reinforcing enclaves, induced by fundamentalist preachers and appeased by a multi-cultural elite.

It is therefore no surprise to find suicide bombers, who have a closer identification to their fellow Muslims in Iran, Lebanon or Gaza than their neighbours, occurring within our midst.

A Letter to Reject

Two days ago, an advert was placed in The Times newspaper — notably signed by three Members of Parliament, three peers and various Muslim religious groups — calling upon the British Prime Minister to change foreign policy to ‘tackle’ terrorism. The text of the advert follows, with thanks to Western Resistance:

Prime Minister,

As British Muslims we urge you to do more to fight against those who target civilans with violence, whenever and wherever that happens.

It is our view that current British government policy risks putting civilians at increased risk both in the UK and abroad.

To combat terror the government has focused extensively on domestic legislation. While some of this will have an impact, the government must not ignore the role of its foreign policy.

The debacle of Iraq and now the failure to do more to secure an immediate end to attacks on civilians in the Middle East not only increases the risk to ordinary people in that region, it is also ammunition to extremists who threaten us all.

We urge the prime minister to redouble his efforts to tackle terror and extremism and change our foreign policy.

Attacking civilians is never justified. This message is a global one. We urge the Prime Minister to redouble his efforts to tackle terror and extremism and change our foreign policy to show the world that we value the lives of civilians wherever they live and whatever their religion.

Such a move would make us all safer.

Sadiq Khan MP, Shahid Malik MP, Mohammed Sarwar MP, Lord Patel of Blackburn, Lord Ahmed of Rotheram, Baroness Uddin, Association of Muslim Schools, British Muslim Forum, Bolton Mosques Council for Community Care, Confederation of Sunni Mosques, Midlands Council for Nigerian Muslim Organisations, Council of Mosques — London & Southern Counties, Council of Mosques — Tower Hamlets, Da’awatul Islam UK & Eire, Federation of Muslim Organisations (Leicestershire), Federation of Students Islamic Societies (FOSIS), Indian Muslim Federation, Islamic Forum Europe, Islamic Society of Britain, Jama’at Ahle Sunnat UK, Jamiat Ahl-e-Hadith UK, Jamiat-e-Ulema Britain, Lancashire Council of Mosques, Muslim Association of Britain, Muslim Council of Britain, Muslim Council of Wales, Muslim Doctors and Dentists Associaion, Muslim Parliament, Muslim Solidarity Committee, Muslim Students Society UK & Eire, Muslim Welfare House (London), Muslim Women Society (MWS), Muslim Women’s Association, Northern Ireland Muslim Family Association (NIMFA), Sussex Muslim Society, The Council of European Jamaats, UK Action Committee on Islamic Affars, UK Islamic Mission, UK Turkish Islamic Association, World Federation of KSIMC, World Islamic Misssion, Young Muslim Organisation UK, Young Muslim Sisters (UK), Young Muslims UK

My first reaction was surprise at the number of significant Muslim associations within Britain but with 1.6 million Muslims in this country as of 2001 (Census figures) I shouldn’t have been. MI5 believes up to 400,000 people in Britain are sympathetic to violent ‘jihad’ around the world and that as many as 1,200 — The Enemy Within — are involved in terrorist networks, the vast majority of these are undoubtedly Muslims.

This letter is nothing more than a case of a minority within our country — Muslims account for 2.8% of our population — pressurising the government to change its foreign policy, based upon the implicit threat of further terrorist attacks by disaffected British Muslims. This shows a lack of basic understanding: last year the British population in the general election voted the New Labour government back in to power — foreign policy included. While it is entirely appropriate to lobby the government of the day, either directly or via one’s local MP, any intimation that the desired change needs to occur to avoid terrorism must be firmly rejected.

Unfortunately, the British government, both past and present, has to take some reponsibility for the current situation. Mass immigration, along with the policy of multi-culturism has allowed the development of unassimilated and fundamentalist Islamic communities in London, the West Midlands, Lancashire and Yorkshire. It is within these communities that Islamic preachers such as Omar Bakri Muhammed and Abu Hamza have operated, preaching the fundamentalist Islamic creed to second- and third-generation Pakistani youths. The activities of such preachers were allowed under an unwritten gentleman’s agreement: cause no trouble at home and we’ll allow you to stay and continue to preach. Unfortunately these were no gentlemen.

I expect a significant proprortion of the signatories to this letter are no gentlemen either.

‘Religion of Peace’ Mantra

The last few days have seen less of the ‘Islam is the religion of peace’ mantra than after the London bombings last year, for which one must be grateful. Violence is a common response of devout Muslims to any criticism of Islam — remember those Danish cartoons or the Salman Rushdie fatwa — and the continuing, decades-long clash between Israel, neighbouring Arab states and Palestinian terrorists provides ample self-justification for Muslim suicide bombers to blow themselves up along with a captive audience.

Several years ago, I read a study of cancer cases that were found to be clustering around nuclear installations and one of the conclusions of the paper was, that as radioactive discharges could not have caused the observed number of malignancy cases according to the accepted aetiological model, some other agent must have been the cause of the problem. This conclusion was fine as long as the accepted model was correct, but what if there were double, triple or even higher multiples of malignancy? Either the accepted model was wrong or some other, associated agent might have been implicated.

