Daud Abdullah is a baddun, but the MCB is moving in the right direction

DougS

For me, Rod said it all when he stated:

'...I don’t think the government should talk to any organization which claims, without democratic remit, to speak for an entire community of people'

End of story as far as I'm concerned!

Andy Gill

Personally I still wouldn't trust Bungalawala any farther than I could throw him. He's changed his tune but not his spots.

rod abdullah liddle

In fairness to the MCB they say they do not claim to speak for an entire community, only for those organisations beneath their umbrella.

Austin Barry

Here’s a better suggestion Inayat: get the MCB to put out a statement saying

“We're a bunch of misguided tossers with an appalling track-record of bigotry and racism and will disband immediately."

Nele Schindler

So Inayat thinks Rushdie should be left alone, and that's somehow a sign that this dreadful person is 'decent'?

To have spoken up for the fatwa in the first place should ban him in perpetuity from polite company. But no - he's been given a platform to keep spouting crap about how the West needs to understand Islam and its discontents, particularly by the Grauniad.

It's also highly condescending to what the Daily Mail would call all 'decent, law-abiding British Muslims' to keep courting these awful people and being fixated on their every brain-fart, in particularly if they happen to vaguely smell of democracy, as if Muslims are a sort of species that doesn't really 'get' democracy and tolerance and needs a big, old pat on the back for doing what to most of us is just basic decency.

Rory the Deplorable

Further pertinent reading in today's excellent article by Michael Gove in The Telegraph, headed ' We are still in the shadow of the Holocaust'

Rachael

For me, Rod lost it all when he wrote:

"I have a lot of time for the MCB’s media secretary and spokesman Inayat Bunglawala, who seems a decent and fundamentally liberal chap."

The clue of course is in the job title of press officer - and look who's been spun.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/columnists/article-480402/A-library-book-bomb-making-sir-Youll-Religion.html

EyeSee

Every nation has, whether the PC mob like it or not, a character. Britain has long been a country of tolerance, fair play, high moral standards and inventiveness. Indeed, for the stiff upper lip. Generally, a country that kept the good bits and sought to improve the bad, by taking on ideas from others. The Left have always undermined this of course, but it took a cuckoo in the nest, New Labour to really accelerate the destruction of Britain (morally, culturally and by accident, economically). Islam should be treated the same way as all foreign ideas always have been, allowed but largely ignored by the State. But New Labour not only removed the sfety net of a shared British culture, but embraced danger wherever it showed itself. This is why we have such dilemmas, so many problems of our own making.

It is not improved by the election talk. What are the politicians offering? Slight refinements on the others stance. The EU is a mess, an embarrassment in world affairs, corrupt and anti-democratic destroying countries that once stood proud, now cesspits of money-grabbing politicians and criminals. AGW is clearly mainly a scam, but again not a topic of conversation among our politicians. We see no movement on MP's expenses, even where blatant criminality is uncovered. Local authorities and Quango's are unaccountable, steadily increasing their power, their bonuses and the tax grab to pay for it. The organisations are riven with corruption and nepotism, no-one ever held responsible (unless you are a nurse who shows up a hospitals' failings and thus embarrass 'authority').

When someone appears who feels these things are important and stands up for the people then we can expect nothing to get any better. And whilst we fester in our confused muddle (particularly where our thinking is controlled by PC) dangerous people will be able to threaten us. The 'radicalism' politicians talk of is nothing of the sort. To corect the framework problems named above and many more, is where the radical knife should start cutting. This would really returrn civil servants into real servants of the people.

Austin Barry

Rod at 12:44:

"In fairness to the MCB they say they do not claim to speak for an entire community, only for those organisations beneath their umbrella."

From Rod's original post:

"It is also true that sheltering beneath the MCB’s copious umbrella are some real badduns and that some of these badduns have close links to some of the leading lights within the organization."

But, neverless, Rod asserts:

"For all its faults, the MCB does seem to be changing, to be moving in the right direction."

The right direction for this unsavoury umbrella group is oblivion.

Derek Pasquill

As long as the Muslim Council of Britain remains wedded to the extremist ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood and the Jamaat-e-Islami, and there is not the slightest indication that it will jettison this supremacist version of Islamist thinking any time soon, then no government should have any truck with this organisation.

Neither should taxpayer's funds be channelled in its direction.

Dirty Harry

Other than the Daud Abdullah farce, can anyone of these commenters provide actual, hard evidence why the MCB should be regarded as extremist? Only a few weeks ago they loudly condemned the real extremists who threatened to march down Wootom Bassett. Give us hard facts, not racist rants

GaryO

Inayat is a chameleon; he'll change his posture according to his audience – very much like Mr Camaron, in fact. So, he changed his position on Salman Rushdie. That's big of him! Can we now expect him and the MCB to publicly apologise to Mr Rushdie and pay some reparations to him and the taxpayer for the damage caused due to Mr Buglawala's insensitive and dangerous remarks?

Also, MCB is moving in the right direction precisely because of this government's action of putting them in the category of Bad Islam, in the first place. I only wish it (the government) had the courage of putting more of these Islamic law-onto-themselves so called umbrella organisations out to starve for themselves.

MCB is doing this for the money it receives from the government.

You though Rod, have been had.

jon ryan

Somebody one wrote something about `leave room for your enemy to become your friend` (Christopher Robin perhaps?).

The overwhelming majority of people just want a quite life. So if a bunch of dingbats wish to join the human race, let's invite them in, as long as they don't pee on the furniture.

Both my granfathers and my father fought Germans - one of whom was my father-in-law. We seem to have got over that.

And remind me. What was Martin McGuinness's profession before he started going around looking like a retired geography teacher?

Liz

Rod, we all know Islam's attitude towards Jews. For Bunglawala, who represents the MCB and all that goes with it, to condescend to attend the Holocaust Day Memorial is, at the very least, an absurd and insulting hypocrisy. But then, I am speaking as a Jew, and as usual have most likely misunderstood yet another 'rational liberal truth', concerning this issue.

Grasmere

With logic like this, I'm beginning to understand why Rod Liddle has been chosen to be editor of the "Independent".

rod abdullah liddle

with you entirely on taxpayer funding/charitable status.

rod abdullah liddle

Dirty harry - yep, that's sort of the point.

Austin Barry

Dirty Harry 2:16

Muslims are not a race.

How many times does this fairly obvious point have to be made?

Jez

"Here’s a suggestion Inayat: get the MCB to put out a statement saying “The Istanbul Declaration is fucking stupid, and Daud was fucking stupid to have signed up to it.” Then we can all march on together."

And also maybe get him to jump backwards through a few hoops, singing The Star Spangled
Banner.... because that's how he'll have translated your last paragraph Rod.

"But this is to ignore (as the government does consistently, pretending not to notice) the enormous, profound ideological differences between Islam and the west."

If they did all of a sudden recognise it, then they'd have some pretty big explaining to do regarding the wholsale shipping in of Islam to every UK urban centre this last 40 years.

Derek Pasquill

Hard facts - the MCB press statement of 6 February 2008 registering dismay at the visa ban for Sheikh Qaradawi.

Let us not forget that this theologian of the sucicide bomb expressed regret in 2009 that Hitler had not completed his task of finishing off the Jews in the Holocaust.

Perhaps this is not hard enough for some people. Or perhaps they are swayed by the sentiment of reverse racism of 'the Muslims cannot help themselves' line.

Verity

"The right direction for this unsavoury umbrella group is oblivion." Well said, Austin Barry.

Rod Liddle has a lot of time for the Bunglawalah? You don't get around much, Rod, do you? This is one vicious little piece of work. Do keep up!

Dirty Harry (whose name you despoil by adopting it. All hail to right winger Clint Eastwood!), could you let us know what race people who believe of their own free will, in this desert diety are, please?

There are white islamics (I think mainly in Bosnia), there are black islamics infesting Africa and holding progress back, there are brown islamics in all those primitive stans and in India and I believe even the Chinese have got a small infestation.

Could you let us know the genetic make-up of the islamic race, please?

