Britain's first sharia-compliant newspaper
The Guardian’s editorial this morning on the government’s revised counter-terrorism strategy is raising eyebrows in a number of places, as here and here. It is indeed a classic example of the Guardian’s signature combination of languid superciliousness and moral inversion. Welcoming the fact that the government has once again avoided
conflating Islamism and terrorism
(Heaven forbid!) it breathes a particular sigh of relief that it has not included in its definition of extremism support for sharia law
-- an approach that would have branded many mainstream Muslims enemies of the people.
From this we note that the Guardian too does not regard support for sharia law – which involves of necessity subordinating English law and liberty to principles such as condign punishment for gays and adulterers, second class status and misery for women and the death sentence for apostates ( including those to the Guardian’s favourite religion, atheism) -- as extreme. It appears that Islamic sharia law has nothing to do with militant Islamism which, as the Guardian knows, derives instead from
stunted alternative opportunities
in such fields as
wealth or health or housing
and so therefore the right response to militant Islamism is
to engage much of the welfare state
since clearly the extensive range of welfare benefits, health and education services that have made Britain the most hospitable environment in the world for militant Islamists for the past three decades and turned the UK into the most important hub of Islamist terror outside the Middle East is nowhere near enough. Employing the tone of
cool pragmatism
that it so admires in the government’s counter-counter-sharia policy, it takes a coolly pragmatic view of the Istanbul Declaration signed recently by the deputy head of the Muslim Council of Britain, Dr Daud Abdullah, which said inter alia:
Praise to Allah who strengthened His troops, aided His servants and alone routed the Zionist Jews, who says, ‘It was incumbent on Us to aid the believers.’ [Quran 30:47] And blessing and peace be on the Imam of the mujahidin who says, ‘There will remain a group of my Ummah adhering to the truth, and those who oppose them will not harm them until Allah’s command comes.’ [Hadith] (And now to our topic). This statement is addressed to the Islamic Nation, its religious scholars, its rulers and its peoples. In it we congratulate the whole family of Islam on the manifest victory which Allah has granted us in the land of Gaza, a land of pride and dignity, over the Zionist Jewish occupiers. Allah has appointed it as the first step in the complete victory for all of Palestine and the holy places of the Muslims.
We affirm that this manifest victory has clearly disclosed the volume of international and local military and political conspiracy against the jihad and the mujahidin in Gaza, as represented by the following: ... The aggressive pressure put on the mujahidin to break their will and force them to agree to their [the conspirators] terms and the stipulations of the Zionist enemy. The attempt to present the Hamas government as the cause of this malicious Jewish Zionist war over Gaza. The absence of any official and effective Arab and Islamic stance and its weakness in reflecting the will of the Arab and Islamic peoples to help our brothers in Gaza win...
This the Guardian graciously concedes was
in many ways offensive, with sweeping threats against those who stand with Israel
although it merely contained
a slip into racialised language in relation to the Jewish state.
And so clearly there was really nothing here to frighten the horses -- certainly nothing to cause the Communities Secretary Hazel Blears to depart from the
cool pragmatism
of government counter-counter sharia policy, and in an unfortunate throwback to the
frenzied outbursts of the later Blair years
cut off contact with the Muslim Council of Britain, all because the Istanbul Declaration also described
the sending of foreign warships into Muslim waters, claiming to control the borders and prevent the smuggling of arms to Gaza, as a declaration of war, a new occupation, sinful aggression, and a clear violation of the sovereignty of the Nation. This must be rejected and fought by all means and ways.
In other words, the deputy head of the Muslim Council of Britain was calling on all Muslims, including those in Britain, to take up arms against British forces should they ever seek to prevent arms from getting to Hamas to be used to murder more Israeli citizens.
This treacherous call (in support of a genocidal war) was what had so upset Hazel Blears. But the Guardian thought Dr Abdullah was absolutely justified:
Very many Muslims, and indeed many non-Muslims, would agree with that - just as many in the mainstream felt anger in response to a war of aggression in Iraq.
