Britain today

just Louise

Well, Melanie, I hope you saved your old C&A or M&S headscarves (I've still got one or two in the drawer). It looks like we women will be needing them, a decade or two down the track.

AY

Yes it isn't paranoia, everyone with pair of eyes can notice this. Such installations, "sculptures", posters etc., are quietly appearing all over the country in local museums, churches, shopping malls, libraries, embankments, railway stations. They don't always go straight to the issue. Sometimes they start in Hindu-elephant or whatever other, a temporary introductory project, usually of stunning mediocrity. Which is then replaced by a permanent one. Once placed there, these artifacts can't be removed as that will amount to the offence of.. and further down, teddy bear cartoons. The depth, meanness and sophistication of this conspiracy is hard to underestimate.

On the other hand, there is systematic depiction of indigenous Brits as faceless, or/and old age, or/and degenerate, or/and drunk nobodies whose culture is chaotic garbage, and dignity equals zero. Fashion especially promotes looks of Western women as Middle-Eastern sluts, with all that turquise shalwars etc.

It is the part of resistance, to withstand cultural jihad, and the point fast approaching when passive mode won't be enough.

Friend

A piece of art designed and strategicly positioned to promote understanding where it may be lacking; what ever shall become of us?

David Coop

Melanie, I am 65 yrs old and have never had children so fortunately I will probably escape what is coming.What I cannot understand is why people are not explaining to their children (and Grand-children) why they will need more than M&S headscarves. We are truly a dumb-down and Ostrich society. God help us.

Robbo

Not long now before they change their name to 'Lancashire Religious Constabulary' and start chopping off a few thief's limbs. That's old Nick Griffin's EU constiuency is it not? Would imagine that he'll be first for a public beheading down the local shopping centre.

Truthtriumphs

Sickening.

James Skinner

Its creeping in everywhere this. Some people are understandably angry, but at the moment at least, its just some. I dont understand it. We are going to have to kick up much more of a fuss if we're to have a chance of saving this country.

Augustus

I would have asked the blond English (female) officer:
"Shouldn't you be wearing your uniform issue hijab in such exalted company?"

maddy1

Do not sweat on the small things!

Miranda Rose Smith

They can celebrate their identity as Moslem young women all they want, but is a police station the place to hang it? Police stations in Britain DON'T display Union Jacks? Odd.

Miranda Rose Smith

just Louise
August 8th, 2010 8:11pm
Well, Melanie, I hope you saved your old C&A or M&S headscarves (I've still got one or two in the drawer

Dar Just Louise: What do C&A and M&S stand for?

GeoffM

Its not so much the Islamists attempts to overwhelm us with their cult that upsets me, I expect it, but the craven cowardice/submissiveness shown by the Police.

Does anyone know of a Police Station that has a permanent work of art with a Christian/indigenous theme? In a majority Muslim area - or anywhere for that matter?

Guess not - it may offend the muslims.

If the Establishment wanted to stir up utter hatred of Islam and Muslims they are going the right way about it!

Already we read yesterday that 75% of indigenous Britons have a "negative" opinion of Islam. That number is rapidly heading towards 100%.

A few years back I was on a stag night for a Hindu guy who worked for me. As the night wore on and we repaired to his new house for a "nightcap" of whisky his Hindu friends all turned to me and and Irish guy and said "Why have you guys let Muslims into your country?. We know they are just trouble and so do you - your country ruled India for centuries so you can't say you didn't know what you were asking for".

They then told me about all the trouble they got from Muslims in Luton and North London - beatings, robbery, threats.

They thought the British were quite INSANE for letting Muslims into the UK.

I could not argue with them.

Simone

Do they seriously believe this sort of thing promotes "harmony and understanding"?
I just feel angry.

Clap Hammer

In the interests of fairness, it would be nice to ask for a reaction from the Lancaster constabulary. To give them a chance to 'explain' this before some more penetrating questions are asked.

Winnie

maddy1
August 9th, 2010 3:50am
Do not sweat on the small things!

"What we call little things are merely the causes of great things; they are the beginning, the embryo, and it is the point of departure which, generally speaking, decides the whole future of an existence. One single black speck may be the beginning of a gangrene, of a storm, of a revolution." - Henri Frederic Amiel

And...

"Little by little does the trick." - Aesop

David Alexander

There are two issues here;

-Most western european nations now have huge Muslim populations who simply cannot (and will not) be ignored. It is no use pretending that they are all wearing cloth caps and sipping John Smiths.

- As we saw with Jews in Germany, it would take very little official sanction (or simple absence of sanction) to incite violence in the streets. All of these clumsy 'official' attempts at integration and ongoing conciliation are the best that we can hope for from the sort of people who are attracted to Local Government.

I have no truck with this state of affairs but it is in every respect way too late for tears...........the horse bolted long ago. It is from here that we must begin.

Derek BLADES

The sinister aims behind this heinous offense against all things Christian and English were explained thus: "The aim of the ... BFV project was to provide an opportunity for black and minority ethnic (BME) groups locally to work together in partnership with staff in local companies and organisations. In collaboration with a local artist they will produce art work that will be displayed in employing organisations, in areas visited by members of the public. The project also aimed to promote harmony and understanding among diverse communities."

Those seem eminently desirable aims. Complaining about this is on the level of "Dixon" a few days back grumbling about squat loos in shopping malls. Variety is said to be the spice of life. I am deeply unimpressed by what seems close to race-hatred by several of those who have commented here.

Pintac

'The project also aimed to promote harmony and understanding among diverse communities.'.

Oh the humanity! Say it ain't so!

Really Melanie, your ability to see all expression of Islamic faith or culture as >inherently< sinister is very, very telling indeed. Some of it is sinister, some of it isn't. This isn't.

topmarqueswales

Much more emphasise needs to be put on "Common Purpose".

They have a Moronic and sinister agenda !!

Ken Bevakasha

Miranda - she was referring to the clothing stores Marks and Spencer and C&A (C&A now gone).

Daniel Lionsden

So many quesyions

1. Why are the police commissioning art anyway? (perhaps "police commissioner" has a different meaning nowadays?)
2. If they must then why are they commissioning overtly political art?
3. If they must then why do they not feel the need to balance one political viewpoint with another?

Stephen Rothbart

I am not sure where I would stand on this. Obviously not all Muslim art is backed by terrorism, and a 'gift' to promote harmony should be treated as such until proven differently.

But it is probably also true that no other religious artifacts, certainly Jewish, and possibly Christian, would be permitted in a Publicly owned building, which probably would raise the question of the perception of equality, in that local governments and institutions seem to be particularly deferential towards Islamic culture in particular.

So the answer for those that oppose these things is to vote.

If a local authrority shows intolerance to any religion, but preference to just one, vote them out.

There is nothing else to do, but to vote out those that abuse democratic principles.

However, judging this action just on prejudice against all things Islamic is also wrong

Michael White

"...to promote harmony and understanding among diverse communities".

Harmony and understanding 'among' communities suggests to me input from both sides. Otherwise it becomes understanding one community by another which does not understand it. I have not yet come upon an example of a Hindu, Sikh, or Islamic community being assisted in their journey of understanding (through displays or literature in public places), of - say - the Christian community. I may have just not come across it yet. If I am correct, however, could it be that these communities somehow do not seek such understanding in that direction?

simone

Derek Blades:
"The project also aimed to promote harmony and understanding among diverse communities."
Those seem eminently desirable aims.

What makes you think the aims are being achieved in this way? What sort of statement does it make to the majority? In fact, I would be interested to know what it says to you personally, since I can't begin to understand your point of view.

I don't want to see a religious statement in a police station.
A police station should be a place where we can all expect equal treatment, so I don't want to see police celebrating Muslim identity.
Muslims can celebrate their Muslim identity in private. The rest of us can then reserve the right NOT to celebrate.

There should be no requirement to like Islam, and no compulsion to celebrate it.
This artwork compels us to celebrate and it should be removed.

Simone

Pintac:
"Really Melanie, your ability to see all expression of Islamic faith or culture as >inherently< sinister is very, very telling indeed. Some of it is sinister, some of it isn't. This isn't."

I think Melanie is spot on. I see something very sinister about a public building promoting a religion that few of us practise and few of us care to celebrate. Islam is being officially recognized and endorsed. I reckon the majority will feel very uncomfortable with that.

Dave M

Derek Blades writes, "Variety is said to be the spice of life."
If this is true maybe somebody could enlighten me as to why we're seeing ever more huge mosques being built from city to city yet I haven't seen any Krishna temples, lavish synagogues or even Orthodox churches. In fact, I had an experience very similar to Melanie's. I was walking along a street and was greeted by the shining domes of the latest mega mosque under construction - a bit like a small stadium in size. Then as I walked on I passed the shambling, rickety building of a modern church with dilapidated appearance. "Jesus Saves" was scrawled on a rickety old door and apparently meetings still took place. There were a few kickboxing classes taking place on off days to raise money, no doubt out of dire need to keep the building afloat.
I'm sorry but I've nothing against variety as the spice of life and so on but neither do I wish in any way to live in a Middle Eastern, Islamic country. If I wanted to that I'd pack my bags and go to Tehran. Of course, Islamisation is exactly what is taking place and has also been taking place in France. Finally the French appear to be waking up to the problem which is why we now see a sudden turn of the tide in opinion. With so many women walking the streets of Paris in full burkhas, the French are beginning to fear the loss of French culture and tradition based on liberty and womens' rights. Briget Bardot may now not be the crackpot or bigot she was originally painted out to be.
Still, as has been stated above, it does seem our politicians have gotten us all into a hell of a pickle. Whereas the Chinese and Japanese plod ahead employing their own people to keep the economy going (with great success in China), the U.K. and Europe have encouraged massive immigration on a scale that would have horrified Churchill no doubt. All of this out of fear that there will be no money to care for an ageing population. Sheer madness. So, now the entire fabric of society has changed, the said politicians feel we all need to accommodate a mosque on every street corner and possible Sharia Law courts to boot.
Meantime, I notice the very racism multiculturalism was supposed to quash has actually increased with people turning to either the BNP or even the IDL as a last resort.
Whether the current coalition Government can take the bull by the horns and address this problem time will only tell. If they do not we're going to see a very fragmented, divided and angry society.

Suffolkbor

I wonder how long it will be before a similar story emerges concerning islamic art/symbolism plastered all over the walls of a courtroom or
sited just above the bench where the incumbent beak is presiding.

I am sure that there are plenty of Judges in this fair land of ours who would be more than happy to accomodate such religious art or iconography especially if it promoted understanding and harmony among diverse communities .

The majority of British people have had more than enough of Islam being shoved down our throats and constantly promoted by the grinning half wits in the media who couldn,t tell crap from cornflakes if their lives depended on it .

I wonder if Lancaster police station has an in house gay outreach team and what they think about it?

Derek BLADES

David M. A couple of corrections to your thoughtful contribution. First, nobody is "turning to either the BNP or even the IDL as a last resort". Just look at the election results.

Second, I live in Paris and have never yet seen a woman in a full face burkha. There are certainly women with head-scarves, which is fine by me as long as they don't wear them to school - secular education being one of the many glories of French society. I also spend much time in Cannes where there are numerous affluent ladies from the Middle East, some of whom arrive on large boats from the Gulf States. They have taken a tip from Brigitte Bardot, whom you rightly admire, and wear flimsy summer dresses and sunbathe topless. Many are well built and a pleasure to the eye. The truth is that secular liberal societies typified by France are infinitely more attractive than the mediaeval cultures from which they escape each summer.

Lighten up David M. The West is everywhere winning the battle for hearts and minds.

Simone

Derek Blades:
"There are certainly women with head-scarves, which is fine by me as long as they don't wear them to school - secular education being one of the many glories of French society."

So you support secular schools but not secular police stations?

Also, I think you should spend a little less time among the wealthy topless Arab tourists in Cannes and rather more time in places like Tower Hamlets and Oldham.
Then tell us whether secular liberal society is "winning the battle for hearts and minds."

Joe

This is yet another example of the discredited ideology of Multi-culturalism.Multi-culturalism was never intended to include the indiginous majority. Instead it was meant to marginalise British culture and traditions.Read Roger Scrutons marvellous book, "The Uses of Pessimism", for a devastating critique of Multi-Culturalism and what it really stands for.There are a thousand and one more appropriate places for this work of art than a police station. The fact that it is in a police station tells us two things. One, is that policing is now seen as some form of morally neutral social work, and two, that Islam has now achieved, the status of most approved religion by a weak and frightened state. No Mr Blades this isn't about race. Its about what kind of state Britain is going to become. Will the centre hold and will Britons continue to enjoy their, (already eroding), democratic rights and freedoms; or will the politically correct architects of multi-culturalism win, and the country fly apart and become a Balkanised polyglot tyranny?

aramkr

Why does the official presumption seem always to be that "understanding" is most lacking on the part of the indigenous population when the opposite is so obviously the case?