Wilhelm

I heard Rod on radio 5 yesterday being interviewed by a BBC dollybird called Kate Silverton, not the sharpest knife in the drawer, anyway the bint was doing her big shot Perry Mason routine.

'' You said that Somalians gave us pirates and goat curry and for that many thanks, thats waaaaaycist '' she screeeched.

Then she played good cop, bad cop

Whats your favourite colour Rod ?
If you were a tree, what tree would you be ?
Whats your favourite film ?

You missed a trick Rod, you should have said your favourite film was ''Triumph of the Will ''

The dopey bint Katy sounded like a little yapping dog attacking a slightly bewildered elderly gentleman. Tragic. Hear it again on the BBC Iplayer.

Norma Zkunz

For me, Rod's new-found Islamo-PC is as fallacious as it is odious. Your new 6 figure salary at the Indy more valuable than your integrity, is it Rod?

ed hall

Rod Liddle really is all over the place. Does he possess any principles or does he just make this stuff up as he goes along.

Rachael

Yes, Norma Zkunz.

There seems to have been a tangible playing to the Hari/Alibhai-Brown gallery since that story (it may not be true) was floated.

Inayat Bunglawala seems to make sure the MCB doesn't get shut out of the government tent by making token concessions, which Rodney has swallowed with alarming naivety.

Is this part of him setting about making his own - entirely unnecessary – concessions, just so he can hang about with a few clowns?

It's not been a good day.

rod seacole liddle

I'm absolutely consistent. Always have been. Freedom of speech for all; don't persecute people because of their beliefs. Don't be scared to say stuff because it might upset people or they might call you a racist. Hasn't changed in 40 years, that basic premise. Never change your opinions to suit your surroundings. Very simple.

cityca

I might have some sympathy with your comment about Bunglawala if he'd also disassociate himself from the bookshop at the St John's Wood Mosques which sold anti-Semitic material on the Dispatches film a year or two ago.

I have asked (via CiF) several times if there's been any change, to which I never get a reply so must assume not. BTW, the St John's Wood Mosque is one of many associated with the MCB, hence my question.

DougS - completely agree.

ed hall

"And at a time when the government is lashing out at individual Muslims it does not like and organizations with which it does not agree, it may be that we need a voice to support a minority which is coming under increasing attack."

We have a parliamentary democracy, your new pals in the MCB can stand for parliament if they want a voice. Otherwise they can sod off.

It's your blog so you can say what you like and I don't have to read it, but it is sad to see you buckle under the pressure of the stupid football blog bs and print grovelling tosh like this.

I don't know what your game is but I see a blog in the New Statesman in your future.

John Steadman

Rod Liddle's very reasonable response to perceived positive moves by the MCB will be seen as weakness by those whose behaviour constitutes the problem at issue; which is one of the reasons why we are where we are in the first place.
Perplexing to me because I thought Rod would have been the first among us to recognise this. I'm with many of his critics on this one.

Edward McLaughlin

"...the MCB is moving in the right direction"

M2>>A2>>Ferry

Who cares after that.

O'Harlan

"...the government is lashing out at individual Muslims it does not like and organizations with which it does not agree..."

Is this the same Rob Liddle who last month hailed the minaret ban, saying "we should applaud any small battle won in the people's war against the growing 'Islamification' of Europe"?

Just wondering...

K Redwood

"I'm absolutely consistent. Always have been. Freedom of speech for all; don't persecute people because of their beliefs." Rod, you're also scandalously shallow. You think that playing Mr Nice Guy is going to protect your flabby liberal views? Unfortunately, being all fluffy and squidgy aint going to protect you or the things that you hold dear, Rod. Please wake up and smell the burqas. Fortunately your readers have more sense than you. No-one here is taken in by your 'right-on' ramblings. We can see it for what it is - obsequious bilge.

David Ossitt

“The MCB was removed from the officially designated category of Good Islam a while back and placed in the ever expanding arena of Bad Islam, along with suicide bombers, Hizb ut Tahrir, women who wear copious veils etc etc.”

I bet that I am not alone; if I state, that I would rather err on being overcautious and regard all the lot of them as Bad.

Far better to be safe than sorry.

David Ossitt

rod abdullah liddle

“In fairness to the MCB”

Rod we do not ask you to be fair; we love you, because you write what others dare not.

Please; lets not bugger about being fair.

WWC

"Here’s a suggestion Inayat: get the MCB to put out a statement saying “The Istanbul Declaration is fucking stupid, and Daud was fucking stupid to have signed up to it.” Then we can all march on together."

Here's a suggestion to Rod Liddle, fucking grow up. Presumably you're just biding your time at the Spectator now. Your comments quotient is important fodder for your future employers and therefore, your blogs have descended into the uber-crap intended to provoke as many responses as possible. "hey bass, my last blog got 85 replies. Ain't I the dude". Well, quite honestly no, you're not anymore. Please go now before you inflict any more damage to your reputation.

David Ossitt

ed hall

"Rod Lidle really is all over the place"

No he is not; not here and now, nor ever.

If you have to comment, then get his name right.

Verity

It puzzles me that Rodney bin Liddle has "a lot of time" for Inayat Banglawangla, who seems to lead a life filled with hectic incident.

Hannah

The trouble is this isn't a freedom of speech issue.

It's a question of character issue - of an organisation and an idividual.

As soon as the MCB finds itself being shoved out of conversation with the government, hey presto, its spinner in chief seems to busy himself making enough concessions to give the organisation oxygen with the government and with gullible press commentators.

Taking this character at his word is like buying a used car from Arthur Daley.

Buyer beware.

Radgie Gadgie

"....enormous, profound ideological differences between Islam and the west."

Too right. Its irrelevant whatever taqqiya tack the MCB are taking this week. Until Islam goes through an astoundingly unlikely reformation its hugely alien theology and associated culture(s) will pose us ever greater problems in facing down its fundamentally unassimilable and unconpromising edicts (issued by God apparently)

Mind you, this post would fit just nicely in the Independent canon as it flails desperately about to cover just enough bases.

(see how I cleverly avoided insulting the MCB's goons there?)

Norma Zkunz

David Ossitt, I'm afraid in your embarrassing haste to toady up to one-size-fits-all Liddle, you've made yourself look a bit of a jerk. Ed Hall's comments were entirely accurate in every respect.

David Ossitt

WWC

I am now; and always have been, of the opinion, that a well judged expletive, inserted into clever well written prose, could enhance an argument.

Yours isn’t and it doesn’t.

M Seacole Brigstoke

Ah......it's a lovely round world.

rod liddle

Look, sorry about this, Ed and the rest:

I think Islam is an ideology antithetical to most of what we believe in. Minarets and veils are but symbols of that ideology and they do not matter. The ideology - which I believe to be inherently bigoted, repressive, authoritarian - does matter. So we shouldn't enact legislation to make us all "respect" it. I don't. On that level, I am a Islamaphobe.

But nor should we penalise individuals who do adhere to it; and we need a dialogue with those who do adhere to it, such as the MCB. Further, as democrats, we should support the rights of people to say things with which we profoundly disagree.
Why is this so hard to understand? Why do people think it is philosophically inconsistent? We can have a debate about the MCB and its legitimacy - and I accept many of the points posted on here about the specifics - but isn't the central issue beyond dispute?

David Ossitt

Norma Zkunz

“Ed Hall's comments were entirely accurate in every respect”

In your; not very humble, opinion, but they were Ed’s comments and opinions, and therefore could be deemed to be entirely accurate, only, in the sense that they expressed his thoughts.

I am not embarrassed to have disagreed with them.

Claude Dalrumple

I like you Rod, but there's no need to swear.

Verity

Rod concludes his dodgy post above with: "Is that so hard to understand?"

Well, yes, it is, actually, because it makes no sense.

I think Islam is an ideology antithetical to most of what we believe in. Minarets and veils are but symbols of that ideology and they do not matter.

