Slouching towards dhimmocracy*

Dhimmier&Dhimmierer

If we do take strong action, Muslims are going to be given another source of grievance. There is no way out of this disaster that does not involve very serious trouble. If we had listened to "racists" like Enoch Powell we could have avoided all or almost all of it. We decided to sow the wind instead. The whirlwind is already on its way.

Nicholas Millman

The government seems to have learned nothing from the history of counter-terrorism. Another aspect of Smith's policy speech was the stated intention to take action against internet websites promoting violent extremism, presumably by suppressing them or maybe by using the gloating New Labour tactic of "targetting the demand" and criminalising British people who look at them. Referring to this on the Daily Politics Hazel Blears revealed a cosy if somewhat sinister relationship between the government and international web service providers. In pre-internet days suppressing the extremist message did not work against the IRA - in fact it was found to be counter-productive. The same will be true of this government's enthusiasm to control the internet, reminiscent of The People's Republic of China. The idea of burying bad news with bad ideas, attempting to censor thought and vision, clucking about the "unacceptable" or the "need to send a clear message" and pretending to exert power over these issues by modifying the vocabulary is a typical New Labour trait - and doomed to failure. By posturing in this way the government runs the risk of appearing as oppressive as the regimes it is seeking to defeat. Far from reducing radicalisation amongst young Muslims this approach may actually inspire more of it. Why New Labour is demonising the internet and some of the information communicated through it (and not other communications media) is an intriguing question. Can you imagine a situation where people are criminalised for merely listening to a radical or extreme speech? Welcome to New Labour's Britain.

Stuart

We may get to the point where large numbers of voters will support the BNP as the only way to make a protest against Government sleepwalking into the latest Islamic State (its a race between ourselves, Denmark and Holland). I keep wondering with astonishment how 3% of our population seem to dominate the bandwith of our concerns over terrorism and issues of non-integration. Islamic/Muslim issues dominate the media. We are told we are like Nazis. We are told that our foreign policy should be changed (or else!). We don't arrest protestors BECAUSE they are Muslims and we fear a backlash. We don't do satire on anything Islamic for fear of a fatwa. 3% of the population seems to hold us and the Government in a grip. I would bet that more than 3% of the population could vote for the BNP. Not that I have any affinity or truck with these odious racists. But sometimes you just might need people to act as useful idiots.

Verity

Jacqui Smith is either insane and should be confined in a straightjacket, or she is stupidity on stilts. Does understand "jihad" - or perhaps that doesn't exist, either. Or perhaps it's an unfair interpretation of an Arab word for 'tea party'. People in the Cabinet used to be informed about the issues they were supposed to be addressing. Jacqui Smith's self-satisfied ignorance is alarming, to say the least. The suicide bombers murder in the name of allah. They shout 'allah akbar' before pressing the button. I would posit that that is a fairly clear indication, out of their own mouths, of their intention to conquer, and their loyalties. These people who claim that islam is not aggressive do a little study on all the trouble spots in the world, and see which religion is promoting mayhem. The Philippines, northern Thailand, India, Sri Lanka, Britain,Spain, France, Italy, Holland, Denmark and indeed the rest of Europe, many African countries,including Kenya, Canada, the United States and Argentina. That's quite a lot of territory. That's a hell of a lot of islamic aggression. Or,which the deeply uninformed Jacqui Smith might prefer to style 'cultural misunderstandings'.

Imno Telingu

Jacqui Smith is a model of ignorance and incompetence and a purveyor of offensive claptrap. She is a standard-bearer for all those in denial about the UK risk environment. From her inaccurate understanding of Islam, to her la-la-land negation of the state of Britain's streets, she insults the intelligence of all of us. She should quit politics and consider running a corner shop somewhere.

Dalmar

Melanie, you should not be surprised because you inadvertently contributed to this drastic paradigm shift. This is how: through your morbid paranoia of blaming every little crisis around the world on Islam—however blatantly untrue or trivial!

Herbert Thornton

The same politically correct impulse to ignore the real problem exists in Canada, where the apparatus of the state attacks not the source of the problem, but the messenger who dares to describe it.

This is illustrated by two current Human Rights Tribunal hearings where the Tribunals are considering censoring magazine and Internet content. One is a case involving Macleans Magazine and the journalist Mark Steyn. The other concerns a commentator called Ezra Levant.

Dalmar

Dhimmier&Dhimmierer, your comments, “… If we had listened to "racists" like Enoch Powell we could have avoided all or almost all of it…” send shivers through my spine. When I hear Mr. Powell’s name mentioned, I remember this too, "…in this country in 15 or 20 years time the black man will have the whip hand over the white man…” . Dhimmier&Dhimmierer, you’re a shortsighted disgusting racist, no wonder you’re a fan of Enoch Powell. What do other readers think? No wonder there are none as blind as those who won’t learn from History. Dhimmier&Dhimmierer, have you ever heard of Pastor Martin Niemoeller? Below is what he said—does it make any sense to you? I'll not hold my breathe! First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out--because I was not a communist; Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out--because I was not a socialist; Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out--because I was not a trade unionist; Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out-- because I was not a Jew; Then they came for me-- and there was no one left to speak out for me.

Verity

In addition, Dalmar, Melanie had the concentration and energy - not to say, the courage - to sound the warning bell in the West. Have you ever heard or condemnations of islamic aggression made by muslims? (In Aayan Hirsi Ali's case, ex-muslims.) Try reading Irshad Manji, who is still a muslim and is working for a Reform. Have you ever heard the acutely intelligent Wafa Sultan talk? Go to Memri and watch her discussion with an imam who dropped into a deeper and deeper sulk as she scored one point after another. Such courage does not come cheap.

English community member

Not that I have any affinity or truck with these odious racists.

The BNP are merely the opposite end of the extremist spectrum that puts NeoLabour's open borders, mass immigration without mandate or debate (with active suppression of any dissent) at one end and a desire for a monocultural, native's only (actually they suggest around 3% would be the ideal level of non British in the UK) Britain at the other. Given the choice I, Like many others, prefer the BNP option. If for no other reason that they are acutely aware of all the issues raised regarding Islam and seem well informed on the subject.

The disintegration of Britain continues apace.

Verity

Dalmar - I had you figured for someone who would produce the Niemöeller quote. So it's out of the way early on, because the tension of waiting for someone to key it in can get unsettling. Before you come leaping out shrieking "Racist! Racist!", islam is a belief system, not a race and encompasses many races. They're proud of this, so you shouldn't try to undermine it. Islamics are confused. It has been an article of faith that everything that needed to be said and everything that needed to be invented had already been done by allah in 800. 2008 - It's unsettling. They live, perforce, in the consumer-driven, technologically-driven, demanding world of democracy, as opposed to theocracy, where the genius of the West has produced technology they cannot live without. In other words, the West has triumphed - despite that the West never noticed it was in a contest with islam. Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the Emirates get their financial clout from the genius of the inventive West. Gasoline driven engines. Oil. This is a religion that has seen its underpinnings whipped away for centuries as the genius of the West advanced. And they are furious. Islams's future, if any, lies in a Reformation. Until then, it will not be acceptable to anyone in the West save overweight ladies like Jacqui Smith and Karen Armstrong.