Appearing to equate Ms Blears’s objection to incitement to violence against British forces (in support of a genocidal war) with
the folly of refusing to engage with widespread views because they are deemed disagreeable
the Guardian went onto compare Islamist terrorism with Irish Republicanism, employing a particularly curious form of words:
For all the undoubted differences with the long years of the Irish republican armed campaign - the abject lack of support for terrorism in the Muslim community being the most important ...(my emphasis).
The Oxford Concise English Dictionary defines ‘abject’ as ‘1) miserable, wretched; 2) degraded, self-abasing, humble; 3) despicable.
It would appear therefore that the Guardian very much disapproves of the Muslim community’s ‘abject’ lack of support for terrorism. Either that, or the Guardian is illiterate.
Tsk! Moral illiteracy they wear as a badge of pride -- but stupidity among the Houyhnhnms of the Guardian is, as we all know, a self-evident impossibility.
Previous
Blogs: Martin Bright | Susan Hill | Alex Massie | Coffee House | Faith Based
Actions: Print this article | Email to a friend | Permalink | Comments (31)
Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit
Advertisement
Popular Blog Posts
1 Ignore the European Court and deport Abu Qatada tonight - Douglas Murray
2 The danger for the Lib Dems - James Forsyth
3 We must be honest about honour killings - William Maxwell
Search this blog
Melanie Phillips is a Daily Mail columnist. She also writes for the Jewish Chronicle and is a panellist on BBC Radio Four's Moral Maze. Her most recent book is 'The World Turned Upside Down: The Global Battle over God, Truth and Power', published by Encounter.
For a complete set of Melanie's articles click here
Melanie Phillips blog archive
sponsored links
THE PRESENT FINDER
1,700 Unusual Christmas Presents Request Catalogue 01935 815 195 Quote SPEC10 for 10% discount www.presentfinder.co.uk
OLIVE BRANCH FLORISTS
Pimilco based Florist with online ordering Web: www.olivebranch.net Tel: 020 7630 1868 Fax: 020 7233 8844
RUFFS Bespoke Signet rings
62 Shore Road, Warsash, Southampton, SO31 9FT Telephone: 01489 578867 Web site: www.ruffs.co.uk
Apollo Magazine | Corporate | Advertising | Privacy | Terms
Spectator, 22 Old Queen Street, London, SW1H 9HP
All Articles and Content Copyright ©2012 by The Spectator | All Rights Reserved
Mark
March 25th, 2009 5:04pmBit chippy are we Mel?
peter
March 25th, 2009 5:09pmThe more you heap scorn on The Guardian - the more I respect it.
Also, funny, Vanessa Feltz on GLR this morning, cited the Guardian several times - whereas she usually only supports pro Israeli media, especially The Times during Gaza.
What s going on?
Mike Harrison
March 25th, 2009 5:10pmHi Melanie, I really like your observations. Your piece in the Mail recently concerning the moral environment that generated the 13-year old father was a brilliant critique of much that is wrong in Britain. I was wondering if you have written at length on this particular social decay subject, as you did in 'Londonistan'?
George Laird
March 25th, 2009 6:32pmDear All
Melanie is still upset with the Guardian!
Yesterday we had the truly an evil newspaper, today we get,Britain's first sharia-compliant newspaper".
I am not a big football fan; I rarely watch the game but this phrasecomes to mind immediately.
What a load of rubbish!
Yours sincerely
George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University
Disturbed
March 25th, 2009 7:54pmOh jeez!..Mel...how about commenting upon the piece about "how jewish is Rahm Emmanuel?" (amongst others) on your other notepad the Jewish Chronicle..(its almost like an analysis of the breeding and genetics of famous jewish people....and includes the chilling phrase "hes one of us"...glass houses and all that....anyone else DARE take it on....
Gil
March 25th, 2009 8:00pmGeorge Laird, are you an academic? If so, do you mark your students' essays with: 'I am not a big football fan; I rarely watch the game but this phrasecomes to mind immediately.
What a load of rubbish!'
George, when I read your comments I recall this football chant: 'hand ball!'
Winston Smith
March 25th, 2009 8:11pmGeorge Laird,
Denial is the first step to failure. How many steps are you on now? Are you looking forward to dhimmi status?