Oh, yes they do. Symbols matter. That is why we have national flags. That is why HM wears a crown. That is why the royal standard flies above any building where she is staying. That's why judges wear wigs. That is why we would all rise if Obama entered a room, no matter how much we loathe him; because he is a symbol of the United States of America.

The ideology - which I believe to be inherently bigoted, repressive, authoritarian - does matter. So we shouldn't enact legislation to make us all "respect" it. I don't.

But nor should we penalise individuals who do adhere to it; and we need a dialogue with those who do adhere to it, such as the MCB.

No. We don't seek "a dialogue" with those whose intent is to conquer us and remove our freedoms. Would you call a mugger "Sir"?

Further, as democrats, we should support the rights of people to say things with which we profoundly disagree.

Certainly. But if someone says they intend to remove my freedom to decide what I'll say, and my fellow citizens' freedom to follow the faith (or no faith) of their ancestors and make us bow the knee to a nasty, ignorant desert dingbat, that's where the pleasantries end.

Why is this so hard to understand?

I would pose the same question to you.

cityca

Verity
Magic post

Derek

Spot on, Verity!

Dixon

"But I have a lot of time for the MCB’s media secretary and spokesman Inayat Bunglawala, who seems a decent and fundamentally liberal chap ..."

Much as we must on the whole loathe Charles Johnson, he at least doesnt deserve to receive threats to have his throat slit. According to him, a couple of years back now, before I was banned from his site along with most of Western Civilisation, Johnson received ( or so he said ) just such a threat that "I will slit your throat" in the E-mail from the IP address of a computer in London shared by two people, of whom one was Ingyat Bunglewala.

Frankly, I have always regarded Bunglewala, or Gollum, as I think of him, as the slimiest, most loathesomne proponent of Islamisation by stealth to infest our media.

I have to say that, weirdly fitting the predictions of some other commentors, Rod Liddle seems to be morphing into the kind of person who one could see editing the Independent. By the time he ever got the job ( which I seriously think unlikely, in spite of his recent Damascene conversion to, uh, well, apologist for Islam basically ) he will by that stage be indistinguishable from any other of its editors.

I hope that we are not seeing our great white hope dissapearing in a puff of sophistry.

Come on Rod, dont let us down.

Dixon

I say grey hope because white could be liable to misinterpretation in that context.

Austin Barry

Coffee Housers

Chums, what's happened to Rod?

Until very recently he was a robust, bites-yer-legs, bollock-chopping journo with a rabid hatred of Islamo-nutcases, Labour's harridan frontline and the Tsunami of politically correct bullshit.

He now seems to be channeling Godfrey Winn, a legendary columnist of indeterminate gender and Patience Strong homilies or, worse, Yasmin Alibhai-Brown.

This pallid, anemic Rod-husk seems to have been drained of the life-force, palely loitering, limp and impotent, on the fringes of abject submission to the Guardian-Independent ethos of brillo-bearded, sandal-shod, bleeding-heart piety.

Rod, a journalistic Superman brought low by the Kryptonite of big bucks editorial ambition.

Rod, mate, say it ain't so.

Derek

Mr. Liddle says "Further, as democrats, we should support the rights of people to say things with which we profoundly disagree. " but this generous position did not appear to prevent my analysis of his post which basically reflected Verity's, though a little more colourfully expressed, zooming off into cyberspace.

ed hall

"But nor should we penalise individuals who do adhere to it; and we need a dialogue with those who do adhere to it, such as the MCB."

I disagree. In my opinion this is death by a thousand cuts. It is already happening, each small concession - more halal meat, more "offence" taken at our innate Islamophobia, more Islamic faith schools, etc. - makes us weaker and them stronger. Look at how much the UK has changed since Labor took over in 1997 - imagine what it will look like after another 13 years of piecemeal concessions.

We are a parliamentary democracy with hundreds of years of history, the MCB are nothing but unelected, scheming, two-faced chancers and you propose speaking to them in some ghastly form of loya jirga.

I don't see the UK adopting the power structures of the muslim world as a step forward.

Norma Zkunz

Austin Barry, unfortunately we are seeing the 'real' Rod Liddle. We enjoyed Rod because it seemed he was able to cut through any bullshit and lay it wide open for everyone see. However, it seems that our brave Rod is a man for all seasons, or should I say websites. Far from being the fearless journo that we all thought, he seems to be able to morph in and out of fashion according to the perceived options of his readership. Unfortunately, he seems to have had a bit of a confused moment here. May I suggest that if you want to read the Rod (I'm absolutely consistent) Liddle, who can still insult and degrade with impunity, a visit to the Millwall Online website might not go amiss.

rod liddle

you'll find the same views there, Ms Kunz, if only expressed differently.

GaryO

Verity
January 25th, 2010 11:28pm

Superb!

Rod Bunglawala-Liddle (not as good as Alibaba-Brown), you should look at yourself in the mirror.

Derek Pasquill

Rod, I am sorry but you seem to be consistently missing the point on this particular thread - no one is contesting the right of the Muslim Council of Britain to hold obnoxious views.

Rather, what is being contested is the attempt by the Government along with spokespeople such as Bunglawala to present the MCB as representative of mainstream Muslim views when it is quite obviously not.

This is why your thoughts on this matter appear to needlessly confuse the issues when clarity is called for, and, the needless to say, raises the worrying prospect that you do not know what you are talking about.

R Mitchum

A very disappointingly naive article. Journalists as a breed seem devoid of the one thing you would think essential - nous.

Mike Wood

It would be fantastic if we could actually have any confidence in the antics of the MCB but unfortunately this is not the case. What a particular muslim spokesman or organisation says is not of much consequence because the islamic rule book will not change and nor wil the islamic agenda. Inayat Bunglawala is not at liberty to change the nature of islam. Islam’s agenda is the spread and dominance of islam and the rule book is derived from the teachings of mohammad. It cannot change without ceasing to be islam. I think a sailing analogy sums up the situation well: the destination for the MCB is set and will not change (the islamisation of Britain). The boat cannot sail directly for the destination because the wind is not always in their favour so they have to tack, this way then that way, but the destination will not change, even though their course at a particular time may appear to dispute this. To think otherwise is to clutch at straws.

Carl

Verity on Muslims:

"Islamics"
"Infestation"
"Desert Deity"
"Nasty, ignorant desert dingbat"
"Primitive Stans"

I think that it is only right to point out that you may have a slight attitude problem.

Verity

Very well said, Dixon. I considered mentioning Charles Johnson, but resisted. But now you've opened the gate, I'll step through it, and much obliged.

Charles Johnson, owns the huge blog Little Green Footballs. While he was still in his incarnation of very conservative commentator, he wrote of receiving threats from a Reuters Press computer in Sweden for things he had written about the Religion of Peace, or Religion of Pieces as many on his site styled it.

His blog, while it was still right wing, had a vast following. Only those registered could comment, but the site also had, I'm guessing, thousands, perhaps tens of thousands, of lurkers like myself who read it compulsively but never registered.

Dixon, can you remember what kicked this event off? I'm assuming Johnson said something about Islam, as was his wont, and Inayat saw it and responded with his customary venom. But anonymously.

But Johnson, skilled technically, tracked the email address down, as Dixon notes. And the threatening emails, it appeared, originated in the news agency Reuters' office in Sweden.

Yes! Sweden! Inayat was very much in London, so he could claim it as some sort of malicious hoax.

But Johnson, despite being a recent convert to the hard left, is cleverer than Banglawangla who had apparently done some fancy footwork of his own. Johnson found the emails actually originated in the Reuters office in Canary Wharf.

http://tinyurl.com/yfk673d

"I look forward to the day when you pigs get your throats cut" was one little aperçu, succinctly expressed. http://tinyurl.com/ybop2nb

Several British commenters advised Johnson to inform Scotland Yard. I don't know whether he ever did, or possibly didn't know what Scotland Yard is.

Someone really should write about this multi-faceted individual.

You should go to the links, Ron, and many others on the same episode. It may serve to diminish somewhat your admiration for this slippery individual.

Liz

Mike Wood. An excellent analogy and a post superbly argued.