Axel

"I noticed, as I walked by, the arcane carvings in the wall and the furtive steps, leading to what must have been a crypt of the old church."
"The Shadow over Innsmouth"

just Louise

Miranda. M&S is Marks and Spencer. C&A (the initials of two Dutch retailing brothers) was another High Street chain store in the UK, but it closed its UK stores some years ago. It's big in its native Holland.

I just cannot understand why our politicians seem to wish this islamification of the British Isles on their offspring.
But if anyone objects, they're accused of "Islamophobia" or collusion with the "fascist" EDL.

Dave M

Derek Blades, Yes, it's true the B.N.P. hardly got anywhere in the elections and Robert Kilroy Silk did even worse with his Veritas Party. Maybe this is because the B.N.P. are still a single issue party but it may also be because the E.U. started to regulate the B.N.P. So, a lot of the hard core joined the E.D.L. and the E.D.L. is a far more extreme group. I've seen some pretty violent situations in my local area with riot police on the street so there is definitely an escalating tension over immigration and Islamification.
In the last election I supported the LibCon alliance because I liked Willy Hague's hardline stance on immigration but I also liked the Libdems stance on civil liberties. I also wanted to see Labour get kicked out A.S.A.P. as I think they've been disastrous for the country.
One thing about the B.N.P. Many people who do vote for them aren't bigots. They don't object to cultural diversity. They don't dislike people of other cultures. They simply feel a sense of outrage and despair over the migration shambles New Labour brought about with its politically correct idealism.
As for France, I'm sure there are plenty of open minded, laid back immigrants from the Middle East who've blended in with the French lifestyle. However, there have been serious issues in France. We had the tyre burning street riots not so long ago and we're all aware some Jewish people felt sufficiently intimidated to return to Israel, even encouraged by an Israeli politician to do so on account of the situation. There were attacks on butchers shops and anti semitic disorder. We've seen similar situations in Denmark and some other European countries. Let's also recall the Islamic World led by Iran was calling for censorship of criticism against Islam all across Europe. Yes, censorship (something Europeans and even Russians struggled to be free of for centuries). The question is what if European politicians begin to cave in as their populations continue to be transformed.
So, I maintain I simply don't wish to live in an Islamic country or even worse an Islamic Europe. I'd be far more light hearted over the whole business if I wasn't witnessing the obvious fact. That fact is this country is becoming Islamified within schools and the political system as a whole. Time will tell if this new alliance will address the problem as France might be beginning to do.

UK Joe

@Derek BLADES
August 9th, 2010 6:04pm

"David M. A couple of corrections to your thoughtful contribution."
Typical snide reaction from Blades!

"Second, I live in Paris"
Why are you 'preaching' to us in the UK then?

"Lighten up David M. The West is everywhere winning the battle for hearts and minds."
LOL!

Blind as well a dhimmi.

People like you will tie flowers the the beheading sword and go eat bean soup in self satisfied ignorance, I always hated Kumbayah at school.

JohnC

This is why we should have directly elected Police chiefs to get rid of these ethno-centric PC oh! so inclusive highly paid social workers called Chief Constables.
Then we will get a police force one could at least tolerate and even respect.

Augustus

Derek Blades writes, "The West is everywhere winning the battle for hearts and minds."

Not everywhere Derek. Didn't youths recently cause riots in Grenoble, burning dozens of cars
and destroying the town because a roving thief had been shot by a policeman? And what about the
perennial riots in parts of Paris, where youths burn cars and buses with abandon, and where riot police hardly dare to go turning these precincts into areas where immigrant youths have virtually complete control? Civil war in the country of the enlightenment and human rights! Even if 2005 was the worst year yet, where even schools were set on fire, this agression is not over yet by a long chalk.

Baron

Friend @ 8.40:

will you kindly explain how this display promotes understanding, and take you time, be as thorough as you like, elaborate, please.

to me, the display promotes the spending of taxpayers cash.

Linda Smith

The history of Islam has always been one of attempting to delegitimize the Jewish and Christian religions and replacing them with Islam, so that Jews and Christians are accused in the Koran of falsifying their scriptures.

Interesting to view the Islamic view of the Old Testament prophets and Jesus (see the link below.) For example, Abraham is claimed to have been called by God to sacrifice his son Ishmail (the son of the concubine Hagar who was sent away in the desert by Abraham's wife Sarah) not Isaac, who the Bible records was the son of Jacob.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophets_in_the_Qur%27an

Linda Smith

Gosh, sorry! I meant to write, of course, Isaac was the FATHER of Jacob.

Barbara

I'm afraid "soon coming to America" if it isn't already here like the proposed mosque at Ground Zero in NYC.

Barbara

I'm afraid "soon coming to America" if it isn't already here like the proposed mosque at Ground Zero in NYC.

Dave M

One point Derek raised I must admit has had me puzzled for some time. How come the B.N.P. and U.K.I.P. are so far behind when elections are held? Now here's a funny scenario: They had Nick Griffin on Question Time and there was national outrage. The tabloids and more Right Wing press wrung their hands over his appearance. George Galloway also appeared on Question Time yet there was no outrage or accusations hurled at him by the same press. What does that tell you about the political situation as it stands?
Of course, it may well be the case many thousands of people who fear Islamification voted Tory in the elections in the hope Willy Hague would take a harder line. The rest of the vote may have been split between U.K.I.P and the B.N.P.
Another thing that was odd was when I took a look at the B.B.C. comments pages, following the comments made by the Archbishop of Canterbury on Sharia Law being "inevitable", I found post after post expressing fury over the situation. If the Beeb had wanted to balance it out with a few posts supporting the Archbishop's stance, it seemed as if they couldn't find any at all. So, I wonder how can it be Islamification has gained so much ground when obviously so many people have had a belly full?

MikeF

Dave M - why do you feel the need to say that many of the people who vote BNP are not 'bigots'. Frankly by saying that you are still implicitly legitimising the use - or rather misuse - of this ugly, inflammatory word by the left i.e. that somehow anyone who thinks or acts in opposition to their preferences is deserving of having this word applied to them.

That is all the word is these days - a term of abuse applied by the left to anyone who thinks differently than them. As such like any other form of abuse it says nothing at all about the people against whom it is directed but everything about the people who utter it. Frankly it lifts the lid on a stew of conceit, intolerance and hatred that hasn't even got the courage to acknowledge itself for what it is. It is a word to be thrown right back in the faces of the left - not used in a pallid, apologetic manner that as I said ultimately just reinforces their debasement of the word for their own ends.

Dave M

"Multi-culturalism was never intended to include the indiginous majority. Instead it was meant to marginalise British culture and traditions."

Joe, I've given this question a lot of thought over the years. I believe it is this simple: The world after WW2 was divided between communist USSR and the U.S.A. The Cold War was a serious affair with billions of dollars and roubles being spent on missiles. Meantime, the U.S. was struggling to win the war while being rocked by civil rights tensions as well as Vietnam. The entire civil rights situation I believe was the origin of the later multicultural ideology that swept through Europe. Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying the civil rights movement wasn't justified but I think it acted as a springboard for multiculturalism, which is something else. Then, of course, of greater importance was the outcome of the Cold War. America won the war unexpectedly when Gorbachev's reforms led to the fall of the whole U.S.S.R. America then became the only superpower left and here it gets interesting because America was promoting multiculturalism. America had wanted Europe to integrate with open borders for years but was prevented by Russia's hold over East Germany and so on. Later I think the mindset was that Europe should simply become a model for the American system and we know America has an open border policy where all races live together. Yet it seems Americans are now themselves becoming unhappy because America is changing from a multicultural European/AfroAmerican society to a globally multicultural society. In other words, America is becoming far more diverse that it has been in the past and many Americans tell me they don't like what's happening. They also fear terrorism from within.
At the same time we now see the rise of China as a major global power and China doesn't promote multiculturalism at all. Not only that but China so far is non interventionist. So, I think this is a rough outline of why what's taking place today is having the impact it does. Who knows where the future lies now but I see multiculturalism as failing in as big a way as communism did.

Preposteroso

Good God!!!

Verity

Dave M - you note that, "Finally the French appear to be waking up to the problem which is why we now see a sudden turn of the tide in opinion."

Not so. The French have always been acutely alert to the undesirability of islam. When I lived in France and the subject of islam came up, French faces would darken like a thundery sky.

What is different is, the government is waking up. It began with Chirac and Jack Laing banning the burqa in schools, and they government has stayed gratifyingly alert ever since. But even when I lived there, five years ago, the average French person was contemptuous of islam and didn't want them allowed to build any more mosques.

Hadrian

There are worryingly numerous and far worse examples of islamification in our land. In certain, islamic London boroughs the venerable Christian saints names of various streets have been erased. Quite apart from the sheer disrespect to the host culture, the significance of this for classical Islam may be lost on Westerners ignorant of Islam but it is a claim to that territory, a claim which once made must never be relinquished.
Furthermore when I daily read of Christian brethren and Jews being oppressed and worse ( often much worse) in Islamic dominated societies, I think I have every right to objecting to any public funding supporting such an ideology. It is outrageous that it is displayed in a police station of all places, the symbol and source of Authority against criminality.

dave s

It is yet another example of the unreality of the liberal elite's worldview and this elite's wilful shamefilled disconnection from their own culture and people. The pendulum always swings back and all the pious platitudes of governors , police chiefs and media stooges cannot prevent it.
They could resort to the use of state oppression but I doubt they have the courage or the will. England might be the first ancient country to volutarily destroy it's culture and dispossess it's people but somehow I doubt it. If we had been led by wise men and women then this could all have been avoided.

Dixon

Crikey, the BNP turnip-heads are such blundering buffoons they think the kind of disingenuous twaddle spouted by "Dave M" is going to fool us? He says "...the B.N.P. are still a single issue party but it may also be because the E.U. started to regulate the B.N.P. So, a lot of the hard core joined the E.D.L and the E.D.L. is a far more extreme group..." Larf, I nearly fell off me chair. The EDL, with its Jewish section, its gay section and its Seikh deputy leader is he says "a far more extreme group".

Clearly he and his goons are peeved at the effectiveness with which the EDL has ejected BNP undercover provcocateurs.

Nothing Ive seen or read anywhere about the BNP has so put me off them than this piece of creative slimeyness. And this is "Dixon" talking, your resident ultra nationalist, so thats saying something. Thanks Dave M, you've done your mates a disservice.

Derek

GeoffM

Melanie should put these questions to Mr. Fraser Nelson with a request that he include comment on them in his piece on Neathergate which he promised to publish almost a year ago now, but has so far failed to do.

AY

google.uk - proudly infiltrated.

if one opens today's google.uk/news, then among first headlines one can read "Muslim Americans Observe Holy Month of Ramadan".

And then go other titles, like "Pakistani floods" (usually featured by the large green-and crescent banner), "Megrahi compassion", "Afghan civilians", and so on.

The question is, in the secular country with 90+ percent non-Muslim majority - why anyone should care?

Who are the people selecting thes headlines? Such obvious bias can't be anonymous.

Noah Aaron Bashi

A Islamic religious craft work in a English police station, Why in a police station? I think this is weird and eccentric.

Mr. Mabutoh Afunfa

The blonde (female) officer said no Hindu art is coming, this is permanent. What? Am I sleep walking or this is discrimination???

Matt Pryor

Derek BLADES thanks for interjecting some common sense.

AY: Whenever I read "indigenous Brits" I think of Nick Griffin. You may wish to avoid such language if you do not wish to be associated with that kind of mentality.

Jon

I'm sorry, but what's the big deal here? England is a Muslim country, isn't it?

As an American living here in Blighty for more than three years, I just assumed it was a Muslim country, as do most of my American visitors.

Dave M

"Dave M - why do you feel the need to say that many of the people who vote BNP are not 'bigots'. Frankly by saying that you are still implicitly legitimising the use - or rather misuse - of this ugly, inflammatory word by the left..."

I agree the perception of the B.N.P. has been so hysterical very few people actually analyse the party and take a rational view. I once had a teacher who was an out-and-out B.N.P. supporter. They came a close second to Maggie Thatcher who he idolised. The guy also had a doctorate from Oxford and was extremely well educated. However, let's be honest, you do get other B.N.P. supporters from the National Front days and I figure it's this element that tarnished perceptions. I agree with you it's very strange there is hyssteria over the B.N.P. yet George Galloway and his Respect Party actually get applauded on Question Time.
Dixon wrote:
"Crikey, the BNP turnip-heads are such blundering buffoons they think the kind of disingenuous twaddle spouted by "Dave M" is going to fool us?"
I'm not a member of any current political party. I can say that had I been on Question Time when Griffin appeared, I'd have definitely backed him up on many points. I say that because it was too unfair, too one sided and on many points he was misunderstood. And by contrast when George Galloway appeared he was applauded by a hand-picked B.B.C. audience.
"So, a lot of the hard core joined the E.D.L and the E.D.L. is a far more extreme group."
I witnessed an E.D.L. protest first hand and in my book it was totally unacceptable. There were genuine protesters out there but the sad thing was the football hooligan element undermined any effort to make a point.