Dr Fred

It's the Left's endemic craziness to describe and deal with the world as they would like it to be and to consider any attempt to point out reality as evidence of bigotry. It's a recipe for disaster, soon to come to your neighborhood.

well pipped off

I am stunned and angry to read this news. A few email complaints to our dumb MP's are due methinks. Maybe there is something in the water at the HOC! Do you ever feel like you are on a sinking ship...? Thank you Melanie for bringing this to our attention - and may I add its great to see you back.

M Clyde

Why don't we just cut the crap and call it 'anti-British activity'?

Verity

Plus no one has mentioned the title of Melanie's post or apparently understands the Joan Didion allusion. Actually, I met Joan Didion and she was amusing and very clever. I still have that book. When I've moved, I've sold off many books, but never that one.

James Strong

A very,very good article from Melanie. Dalmar is wrong in his comments to Dhimmier&Dhimmierer. There is nothing necessarily racist about opposition to Islam. Islam is not a religion of peace, and wishing won't make it so. We must face the facts and formulate appropriate policies now. No concessions to Islam in the UK at all. Say 'No' to the prayer call from loudspeakers. Say 'No' to any request for modification of our behaviours in any area when it is suggested or stated that our behaviours might cause offence to muslims.And describe jihadist terrorism as jihadist terrorism. Change UK immigration policy to stop all muslim immigration now, and institute a religious test for migrants.Of course this policy will have greatest impact on people originating from Pakistan, also North Africa and possibly Turkey but it is not a racist policy because it should be applied to the religion not a race. If an Eskimo,Norwegian, New Zealander or Bolivian can't pass the religious test they can't come into the UK. Yes, I'm advocating discriminating by creed. Muslims have this discrimination written into their holy texts.It works against our interests. We should apply it in favour of our interests.

Philip Saenz

Will they continue to twist it until it becomes "Christian Terrorism"?

Bulldogbreed

Maybe what's needed is for the Home Secretary to invite a few Wahabi Imams, Robert Spencer, Daniel Pipes and Wafa Sultan to have a nice round table discussion about the religion of peace and tolerance. Better yet - forget the imams (we already know what they preach) and just get her to listen to Robert Spencer, Daniel Pipes and Wafa Sultan. She just might learn the truth about islam from those who make it their business to study this ideology in great detail. She might just learn that it is not islamic fundamentalists who are the problem. It is the fundamentals of islam itself which is the root cause of it all.

Austin Barry

So, we must avoid language that is "inadvertently inflammatory" when talking about those who wish to kill us. Really. Why don't we just wave a white flag and get it over with.

Stuart

I had a great discussion with the Muslim owner of my local Indian Take Away. We discussed the language of the Koran, the role of women in Islam and the difficulties of language. We had a great and respectful dialogue. Two people of different faiths, origin and cultural upbringing. He apologised in case I thought he was prosletyzing. I made sure I never thought that at all. We shook hands. Its not ordinary people just wanting to live their lives with mutual respect that we have to worry about its those engaged in political and violent Jihad. I know he would have told me that suicide bombing was forbidden in Islam. But Qaradawi has issued a fatwa that it is permissible. Do we worry about my friend who doesn't seek to harm or insult me or those who follow Qaradawi? No. Remember, Muslim Council of Britain invited Qaradawi and Livingstone embraced him. Said the smears against Qaradawi were a Zionist plot by Mossad based MEMRI. In fact, Qaradawi made his statements of support for suicide bombing on BBC2 Newsnight a few days before visiting. As the Sun put it "The Evil Has Landed".

Zardoz

Dalmar: Over the years, in my experience, I have found that those whose only argument is to cry "racist" are usually amongst the worst offenders. They do this in order to shut down all legitimate comment and debate. Enoch Powell was not a racialist or a racist. Anybody who takes the time to actually READ his speech instead of perpetuating misquotes will discover that in the contentious parts of it he was quoting from conversations and correspondence with his constituents and from an article by John Stonehouse MP a Minister in the Labour government of that time. Today the notion of a MP actually listening to and expressing the concerns of his constituents seems somewhat quaint, but way back then it was not uncommon. Enoch Powell was a thoroughly honourable and decent man. Amongst many other things he was a classicist, which explains the colouful language in speech, but he certainly wasn't a racist. If anybody cares to read what he actually said they will discover that it was fair comment and a fair proportion of it has come to pass. http://www.sterlingtimes.org/powell_speech.doc

Michael W Stone, BA FBIS

If I were you, Melanie, I'd be careful about calling it "Dhimmocracy" that Muezzins are allowed to disturb Christians with their (amplified) calls to prayer. That's probably exactly how atheists feel about Church bells: and to give them ammunition would surely be a rather "dhim" thing to do.

Andrew J.A.

I am deeply saddened that these people(the britts) once had an empire

elixelx

The precedent of Hugo Chavez should give us all pause. The Venezuelan dictator wants the FARC, a world-recognized and UN-declared terrorist group, taken off the Watch List because they released TWO, that's TWO, of the over 3000 kidnappees they have held for years, even decades! When HM Government takes Al-Qaeda and other jihadi groups off the terrorist list because they have ONLY committed one or two "crimes", that's when the dhimmification of Britain will be complete. If you don't recognize alcohol as a danger, there are no "alcoholics" in your country(see Soviet Union)!; If you deny that homosexuality exists there will be no homosexuals in your country (see Iran)! If you deny that terrorism exists well...BOOM!

James Strong

Michael W Stone I'm an atheist. There is no equivalence between the church bells and the muezzin's prayer howl. The bells are a traditional part of British life, there is a melody to them and there is no linguistic claim made by the sound of the bells that says anything about the nature of God and how his message is accessible to mankind. The church bells do not call any of us to interrupt our activities to go and pray if we would rather do something else; the prayer howl does.In fact the morning prayer howl states that prayer is better than sleep. The prayer howl is not melodious, it's in a language foreign to our islands and ,whatever Mohammedans might claim, it is not beautiful. It is heard 5 times a day in a number of countries where Islam is the dominant religion. Why don't the Mohammedans currently in Britain go there? And they won't be offended by people there calling them Mohammedans either.Or by people there referring to the muezzin's noise as the prayer howl.