Wilhelm

Carl squeeks 1:51pm

So you approve of beheadings, floggings and stonings then ?

Verity

Carl - I have also referred to allah as a sand dune diety. Do keep up!

I have a normal, robust, British attitude. You seem to be a bit of a dhimmi-wit.

Verity

Plse forgive the typo in your name, Rod. I know our name is Rod, not Ron.

rod liddle

Well, yes, I'm partly with Mike Wood in that beautifully argued post, and also with Derek Q. But we are where we are. Reject the ideology, but don't proscribe people who follow it. Reject the ideology, but listen to the advice of Muslim groups who support it.

Rachael

Carl: "I think that it is only right to point out that you may have a slight attitude problem."

I mean, Carl, how could Verity reject The Koran's view: "Make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall be their home: an evil fate."

An attitude that's never produced a squeak out of you. But the moment someone else responds to it, you find that tongue of yours.

Derek Pasquill

When the Secretary General of the Muslim Council of Britain is invited to speak at the Open Forum of the World Economic Forum, Davos, it is obvious that the MCB must be doing something right, and concomittantly most of the comments here are superfluous.

Rachael

"Reject the ideology, but listen to the advice of Muslim groups who support it."

And the Neville Chamberlain Award goes to...

jon ryan

"I mean, Carl, how could Verity reject The Koran's view: "Make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall be their home: an evil fate."

Well pointed out, Rachel! How about this in Koran as well:

"They found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day. ... And the LORD said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones.... And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the LORD commanded Moses."

(Ooop! My mistake. That's from the Bible...Numbers 15:32-56)

Vulture

Dixon, Austin , ed hall and Verity have it pretty much on the nail.

Painfully clear what's going on here: this is the third more or less pro-Muslim post from the previously rather rabidly (and rightly) anti-Islamist Rodders.

Research indicates that the remaining two readers of the Indie, Sid and Doris Bunglawala, would welcome a change of direction from the Imam of Bray. Result: hasty adjustment of Rod's religious robes ..As Walpole said, every man has his price... peace be upon him.

Verity

Derick Pasquill "When the Secretary General of the Muslim Council of Britain is invited to speak at the Open Forum of the World Economic Forum, Davos, it is obvious that the MCB must be doing something right."

Yes, it's called bullying and self-elevation. The secretary-general - where's he from? Bangladesh? - has nothing to teach the West about economics or anything else.

Mr Grumpy

"But this is to ignore (as the government does consistently, pretending not to notice) the enormous, profound ideological differences between Islam and the west."

Yes, and everyone who fears being labelled a racist must pretend not to notice too.

Rod Wannaedittheindiesobettersuckuptoyasmin Liddle, is it racist to feel that the more enormous, profound ideological differences we import, the less at home we become in our own country?

Verity

jon ryan - You flagged up your punch line way, way too early. In fact, your first sentence signalled there was heavy and depressing irony ahead. Also the word "Sabbath" sort of spoiled the punch, given that you had said you were quoting the q'ran.

Liz

Rod, what exactly is meant by "Reject the ideology, but listen to the advice of Muslim groups who support it."? You sound like someone who's boxed themselves into a corner. Please be honest Rod. Do you really mean what you wrote or in hindsight, do you think it may have been rather a hasty post, full of lofty ideals but empty of substance?

Liz

Jon Ryan. The point is this. In Hebrew law, only one person was ever put to death for defying Shabbos, and that was in the immediate post-exile period. Death for transgression of any Torah law is not a device used by any Beth Din nor has it been for centuries. I'm not well up on Islamic law but I would hazard a guess that more than one person has been stoned to death this year. And I mean 2010. Interesting that you should have earmarked Rachel for your comment. Any particular reason?

Baron

Keep re-reading Verity’s acclaimed posting @11.28; instinctively, it feels spot on, bang, bang; and crafted well, as only Verity can do.

Two things, however, if I may. First, the upshot what she says doesn’t leave much room for manoeuvre. It’s close to a sort of monochromatic take on things, black and black again, it ain’t nuanced enough. To use the jargon of the anointed that govern us, it limits policy options bar one. The other point, and more significant, is that it conflates the Bunglawala’s wing with the bunch of the nutcases that call us kufirs, infidels and stuff and want us to die, as well as with the Muslim mainstream.

Muslims of the Bunglawala phylum plot and shout about their delusional aim of world domination, but they do so within our rules of the game, openly in full publicity. They bought into a process that the Allah’s rule book doesn’t recognize. Their aims and methods may not cut it with any of us, and may often border on the abhorrent. So what? It’s still a free country.

If they manage to convince enough of us (I doubt it) to see the world through their eyes, or if they outbreed us, and thus succeed in beating us through the ballot box, tough titty, it would be our fault.

Until and unless they commit deeds that fall outside the law we should engage with them in a dialogue. These confrontations are but a step in a process of their getting integrated within the indigenous culture. It’s entirely within the framework of democracy.

The other group of men, much smaller in size, but scarier in their intentions, inspired by Osama even at a distance, more scattered, hard to pin presents the real challenge. Since 9/11, its members have so far shown greater proclivity in burning parts of their anatomy rather than seriously harming us. Hitting them, and their teachers of hatred, hard rather than appeasement seems the right response.

From my, albeit limited experience, the Muslim mainstream, the vast majority of the Allah worshiping burghers, have no intention whatever taking over anything or anyone. These are the followers of Allah whose claims on life don’t differ that much from ours – a steady job, raising a family, fun here and there, and a peaceful retirement at an age when the 74 virgin offer no longer excites. Many worship more intensely, but in the vein of the Church of England followers. As far as I can judge they’d rather neither of the two groups above were around.

Dixon

Verity, now the matter of Charles Johnson receiving death threats from someone using Gollum Gollumwalla's computer has brought Jonson himself into focus ( thanks for the detail ) doesnt it seem that we have here something of a precedent?

I mean, isnt Johnsons volte-face a worrying case when we consider the prognosis for Rod following his recent wobbling on these issues?

Edward McLaughlin

"But we are where we are."

Right enough. But we will soon be in a 'somewhere else' of massive demographic change, such that any rejection of the ideology will be buried under the sheer weight of those who follow it.

Baron

Verity @ 2.20:

the case of Charles Johnson: Isn’t it a police matter? Also, wouldn’t it be possible to find a similar case without a religious underpinning?

How does a deranged, religious fanatic become a proxy for the millions who may have one thing in common with the violence threatening nutcase – the worship of Allah?

ed hall @ 7.38:

your point about the changed Britain’s valid. I subscribe to it, too. One could challenge the size and the speed of immigration from cultures different from ours. The point of this blog, however, was what we do now after it happened.

Edward McLaughlin @ 6.37:

Your stab at the inverse infidels made me laugh. Quite witty.

If we are so scared of the MCB we must be pretty unsure of the strength of our culture, no? I have a better opinion of the indigenous unwashed. It has swallowed other fish before, and given time, and a little help from the lawmakers (one hopes), it will swallow the deluded in Allah, too.

Verity

Dixon - I cannot comment on Charles Johnson because his conversion from right to left was such a shocker that I'm still bemused.

I also can't imagine he'd be worried about a squirt like Banglawangla - although a little squirt who seems to lead a rather hectic life.

Linda Smith

Rod, you wrote at 3.45pm today “Reject the ideology, but listen to the advice of Muslim groups who support it”. Can’t get my head round that one. What advice would that be exactly, and why should we listen to it?

Gil

Rod, you say this in your original post:

'You might well argue that both of these issues [Holocaust day and Rushdie] are so fundamental to our notions of democracy, freedom and decency that nobody should be afforded credit for supporting them. But this is to ignore (as the government does consistently, pretending not to notice) the enormous, profound ideological differences between Islam and the west.'

What on earth are we to make of that second sentence ('But...')? This is more than your opinion of Inyat and individuals. This is your new mantra. An apologia for Islamism.

I think that Liz's comment at 6.52 was too charitable towards you. The MCB and Inayat are playing you like a fiddle, Liddle.

