Actions and Reactions, Islamophobia, Moral
Equivalence, Double Standards
"No sane person would condone the
Finsbury act of terrorism. No intelligent person would say it was
unpredictable, especially if he studied physics at school. Didn't
Newton explain that for every action there is an equal and opposite
reaction?" [source].
"Everything and everyone has a
breaking point. When a stone is put under increasing pressure,
nothing visible happens till it finally disintegrates in a fraction
of a second" [comment at
source].
"This will only become more frequent
until the Media/Government start dealing with Islam and speaking
honestly about it" [comment at
source].
"If you allow society to degenerate
to the point where there is less and less in common to bind
competing groups together, there we will be action... but just as
surely there will - slowly, eventually, belatedly - be reaction. And
the most obvious reaction is to reach for the same weapon your
opponent's got on you: In the cold war, the Communists acquired
nukes. In the culture war, the right is storming the stage
[at the recent leftist production of
Julius Caesar at Central Park].
In the jihad, the Islamophobe rented a van" [source].
"One cannot begin to solve a problem
until (i) one accepts there is a problem (ie. put an end to denial),
(ii) identify and acknowledge what the problem/issue is, and (iii)
the reasons that lie behind the problem/issue. It is important to
understand actions and reactions, and the first step towards that
process is assessing the reasons that lie behind the action, and the
reasons that lie behind the reaction. So reasons assist assist
understanding, they do not, or do not necessarily in and of
themselves, amount to an excuse. So when someone sets out the
reasons behind any act, one is not becoming an apologist for the act
in question, unless and until that someone goes a step further, and
states that the reasons is a valid excuse for the action" [comment
at
source].
"It's not Islamophobia that has put
the electricity of fear and tension into the atmosphere, but Islamic
terrorism. So surely our response to the Finsbury Park attack should
distinguish between action and reaction. Both may be reprehensible,
but it takes a broken moral compass to suggest they are
equally
reprehensible. Or else it takes a conscience warped by what some
call political correctness and what could more appropriately be
called our civilisation's suicide wish" [source].
"The 'authorities' usual
consternation about motive is missing. If the incident seems 'Islamophobic'
they announce the motive quickly. If the perpetrator is shouting 'Allahu
Akbar' the motive is almost impossible to pinpoint, and even if
identified is never described by any word with 'islam' or 'muslim'
as a modifier" [comment at
source].
"We do not know all that much about
the attacker, Darren Osborne, but within minutes of the incident the
media, the politicians and the elites were utterly sure about his
motivation: he was an evil Islamophobe. Yet when a Muslim with the
name Muhammed waves an IS flag, shouts 'Alahu Akbar', and lops off
the heads of infidels, all the experts [sic] assure us that we have
no clear motive to go on" [source].
"Finally, the terror deniers of the
Left have a terrorist they are happy to condemn. In the aftermath of
the attack there have been no idiotic efforts to downplay the terror
threat by comparing the number of deaths in the West with those who
die from bee stings or fall off ladders" [quoted at
source].
"Do you remember that after
Manchester and London Bridge MSM, luvvies and politicians told us
not to tar a whole community of peace-loving muslims with the brush
of terrorism, and that we must all love each other - 'don't look
back in anger'? Compare that with the instant outpouring of rage and
incrimination after that 'terrorist attack' now downgraded to
'incident' on Monday night: tarring the whole 'white community' ...
as Islamophobic racists is perfectly all right, muslim 'rage'; is
totally acceptable" [source].
"Let me remind all of you of one very
basic and damning truth. It is a cold hard statistic that cannot be
wished away or explained away: since ... 9/11/2001 ... there have
been 31,046 deadly Islamic terror attacks. Did you get that? And yet
the fools running the West ... are insisting that there is some sort
of moral equivalence here: Islam has a few bad eggs, but so too does
the evil right wing. Um no. Conservatives during the past 16 years
have not gone on 31,046 deadly terror attacks. ... please offer me
ten other examples of right wing terrorism resulting in numerous
casualties this month. Indeed, just name two others. There is no
moral equivalence here whatsoever" [source].
"If [Mrs May] really will stop at
nothing to defeat violence, she should start by stopping the Muslim
action first, and the reaction to it second. This isn't just a
temporal sequence, but a moral pecking order" [source].
"[I]t seems likely that in the long
run Mrs May et al will attach greater significance to this long
anticipated 'Islamophobic backlash' than to mere humdrum terror
attacks like Manchester, Westminster Bridge and London Bridge. If a
fellow goes all Allahu Akbar ... well, he was a bit of a loner, had
a few mental-health issues, difficult family background, etc. No
wider significance or pattern can be discerned: ... all jihad is
local. But, if some guy rides his van up on the sidewalk in Finsbury
Park, that will doubtless be emblematic of an epidemic of right-wing
hate, and Facebook, Google & Co need to do a better job of policing
social media" [source].
"The response to the Finsbury attack
has been striking for its double standards. Observers and politicos
have done all the things they warn us not to do after Islamist [sic]
attacks. After Islamist [sic] terrorism they instruct us not to get
angry, not to hold any community or culture responsible, and not to
fall for the apparently foul, racist idea that the Koran or certain
imams might have inspired this violence. In fact, they ringfence
Islam from criticism and frown on efforts to discover the possible
scriptural source of the terror. They wield the insult 'Islamophobe'
against anyone who suggests there might be a broader cultural
problem behind such violence. 'It's just an individual with warped
ideas', they insist. This time, in response to a suspected act of
far-right violence, they've changed their tune. They've ditched
their usual pacifying cry of 'Keep calm and carry on', in favour of
inviting the nation to look in the mirror. This act of violence does
have a communal base, they claim. It speaks to an 'increase in
Islamophobia all over the country' ... This violence does have an
intellectual origin we should all worry about: it is the tabloid
media's 'addiction to Islamophobia' that nurtured it, we're told.
This violence does raise questions about certain communities in
Britain, especially tabloid-reading ones ... 'the vulnerable',
easily whipped into 'crazed hysteria'" [source].