Mladen Andrijasevic

And here is the champion of dhimmitude – the BBC at 11 am GMT : http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7195459.stm "Israel closes crossings with Gaza" "Israel has closed its crossings with the Gaza Strip, after a series of rocket attacks on nearby Israeli towns from the Hamas-run territory." A series according to Webster is "a number of things or events of the same class coming one after another in spatial or temporal succession." But what is this number representing a series? The BBC gives no clue. The number of rockets was more than 50 on Wednesday, 40 on Thursday and 11 this morning. To the BBC it is more important that Israel closed the crossing with Gaza than to report on more than 110 rockets that have landed on Israeli towns which were the reason Israel closed the crossings in the first place. http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/946040.html

korova

elixelx - Hugo Chavez a dictator?????!!!! Brilliant. I haven't laughed so much in ages. Just where do you get that wacky idea from?? A dictator that holds referendums?? What a crazy notion.

Cheeta

Dalmar January 17th, 2008 10:32pm Melanie, you should not be surprised because you inadvertently contributed to this drastic paradigm shift. This is how: through your morbid paranoia of blaming every little crisis around the world on Islam—however blatantly untrue or trivial! "Trivial"..."untrue"...Hmmmm.. Like blowing up the London Tube? Death warrants for artists? Effigy burning of virtually anyone? Placards calling for the beheading of insulters of Islam? Flying jet liners into buildings? Rioting throughout France? Murdering a film director? Threats of murder to journalists? Yes, now I come to think of it these are trivial offences. I expect Melanie will now see the errors of her ways.

Rick

Posing a threat to a nation state from within would in most cases be dealt with properly and quickly elsewhere. But I suppose when the able are in charge one can only expect this kind of Jibber-jabber.

Stuart

Ref the report by BBC on Gaza. BBC says "Hamas, the militant Islamist group, has fired salvoes of unguided rockets for the first time in months, causing injuries in Israel." A well-crafted misdirection. It makes it seem like Hamas has just resumed rocket fire. In fact it only relates to 'a salvo' - ignoring the hundreds of rockets fired in one's or two's daily for several months. "Gazans were digging up roads because there was no cement for making graves, he said.". Spend money on cement then and not guns and rockets. BBC also reported that civilians were allowed access for mdeical treatment and a UN Childrens charity was allowed to pass.

Adam B.

Korova, Did you know that whenever your hero Hugo Chavez makes a speech, all television channels in the country are obliged to show it live, interrupting everything else. If we had this situation in the UK, you would be the first to be screaming about how we don't live in a democracy. Chavez uses fascistic tactics to sideline opposition in Venezuela, closes TV stations which don't toe the party line, and is best friends with Castro the dictator of Cuba (he's only been in power since 1961!) and the Holocaust denying Ahmadinejad. You just like him because he's anti-American and anti-Israel. You're so transparent.

RS

The writer has hit nail on the head. To deny the threat of rabid Islam is to pause to bury ones head in sand. Call spade a spade even it ruffles few feathers. Pussy footing arround the issue will lead to long lasting problems. India is fine example where preferencial treatment offerd due to minority status in order to create vote banks is causing havoc. It has been split once because Islamist wanted separate homeland it may split again ( India has second largest muslims ppopulation and thanks to money pouring from S Arabia it is fast becoming radicalazied). The ones who do not know about India, HIndu majority was ruled by Muslims with iron rule. Nobody knows the untold story of millions of defeated hindus states enslaved. males slaughterd, children and females becoming properties over 6-7 centuries. Read Quranic verses and decide for yourself what islam has to offer to kafirs, pagans and dimmies. NOt a lot, Islam or death. Check Islam watch.com. So politicians have some spine. I might also add it has nothing to do with race a black christian, buddhist, or atheist deserve same treatment as a white under Sharia law. Now here is a theology which offer equality to all races if you fit the bill!!!

Ruddigore Topsider

The obvious difference is that Islam is not just a religion: it's effectively a political movement. In a post-Enlightenment society, that makes 'equivalence' between Anglican bells and muezzin calls misleading. But fuzziness about this also makes resisting the assertion of its visible practice much harder. Mark Steyn has pointed out the absurdity of a 1930s British government tolerating an Adolf Hitler Grammar School of Josef Stalin Prep in each town. Well, having a King Fahd mosque in a town is more like that than a St Ignatius High. However, perhaps as a starting point, we could take Lady Thatcher's line: we'll allow the intrusive calls of Saudi-funded muezzin in Oxford when Saudi allows Christians to announce a call to prayer. And Dalmar, The trouble with quoting Niemoller is that he was refering very specifically to a state that had appropriated for itself the role of God. That is more similar to the aims of Islamists - indeed, there's a well-documented history of co-operation between Nazism and Islamism. But in today's Britain, 'they' are just as likely to be assertive Islamist thugs or their fellow-travellers in the Human Rights Commissions pursuing fantastical claims of 'Islamophobia' and racism as they are to be black helicopters and spooks. Niemoller's call could be accurately updated to ask at what point we take the threat from militant Islam seriously: the self-censorship of the BBC in calling Muslim criminals 'Asian youths'? The reluctance to tackle actual crimes (e.g. honour killings) for fear of provoking hypothetical ones ('Islamophobic' attacks)? The dcemand for public space to be turned over to political propaganda? Sponsoring visits by Islamist sympathisers like Qaradawi? Prosecuting film producers for recording actual racist incitement by Islamic clerics? And, since you ask, I'd very happily have seen 'them' come for communists, socialists and trade unionists. I'd have drawn the line at Jews, and probably have written a strong letter or angry post on a website 'comments' section.

Achad Ha'amoratzim

Either I misread Dalmar or everyone else has. I did not read Dalmar as saying that militant Islamism is not a severe problem, but rather that the BNP is not the solution. Not being a Brit and knowing little about the BNP, I have no opinion on the latter.

Alan

Unfortunately, millions of Brits may have to die in the next Islamist terror attack for the nation to wake up. Then again, that may not even do it.

John Backhouse

Deus Vult!