John Doe

Too many minorities. Whites have more in common with each other, regardless of "nationality" than they ever will with people from far-flung continents. Races developed because continents were cut off from each other.

I happen to think ALL races are worth preserving: White, African, Pacific Islander, East Asian etc.

Therefore,

Non Whites need to be managed to remain a majority. Arbitrarily I would say 5% of the population would be a good figure.

Remember this isn't pie in the sky medieval thinking. This was the basis for the 1924 US Immigration Act.

Don't believe the lies of libtards like Liddle who think that we are all marching towards an inevitable libtard utopian future.

History dont work dat way.

Mike Wood

BTW the sailing analogy is not mine. I got it from Marc Durie "The Third Choice: Islam, Dhimmitude and Freedom" which I'm reading at the moment. This book is superb and very accessible. Please, please read it. It really illuminates our current predicament and the terrible price we (or our children) will pay if we do not prevail.

Hannah

Hey, check out the brains on jon ryan, January 26th, 2010 5:43pm, who's found a quote from the Bible.

But then somehow forgot that Christianity underwent a reformation - something Islam is implacably opposed to.

What is he? A Radio 4 listener?

Dixon

John Doe, youll be having the likes of Carl and "John Ryan" on yoe back mate.

Problem is, look South and East inside "white" Europe and you find whole populations of white-skinned, Caucasian ( often most literally ) Muslims who are beginning to show themselves to be as Jihad preoccupied as any dark-skinned people. And what about the Chechens? And what about the white converts who are turning to Jihad in growing numbers? Adam Gahan is white, American, a jihadi. The Mumbai massacre was prepared, reconnoitred, etc, by a white American Muslim.

And who are the most vehemently anti-Muslim community in Britain. Its not the whites, who are shot through with the Carls and Ryans, Galloways and Stafford-Smiths. No, its the Hindu and West-Indian communities, who, aside from Jews, are presently feeling the friction with Muslim communities more than anyone!

NO, This most definitely is NOT about skin colour mate!

Old Slaughter

Talking to the Muslim Council as a proxy for Muslims in Britain is as silly as apologising to Jesse Jackson on behalf of all black people.

Lee Jakeman

Bungalawala - isn't he the one who sneeringly referred to the Jews as the "tribe of Judah"?

So he seems "a decent and fundamentally liberal chap" does he?

Sorry, Rod. I can't see anybody in the MCB who qualifies as a liberal. Any "liberal" in the organisation would leave it.

Wilhelm

Jon Ryan squeels

When was the last time a Christian hijacked an airplane and drove it into a skyscraper ?

So your supercillious smug '' joke'' twitterings falls flat.

logdon

Good Islam, bad Islam?

Islam is Islam no matter how our PC politicians spin it.

The myth of some kind of breakaway jihadi Islam, perverting it's original premise is total bunk. These jihadi's are in fact part of the revival of authentic Islam now sweeping the globe.

After many years in the doldrums of post colonialism and failed Marxist nationalism, Islamic scholars decided that the problem was westernisation. The dilution of the faith. And incidentally a major loss of power for the centres of Islamic thought such as Al Azhar university in Cairo.

This line of thought was expounded by Sayyid Qutb in his tome Milestones, (Google his name and it’s all there) which has grown into a kind of Little Red Book of Islam.

Imprisoned and eventually executed by Nasser, his name has a resonance amongst Muslim youth akin to the worship of Che Guevara by our own young idealists.

Here’s what Turkish PM Tayyip Erdogan has to say about this synthetic and designedly soporific divide.

“Erdogan is particularly interesting as a democratically elected Islamic leader who eschews all word-modifiers of Islam including "moderate," the adjective the media often applies to his AKP political party. "These descriptions are very ugly," Erdogan said in 2007. "It is offensive and an insult to our religion. There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam, and that's it." Erdogan has also bluntly rejected descriptions of Turkey itself as an example of "moderate Islam," saying last April: "It is unacceptable for us to agree with such a definition. Turkey has never been a country to represent such a concept. Moreover, Islam cannot be classified as moderate or not."
www.JewishWorldReview.com

So, in toeing the Western spun line which attempts to conveniently box adherents of this faith into a raging nutter v. religion of peace divide, these false comforters talk absolute rubbish designed merely as a soothing balm for western ears. In other words a fabricated lie designed to keep us uppity white racists nice and docile whilst Britain inexorably succumbs to shari'ah.

A better way of thinking is, ‘good cop/bad cop’, both after the same result of a Dar el Islam dominating the world but utilising different methodology.

One, the bomb and the bullet backed by the ranting of the likes of Anjem Choudary. The other the gilded serpent tones of superficially appeasing taqqiya at which Bunglawala is so expert.

Here’s another link to someone who knows what he talks of. Funny also, which makes a change whenever this faith rears it’s decidedly unfunny head.

www.patcondell.net

jon ryan

"Interesting that you should have earmarked Rachel for your comment. Any particular reason?"

Umm, because she made the original point? (duh...)

What I was pointing out is that all religious books carry absurdly stupid stuff. All religions are equally absurd, come to that. Picking on one and ignoring others is not a good way to argue rationally.

However, the main argument is that only by talking to people is it possible to make arrangements with them. This country has been at war with just about every other country in Europe in the past. We got through it. Those countries often were intent on forcing their version of what was the "correct" way to live down the throats of my ancestors.

As Wayne Rooney with typical wisdom put it:

"Jaw jaw is better than war war."

logdon

To utilise Rod's terminology, anyone who thinks that a PC, don't scare the horses, lead convenient parcelling up of Islam into moderate/not so moderate/homicidal is 'fucking stupid'.

Here's another little reminder that behind that oily veneer lies the true heart of Islam.

"Moderate Muslim head of UK TV channel held on terror claims

The division between "moderates" and "radicals" is a matter of imposed terminology and wishful thinking on the part of Western non-Muslim analysts. In Islamic communities there exists no such distinction, such that even the head of a Muslim TV channel in the UK -- a man whom authorities undoubtedly assume is a stalwart "moderate" -- can end up being involved in jihad activity.

"U.K. Islamic TV head held on terror claims," from UPI, January 26 (thanks to Block Ness):

jihadwatch.org/2010/01/moderate-muslim-head-of-uk-tv-channel-held-on-terror-claims.html

Derek Pasquill

Talk to the MCB? Talk about what? The weather? The consistency of the clotted cream?

Any 'talk' with the Muslim Council of Britain and various other front organisations for the Muslim Brotherhood etc, is a one-way street, a monologue of ever-increasing demands.

As Lenin might say: Who, Whom?

While the Government delivers up sections of the community to the tender administrations of its self-appointed, extremist leaders, those same leaders use their increasingly-radicalised community as a bargaining chip to acquire more influence for themselves and their brand of radical Islam. Neat.

There might be a name for this type of maneouvre - protection racket?

logdon

jon ryan
January 27th, 2010 9:02am

Is Rooney now the new Churchill or merely channeling the great mans thoughts?

Graeme Thompson

So let's see Rodney, the current incarnation of the BNP claims its not anti-semitic and is pro-Israel. You believe them as well? You want Nick Griffin to be invited to the Holocaust Memorial too?

Your credulity may strengthen your chances with the Indie editorship, but doesn't do you much good.

The shifting sands of Bungle's positions as well leave an extreme amount of doubt over their sincerity. Just take a look at what Harry's Place tells us.

EyeSee

Well all of this is as may be, but for social cohesion I think Liz Jones should become Rod's second wife, forced if necessary.

Graeme Thompson

Does Rodney's love-in with Mr Bunglawala make Rodney a 'bung-wallah' for the Independent?

Linda Smith

John ryan asserted “..the main argument is that only by talking to people is it possible to make arrangements with them. ..”

Rubbish! We didn’t “make arrangements” with Hitler, we defeated him after six years of bloody warfare.

What “arrangements” would you have made with Hitler, jon ryan? I’m all ears.

Derek Pasquill

Graeme, more like any bung in a hole, to coin a phrase.

