Anti-Muslim hatred!

Source

In the run-up to the announcement of a new 'Prevent' strategy, predictable outrage has been expressed about measures described as 'anti-Muslim hatred' by Nabil Ahmed of the Federation of Student Islamic Societies in a discussion on Newsnight yesterday evening [starting at point 16.11 into the programme]. In his introduction Jeremy Paxman said that there is a delicate balance between protecting individuals and alienating an entire community if mistakes are made. In other words, softly, softly with an ideology that has at its heart, the sentiments expressed above and below:

In February the Prime Minister posed some questions over the funding of Muslim groups: "Do they believe in universal human rights, including for women and other faiths; equality of all before the law; democracy and the right of people to elect their own government; and, do they encourage integration or separation?" The answer to these questions, and to many others, is contained in the film from which the quotations are taken. Islam means submission. Islamists are not interested in the democratic human rights of other religions or equality before the law. This is the price of not submitting:

Those who refuse to believe it should read this. A Google search provides ample evidence of the barbarism of the 'religion of peace' - I would advise against watching the sickening video. If the alternative to 'alienating an entire community' is acceptance of a religious ideology that has no time for non-Muslims and which not only tolerates but has violence at its heart, then so be it.

The Home Secretary, Theresa May,says that It may be "too easy for Muslim extremists to form groups on campuses 'without anyone knowing' " and that "the Government would cut funding to any Islamic group that espoused extremist views" but tackling 'extremists' does not get to the heart of the problem of jihad, cultural or otherwise, which seeks to create a Muslim world. As details of the new 'Prevent' strategy emerge, that is the central question which needs to be addressed if we are to avoid more of this.

Read More

Burning issues

Watching books burn is an unpleasant experience for those old enough to recall newsreel footage of Nazi excesses. With e-books and Library deposits the notion of denying or limiting knowledge to others is a thing of the past in the free world. Now the act is more a gesture of principle or defiance as dangerously demonstrated by the obscure US pastor who caused worldwide uproar by threatening to burn copies of the Koran and encouraging others to do likewise.

Just the suggestion had Islamic people on the streets waving placards and threatening violence particularly against against US troops. There is an odd contradiction here. The pastor had the freedom to exercise free will in a free country but was shackled by public opinion and political pressure. Islamists on the other hand have no qualms about desecrating non-Islamic religious symbols or even killing people just for being Christians.

As we celebrate the 70th Anniversary of the Battle of Britain we remember those who fought and died in the war against tyranny. Today we face a different tyranny, the threat to freedom of expression. Islamic fundamentalists are succeeding in muzzling everyone but themselves. The slightest hint of criticism is regarded as abuse yet Islamic abuse is rife, particularly in Iran. If as claimed, Islam is a religion of peace, protestors could demonstrate that forcibly by taking up the cause of Sakineh Mohammadi-Ashtiani, sentenced to death by stoning, or is a book, however sacred, more precious than a life?

Read More

The Way paved with good intentions?

From the Catholic Herald, Muslim scholars address Synod of Bishops.

"Ayatollah Mohaghegh Damad said the Koran’s view of Christian-Muslim relations is one of “friendship, respect and mutual understanding,” even though there have been “dark moments” in the relationship over the past 1,400 years."

"Earlier Mr al-Sammak had said the death penalty for apostasy from Islam to Christianity dated from a time “when changing religions meant joining the enemy – it was punished as an act of treason”. While some still think converts should be punished, he said the “golden rule” of Islam is that “there is no compulsion in religion, that’s what the Koran says”."

Others would question the words I have emphasised in italics above in that Muslims regard non-Muslims as second-group citizens if they do not accept Islam and Sharia. With no mention of abrogation, should taquiya be assumed? These are the real questions that must be addressed.

Read More

Wake up call

This tiny, carefully constructed island which the warbler calls home has been occupied by a fellow creature which she feeds and cares for as her own. Her inbred instincts of kindness and generosity overwhelm her, completely unaware that the cuckoo in her nest has a wholly different agenda.