"Suddenly, it is okay to see an act
of individual violence as a signifier of social and communal
problems. It is bad, apparently, to raise any questions about Muslim
communities after Islamist [sic] attacks. But after Finsbury it is
absolutely fine, important in fact, to query the rank, media-fuelled
prejudices that apparently lurk in certain communities 'all over the
country'. ... 'We must never criticise the Muslim community, because
we might hurt their feelings, but we should definitely criticise the
tabloid-addicted, 'vulnerable' sections of society that refuse to
respect religious difference'. ... This approach both infantilises
the Muslim community, treating them as incapable of robust
discussion, and criminalises the white working class, who are
presumed to be one newspaper editorial away from 'crazed hysteria'"
[source].
"Action and reaction indeed, the
physics of politics. Now we have the beginnings of an answer to a
question ... politicians don't seem to ask: 'Do you think people
are just going to keep taking this?' Politics is about the
management of violence: who gets to use violence on whom, when, and
why. In the UK and other European countries, the invaders get to
come to your land and kill and molest and impoverish you, [clog]
your streets with strange tongues and customs, and trash your
heritage. The legacy population is not allowed to protest. They must
endure silently or mouth cant about diversity and acquiesce. And the
politicians can't claim the populaces they represent - or used to
before the demographics changed - agreed with this. Voting did no
good for these beleaguered. It will do less good as immigration
increases. The violence was not only managed in Britain. A de facto
monopoly was given for one side to cook up more, its numbers ever
strengthened by immigration, its propaganda never challenged. It is
even subsidized. If violence is the last, horrible, uncertain resort
for the natives, those not only native by birth but also confident
adherents to the Western rite of reason, secularism, free speech,
and the rule of law, I won't, as a citizen of a country created and
preserved by two violent wars, condemn it" [comment at
source].
"The MCB [Muslim Council of Britain]
won't accept that Islam bears responsibility for terrorism unless we
Islamophobes also accept that Douglas Murray is responsible for the
Finsbury Mosque van-ramming. If the MCB thinks it can deflect the
notion that Islam bears responsibility for terrorism by arguing that
Douglas Murray must accept responsibility for Finsbury Park, that is
wrong. There are many flaws in this imaginary comparison. Apart from
the huge difference in scale and 'pattern', and the differing
elements of direct incitement to violence - (some in the case
of hate preachers and none in the case of Douglas Murray) the
most fundamental difference is that Islam is the catalyst and 'the
other side' is the response. The equivalence theory is not going to
work. There is no equivalence and no contradictory principle there"
[source].
"Islamophobia: a word created
by fascists, and used by cowards, to manipulate morons" [Christopher Hitchens].
"Islamophobia should really be
defined as the cowardly and irrational compulsion to appease Islam,
for fear of the likelihood of its adherents rioting and murdering
should it be required to abide by the same laws as all other
beliefs, and to encourage cultural, legislative and judicial self
mutilation rather than to risk offending a belief system that holds
us in utter contempt. An example of this bizarre and repulsive
mental condition would be not just allowing but applauding a march
in London, replete with emblems of various banned terrorist
organisations, calling for the destruction of Israel (as opposed to
calling for equal civil rights for Palestinians, which could have
been achieved decades ago if the goal of the Palestinian
'liberationists' had been justice rather than genocide), and within
one day calling for the arrest of Tommy Robinson who has never
advocated violence, simply for refusing to pretend that there isn't
a problem" [comment at
source].
"I don't think I'm an extremist. I've
never been on a demonstration, I've always paid my taxes, I've never
been arrested. I've never been to a football match, I don't support
any team. Boringly conventional I've even spent half my working life
as a civil servant. I don't bear ill will to any nation or people,
if 'they' want to live like 'that', well good luck to them.
I'm not blind either. I don't see Islam being good to any peoples
anywhere. The more I study of its doctrines the more convinced I am
that it is bad. I can understand why people in Pakistan follow it
because to not do so is to die. I don't understand why any sane
government would want to import it and having done so to protect it.
But then I thought men were men and women were women and their
different bits fitted and that made babies and babies were better
off with mums and dads. And I thought that I should accept some
responsibility for my weaker neighbour but now I find that it is his
right to demand my help, even if he never was my neighbour until
yesterday. So just by standing firm on my society's foundations I am
now an extremist as the new 'moderates' rush toward me with their
staves and sickles" [comment at
source].
Government Failure to
Protect Its People --> Vigilantism
"But what if the eternally
unprovokable finally decide to get provoked?" [source].
"This will only become more frequent
until the Media/Government start dealing with Islam and speaking
honestly about it" [comment at
source].
"It's axiomatic that, if the state
won't protect the people, the people will protect themselves" [source].
"The laws of political correctness
superseding all other laws, the state has done nothing to solve the
problem of Muslim terrorism or even to acknowledge that this is what
it is. Both main parties are implicated in this. ... Pressure has
been building up in the cooker for a long time, and everyone knew
the top would be blown before long" [source].
"I am not really surprised that we
now see some insanity from our side with worshipers being mown down
at their Mosque. When your country or government does little to
nothing to defend its ... subjects, people when pushed hard enough
will start resorting to vigilantism when they feel helpless to stop
what is happening! There are fringes on both sides, but now our
fringe is beginning to push back, and although I don't like it, I
can certainly understand it" [comment at
source].
"[W]hat he did was utterly dreadful
and attempting murder is not the answer, ever. However ... my heart
goes out to this man ... the father of four children, watching what
happened to other children in Manchester - not just that, watching
life getting increasingly more dangerous for his children. He must
have felt that nothing was being done to protect them - we can only
guess at what was going on in his obviously tormented imagination,
but I am sure he isn't alone in worrying about his young family"
[comment at
source].
"The 'Bubba Effect': When the
government cannot or will not protect the citizens, some people
stand up and protect themselves or go on the offensive. They carry
out what they see as justice, on their own because the State has
repeatedly failed to do so ... hence, a White English guy just drove
into a bunch of muslims, because, well, a bunch of muslims have been
killing White Englishmen for years now. Never mind that the folks he
killed and injured probably have not and would not have been
involved in terrorist activities. The point is, he's sick of it and
is fighting back for what he sees as an attack on his culture, his
way of live, his family, his church, etc, etc." [comment at
source].