It’s the same with Muslim terrorism and the ‘religion of peace’ mantra. The mantra is the model that Muslims and the bien pensant multi-culturalists want us to accept, but experience and the increasing incidence of terrorist and potential terrorist outrages are showing us that the ‘accepted model’ of Muslim behaviour is wrong. Muslim suicide bombers and Muslim terrorist groups generally are composed of devout Muslims.

The Language of Terrorism

Dr Imran Wahid

On Newsnight last night — the BBC’s flagship current affairs programme — Kirsty Wark interviewed Dr Imran Wahid, spokesman for the Islamist political party Hizb ut-Tahrir, and Haras Rafiq from the Sufi Muslim Council. Tony Blair had stated in a press conference on 5 August 2005, following the London bombings, that “we will proscribe Hizb-ut-Tahira [sic] and the successor organisation of Al Mujahiroun”, but this nasty, terrorist-supporting party still has free reign in this country.

Last night’s interview was the inevitable discussion into the ‘root causes’ and motivations of ‘British-born’ Muslims planning and committing terrorist atrocities and, while Mr Rafiq seemed to talk a great deal of sense, Dr Wahid did not fail to disappoint. When asked about such motivations Dr Wahid replied with, “…people who use political violence, usually there is a political grievance.”

So terrorism has now been sanitised to become ‘political violence’, denying the horror of violent death through mass murder. Let’s be clear, what’s being alleged is that Muslim terrorists, born in this country, have conspired to take international flights and deliberately detonate bombs, thus murdering hundreds of innocents with each act. That’s the reality of what Dr Wahid, a supporter of Islamic terrorism, describes as ‘political violence’.

Was I Wrong?

Yesterday I wrote about the alleged terrorists who had been arrested as follows:

We all know, even before there have been any official statement and despite the ‘careful language’, that these are Muslims, probably second- or third-generation Asians and unlikely to have been poor or oppressed, just anti-British and anti-democracy.

It seems that, apart from possibly two converts to Islam, I am correct. Twenty four people are in custody and nineteen have had their assets frozen, their names appearing on the Bank of England website as reported by the BBC. A quick glance will confirm the origin of these alleged terrorists: three named Ali, three named Hussain, two named Khan, and an Islam notable amongst the rest. Not a Smith, Jones or Bloggs amongst them. These are Muslims. Reports this lunchtime are that one is a biochemist, another is aged seventeen and a third one works at Heathrow. One of the white converts to Islam was educated at Grammar school, hardly poor or oppressed.

At some point the usual platitiudes will be served up to us by the Left, the BBC and Muslim ‘community leaders’: these people ‘are not true Muslims’ or that ‘Islam is a religion of peace’. To both all one can say is “Rubbish!”

It will become apparent that these alleged terrorists — if anything — are too religious, probably devout Muslims well-versed in the Koran and respected by their peers. It will be apparent that with increasing Islamic religiosity comes increasing fundamentalism and a propensity to terrorism. These suspects will be found to have considered themselves as devout Muslims and who are we to disagree?

Islam means submission, not peace, and is the common thread in all major terrorist atrocities of the last few years yet we will see politicians and ‘community leaders’ urging restraint and tolerance upon our indiginous population: it’s not us who need to be tolerant and restrained.

I’m not wrong.

Euphemistic BBC

In the latest report from the BBC, Police probe flights terror plot, we find that the alleged terrorists in custody ‘…were British-born, and some have links to Pakistan.’ The reality is more stark and Sky News gets closer with:

…22 of those in custody are of Pakistani origin, one is Bangladeshi and another is Iranian. Officials have said all the suspects are British citizens.

The Left-leaning, bien pensant BBC is trying desperately hard to shore up the received wisdom of multi-culturism, even as the beneficiaries destroy it from within.

Required Reading


The book Londonistan, published this year, looks to be required reading — ordered from Amazon today:

For four years after 9/11 Britain pretended to be tough on terrorism. But when London was hit by British suicide bombers, the secret was finally out. Under the noses of the British government, parliament, intelligence services and police, Britain has become the European hub for the promotion, recruitment and financing of Islamist terror and extremism. Terrorists have used it to plot, finance, recruit and train for atrocities throughout the world, and now also at home. Such is the scale of these operations that Britain is referred to as ‘Londonistan’ by anti-terrorist specialists abroad.

How could this happen? In this ground-breaking analysis Melanie Phillips interviews key politicians, Muslims, academics and intelligence experts. She uncovers a persistent state of denial by the British establishment both on the left and right. In Britain’s universities, Islam is taught as dogma out of fear. ‘Londonistan’ has become a country within the country that is growing in strength. Its radical demands are being appeased by multiculturalism rather than challenged by common sense.

Melanie Phillips compellingly argues that Britain should face up to the threat to its way of life. The picture she paints of modern Britain is a forceful warning not to subscribe to the false causes of religious radicalism that have misled us so far.