Dave M

"If we had been led by wise men and women then this could all have been avoided."

I'm afraid our modern politicians and erudite B.B.C. careerists all compete to praise the flawless design of the King's invisible suit. He may, to you and me, appear to be walking the streets starkers but, then again, who are we ignoramuses to make such wild claims? Of course, every so often some brave soul takes a look at the current situation and says, "Hey, the King's in the all-together!" and then all hell breaks loose doesn't it? I can't help but think there exists a certain phenomenon whereby the masses would rather believe in a fairy tale rather than face the uncomfortable reality. Those of us who suggest the King's making an ass of himself threaten to sweep away the fabric of false security.

deadmanjones

In reading this article and its attendant comments I am reminded, very strongly, of the last rejoinder to the Golgafrincham's 'B' Ark as to why their ship was programmed to crash.

Peace be upon you.

Suffolkbor

Jon:

I suggest that you get out more and travel around the British Isles before making idiotic statements to the effect that Britain is a Muslim country .

There are large areas of the country that have very few ethnic people let alone hordes of Muslims with their attendant mosques .

When you go back to the States try relocating to Dearborn Michigan and then after a while take a vacation in Warm Springs Georgia and see if you spot the difference .

I am assuming ,maybe wrongly , that you live in London .
If so I will repeat what I have said on this blog before ,
Namely that London is not the UK/Britain .
Why is that so difficult for people from abroad to understand?

Neil Saunders

Matt Pryor:

Until the ideological capture of most of our institutions and mass media by the politically-correct "left" (whose genuine entitlement to that term I dispute, given their almost universal embrace of laisser-faire economics), most people would have had no problem whatsoever with the notion of an indigenous English, Welsh or Scottish people in Great Britain. To suggest that only people such as Nick Griffin subscribe to such a view is disingenuous. (Actually, the BNP subscribes to a preposterous creation myth about the indigenous people of Britain - based upon a tendentious interpretation of DNA data - that is quite at odds with the traditional view, which was both held and taught to schoolchildren in this country until comparatively recently.)

It is the triumph of political correctness among our elites that has promoted extremism (although this now masquerades as mainstream opinion, or the kind of "common sense" displayed by people such as Derek BLADES), in this case the denial that there are indigenous inhabitants of the constituent nations of Britain.

Why the revulsion against the notion of indigenous British peoples? Would you deny that there are indigenous Palestinians or indigenous Pakistanis?

Perhaps you live in some ivory tower, a leafy suburb or charming country town, far away from the social problems created by mass immigration and multiculturalism. On the other hand, perhaps you are just so blinded by ideology that you believe the destruction of the indigenous culture of Britain, and the rapid replacement of its indigenous people, are wholly benign developments.

Dixon

Dave M...maybe I over-reacted to your earlier statements. My reason for saying so being your placid reaction to my statement! However, if you stand back and look again at what you wrote...ask yourself who can blame a reader thinking you were an undercover apologist for the BNP trying to twist things. The fact is, every time the EDL try to demonstrate anywhere they are mobbed by the thugs of the UAF and gangs of "youths", typically well armed and bussed in for the occasion. So, firstly, to say their demos being marked by violence marks them as the extremists rather blames the victim than the perpetrators. Secondly, aggression foments aggression. Sure theyve their dodgy looking skinhead types amonmg them, but isnt it just racial stereotyping to regard every white who sports a certain "style" (albeit not one to my taste) as being an "extremist". As a matter of fact, I once had a skinhead (and I do mean "once") and yet you would be hard pressed to find anyone less akin to the "football hooligan" stereotype than myself. At the time I was an English teacher for the ALBSU working with diverse immigrants and sharing a flat with a Muslim and a Seikh!

The mere fact that the riot police turn out means nothing. Someone in the heirarchy has decreed that the police should do everything to demonize the EDL. So they turn out in riot gar as a basic default. They then shot the tyres out of an EDL members van without even trying to stop him by the normal means and arrested him and some others on an entirely bogus "suspcion" that they were engaged in a plot to attack a mosque. A plot which the police themselves admitted later never existed, declaring that no mosque was under any kind of threat, after releasing the EDL members without charge, having detained them for 24 hours and ransacked their homes in the meantime.

Its patently obvious that we do not live i anything thaty could sensibly be called a democracy and that those who determin what we are allowed to discuss will pay extraordinary attention to anyone who dares not to conform.

Ok, so we might abhorr the treatment of Nick Griffin on TV. Agreed. But to declare the EDL to be the "real extremists" is to buy what the prevaling authorities in this bemnighted land want us to believe.

AY

Matt Pryor on "indigenous" terminology.

First of all, if Nick Griffin says sun raises in the East, - it's really up to you to start arguing.

My understanding of indigenous Brits is, that they are the people whose ancestors lived on, built and defended this country for generations.
That doesn't add automatically anything positive to the concrete individual, but broadly there is a context of human acievement associated with the word "nation". And this one, is the Nation of titans, - Newton, Shakespeare, Wren, Elgar, Blake, Darwin, Wilde, Kipling, Maxwell, Tolkien, Beardsley, Wells, it will take hours to count.

One can argue that Rossetti wasn't indigenous, and Rosalind Franklin and PAM Dirac, and Hershel, and Handel too. But they contributed to the makeup of the nation, had students and followers.

Briefly, indigenous people are the genitori, those who left for us the blueprints of truth, virtue, freedom, and beauty, - that we accept, preserve, and if needed will defend.

If someone wishes to deny this, - there should be a reason for that denial. So what is the reason, could you please expalin, not mentioning Nick Griffin?

Dixon

As to how we define an indiginous person, I refer again to my rose analogy. How can you describe the aroma of a rose? You cannot. That doesnt mean it isnt distinct from that of other flowers. You know it when you rcognise it.

martinR

The use of the term ‘Brits’ is in my opinion embracing the national ‘dumbing down’ of a once strong and proud nation, regardless of the cultural mixture that has made this country, we should use the proper noun.
British – British People, etc
Using the word ‘Brits’ to describe a people seems apologetic, self effacing and pandering to the whimsical ‘Red Top’ mentality I abhor, we are no longer allowed to be proud of our nationhood but must minimalise a nations heritage with a nickname. New Labour is dead!
-http://www.sovereignty.org.uk/siteinfo/newsround/minority2.html
Statistics can be made to prove anything! Choose your bias.

-http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Brits
Laugh out loud! at the 'clip art' choice for this definition page! Is that who you are?

My views will probably be dismissed as BNP bigoted propaganda. This 'is' the point!

Derek BLADES

Simone, on 9 August you put this question to me. "So you support secular schools but not secular police stations?" Please be assured that I support secularism in all public places. (Including â“ wishful thinking I admit - in churches, mosques, synagogues, temples and other buildings devoted to mediaeval propaganda.)

What is all the fuss about? A police station is displaying an image of a spinneret that won a local art competition. Probably one reason why the police station accepted it was to reassure their Moslem customers that the police are not necessarily against them on racial grounds and that they will get a fair hearing. That looks to me like a smart move by the station commander.

To suggest that the police station in question has thereby de-secularised itself is frankly potty.

John.

Neal Saunders: The professor of Human Genetics at Oxford University, Brian Sykes and Stephen Oppenheimer, among others have conducted long and widespread research into the genetic make-up of the ancestors of those who, for ease of identification, one could say are the contemporary descendants of those who were living in the Br. Isles in 1945 or were alive then. It has been discovered, rather surprisingly, that about 70% of their gene pool is comprised by genes directly descended from the first proto-Basque arrivals to what was, 15,000 years ago, uninhabited territory, joined to mainland Europe. Most of the remaining percentage come from those who brought agriculture to these islands about 7000 ago. Not many Celts or indeed Anglo-Saxons contributed to the gene pool and only a tiny number of Romans and Normans. As the build-up of the number of immigrants whose religion and culture makes assimilation here impossible - (as their so-called holy book instructs them to convert the whole world to their religion, - using lies, treachery, deceit and murder to further this aim) - has increased slowly and imperceptibly until quite recently, no-one has noticed that we now have a massive fifth column within the country ready to further the aims of the aggressive, proselytising millions of their fellow-believers in the Near, Middle and Far East and in Africa. What can be done once the wooden horse has discharged all of its occupants into the midst of the city?

Richard of Moscow

Matt Pryor: "Whenever I read "indigenous Brits" I think of Nick Griffin."

Why not Stonehenge, or the voyage of Pytheas of Massilia, or Boudicca?

It's safe to assume that if someone mentions Homer, you think of the Simpsons, and if people refer to "perfidious Albion," you wonder what division they play in.

I blame the schools and universties. It's those idiot factories, rather than any immigrants, that do the most harm to Great Britain.

Dave M

"My understanding of indigenous "Brits is, that they are the people whose ancestors lived on, built and defended this country for generations."

The Beeb and New Labour think tank "academics" have made a big deal about the effects of immigration over the centuries. It's true these isles have absorbed various cultures but we've never been a multicultural society as New Labour interpreted it. In Roman times there were various tribes who dug for copper and adhered to druidism and, of course, the Roman occupation had a significant effect on culture. Basically the Britons are a European people with Gallic and Germanic influences and so on. However, New Labour began to promote the belief indigenous Britons don't exist and that "we're a nation of immigrants". We've heard this many times before. I think it was a terminology of convenience because the truth is New Labour did its utmost to create an American State. New Labour based its immigration policy purely on the American system and the aim of its immigration policy was to create a land of no single ethnic majority. They flung the doors wide open. The trouble is Europe and Britain are not relatively young countries created by mass immigration as the U.S. was.

Dixon

I feel I should make clear that when I said "I once had a skinhead" I meant by that that I had once a haircut of that description...not any other interpretation that might be placed upon it.

That said, I indeed once "had" (what was barring her red mohecan) a skinhead!

Vicky

Having just read Bauer's book "While Europe Slept" and following the debates surrounding the planned building of a mosque near ground zero, this article encapsulates the stupidity, temerity and agenda of those who allow this type of invasion 'in ya face' kinda of insult that we have come to expect from certain quarters. When are we going to wake up and take a stand for our heritage, our culture and beliefs?

Dixon

Richard of Moscow, brilliant coments. Lets all start a sub-thread, "What would Matt Pryor think of".

Having started it I guess I should offer my own entry. Nothing like your brilliant offering ("When you [Matt Pryor] hear of Homer you think of The Simpsons") but still...

When Matt Pryor hears the word "Hamlet" he thinks of low-quality cigar-substitutes.

Or even: When Matt Pryor sees a Hamlet he thinks its a cigar.

Or maybe, When Matt Pryor hears Charpentier he thinks its the Eurovision Song Contest.

Please folks, lets see what you all think Matt Pryor thinks!

Wilhelmina Aurt

The muslims in Afghanistan are killing the aid workers who are helping them, in Somalia they are trying to kick all out they think they are converting Christianity to their people which is not true and here they are spreading their religion in the prisons or in a paintings, it is unfair init?

Eddie

'I blame the schools and universties. It's those idiot factories, rather than any immigrants, that do the most harm to Great Britain.'

Yes EXACTLY R of Moscow!

It is the people in positions of influence and power (usually white non-Muslim) whose tolerance of extremist Islam, and promotion of the relativist concept that multiculuralism means everyone must accept and celebrate and fund the promotion of any ideology of anyone with a religion (especially from an immigrant and/or ethnic community) who are the real problem.

We should instead be telling people that they have to adapt to our values and our ways, not accommodating the backwards values of the south Asian village! The word is 'betrayal' - betrayal of Enlightment values and principles of democracy, pluralism, equality and tolerance - and all in the name of diversity and equality!

VERY depressing.

R Price

Christianity is being attacked by islam and humanist. Be warned as we have no backing from our governments or churches

Derek BLADES

Eddie writes âœmulticuluralism means everyone must accept and celebrate and fund the promotion of any ideology of anyone with a religion...â�.

Interesting point, Eddie. We should certainly not stop anyone from practising a religion however wacky it may be but we can surely insist that they behave in a civilised manner. I see good reason to ban female circumcision, halal and kosher slaughtering practices, and clothing worn in public that hides the face. I also wonder about the Catholic churchâ™s rules on celibacy. As we now see they donâ™t work and may actually encourage child abuse. Should we ban them?

Dawkins has somewhere complained that âœreligion trumps allâ�. I agree with him. We should level the playing field.