"The British government ... are ...
due some introspection. They actively brought in thousands upon
thousands of people from a far away land, many of whom have nothing
in common with regular Britons, and have no desire to assimilate,
and actually hate everything about Westerners and our way of life.
... [then] when those from the far away land [who] are more inclined
to violence, do decide to self-detonate or make their car a human
battering ram, instead of a hard line, we are told the usual
sissified, PC platitudes that only make those from this land are
inclined to be 'Bubba', more furious and prone to violent action
themselves" [comment at
source].
"[The Bubba Effect] was played out in
full in the case of Ken Rex McElroy, the 'town bully' of Skidmore,
MO. McElroy spent [years] stealing, raping, burning, and
terrorizing the people of his small country town. Attempts to get
the law to take action were futile: the police and judges were
intimidated by this outlaw, and people who tried to stand up to him
would find themselves alone and targeted for reprisals, as their
neighbours ran for cover and the law looked the other way. Finally
the guy was gunned down on the main street by a posse of townsmen
who'd had enough. After he was executed, everyone just walked away,
and no one to this day has ever broken the silence over who did the
shooting, even though it was witnessed by over a dozen people. The
authorities will find soon enough that having armed enforcers on
their side isn't enough if they don't have the support of the
people. The difficulty of trying to investigate Muslim communities
will be duplicated in the native population, as people close ranks
and refuse to assist investigations of their own"
[comment at
source].
"There is clearly a large swath of
Western society that does not wish to commit suicide by
multiculturalism and when you essentially outlaw freedom of thought
and speech, and criminalise dissenting thought, this is
unfortunately but ultimately a very predictable consequence"
[comment at
source].
"When the people see those they have
entrusted to protect them actively excusing and indirectly abetting
those who attack them, why would it be surprising at all to see the
people begin to take matters into their own hands. Playing by the
rules only applies when the rules apply to everyone ... Perhaps if
the governments involved treated the guilty as the threats to
society that they are, and that includes those who assist the guilty
both physically and ideologically, then the innocent wouldn't have
to suffer the backlash that will inevitably come" [comment at
source].
"Muslims run down pedestrians in an
attack aimed at white, Christian westerners and we are expected to
just hold our cranks and take it because [of] multiculturalism.
Muslims lop the heads off of white western soldiers in broad
daylight in the middle of London and we are expected to deal [with
it] because vibrant diversity is our strength. Muslims gun down
people in the Canadian Parliament building and, oh well, we need to
get used to it. The governments of Europe turn a blind eye to
blatant terrorist acts on the native-born, ostensibly free born
people. The civil police forces cannot be bothered to crack down on
the grooming gangs of English daughters for fear of being called
'racist'. The 'no-go zones' of European cities, where police,
unveiled women, and angels, fear to tread, are accepted by the
authorities as a way of life in the multicultural reality. Ye the
governments of these ostensibly free and liberty-minded societies
are shocked, SHOCKED, when the people start rising up in retaliation
against the enemy Mohammadans in their midst"
[comment at
source].
"Darren Osborne ... wasn't in any
immediate danger - he wasn't pre-empting or warding off an attack.
However, he was justified in feeling threatened as a member of the
group routinely and indiscriminately targeted by Muslim terrorists -
just as Jews were targeted in Russia circa 1903. That feeling he
had, however justified it might have been, doesn't excuse his
criminal action. But it certainly mitigates it" [source].
"[M]ost folks are getting sick and
tired of [the hypocrisy]. If we took the threat of Islamic terror
seriously, we might spare the lives of many innocent men, women and
children. But as long as our elites play this sick game of defending
Islam at all costs, the toll will rise, there will be more bloodshed
on our streets, and likely - and regrettably - there will be more
revenge attacks carried out by those who have lost all faith in
their governments to protect them" [source].
"[Tommy Robinson] says the
politicians are failing us by not tackling the real problem and that
this has led to what happened last night as people decide to take
things into their own hands. What Robinson is not saying is that we
should do that... he is in fact urging the government to take action
to prevent such 'radicalisation' of non-Muslims who see themselves
and their society under attack almost daily"
[source].
"[U]nless HMG does something about
[Islamic terrorism against Her Majesty's subjects], people like
Darren Osborne ... will. If they start doing it
en masse,
that could spell disintegration of public order, with vigilante
justice replacing the rule of law" [source].
"There is a simple question to be
asked of our 'leaders': 'What are are you trying to achieve? (What
is the goal?).' They have imported an American Pit Bull
Terrier and let it breed. Some of these dogs have attacked other
dogs. They tell us that not all APBTs bite (which is true). Their
'answer' appears to be to import and breed more APBTs. Eventually
everyone will have an APBT so there won't be any Yorkshire terriers
being attacked so that will be 'alright'. Sadly the same approach is
being adopted with gusto across the entire West. Eventually there
will be no homes for any Yorkshire terriers in the world, which is
exactly what the 'APBTs breed society handbook' has called for for
the last 1400 years" [comment at
source].
"The liblabcon government has allowed
the return of 500 hardened ISIS volunteers who together with their
families and clan members ... and recruits and sleepers give access
to upwards of 5,000 jihadis. They are free to live off welfare and
to go where they want and plan what they want notwithstanding GCHQ
monitors some of them. That is the equivalent of the wartime
coalition government of Churchill allowing two regiments of Waffen
SS to infiltrate the big towns of the North of England and to go to
ground to fight a guerrilla war. This is High Treason. It cannot be
made clearer that the government has no plan but appeasement and the
punishing of people like Tommy Robinson who has the charisma and the
[courage] to speak the truth" [comment at
source].
"Never in history has European man
been more compliant to the wishes of his overseers, or even his
peers. Life expectancy has increased, but is life being truly lived?