Mike Wood

Derek 270110 10:08 :

Protection racket is exactly what it is. This protection racket served as the condition that non-muslims lived under in the lands dominated by islam. It was subdued by European colonialism but has now undergone a revival. It was known as the dhimma. Muslims love to tell us that different creeds lived in harmony under the Ottoman Empire and the Caliphate but this is totally baseless. These peoples (when you read the accounts of their lives under muslim domination, one’s heart goes out to them) were subjected to a system of legal discrimination, systemic vulnerability, and codified rules of humiliation that compare with Nazism and all of which are wholly consistent with Sharia law. For example, the blood of a muslim was not equal to the blood of a non-muslim and whereas a muslim could be executed for killing another muslim he could not be executed for killing a non-muslim; anyone who converted to Islam gained preferential inheritance rights within their family; non-muslims had to wear distinctive and degrading clothing to make them easily recognisable as such; if a non-muslim raised his hand against a muslim he could have it amputated). These are some of the rules devised in accordance with the Koran “so that they feel themselves subdued”. In effect, once a Christian or Jewish community was conquered by the muslims then under the provisions of Sharia, the adult males could be massacred outright and the women and children taken as war booty (the Koran states that Muhammad was allowed to take war booty and since he is the model for muslim conduct and law this outcome is entirely logical). The conquered peoples could convert to Islam to avoid this fate or submit to the rules of the dhimma. The basis of the pact known as the dhimma was protection from this provision (to be slaughtered or enslaved) of the Sharia.

If this is not a protection racket, what is? This is the system that will be reinstated if muslims ever dominate Europe.

If we are going to talk to the MCB and the like then they need to be confronted with these facts and they need to give some very straight answers. Don’t’ hold your breath though.

What our politicians have demonstrated so far is typical dhimmi behaviour: praise for Islam; talking up the achievements of Islam; never criticising islam or sharia law; misattribution of muslim atrocities to some other cause.

Rachael

jon ryan: “What I was pointing out is that all religious books carry absurdly stupid stuff. All religions are equally absurd, come to that. Picking on one and ignoring others is not a good way to argue rationally.”

No. What you were doing was wilfully ignoring that passages like that in the Bible were specific to time and place. Or tell us where you’ve seen Christians stoning people lately.

What you were doing was wilfully ignoring that Christianity has had a reformation – something unlikely to ever happen with Islam.

I did not pick on one religion and ignore others. I merely pointed out what Verity was reacting to when Carl tried to paint her as an aggressor. What’s irrational about that?

Religions are not interchangeable morally equivalent sets of ideology. That’s why so many Islamic states don’t have real democracy and human rights. It’s why so many Islamic apostates are forced to flee from there to civilisations rooted in Christian traditions.

There clearly is a difference in these two ideologies and if people like Carl want to turn a blind eye to the intractable instructions of Islam, it seems only rational to point them out to him.

Bill Corr

How silly to use the expression "swallowing its inherent racism" because race and racism are not the issue at all for Muslim believers; defecting ex-Jews who embrace Islam are regarded as Muslims with no ifs and no buts about the issue, as are ex-Christians, ex-Hindus and so on.

Far better and more accurate to have written "overcoming its inherent anti-Jewish bigotry" rather than mouithing off about racism.

rod liddle

Rachael - your last point is the subject of my piece this week in the mag. Hurry, hurry, while stocks last etc.

Verity

Baron writes: "the case of Charles Johnson: Isn’t it a police matter?"

As I wrote above, several British commenters on LGF posted advising Johnson to contact Scotland Yard. I don't know whether he did or not. He is a Californian and a long, long way away and might have wondered how Scotland figured in all this. I don't know. He may have. And if he did, do you think officers would have lifted a finger? Especially if the gangster Muslim Police Association said it would be an offence against allah and their co-religionists would be reluctantly obliged to blow up Scotland Yard in retaliation.

To all the poorly read people posting here and elsewhere about "moderate" islam and how the jihadis and aggressive burqa clad ghouls are wrecking it for everyone else, hark! The term "religion of peace" means that once everyone has submitted to islam (the word islam means submission; that is why Theo van Goch called his movie about it "Submission"), there will be peace. In other words, once everyone agrees to be a victim, there will be no more jihad!

I sometime wonder whether you people sincerely do not understand this, or pretend to not to understand it out of panic.

Derek Pasquill

You are absolutely correct Mike.

One shouldn't forget that, while it may be good sport to bash-a-bunglawala Islamist, on a continuum from the MCB to Islam4UK (any differences are purely cosmetic), there are ineradicable structures within Islam itself which are inimical to happy co-existence should Islamists get the upper hand.

And if the recent actions of the Government, and the general attitudes and outlook of the liberal Establishment in the UK, are anything to go by, this may not be as unlikely as naysayers and apologists for Islam would like to make out.

Dixon

"John Ryan" in his inestimable parody of weit cites Churchill, thus:
"As Wayne Rooney with typical wisdom put it:

"Jaw jaw is better than war war.""

I recommend mr "Ryan" take a look at how Churchill actually described Islam, or "Mohammedism" as he called it, in his book "The River Wars". You will find it is far stronger stuff than either Verity or myself have ever posted and would these days have landed him in court.

Dixon

"inestimable parody of WIT" is what I meant. As ever, please excuse my typing.

Verity

Dixon - I often refer to islam as mohammadanism because I know it drives mohammadans nuts.

Not for Prophet

The only way the MCB can be moving in the right direction is if it is moving along the travelator to the departure lounge for its flight out of Britain.

Wilhelm

Even the name the '' Muslim Council of Britain '' is irritating, it trys to give the impression of authority and legitimacy.

But in fact they are a bunch of shit stirrers and should be boooted out the country.

Wilhelm

Ever heard of the Methodist Council of Saudia Arabia ?

Verity

Wilhelm, that was funny! (In a ghoulish kind of way.)

Baron

Verity @ 1.49:

may have missed your earlier posting on what Charles Johnson did or didn’t do, but come on, Verity, within the Scotland Yard and elsewhere in the police forces there sit other cops than the members of the Muslim Police Association.

don’t rate the creation of the Muslim lobby group within a body supposed to enforce the law equally on all of us as the smartest move for either the police or the Muslims. The last thing I would want being a member of an ethnic group is to separate myself from the mainstream.

Having been classed as one of the dumb I’ve got to tread carefully. Still, has it ever crossed your mind that many, if not the majority of the Muslims who’ve landed here did so because they wanted to avoid living under the rules that you suggests some of their ilk want to impose on us?

Hard to peep into people’s souls, but I reckon it’s only a minority amongst the Muslims here who harbour the delusion that it’s the interpretation of a book written some 1400 years ago that should furnish fully the rules for the governance of the country, or at least contribute to them. That’s bollocks, of course.

Dixon

Baron, unfortunately the opinion polls of British Muslims dont support your contention. I think you would find the results depressing, believing as you do.

Linda Smith

Baron wrote “Hard to peep into people’s souls, but I reckon it’s only a minority amongst the Muslims here who harbour the delusion that it’s the interpretation of a book written some 1400 years ago that should furnish fully the rules for the governance of the country, or at least contribute to them. That’s bollocks, of course.”

It’s not “bollocks”. What do you think “the rules for the governance” of European and Anglo countries (including the USA) are built on? Biblical Judeo-Christian values of course. Ever heard of the 10 commandments? They certainly “contribute” to our “rules of governance.”

Verity

"Hard to peep into people’s souls, but I reckon it’s only a minority amongst the Muslims here who harbour the delusion that it’s the interpretation of a book written some 1400 years ...".

You're wrong, Baron. They are taught that this is the direct word of God as dictated to mo. And that word is: the entire world must worship allah and then their will be peace. Islam means submission. And mohammad, who married a six year old child, but didn't deflower her until she was nine, so that was OK, then, is his prophet. Mohammad had visions (I've read that he shows signs of having suffered from epilepsy, but that's just a reading of some people) that he then dictated to a scribe, not being able to read and write himself.