Steve Brand
March 25th, 2009 9:00pmThe islamic terrorist-loving anti-semites are naturally going to disagree with this article.
Polly Gamma
March 25th, 2009 9:09pmPeter:
Now now don’t be so fickle The Graudian needs to keep hold of as much of its dwindling readership as possible. And well, go t’ the foot of our stairs, bring on the observations of... drum roll please… Vanessa Feltz! Hmmm yes okay Peter.
George Laird: Here’s another anthem for your new repertoire –
O Flower of Scotland,
When will we see
Your like again,
That fought and died for,
Your wee bit Hill and Glen,
And stood against him,
Proud Edward's Army,
And sent him homeward,
Tae think again.
The Hills are bare now,
And Autumn leaves
lie thick and still,
O'er land that is lost now,
Which those so dearly held,
That stood against him,
Proud Edward's Army,
And sent him homeward,
Tae think again.
Those days are past now,
And in the past
they must remain,
But we can still rise now,
And be the nation again,
That stood against him,
Proud Edward's Army,
And sent him homeward,
Tae think again.
0 Flower of Scotland,
When will we see
your like again,
That fought and died for,
Your wee bit Hill and Glen,
And stood against him,
Proud Edward's Army,
And sent him homeward,
Tae think again.
Rachel
March 25th, 2009 9:43pmI wish we could send all those Sharia fans, particularly if they are gay/lesbians working for the Guardian & its readers, to Saudi Arabia for a couple of days. I wonder if they will ever get a chance to make it out after they get a taste of what they are preaching for.
Mjolnir de Jersiase
March 25th, 2009 10:20pmGeorge Laird: I take it you approve of the MCB's decision to sign the Istanbul Declaration? It would be interesting to hear some reasoned argument from you, for a change, instead of the usual inane and tedious insults.
To Winston Smith: George Laird already enjoys Dhimmi status, as do Guardian readers everywhere. They think that the Moslems will love and cherish them after the Islamic takeover; they are in for a rude awakening...
david skinner
March 25th, 2009 11:39pmTalk about turkeys voting for christmas. When Stonewall ( Ben Summerskill)get "what they want when they want" in the shape of clause 58 of the Coroners and Justice bill, ie, the scrapping of the freedom of speach that allows the public to ask homosexuals to stop fellating in public in the London Pride 2009 . When they achieve this, the Muslims will be justified, as sure as night follows day, in demanding a religious hate speech clause that they were denied in January 2006. This will spell the beginning of Shariah for all of us, but trouble in particular for militant homosexuals.
John Edwards
March 26th, 2009 12:00amI agree with Tony Benn's proposal a few weeks back. The Royal Navy should be used to escort aid convoys to Gaza not assist in continuing the blockade.
Worried
March 26th, 2009 12:20amI may be wrong, but it appears that Mr. Laird is of a group that appears to be getting smaller. I think (hope) that M's analysis and subsequent vindication is (possibly) making a few people sit up and say "You know what?, she may be onto something." Events such as George Galloway being repelled by the Egyptians and that Mullah attacking his own door (while insignificant on the grand scale of things) may have something to do with this. All said, alas, the main event to change everything will be another terrorist attack of such magnitude, even the most pot brained lefty will be convinced there really is evil amongst us.
johnny
March 26th, 2009 12:25amHas the Guardian article broken the law which prohibits the glorification of terrorism, or any related laws?
Linda Smith
March 26th, 2009 12:38amGeorge Laird posted "I am not a big football fan; I rarely watch the game but this phrasecomes to mind immediately.
"What a load of rubbish!"
Well, judging by all his sneering comments, George Laird is certainly not a big Melanie Phillips fan, but nevertheless he watches her "game" obsessively. If he thinks Ms Phillips's blog is "a load of rubbish" as all his posts say in one guise or another, why does he waste his time reading it and posting comments?
A H
March 26th, 2009 2:09amGeorge Laird speaks for himself , not Britain's fourth university .
Undergraduate middle-class Marxism is so much the norm that we have had a government composed of its victims/perpetrators for 12 years .
Get them out and ignore their acolytes .
With reason , empirical thought and , above all , organisation , we can defeat their anti-intellectual Marxist mind-set .