... Despondency sets in. Some join the ranks of the silent epidemic
of White middle aged males taking their own lives. Mass immigration,
Islamic terror, and the rape of White children occurs amidst this
bewildering, infuriating inertia. All of this occurred to me as I
watched phone-recorded images of Darren Osborne prior to being
bundled into the back of a police van. In one clip he shouts 'Kill
Me' to the Muslims surrounding him. Semi-drunk, he appears possessed
of both physical and mental pain. I believe that Osborne's actions
were indeed an act of revenge, but they were perhaps foremost an act
of rebellion - a rebellion against the idea that revenge couldn't
even be contemplated; a rebellion against inertia and the silent
suffering of inaction" [source].
"It was 'the authorities' that
disarmed the citizenry [sic] in the 1950s and 1960s. Before that it
was recognised that self defence was not only an unalienable right,
but a basic human instinct. The assumption was that the free citizen
[sic] should be able to protect himself or his property by any means
at his disposal - including firearms. Also it was a principle that
the 'keepers of the Queen's peace' were the citizens themselves -
the police merely being citizens in uniform who were paid to devote
themselves to it full time. In disarming the citizenry, government
assumed responsibility for the safety and security of the individual
citizen. It has not only failed in that duty ... but the loss of
life and limb has been a direct result of government policies"
[comment at
source].
"Sadly, General Gordon's deep
misgivings during his last posting to Khartoum (1884-1885) have
proven to be only too well-founded. like the British in 1885,
Western powers still fail to understand [the] indomitable spirit of
the world's mujahidin" [comment at
source].
Dhimmis,
Appeasers, Quislings, Virtue-Signallers
"Finally, the terror deniers of the
Left have a terrorist they are happy to condemn"
[quoted at
source].
"The very people who implored us to
carry on as before and not be alarmed after an Islamist [sic] blew
up little girls leaving a pop concert in Manchester seem to think it
is perfectly reasonable to be hysterical about a lone attack aimed
at Muslims" [quoted at
source].
"[T]he usual calls for love,
tolerance and togetherness have been replaced by opportunistic
fearmongering from the very people who steadfastly refuse to accept
the reality of Islamist [sic] terror around the world. Instead of
prayers, hashtags and demands for unity, the Left has gone on the
attack by blaming its ideological opponents for inspiring the
attack. Terror is terror and should be condemned categorically, not
just when it is convenient to your ideological narrative" [quoted at
source].
"The simple truth is, most Western
leaders and commentators are fully in bed with Islam and will never
say anything negative about it - despite the daily, even hourly,
body count which keeps on rising and rising. They will only really
get hyped up about terrorism when it comes form a non-Muslim it
seems"
[source].
"The real blame lies with the
treasonous quislings who have sold us out for a few bags of silver.
Sure Blair got 50 to 100 million for it, nits it's surprising how
cheaply the rest were bought. Our politicians have dug this hole for
us and now they don't have the guts to fix it or even admit it"
[comment at
source].
"The British government and the rest
of the elites go from 'what could possibly go wrong' to 'how could
we have possibly known' in a nanosecond, but not with any sense of
shame or responsibility. You can't shame the shameless. There will
be no introspection ... they will double down on the multiculti"
[comment at
source].
"How long do these apologists think
the steady stream of Muslim terrorism can go on before the backlash
occurs, and do they really think that yelling 'Islamophobia' is
going to stop the backlash once it has started?" [comment at
source].
"[T]he complete intractability of the
liberal mindset, ie. Yes, we must accept the cultural differenced,
yes, we ARE supposed to lie down and take it just because, and yes,
this will never happen to anyone I care about, therefore I see no
reason for anger or revenge, you conservative beastly person. ... At
this point I firmly think that there is a physical chasm in the
liberal/conservative genetic makeup that can never be bridged by
discourse or body count. We are doomed to spin in our alternate
realities, overlapping occasionally like a Venn diagram. How
disheartening" [comment at
source].
"[T]he double standards also point to
a deeper problem: the commonalities between the extremist Islamist
outlook and what passes for 'liberal' commentary today ... Reading
some of the commentary on the Finsbury attack, about the 'poisonous
narrative' spreading through Britain and creating 'hateful bigots'
all over the country, it is hard to tell where mainstream thinking
ends and Islamist [sic] intolerance begins. Because that outlook,
that idea that vast numbers of Brits despise Muslims and are on the
cusp of bigoted hysteria, is precisely the underpinning of the
extreme victim narrative of modern Islamist [sic] violence" [source].
"The frothing at the mouth of the
liberal cognoscenti has been excruciating to follow. That idiot of
idiots Owen Jones described Finsbury park as an atrocity. Will he be
censured, lose his job at the Grauniad or his fat ABBC pay packet?
... Will Cressida Dick be censured? ... We are led by idiots and I
really don't know how it has happened" [comment at
source].
"[T]he figure of the 'right wing
extremist' is largely mythical. Not only is this true in terms of
the vulgar exaggeration of the threat of violence from the Right,
but also because 'extremism' is itself merely an invention of the
late 20th-century Liberal state, which hubristically lays claim to
define what is normal and natural. The Liberal state sees itself as
devoid of ideology, and the ultimate in benevolent neutrality. Just
as the Liberal state is founded on this lie, so the concept of
'extremism' is a lie. There isn't even anything 'extreme' about
Islamism - it simply is, and is true to its own primitive
nature. It would be more honest for us to simply call Islamists
'Muslims' than to call them 'extremists'" [source].
"In truth, so called 'right wing
extremists' comprised just 8% of terror arrests last year, and were
almost non-existent at the charging and conviction stages -
suggesting that the legal system is deliberately targeting innocent
Whites for arrest on very weak suspicions in an effort to massage
its figures and make Muslims look slightly better" [source].
"I could probably argue that the
Liberal 'state' is itself 'extremist' because it locks people in
jail for years for leaving sandwiches outside mosques, but that
would be playing their game ... the only oddity about it all is that
Liberalism has forgotten that it rests on 'the shoulders of giants'
who jailed, were jailed, killed, or were killed in order to pave its
way into government and statehood. Without 'extremists' Liberalism
wouldn't exist today" [source].