Augustus

Derek Blades, At last I agree with you: "we can surely insist that they behave in a civilized manner." But a glance at reality
today shows us that this is pure wishful thinking. Because, not since Nasser's time have the sworn enemies of the Jewish state so clearly stated that they want to destroy it. That is particularly true of Hezbollah in the north, Hamas in the south, and Iran in the east. And nothing whatsoever points to the fact that these uncivilized religious radicals will ever abandon their destructive goals, and allow Israel to exist peacefully. And before you state that any of this is Israel's fault, and that peace lies 'just around the corner', the facts prove that the Arab willingness for that peace just isn't there.

Derek BLADES

Augustus accuses me of wishful thinking "Because, not since Nasser's time have the sworn enemies of the Jewish state so clearly stated that they want to destroy it."

Interesting that he mentions Nasser because since his time Egypt has made peace with Israel. That rather undermines your thesis that peace is impossible.

Augustus belongs to the no-hopers camp. They makes up roughly 90% of the contributors to this blog but probably less than 1% of the population of the western world. The Arab's do actually have their own peace plan, put forward by the Saudis and remarkably similar to the Oslo terms.

The truth is that peace could actually break out if Israel stops stealing land in the West Bank and making life nasty, brutish and short for their Arab neighbours.

What do the no-hopers foresee? A permanent state of semi-war in the Middle East until the Arabs "come to their senses", accept that they have been been beaten in battle, roll over and play dead? Not a very likely scenario. The British did not do that after Dunkirk and nor, to their credit, will the Arabs.
The want peace with honour and that will entail concessions by both parties.

Dhimmitude Ishere

Further to GeoffM's observation about the attitude/experiences of non-Muslim BME groups, my Thai-born ethnically Chinese wife was making similar comments about our "stupidity" when we met twenty years ago. At first, I thought her comments about the insidious nature of Islam and its inherently divisive nature were exaggerated but experience since then has demonstrated that, if anything, her views were an under-statement. Other Asian (both from the Indian sub-continent and elsewhere)friends also tell tales of how other communities feel isolated and threatened by Muslim ones both here and in the countries from which previous generations of their families emigrated. We have ignored their experience and now face the dilemma of how to deal with a group that regards itself as superior to all others within our society and seeks to influence and change institutions and laws to support this view. An aim which is insidiously being achieved and to which our political classes have no answer. Inevitably, there will be a Muslim dominated town or city which will seek greater independence from the norms of this country. If this is not given, violence will be used as a mechanism to achieve their 'rights' and the pattern will be replicated elsewhere leading inevitably to mass bloodshed and/or division. This scenario is not unique to the UK and the seeds of similar conflicts can be observed in many countries not just in Europe but throughout the world wherever Muslims have bee given a foothold.

phil

Derek BLADES
August 14th, 2010 7:19am It did not take long before you got onto your pet subject of putting down the Israelis .You always conveniently forget that it was the Arabs who started the wars ,and when they have lost ,they call Israel the bullies .Peace requires both parties to recognise one another and to put aside the desire to wipe each other off the face of the earth -do the words of hamas and hesbollah ever tug at your mind ?
-------------
Untruth follows untruth from your pen and then you have the chutzpah to call the rest of us no hopers .You are a legend in your own kitchen Derek,and no further. Your mind has obviously become addled by staring at the topless Eastern beauties on the Cote D,Azure .Perhaps your judgement of the female form is what you should stick to,because world affairs are obviously not your strong subject .
--------------------
I know I waste my words on you ,as do many others,because the fact is it is you who is the no hoper and minds like yours, that are the true obstacle tp peace .Your self serving desire for fame at the expense of the lives of so many on both sides is a testimony to how little you care for the unfortunates who bear the brunt of your wantonness .Stay on the beach derek and give the Israelis and Palestinians a chance to make lives for themselves .

AY

"..to which our political classes have no answer.."

There is only one answer, and it is an apartheid.

The society most freindly to the existence and development of man is the secular, humanist order. One should expect that such order will be eventually formed and separated from the rest.

That rest will continue as (hopefully shrinking and marginal) multicultural goo, a mix of Sharia and tribal cults alike, - underachieving, dark places where progress stalled and human live worth a penny.

So let us just wait until some heavenly Geert Wilders comes and builds here an enlightened, free, responsible meritocratic state where everyone would like to live.

Or, another option, we could start building it ourselves, now, from what we see around - create acceptable habitat for modern humans.

In the end, look at that example of followers of the religion of peace, who just install their Mordor principalities where jhey can, on the backs and bones of others, without much asking. This is zero sum game, the more they grab today, the less will be left for us tomorrow.

Linda Smith

What has been overlooked in the dispute about the imposition of halal meat in Harrow schools is that non-Muslim schoolchildren will be deprived of pigmeat - pork, bacon, ham - as pigmeat is prohibited under Islam.

The imposition of Halal meat in State schools in Harrow - and any other State schools in the UK - is the imposition of Sharia Law. Sharia-creep indeed.

quadratus

I live in France where each & every morning a pristine French flag is respectively hoisted outside the Gendarmarie station and remains until dusk.

Eddie

Is it true that in some schools pork products are banned and all meat is halal?

I suppose at 60-70% of kids have packed lunches it's not as much of an issue as it could be. But I thought this was just a myth: I read about this in a novel but thought it was a joke!

But as someone who love pork/ham/bacon and thinks halal way of killing animals is cruel and unnecessary, I'd like to know whcih school authorities do this so I can complain.

Dave M

"The truth is that peace could actually break out if Israel stops stealing land in the West Bank and making life nasty, brutish and short for their Arab neighbours."

This is a modern perspective and we see it everywhere because Israel's history simply isn't taught. Even the Romans recognised all of this disputed land today is Jewish, albeit occupied as a Roman province and subject to tribute.
Derek, unless you read a decent book covering the entire history of Israel you'll never see the other perspective. There is a completely academic one written by Michael Grant and no politics at all.

Neil Saunders

John.

Before we get started, it's "Neil", not "Neal". (I just thought I'd clear that up.)

The problem with theories such as those of Sykes and Oppenheimer is that they raise more questions that they attempt to answer. In one fell swoop they violate Occam's Razor by failing to observe the principle of parsimony.

The unwary layperson, distracted (and perhaps confused and intimidated) by technical talk about mitochondrial DNA and suchlike, will probably fail to ask Sykes and Oppenheimer how they account for the following indisputable facts (and in any case, a credible answer has not yet been forthcoming):

1) The prevalence of Anglo-Saxon personal and place-names in England;

2) The complete absence of Basque or Iberian personal or place names in the British Isles, together with an absence of any Basque- or Iberian-derived folklore, vocabulary, etc.;

2) The complete dominance of the (Anglo-Saxon derived) English language in the British Isles, the vehicle of our culture and literature from that well-known Basque epic Beowulf onwards;

3) The failure of historians, from the Venerable Bede onwards, to mention the Basques, etc., that Sykes and Oppenheimer claim as our true ancestors.

There are more questions that Sykes and Oppenheimer raise (but do not answer), but these three alone suffice to cast serious doubt upon the plausibility of their claims.

It is easy to understand why such claims would appeal (on pragmatic grounds) to the BNP: they suggest a longer period of continuous settlement by the indigenous peoples of Britain than has traditionally been accepted, and a closer kinship between the constituent British nations.

However, in minimising the role of the Anglo-Saxons in England, and the Celts elsewhere Sykes and Oppenheimer actually do serious damage (as perhaps they intend) to the national self-identity of the English, Welsh and Scots.

Dixon

Neil Saunders, clearly, given the correspondence of place names in West of England to those in Lord Of The Rings its patently clear that the indiginous people of that region are all from Middle Earth! Or am I pointing poit the obvious, the prevalence of troglodites in these parts!

Dixon

Eddie, Id be very surprised if ANY inner city schools permit pork products on school premises today. Even in packed lunches.

I know what you say about reality out-weirding fantasy. I have written a novel in which, weird flight of fantasy this, smokers have to be registered before they can buy tobacco products. Within weeks of my having written what I tjought a very "far out" scenario, the BMA were proposing that exactly such a scheme be made law (and presumeably still are).

Henrietta Shoemaker

"Britain Today" also blind passengers are ordered off buses or taxis because the muslim drivers or passengers don't like dogs they said dogs are unclean and against their religion.

Neil Saunders

Dixon

I have always loathed The Lord Of The Rings.

You've just provided me with another reason to do so.

Eddie

Dixon. Indeed, reality very often does seem to be out-weirding fiction at the moment! I read about such things in a campus novel called Crump, and thought this exaggerated everything - but maybe not!

Who would have thought, even a few years ago, that science teachers would seriously be telling schoolkids that evolution is no more valid than creationist Christian/Islamic fairy tales in old books! Yet, this is happening in state schools in the UK - teachers are too scared of upsetting muslim/african parents, it seems. An UTTER DISGRACE!

This anti-integrationist surrender to - and appeasement of - what are essentially modern-day fascists is very sad, very troubling and something those of use who care about this country and Western, Enlightenment, civilised values must fight - even if it gets us called racist, 'Islamophobic' etc by the modern-day socalled 'liberal' thought police.

Linda Smith

Eddie asks “Is it true that in some schools pork products are banned and all meat is halal.”

If you google, say halal meat in Harrow schools, you will find plenty of info on the latest furore over the imposition of halal in State schools, for example on the BBC News website: “A north London council is offering its primary schools the chance to serve only halal meat on its menus.
Nine Harrow secondary schools already provide pupils with meat prepared according to Islamic law in a scheme that has been running for two years.” Read the rest of the article at http://www.google.com/search?q=halal+in+harrow+schools&hl=en&rls=GGLM,GGLM:2009-34,GGLM:en&ei=qG5qTLj3GcK5jAeYpNlw&start=0&sa=N

If only halal meat is served on school menus, then pork products are banned, as pigmeat is banned under Islamic law. Such a ban signifies that Sharia law is being imposed on non-Muslims in British State schools. I suggest that you all write to your MPs in protest.

Betty Cheng

MacDonald's and some other fast food restaurants in Britain have only Halal food on the menu, the state schools mostly have this, in selective stores of Tesco and Sainsbury's have special only halal food sections I don't understand why do they want to shove halal food down to our throats?

Eddie

Really? MacDonalds too.

Thanks for the link Linda - I'll research this about schools in Harrow (I always thought it was more Hindu/Indian there anyway...)

If true (I do not suggest this isn't) then this is all utterly disgraceful!

Augustus

Derek Blades (14/8) calls me a 'no-hoper'. I am a realist and whatever those other 99% of the Western world are they are certainly more cowardly in their dealing with a Fascist ideology than previous generations. But the really
pertinent question is Israel's economic and social success. No crisis, no war, no boycott, no
waves of terror whatsoever have since its founding in 1948 managed to curtail its economic success in the slightest. What's the secret?

Linda Smith

Eddie, the punchline is that only 7% of school pupils in Harrow are Muslim!!!

The Harrow debacle has been well-aired on the mejia. I'm surprised you missed it.

Dixon

Neil Saunders...Ive never ...touched the infernal rubbish. I was incensed and perplexed at the age of twelve when we were made to read "The Hobbit"...why, I wondered in dismay, are we being asked to read a childish story for kids still into fairy tales?

I found the movie to be utterly unwatchable rubbish as well. Cliches strung together like beads on a hackneyed string.Why is "bucolic" in American movies (yes, I know the director is a New Zealander) always equated with "Oirish"?

Mr. Mabutoh Afunfa

If people are getting free lunches from state schools they should not complain and eat what they get, if they don't like it they should bring their own lunches with them packed lunches their own Halal food wherever, they are minority why they should be treated better then the majority?

Neil Saunders

In a funny way, Dixon, you were sort of barking up the right tree when you invoked Tolkien's Middle Earth. I've never managed to get beyond page 150 of Lord Of The Rings, but those in the know tell me that Tolkien expressly based the history of the Shire on that of Anglo-Saxon England, and viewed the Hobbits as essentially English.

I remember reading Tolkien's introduction to his magnum opus, in which he disclaimed any allegorical or satirical intent, but simply a desire to construct an alternative history. (I'm quite happy to settle for the real thing, so I don't feel the need for the made-up variety.) Together with his leaden prose-style, this is probably why I find it more or less unreadable.

(Incidentally, a reviewer on Amazon UK, "Angeln", quite rightly objects to the hijacking of Tolkien's Middle Earth - which is entirely Germanic in its mythological and cultural orientation - by those who seek, for the purposes of promoting the films which I strongly suspect to be as unwatchable as their literary precursors are unreadable), to impart to it a spurious Celtic ambience.)

That said, it's on a demonstrably higher plane of literary and cultural merit than present-day tripe like Harry Potter.

Dixon

Neil Saunders...but at least Harry Potter is actually meant for children.

You see what I say avout the Oirish line dancing and fiddle aspect is what your reviewer referred to as "celtic", Though strictly speaking the red-headed folk werent (Celtic, that being a culture based in middle Europe with its capital in present day Switzerland).So actually Germanic and Celtic overlap.