Verity

Michael W Stone, BA FBIS - Are you German? I think it's the Germans who always put their academic qualifications on everything isn't it? Do they even write their qualifications for commenting on blogs? That seems a bit de trop! Re church bells, as you may be aware, in Britain, the majority rules and the majority of people in this country are Christian and the country was developed along Christian guidelines, with Christianity interwoven throughout the tapestry of our society for centuries. The two most irritating proselytising belief systems are islam and atheism. They should both observe a lengthy period of silence. The noisy islamic immigrant minority cannot force the will of their allah on the majority. They should on no account be granted the right to have calls to worship their diety broadcast in public, irritating the rightful owners of the country. Muezzins are very plentiful in muslim countries and anyone seeking timely reminders from these people have many countries to choose to move to.

elixelx

Ah! Dear Red Korova who never met a Stalinist dictator she couldnn't love unto death! And I do mean unto death! Korova, do you remember when "Presidents" of the Soviet Union had "democratic" elections in which they got 99% of the popular vote? Do you remember Generalissimo Fancisco Franco holding a referendum on the kind of Government the Spanish wanted--after his term, life, and he, had expired? Ditto General Pinochet? True Democrats, all of them! Oh! Yes! I'm sure you supported their initiatives as signs of the "democratic" souls you divined within them! Hugo Chavez can't dictate to his dog much less to the Venezuelan people, who had had enough of his tin-pot banana-republic "democracy" when they voted NOT to let him be "PRESIDENT FOR LIFE"--A dictator! Finally, Korova, Holding Elections or referendums do not make one a "Democrat". Referendums are democratic means, often leading to unwelcome anti-democratic outcomes! Just ask Hamas! The Wise King Solomon said "Answer not a fool according to her folly!" I've made an exception in your case because I think that behind that Tsarist-loving facade there is a rational being waiting to pop out! Love ya!

Ron

So when commenting on past Irish atrocities in the U.K., must we now refer to the perpetrators as the IRISH REPUBLICAN ASSOSIATION???.

Dalmar

To you all myopic defenders of freedom: if you want to succeed, you need to target your message better—for instance I believe that 90% of the Jihadis are financed (directly or indirectly) by oil-rich Wahabi billionaires in Saudi Arabia. Where does this money come from? Obviously, it comes mostly from the West—people who buy their oil, including you—Melanie, Verity, Zardos, Dhimmier&Dhimmierer, Cheeta and the other myopic cheerleaders in this forum. With oil now hitting $100 a barrel, there’s even more money for these twisted Saudi Wahabis to disburse for their dangerous courses. Achad Ha'amoratzim, I truly understand the ferocity of the dangers we face from these twisted Jihadis but maligning all Muslims is not the way to go. If you truly want to end these Jihadi wars against the World (islamic world included)—that is where you need to concentrate on—instead of maligning all Muslims. To start, why don’t Melanie & her morbidly paranoid cheerleaders in this forum—put their money where their mouths are? To you all racist defenders: I am not surprise to hear from you that Mr. Powell was not a racist. For as the respected Rt Rev Dr Wilfred Denniston Wood once said, “…Enoch Powell gave a certificate of respectability to WHITE RACIST VIEWS which otherwise decent people were ashamed to acknowledge…”—Zardos & other paranoid racist defenders in this forum—need I say more?

The Radical

Melanie, you claim that "if a cause has been appropriated by a terrorist campaign, the only principled response is to put it automatically beyond the pale". Therefore Zionism (and Israel) must be beyond the pale because Zionism in the 1940s had been hijacked by the Irgun and the Stern Gang, who were known and wanted terrorists and who carried out repeated terrorist atrocities. Why the double standard Mel? http://radicalopinions.blogspot.com

Stuart

You will probably all want to know the latest Dhimmitude of the BBC. They have just apologised to Muslim's who protested that their news report of the young Muslim girl victim of an honour killing was called a Muslim. http://www.mpacuk.org/content/view/4325/34/

Stuart

The Radical. But not VERY Radical. Dragging-up the old chestnut of Irgun and Stern Gang (a very serious lot they were, hence their name). In the same equation we would never had made peace in NI because of IRA and Nationalist groups. We certainly wouldn't have rejoiced South Africa freedom won by the terrorist Mandela. When did Stern Gang bomb the underground, fly planes into buildings, massacre children in a school - all for some global cause called Zionism? Where are the Zionists marching with placards complaining about Antisemitic cartoons and articles in the media and threatening to kill the authors? Stern and Irgun were actually outlawed and disbanded by Israel upon statehood. Have Hamas and Fatah been outlawed in order to approach a statehood guaranteed by non-violence (for example). You must be some Free Radical and floating away from reality.

Mladen Andrijasevic

I went back once again to the BBC’s website (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7195459.stm) to check if there was any mention of how many rockets launched from the Gaza Strip fell on Israel in the last three days. Not descriptively like “series of rocket attacks” but in natural numbers (positive integers). I could not find it anywhere. If anybody finds the reference please post it. So my questions to British readers are: 1) Why is it that the BBC refuses to mention numerically that more than 110 rockets ( 30 today http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3495870,00.html ) fell on Sderot , Ashkelon and surrounding cities in the last three days? 2) Do British readers realize that the BBC is by withholding facts, in effect distorting reality? 3) How many would be aware that since Israel left the Gaza Strip two and a half years ago more than 1500 rockets were launched from the Gaza Strip, deliberately targeting Israeli civilians? 4) Do British readers realize that the BBC is not a reliable source, and do they plan to something about it?

Jack R

The UK Labour government is still deeply ignorant about Islam, Islamic Jihad and the history of Islam. Apart from trying to avoid the accurate term, 'Islamic Jihad' to decribes the violence and terror, the Labour government still sees Muslims as a useful block vote, and so Labour appeases. As it plays the dhimmi, Labour naively turns to Muslim 'Islam experts' for policy guidance; in contrast, there are now many non-Muslim trustworthy scholars, e.g. at www.jihadwatch.org. whose knowledge and advice the Government should use. An anti-Islamic Jihad government would see the urgent need to stop the immigration of jihadists amd their potential sympathisers. There is abundant evidence that Islamic jihadists, the Muslim Brotherhood and compliant sections of the Umma (whose first loyalty is not to the UK) will not assimilate, but intend to impose Sharia Law here.

Gareth

I suppose Hitler must have been anti-facist then.

Verity

Dalmar - have you ever read Enoch Powell's speech? Not how it was reported by the socialists, but have you ever read the speech? Admittedly, it would be difficult for you, given that it contains classical allusions that your education may not have prepared you for. However, if you read it, you will search in vain for the phrases the left "reported" as having been said. BTW, you knew, did you not, that Enoch Powell spoke fluent Urdu? Would anyone spend so much time learning a language of people for whom he had no respect? To save others the bother of Googling him, the Rt Rev Dr Wilfred Denniston Wood you refer to was Britain's first black bishop and had a vested interest in not understanding what Enoch Powell was saying. He was also a busy committee-sitter and "initative"- launcher. In other words, he was a socialist with an agenda. Islam is an aggressive belief system. Don't try to soften it. It is set on conquest. Their diety has directed that the entire world and beyond has to become islamic, which proves how wrong a diety can be. There are, of course, many peaceful islamics who aren't looking for trouble, but the gist of the religion is militant proselytisation at the end of a sword. Or a gun. Or a bomb. Or a plane. They impose the death sentence on apostates. They believe that everyone was born islamic. They believe that is in the nature of things, which is why converts are referred to as "reverts" - having reverted to their notional natural islam. The reason there are so many Christians, Buddhists, Jews and Hindus is, these people wickedly left islam at birth, thus attracting punishment. However, if they "revert", they're OK. This is a vicious, aggressive pbelief system and we should not be permitting their calls to prayer to their rather unpleasant diety. Apologies if this appears twice. I submitted it around 2 1/2 hours ago and assume it didn't go through.