"Liberalism is facilitating
multiculturalism. Multiculturalism is facilitating the demographic
decline of our people. We cannot long endure the status quo. As
things worsen, we will very probably see more examples of the
frustration of the everyman boiling over. However, Liberalism cannot
accept that it is pushing ordinary people to the edge. Thus, Osborne
the frustrated everyman is being reconstructed as Osborne the
right-wing terrorist. It's a narrative resting on very poor
foundations, but the status quo is milking the incident in Finsbury
Park for every drop of ideological value. Owen Jones, a repugnant
homosexual journalist at The Guardian has written: ... Jones,
like many pathological liars on the Left, is being disingenuous to
say the least ... Jones may truly believe the lies he tells, though
he has a history of bending narratives in accordance with his own
ideological preferences" [source].
"The real, deeper, reason why Osborne
has been charged with a political offence is because his actions
were a political affront to the multicultural agenda and the
Left-Liberal, globalist state, and must necessarily be reconstructed
as systematically 'racist', 'neo-Nazi' or 'far right'. As time
progresses and things worsen, we should expect more and more
relatively ordinary, unaffiliated, and frustrated people to act
against this system, and to undergo similar reconstructions" [source].
"I have no doubt that Osborne will be
convicted of terrorism as a diversionary tactic. Interesting that
the rent-a-mobs are out with other anti-White protest about the
Muslim filled Grenfell Tower fire. Bad press for Muslims - London
Bridge and Manchester - are out of the news and good press is in!"
[comment at
source].
Fifth Columnists and
Trojan Horses
"Does Sadiq Khan think terrorism is
'part and parcel' of living in London now?" [quoted at
source].
"For some reason the Muslim Mayor of
London Sadiq Khan did not repeat his claim that terrorism is part
and parcel of living in a big city. Indeed, while he is often silent
on all the terror attacks in his city and nation, he was very quick
to stand in front of the media to condemn the attack and offer more
police protection for mosques" [source].
"The MCB [Muslim Council of Britain]
won't accept that Islam bears responsibility for terrorism unless we
Islamophobes also accept that Douglas Murray is responsible for the
Finsbury Mosque van-ramming. If the MCB thinks it can deflect the
notion that Islam bears responsibility for terrorism by arguing that
Douglas Murray must accept responsibility for Finsbury Park, that is
wrong. There are many flaws in this imaginary comparison. Apart from
the huge difference in scale and 'pattern', and the differing
elements of direct incitement to violence - (some in the case
of hate preachers and none in the case of Douglas Murray) the
most fundamental difference is that Islam is the catalyst and 'the
other side' is the response. The equivalence theory is not going to
work. There is no equivalence and no contradictory principle there"
[source].
"Maybe the MCB should be confronted
with a few questions.... (1) Does Douglas Murray use a book of
socio-political rules in a religious binding to back up his very
well researched arguments? (2) Have there been any Channel 4
documentaries made about how Douglas Murray tried to undermine the
political system in London by installing shills into the Labour
Party, and furthering a political agenda using religion as a base
for nepotism? (Britain's Islamic Republic (2010)) (3) Has
Douglas Murray, using his belief system and adherents thereof,
published an 'online magazine' downloaded by 55,000 people in the UK
which calls for the destruction of the secularist west? (4) Is
Murray trying to start a state that is entirely based on the
teachings of the literature of one religion? (5) Has Douglas
Murray ever issued a death threat, even a slightly camp one?
(6) In his broad lexicon, does Murray have equivalent words for 'taqiya,
jizya or kaffir', words that would sum up their Arabic and Koranic
semantics quite as well?" [comment at
source].
'Moderate' Muslims
"The attacker is solely top blame -
he chose to do this, nobody made him do it - he alone is guilty of
this crime. But I think the 'moderate' or 'peaceful' muslims
('please stand up, please stand up, please stand up') need to look
in the mirror and realise that they have a responsibility to ferret
out muslim supremacists within their ranks. Problem is, too many of
them who may not be violent themselves, are okay with other muslims
using violence against infidels. Also, they've had many
opportunities to stand up and say something, or do something, and
very, very few of them rarely do" [comment at
source].
The Mainstream Media and
the Press
"If you have not heard anything about
the Brussels and Paris attacks there is good reason for this. The
leftist MSM is utterly focused on ... Finsbury Park ... it is the
despicable hypocrisy and double standards here that stink to high
heaven. The T and H words were immediately released (terrorism and
hate); global condemnation was instantaneous; and incredibly, not
one excuse was made by the MSM for this particular attack" [source].
"The irony is that the BBC has long
warned of the rise of the Far Right and they get applauded...
[Tommy] Robinson does it and he gets attacked and told he should be
locked up.... the difference of course between him and the BBC is
that Robinson tells you why the Far Right is able to get an
audience and attract supporters... it lies in the policies of the
government and its failure to genuinely tackle the rise of radical,
conservative Islam... in fact doing all it can it would seem to
encourage it and prevent criticism of it as the dangerously failing
experiment of mass Muslim immigration into Europe continues apace.
The BBC naturally does not tell you that awkward truth merely
suggesting that the Far-Right are simply racists who have no
rational reason to rise up against what they see as a threat... and
of course there is no thereat... it's racist scaremongering by the
Mail apparently" [source].
"Today has made me really angry about
how the bBC promotes this leftwing idea that Islam can only be a
religion of peace ... We had an incident where somebody allegedly
drove into a load of people. The bBC which always affixes
'allegedly' to any terrorist attack carried out by Muslims hasn't
done so in this case. 1 Person died and it seems he didn't die due
to being hit by a van, but rather he died due to medical reasons,
which is why he collapsed into the road just before the van came
along and where so many people had rushed into the road in which to
help him" [comment at
source].
"Last month 25 year old Akikul Islam
was found guilty in London of driving into a crowd of Muslims (who
just happened to be celebrating Eid with baseball bats, knives,
bottles, fists and feet). He put a load into hospital some
seriously. Where was the bBC outrage? Last night a man armed with an
axe and a knife was arrested outside a TA (reserves centre) in
Kidderminster. On friday a muslim looking fellow was tazered outside
parliament whilst carrying a knife. In Paris a man drove into a
police car and died. Inside the car was found an nAK47, explosives.