The Christian faith which shaped much of our heritage is on the wane but unwittingly its principles still motivate the lives of most people in the British Isles; love thy neighbour, do unto others as you wish to be done by, etc. Familiar Christian landmarks like the vast Cathedral churches struggle on aided by tourism. Smaller churches which were built with their Norman towers in sight of others to warn of invasion still dot the landscape while town and city churches and chapels close, many to become Mosques. And why shouldn?T they people ask? Muslims need somewhere to pray! They ask as though the Muslim call to prayer is simply an expression of a faith which many Christians and other religions have now lost, unaware that it is a completely different religious ideology. They hear talk of peace - but at what price?

Islam is alien to our culture. The Koran is not the same as the Bible. When Muslims talk of peace they mean peace under Islam and Sharia law, not as we know it. Biblical-type argument in which one verse is pitched against another does not exist. In the Koran earlier verses are abrogated by later verses permitting dissemblance and are regarded as commandments. To this aim deception (taqiyya) is not only permitted but encouraged. In religious Islam the objective is clear for those who want to see it. Political Islam is less clear. How much is deception?

There have been warnings in the press of political infiltration but much is ignored in the guise of democratic rights and political correctness. That is a huge mistake. The democratic rights they demand under British law would be denied us under Islam. To allow the spread of a system that seeks to suppress all others is political and religious suicide. If it were a virus there would be health warnings. The fact that it is a religion is worse because people are intimidated against questioning it through fear of being accused of racism yet in Muslim countries Christians are persecuted and driven out. Couldn't happen here? Lebanon used to be a Christian country; it is no longer.

Read More

Woolwich response: Deceptive, stupid or just plain ignorant?

A Baghdad church. More 'religion of peace' imageshere

It is entirely understandable that the authorities would want to avoid a backlash after the random, callous murder of an innocent British soldier in Woolwich. Less understandable is the response of the Prime Minister who defended Islam saying that it was "a betrayal of Islam" and "there is nothing in Islam that justifies this truly dreadful act" while his Deputy quoted from the Koran in apparent ignorance that one verse can be abrogated by another or another verse used as justification for acts of terror: [Remember] when your Lord inspired to the angels, "I am with you, so strengthen those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieved, so strike [them] upon the necks and strike from them every fingertip." [8:12]. Cleggsaid that the unspeakable act “flies in the face of the peace and love that Islam teaches” as he paid special tribute to London's Muslim community. Is he blind to what is happening around the world? Where is that 'peace and love' in Muslim dominated countries where Christians are leaving in droves in fear of their lives and their churches razed to the ground?

Recent census figures clearly illustrate that Christianity in this country is on the wane while Islam is increasing rapidly, particularly among the young, giving rise to the prediction: “In another 20 years there are going to be more active Muslims than there are churchgoers”. The unwarranted glorification of Islam as the 'religion of peace' helps to validate a supremacist ideology encouraging more people to assume that there is nothing to fear from Islam, contrary to evidence worldwide. The perpetrators of the latest atrocity are believed to be of Nigerian descent, a country ravaged by Islamism. All should be aware of what is happening in Nigeria. ReadThe Supremacist's Ideology Of Islam which explains 'ISLAM’S CLAIM FOR PEACE'.

Attempts to separate religion from its Islamist ideology are futile because the ideology dictates a way of life which elevates Muslims above Christians and Jews which has already resulted in the 'cleansing' of Islamic countries. If Messrs Cameron and Clegg are ignorant of this process around the world there is plenty of evidence available. They could starthere by reading 'Islam and Extremism: What is Underneath' after picking up the basic differences between Islam and other religionshere.

With fear of possible reprisals it is not surprising that Muslims have gone to great lengths to distance themselves from this atrocity. Westernised Muslims may indeed be sincere in their condemnation but their motives can never be guaranteed because their religion sanctions dishonesty, taqiyya, in defense of Islam.

The victim card is already being played, even in Cairo [here] where the persecution of Coptic Christians in Egypt is well documented. Conscious of requests for calm I effectively imposed self censorship in pondering whether to make this entry but the more I read the more absurd our position has become in making Islam untouchable at the expense of Chritianity in a supposedly Christian country. It is being defended as a sacred religion of peace enabling Islamism to gain ground because people are not given the full facts and accused of Islamophobia for daring to raise legitimate questions. In an article for the Observer Dr Matthew Goodwin, an associate professor at the University of Nottingham who advises the government on tackling race hatred wrote:

"Many have suggested that the events in Woolwich have fuelled a wave of public hostility towards British Muslims and Islam more generally. But our findings, based on a YouGov survey undertaken within 24 hours of the attack, suggest that the picture is both more complex and more positive.