Gareth

So i suppose Hitler was anti-Facist then.

Frank Pulley

Gordon Brown appointed Jacquie Spliff as Home Secretary of the United Kingdom. Had anyone been in any doubt, as to his unsuitability for the Premiership of the United kingdom, this one appointment should have cleared the minds of those who wished him well. This woman is responsible for marshalling resistance to jihadists during the most dangerous period of determined subversion this country has known for many years. And what does she do? Refuses to implement the modest pay award for the police, negotiated with the independent arbitration body. Thereby proving beyond reasonable doubt that both the Prime Minister and his Home Secretary are as stupid as they are ugly. Excellent qualifications for the two most important political offices of state, don't you think? Welcome back Verity; if you read back through Melanie's recent posts on the Middle East since she relocated you will observe that Dalmar is a troll and high on the oxygen of responses to his whimpering.

Andy Gill

'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone,' it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.' 'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you CAN make words mean so many different things.' Quite.

Bogdan of Australia

I wonder; Is Dalmar the name of that domestic animal Korova?

field

Yes, we are at war with a Jihadi movement. In fact Al Queda formally declared war on the USA (and by extension its allies) in 1998, long before 9-11. The declaration has never been rescinded. I think this is important to understand because even if you want to avoid war you can't : THEY have declared war on US. There's no doubt that the BNP do use the cover up of Islam-related issues to further their cause - which is purely racist.

Herbert Thornton

Philip Saenz asks - "Will they continue to twist it until it becomes "Christian Terrorism"?" The answer is - yes, that is indeed the direction in which things are heading. Although the expression Christian "terrorism" is not yet used, the effect is much the same: and will, unless sane heads prevail, lead to suppression of any criticism of Islam. The logic seems to be something like this -

"Terrorism is an attack on Islam. Therefore, all attacks on Islam are terrorism. Therefore all criticism of Islam must be suppressed."

In Canada, the suppression of Christian opinion is already happening -

http://albertahumanrights.ab.ca/legislation/Panel_Decisions/panel_decisLund.pdf

Now there is movement towards the suppression of any criticism of Islam - see my earlier posting where I mentioned the two current cases before Human Rights Tribunals brought against Ezra Levant and against Macleans Magazine and the journalist Mark Steyn.

Verity

What happened with Ezra Levant is a crime against humanity. I am astounded that there has not been an outcry. On the other hand, no I'm not, cowardice being the potage du jour in the West. What happened to a man and a business operating legally under Canadian laws is so bizarre, although not in today's muslim-directed world. They've got the boot on your neck. Too bad the socialists persuaded you that this was a good idea. But you're goners. Churches will be allowed in our formerly green and pleasant land before we started building boxes over that land to accommodate "immigrants" to squat in, under special dispensations. The evil little malevolent spirit of tony blair started it, and no one dared stop him. No one, dared speak out against the lunatic Toons-jihad. Not one newspaper in Britain dared speak, although Holland did, and so did Mexico and even France. So much for Britain's free press, like the NHS, the envy of the world.

Woody (maurice wood)

Slowly, slowly catchee monkey. The jihadists have no timetable so they gnaw away at Britain at their leisure knowing that, with the full and eager operation of the Labour government(hear no evil, see no evil, say no evil) and the dozy left-wing intellectuals the land will be theirs. Get used to the raucous calls to prayer, the sharia laws, "honour" murders, the veils and beheadings and stonings. They're on their way.

Dalmar

Verity, you can keep defending Enoch Powell until the cows come home—but the facts remain the same—he was a white racist who spoke for many white racists like you. Period. As for my education, now that you asked, I can bet that I am more educated than you’re—do you want to bet? I can tell from your closed mind & myopic arguments—like blaming all your problems on all Muslims in the world—all 1.5 billion of them! It’s only a morbidly paranoid & uneducated fool like you who blames—his/her problems on 1.5 billion people! I can tell because….it’s only an uneducated fool like you who claims that s/he is fighting for freedom—by trampling on the freedom of million innocent people—just because of who they are. Verity, I can bet that you are a sad, lonely & hateful human being. Do you have any black friends? I am not going to hold my breath. Verity, hate is too heavy a burden to carry around—repent & get a life!

Maven

Enoch Powell had the right message for the wrong time. Maybe the time is to come. His speech was at a time of Black immigration and he was wrong. There isn't a massive White vs Black emnity that results in race riots although I seem to remember a summer many tears ago where there were some localised rioting which has now quelled. Similarly there were the Bradford Riots. We must congratulate ourselves as a country that the events of 7/7 did not spill over into revenge. There is absolutely NO suggestion that arguing against radical Islam, political and violent Jihad means disparaging 1.3 bn Muslims. It only takes idiots like Dr Bari to suggest the UK is becoming like Nazi Britain and for his followers to start to use that to scare the non-politicised Muslims.

Dhimmier&Dhimmierer

Dalmar -- If Enoch Powell had been listened to, we would have be in our present disastrous situation. Full stop. (This is the UK, not the US.) If he was a white racist, then so were most voters, because his views were extremely popular. If you cannot see why letting so many Muslims in the UK was extremely foolish, then nothing further I can say will help you, because you are obviously living in a socialist fantasy world.

Maven

Melanie, I think we have devastating new evidence of the Dhimmocracy of the Government http://theymadeitup.squarespace.com/the-latest-news-and-discussion/2008/1/18/gordon-brown-a-muslim-secret-is-out.html Gordon Brown, May Allah guide his Wisdom.

Zardoz

Frank Pulley: "Dalmar is a troll and high on the oxygen of responses to his whimpering." Quite!

Andrew Wilson

This is an astonishingly hate filled screed which wouldnt be out of place on the BNP website.It essential implies that ALL Muslims are a threat and all are sympathethic to extremists. I wonder what makes the author an expert on Islam other than her extreme support for Israel. Her use of the extremist dhimmi watch website (the BNPs website of choice) is telling. Its no different from the "all Jews are a threat" garbage preached by Nazis

field

Andrew Wilson did you actually read what the allegedly moderate Mufti from Bosnia brought over to turn Muslims away from terrorism actually said? It is clear from this mainstream voice that Islamic belief remains consistent. It is pro-caliphate, anti-democratic and dedicated to confrontation with non-Muslims. Whether violent Jihad is pursued or more subtle Taqqiyah (soft words and deception), the ideology is pretty consistent: Koranic literalism; oppression of women and non-Muslims; Shariah law; protect Islamic lands from non-Islamic influence; and expansion of Islam until it rules the planet. That is the reality. It is not being hate-filled to tell it like it is. In my view Powell was infected with racism. He was an enthusiastic Imperialist. He was entirely the wrong person to call attention to the dangers of unrestricted mass immigration to this country and he set back the cause of sensible debate on immigration by 30 years. We have only just woken up from the spell of that crisis.