Meanwhile, I actually do find alternative histories an intriguing and also useful device. Particularly good as an exponent being P.K.Dick. Although his are really concurrent alternative worlds. Undoubtedly the alternative history that most often fascinates is "what if" the NAZIs had won WW2? The background to "The Man in The High Castle".

Neil Saunders

Dixon

Now I'm straying even more wildly off-topic, on a thread that is supposed to deal with public and permanent displays of Islamic art in British police stations, a serious and disturbing topic that should not be forgotten.

With Tolkien it's not so much the fact the he sought to create an alternative history per se that repels me; it's that it does not, and was not intended to, tell us anything about our own world. Most genre fiction, whether it's set in the Middle Ages, the Wild West, Utopia, Erewhon or outer space, is intended to have precisely the kind of symbolic, allegorical or satirical content that Tolkien expressly disavows for his Middle Earth.

The genre of counterfactual history is an intriguing one where such a symbolic, etc., intent on the part of the author exists. (It is difficult to divine its purpose where such an intent is absent.) Salient examples in print fiction are Keith Roberts' Pavane, Kingsley Amis's The Alteration and Robert Harris's Fatherland. One of my favourite films is Quest For Love (starring Tom Bell and Joan Collins) - an expansion of (and, uncharacteristically for a film, and improvement upon) John Wyndham's short story, "Random Quest". This posits not only an alternative biography for its main character, who is a chaste, single research physicist in our world, but a drunken, womanising (and unhappily married) playwright in the parallel one, but an alternative history in which World War 2 has been averted, President Kennedy is still alive (in 1971!), and in myriad small but telling details the world is different (and slightly quainter).

Incidentally, Harry Potter might be intended for children (although there seem to be plenty of so-called adults who are prepared to plough through its sub-prime prose and brave the shallows of its New Labourish social attitudes). I repeat, compared even to Tolkien, whom I do not admire, let alone the really great classics of children's literature, it is very poor stuff indeed.

Matt Pryor

@Neil Saunders:

"Why the revulsion against the notion of indigenous British peoples? Would you deny that there are indigenous Palestinians or indigenous Pakistanis?"

I just hate the phrase. It has racist undertones. I didn't pass comment on the concept, and I'd rather keep my views on such a sensitive and difficult subject to myself.

But the expression is one that was seldom heard to describe British people before the BNP started using it. In my view the BNP are idiots, and people that employ their rhetoric come across as idiots too - this is the internet after all and there is very little else to judge people on (as the reactions to my comment demonstrate).

But thank you, and others, for letting me know what I think.

Neil Saunders

Matt Pryor

Well, Matt, congratulations on keeping your opinions on a sensitive and difficult issue strictly between you, me and possibly several thousand other people who may peruse this thread. We wouldn't want it getting about, would we? I have to say I admire your rather neat trick of saying how much you hate something while somehow "not passing comment" on it; how did you manage it?

I notice, though, that you've deftly sidestepped my question about indigenous Palestinians and Pakistanis.

You've also rather unsubtly tried to smear anybody who uses the expression "indigenous" (at least in relation to British people) by associating them with the BNP. Before the effects of mass immigration became obvious to those of us in Britain whose ancestors have been here for centuries it was hardly necessary to identify ourselves as "indigenous". The fact that parties like the BNP exploit the anxieties of indigenous people is not a prima facie proof that these anxieties are unfounded.

But, more immediately to the point, why do you hate the expression "indigenous" when applied to British people? Why do you believe it to have racist undertones? Having expressed your own opinions and made insinuations against those who hold different ones you delicately withhold the chain of reasoning and/or evidence that have led you there. Perhaps you have not reasoned yourself into your present beliefs, and have no evidence for your assertions about others. But if you have and you do, don't be shy - please share them with us, otherwise we might return the compliment, and think that you're a bit of an idiot yourself.

Dave M

"Before the effects of mass immigration became obvious to those of us in Britain whose ancestors have been here for centuries it was hardly necessary to identify ourselves as "indigenous"."

I'd also like to point out there is a common mistake of associating mass immigration and multiculturalism as something belonging to the Left. I don't understand where this idea came from. If you look at the Soviet system from Lenin to Chernenko (and even Gorbachev)there was never any mass immigration into Russia. Never any attempt to "diversify" Russia or Ukraine. There was an idea of working classes worldwide uniting and so forth but I can find no link between the hard left and multiculturalism. My guess is it actually came about as a byproduct of Imperial expansion and then via Democratic American policy.

anonalien

Matt Pryor, I see that you think that the BNP are idiots, but I also see that Neil Saunders has put you right on that one. What is wrong with people who are proud to honour the memory of all those brave men and women who, down the centuries, gave their lives so you could live free? Is it not right to be against being treated as second-class citizens in your own country, and the undermining and rejection of all things British?

AY

More and more o'stuff hits the fan, aka Matt Pryor's comments.

Technically, it is hard to decide who, and at what extent is indigenous. But the whole arguing is rather not about this ambiguity, but about

1) the origin, the value and the future of national civilizational heritage

2) the threat to it form the destructive colonizers' forces cannibalizing the culture and enslaving the nation.

The word "indigenous" is used for brevity and I think none of the commenters here would salivate over its literal interpretation.

When I hear people talking German, French, Italian, Russian, Dutch, Polish, Spanish, - any of the European languages where familiar words and roots are recognizable - there is always a sense of attachment and sympathy - "they are our people". Indigenous to the West. (Oh and Greek and Hebrew certainly, the foundations). And in this, race isn't an issue. Ayan Hirsi Ali is with us, one can only be proud about that.

Matt Pryor

Neil,

I object to the word "indigenous" being used to describe British people because it implies white British people are somehow superior to non-white British people or have more right to be here, and I find that offensive. I'm sure you will agree with me that peoples' "Britishness" is about their loyalties and allegiances, not the colour of their skin (or their religion, for that matter).

The word brings to mind Aboriginal Australians, American Indians, and generally people that have been displaced or subdued. To use it to describe British people makes us sound like victims. We are not.

"I notice, though, that you've deftly sidestepped my question about indigenous Palestinians and Pakistanis."

What question? What do you want me to say? "Indigenous" is not a word used to describe Pakistanis as far as I know, and when used to describe Palestinians (I presume you mean non-Jews?) it is usually an expression of victimhood not identity.

And I have not tried to "smear" anyone, I was trying to point out the association so that people can perhaps choose to moderate their language. I hope you agree with my point about the BNP being idiots, and I'm sure you wouldn't want to be identified with their divisive and simplistic beliefs and rhetoric?

Britain is a fantastic country that is mostly populated by polite, civil and easy-going people. We have much to be proud of, and we do not need more hatred and division. The BNP are a disgrace to all the things I love about this country, and I doubt if I am not the only person that reads Melanie's blog that feels that way.

John.

Neil Saunders: Genes can't lie. The Oxford Professor of Genetics is unlikely to lie either. "Indigenous" or "aboriginal" mean originally native to the place being discussed. Our distant ancestors, most of whom arrived in an uninhabited land about 15,000 years ago were of the same kin as the present-day Basques and Berbers. The majority of the other 30% arrived about 7,000 years ago bringing agriculture. There is about a 2% input from the Normans, a minute Roman input and negligible contributions from elsewhere. It doesn't need nuclear science to conclude that the indigenous population are predominantly the descendants of people who arrived 15,000 years ago with a smaller input from agriculturists who arrived around 7,000 years ago. People tend to adopt the language of newcomers whom they admire for one reason or another or whom they need to be able to communicate with as a result of conquest. The genetic record tells us that in the case of our islands both the Anglo-Saxon and the Celtic languages were the languages of a rather small number of immigrants. Welsh continued to be spoken in the North of England and, oddly enough, in Scotland, long after the arrival of small bands of Anglo-Saxons. Anglo-Saxon spread gradually therefore and was possibly adopted for commercial reasons. It is possible that the Picts, who were in no way different genetically from their celtic speaking neighbours, spoke the original British language - i.e.: Proto-Basque. Obviously all memory of such far distant Basque and, (in the case of the other 30%), Near Eastern ancestry has been forgotten after the lapse of, (in the case of the 70%), Basque origins and language, and of a Near Eastern origin and language. Who, in North Africa and the Near and Middle East now remembers that their ancestors spoke Latin and Greek, until conquest by Muslims between 1,300 and 600 years ago? How much longer the lapse of time from the arrival of our own ancestors! I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the greater part of the genetic make-up of the present-day "Turks" wasn't composed of the original genes of the Anatolian inhabitants there before the Turkish conquest. All this is just to try to clarify who may be termed indigenous and who are recent immigrants. It seems to be common sense to me.

Dave M

Just thought I'd politely elbow in here..

"I object to the word "indigenous" being used to describe British people because it implies white British people are somehow superior to non-white British people or have more right to be here, and I find that offensive."

This statement I agree with strongly and disagree with strongly. I agree with your point white British people aren't superior to any other ethnic group. You see this is exactly where it all went wrong after WW2 and this modern fear of nationalist thinking. The Nazis were bent on global domination and did believe Germans were superior to all other peoples but that kind of warped ideology doesn't have anything to do with modern nationalist parties (such as in Holland). What we're discussing on this site is Japan basically belonging to Japanese people, China belonging to Chinese people, Denmark belonging to Danish people, Britain belonging to British people and so on. That's not to say foreigners shouldn't be made welcome in any of these countries. Neither is it to say any one group is superior to others.
"I'm sure you will agree with me that peoples' "Britishness" is about their loyalties and allegiances, not the colour of their skin (or their religion, for that matter)."
Here is where we do disagree on a huge scale. That definition of nationality is merely being based on outlook. If we use those standards then myself being ethnically Scottish/English can take off to live in China, for example, pledge allegiance to China and Chinese values and, presto, I become Chinese. Or Russian, or Japanese so long as I "identify" with the values and allegiances of those countries. Well, I think this is a hugely flawed ideology although I know it's been propagated by The Beeb and New Labour for decades. Also, the funny thing is it only applies to Britain and the U.S. for some reason. Even the Beeb would probably agree with my notion I can't become Japanese simply on the basis of allegiance and identification. However, if any other ethnic group comes to the U.K. he (or she) can become British or Anglo Saxon?
Also the reason this ideology has gotten this country into such a mess is because indigenous Britons have been hoodwinked into accepting absolutely anyone who comes here has a God Given right to N.H.S. care, education, housing and welfare on the basis that they're all British. The indigenous Brits have also been taught that to object is akin to outright racism.
Let's look at it another way: Suppose the Japanese Government adopted a policy whereby anyone who comes to Japan and adopts Japanese values should be classed as Japanese. Could you imagine people arriving to Japan from Europe, Eastern Europe, Asia, the Middle East, claiming welfare, housing, the right to work and so on. Japanese employers are then given forms to fill in to ensure sufficient diversity is reflected in the workforce. That then puts a lot of indigenous Japanese out of work and will no doubt have a massive impact on the budget as the country gets more crowded. Could you imagine the Japanese people putting up with all of that? Or the Russians, Chinese or Indians?
The truth is the average Briton has no problem at all over foreign peoples coming to live in the U.K. so long as the process is controlled and regulated. Also, especially if the people who come here are educated and hard working. What infuriates people, on the other hand, is to see hundreds of people camping out in Calais because they know the country is a soft touch. FInally people have worken up to the simple fact the wool has been pulled over their eyes and that's what cost Labour the last election. It may also have cost Labour its future as a viable political party that could ever be trusted again.

Neil Saunders

John.

"Genes can't lie."

No, but geneticists can and do disagree. Research from the University of London in 2006 confirmed that within 15 generations of the English settlement (from the 5th AD century onwards), more than 50 per cent of male DNA in the English population was Anglo-Saxon, and concluded that "In the present-day population the DNA is even more heavily Germanic in origin".

Sykes and Oppenheimer are mavericks within their profession, not mainstream figures, however prestigious the institutions to which they are attached. You are welcome to believe highly improbable theories that fly in the face of all the historical, cultural and linguistic evidence if you choose to; just don't expect the rest of us to.

If the English are - as you laughably claim - descended from Basques and Berbers, why on earth do we look nothing like them, speak a language completely unrelated to theirs and have no folklore in common with them?

More junk science and "counterknowledge", methinks.

Comprehensiveboy

Dave M you ask a very interesting question about the thae fact that what 'indigenists' describe as agressive muticulturalism seems not to be related to the old marxist left in simple way. Of course there are plenty of people who will disgree and point to the way that post WW1 the marxists had a problem in the empirical disproving of their 'scientific'theory. There are plenty of elucidations of this on the net. Search for 'history of political correctness'. It is plausible.