Last week a Pakistani boy had his throat slit in London. In fact
this past month has seen an average of 1 person (usually non-white)
stabbed to death or shot in London every other day. Yet for all of
the above only one is deemed a hateful terror attack" [comment at
source].
"[T]he BBC can best be understood as
having a number of linked agendas and bias is just a product of
those agendas. Having an agenda is more than just a bias - they seek
to indoctrinate, persuade and suppress. Just take a look at the CBBC
channel - which is aimed for 6 to 12 year olds - an age where
children in general lack critical faculties. On the CBBC channel
they describe the Finsbury Mosque attack as a case of Islamophobia
and they they have a very detailed explanation for Islamophobia: ...
But it is much more than this... it leaks into the actual television
programmes for children too" [comment at
source].
"It doesn't seem to occur to all
those who have abandoned their professional duty to report
objectively that what they are doing is worse than appeasement. They
are promoting the submission of us, the 'white British', to Islam.
Criticising that 'religion', never mind being angry about their
terrorist attacks, and above all never mind being angry about their
child grooming gangs and rape gangs over decades: that must be
prohibited in the the name of 'peace and love'. Edmund Burke said: 'All
that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do
nothing'. Prohibiting us ordinary people from speaking out
against evil allows that evil to flourish and triumph"
[source].
"As for The Guardian, it is
the voice of a small minority and its content has reached
self-parody as a sort of BAME/LGBT/Marxist broadsheet, but it is
unfortunately quite influential, especially in the BBC, among
Labour/Liberal Democrats, and the Red Bohemia of the 'music' &
'arts' scene. It has been the main public 'intellectual' tool of the
New Left 'race-gender-class' agenda-networking, which has
incrementally subverted our institutions, from education curricula
to parliamentary legislation, and is now poised for 'insurrection'
(John McDonnell MP) as a final push on the 'class' front - targeted
vilification of opponents, grievance demos, student safe-spaces &
sit-downs, wildcat strikes, race riots, direct action, social media
manipulation, paralysis of government, etc" [comment at
source].
Piers Morgan
'Interviews' Tommy Robinson
The one in which Piers Morgan
shows himself to be a fool and a disgrace, devoid of all truth and
knowledge; Tommy Robinson shows himself to be standing on the
righteous and factual high ground; and the air-head in red shows
herself to be, well, the air-head in red...
YOUTUBE:
Muslim Terrorism: Piers Morgan vs. Tommy Robinson:
Part One |
Part Two |
Part Three |
Part Four (20
June 2017)
"Answer not a fool
according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him" (Proverbs 26:4)
/ "Woe unto them that call evil
good, and good evil;
that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that
put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!"
(Isaiah 5:20-21) / "He that saith
unto the wicked, Thou art righteous; him shall the people curse ...
But to them that rebuke him shall be delight, and a good blessing
shall come upon them" (Proverbs 24:24-25)
"I ... timed the so-called
'interview' and the total amount of time that Tommy Robinson was
allowed to speak without being interrupted or talked over was 5m 22s
or in other words 23% of the entire interview time ... that wasn't a
fair interview, just a finger-wagging diatribe. No not diatribe...
RANT, by Piers Morgan" [comment at
source].
"All the left have in their locker is
screaming those buzzwords, they have no common sense argument
against us. Piers Morgan, what a disgrace, Tommy came armed with the
Koran and they freaked out they had no answers and everybody saw
that" [comment at
source].
"Piers' reaction, once his ignorance
of Islam had been so graphically exposed, was to attempt to drown
out the arguments he could not answer by hurling a barrage of
prejudiced, intolerant, totally inaccurate and underserved insults
at Tommy. Piers is by no means always wrong. But, on this occasion
he was pitifully wrong. Fortunately, as we saw, Tommy is an
experienced old hand at dealing with this sort of bigotry" [comment
at
source].
"As soon as Tommy mentioned Sir
William Gladstone, it was all over for Piers, and that's precisely
why he flew into hysterics. Obviously you can't call beloved figures
like Gladstone and Churchill Islamophobic bigots, so Piers has no
choice but to regress into ad homs ('bigoted lunatic') and furious
denouncement in order to avoid conceding the larger point. Not only
could Piers not refute Tommy's point, he couldn't even acknowledge
it. He lost his moral high ground and silencing tactic in one fell
swoop. At that precise moment, in front of the whole country, he
looked like the unpatriotic Tokyo Rose turncoat that he is. He
couldn't let that stand" [comment at
source].
"It's become apparent that this
current crop of politicians and pundits are trying to forcibly
separate Brits from their forefathers and ancestors. Deliberately
burying and drowning out the timeless wisdom and warnings they
imparted before entrusting us with their legacy. The pro-Islamic
propaganda the left pushes is the 180 degree opposite of what the
country stands for and they b***** well know it. Echoes of the past
are like crosses to these EU vampires because they serve as a
painful reminder of a long-abandoned duty to the British way of life
and representative government. Piers and his comrades are as guilty
as sin and the thing they fear most is you REALIZING it. Tommy left
them exposed beyond a reasonable doubt, and their only remaining
course of action became distraction, panic and rage" [comment at
source].
"I believe that British people are
truly demoralized and frightened and Piers simply shows that they
are in denial. The UK is occupied by a fifth column, there is no
doubt about it. If Tommy Robinson didn't have a 'lower class'
accent, he'd be in parliament! A prophet its without honor in his
own land... He speaks truth with passion" [comment at
source].
"I believe that the school already
teach their kids that Gladstone and Churchill were 'racist thugs'.
There is no controversy in today's UK about that. Also, I don't
remember anyone in the government protesting when Hussein Obama
removed the bust from the Oval Office. I think quoting Churchill (or
even Ataturk) is considered blasphemy, Islamophobia, racism and hate
speech. To quote the Koran with the intent [of] 'exposing' its hate
speech is also hate speech" [comment at
source].