Glasgow Graduate
EDDIE
March 26th, 2009 7:49amit is common knowledge that staff at the BBC and Guardian are mainly recruited through advertisements in that paper. In t he interests of PC priority is sometimes given to minority candidates. ~I wonder if that may influence the way these organizations view the world
luckyjim
March 26th, 2009 11:18amHi Mel - I don't want to see Sharia Law in the UK either.
Can I take it you also oppose other religious courts that subordinate "English" law, such as Beth Din courts?
Iordache Brînzovenescu
March 26th, 2009 11:56amluckyjim - Beth Din courts do not claim and have never claimed jurisdiction over non-Jews. Sharia, however, is a totalitarian system that controls the lives of Muslims and non-Muslims alike wherever it gains power. When Anjam Choudary advocates stoning for homosexuals and adulterers and flogging for drinkers, limb amputation for thieves etc., he is not just talking about homosexuals, adulterers, drinkers, and thieves from the Muslim community. Sharia as a legal code, in those countries where it applies, also dictates what the "dhimmi" (non-Muslim second-class citizens) are and are not allowed to do and what punishments apply to them. Sharia Law in the U.K. would be a very real danger not only to Muslim women, Muslim apostates etc. but also to non-Muslims. Beth Din courts affect no one except those in the Jewish community.
Kamil Hanani
March 26th, 2009 12:13pmluckyjim, Beth Din Courts are not like Sharia law courts, one is peaceful "Beth Din" and the other one "Sharia Law" is violence towards many things
I hope you understand
stanley Jerusalem
March 26th, 2009 1:11pmluckyjim
March 26th, 2009 11:18am
Not so lucky this time. The Beth Din is a fully accredited Court of Arbitration acting under and within English Law and as such is powerless to impose any decision not in conformity with same. It is not an alternative system of legislation with the power to punish or imprison. Before making unsubstatiated claims to bolster your point [and your ego no doubt] check your facts. You wouldn't want the truth to get in the way of a good story, would you?
Thanks Kamil, you are quite right but the nature and extent of jim's posting needed to be shot down in flames. After all, they start with little lies
[and half truths] and build up to really big whoppers to demonise their targets in order to dehumanise them before the outright attack by which time the target is viewed with such contempt that even the disinterested believe the attack to be deserving.
stanley Jerusalem
March 26th, 2009 1:14pmSorry, and lordache with Kamil
phil
March 26th, 2009 1:18pmluckyjim you should get your facts right prior to posting here .beth din courts do not subordinate our laws -never !and are only used by those that wish to .
Original Tony
March 26th, 2009 4:05pmHas somebody investigated why The Guardian is so anti-Israel? I mean undercover investigation? Are they owned by the Saudis?
George Laird
March 26th, 2009 5:41pmDear A H, Glasgow Graduate.
You stated;
"George Laird speaks for himself".
Thank you for admitting that unlike some others I am not a sheep.
"not Britain's fourth university".
If you check the Times Good University Guide you will see that Glasgow is ranked 20th, not 4th.
As someone who alleges that they went to the same University as me allow me to help you.
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20.
Additional numbers can be provided upon request.
Yours sincerely
George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University
phil
March 26th, 2009 7:27pmA H- now we can see that the laird has a degree- in counting up to twenty .an obvious success story ,
Lizzy
March 26th, 2009 8:08pmEveryone, George Laird is a troll.
Do not feed him.
Yarrow
March 26th, 2009 8:09pmIf Mr Laird is indeed connected with the University of Glasgow, he should know that it is indeed in one sense Britain's fourth university, being the fourth to be founded after Oxford, Cambridge and St Andrews.
tommy
March 27th, 2009 10:48amQuote..."George Laird, are you an academic?"...Unquote
ha ha ha ... rofl
At least we retain our sense of humour
Quote...1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20.
Additional numbers can be provided upon request.... Unquote
blatant plagiarism if you ask me..
waah
Will MacDonald
October 26th, 2009 3:32pmThe UK's debts are so serious that we need to cut back on the expensive advertising of public appointments in broadsheets; the internet is the way ahead. Alas that may hit some newspapers more than others.