I would like to offer the theory that it is primarily a spiritual problem brought on perhaps by colonial guilt. I think it is quite reasonble to 'feel guilty' about colonialism and I'd wager some of the indigenists of e.g. the BNP might agree. They remind me of Sinn Fein whose name means 'We ourselves'. We notice too that this point of view is more prevalent amont the middle classes whose forbears benefited more directly by colonialism in terms e.g. of living the high life out in the colonies and lording it over people. These views are quite rare among the white working class who spent their time e.g. a mile underground in the dark digging coal. However, the reaction amongst some seems to have created a level of self hating, applied to the race, nation and its state, which is similar to certian heresies/religions who held that e.g. matter was the source of all evil and the 'spirit' the source of all good. These people wish to see the physical reality of their own selves - their race and country expunged from the earth to propitiate for their guilt. Yet this is plainly destructive and evil and shows a selfish lack of normal empathy with the human beings to which one has immediate affinity. It's highly perverse. Matter is not evil and like the race or nation state is part of God's creation.

Neil Saunders

Matt

I did try posting another lengthy reply to you earlier, but for whatever reason it didn't get past Melanie's gatekeepers. I'll recap its main points here, and hope it gets through this time.

1) If the "superiority" you claim to be implicit in the term "indigenous" simply means that longer-settled people have a prior claim to a given territory, then this is just the way of the world. No viable nation-state has ever emerged that shows no general preference for its own people and culture over strangers and theirs.

2) The Australian Aborigines and Native Americans are indisputably victims as a result of losing possession of their territories to incomers who marginalised them and swept their cultures to one side, replacing them with their own. If the British people are ultimately similarly marginalised and dispossessed in the country they regard as their homeland (as seems likely on current demographic trends), in what sense will they not also be victims? (A similar pattern of marginalisation, dispossession and replacement is occurring all over Western Europe.)

3) You ask "What question? What do you want me to say?" I will answer the second of these queries first: I want a straightforward answer rather than yet another evasion. In reply to the first I repeat my original question (even though you must have seen it, since you quoted it yourself in one of your responses): Would you deny that there are indigenous Palestinians or indigenous Pakistanis?

If native Pakistanis in Pakistan are not regularly referred
to as "indigenous" this is surely because their society remains homogeneous, not having succumbed to mass non-Pakistani immigration. Nevertheless, I am concerned with matters of fact, not alleged current usage; either there are indigenous Pakistanis or there are not.

I also take issue with you over the term "indigenous", when applied to Palestinians (who are, by definition, Arabs - mainly Muslim, although some are Christian) as a badge of victimhood rather than a token of nationality. This strikes me as a thoroughly arbitrary redefinition of the term. I repeat: Do you think that there are indigenous Palestinians or not?

4) In what way is associating people who use the term "indigenous British" with a widely-reviled far-right political party such as the BNP not a smear? I urge you to recall your own words: 'Whenever I read "indigenous Brits" I think of Nick Griffin. You may wish to avoid such language if you do not wish to be associated with that kind of mentality.'

(Incidentally, if you wish people to "moderate their language" you might care to moderate your own.)

I dislike the BNP for a whole host of reasons, and reject most of their policies and their entire framework of prospective government (for reasons that I will be happy to elaborate upon later), but I think that you are guilty of arrogance and complacency (typical of a certain type of smug leftist) if you believe that all of their opinions are presumptively wrong and self-refuting, and therefore do not need to be seriously considered and, where necessary, adequately rebutted.

If you disagree with anybody's opinions (and not just those of the BNP) it is not enough just to call them, for example, "divisive" or "simplistic", and to dismiss the language in which they are couched as "rhetoric"; you must demonstrate that they are these things.

5) The Panglossian Britain you rhapsodise over, "mostly populated by polite, civil and easy-going people" is not one, I am afraid, that I recognise. I think ours is an already broken society which is set to fragment further and descend into even deeper chaos, precisely because people like you would rather not face reality.

Dixon

Neil Saunders...Ive never ...touched the infernal rubbish. I was incensed and perplexed at the age of twelve when we were made to read "The Hobbit"...why, I wondered in dismay, are we being asked to read a childish story for kids still into fairy tales?

I found the movie to be utterly unwatchable rubbish as well. Cliches strung together like beads on a hackneyed string.Why is "bucolic" in American movies (yes, I know the director is a New Zealander) always equated with "Oirish"?

Neil Saunders, well heres the problem with my not having read Tolien past the confounded Hobbit. I cant really state for a fact that the movies reflect the author. Even then, as I say, I couldnt stomach it to the end. BUT, part of my reason being the very fact that it is indeed trying to convey a "message". In LOTR surely he has a very big message which is not controversial (and therefore rather pointless) ...that power corrupts. And a subsidiary message, which is utterly pernicious, that technology is evil. Hence the adoption of LOTR as a kind of Bible by the original Hippies, who could be seen walking around with it under their arm as a kind of badge of honour (speaking from my own observations as a child at the time).The movie very definitely drives home this anti-science "message" with a sickening vengeance. Only the wicked have technology and they are utterly evil. No grey areas there then.

Of course what you say inevitably veers towards the observation that it is science fiction itself that characteristically sustains the kind of useful imagining that you describe. Though sneered upon by "serious" minded literary "types", science fiction has generally had far more direct relevance to the real world than any mountain or two of "serious" fiction. A case in point, bringing us back to the theme of this thread, being Frank Herberts "Dune". A book which Osama Bin Laden read as a teenager (at about the same time as I did) and which many believe inspired him on his Jihad against the West. And by golly do they have a point. The Fremen of Arrakis clearly are analogs of Arabs, living in a desert, speaking Arabic and even using the very word "Jihad" for their war on The Empire. The Empire is quite obviously the USA (or all developed industrial nations, East and West), its utter dependence upon The Spice of Arrakis, particularly for transport, clearly makes the latter an analogue of oil. The messiah of the piece, coming from an industrialised culture but adopting the ways of the "oppressed" of his chosen people to reject and conquer all that had made him, leading the global Jihad, is clearly a role that Bin Laden saw himself in and has adopted in the three decades since. Even the terminology is the same.

Thanks for that, Frank!

Neil Saunders, well heres the problem with my not having read Tolkien past the confounded Hobbit. I cant really state for a fact that the movies reflect the author. Even then, as I say, I couldnt stomach it to the end. BUT, part of my reason being the very fact that it is indeed trying to convey a "message". In LOTR surely he has a very big message which is not controversial (and therefore rather pointless) ...that power corrupts. And a subsidiary message, which is utterly pernicious, that technology is evil. Hence the adoption of LOTR as a kind of Bible by the original Hippies, who could be seen walking around with it under their arm as a badge of honour (speaking from my own observations as a child at the time).The movie very definitely drives home this anti-science "message" with a sickening vengeance. Only the wicked have technology and they are utterly evil. No grey areas there then.

Of course what you say inevitably veers towards the observation that it is science fiction itself that characteristically sustains the kind of useful imagining that you describe. Though sneered upon by "serious" minded literary "types", science fiction has generally had far more direct relevance to the real world than any mountain or two of "serious" fiction. A case in point, bringing us back to the theme of this thread, being Frank Herberts "Dune". A book which Osama Bin Laden read as a teenager (at about the same time as I did) and which many believe inspired him on his Jihad against the West. And by golly do they have a point. The Fremen of Arrakis clearly are analogs of Arabs, living in a desert, speaking Arabic and even using the very word "Jihad" for their war on The Empire. The Empire is quite obviously the USA (or all developed industrial nations, East and West), its utter dependence upon The Spice of Arrakis, particularly for transport, clearly makes the latter an analogue of oil. The messiah of the piece, coming from an industrialised culture but adopting the ways of the "oppressed" of his chosen people to reject and conquer all that had made him, leading the global Jihad, is clearly a role that Bin Laden saw himself in and has adopted in the three decades since. Even the terminology is the same.

Thanks for that, Frank!

Dixon

Indiginous, exdiginous, who settled where what when?

According to a Channel 4 documentary that went out before I stopped watching television, 30% of all real estate in the UK is still owned by direct descendents of the original Norman conquerors.

Dixon

Matt Pryor:

"I object to the word "indigenous" being used to describe British people because it implies white British people are somehow superior to non-white British people or have more right to be here, and I find that offensive."

Poles are mostly white.Czechs are mostly white. Americans are of all colours. Most non-indiginous residents of the UK are white. Clearly, your sophistry is empty.

Why is it, when you hear the word "indiginous" you tink of a white person? Havent the indiginous people of other countries who are not white as much right to a claim on their authenticity? Are you saying white settlers had as much right to claim posession of Australia as did the non-white indignous people, quite literally in all senses of the word, "aborigines", who they in fact rounded up and treated like animals?

Why dont you just forget skin colour, it seems its only you who it matters to in this debate?

Dave M

"I would like to offer the theory that it is primarily a spiritual problem brought on perhaps by colonial guilt."

You're right, I think, That is part of it. Also, I didn't point out that Japan, for example, didn't create any kind of Commonwealth so it's been easier for countries like Japan not to be affected.
At any rate, I agree with your point. Personally I believe colonialism was a bad thing but I don't think we should all spend the rest of our lives wringing our hands for wrongs we had nothing to do with centuries ago.
Apart from Colonialism, I also think the American Civil Rights situation has a direct link to multiculturalism. That's because with Civil Rights there were two camps. There were integrationists such as King and non integrationists as championed by Muhammad Ali the boxing champ. I refer to integration of all races in America because there was a lot of inequality. The trouble is the integrationists used force to attain their objectives rather than education. They tried to force people to live together in harmony by making schools more diverse, for instance. Scuffles broke out in the streets over this and also over Vietnam.
However, what's crucial to understand is this was an American issue which had to do with the structure of an immigrant nation. Both Africans, Europeans and Asians in America were all immigrants and had to try and find the ways and means to live together under one flag. This is all very different from Europe. The mistake we see clearly being made is to take American post civil rights policies and then reapply those same policies in Europe. It simply doesn't work because Europe isn't a modern nation of immigrants. In spite of all that, if you pay attention to the media you'll see how often teams of either Tories or other politicians pop over to the States to study policies with a view to applying those policies over here. The census forms and emplyment forms we fill in today, asking us to tick a nationality box or whatever came straight from the U.S. It's just copied policy without any real thought paid to the differences in individual countries. Britain is not a nation of immigrants. Its population is indeed diverse and has been affected by immigration from Normans, Vikings, Germans, Gauls and so on. However, we are still Western European in culture, JudeoChristian in religious heritage and maybe Greco/Roman politically.

Derek BLADES

Neil Saunders asks Matt Pryor what he apparently regards as the killer question - "Would you deny that there are indigenous Palestinians or indigenous Pakistanis?"

This is rather like asking him when he stopped beating his wife. Indigenous has become a nasty word because it is used by the BNP with an overtly racist meaning. Let's stop using it and behave like the vast majority of British people - live and let live. We really are an easy-going and tolerant bunch of people. The bigots who contribute to this blog are a paranoid but thankfully small minority.

elizabeth anderson

is this a joke ?

Ann Marie

Has anybody who has written on this blog stopped to consider the following, that Islam is using the very things that we value and argue over against us - our overinflated sense of self, our need to be right and our need to feel good by including all regardless of whether or not their beliefs are humane, moral, or obey our laws. Heaven forbid we might hurt somebody's feelings. As we spent our time focusing on these things the muslim communities have insidiously worked their way into our communities and manipulated our leaders to ensure the roots of Islam were deeply rooted and spreading into our laws, our schools and our way of life. Islam, although made up of different factions, views itself as the one true religion. They are unified in this belief. They don't spend their time arguing with one another on blogs. They share a common goal...the mandate of Muhammed to go out and dominate the world so that the laws of Islam are enforced every where and to destroy any nation or person or groups that do not convert and follow Muhammed. Sound paranoid? Maybe, but that is another source of division that the extremist Muslims are using to their advantage. It is time to wake up and realize that the threat of extreme Islamic domination is real and not imagined or paranoid...not so sure? then explain this quote "We have ruled the world before, and by Allah, the day will come when we will rule the entire world again" ---Sheik Ibrahim Mudeiris. I'd say that if we don't stop bickering amongst ourselves and don't come together as different nations united in a goal to stop further spreading of extreme Islam. We will surely regret it.

Neil Saunders

Who the hell does Derek BLADES think he is to dictate how any of us use the word "indigenous", just because he adjudges it to be racist (on the basis that the BNP use the term)?

Derek BLADES is also quite wrong to assume that my original question to Matt Pryor is of the same kind as "When did you stop beating your wife?", which "begs the question" in the original, semi-technical sense of that now generally misused expression. It is a question that assumes nothing, and requires for an answer only a "yes" or "no" regarding a matter of sociopolitical fact, not personal speculation or innuendo.

Rather than assert that the word "indigenous" is racist (on the tenuous basis that the BNP use it), and insinuating that anyone who objects to unlimited open-door immigration and state-sponsored multiculturalism is a "bigot" who is both "paranoid" and a member of a "small minority", Derek BLADES needs to prove these large, controversial claims on the basis of evidence (which he has so far failed to provide), otherwise all he is doing is calling people names (and making unsupported statistical claims) while trying to dictate the terms of the debate.