Forget all the tribal apppurtenances of the Saudis, like the desert wear, for example, the religion still aims at conquest and conversion at the point of the sword. Nothing has changed. The four wives thing is to breed warriors for allah (another reason we shouldn't be giving benefits to polygamous wives ... beside the fact that polygamy is against the law, of course). The intention is to outbreed us.

And all these "moderate" muslims people talk about ... where are they? Why aren't they militating against the militants who are wearing their fright outfits and pushing baby buggies and carrying vicious signs in the streets?

Verity

Baron asks: "Still, has it ever crossed your mind that many, if not the majority of the Muslims who’ve landed here did so because they wanted to avoid living under the rules that you suggests some of their ilk want to impose on us?"

Why, no. It hasn't. Because those are the basic tenets of their religion you're talking about. They didn't come to the West to escape islam, they came to enjoy the riches of the West and get the West for islam. That's what allah told them to do.

That's why we had the Crusades, in the 1000 and 1100s. To stop them.

That's why they aggressed to the Gates of Vienna in 1529. That's why they aggressed into Spain and Portugal in the 700s. They are charged with conquering the world for allah.

"Hard to peep into people’s souls, but I reckon it’s only a minority amongst the Muslims here who harbour the delusion that it’s the interpretation of a book written some 1400 years ago that should furnish fully the rules for the governance of the country...".

And I would say it's close to 100%. That's why it's their religion. They believe in it.

Dixon

Verity, You mention Vienna 1529. I dont know that one but I sure as hell am on-board for Vienna 1683! When Jan Sobieski, king of Poland rode to the defence of Western Civilisation at the head of his avenging angels ( the Hussaria ) and gave the Ottomans a kicking from which they never recovered ( whilst the French exploited his absence to seek spoils in the flank, as they did in 2003 ).

It all happenned on the eleventh of September, or, in American terms, 9/11, 1683! Funny that, if it were just a coincidence!

On the contrary, it shows that even when a battle has been utterly forgotten by the Western "Man in The Street", its a festering sore of resentment in the minds of Jihadists. They never forget, and they will never give up.

Baron

Dixon @ 7.08:

Many things depress me, my sparring friend, but this ain’t one of them. Amongst the various surveys I’ve come across, not a single one suggested that I might be in the wrong. Just between you and me, the Spectator published a piece in 2008 (the link’s below) that confirms my contention, too and gives a fair shot of the views of the mainstream Muslims on sharia. Things may have changed, of course, but I doubt it.

You, of course, don’t know me. I’m one of those weird individuals who can get away with saying to a Border Control officer after he has examined my passport and is handing it to me: ‘So you haven’t caught up with me yet?’ I talk to people freely, and that includes Muslims. Two things stick in mind talking about sharia: the whole process’s cheaper and quicker, and punishment of violent crime better. In my last encounter a young man of about 20 said ‘sharia’s better because of mutah, (?) the temporary marriage that can be arranged verbally for anything from a couple of hours to many years. Judging by his looks he would benefit nicely, I reckon. Others in the group argued it wasn’t a part of the rule book, and I didn’t take sides.

http://www.spectator.co.uk/essays/all/825601/our-survey-shows-british-muslims-dont-want-sharia.thtml

Graeme Thompson

Mr Pasquill, viz your 'FO lawrentian' comment, did you know Lawrence of Arabia, according to Martin Gilbert, was a Zionist?

http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache:JweB2tiulrgJ:www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite%3Fcid%3D1171894488324%26pagename%3DJPArticle%252FShowFull+lawrence+of+arabia+zionist&cd=2&hl=es&ct=clnk&gl=es

Also, if you are this Derek Pasquill, congratulations:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008/jan/09/pressandpublishing.freedomofinformation

It seems like only a couple of months ago I was reading about this. Funny how time flies.

Baron

Linda Smith at 7.15:

The Judeo-Christian tradition may inform the governance in our society, yet it isn’t literally ‘the’ governance as it’s practiced. It cannot be since people of other denominations and atheists have a vote, too.

Granted, the roots of our culture can be found in one of the three Abrahamic faiths, but we’ve reformed long time ago, leaving to God the private and to Caesar the public domain. That’s the nut the Muslims haven’t yet cracked.

Baron

Verity @ 7.23:

Listen, please calm down. What’s this ‘at the point of the sword, then?’ Since 9/11 and the London tube and Madrid train atrocities the sword seems to have done more damage to their deluded fighter’s anatomy than to us.

The inconvenience on air travel, and the restrictions on our liberties have come about because those who govern us lost the conviction and will to stand up for our culture firmly. Who knows what may happen in the years ahead.

Am off to get life. Football’s on the box. Be good, and stay well away from swords, sharp or blunt.

Derek

Verity might also have mentioned the fall of Constantinople in 1453, not least because the Turks are lobbying for their country with its close to 80 million people to become a member of the European Union - though of course all,well mostly, all of their muslims are moderate...

Dixon

Baron: "’m one of those weird individuals who can get away with saying to a Border Control officer after he has examined my passport and is handing it to me: ‘So you haven’t caught up with me yet?’ "

...wot, you mean you are from Yemen on a no-fly list, known to the FBI and have got gun-cotton for lining in your jock-strap!

Dixon

How long is it before I am banned from wearing my fez?

Verity

Derek - Touché! I wasn't being attentive enough.

Verity

Baron, once again, failing marks.

You're not up against your own kind here. You're up against the people who have owned the country for a couple of thousand years, plus immigrants who have settled, down through the centuries, and adopted British ways and become one of us - including fighting for these isles in times of war.

Baron, Ahmad, Omar, whatever your name is, you're like a silly little nat in an English summer that thinks, if only it irritates and bites for long enough, it can get the whole human.

Baron Pippin II

Verity @ 4.24:

we must stop the bickering, people might think we are like, you know, lovers and stuff.

listen, I promise that this is the last one by me, and you can respond if you wish. Then we call it a day on the subject of world domination by our friends ‘whose grievances we haven’t yet addressed well’. what’d you say, a deal?

from moi just two things.

Couldn’t resist showing this posting (and the rest) to a Net-less friend. ‘Have it framed’, said he chucking, ‘but don’t even think it’ll move from what you’re, miles to the right from Genghis Khan, mate’.

The other one’s ‘nat’. Never been called that (if anything, it shows you how much I know English, doesn’t it). Consulting the on-line Thesaurus I came across this.

Nat- in Burmese folk religion, any of a group of spirits that are the objects of an extensive, probably pre-Buddhist cult; in Thailand a similar spirit is called phi. Most important of the nats are a group collectively called the "thirty-seven," made up of spirits of human beings who have died violent deaths. They are capable of protecting the believer when kept properly propitiated and of causing harm when offended or ignored.

Thanks Verity, like it, and will treasure it.

Old Slaughter

Any organisation that describes Ken Bigley as a prisoner of war is beyond the pale in my book.

Dixon

Baron, I think a more apt descriptor for you from the spirit world might be Djinn!

...because it seems like your posts come out of a bottle.

Verity

Old Slaughter - What organisation so styled Kenneth Bigley?

McCfuzz

The MCB are the public face of 'Al Taqiyya'.
Their aims are the same as the Jihadists.
The Jihadists use violence. The MCB uses our own system in order to further Islam.
Furthermore when/or if the time comes they won't give a damn about our 'free democratic system'!

daniel maris

Linda Smith -

Most of the ten commandments are common to most of the world's belief systems. They are very general provisions - hardly anyone interprets "thou shalt not kill" as "thou shalt not kill in any circumstances whatsoever".

But the specifics of Judaic law - the various misogynistic provisions, acceptance of slavery, Sabbatarian and dietary laws etc have no place in our society.

Similarly traditional Christian law - with its persecution of Jews, heretics, atheists and sexual miscreants is not followed.

One can trace the philosophy of individualism to the Judeo-Christian tradition perhaps, although equally it has been influenced by classical pagan culture and modern political thought (e.g. Rousseau).