Interested Speccie Reader

To Andrew Wilson: I've been reading www.dhimmiwatch.org and www.jihadwatch.org for several years and have also read several books on Islam and attended lectures on it. Those websites are scholarly, present links to all major translations of the Koran and the Hadiths, present opposing viewpoints and permit readers' comments which seem, in the main, to be quite well-informed. We are going to get nowhere if the response to unpalatable and unpleasant facts is to label those providing the information as 'bigots', 'phobics', 'racists'in order to silence them. You should be more concerned at the fact that the EU is now attempting to label criticism of Islam as 'islamophobia.' Islam is a political ideology with a violent warlord as its leader and inspiration and a history of persecution and cultural as well as human destruction; its Sharia law is degrading and antithetical on many grounds to Western concepts of freedom of speech, worship and human rights. None of the comments I've read on this or other articles in the Speccie is labelling all Muslims as dangerous but, considering that Islam mandates the death penalty for anyone who tries to leave it, why don't you entertain the thought that there might be a few people out there in the real world who'd welcome a bit of truth about Islam which could assist them to break free from it without spending the rest of their lives in hiding? That's the fate of most apostates from Islam in the West and it's due, in no small part, to the cowardice of msm in discussing Islam critically.

Terry

There is a degree of hope (yet small) on the horizon - see reformislam.org

Maven

Andrew Wilson!!! Hello! Wake up! You entertained us with:- "This is an astonishingly hate filled screed which wouldnt be out of place on the BNP website.It essential implies that ALL Muslims are a threat and all are sympathethic to extremists. I wonder what makes the author an expert on Islam other than her extreme support for Israel. Her use of the extremist dhimmi watch website (the BNPs website of choice) is telling. Its no different from the "all Jews are a threat" garbage preached by Nazis" First, prove to us that "Dhimmi Watch is the BNP web of choice". Show us where anyone here has suggested ALL Muslims are " a threat and all are sympathethic to extremists". What is 'extreme' support of Israel compared to mild, strong and indifferent support. To be honest your poit is of such low quality I am suprised I bothered.

oliver

The diversionary tactic of arguing that anyone arguing the anti-Islamist case is tarring 'All 1.5 Billion Muslims with The Same Brush!!' must now be sent to the rhetorical dustbin, along with the 'We Didn't Call IRA Terrorists 'Catholic' Terrorists!!' and the 'Muslims are the New Jews!!' devices, beloved of the Guardian crowd in their Anglophobia and naivity. It is ahistorical, false ideas like these that are destroying the will to define and deter the enemy - and yes, the jihadi is an enemy, because he (and she) has told us so on many occasions. The semantics of verbal offence and the politics of grievance are frankly, causing the Jacqui Smith's of this world to fiddle while Rome burns. Will the Conservatives be any better? Unlikely. Meanwhile, the UK is being set up for, potentially, centuries of sectarian conflict, India-style.

S.J.

Andrew Wilson
You wonder what makes the author an expert on Islam?
Have you just flown in from outer space?

Nazis and Muslims make no secret whatsoever of their feelings about Jews. If you are interested in hate-filled screeds look at Islamist websites, moderate and extreme.
All the arguments here are evidence-based unlike the ‘descendants of apes and pigs’ rhetoric put out by Imams.
Unfortunately ‘extreme support for Israel’ does involve familiarisation with Islam. It is an eye-opening experience.
If I were you I’d get back in the spaceship and go somewhere more agreeable.

Dalmar

Verity, Zardoz, Frank Pulley & other haters in this hatred-filled forum, anybody who doesn’t agree with your myopic “BLAME IT ON ALL 1.5 BILLION MUSLIMS” mentality is a troll—and you wonder why no authorities are taking you seriously? Cursed are the haters for they shall be thrown into the dustbins of History! You guys never learn from History—blanket hatred never succeeds. I am under no illusions about the dangers we face from Jihadis, but instead of blaming it on ALL Muslims, target your arguments. In my opinion, continuous targeted-economic-boycotts are more likely to succeed, over blanket BLAME IT ON ALL MUSLIMS blind hatred. For instance, I believe that most of the jihadi finances come (directly or indirectly) from oil-rich Wahabi billionaires. Now that oil is hitting $100 a barrel, these Wahabi oil-billionaires have even more resources for their jihadi courses. Ultimately, where does the money come from? Obviously, mostly from the West—people like Verity, Zardoz, Frank Pulley, Melanie & I—because we buy their oil. So if we want the most bung for our buck, ladies & gentlemen, we need to concentrate on these guys—instead of blaming every Muslim—what does a poor Muslim peasant farmer in Burundi got to do with our problem?

Frank Pulley

Andrew Wilson Unfortunately we're all experts on Islam these days whether or not we want to be; events have ensured that by osmosis we have assimilated the hate filled creed of Islamic Jihad. Melanie Phillips is a particularly erudite and articulate student of the problems of the Middle East and as a British born Jew and journalist has been a champion of British Culture and social affairs for many years. She is one of the few practitioners from the mainstream media who has spoken up for Israel in the face of the evil onslaught of propaganda and terrorism directed against Israel - the only true ally of the West in the Middle East. If you wish to draw attention to hatred, pay attention to what militant and murderous islamists are are saying and doing - and to the atrocities of the past two decades. Why should she not alert her readership to Islamic creep? Why should she not quote sources that are publishing facts and data about the jihad and draw attention to weasel words from a Home Secretary who is clearly out of her depth? So what if the BNP are keen to use the data for their own ends? There is no copyright on the truth. Wake up and smell the cordite and become accostomed to the smell of bullshit ineffectively masked by the sweet smell of governmental platitutes.

Verity

Well said, Oliver! To those provincial people who think muslims are "just like us", I can say with certainty that you have never lived in an islamic society and you know nothing about islam. Their diety has commanded that the world worship him. The world is to live under shariah. This is a long-term programme that they're currently rolling out in Europe, Britain and Africa, and they are having some success in places that have raving left governments. The leftists find islamics useful for unsettling what used to be, within living memory, a cohesive society. Eventually, the left will realise that islam is not their friend,but it will be too late. Leftist who think "they're just like us" are very deluded. Meanwhile, it baffles me that you people defend a belief system that believes in the righteousness of "honour" killings, mutilating the sex organs of little girls so they will never enjoy sex and thus be tempted to run away from their husbands and embarrass everyone, hangs homosexuals from cranes, stones adulterers (or, more frequently, adultresses) and requires a woman who has been raped to produce four male witnesses to the rape. It also accords the testimony of women in court exactly one-half the value of male testimony; and women inheriting money/property are only entitled to one half of what the male heirs get.