First, we find some evidence to suggest that, in the aftermath of these tragic events, Britons were more likely to think positively about community relations. There are some challenging results, such as the finding that the number of citizens who think that conflict between groups is "largely inevitable" has risen by seven points to 40%, or that agreement with the suggestion that there will be a serious clash between British Muslims

and white Britons has also risen, by nine points to 59%. But these buck the broader trend.

Compared with last year, when we ran the same survey, people are now either just as likely, or more likely, to endorse a series of more positive statements: that Muslims are compatible with the national way of life; are good citizens; make important contributions to society; and share British culture and values ." [My emphasis - Ed.]

A measured response is essential but it is a grave error of judgement to take a head-in-the-sand view that Islam can be judged by Christian standards. If it is a 'religion of peace' why are there so many conflicts around the world involving Muslims? The fact the Muslims are fighting other Muslims is not an excuse for turning a blind eye to the threat. The Government has been busily discarding Christian values creating a spiritual vacuum that on current trends will be filled by Islam, an ideology that justifies not only the oppression of non-believers butdeath for apostasy. This is a dangerous strategy. Compare the statement at the end of the previous paragraph with this statement taken from the link at the end of the second paragraph:

"Even though Muslims claim their religion preaches peace, a critical observation shows that this is far from the truth.

As long as a Muslim population in a given area, community or Country is below 2%, they regard themselves as a peace-loving people who do not pose a threat to other citizens.

At 2%-5% Muslims begin to proselytize other disaffected ethnic minorities and groups often recruiting from the jails and street gangs. This is the case in about 5 Countries as you can see.

COUNTRY / MUSLIM %

Denmark / 2%

Germany / 3.7%

United Kingdom / 2.7%

Spain / 4%

Thailand / 4.6%"

Not only Government Ministers but religious leaders are following the line that such acts as witnessed in Woolwich have no place in Islam but the leadership of the church today has more to do with politics than defending Christian orthodoxy. By adding their validation of a religious ideology that seeks our extinction what hope can there be? Even if Islamist violence were not the reality that it is, Christians are supposed to believe that there is only one way to the Father and that is through Christ. If we lose that conviction we are already lost to the so-called 'religion ofpeace' under Islam.

Perhaps there is some comfort in getting old after all - but what of our children and our children's children? If this pretence continues it will be too late to turn the tide. We need honesty based on world wide evidence, not blinkered denial. Ignoring legitimate concerns serves only to encourage rather than discourage elements in society looking for an excuse to take matters into their own hands. That must be avoided. Honesty must be the best policy.

Read More

London Mayor says it as it isn't

[Note: This video has been replaced by a still because I was

 unable  to switch off the auto play. Text below - AB]

In a video clip published by the Independent the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, said, "There can be no justification for the acts of these terrorists and I am quite clear that we will never let them win."

These "terrorists" informed their innocent victims of their justification when they shouted "this is for Allah" as their victims' throats were cut. I would expect the Mayor of London to be aware that these Muslims are simply following the example of their Prophet according to instructions in the Koran. If he doesn't know that he should.

Given that peaceful Islam was abrogated with clear instructions on how to attack the infidel, one has to ask oneself whether the majority of  Muslims really understand their ideology or whether they choose to ignore it.

Why would anyone want to follow a religious ideology which prescribes death to unbelievers and apostates other than through fear? More to the point why would anyone want to make excuses which do let them win.

Postscript [05.06.2017]

London Mayor Sadiq Khan has added,

"I'm angry, and I'm furious that these three men are seeking to justify their actions by using the faith that I belong to.

"The ideology they follow is perverse, and is poisonous and it has no place in Islam.

"I condemn this terrorist act but also the poisonous ideology these men and others follow."

How can he say that when the "ideology" is Islam? It is in the Koran for anybody to read.

A similar argument has been presented by the newly elected mayor of Manchester Andy Burnham who claimed that the Manchester suicide bomber who killed 22 was a terrorist, not a Muslim.

As a former UK Islamist Leader says: ‘Stop Pretending Violence Has Nothing to Do With Islam’.

Read More