"[Tommy] was completely set up there,
but it didn't work out quite as they'd planned :)" /
"They really thought they had him didn't they. The pre-production
meeting must have been something to behold as they high-fived past
the croissants armed with their bit of footage from 2011 and media
diplomas in 'berating and obfuscation'. Reid proving herself to be a
cretin on no less than three occasions. Morgan interviewing himself.
Again" [comments at
source].
"This takes Craig's interruption
quotient up to a whole new level. I don't think Tommy was allowed to
complete a single sentence before being shouted down - or shrieked
at by the apparently ill-informed duo. Remember, it's all about the
questions - in Piers Morgan's world answers are not important. Who
needs a guest anyway?" [comment at
source].
"When someone calls you names and
tries to silence you, they've lost"
[comment at
source].
"Tommy Robinson has his faults but is
generally on the side of the angels. The fact he gives his opinions
in blunt working class fashion, does not make them less valid. His
persecution by the state has been outrageous" [comment at
source].
"Which part of Sharia law does Morgan
like? I wish he'd tell us since he's not an Islamophobe" [comment at
source].
"Oh look! ITV have blocked the video
on copyright grounds. Not because they had two presenters that made
utter turkeys of themselves for 10 minutes then? To be honest, if I
was ITV I'd have blocked it too. Robinson waving the Koran about
could be enough to start conflict, which proves his point to an
extent. The broadcasters just can't seem to complete the circle of
logical thought that would lead them to start asking why they are so
terrified" [comment at
source].
"Morgan is just a talking head. All
of the MSM is these days. After Rushdie, Theo van Gogh, the Danish
cartoons, Charlie Hebdo, etc etc... the MSM bosses have probably had
private meetings where they have decided to defend Islam in order to
protect their employees. The BBC and ITV, for example, have
thousands of workers turning up every day, from cleaners to
'journalists' to CEOs. If a SINGLE WORD is out of place then they
are ALL under threat. The majority of these workers probably don't
even know about these issues. They are too busy trying to earn a
living and survive. ... The MSM lives in fear due to the threat of
death to innocent people. ... It's a real shame that so many people
get their news from the MSM. The MSM is cucked, but I can understand
why ... Criticising Islam equates to a possible death sentence"
[comment at
source].
"[F]ear ... for the welfare of
employees serving to gag media organisations ... is a problem that
needs serious consideration, but is generally avoided due to its
obvious difficulties. In the bleakest terms though the readiness of
Islam's adherents to resort to violence over any challenge to their
attempts at supremacy can be either confronted or submitted to. This
should be responded to with open public criticism and defiance. Yes
this is dangerous. The fact is that many of us are going to get
killed and injured. It is also the case that responding in kind is
not helpful. But there is no choice, refusing to recognise and
confront this problem only allows it to grow and the danger to
increase" [comment at
source].
UK's Mosques
"[N]o efforts were made to integrate
the Muslims into British society. On the contrary, Islamic
particularism was encouraged in the name of diversity"
[source].
"[Nothing] has been done to make sure
that none of Britain's 1,600 (!) mosques would be used as
recruitment grounds for mass murderers. Specifically, from 1997
until 2003 Finsbury Park Mosque ... provided a platform for Abu
Hamza to preach Islamic hatred for our hospitable country. And this
was far from the only mosque used for that purpose"
[source].
"Those impassioned youngsters, many
of whom can't even speak proper English despite being born in
Britain, are easy clay to mould. They go out and kill in the name of
Allah, with people in Britain becoming increasingly desperate and
insecure" [source].
"'...on random Muslims in the street'
Of course Finsbury Park mosque area is notorious and has been on the
news over many years. Just for accuracy" [comment at
source].
The 1400 Year War
"[L]et's begin by admitting that
we're at war - not with alienated [loners] on cannabis, not with
Islamists, not with Islamofascists, not with Islamic
fundamentalists, but with Islam. This was has been going on for
1,400 years, and it has had lulls alternating with flare-ups. We're
going through a flare-up now" [source].
Secularism and
Bigotry
Bigot: "a person who is
obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and
prejudices"
Bigotry: "obstinate or intolerant devotion to one's own
opinions and prejudices"
/
"stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion
that differs from one's own"
"[The]
stumbling block is the new secularism that says, very clearly, that
we are to be treated equally and to do otherwise is contrary to the
separation of state and religion. This, of course, is not what
secularism originally meant. True secularism never claimed that all
beliefs (or behaviours) were equal but it did state that all beliefs
were to be heard and considered and then the people were entitled to
make a decision based on the facts. The new secularism jams that
mechanism and says that we are not even entitled to discuss the
matter. This is based on the claim of 'bigotry', but to anyone who
knows what bigotry actually means, it is the idea that people refuse
to be convinced irrespective of the evidence. The idea that people
should be shut down from speaking and putting forward a point of
view because their ideas are 'bigoted' is absurd. It goes completely
against any logical concept of what bigotry actually is. Until we
address this fundamental problem with how people perceive what
secularism is then the way forward is blocked. Secularism needs to
be returned to what it originally meant"
[comment at
source].
When Truth
Disappears
The
following is an extended extract from the article:
Terrorism: When Truth Disappears
"You know the drill by now: every
idiotic excuse in the book is made for Muslim terrorists. It has
become such a standard and routine response of Western leaders,
commentators and 'experts' that we do not need to wait for any new
information.