Barry Larking

I welcome Melanie Philip's article, despite having some differences with her over details. Home Secretary Jacqui Smith is in an invidious position. There are approximately two million Moslems in the UK mostly in the larger cities and of these about ten per cent are believed to support the violent overthrown of the Kuffar state; in other words rather more people than currently in the British armed forces. If these people were organised and willing to take to the streets, then the result would be catastrophic. Naturally, Smith has to walk a tight rope to avoid widespread and violent civil strife unlike any we have known since the 17th century. So also will her likely successors from whatever party. Indeed, I believe there exists already good evidence to support this contention. For instance, when Smith said,

"But where grievances are legitimately expressed ... where grievances are not only legitimately expressed but well founded we must be prepared to respond."

she was merely echoing thoughts expressed by Dame Pauline Neville Jones who chairs the Conservative Party Group on National and International Security, made, almost word for word, in her interview with Jeremy Paxton on Newsnight this week. I could barely believe what I was hearing from Dame Pauline either, but then as I have pointed out, prudence alone might dictate caution. She went further than even Smith, suggesting possible changes to the UK's foreign policies may be required.

Again, when Philip's writes

" ... Can you imagine if, at the height of the IRA’s terrorist campaign to bomb Britain into agreeing to a united Ireland, ministers had announced that they were now prepared to ‘enter into a dialogue’ about this ‘grievance’ with those who wanted to discuss it over tea and buns?

her memory escapes her. This is exactly (I cannot speak to the tea and buns obviously) what happened in 1972, when John Stephenson ( known as Sean MacStiofain) and Martin McGuinness, of Sein Fein IRA were flown to London by Edward Heath's government and met at Paul Channon's house on Cheyne Walk to discuss a cease fire. According to one witness Stephenson/MacStiofain walked back and forth explaining since the British Army had been 'defeated' it must surrender to him "in the field", as if he, Stephenson were the head of a victorious army rather than a scummy little terrorist gang supported by American money.

However, when Philips writes – " ... the history of violent jihadi conquest to which it gave rise that stretches back to the beginning of Islam in the seventh century." she is on safer ground. From the Battle Poitiers (Tours) in 732 AD to the siege of Vienna 1632, it was Islam that was threatening Europe, not the other way round.

The current situation in the UK is entirely due to a loss of nerve on the part of the ruling political-media elite and the rise of an anti-English narrative at the core of our UK identity. This results, to give one tell-tale example, I might describe myself as Scottish or Irish or Welsh on application forms but not English; to do so would be to court the charge of racist. Beginning in the seventies' but growing steadily since, there has been a systematic programme, lead frequently by the BBC, to minimise national achievements, de-bunk national heroes and describe anything with a specifically English dimension in negative terms. This is sometimes presented as a necessary atonement. Millions have been encouraged to 'learn and rehearse' a sense of historic grievance against England and the English and portray this as an inheritance. The consequence of any vacancy is that it will be occupied by a force willing to shove itself in place. Without a national identity, how can Islam rob us of one?

korova

Andrew Wilson - notice that Maven hasn't exactly contradicted your (very accurate) claim. Perhaps, Maven, you might like to clearly state that you do not believe that all Muslims are a threat. Come on, let's see you explicitly state it.

sebastian

Excellent analysis - but so uncomfortable to the likes of our low-grade and not very shrewd Home Secretary that it will be wholly ignored - even sneered at. Of course all this "not-terrorism" is intimately part of Islam. Only an ill informed nutter - or a Home Secretary - could imagine otherwise. The worst thing that could happen to us is that we'll be forced into adopting the highly narcissistic view of Islam that it has of itself. To do so would be to submit willingly to mental and intellectual slavery. Some may argue that this is already happening. A prevailing multiculturalism has all but stamped out certain kinds of critical thought and frank commentary; especially about Islam - the "Religion of Peace" whose followers demolished, to a chorus of almost total indifference and silence from the muslim world, ancient, world heritage, Buddhist statues. This gross effrontery to a genuinely tolerant and passive philosophy raised hardly a murmer of muslim disapproval. In an attempt to contain my anger at what I see going on, I'll limit myself to saying I'm truly sickened by the way this looming threat is being responded to. We're being awfully misguided. It's down entirely now to those outside Government, to raise these matters more sensibly and honestly - as Melanie has done.

Maven

Korova, lets say that Andrew Wilson believes that David Beckham is an alien from Pluto. Should I waste my time explaining why he isn't or should I take the shortcut and bow to universal logic and not bother to dignify stupidity with a rebuttal? As for stating that not ALL Muslims are a threat to World peace and succesful conclusion of the Super Bowl - because you demand it from me, then my answer is "I don't dance to other people's tunes". The greatest threat to World peace that might immediately affect me is if my friend at our Indian Take-away forgets to leave the sugar out of my meat korma.

Verity

As you are aware, Sebastian, when you write, "It's down entirely now to those outside Government, to raise these matters more sensibly and honestly - as Melanie has done." one invites capering, jeering yahoos flinging abuse and insults. If one spoke too strongly, regardless of whether what one wrote is the proven truth, one might invite the attention of the British Thought Police and be take away for re-education. It depresses me to have to write that the British have been bound and gagged by a government best described not as incompetent, but sinister.

Verity

I've just seen a sickening headline in The Telegraph. Apparently "senior muslims" whatever that might be, are "offering shariah law" for Britain. I can't do links, but it's on the front page of The Telegraph.

Dhimmier&Dhimmierer

No-one is blaming Jihadism on "all Muslims", but the fact remains that once a large number of Muslims is established in a country, Jihadism can operate much more easily. If Japan allowed mass immigration by Muslims, it too would have huge problems with them. Nor is it the case that only a small number of Muslims are problematic: take a look at some of the polls of Muslims and see the disturbingly high levels of support for things like shariah law, al-Qaeda and some of the more lunatic clerics. Enoch Powell was right and he had the majority of voters with him. The treacherous liberal elite thought it knew better and we now see the consequences.

field

Here's the link ( a long one - make sure you get to the end): http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=ZFLAGXX1JNHGNQFIQMFCFFWAVCBQYIV0?xml=/news/2008/01/20/nsharia_120.xml It is clear that Shariah is already being operated in the UK. I am opposed to all such religious courts claiming competence in matters covered by the law of the land. I am consistent on this - I apply that to Jewish religious courts as well. I think it should to such bodies by judicial titles; to suggest that the statements made by such rulings are obligatory or have legal force. I think they should also be required to copy all their rulings and notes of proceedings to the local police so that we can monitor what they are doing.