The BNP use thousands of words, both functionally (i.e. in their ordinary, everyday senses) and ideologically; are we to expunge all of these words (or perhaps only the latter category) just because the BNP do? I see no more reason to have the BNP dictate my vocabulary than have Derek BLADES do so.

AY

Oh not this again, that morris dancing around "indigenous" fetish.
Not indigenous marmots, - it's about PEOPLE.

Hitler and Goebbels were "genetically and linguistically indigenous" to the German nation, is that a budge of honor? The whole Europe (including "non-indigenous" Hungary) was culturally formed under influence of Christianity coming from "non-indigenous" Middle East.

Look on youtube how many Chinese and Koreans", just amateurs, non-indigenous" to the West, love to play classical Western music, eg Palchebel canon (and how well they play). And then look in the news just to know that "indigenous" Brits urinate on the tombs of nation's heroes and their grandfathers. I would rather have these Chinese here.

The word is devoid of meaning out of the context of morality and creativity of the nation.

The word has the meaning (a shortcut) when it capitalizes on the sense of allegience to the land and the ways of fathers, - because West faces real and growing threats from many unreconcilable, aggressive and barbaric adversaries openly declaring their goals of, and already practicing the suppression of any culture they don't like.

Derek BLADES

With nothing better to do on a Sunday morning, Neil Saunders asks "Who the hell does Derek BLADES think he is to dictate how any of us use the word "indigenous", just because he adjudges (sic) it to be racist (on the basis that the BNP use the term)?"

I was not dictating old Chap - just suggesting that indigenous is a word that sensible people should avoid as it has become short-hand for "white skinned and WASP-looking". Racists use the term with a nod and a wink, although I see that "Dixon" prefers his smell test to spot the true Brit. An ultimate obscenity.

I am not sure how I could “prove” to you that paranoia characterises many of the contributors to this blog but the piece by Ann Marie that preceded your outburst is a good example of what I have in mind. She quotes Sheik Ibrahim Mudeiris as saying "We have ruled the world before, and by Allah, the day will come when we will rule the entire world again". She concludes that “It is time to wake up and realize that the threat of extreme Islamic domination is real and not imagined or paranoid”. But paranoid is exactly what she is. Islam has never ruled the world – just Turkey, the Gulf states, small bits of Africa and Asia and – temporarily – Spain. The world is increasingly dominated by people who are well educated, industrious and adaptable. In his contribution following yours AY gives examples of the kind of people I have in mind – Koreans and Chinese – although there are many others here in Europe, America and elsewhere who fit the bill. People of a religious bent of mind, including those of the Islamic persuasion, have few of the qualities required for success in the modern world. They will certainly not “rule the entire world”. To believe in such a threat is proof of both paranoia and ignorance of how the world works.

AY

Derek BLADES
August 22nd, 2010 4:22pm

"..The world is increasingly dominated by people who are well educated, industrious and adaptable.."

!!!
..rather those who are power-lust, ruthless, and deceptive.

Although, - what a wonderful depiction of an exemplary dhimmi, an obedient protoplasma whose destiny is to flow and squeek in the callous, loving hands of the passionate master.

In the better world, the "dominating" people should have, first-foremost, an adequate notions on good and evil. Then, the courage to stand against evil. Then, the desire to know truth, and all of the above.

It is quite typical for modern days propaganda, - to feed people by all sorts of dehumanizing smoothies, while consistently denying the existence of threat.

Augustus

By all accounts many Middle Eastern and East African immigrant communities in Britain aren't going to make it to a sane and healthy future. Already today 50% of Britain's Pakistani community marry their first cousin, and in Bradford the figure is 75%. This is incest, and though legal the consequences can be tragic and severe. First cousin marriages cause thousands of children to be born with terrible disabilities every year in Britain, one third of whom are so ill they die before they are five years old. And if these unfortunates reach maturity they invariably risk blindness,
metabolic disorders and what is most revealing sporadic abortions and infertilty. The funny thing is that, even though the authorities have established and pointed out the risks, these people still deny the dangers and extol the benefits of marrying within the family.

C.Gee

Derek BLADES:

You need to brush up on your history on the spread and reach of Islam.

I feel no confidence that "well-educated, industrious and adaptable" people will dominate the world. "Well-educated" is as open to interpretation as "indigenous". "Industrious" is as industrious earns and "adaptable" can go from primitive and barbaric to sophisticated and civilized or the other way round. There is enormous pressure from the "well-educated" for the "industrious" to "adapt" to what they call "sustainable" simplicity.

Moreover, the "religious frame of mind" does not have to hook itself to a god. It shows itself in the promotion of collectivism.

The great intellectual (and actual) battle now is about "how the world works" and how it should work. So far it is the nation-state, constituted on the principle of individual liberty and free markets, that has been the bulwark against collectivist totalitarianism, whether religious or secular. The nation is the jurisdiction that is best able to contain and protect subjects of different cultures, races, religions - in fact to make such differences irrelevant to citizenship, and citizenship irrelevant to equal protection under law (except for voting) - provided the law governing all within the boundaries of the state is the same for all. It is not diversity of population, but diversity of law (different laws for different folks) or unequal enforcement of the law that is the greatest threat to our fragile civilization. And the threat to the idea of a nation state - where the subjects can live as individuals, not as contributors to the hive - is most clearly coming from the soft jihad of universalist Islam and the post-nationalism of the left. It is the desire for the destruction of nations that the militant left and militant Islam have in common.

Perhaps the "well-educated" left hopes that international socialism (Dar el Harb) will reach an accommodation with Dar el Islam. Everyone is ignorant as to how that world could work. Perhaps the left is happy to see Islamic policies enacted in the western nations as the Muslim population (multi-ethnic - Islam proselytizes) reaches critical political mass, provided the one-world regulations against global warming and capital are promulgated. The old legal code will be altered to wink at honor killing, polygamy, genital mutilation for women (circumcision for boys permitted only on production of a religious certificate). The new legal code will bring back blasphemy, an umbrella term for any speech which offends adherents of Islam, and, as a compromise, any speech which offends the left, like nationalist, anti-collectivist, pro-capitalist "lies".

What this carbon-speech- idea-action-controlled world will be like for smug soi-disant well-educated Brits and Americans who gaze benignly on those hard-working adaptable Asian johnnies doing a bloody good job at living Western style, and who are embarrassed by British and American - but not imperial Islamic - jingoism, I am too ignorant to tell. But if I were such a Brit or American, I wouldn't dismiss that queazy feeling at the prospect of universal peace and brotherhood as "paranoia".

Neil Saunders

Derek BLADES

First of all, why, when quoting me, do you feel the need to mark the word "adjudges" with the bracket word "sic"? It is the word with the precise meaning that I intended and it is neither misspelt nor wrongly conjugated.

Secondly, if you claim that a word is so inherently "nasty" that no decent person ought to use it, dictating is precisely what you are doing.

By the way, the term "indigenous" is not shorthand for anything. Consulting my Shorter Oxford English Dictionary (1986) I find the following definition:

1. Born or produced naturally in a land or region; native to (the soil, region, etc.). b. transf. and fig. Inborn, innate 1864. 2. Native, vernacular 1844.

"1. Yet were they [Negroes] all transported from Africa... and are not i. or proper natives of America SIR T. BROWNE. b Joy and hope are emotions i. to the human mind 1864. 2. I. schools H. H. WILSON. Hence Indigenous-ly adv., -ness."

There is no reference at all to "white skinned and WASP-looking", although as a matter of fact the indigenous people of England ARE white-skinned and both predominantly Anglo-Saxon and Protestant. Only reverse bigots like Derek BLADES (who arrogantly assumes that any attempt to answer him must constitute a waste of time) believes this to be a self-evidently bad thing.

Dave M

"People of a religious bent of mind, including those of the Islamic persuasion, have few of the qualities required for success in the modern world. They will certainly not “rule the entire world”.

Derek, it's not so much the case that Political Islam is strong militarily or otherwise. Rather the problem is Europe is weak and the U.S. seems to be a fading global power. Also, the most crucial point is that western civilization has lost belief in its own values. Especially it's the case in the U.K. where we have weak-willed, hand-wringing politicians who basically have no values or backbone. They think about how best to say what they imagine people might want to hear so they can get into office rather than stand on any genuine conviction. Mostly their main concern is a career in politics in order to make money.
It's funny but I used to hear various educated academics outline the causes of the fall of the USSR such as stagnation, lack of enterprise, the economy and arms, the Party bosses and so on. I suppose one day, academics will also analyse the causes of the fall of the West which are:
(1) The willigness of the population to sit back in apathy while a minority of careerists use politics as a vehicle to personal wealth. That is, very little active democracy.
(2)A loss of belief in western values and a mustaken belief other value systems are superior.
(3) No protection of enterprise from global competition leading to a shrinking manufacturing industry.
(4) A shrinking, diminished army.
(5)A flawed belief in multiculturalism as a means to social harmony and prosperity.
The trouble is, of course, when a society wobbles and starts to go downhill, something has to fill the void. The reason we see so many mosques and radical clerics in some of them is because, at the end of the day, the Beeb and political classes simply don't care and shrug it all off.
Really we've seen this before when the Dark Ages replaced GrecoRoman civilization. An age of art, philosophy, maths and science was replaced by religious zelots and mediaeval stagnation. Isn't that what we see today as the value system grows ever more intolerant of normal people (who might simply want to wear a small cross at work)?
No, political Islam won't take over the world I agree but it will probably have a far greater impact on western life than you could imagine.

Harold

Moderator,

You published this poison - Augustus
August 22nd, 2010 6:31pm - so I think you should publish a response.

Augustus will have to choose:

either we in the West are to be swamped by Islamists who breed more rapidly than we

or our health service and welfare system is to be burdened with the tragic offspring of a dwindling population of couples too closely related.

It has to be one or the other. Yet Augustus is ever so keen to express hatred every which way he can.

Harold

...or maybe Augustus could contemplate the third option, the one that obtains in the real world, that neither of his phantasms has any substance.

Dixon

Ive tried now five times to have published a legitimte response to an outrgous mis-representation of my words. Whats up with that? To whit:

Derk Bladders:
" was not dictating old Chap - just suggesting that indigenous is a word that sensible people should avoid as it has become short-hand for "white skinned and WASP-looking". Racists use the term with a nod and a wink, although I see that "Dixon" prefers his smell test to spot the true Brit. An ultimate obscenity."

So he's trying to make it sound to anyone who hadnt read what I actually wrote that I said you can tell if somone's British by how they mell. Now hats called "traduction" (and theres no egregious "sic" after it, though sick to anyone who cares about truth it undoubtedly is)...well that really IS obscene. What I actually wrote was that like the smell of a rose, Englihness (not necessarily Britishness) is something you can recognise but not describe. That the fact you cannot define it does not mean it is not distinct.

Or maybe Bladders really is unable to understand that very simple observation, and really did think it meant you can identify foreigners by their smell? After all, that appears about par for him. Though I expect he could understand perfectly well but chose to mislead. Par also for him.

Zaynab bint al Harith

A short note pertaining to the minor discussion of Tolkein's oeuvre: the final work of C. S. Lewis' Narnia series is to be recommended. It is distinct from the previous six books, transparent in its allegory, avowed by the author as such and is imminently, immanently pertinent. Perhaps unavailable in school libraries in HA1.

Neil Saunders

Zaynab -

I have no problem with ANY of C. S. Lewis's seven Narnia Chronicles, which are far more compelling than Tolkien as well as much better written, although I'll admit that The Last Battle is very fine indeed.

I might not share Lewis's religious beliefs or many of his social and political attitudes, but I'll gladly acknowledge that he was a man of the world, rooted in reality, and not some rarefied, out-of-touch, ivory-tower don. Even the most imaginative of his fiction reflects this fact.

Dixon

Harold
August 23rd, 2010 9:11pm

"Augustus will have to choose:

either we in the West are to be swamped by Islamists who breed more rapidly than we

or our health service and welfare system is to be burdened with the tragic offspring of a dwindling population of couples too closely related.

It has to be one or the other. Yet Augustus is ever so keen to express hatred every which way he can."

Well, Im not Augustus, but this of Harolds really is such an indicator of a howling lack of comprehension that I cant resist pointing out the ludicrus non-dilemma he poses. The second "option" is not in contradiction to the first "option" as he implies but follows logically from it. Theres no contradiction. One observation supports the other! Doh!

Perhaps Harold needs to know two simple facts. 1) Present demographic trends mean that the children of Muslims currently born in the UK will form the largest ethnic group by descent of any here within this century. Ie, there will be more people of Muslim descent BORN in this country in the next ninety years than English, Scottish, Welsh, Irish, Polish, Czech or any other sub-division of the population. Theres nothing controversial about this. Its just arithmetic based on current birthrates. Its nothing to do with being "swamped by immigrants", thats just blather to confuse the issue.
2) 75% of Muslims marry a first cousin. That is consanguinity and it is a basic tenet of public health that this leads to birth defects.