"The formula runs like this: A Muslim
kills in the name of his faith, or political ideology, making it
100% clear what his motivation is, what his religion is, and what
his beef is, and the West offers us this:
- he was mentally ill;
- he was a lone wolf;
- he must have had some real
serious grievances to act like this;
- we cannot tar all of Islam with
this one attack;
- we must remind people that
Christians are terrorists too;
- we must insist that you have
more chances of getting killed by a wayward emu than a Muslim
terrorist;
- we must repeat the mantra that
Islam is a religion of peace;
- we must come to accept all this
as the new normal;
- we must accept that this is the
way life now is in the West;
- we must insist that the real
worry is any backlash against Muslims;
- we must do more to protect
Muslims;
- we must resist all this racism;
- we must assure all Muslims that
we fully stand with them no matter what;
- we must stop alienating and
offending Muslims;
- we must above all guard against
Islamophobia;
- we must remember the appropriate
response: more hashtags, candle-lit vigils, 'peace' marches and
love-ins;
- we will need more pop concerts
with young pop stars gyrating in front of smitten 13-year-old
girls;
- we will hire yet more Muslim
policemen, firemen, politicians, military leaders, lecturers,
and news readers in the West to combat all this ugly
Islamophobia;
- we will immediately attack and
condemn anyone who dares to say we might have a problem with the
political ideology of Islam.
"Now just change a few words and see
how all this goes down with the Finsbury Park attacker:
- he was mentally ill;
- he was a lone wolf;
- he must have had some real
serious grievances to act like this;
- we cannot tar all of
conservatism with this one attack;
- we must remind people that
Muslims are terrorists too;
- we must insist that you have
more chances of getting killed by a wayward emu than a right
wing terrorist...
"Exact same response, but to a
different attacker. Now unless I have missed something here, I have
never once heard any of these excuses and justifications for the
non-Muslim attacker. Not one. Never. Why is that? Why do we have a
broken record when it come to clear-cut cases of Islamic terrorism
and jihad, but the whole world goes nuts when one non-Muslim does
something similar?"
[End of Extract]
The Curse
of Cain
"After Cain killed his brother, the Lord told him,
... 'Cursed shall you be from the earth', ... and so it has been. The earth
under their feet may be cursed, it yields nothing but sand and thistles, ...
They become worshippers of death dreaming of the green verdant fields of
paradise which they can reach only if they kill enough men, women and children.
Leaving devastation behind them, dead lands, lost cultures, widows and orphans,
they claw their way up to heaven on a ladder of bones. Everything around them
dies until the only green is on their flags. They are cursed from the earth and
they curse the earth. Where they go, the world dies. ... Cain sows fields of
corpses of the innocent for the Lord and he still does not understand why his
sacrifice is not accepted and why the earth he dwells on is cursed. ...
From Iraq to Iran, from Kuwait to Saudi Arabia, from Nigeria to Somalia, from
Pakistan to Indonesia, he holds up human heads and cries 'Allahu Akbar'. ...
There is no room for Cain anywhere. Where he remains there will be death and
suffering. He will kill because it is all he can do. He has nothing else to
offer the world, his own kind, or the Creator.. ... He kills from one end of the
world to the next and it is never his fault. Each time, each Abel did it. ...
His code is cruelty and his holy book is written in blood on the flayed skins of
his murdered victims. ... The cries of peoples long vanished from the earth warn
us that we will either drive out Cain or his curse will fill our lands with
blood and dust and all that we love and all that we have worked for will die at
his cursed touch" [source].
The Burden Which
Habakkuk the Prophet
Saw
The righteous cry out for God's punishment of the injustice in their
lands:
O LORD, how long shall I cry, and thou wilt not hear! even cry out unto
thee of violence, and thou wilt not save!
Why dost thou show me iniquity, and cause me to behold grievance? for
spoiling and violence are before me: and there are that raise up strife
and contention.
Therefore the law is slacked, and judgment doth never go forth: for the
wicked doth compass about the righteous; therefore wrong judgment
proceedeth.
The LORD God answers:
Behold ye among the heathen, and regard, and wonder marvellously: for I
will work a work in your days, which ye will not believe, though it be
told you.
For, lo, I raise up the Chaldeans, that bitter and hasty nation, which
shall march through the breadth of the land, to possess the dwelling
places that are not theirs.
They are terrible and dreadful: their judgment and their dignity shall
proceed of themselves.
Their horses also are swifter than the leopards, and are more fierce
than the evening wolves:
And their horsemen shall spread themselves, and
their horsemen shall come from far; they shall fly as the eagle that hasteth to eat.
They shall come all for violence: their faces shall sup up as the east
wind, and they shall gather the captivity as the sand.
And they shall scoff at the kings, and the princes shall be a scorn unto
them: they shall deride every strong hold; for they shall heap dust, and
take it.
Then shall his mind change, and he shall pass over, and offend, imputing
this his power unto his god.
The dismay of the
righteous at God's answer:
Art thou not from everlasting, O LORD my God, mine Holy One? we shall
not die.
O LORD, thou hast ordained them for judgment; and, O mighty
God, thou hast established them for correction.
Thou art of purer eyes than to behold evil, and canst not look on
iniquity:
Wherefore lookest thou upon them that deal treacherously, and
holdest thy tongue when the wicked devoureth the man that is more
righteous than he?
They take up all of them with the angle, they catch them in their net,
and gather them in their drag: therefore they rejoice and are glad.
Therefore they sacrifice unto their net, and burn incense unto their
drag; because by them their portion is fat, and their meat plenteous.
Shall they therefore empty their net, and not spare continually to slay
the nations?
I will stand upon my watch, and set me upon the tower, and will watch to
see what he will say unto me, and what I shall answer when I am
reproved.
The LORD God's reassurance to
the righteous:
And the LORD answered me, and said, Write the vision, and make it plain
upon tables, that he may run that readeth it.
For the vision is yet for an appointed time, but at the end it shall
speak, and not lie: though it tarry, wait for it; because it will surely
come, it will not tarry.
Behold, his soul which is lifted up is not upright in him: but the just
shall live by his faith.
[Habakkuk 1:1-2:4]
Please Pray for All Those Persecuted
by Islam
There
are many, many suffering brothers and sisters who desperately need us to pray for them...
http://www.persecution.org/
http://www.britishpakistanichristians.co.uk/
http://www.releaseinternational.org/index.php
http://www.barnabasfund.org/
"Remember them that are in bonds, as bound with them;
and them which suffer adversity, as being yourselves also in the body"
(Hebrews 13:3)
© Bayith Ministries
http://www.bayith.org
bayith@blueyonder.co.uk
|