HerbertThornton

Verity et al. - I've just found a more comprehensive description of the sinister role that has been assumed by Human Rights Commissions and Tribunals -
http://www.westernstandard.ca/website/article.php?id=2686

korova

"see the disturbingly high levels of support for things like shariah law" Oh, I loved that poll. The question was, if I remember rightly, "Would you prefer British Law to be based on Sharia Law?". The result was pretty meaningless. Ask a Jew if they prefer British laws to be based on the Torah, Christians if they want laws based on Christianity, Hindus on Hindusim and Buddhists on Buddhism and I suspect you would have had exactly the same result. In other words, the poll was entirely pointless, but a useful tool for the elite (mainstream media, politicians etc) to once more whip up a frenzy of which you seem happy to help sustain. Truly, you are a tool for the establishment. As for liberal elite, yes we do have a liberal elite. An ECONOMIC liberal elite infatuated with capitalism. The notion that the elite are in any way socially liberal is beyond a joke.

Adam B.

Korova, instead of making demands from others, why don't you explicitly state that you condemn Islamic terrorism and that the Islamic world needs to change its attitude to people of other faiths, adopt human rights, freedom of speech and tolerance for different opinions? All you do is carp about everyone else, does this make you feel you have a purpose in life? And do you stil think Chavez, friend of the world's tyrannies, is a great guy?

Verity

Korova hyperventilates: "The notion that the elite are in any way socially liberal is beyond a joke." Okaaaaay. Explain with examples, please. David Cameron is not a social liberal and disloyal to his conservative (small c) antecedents? Hmmmm. The high profile Grauniadistas? The entire, licence-fee funded, bloated BBC? A goodly few of the High Court judges? Hmmmm. Jon Snow,son of a bishop? Hmmmmm. All the drawling, drawing room socialists like Bertrand Russell, for example, from the beginning of the last century? H G Wells? Katherine Hepburn? The Kennedys? Adelai Stevenson? They're a tribe. These are enablers. But they don't know what they're enabling. And that they won't be saved. They'll just be eaten last.

Maven

Korova, I 100% guarantee that if you asked Jews in the UK if they would like UK Law to be based on the Torah they will womder what planet you've been on. Some will rightly tell you that Western Law is ALREADY based on the Torah since our Western Liberal society is based on evolved Judaeo-Christian values. Even if you asked an Orthodox Rabbi his answer would be No! for the very simple reason that Talmudic/Torah Law can only apply to Jews and I don't see 60 million willing converts! Let's face it, your point shows such naivety that I think you might disqualify yourself from this debate (although I always welcome the easy ones). As for the Talmudic Courts that do operate I 100% support them for the simple reason they provide a service to Orthodox Jews who wish to refer to them in matters that are related to their religion. They are no different to an agreed arbitrator. They don't claim to have any ruling over British Law. They are a quaint historical and cultural link to the past. They don't affect any non-Jew in the UK and they certainly wouldn't be interested in spreading their influence. I am against the idea of Shariah courts because some of their sense of justice might run contrary to UK Law and it may well be a block to integration.

Zardoz

My my, I see that you all had a late night. There is never anything worth watching on TV. Well I say all, but it appears than Dalmar's Mum made him/her go to bed early and if you don't stop teasing master korova his acne might explode with ghastly consequences.

Zardoz

I was laughing too much to notice the typo in the previous. There will be more! But seriously now .... From The Sunday Times today: "Jacqui Smith says streets are safe but she wouldn't walk around after dark, even in relatively affluent areas." Oh what a gaffe! Leaving aside the myriad humourous possibilities in that, when will she admit to the "no go" areas in towns and cities where sharia law ALREADY takes precedence over English Law? Speaking of gaffes I was very grateful to Abu Izzadeen for the following: "How dare you come to a Muslim area .." in friendly conversation with John Reid. Whoops! Unrestrained immigration combined with a lethal dose of multiculturalism, aka cultural apartheid, has turned our towns and cities into third world cesspits. How much longer can Ms. Smith et al sit on the lid of multiculturalism before the whole sewer explodes?

Jack R

'Sunday Telegraph' today, a message from some Muslims in UK: "We want to offer sharia law to Britain" (www.telegraph.co.uk, see 'most viewed'); My reply to them: "I want to offer you emigration / repatriation to a Muslim country."

Maven

Jacqui Smith will, of course, feel much safer walking down Luton High Street after dark since the good citizens there will have a greater fear of local Shariah Courts than our police (if they feel brave enough to patrol that is)

Mikestone

Maven, My favourite (though possibly apocryphal) story on this subject related to a British woman (husband presumably in oil industry)who went out to the market in some Mideast palce or other. Back home, she was horrified to find that she had left her handbag in the bazaar - including her purse with the equivalent of £200 in local money. Hastening back to market, he found her handbag exactly where she had left it, with the contents untouched. They knew what happened to thieves in those parts. Sharia Law in England? Don't tempt me.

Verity

Mike Stone, two points. England used to be like that. If someone found someone's handbag, they'd hang it on the railings for the person looking for it to come and pick up. No one else would touch it. Second, what the lady related is not necessarily fear of shariah (I am not excusing shariah in any way; it's beyond loathesome), but many islamic societies just have a tradition of respect for private property and respect for the worry of the person who misplaced the item. As in England of old. This has nothing to do with law or religion, but just shared humanity. This would be in the ME and SE Asia. Africa, the purse would probably have been gone in around 15 seconds. It's actually a social, or tribal attitude, not religious. To those immature and uneducated people who claim that an intense dislike for islam in Britain (or anywhere else) is "racist" - no tiny little human being can be responsible for how it emerged from its mother. That's why racism or loathing of homosexuals is ridiculous. Islam is a belief system and people adhere to it willingly, and that is their choice. That is why confusing "racism" with the adherents of a religion has been a triumph for Blairesque manipulative double-speak. People adhere to this ghastly belief system of their own free will and are therefore responsible for the horrors committed in its name. If they disagreed with it, they would leave the religion. They don't, so they are.

korova

"As for the Talmudic Courts that do operate I 100% support them for the simple reason they provide a service to Orthodox Jews who wish to refer to them in matters that are related to their religion." How curious. That sounds exactly the same as the service provided by the Islamic Sharia Council in the UK. Why the support of one and not the other?? Couldn't be 'naivety', could it? Although, of course, not the type that "might disqualify yourself from this debate", I really rather enjoy free speech and I defend your right to continue on this debate.

Maven

Mikestone. I will tell you a true story about myself. I went to Japan on a business trip. Went out with the boys to a yakitori bar and realised 30 minutes later I had left my bag in the taxi. I panicked! They said 'Don't worry'. one hour later the taxi arrived with my bag and it was a dishonour