These are not controversial things nor are they susceptible to denial. To scream "hate" at the statement of facts which can be confirmed by using the computer you make your imputations of "racism" on is to demonstrate and extraordinary degree of willful ignorance.

Dixon

Neil Saunders. I disagree with you on one thing. Replying to Bladders REALLY IS a waste of time. Apart from correcting his misquoting of me, I just ignore him. If everyone just ignored him, I suggest he would b**&^r off back to Troll Land from whence he emigrated to here in search of attention.

Harold

Dixon
August 24th, 2010 7:37pm
Three university degrees and still possessed of the autodidact's bumptious inability to read or comprehend.

Dixon

Harold
August 25th, 2010 10:40am
Dixon
August 24th, 2010 7:37pm
"Three university degrees and still possessed of the autodidact's bumptious inability to read or comprehend."

I dont know, as Ive said before, where this stuff about "three degrees" ("When Will I see You Again") comes from. Ive never revealed what my qualifications are, my profession, my business, my hobbies or anything else of such particular personal nature here. Only my nationality, location and some odds and ends. You dont even know my skin colour! So either you are making it up or have confused me with someone else.

Which leads neatly to the second part of the above. Ie, its you Harold who obviously, like a wall in yer face, so obviously lack any capacity for comprehension, both on account of confusing the identities of different commenters here and, as I illustrated in my comment before last, in your inability to comprehend what Augustus was saying.

Again, DOH!

Coconut tree

Harold actually what Augustus is saying is true I am African and I understand the East African Community in Britain the way I see it is if people immigrate one of the most expensive country in the world or in Europe for brighter future they should appreciate, integrate, develop and progress so they can go back help their country one day or stay here and at least give something good back to the country who help them but that is not happening now they are volunteering to be very religious and live like 500 yrs ago and ofcourse this is not healthy future for any country.

Harold

Dixon,
I know this is futile, but...

You are very coy about precisely what you have studied, but are clearly very taken with your university education - you have mentioned three different spells in tertiary education, usually you mention them in an effort to awe the opposition with your learning.

I still fail to see how it can be true BOTH that the West risks swamping by the higher birth-rate among Muslims AND that the offspring of Muslim couples will be so genetically damaged as to be unlikely to reproduce in their turn.

Perhaps one of your degrees will enable you to explain.

Derek BLADES

When I wrote that "Dixon prefers his smell test to spot the true Brit. An ultimate obscenity", I did not think he was suggesting that all non-Brits are smelly. What is obscene is his belief that he has a magical sixth sense that allows him to spot the real thing. Clearly, skin colour and dress count for ninety-nine percent of his "smell test". In my book that makes him racist.

But if his smell test uses other, more subtle, criteria, can he please tell us what they are? Can he, in effect, convince us that he is not the truly nasty person that his contributions suggest?

Derek BLADES

Dixon tells Harold that "Present demographic trends mean that the children of Muslims currently born in the UK will form the largest ethnic group by descent of any here within this century. Ie, there will be more people of Muslim descent BORN in this country in the next ninety years than .... any other sub-division of the population." He goes on to claim that "Theres (sic) nothing controversial about this."

I agree. It is not controversial. It is just nonsense. There will only be “more people of Muslim descent BORN in this country”, if second, third and fourth generation Muslims continue to have families of the same size as those of their parents. There are many unknowns in predicting the growth and make up of future populations but one thing is certain - the children of immigrants with large families have fewer children than their parents as they adapt to the customs and living conditions of their host country.

I understand that Dixon already has several university degrees. If he can squeeze in one more before it is too late, he may want to consider something in the way of demographic statistics.

Mr. Mabutoh Afunfa

Coconut tree interesting post, I don't think those people want to develop or change they are here for the welfare, if the British government stop the welfare today they will all leave. Derek Blades I don't agree with you, you said " One thing is certain the children of immigrants with large families have fewer children then their parents as they adapt to the customs and living conditions of their host country". No you wish they do that, the immigrants coming from South Asia and East Africa are still having many children, they are more religious and violence then their parents and no way they are adopting the customs and living conditions of their host country. I don't think you know what is going on Britian today, now in British state schools little girls from Somalia wear to school skirts over their uniform trousers because their parents think the trousers are for the westerns the parents who are also second generation immigrants force their little girls to wear head veils to school at the age of five is this adopting the customs and living conditions of their host country or this is the opposite?

Harold

Dixon,

True to form.

As you would say, "Doh".

Original Tony

Everyone needs to relax.

Islam has no power over Brits getting blind drunk almost every night and young women wearing provocative clothes and lots of make-up, or a god-like obsession with football. True rebellion against Islam will start when they try to take THOSE things away, not bits of stained glass in a cop shop.

Our culture, ot lack of it, will rebel when we are in-the-face-threatened.

Besides, has no-one noticed how European countries are turning against Islam? Banning the burqa, closing mosques, banning minniarets and all that from the reaction to a few cartoons.

I would rather die than become a muslim and I am sure most of Britain feel the same.

Silvia

Wake up Original Tony.

Augustus

Original Tony - Our civilization
is not indestructible, it needs to be actively defended. The first step towards winning this
'clash of civilizations' is to understand how the other side is
waging it. According to a CIA report the Saudis invested at least US$2 billion a year over a thirty year period just to spread their brand of fundamentalist Islam. But the Western response in promoting our civilization is negligible in comparison.

After the fall of Communism the fashionable idea was put forward
in Francis Fukuyama's 1989 essay
'The End of History", in which he wrote that all states would converge on a single standard of
liberal capitalist democracy, and never go to war with each other again. We were headed for a One World order. It's about time we in the West rid ourselves of such an illusion.

Andrei

Here is Augustus back - he is unwilling or unable to explain what he said before but happy to dump some more.

AY

Original Tony

First you write "Islam has no power over Brits", and then "European countries are turning against Islam".

So the idea is to turn against those having no power, other words, to suppress and subvert a defenceless?

Facts, however, suggest another explanation. You look at all places from where Islam is imported to the West - Pakistan/Afghanistan, or Lebanon or Africa, you see the same traits, namely traditionalist way of life, Kalashnikov culture, enslaved women, universal hate of others (neighboring tribe, or state, or unbelievers, you name it), and as consequence - wars and barbaric mass murders/rape/enslavement, a decisive arguments in any social conflict.

Is it surprising then, that Westerners don't like the bloody package?

Augustus

Andrei - If "what he said before" refers to my post on Asian first cousin marriages, I cannot do better than quote a piece by Peter Hitchens from Daily Mail Online dated 22nd August, 2010:

"When first cousins marry, they take a terrible risk. In some cases their children will inherit disastrous, horrifying disabilities. This is a statistical fact, and doctors know it. But the medical authorities in this country are reluctant to talk about it because most such marriages take place among British Asians,
where they have long been a strong part of the culture. They fear - with some reason - that they will be falsely accused of 'racism'..."

There is more, and Channel 4 aired a whole programme on the subject the following day. So much for your indignation, and I might add, Harold's ridiculous remarks earlier. You are both masters of patronizing
communications of ignorance, which, I am sure, are much more despised than appreciated.

Carlos Mahinga

Original Tony I think this kind of things are happening in some parts of London or Britain already but they are not reported. Few weeks ago I was outside at the park enjoying the weather drinking can of diet Coke this guy walk by and told me to stop drinking don't you know it is Ramadan? I told him go away control freak you don't tell me what to do, he left me alone, my friend was smacked on the chest too just because the top button of her shirt was not fastened she said a muslim woman came to her and said cover your naked body, I don't mind if people practise their religion in a free society and keep it to themselves but I do mind when they bring their beliefs to other people.

Andrei

Augustus
And still you do not read carefully.

You are one who warns of danger of Muslims overwhelming West by sheer numbers.

You are also one who enjoys retailing sad story of ignorant people following traditions which means, you say, next generation of Muslims genetically damaged.

Yet still do not see inconsistency pointed out to you or explain how not inconsistent. So please try, instead of pretend "more in sorrow than anger" attempt to avoid it.

Will West be overwhelmed by numbers? Or will "many Middle Eastern and East African immigrant communities in Britain" fail to "make it to a sane and healthy future"?

This was point Harold put to you and you did not have answer (seems you simply did not understand). He said your relish of this tragic story of traditional ignorance distasteful - I agree.

Marcher Baron

When I was at university in Wales recently (I graduated two years ago), the sandwiches in the canteen were halal. I brought my own lunch.

Augustus

Andrei - Go to the Channel 4 (4oD) website, type in
'dispatches', and watch the 48min programme: 'When Cousins Marry'. Facts are facts, nothing to do with
'inconsistency' or 'relish'. And I am not the only one who has warned of the newfangled and insecurely founded doctrine of multiculturalism for entrenching the segregation of communities. Even bishops have done so!

Andrei

Augustus
If you read what is written you maybe notice I have not questioned harm of union between too close relatives. So always to point me to more information on subject is beside point. I am truly astonished you do not see the inconsistency between saying West at risk from breeding Muslims and at the same time Muslims at risk of failing to have healthy future. You have to decide which. Genuine surprise you cannot understand point made to you.

Derek BLADES

Augustus can surely do better than quote a tabloid journalist to support his argument against first cousin marriages. He could try Wikipedia, for example. There he would learn that such marriages were traditionally more common in Britain among the aristocracy. Queen Victoria's marriage to Prince Albert is a well-known example. Charles Dickens also married a first cousin. The medical evidence suggest that offspring of consanguineous marriages have a slightly higher risk of premature death - although still quite a low one.

On balance, first cousin marriages are to be discouraged. As the second and third generation of Muslim immigrants learn of the dangers of consanguineous marriages they will turn away from the practice. As with many societal problems, education turns out to be the best remedy. In any event, let’s not use it to stir up racial hatred.

AY

Andrei

"This snake is poisonous"
and
"It is two feet long".

Is here a contradiction?

Augustus

Derek Blades - Your points are taken, but people in the know are not only very concerned about extent of the problem (50%
is not inconsequential, and cannot be compared to past royalty in scale), but also that there is a definite conflict between Muslim doctors
and the intransigence of the imams. According to the TV programme such victims cost about £75,000 each to be cared for, and yet there are cancer sufferers who are refused some treatments because of the cuts. How the subject has been interpreted to stir up hatred,
however, escapes me. I might add that many of the daughters with whom a marriage to a cousin
from overseas is 'arranged' are emotionally blackmailed, being told that if they refuse to marry someone they haven't even met, let alone love, they will be ostracized from the family and left destitute. Not a healthy business all round.

Andrei

AY
West will be swamped by offspring of Muslim citizens: offspring of Muslim citizens have no viable future because of genetic damage. Is contradiction here?

Poisonous snakes, for goodness sake!

Andrei

Augustus still flounders. And I too find it hard to believe this subject can be used to stir up hatred.

Mr. Mabutoh Afunfa

Derek Blades you wish they do that but they wouldn't, anyhow I read somewhere there are people having disable children more then one who are from East background and they are married to first cousin, did you say something about British aristocrats? Maybe in Europe they marry first cousins in the past but they don't do that anymore, Derek and Andrei you need to stop arguing you need to listen with out thinking hate, race and things like this.

Simone

Derek Blades:
"...but one thing is certain - the children of immigrants with large families have fewer children than their parents as they adapt to the customs and living conditions of their host country."

Apparently not. Muslims generally still have large families. I don't think we will ever have the sort of integration that you mention until we stop chain immigration.
The arrival of spouses from places like Pakistan hinders integration.

Also, we have had a couple of decades of officially encouraging non-integration. This article provides an example of that. If Muslims (rightly or wrongly) think they are going to get special treatment from the authorities if they strongly identify with their Islamic culture, then that's what they will do.

Andrei

Mr. Mabutoh Afunfa
August 28th, 2010 10:38pm

Mr. Mabutoh Afunfa (alias John Bull of Dacre), I am not arguing, I am asking Augustus to explain how he can hold contradictories to be both true. This is simple request but extraordinarily difficult for Augustus to understand (also "Dixon" the bluffer).

Derbyexile

And the problem with this is what exactly?

mjrdespairingpissinginthewind

Just come across Melanie's blog. Well, some time ago, having waded through most of the deluge it precipitated.

Can anyone foresee a time when public officials and politicians of all colours will take any notice of normal people?

Just a thought: surely it must be technically possible for the nationwide phenomenon of 'shouting at the telly' to be directly rebroadcast without Establishment filter?

I know, that was another silly question, it would need to be Approved.

Ian Brown

Hi,we started the Halal campaign in July. go to our site at theiol-com.com
go to news,outbox,photos
our campaign is stil on going
Ian Brown