Mark Jolley

Ppl here keep forgetting that the Spectator is a mouthpiece for the Right-wing and mainly Jewish readership. Take their opinions with a healthy pinch of salt. And don't ever ask for evidence, it's not customary in this quarters.

Linda Smith

Mark Jolley opined “Ppl here keep forgetting that the Spectator is a mouthpiece for the Right-wing and mainly Jewish readership. Take their opinions with a healthy pinch of salt. And don’t ever ask for evidence, it’s not customary in this quarters.”

Where’s your evidence for your assertion, Mark Jolley? How do you know the Spectator readership is “mainly Jewish”?

Dixon

"Mark Jolley
January 29th, 2010 11:15am
Ppl here keep forgetting that the Spectator is a mouthpiece for the Right-wing and mainly Jewish readership. Take their opinions with a healthy pinch of salt. And don't ever ask for evidence, it's not customary in this quarters."

Keep remembering such jolley fellows are trolls for the left-wing anti-semite community who masquerade as critics of Israel so as to suck you into their paranoiac racial delusions about the world. Take every "humane" sounding or overtly "reasonable" comment with a few buckets of salt.

PS. Im not actually Jewish but in real life I just get a lot of anti-semitic efflux from such people because in their pimple-heads I fit the racialiast stereotype of "a jew". Refer back to posters, of 1930's by earlier socialists depicting "Der Jude".

Edward McLaughlin

Mark Jolley

Oi vay what an incisive mind you have my dear. For this we must hold up our hands. You got us banged to rights (what does that actually mean btw?)

Best shut down the Spec' and start up another title as a smokescreen to hide such Zionist skullduggery.

Chimp.

Radgie Gadgie

E: "Mark Jolley
11:15am
...the Spectator is a mouthpiece for the Right-wing and mainly Jewish readership. Take their opinions with a healthy pinch of salt. And don't ever ask for evidence, it's not customary in this quarters"

Mark, could I just have my two penn'orth..

I've not met many Speccy readers, but of those I have, none have been Jewish. Mind you if reincarnation existed I'd be quite happy to come back as one - does that count?

As for evidence, you must be new here. Compared to other blogfests and the magazine itself, 'tis replete with evidential discourse (an' that). Stick around and find out.

Old Slaughter

@Verity,

Apologies for the vague nature of this response. I remember the incident clearly however because I found it so objectionable. Mainly by the BBC.

I was watching a BBC News program shortly after the confirmation on Ken Bigley came through. The BBC newsreader conducted an interview with a representative of MCB, quite high up if I recall. She fed him repeatedly the opportunity to condemn the action. I recall she actually said "you condemn this action?". More than once the representative replied "We condemn this because in the Koran it say you should not kill prisoners of war".
Again he was given the chance to completely condemn the entire action but again repeated the notion that the execution (murder) was the fault.
There was no mention of condemnation for the kidnapping of a reconstruction worker.
I was shocked that the BBC presenter let him get away with it, but she seemed little more than an autocue relay station.
That choice of response, which I can understand has some value from the perspective of pointing out the apparent 'unIslamic' nature of certain actions, but to me the refusal to call Ken Bigley innocent at least was quite telling and completely irresponsible.

David Ossitt

Mark Jolley
11:15am

“Ppl here keep forgetting that the Spectator is a mouthpiece for the Right-wing and mainly Jewish readership. Take their opinions with a healthy pinch of salt. And don't ever ask for evidence, it's not customary in this quarters.”

Hello; what have we here?

Or should I ask; who do we have writing such utter twaddle?

Whomsoever it matters not; for he is a twat.

Verity

Old Slaughter, thank you very much for that!

Mr Bigley was a businessman who had worked in the ME/done business in the ME on and off for years. He wasn't a political individual at all.

The MCB is a nasty piece of work and should be disbanded. Or, they should be allowed to continue, but be self-supporting. By subscription.

If supported in the lavish manner to which it is accustomed, by paid subscriptions, then we will have a clue about muslims' opinions of the value of this dire organisation.

Equally, if ordinary muslims didn't choose to subscribe, that would be an encouraging clue, and the exciting Mr Banglawangla would have more time for his other activities.

Nick

Quite right Rod. But why are you using a picture of Lenny Henry in Othello?

Amanda in America

Verity at 11:28 (sorry haven't read your other posts as I'm turning in -- it's 10:54 pm in Texas):

Boffo post, and exactly right.

Rod has the right instincts but as a philosopher he needs a bit of work. And philosophising takes a coolly questioning mind, which I suspect is not Rodders' strong point. I'm not saying passion has no place -- it does. But passion must be held up and looked all around at like a diamond. Then you see all the angles, without being blinded by them.

The basic rule in any intellectual exploration is this: If you have to say anything stronger than 'By Zeus!' (and by god I know you do, Rod), the truth is going to be just a little beyond your reach....

Russell

In you latest Spectator article you state that "Malaysia is about the best Islamic democracy has to offer ..."
Indonesia, the largest Muslim country, is the best one I know.

GaryO

Russell
February 1st, 2010 7:27am

Neither is tolerant towards their Christian and Hindu/Chinese minorities. In fact Christians and Hindus get attacked and harassed on daily basis and there are recent examples of Churches and Temples being burnt and severed heads of cows stacked at the proposed Hindu temple site. You do not hear anything in the media here about these intolerance because of the fear it might upset the delicate community harmony that is supposed to exists here.

In fact Malaysia’s former premier Mahathir Mohamad said recently that "Jews had to be periodically massacred":

http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermail/andrewbolt/index.php/couriermail/comments/mahathir_jews_had_to_be_periodically_massacred/

You can guess where he is coming from.

There is no Islamic country in the world that is tolerant towards people of other faiths, women, gays or pigs. Isn't possible.

Verity

Russell - I would agree with you about Indonesia.

This is because it declined to be an islamic republic. It chose to remain a secular state. It's well-governed and relaxed about other faiths. The traffic police turn a blind eye to double parking and parking on the pavements outside mosques on Fridays; but they turn an equally blind eye to the same offences outside churches on Sundays.

I would also give a little bow to Jordan, which is islamic but not aggressively so. For example, Queen Rania doesn't wear a hijab or even a simple scarf on her hair. She goes with glamourous hair-dos. She wears make-up. She wears high heels and designer clothes. She also does her turn on a rota of driving a Red Crescent ambulance. King Abudullah is also relaxed (he went to Sandhurst, as did his father, King Hussein).

But Indonesia has power, because it has oil.

Linda Smith

Verity, you "bow" to Jordan. Are you aware that it has a law barring Jews from citizenship?

Verity

Linda Smith, do not try to manipulate my words. I said I'd "give a little bow" - in other words, a bow of acknowledgement, not fealty - to Jordan because it is a very pleasant country with a history of enlightened leadership.

You write: "Are you aware that it has a law barring Jews from citizenship?" No. I wasn't aware, but why should I care? Jordan doesn't belong to the EU. It makes its own laws to suit its own country and its own people.

Jordan's domestic laws are not your business - nor mine.

Linda Smith

Verity: anything concerning Jews is my business.
Anything I think is my business is my business. This is a free country...still.

Verity

Linda Smith, re your bullying post, I expressed a strong admiration for Jordan. I have not changed it.

You had the impertinence to reprimand me, and then, when challenged, wrote: "Anything I think is my business is my business. This is a free country...still."

I semi-concur. If you're writing from Israel, maybe. If you're writing from Britain, no, it's not a free country.

And whatever I think is my business. And I wrote that I admire and am fond of Jordan. This opinion will not change.

You appear to have a needy drive to control.

Linda Smith

Verity, “re your bullying post“….You appear to have a needy drive to control.”

The camel cannot see his own hump!I suggest you stand in front of a mirror.

martin

'...I don’t think the government should talk to any organization which claims, without democratic remit, to speak for an entire community of people'

This is the essence of the vile doctrine of multiculturalism.

People have no choice. They are put in to one of a dozen categories, & self appointed leaders speak for them.
In S.Africa it was called Apartheid
It's nearer Fascism than Marxism.
Either way it stinks.